format: text

text:
# Supergravity Couplings of Noncommutative D-branes

## 1 Introduction

It has become clear that open Wilson lines  play a fundamental role in the dynamics of noncommutative gauge theories. They are essential to building gauge invariant operators and are thus essential when coupling noncommutative Yang-Mills modes to closed string modes . They are also important for a proper understanding of the loop dynamics of noncommutative gauge theories, and of the Seiberg-Witten map  between ordinary and noncommutative Yang-Mills modes  (see also ).

An open Wilson line of momentum $`k`$ along some open contour $`C`$ is given by

$$W_k(C)=\mathrm{Tr}d^dxW(x,C)e^{ikx}$$
(1)
where $`W(x,C)`$ is a Wilson line in which multiplication is given by the $``$-product. $`W_k(C)`$ is gauge invariant  when the momentum $`k`$ of the line, and the distance $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ between its two end points, satisfy the relation

$$\mathrm{\Delta }x^\mu =\theta ^{\mu \nu }k_\nu ,$$
(2)
where $`\theta `$ is the noncommutative parameter of the theory. Similarly, for any local operator $`𝒪(x)`$ which transforms adjointly under gauge transformations, $`𝒪(k)`$, defined by111$`P_{}`$ denotes path ordering in which multiplication given by the $``$-product.

$$𝒪(k)=\mathrm{Tr}d^dxP_{}\left[W(x,C)𝒪(y)\right]e^{ikx},$$
(3)
is gauge invariant , where $`y`$ is any point on the path $`C`$ of the Wilson line. Thus whereas there is no gauge invariant local operator in position space, it is possible to write down the linearized coupling of a supergravity field $`h`$ to the noncommutative Yang-Mills modes in momentum space

$$d^dkh(k)𝒪(k)$$
(4)
with $`𝒪(k)`$ an operator of type (3).

However, since inserting local operators at any point of an open Wilson line all yields gauge invariant operators, it is not a priori clear what the precise ordering prescription is for constructing such a gauge invariant operator. In , by considering the factorization of the one-loop open string amplitudes , it was proposed that the correct prescription is to integrate all external insertions over a straight Wilson line222Straight Wilson lines were first advocated in .. For example, the Yang-Mills operator that couples to the dilaton contains

$$d^dx_0^1𝑑\tau _1𝑑\tau _2P_{}\left[W(x,C)F_{\mu \nu }(x+\xi (\tau _1))F^{\mu \nu }(x+\xi (\tau _2))\right]e^{ikx}$$
(5)
with $`C`$ parameterized by $`\xi (\tau )`$, a straight line. In  it was argued based on the connection between noncommutative gauge theories and the Matrix model (see e.g.) that the integration procedure provides a natural generalization to $`U(\mathrm{})`$ of the “symmetrized trace” prescription of the Born-Infeld coupling to weak external supergravity fields (see e.g. ).

In this paper we investigate the disk amplitudes between one massless closed string in the NSNS sector and the noncommutative gauge modes on the brane, aiming to provide further support for the integration prescription and to write down the precise couplings of the massless closed string modes to a noncommutative D-brane. We will address RR insertions in a forthcoming paper. We shall be interested in the leading terms of the amplitudes in the low energy limit in terms of open string metric $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ on the D-brane, while exploring the effect of the noncommutative parameter $`\theta `$. More explicitly, as in , we take the low energy limit to mean

$$\alpha ^{}k_{i\mu }G^{\mu \nu }k_{j\nu }1\text{with}k_{i\mu }\theta ^{\mu \nu }k_{j\nu }O(1).$$
(6)
Since the closed string metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ scales differently with respect to $`\alpha ^{}`$ from the open string metric, in the above limit (6), low energy processes in terms of the open string metric on the brane do not correspond to low energy processes in the bulk that involves the closed string metric. This differs from the $`B=0`$ behaviour.

The disk amplitudes of one massless closed string mode and two open string modes were previously given in . In particular in  (see also ) the low energy effective action in the limit (6) was found and compared with the Born-Infeld action. In this paper, with the role of an open Wilson line in mind, we show that the effective action can be written in a simpler and physically more transparent way than presented in . The result also confirms the integration prescription (5) proposed in .

Physically, the appearance of the Wilson line and the integration prescription can be understood from the “stretched string” effect discussed in . Recall that when $`B=0`$, the low energy external open string modes are point particles and the spacetime image of the worldsheet boundary is a single point, thus yielding local couplings between the closed string and gauge theory modes. With a nonzero $`B`$-field, the low energy open string behaves like an electric dipole that is in the presence of a strong background magnetic field . As a result, an open string mode (even on-shell) has a finite spacetime extension $`\mathrm{\Delta }x^\mu =\theta ^{\mu \nu }k_\nu `$  proportional to its center of mass momentum. These open strings interact by splitting and joining their ends. When a closed string mode scatters off open string modes on a D-brane, all external open string modes join together to form a macroscopic open Wilson line, which then couples to the closed string mode. The extension of the Wilson line is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }x^\mu =\underset{a}{}\mathrm{\Delta }x_a^\mu =\theta ^{\mu \nu }\underset{a}{}k_{a\nu }=\theta ^{\mu \nu }q_\nu ,$$
(7)
where $`k_a`$ and $`q`$ are the momenta of open and closed string modes respectively. From the worldsheet point of view, the Wilson line can then be viewed as the spacetime image of the worldsheet boundary, and the integration procedure has its origin in the integrations of the vertex operator insertions on the boundary worldsheet. It is interesting that in the noncommutative theory, the spacetime image of the worldsheet boundary, which is closed, is an open contour instead of a closed loop.

The way in which we write the string amplitudes previously given in  makes it easy to extract the Wilson line from the operators $`𝒪(k)`$. We will also see that the effective couplings illustrate to all orders the expectation that when multiple D-branes interact with background supergravity fields, the supergravity fields should be regarded not just as functions of the $`(p+1)`$-dimensional spacetime but also as functionals of the nonabelian scalar fields (see e.g. ). For example, the coupling of a $`Dp`$-brane to the graviton can be written as

$$d^{p+1}x\mathrm{STr}\left[h_{\mu \nu }(X(x),x)T^{\mu \nu }(x)\right]$$
(8)
where $`X`$ are the nonabelian adjoint scalar fields of the D-branes and $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ is the perturbation of the graviton.333We use the coupling (8) to define the energy-momentum tensor, $`T^{\mu \nu }`$, of the noncommutative theory; this seems to differ from the Noether definition . We also confirm to all orders the “symmetrized trace” prescription for the ordering in (8) up to terms quadratic in the field strength in $`T^{\mu \nu }`$.

This paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we present the string amplitudes for the interaction of a closed string with one or two open strings. From this result, we extrapolate, in section 3 an action which involves the open Wilson line. In section 4 we prove the proposal of section 4 by extracting the contribution to the Wilson line from the infinite series of disk diagrams with one closed string and an arbitrary number of open strings. This confirms the presence of the open Wilson line, in the postulated form. We conclude in section 5 with a discussion of the relation to Born-Infeld action.

As this work was being completed, ref.  appeared. That paper overlaps with this one. In particular, their energy momentum tensor agrees with the large $`B`$ limit of ours.

## 2 Disk amplitudes with one closed string insertion

### 2.1 Preliminaries

We will use $`M,N=0,1,\mathrm{},9`$ to denote the spacetime indices; $`\mu ,\nu =0,1,\mathrm{},p`$ to denote the worldvolume directions of a D-brane; and $`i,j=p+1,\mathrm{},9`$ are the directions transverse to the brane. The relations  between the closed (open) string metric $`g`$ ($`G`$) and coupling $`g_s`$ ($`G_s`$), the $`B`$-field, and the noncommutativity parameter $`\theta `$ are

$`G^1+{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2\pi \alpha ^{}}}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{g+B}}`$ (9)
and
$`G_s`$ $`=g_s\left({\displaystyle \frac{detG}{detg}}\right)^{\frac{1}{4}}.`$ (10)
We assume that $`B`$ lies only in Neumann directions (that is, along the $`D`$-brane) and that $`g_{MN}`$ vanishes for mixed Neumann/Dirichlet directions. Therefore the above equations apply to all spacetime directions; in particular, $`G_{ij}=g_{ij}`$ and $`\theta ^{ij}=0`$.

The NSNS vertex operators are given by

$`V_{NSNS}^{1,1}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2g_c}{\alpha ^{}}}e^{\varphi \stackrel{~}{\varphi }}e_{MN}\psi ^M\stackrel{~}{\psi }^Ne^{iqX}`$ (11)
$`V_O^0`$ $`=a_M(i\dot{X}^M+4k\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^M)e^{ikX}`$ (12)
where the overdot in equation (12) is understood to be the tangential derivative along the worldsheet boundary for Neumann directions, and the normal derivative for Dirichlet directions. The gauge bosons have momenta $`k_a`$ and polarizations $`a_a`$, with $`a,b,\mathrm{}`$ labeling the gauge boson444We have absorbed a factor of $`g_{YM}`$ into the polarization. Also, we will suppress Chan-Paton factors from the formulas for simplicity, although we will comment on them when appropriate.; the massless closed string mode has momentum $`q`$ and polarization $`e_{MN}`$. We can decompose the closed string polarization into modes corresponding to perturbations of the graviton, $`h_{MN}`$, the antisymmetric $`B`$-field $`b_{MN}`$ and the dilaton $`\phi `$ via

$$e_{MN}=h_{MN}+b_{MN}+\frac{1}{2}\phi (g_{MN}q_M\rho _Nq_N\rho _M).$$
(13)
In addition, $`h_{MN}`$ is traceless—$`h_{MN}g^{MN}=0`$—and both $`h_{MN}`$ and $`b_{MN}`$ are transverse: $`h_{MN}g^{NP}q_P=0=b_{MN}g^{NP}q_P`$. Note that we exclusively use the closed string metric when discussing closed string fields. The auxiliary vector $`\rho _M`$ obeys $`q_Mg^{MN}\rho _N=1`$ and is introduced to enforce transversality of $`e_{MN}`$,

$$q_Mg^{MN}e_{NP}=0=e_{PN}g^{NM}q_M,$$
(14)
but it will not appear in any total amplitudes. Also, momentum conservation requires $`q_{}=k_ak_a`$, where $`q_{}`$ and $`q_{}`$ denote the components of $`q`$ parallel and perpendicular to the brane. In addition to (14), the on-shell conditions require that $`q_Mg^{MN}q_N=0=k_{a\mu }G^{\mu \nu }k_{a\nu }`$ and $`k_{a\mu }G^{\mu \nu }a_{a\nu }=0`$.

We shall take the worldsheet to be the upper half plane and use the doubling trick to relate the the fields in the anti-holomorphic sector to those in the holomorphic sector

$`\stackrel{~}{X}^\mu (\overline{z})`$ $`=\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{gB}}(g+B)\right)^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}X_{}^{\nu }(\overline{z})`$ (15)
$`\stackrel{~}{X}^i(\overline{z})`$ $`=X^i(\overline{z})`$ (16)
and

$`\stackrel{~}{\psi }^\mu (\overline{z})`$ $`=\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{gB}}(g+B)\right)^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}\psi _{}^{\nu }(\overline{z}),`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\psi ^\mu +\stackrel{~}{\psi }^\nu )=\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{gB}}g\right)^\mu {}_{\nu }{}^{}\psi _{}^{\nu },`$ (17)
$`\stackrel{~}{\psi }^i`$ $`=\psi ^i,`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }^i`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\psi ^i\stackrel{~}{\psi }^i)=\psi ^i.`$ (18)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }^M`$ is the open string supersymmetric partner of $`X^M`$ which lives on the worldsheet boundary. By introducing $`D=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,\mathrm{},1,\mathrm{},1)`$—an identity matrix in the Neumann directions and minus the identity matrix in the Dirichlet directions—the above equations can be written collectively as

$`\stackrel{~}{X}^M(\overline{z})`$ $`=\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{gB}}(g+B)D\right)^M{}_{N}{}^{}X_{}^{N}(\overline{z}),`$ (19)
$`\stackrel{~}{\psi }^M(\overline{z})`$ $`=\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{gB}}(g+B)D\right)^M{}_{N}{}^{}\psi _{}^{N}(\overline{z}),`$ (20)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }^M`$ $`=\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{gB}}g\right)^M{}_{N}{}^{}\psi _{}^{N}`$ (21)
Note that in equations (11) and (12)

$$g_{YM}^2=(2\pi )^{(p2)}G_s\alpha _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\frac{p3}{2}},g_c=\frac{\kappa _{10}}{2\pi }=\sqrt{\pi }g_s^2(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2,$$
(22)
where the open and closed string couplings $`G_s`$ and $`g_s`$ are related by (10). The overall normalization constant for the disk amplitudes is given by

$$C_{D_2}=\frac{1}{2g_{YM}^2\alpha _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\sqrt{detG}$$
(23)
and the brane tension is related to the Yang-Mills coupling constant $`g_{YM}`$ by

$$T_p=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^pg_s\alpha _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\frac{p+1}{2}}},T_p\sqrt{det(g+B)}=\frac{1}{g_{YM}^2(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}\sqrt{detG}.$$
(24)
The Green functions for the worldsheet fermions are555We are being a little sloppy in writing $`\frac{gB}{g+B}`$ in (26) (and subsequent equations) and not specifying $`\frac{1}{g}(gB)\frac{1}{g+B}`$ or $`\frac{1}{g+B}(gB)\frac{1}{g}`$ because, in fact, they are equal.

$`\psi ^M(z)\psi ^N(w)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^{}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{MN}}{zw}}`$ (25)
$`\psi ^M(z)\stackrel{~}{\psi }^N(\overline{w})`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^{}}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{gB}{g+B}}D\right)^{MN}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z\overline{w}}}`$ (26)
$`\psi ^M(z)\mathrm{\Psi }^N(w)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^{}}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{g+B}}\right)^{MN}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{zw}}`$ (27)
$`\stackrel{~}{\psi }^M(\overline{z})\mathrm{\Psi }^N(w)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^{}}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{gB}}D\right)^{MN}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{z}w}}`$ (28)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }^M(z)\mathrm{\Psi }^N(w)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^{}}{2}}G^{MN}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{zw}}.`$ (29)
The Green functions for $`X`$ are given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill X^\mu (z,\overline{z})X^\nu (w,\overline{w})=\alpha ^{}& [g^{\mu \nu }(\mathrm{log}|zw|\mathrm{log}|z\overline{w}|)+G^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{log}|z\overline{w}|^2\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}\theta ^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{log}\frac{z\overline{w}}{\overline{z}w}]\hfill \end{array}$$
(30)
$$X^i(z,\overline{z})X^j(w,\overline{w})=\alpha ^{}g^{ij}(\mathrm{log}\left|zw\right|\mathrm{log}\left|z\overline{w}\right|).$$
(31)
Using the above equations we can work out some basic formulas like

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill A_n& =e^{iqX}(i)\underset{a=1}{\overset{n}{}}e^{ik_aX}(y_a)\hfill \\ & =i\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}^{\alpha ^{}k^2}C_{D_2}^X(2\pi )^d\delta (\underset{a}{}k_a+q_{})\underset{a<b}{}\left|\mathrm{sin}(\pi \tau _{ab})\right|^{2\alpha ^{}k_ak_b}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{i}{2}\left(k_a\times k_b\right)\left(2\tau _{ab}ϵ(\tau _{ab})\right)\right]\hfill \end{array}$$
(32)
where the $`y_a`$s are on the real axis and $`k=_bk_b`$. For later convenience we have expressed the above correlator in terms of $`\tau _i`$ which are defined by $`y_a=\mathrm{cot}(\pi \tau _a)`$. Note that $`0\tau _a1`$ follows from $`\mathrm{}<y_a<\mathrm{}`$.

We will also use

$$B_n=a_Me^{iqX}(i)i\dot{X}^M(y_a)\underset{b=1}{\overset{n}{}}e^{ik_bX}(y_b)=a_MV^M(y_a)A_n$$
(33)
with

$$\begin{array}{c}a_MV^M(y_a)=2\alpha ^{}[(ak)\frac{y_a}{1+y_a^2}+\frac{i}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}(a\times k)\frac{1}{1+y_a^2}+ia_ig^{ij}q_j\frac{1}{1+y_a^2}\hfill \\ \hfill +\underset{b=1,ba}{\overset{n}{}}(ak_b)\frac{1}{y_ay_b}]\end{array}$$
(34)
where again $`k=_bk_b=q_{}`$. In this paper, when not specified otherwise, the dot product is with respect to the open string metric and the cross product denotes contraction using $`\theta ^{\mu \nu }`$, i.e. $`a\times k=a_\mu \theta ^{\mu \nu }k_\nu `$.

### 2.2 One closed and one open

The amplitude for the interaction of one massless closed string mode and one massless gauge field mode is given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝒜& =V_{NSNS}^{1,1}(i)V_O^0(0)\hfill \\ & =\frac{2g_c}{\alpha ^{}}e_{MN}\mathrm{Tr}a_P\psi ^M\stackrel{~}{\psi }^Ne^{iqX}(i)(i\dot{X}^P+4k\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^P)e^{ikX}(0)\hfill \end{array}$$
(35)
We have suppressed the ghosts, the relevant contribution from which turns out to be unity. In the following we shall take the polarization of the closed string mode to be along the brane666An unfortunate by-product is that we will miss some couplings of the dilaton to the transverse scalar fields and so we will not be able to see explicitly that $`\rho _M`$ of (13) drops out in terms that involve scalar fields., i.e. $`e_{MN}=e_{\mu \nu }`$, and we shall always omit the momentum conservation factor $`(2\pi )^{p+1}\delta (q_{}+_ak_a)`$. The amplitude (35) can be evaluated using equations (32) and (33) to yield

$$𝒜=\frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\frac{i}{2}EM(2\pi \alpha ^{})E^{\mu \nu }f_{\mu \nu }\right]$$
(36)
where

$`E`$ $`=e_{MN}\left({\displaystyle \frac{gB}{g+B}}D\right)^{MN},`$ $`E^{MN}`$ $`=e_{PQ}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{g+B}}\right)^{PM}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{gB}}D\right)^{QN}`$ (37)
and
$`M`$ $`=\theta ^{\mu \nu }a_\mu k_\nu +(2\pi \alpha ^{})\varphi _ig^{ij}q_j,`$ $`f_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=i(k_\mu a_\nu k_\nu a_\mu ),`$ (38)
with $`\varphi _ia_i`$.

### 2.3 One closed and two open

The amplitude with one massless closed string mode polarized along the brane direction and two noncommutative gauge modes is

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝒜& =_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑yV_{NSNS}^{1,1}(i)V_O^0(0)V_O^0(y)\hfill \\ & =\frac{2g_c}{\alpha ^{}}e_{MN}\mathrm{Tr}a_{1P}a_{2Q}\hfill \\ & \times dy\psi ^M\stackrel{~}{\psi }^Ne^{iqX}(i)(i\dot{X}^P+4k_1\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^P)e^{ik_1X}(0)(i\dot{X}^Q+4k_2\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^Q)e^{ik_2X}(y)\hfill \\ & =\widehat{𝒜}+\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_1+\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_2\hfill \end{array}$$
(39)
For convenience, we have split the amplitude into three parts: $`\widehat{𝒜}`$ contains the part involving the self-contraction of $`\psi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }`$ in the closed string vertex operator; $`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_2`$ contain the remaining terms, which respectively involve four-fermion and six-fermion contractions.

Using (32) and (33) and integrating over $`y`$, the final result can be written as

$`\widehat{𝒜}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{2g_{YM}^2}}EJ\left[(k_1a_2)(k_2a_1)(a_1a_2)(k_1k_2){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}}M_1M_2\right]`$ (40)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{8\pi \alpha ^{}g_{YM}^2}}EJ{\displaystyle \frac{2\beta }{\alpha ^{}t}}\left[(a_1k_2)M_2(a_2k_1)M_1+(k_1\times k_2)(a_1a_2)\right]`$
$`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_1`$ $`=i{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2}}JE^{\mu \nu }\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}}(f_{1\mu \nu }M_2+f_{2\mu \nu }M_1){\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{\alpha ^{}t}}\left(f_{1\mu \nu }(a_2k_1)f_{2\mu \nu }(a_1k_2)\right)\right]`$ (41)
$`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2}}JE^{\mu \nu }[f_{1\mu \rho }f_{2\nu }^\rho +_\mu \varphi _1^i_\nu \varphi _{2i}+(12)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{\alpha ^{}t}}(f_{1\mu \rho }f_{2\nu }^\rho +_\mu \varphi _1^i_\nu \varphi _{2i}(12))]`$ (42)
where $`E`$ and $`E^{\mu \nu }`$ were defined in equations (37) and (38). $`M_1`$ and $`f_{1\mu \nu }`$ generalize (38) to

$`M_1`$ $`=\theta ^{\mu \nu }a_{1\mu }k_\nu +(2\pi \alpha ^{})\varphi _{1i}g^{ij}q_j,`$ $`f_{1\mu \nu }`$ $`=i(k_{1\mu }a_{1\nu }k_{1\nu }a_{1\mu }),`$ (43)
and similarly for $`M_2,f_{2\mu \nu }`$. Note that the total (open string) momentum $`k`$ appears in the definition of $`M_{1,2}`$; this will be important when we relate terms involving $`M`$ to the Wilson line. We have also introduced

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\hfill \beta & =\frac{k_1\times k_2}{\pi },\hfill & \hfill t& =k^2=2k_1k_2,\hfill & \hfill _\mu \varphi _{1i}& =ik_{1\mu }\varphi _{1i},\hfill \end{array}$$
(44)
$$J=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\alpha ^{}t)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1\frac{\alpha ^{}t}{2}+\beta \right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1\frac{\alpha ^{}t}{2}\beta \right)}=\frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}+𝒪(\alpha ^{}t)+\mathrm{},$$
(45)
In (40)–(2.3) the dot product is with respect to the open string metric777In particular $`a_1a_2=a_{1\mu }G^{\mu \nu }a_{2\nu }+a_{1i}G^{ij}a_{2j}=a_{1\mu }G^{\mu \nu }a_{2\nu }+\varphi _{1i}g^{ij}\varphi _{2j}`$. and the indices are raised and lowered by the open string metric.

We shall be interested in the leading terms of the amplitude in an $`\alpha ^{}t`$ expansion i.e. we consider the limit $`\alpha ^{}k_\mu G^{\mu \nu }k_\nu 1`$, while keeping $`k_{1\mu }\theta ^{\mu \nu }k_{2\nu }`$ finite. Substituting the leading term in the expansion (45) into (40)–(2.3), the amplitude separates into finite terms and terms containing poles in $`t`$. The finite terms are

$`\widehat{𝒜}_f`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{2g_{YM}^2}}E{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}}M_1M_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}f_{1\mu \nu }f_2^{\mu \nu }+G^{\mu \nu }g^{ij}_\mu \varphi _{1i}_\nu \varphi _{2j}\right]`$ (46)
$`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_{1f}`$ $`=i{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}}E^{\mu \nu }(f_{1\mu \nu }M_2+f_{2\mu \nu }M_1)`$ (47)
$`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_{2f}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}}E^{\mu \nu }\left[f_{1\mu \rho }f_{2\nu }^\rho +_\mu \varphi _1^i_\nu \varphi _{2i}+(12)\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{\pi \alpha ^{}g_{YM}^2}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}E^{\mu \nu }(a_{1\mu }a_{2\nu }a_{2\mu }a_{1\nu }),`$ (48)
and the terms with a pole are

$`\widehat{𝒜}_p`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{2\pi ^2\alpha ^{}g_{YM}^2}}E{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\alpha ^{}t}}\left[(a_1k_2)M_2(a_2k_1)M_1+(k_1\times k_2)(a_1a_2)\right]`$ (49)
$`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_{1p}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2i}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\alpha ^{}t}}E^{\mu \nu }\left[f_{1\mu \nu }(a_2k_1)f_{2\mu \nu }(a_1k_2)\right]`$ (50)
$`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_{2p}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\alpha ^{}t}}E^{\mu \nu }[(f_{1\mu \rho }f_2^\rho {}_{\nu }{}^{})_p+_\mu \varphi _1^i_\nu \varphi _{2i}(12)]`$ (51)
where

$$[f_{1\mu \lambda }f_2^\lambda {}_{\nu }{}^{}]_p=[(a_2k_1)a_{1\mu }k_{2\nu }+(a_1k_2)a_{2\nu }k_{1\mu }(a_1a_2)k_{1\mu }k_{2\nu }]$$
(52)
Note that the fourth term in $`f_{1\mu \lambda }f_2^\lambda _\nu `$ contributes to the finite term. The pole terms are all proportional to $`\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}`$ and can be reproduced from exchanging massless gauge bosons (or scalar fields) using the vertex (36) and cubic vertices of gauge bosons, as was pointed out in .

The finite terms in (46)–(2.3) are all proportional to $`\frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}`$, except for the last term in (2.3) which is proportional to $`\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}`$. The factor $`\frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}`$ gives rise to the generalized star-product $`_2`$ between two Yang-Mills fields , which in momentum space is

$$f(k_1)_2g(k_2)=f(k_1)\frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}{\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}}g(k_2)$$
(53)
The last term of (2.3) combines with the second term in (36) to give the noncommutative field strength

$$F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu iA_\mu A_\nu +iA_\nu A_\mu $$
(54)
which in momentum space becomes

$$F_{\mu \nu }=i(k_\mu A_\nu k_\nu A_\mu )2\mathrm{sin}\frac{k_1\times k_2}{2}A_\mu (k_1)A_\nu (k_2)$$
(55)
## 3 Supergravity Couplings of Noncommutative D-branes

From equations (36) and (46)–(2.3) we are ready to write down the effective couplings of the massless NSNS closed string modes to the noncommutative D-brane up to terms quadratic in Yang-Mills fields. Since $`M`$ defined in (38) and (43) involve the total momentum of the open string modes it is more convenient to write down the couplings in momentum space888We have included a tadpole term which can be easily obtained, for example, by cutting open the annulus diagram.

$$\begin{array}{c}S=\frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2\left(2\pi \alpha ^{}\right)^2}\frac{d^{10}q}{\left(2\pi \right)^{10}}\frac{d^{p+1}k_1}{\left(2\pi \right)^{p+1}}\frac{d^{p+1}k_2}{\left(2\pi \right)^{p+1}}\sqrt{detG}\left(2\pi \right)^{p+1}\delta ^{\left(p+1\right)}\left(q_{}+k_1+k_2\right)\hfill \\ \hfill \times \{\frac{1}{2}E\left(q\right)[1+iM\left(k_1\right)\frac{1}{2}M\left(k_1\right)_2M\left(k_2\right)+\frac{1}{4}_{\mu \nu }\left(k_1\right)_2^{\mu \nu }\left(k_2\right)+\frac{1}{2}D_\mu X_i\left(k_1\right)_2D^\mu X^i\left(k_2\right)]\\ \hfill +\frac{1}{2}E^{\mu \nu }\left(q\right)[_{\mu \nu }\left(k_1\right)i_{\mu \nu }\left(k_1\right)_2M\left(k_2\right)+_{\mu \rho }\left(k_1\right)_2^\rho {}_{\nu }{}^{}\left(k_2\right)D_\mu X^i\left(k_1\right)_2D_\nu X_i\left(k_2\right)]\}\end{array}$$
(56)
where $`=2\pi \alpha ^{}F`$ is the noncommutative field strength (54), $`X_i=2\pi \alpha ^{}\varphi _i`$ and $`D_\mu X_i=_\mu X_ii[A_\mu ,X_i]_{}`$. Note that we have promoted the perturbation $`a_M`$ to the full gauge field $`A_M`$. $``$ and $`DX`$ should be understood as their Fourier transforms, as in (55). For terms linear in Yang-Mills fields it is understood that $`k_2`$ should be set to zero and not integrated, and for the tadpole term, it is understood that $`k_1=k_2=0`$. Except for those in $`E`$ and $`E^{\mu \nu }`$ the indices are always raised and lowered using the open string metric (recall $`G_{ij}=g_{ij}`$). The $`_2`$-product was defined in (53) and

$$M(k_i)=\theta ^{\mu \nu }q_\mu A_\nu (k_i)+q_{}X(k_i).$$
(57)
For the graviton polarized along the brane

$$E=h_{\mu \nu }\left(\frac{gB}{g+B}\right)^{\mu \nu },E^{\mu \nu }=h_{\lambda \rho }\left(\frac{1}{g+B}\right)^{\lambda \mu }\left(\frac{1}{gB}\right)^{\rho \nu }.$$
(58)
with $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ symmetric, traceless in terms of closed string metric, i.e. $`g^{\mu \nu }h_{\mu \nu }=0`$. A similar expression applies to the NSNS anti-symmetric tensor $`b_{\mu \nu }`$. Note $`E`$ and $`E^{\mu \nu }`$ in (58) satisfy the relation

$$E=G_{\mu \nu }E^{\nu \mu }$$
(59)
For the dilaton

$$E=\phi (g_{\mu \nu }G^{\mu \nu }4),E^{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}\phi g_{\lambda \rho }\left(\frac{1}{g+B}\right)^{\lambda \mu }\left(\frac{1}{gB}\right)^{\rho \nu }.$$
(60)
It can be checked that the effective action (56) is not gauge invariant under the noncommutative gauge transformations

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \delta _\lambda A_\mu & =_\mu \lambda +i\lambda A_\mu iA_\mu \lambda ,\hfill \\ \hfill \delta _\lambda X_i& =i\lambda X_iiX_i\lambda .\hfill \end{array}$$
(61)
This is almost the same situation encountered in the one-loop effective action of noncommutative super-Yang-Mills theory , which is related to the disk amplitudes considered here by factorization. The reason is by now well understood; the non-gauge-invariance of higher order terms in the action will conspire to cancel those from (56) to make the whole effective action gauge invariant . Using the result of  regarding the relation between the $`_n`$ products and an open Wilson line, the resolution is to attach each $``$ and $`X`$ in (56) to a straight Wilson line and integrate over the insertion positions with respect to the path ordering. The presence of the Wilson line can already been seen from the nature of the $`M`$-dependence in (56). Thus we obtain the following gauge invariant completion of the above action (56)

$$S=\frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}\frac{d^{10}q}{(2\pi )^{10}}\sqrt{detG}\frac{1}{2}E^{\mu \nu }(q)T_{\mu \nu }(q)$$
(62a)
where
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill T_{\mu \nu }(q)& =\mathrm{Tr}d^{p+1}xL_{}\left(W(x,C)T_{\mu \nu }(x)\right)e^{iq_\rho x^\rho }\hfill \\ \hfill T_{\mu \nu }(x)& =G_{\mu \nu }(1+\frac{1}{4}_{\lambda \rho }^{\lambda \rho }+\frac{1}{2}D_\lambda X_iD^\lambda X^i)_{\mu \nu }+_{\mu \rho }^\rho {}_{\nu }{}^{}D_\mu X^iD_\nu X_i\hfill \end{array}$$
(62b)
and ($`\xi ^\nu (\tau )=\theta ^{\mu \nu }q_\mu \tau `$)
$$W(x,C)=P_{}\mathrm{exp}\left[i_0^1𝑑\tau \left(q_\mu \theta ^{\mu \nu }A_\nu (x+\xi (\tau ))+q_iX^i(x+\xi (\tau ))\right)\right].$$
(62c)
Clearly, (62c) leads to the expansion in $`M`$ seen in (56). In (62b) we have used a short hand notation $`L_{}`$ to denote the procedure of integrating each $``$ or $`X`$ in $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ along the Wilson line via path ordering.999For example,
$$\begin{array}{c}d^{p+1}xL_{}\left[W(x,C)F_{\mu \rho }(x)F_\nu ^\rho (x)\right]e^{iq_\mu x^\mu }\hfill \\ \hfill =d^{p+1}x_0^1d\tau _1_0^1d\tau _2P_{}\left[W(x,C)F_{\mu \rho }(x+\xi (\tau _1))F^\rho {}_{\nu }{}^{}(x+\xi (\tau _2))\right]e^{iqx}.\end{array}$$

In general,

$$\begin{array}{cc}& d^{p+1}xL_{}\left[W(x,C)\underset{a=1}{\overset{n}{}}𝒪_a(x)\right]e^{iqx}\hfill \\ & d^{p+1}x\left(\underset{a=1}{\overset{n}{}}_0^1𝑑\tau _a\right)P_{}\left[W(x,C)\underset{a=1}{\overset{n}{}}𝒪_a(x+\xi (\tau _a))\right]e^{iqx}\hfill \\ & =\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{i^m}{m!}\left(\underset{i=a}{\overset{n+m}{}}\frac{d^{p+1}k_a}{(2\pi )^{p+1}}\right)Q_m(k_1,\mathrm{},k_{n+m})\hfill \end{array}$$
(63)
where in the third line we have expanded the Wilson line in terms of the power series of the gauge fields with ($`𝒪_i(k)`$ are the Fourier transforms of $`𝒪_i(x)`$)

$$Q_m=\left(2\pi \right)^{p+1}\delta ^{\left(p+1\right)}\left(q+\underset{i=1}{\overset{m+n}{}}k_i\right)𝒪_1\left(k_1\right)\mathrm{}𝒪_n\left(k_n\right)M\left(k_{n+1}\right)\mathrm{}M\left(k_{n+m}\right)J_{n+m}(k_1,\mathrm{},k_{n+m})$$
(64)
and

$$J_n(k_1,\mathrm{},k_n)=_0^1𝑑\tau _1\mathrm{}_0^1𝑑\tau _n\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{i}{2}\underset{a<b}{\overset{n}{}}(k_a\times k_b)(2\tau _{ab}ϵ(\tau _{ab}))\right].$$
(65)
It is important to note that all the entries in (64) are completely symmetric under the ordering due to symmetric properties of the $`J_{m+n}`$. For simplicity, we have written equations (3.10)–(3.12) as if the gauge group were abelian. With Chan-Paton factors, we should include a path ordering with respect to the $`\tau _i`$s when multiplying the adjoint-valued objects; this orders the operators according to their location on the Wilson line. This prescription clearly maintains the full symmetry of $`J_{m+n}`$.

In the next section we shall show that higher order terms in (62) can be systematically extracted from the amplitudes of one closed string with arbitrary number of open string modes. In particular, the structure of the amplitude is such that one obtains a fully symmetrized action, though only in the low energy limit.

The effective action (62) indicates that when we turn on a constant $`B`$-field, the D-brane becomes a source for the dilaton (even for a $`D3`$-brane) and the NSNS $`B`$-field, in addition to the graviton. This is expected as we know that the supergravity solution for D3-branes with a $`B`$-field involves nontrivial dilaton and $`B`$-field background . Since a constant $`B`$-field does not break supersymmetry, there will still be no net force between parallel D-branes. Thus the exchange amplitude due to these additional couplings have to cancel with the new couplings in the R-R sector or among themselves. Similarly there are new couplings at the linear and quadratic level, and their contributions to $`F^2`$ and $`F^3`$ interactions between the branes should cancel one another or with those in RR-sector since, as shown in , there is no one-loop correction to $`F^2`$ and $`F^3`$ terms in $`𝒩=4`$ noncommutative super-Yang-Mills theory. In , minimal couplings which reproduce the one-loop $`F^4`$ terms were worked out and it was found for example that the graviton couples to noncommutative gauge field modes in a form

$$h_{\lambda \rho }(q)g^{\lambda \mu }G^{\rho \nu }d^{p+1}xL_{}\left[W(x,C)\left(F_{\mu \sigma }F_\nu {}_{}{}^{\sigma }\frac{1}{4}G_{\mu \nu }F_{\sigma \alpha }F^{\sigma \alpha }\right)\right]e^{iq_\rho x^\rho }.$$
(66)
The quadratic in field strength coupling to the graviton that we found above is

$$h_{\lambda \rho }\left(q\right)\left(\frac{1}{g+B}\right)^{\lambda \mu }\left(\frac{1}{gB}\right)^{\rho \nu }d^{p+1}xL_{}\left[W(x,C)\left(F_{\mu \sigma }F_\nu {}_{}{}^{\sigma }\frac{1}{4}G_{\mu \nu }F_{\sigma \alpha }F^{\sigma \alpha }\right)\right]e^{iq_\rho x^\rho }$$
(67)
The general structures of (66) and (67) agree very well except for the index structure of the graviton. This is to be expected since (66) was inferred indirectly to reproduce the one-loop $`F^4`$ terms and this procedure does not determine the Lorentz structure uniquely.

To gain some intuition about the physical meaning of (62) let us look at some special cases.

### 3.1 $`B=0`$

In this case $`E^{\mu \nu }`$ is the standard supergravity perturbation and equation (62b) becomes

$$T_{\mu \nu }(q)=d^{p+1}xe^{iq_iX^i}e^{iq_\rho x^\rho }T_{\mu \nu }(x)$$
(68)
and thus equation (62a) becomes

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill S& =\frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}\frac{d^{10}q}{(2\pi )^{10}}\sqrt{detG}\frac{1}{2}E^{\mu \nu }(q)\left[d^{p+1}xe^{iq_iX^i}e^{iq_\rho x^\rho }T_{\mu \nu }(x)\right]\hfill \\ & =\frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}d^{p+1}x\sqrt{detG}\frac{1}{2}E^{\mu \nu }(X(x),x)T_{\mu \nu }(x)\hfill \end{array}$$
(69)
where in the above we have used

$$E^{\mu \nu }(X(x),x)=\frac{d^{10}q}{(2\pi )^{10}}E^{\mu \nu }(q)e^{iq_iX^i}e^{iq_\rho x^\rho }$$
(70)
The above result indicated that the external supergravity fields should be considered as a functional of the transverse scalar fields.

In the nonabelian case, the $`L_{}`$ in (62b) reduces to a symmetrized trace and the action becomes:

$$S=\frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}d^{p+1}x\sqrt{detG}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{STr}\left[E^{\mu \nu }(X_i(x),x)T_{\mu \nu }(x)\right]$$
(71)
Note that the $`X_i(x)`$ are now nonabelian matrices and the symmetrized trace is to be understood as first doing the Fourier transform as in (70) and then treat the exponential as a power series.

### 3.2 Relation with Matrix Theory

In this section we shall consider the Euclidean version  of Matrix Theory . Noncommutative Yang-Mills theory is obtained naturally from the $`U(\mathrm{})`$ limit of Matrix Theory . This is closely related to the construction of D$`p`$-Branes in Matrix Theory (see e.g. ). In terms of Matrix Theory variables $`X^M`$, D$`p`$-branes can be obtained as a classical solution

$$[x^\mu ,x^\nu ]=i\theta ^{\mu \nu },\mu ,\nu =0,\mathrm{},p$$
(72)
and the noncommutative Yang-Mills theory arises by considering the dynamics of the fluctuations around the classical solution

$$X^\mu =x^\mu +\theta ^{\mu \nu }A_\nu $$
(73)
and

$$[X^\mu ,X^\nu ]=i\left[\theta (F\theta ^1)\theta \right]^{\mu \nu }$$
(74)
As pointed out in , the noncommutative Yang-Mills theory obtained this way corresponds to the choice of $`\mathrm{\Phi }=B`$ description of the open string dynamics . In this description, the open string parameters given by

$`\theta `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{B}}`$ (75)
$`G^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{B}}g{\displaystyle \frac{1}{B}}`$ (76)
$`G_s`$ $`=`$ $`g_s\sqrt{detBg^1}`$ (77)
On the other hand the off-shell action (62a)–(62c), which was extrapolated from the on-shell string amplitudes, corresponds to the choice $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$. The two descriptions are in general related by field redefinitions .

In the large $`B`$-field limit, the mixed Neumann and Dirichlet boundary conditions (15) become effectively Dirichlet conditions and thus we expect that our results (62a)–(62c) can be expressed naturally in terms of Matrix Theory variables $`X`$. Indeed it can be checked that equations (9) and (10) reduce to (75)–(77) in this limit. We note that the open Wilson line (62c) can be written in Matrix Theory variables (73) as

$$W(x,C)=\mathrm{exp}\left(iqX\right)=\mathrm{exp}\left(iq_\mu X^\mu +iq_iX^i\right)$$
(78)
After some algebraic manipulations it can be shown that in the large $`B`$-field limit, the action (62a)–(62c) can be rewritten (e.g. for the graviton) as

$$S=\frac{\kappa _{10}}{(2\pi )^{\frac{p1}{2}}g_s\alpha _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{(\frac{p+1}{2})}}\frac{d^{10}q}{(2\pi )^{10}}\sqrt{det\theta }h_{\mu \nu }(q)\mathrm{STr}\left[e^{iqX}[X^\mu ,X^M]g_{MN}[X^N,X^\nu ]\right]$$
(79)
where we have used (74). In the above “Tr” should be understood to be defined in the Hilbert space given by (72), i.e.

$$\sqrt{det\theta }\mathrm{Tr}=\frac{d^{p+1}x}{(2\pi )^{\frac{p+1}{2}}}\mathrm{tr}$$
(80)
where here “tr” denotes the group trace, and the symmetrized trace “STr” should be understood as a formal way of writing the $`L_{}`$ prescription defined below (62c).

## 4 The structure of higher-point amplitudes and the open Wilson line

In this section we will show how, by considering disk amplitudes with one massless closed string and an arbitrary number of massless open string modes, one finds the full open Wilson line in the effective action (62). We will not attempt to evaluate the general amplitudes and shall be only interested in the parts of the amplitudes relevant for the higher order terms in (62). As we have seen the last section, they should arise as finite terms of the amplitudes in the limit $`\alpha ^{}k_ak_b0`$.101010We will ignore terms with a pole in $`k_ak_b`$ as they arise from exchanging massless gauge bosons (or scalars) using lower order vertices. For the convenience of the discussion we shall not write explicitly the numerical prefactors of the amplitudes.

The general disk amplitude is

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝒜_m& =\left[\underset{a=2}{\overset{m}{}}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑y_a\right]V_{NSNS}^{1,1}(i)\underset{a=1}{\overset{m}{}}V_O^0(\xi _a,k_a;y_a)\hfill \\ & =e_{MN}𝑑y\psi ^M\stackrel{~}{\psi }^Ne^{iqX}(i)\underset{a=1}{\overset{m}{}}a_{aM_a}(i\dot{X}^{M_a}+4k_a\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{M_a})e^{ik_1X}(y_a).\hfill \end{array}$$
(81)
We may take $`y_1=0`$ using the $`SL(2,)`$ invariance of the disk, and in the second line we have used a shorthand for all the $`y_a`$-integrations.

There are two important features of the correlators inside the integrals which will be relevant for us. There is a nontrivial phase factor

$$\underset{a<b}{}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{i}{2}(k_a\times k_b)(2\tau _{ab}ϵ(\tau _{ab}))\right]$$
(82)
as was given in (32). (Note that this just gives unity when $`B=0`$.) The $`ϵ(\tau _{ab})`$ term is probably quite familiar by now, from  and much subsequent work. It arises from bosonic contractions between open string vertex operators. Were it not for the linear term, which arises from contractions between the open strings and the closed string, the phase factor would give rise to the $``$-product.111111The linear term vanishes when there is no momentum flow between the closed and open strings. The phase factor also appeared in one-loop diagrams ; this is more than just a coincidence as the one-loop diagrams must factorize into tree diagrams. Equation (82) is precisely the same phase factor that appears in the expansion of the open Wilson lines (65).

Another general feature is that for every $`i\dot{X}^M(y_a)`$ insertion from an open string vertex operator, there is a term of the form

$$i\left[(q\times a_a)+(2\pi \alpha ^{})\varphi _aq_{}\right]\frac{1}{\pi (1+y_a^2)},$$
(83)
coming from the contraction with $`e^{iqX}`$ in the closed string vertex operator, as was already given in (34). This, of course, is precisely the $`iM_a`$ of (57).

Naïvely, the Wilson lines now can be seen to arise as follows. Suppose we are considering what is an interaction between $`n`$ open strings and a closed string. For each additional open string that we add, one of the contributions is an additional factor of $`iM_a`$. Because this comes from the $`i\dot{X}^M(y_a)`$ in the vertex operator, the rest of the amplitude is almost unchanged from that without the additional open string; the only other change is in the phase factor (82) from the additional $`e^{ikX}`$. But this is precisely the open Wilson line expansion (63)–(65). In practice the story is more complicated as there are additional functions and singularities of of $`y_a`$ in the integrand.

As the simplest example let us look at the (tadpole) term

$$E(q)d^{p+1}xW(x,C)e^{iq_\mu x^\mu }$$
(84)
in (62). From what was outlined just after equation (83), the relevant terms are the products of $`iM`$ coming from the contraction of $`i\dot{X}`$ with the $`e^{iqX}`$ part of the closed string vertex operator. Thus the relevant terms are

$$\begin{array}{c}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑yA_n\underset{b=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{i}{\pi }M(k_b)\frac{1}{1+y_b^2}\hfill \\ \hfill =(2\pi )^d\delta (\underset{a}{}k_a+q_{})_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}dy\{\underset{a<b}{}[|\mathrm{sin}(\pi \tau _{ab})|^{2\alpha ^{}k_ak_b}\mathrm{exp}[\frac{i}{2}(k_a\times k_b)(2\tau _{ab}ϵ(\tau _{ab}))]].\\ \hfill .\times \underset{b=1}{\overset{m}{}}iM(k_b)\frac{1}{\pi (1+y_b^2)}\}\end{array}$$
(85)
where $`y_a=\mathrm{cot}\pi \tau _a`$ and in the first line $`A_n`$ is given by (32). Since the integrand (85) is regular for all values of $`y_a`$ we can take the limit $`\alpha ^{}k_ak_b0`$ before integrating over the vertex operator positions121212 Although we are interested in the $`\alpha ^{}k_ak_b0`$ limit, we cannot generally take this limit until after integrating, because the integrals are typically defined only by analytic continuation from outside the kinematic region of interest. We can take $`\alpha ^{}k_ak_b0`$ inside the integrals only when the integrand is regular throughout the limit.. Using $`\frac{dy}{d\tau }=\pi (1+y^2)`$ to change the integration variables to $`\tau _a`$ we find

$$(2\pi )^{p+1}\delta (\underset{a}{}k_a+q_{})\underset{b=1}{\overset{m}{}}iM(k_b)\left(\underset{a=2}{\overset{m}{}}_0^1𝑑\tau _a\right)\underset{a<b=1}{\overset{m}{}}\mathrm{exp}[\frac{i}{2}(k_a\times k_b)(2\tau _{ab}ϵ(\tau _{ab}))].$$
(86)
This is precisely the $`m`$th-order term in the expansion of a Wilson line (63)–(65) with no operator insertion131313Recall that the $`SL(2,)`$-invariance was used to fix $`y_1=0`$ or $`\tau _1=\frac{1}{2}`$.. The factor of $`\frac{1}{m!}`$ also arises correctly from the symmetry factor when translating the amplitude into the effective action.

As a more complicated example let us look at the term

$$E(q)d^{p+1}x\left[W(x,C)F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }\right]e^{iq_\rho x^\rho }$$
(87)
in (62), which has an expansion, using (63)–(65), of

$$\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{m!}\left(\underset{a=1}{\overset{m+2}{}}\frac{d^{p+1}k_a}{(2\pi )^{p+1}}\right)F_{\mu \nu }(k_1)F^{\mu \nu }(k_2)\left(\underset{b=3}{\overset{m+2}{}}iM(k_b)\right)J_{m+2}(k_1,\mathrm{},k_{m+2})$$
(88)
where we have omitted the factor $`(2\pi )^{p+1}\delta (q+_{a=1}^{m+2}k_a)`$ so as not to make the formula too long. To reproduce the $`m`$th order term in (88) we shall look at the following amplitude

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑y_2\underset{a=3}{\overset{m+2}{}}dy_aV_{NSNS}^{1,1}(i)V_O^0(0;k_1,a_1)V_O^0(y_2;k_2,a_2)\underset{a=3}{\overset{m}{}}V_O^0(y_a;k_a,a_a)$$
(89)
where we have separated two open string vertex operators with the rest. For vertex operators $`a=3,\mathrm{},m+2`$ we again take only the factors $`iM_a`$ while the first two are to be contracted with the closed string vertex operator in a way that gives rise to the factor $`F_{\mu \nu }(k_1)F^{\mu \nu }(k_2)=2(k_1a_2)(k_2a_1)2(k_1k_2)(a_1a_2)`$. With this in mind it is easy to extract terms of the relevant kinematic structure from the amplitude (89)

$$\begin{array}{c}E(q)_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\left(dy_2\underset{i=a}{\overset{m+2}{}}dy_a\right)A_{m+2}\left[2\alpha ^{}(a_1k_2)(a_2k_1)\frac{1}{1+y_2^2}+\frac{1}{y_2^2}(1+\alpha ^{}t)(a_1a_2)\right]\hfill \\ \hfill \times \underset{a=3}{\overset{m+2}{}}\frac{iM_a}{\pi (1+y_a^2)}\end{array}$$
(90)
where $`t=2k_1k_2`$ and $`A_{m+2}`$ is again given by (32). The first term in the square bracket is regular as we take $`\alpha ^{}k_ak_b0`$ and after changing the integration coordinates to $`\tau _a`$ we find,

$$2\pi \alpha ^{}E(q)(k_1a_2)(k_2a_1)\left(\underset{j=3}{\overset{m+2}{}}iM_j\right)J_{m+2}(k_1,\mathrm{},k_{m+2})$$
(91)
The second term has a double pole in $`y_2`$ as we take $`\alpha ^{}k_1k_2`$ to zero. Thus we can not take the $`\alpha ^{}k_1k_20`$ naïvely in the integrand and have to be more careful with the integral over $`y_2`$. Taking all other $`\alpha ^{}k_ik_j`$ to zero except $`\alpha ^{}k_1k_2`$ and changing the coordinates to $`\tau _i`$ we get141414Recall that $`y_1=0`$ and so $`\tau _1=\frac{1}{2}`$.

$$\begin{array}{c}E(q)\pi (a_1a_2)\underset{a=3}{\overset{m+2}{}}iM_a(1+\alpha ^{}t)\left(_0^1𝑑\tau _2\underset{a=3}{\overset{m+2}{}}d\tau _a\right)|\mathrm{cos}\pi \tau _2|^{\alpha ^{}t2}\hfill \\ \hfill \times \underset{a<b=1}{\overset{m+2}{}}\mathrm{exp}[\frac{i}{2}(k_a\times k_b)(2\tau _{ab}ϵ(\tau _{ab}))].\end{array}$$
(92)
Note an identity

$$(1+\alpha ^{}t)|\mathrm{cos}\pi \tau _2|^{\alpha ^{}t2}=\alpha ^{}t|\mathrm{cos}\pi \tau _2|^{\alpha ^{}t}+\frac{1}{\pi ^2\alpha ^{}t}_{\tau _2}^2|\mathrm{cos}\pi \tau _2|^{\alpha ^{}t}$$
(93)
Now both terms on the right hand side are regular in $`\tau _2`$ as we take $`\alpha ^{}k_1k_20`$, where the second term should be evaluated using integration by parts. Since integrating by parts in the second term does not yield anything to cancel the $`1/(k_1k_2)`$ factor, it contributes a pole term in the final amplitude and is not of interest to us. Thus in the low energy limit (92) becomes

$$2\alpha ^{}E(a_1a_2)(k_1k_2)\underset{a=3}{\overset{m+2}{}}iM_a\left(_0^1\underset{a=2}{\overset{m+2}{}}d\tau _a\right)\underset{a<b=1}{\overset{m+2}{}}\mathrm{exp}[\frac{i}{2}(k_a\times k_b)(2\tau _{ab}ϵ(\tau _{ab}))].$$
(94)
Combining (91) and (94) we find precisely (88) including the symmetric factor. We have again suppressed the Chan-Paton factors, but they can again be easily inserted. In particular, when $`B=0`$, only the second term in (83) survives, which leads to the fully symmetrized trace over the Chan-Paton factors. We also note that if at the beginning we had taken the large $`B`$ limit of section 3.2, then the $`F^2`$ term we have just finished considering would not have appeared.

Similarly we can recover all higher order terms in (62), by specifying a contraction as in the corresponding term in (56) by extracting factors of $`iM_a`$ from other contractions.

## 5 Discussion and Conclusions

In this paper we have investigated the supergravity couplings of the noncommutative D-branes. The general picture that emerges agrees very well with the proposal in  and with the expectations from the Matrix Model: supergravity fields couple to an open Wilson line and additional operator insertions have to be integrated along the Wilson line. When $`B=0`$, this prescription reduces to the “symmetrized trace” prescription for multiple D-branes interacting with background supergravity fields, and the supergravity fields are seen to be functionals of the nonabelian scalar fields on the branes.

When $`B0`$, the graviton, antisymmetric tensor and the dilaton all couple to Yang-Mills fields at tadpole, linear and quadratic orders. Most of these couplings disappear when $`B=0`$. Then, for example, the dilaton only couples to the D3-brane at quadratic level. Since, from the worldsheet point of view turning on a constant $`B`$-field simply corresponds to a relative Lorentz rotation between the left and right moving sector, we may consider the couplings at $`B0`$ as certain kind of rotation of the original $`B=0`$ couplings. Indications of this can be seen from the Lorentz index structure of (58)–(60) (see also equation (98) below). This point of view may be helpful in understanding the mixings in the perturbations of supergravity background in the noncommutative version of AdS/CFT .

Finally we comment on the relation between our results and the Born-Infeld action. The effective action (62a)–(62c) can be obtained from the ordinary Born-Infeld action by the following procedure:

1. Take the Born-Infeld action

$$S_{BI}=\frac{1}{g_{YM}^2(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}d^4x\sqrt{det(G+2\pi \alpha ^{}F)}$$
(95)
and perturb the open string metric by $`GG+\kappa _{10}ϵ`$, where $`ϵ`$ does not have to be symmetric.
2. Expand the Born-Infeld action (95) to linear level in $`ϵ`$ and quadratic level in $`F`$ to find that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill S_{BI}& =\frac{\kappa _{10}}{g_{YM}^2(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}d^4x\sqrt{detG}\{\frac{1}{2}G^{\mu \nu }ϵ_{\mu \nu }(1+\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{2}D_\mu \varphi _iD^\mu \varphi ^i)\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}(G^{\mu \lambda }ϵ_{\lambda \tau }G^{\tau \nu })(F_{\mu \nu }+F_{\mu \rho }F_\nu ^\rho D_\mu \varphi ^iD_\nu \varphi _i)\}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(96)
3. Fourier transform $`ϵ`$

$$ϵ_{\mu \nu }(x)=\frac{d^{10}q}{(2\pi )^{10}}ϵ_{\mu \nu }(q)\mathrm{exp}\left[iq_\mu X^\mu +iq_{}X\right].$$
(97)
4. Turn the exponential factor in (97) into an open Wilson line (62c), and at the same time integrate each operator in (96) along the Wilson line with respect to the $``$-multiplication and path ordering.

Following the above steps we precisely recover (62a)–(62c) with the identification

$$ϵ_{\lambda \rho }G^{\lambda \mu }G^{\rho \nu }=E^{\mu \nu }=e_{\lambda \rho }\left(\frac{1}{g+B}\right)^{\lambda \mu }\left(\frac{1}{gB}\right)^{\rho \nu }$$
(98)
It would be interesting to check whether higher order terms in (95) also reproduce the string theory amplitudes following the same steps. There are some indications that this might be true:

* Note that the general disk amplitude (81) can be written as

$$𝒜_m=\widehat{𝒜}_m+\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_m$$
(99)
with

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \widehat{𝒜}_m& =E𝑑yQ_m(\xi _i,k_i,y_i;G,\theta )\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{~}{𝒜}_m& =E^{MN}𝑑yT_{MN}^{(m)}(\xi _i,k_i,y_i;G,\theta )\hfill \end{array}$$
(100)
where

$$E=e_{MN}\left(\frac{gB}{g+B}D\right)^{MN},E^{MN}=e_{PQ}\left(\frac{1}{g+B}\right)^{PM}\left(\frac{1}{gB}D\right)^{QN}.$$
(101)
$`\widehat{𝒜}_m`$ comes from the self-contraction of $`\psi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_m`$ comes from the other terms. It is important to note that except for the factor $`e^{iqX}`$ in the closed string vertex $`Q_m`$ and $`T_{MN}^{(m)}`$ involve only the contractions of the open string vertex operators and are naturally expressed in terms of the open string metric $`G`$ and the noncommutative parameter $`\theta `$. The general dependence on the closed string perturbations in (100) is consistent with that in (96) with the identification (98).
* The additional structures (82) and (83) in the worldsheet correlation functions due to the presence of the $`B`$-field is consistent with the appearance of the Wilson line and the integration procedure as we outlined in Sec. 4.

However we note from the examples in Sec. 4 that the emergence of the Wilson line and the integration prescription (and similarly the symmetrized trace prescription) depend crucially on the analytic properties of the worldsheet correlation functions in the low energy limit. It would be interesting to investigate them systematically. It should be helpful in understanding Matrix Theory and also D-branes in curved space.

###### Acknowledgments.

This work was supported by DOE grant #DE-FG02-96ER40559.


text:
# Introduction

## Introduction

Qualitative and quantitative description of relaxation Mössbauer spectra is based on choosing of some relaxation process model. In the most general model of motion of magnetic moment $`\stackrel{}{M}(t)`$ suggested by Brown  this motion is considered like diffusion process on radius $`|\stackrel{}{M}|`$ sphere in a drift field stipulated by the magnetic anisotropy of the pattern. Under Born’s approximation Móssbauer spectra line shape one can express in terms of resolvent of the generator of quantum evolution operator of a nucleus, averaged along all diffusion process $`\stackrel{}{M}(t)`$ trajectories. But computation of averaged evolution operator is connected with solving of complicated differential equation system of partial derivatives and can not be done in analytical form. To avoid this difficulty phenomenological models are used, where magnetic moment $`\stackrel{}{M}(t)`$ position becomes discrete, and process of $`\stackrel{}{M}(t)`$ motion itself is replaced by Markovian process with final number of states, which is described by stochastic matrix with phenomenological transition probabilities of the magnetic moment $`\stackrel{}{M}(t)`$ from one state (of easy magnetization) to another (so called discrete orientation model (DOM)). In this case the problem of computation of averaged evolution operator obtains algebraic character and reduces to inversion of special matrices, which properties and order are determined by the number of easy magnetization directions, the structure of nucleus magnet electron system and by the symmetry of pattern. In this direction certain progress was reached for SP particles with cubic symmetry . Direct account of symmetry in frames of phenomenological DOM permitted authors  to reduce the calculation of absorption line shape of SP particles to inversion some matrices of 8- and 6- order for cubic symmetry systems with negative and positive magnetic anisotropy constants respectively.

For the case of large values of reduced barrier $`\alpha =KV/kT`$ , where $`K`$ is magnetic anisotropy constant, $`k`$ \- Boltzmann constant, $`V`$ \- volume of SP particle, $`T`$ \- temperature, DOM parameters one can calculate by the lowest eigenvalues of Fokker-Plank equation , , giving evolution of $`\stackrel{}{M}(t)`$ in diffusion model , and line shape calculated in such a way is the leading term under $`\alpha \mathrm{}`$ of line shape calculated on the base of diffusion model . For accurate calculation of the line shape error under substitution of diffusion model to discrete one (DOM) first of all detailed analysis of the generator of averaged evolution operator of a nucleus in frames of DOM is necessary.

In present paper, developing symmetry considerations stated at , we investigate the structure of complete averaged evolution operator corresponding to DOM for cubic symmetry (with 6 and 8 easy magnetization directions on $`Fe^{57}`$ nucleus) and some others, maintain it’s spectral analysis in frames of perturbation theory under assumption of slow relaxation and also describe qualitative picture of spectrum behavior in general case (subject to temperature). In proper basis the generator matrix is composed of equal blocks of $`8\times 8`$ older differing only by its diagonal elements composed by combinations of eigenvalues of the stochastic matrix giving DOM. Nondiagonal part of such block is determined only by the nuclear system structure and does not depend neither on stochastic variables nor on crystal lattice symmetry type (on magnetic anisotropy constant sign for cubic symmetry).

## 1 Basic Formulas

In DOM magnetic moment evolution is defined by matrix $`P=S^\text{T}I`$, where $`S`$ is stochastic matrix of transition probabilities between easy magnetization states in unit of time. Vector $`\stackrel{}{g}(t)`$ of magnetic moment $`\stackrel{}{M}(t)`$ distribution is governed by ordinary differential equation

$$\frac{d\stackrel{}{g}}{dt}=P\stackrel{}{g},\stackrel{}{g}=(g_1,g_2,\mathrm{},g_N)^{},$$
(1)
where $`N`$ \- the number of process states (easy magnetization directions). In the case of cubic symmetry $`N`$ is equal either 6 or 8 for positive or negative magnetic anisotropy constant respectively. Matrix $`P`$ is naturally to call as Markovian one.

Line shape is determined by expression ,

$$\phi (\omega )=\frac{2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}Re\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{(i\omega \mathrm{\Gamma }/2)t}Sp(𝐕^{}\overline{G(t)}𝐕\rho )𝑑t,$$
(2)
where $`\omega `$ is the electromagnetic frequency, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ \- natural half-width, $`\rho `$ \- the initial state density matrix, $`𝐕`$ \- the operator of interaction of the nucleus with electromagnetic field, $`\overline{G(t)}`$ \- the result of averaging of the quantum evolution superoperator of the nucleus $`exp(i_0^t\widehat{L}𝑑\tau )`$ along all diffusion process trajectories, in our case along trajectories of Markovian process (1) with finite number of states. In this connection $`\overline{G(t)}`$ is the solution of equation :

$$\frac{d\overline{G}}{dt}=\widehat{P}\overline{G}i\widehat{L}\overline{G}.$$
(3)
Here $`\widehat{L}`$ is diagonal on stochastic variables Liouville’s superoperator, which action on the spin transition operators $`B`$ is determined by the rule: $`\widehat{L}B=H^eBBH^g`$. Here $`H^{e,g}=A^{e,g}\times (\stackrel{}{I}^{e,g},\stackrel{}{m}),\stackrel{}{I}`$ spin operator of a particle (for $`Fe^{57}:I^g=\frac{1}{2},I^e=\frac{3}{2}),\stackrel{}{m}`$ \- unit vector of particle magnetization direction, $`A^{e,g}`$ \- hyperfine interaction constants, $`\widehat{P}=PE_q`$ \- operator matrix diagonal on nuclear variables, $`E_q`$ \- identity superoperator acting in quantum states space.

Calculating integral (2) taking into account (3) one can get the following expression for line shape

$$\phi (\omega )=Im\underset{a,b}{\overset{N}{}}\rho _a\stackrel{}{\eta }^{}J(a\widehat{L}+i\widehat{P}\lambda \widehat{E}^1b)\stackrel{}{\eta }J^{},$$
(4)
where $`\lambda =\omega +i\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2},\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ \- natural half-width, $`\stackrel{}{\eta }`$ \- vector of polarization of falling $`\gamma `$-radiation, $`J`$ \- nuclear current operator, responsible for transitions between sublevels of ground $`|m_g`$ and excited $`|m_e`$ nucleus states, $`\rho _a`$ \- relative probabilities of population of electron states $`a`$ (there are $`N`$ such states). So such calculation is reduced to spectral analysis of the generator of quantum evolution superoperator of a nucleus $`\widehat{G}^1(\lambda )=\widehat{L}+i\widehat{P}\lambda \widehat{E}`$, acting in space of operator-functions of the form: $`|\mathrm{\Psi }=|m_em_ga)`$, which is a tensor product of the spin operators space and stochastic space of magnetic moment directions. Superoperator $`\widehat{L}`$, responsible for hyperfine decomposition of levels, acts by the rule

$$\mathrm{\Psi }\widehat{L}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=[H_{m_em_e^{}}^e\delta _{m_gm_g^{}}H_{m_g^{}m_g}^g\delta _{m_em_e^{}}]\delta _{aa^{}}.$$
(5)
Operator matrix $`\widehat{P}`$ is diagonal on nuclei variables

$$\mathrm{\Psi }\widehat{P}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=p_{aa^{}}\delta _{m_em_e^{}}\delta _{m_g^{}m_g},$$
(6)
$$p_{aa}=\underset{a^{}a}{}(a\widehat{P}a^{}).$$

Relaxation matrix elements $`p_{aa^{}}`$ are transition probabilities in unit of time from state $`a`$ to state $`a^{}`$.

Of course one can consider the state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }>`$ at (5) and (6) as usual state in direct product space of variables $`m_e`$, $`m_g`$, $`a`$ and forget the superoperator nature of $`\widehat{G}=(\widehat{L}+i\widehat{P}\lambda \widehat{E})^1`$.

## 2 Spectral Analysis of Stochastic Matrices

Let us suppose that easy magnetization axes coincide with axes of 3(4)-order of cube for the case of negative (positive) magnetic anisotropy constant. We accept the following indexing of these axes (fig.1,2). For such indexing stochastic matrices of the Markovian process, giving magnetic moment motion, look in a following way

$$P^{(6)}=\begin{array}{ccccccccc}& & 1& 2& 3& \overline{1}& \overline{2}& \overline{3}& \\ 1& (\mathrm{}& 4pq& p& p& q& p& p& )\mathrm{}\\ 2& p& 4pq& p& p& q& p\\ 3& p& p& 4pq& p& p& q\\ \overline{1}& q& p& p& 4pq& p& p\\ \overline{2}& p& q& p& p& 4pq& p\\ \overline{3}& p& p& q& p& p& 4pq\end{array},$$

$$P^{(8)}=\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}& & 1& 2& 3& 4& \overline{1}& \overline{2}& \overline{3}& \overline{4}& \\ 1& (\mathrm{}& s& p& q& p& r& q& p& q& )\mathrm{}\\ 2& p& s& p& q& q& r& q& r\\ 3& q& p& s& p& p& q& r& q\\ 4& p& q& p& s& q& p& q& r\\ \overline{1}& r& q& p& q& s& p& q& p\\ \overline{2}& q& r& q& p& p& s& p& q\\ \overline{3}& p& q& r& q& q& p& s& p\\ \overline{4}& q& p& q& r& p& q& p& s\end{array},$$

$$s=3p3qr.$$

Spectral analysis of such matrices is well known ,,. In particular $`P^{(8)}`$ has two single eigenvalues and two triple ones ($`\rho =\lambda _1=0`$, $`\eta =\lambda _2=\lambda _3=\lambda _4=2(p+2q+r)`$, $`\xi =\lambda _5=\lambda _6=\lambda _7=4(p+q)`$, $`\zeta =\lambda _8=(6p+4q)`$), and $`P^{(6)}`$ has one single, one double and one triple eigenvalues ($`\rho =\lambda _1=0`$, $`\zeta =\lambda _2=\lambda _3=6p`$, $`\zeta =\lambda _4=\lambda _5=\lambda _6=4p2q`$). In connection with degeneration there is some arbitrariness in choice of eigenvalues, which can be eliminated by the requirement of definite symmetry of eigenvectors with respect to turns around quantization axis $`z`$ (quantization axis direction for 3-axial case is different from  and this is connected with natural for giving case symmetry). In the case of $`N=8(6)`$ in the capacity of such eigenvectors let us choose states, that under turning at angle $`\frac{\pi }{2}(\frac{2\pi }{3})`$ around quantization axis $`z`$ obtain factor $`c_n=i^n,n=0,1,2,3`$($`=exp(\frac{2\pi in}{3}),n=0,1,2)`$. In the case of $`N=8`$ such vectors are the following

$$K_n=\frac{1}{4}[|1)+c_n|2)+c_n^2|3)+c_n^3|4)+|\overline{1})+c_n|\overline{2})+c_n^2|\overline{3})+c_n^3|\overline{4})],$$

$$\stackrel{~}{K}_n=\frac{1}{4}[|1)+c_n|2)+c_n^2|3)+c_n^3|4)|\overline{1})c_n|\overline{2})c_n^2|\overline{3})c_n^3|\overline{4})],$$

and in the case $`N=6`$

$$K_n=\frac{1}{\sqrt{12}}[|1)+c_n|2)+c_n^2|3)+|\overline{1})+c_n|\overline{2})+c_n^2|\overline{3})],$$

$$\stackrel{~}{K}_n=\frac{1}{\sqrt{12}}[|1)+c_n|2)+c_n^2|3)|\overline{1})c_n|\overline{2})c_n^2|\overline{3})].$$

In this connection matrix $`P^{(8)}`$ is diagonal in basis $`(K_0,K_1,K_2,K_3,\stackrel{~}{K}_0,\stackrel{~}{K}_1,\stackrel{~}{K}_2,\stackrel{~}{K}_3)`$ and takes form

$$P^{(8)}=\frac{1}{2}diag(\rho ,\xi ,\xi ,\xi ,\eta ,\eta ,\zeta ,\eta ),$$

and matrix

$$P^{(6)}=\frac{1}{2}diag(\rho ,\zeta ,\zeta ,\xi ,\xi ,\zeta )$$

in basic $`(K_0,K_1,K_2,\stackrel{~}{K}_0,\stackrel{~}{K}_1,\stackrel{~}{K}_2,)`$.

It should be noted, that strictly speaking the use of probability transition matrices in produced form is certain assumption, i.e., is adjustment to real continuous diffusion process. However, in the case of small diffusion (or, that is the same, diffusion at strong fields) these matrices one can get directly from continuous diffusion model , on the base of strict asymptotic analysis of the diffusion operator. In addition it is found that nonzero transition probabilities are only those, that correspond to transition between potential wells, having attraction domains with common boundary. For matrix $`P^{(8)}`$ this means that $`q=r=0`$, and for $`P^{(6)}`$ that $`q=0`$. Moreover, calculations show that one can obtain symmetrical Markovian matrices only for the case of potential drift field. Non-symmetrical field automatically means that transition probability from one easy magnetization direction to another is not equal to the inverse one.

## 3 Reduction of Superoperator $`\widehat{G}^1`$ to Block Form

Since superoperator $`\widehat{G}`$ is invariant with respect to group $`C_4(C_3)`$ action, it is necessary to study transformations properties of complete space of quantum-stochastic states respectively on such action, i.e., to construct basic elements of complete space of states, that under turning of coordinate system on angle $`\frac{\pi }{2}(\frac{2\pi }{3})`$ obtain factor $`c_n`$. According to selection rules  superoperator $`\widehat{G}`$ in such basis is of block structure. For this aim it is naturally in quantum variables space to extract states with such properties relatively group $`C_4(C_3)`$ (such kind of states in stochastic variables space we have constructed above) and than to construct 4(3) nonoverlapping subspaces of complete quantum-stochastic space, the states of which obtain factor $`c_n`$ under turning at angle $`\frac{\pi }{2}(\frac{2\pi }{3})`$ around quantization axis $`z`$. How it is shown in , invariant with respect to group $`C_4`$ subspace in the case $`N=8`$ is divided into two nonoverlapping subspaces with different properties relatively time inversion (symmetry and asymmetry subspaces). Really, all others subspaces also suppose such division both in 4- and 3-axial cases and also at other symmetries under proper disposition (consistent with the symmetry) of coordinate system. So it is possible to construct basis in which superoperator $`\widehat{G}`$ consists of 8(6) equal blocks of order $`8\times 8`$, that differ from each other only by diagonal elements, composed of stochastic matrix eigenvalues combinations. Nondiagonal part of each block is determined only by the transition structure of nuclear system and does not depend on sign of magnetic anisotropy constant. Denoting by $`\{n\pm \}`$ blocks $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{symmetrical}{asymmetric}\right)`$ with respect to time reversal, that obtain factor $`c_n=i^n,n=0,1,2,3(exp(\frac{2\pi in}{3}),n=0,1,2)`$ for 4(3)-axial case and denoting quantum transition operators

$$\alpha =|\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}|,\beta =|\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}|,\gamma =|\frac{3}{2}\frac{1}{2}|,\sigma =|\frac{3}{2}\frac{1}{2}|,$$

$$\delta =|\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}|,\epsilon =|\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}|,\mu =|\frac{3}{2}\frac{1}{2}|,\nu =|\frac{3}{2}\frac{1}{2}|,$$

we have the following basic functions for blocks $`\{n\pm \}`$ in 4-axial case

$$|1=K_n(\alpha \beta ),|2=K_{n+3}\delta \pm K_{n+1}\epsilon ,|3=K_{n+3}\gamma \pm K_{n+1}\sigma ,$$

$$|4=K_{n+2}(\mu \nu ),|5=\overline{K}_{n+2}(\mu \pm \nu ),|6=\overline{K}_{n+3}\gamma \overline{K}_{n+1}\sigma ,$$

$$|7=\overline{K}_{n+3}\delta \overline{K}_{n+1}\epsilon ,|8=\overline{K}_n(\alpha \pm \beta ),$$

and in 3-axial case

$$|1=K_n(\alpha \beta ),|2=K_{n+2}\delta \pm K_{n+1}\epsilon ,|3=K_{n+2}\gamma \pm K_{n+1}\sigma ,$$

$$|4=K_{n+1}\mu K_{n+2}\nu ,|5=\overline{K}_{n+1}\mu \pm K_{n+2}\nu ,|6=\overline{K}_{n+2}\gamma \overline{K}_{n+1}\sigma ,$$

$$|7=\overline{K}_{n+2}\delta \overline{K}_{n+1}\epsilon ,|8=\overline{K}_n(\alpha \pm \beta ),$$

Here in the 4(3)-axial cases all indexes are taken by $`mod4(3)`$. In this basis diagonal submatrix $`P_{n\pm }`$ takes form for 4-axial case

$$P_{0\pm }=diag(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Xi },\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}})$$
(7)
$$P_{1,3\pm }=diag(\mathrm{\Omega },\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2},\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2},\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{{\rm Y}})$$

$$P_{2\pm }=diag(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{\Xi }),$$

where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0,`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }=4p+4q,`$ $`\mathrm{\Xi }=6p+2r,`$ $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}=2p+4q+2r,`$ $`\mathrm{\Theta }=4p+2q+2r`$. For $`N=6`$ we have

$$P_{0\pm }=diag(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}}),$$
(8)
$$P_{1,2\pm }=diag(\mathrm{\Omega },\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2},\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2},\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{{\rm Y}}),$$

where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0,`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }=6p,`$ $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}=4p+2q.`$

Superoperator $`\widehat{L}`$ action at all received subspaces independently on symmetry appears to be the same and is given by matrix

$$\widehat{L}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& D\\ D^{}& 0\end{array}\right),$$

$$D=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& A^e/\sqrt{2}& (2A^eA^g)/\sqrt{6}& (A^eA^g)/2\sqrt{3}\\ A^e/\sqrt{2}& 0& (A^e+A^g)/2\sqrt{3}& (A^g+2A^e)/\sqrt{6}\\ A^g/\sqrt{6}& (3A^eA^g)/2\sqrt{3}& 0& A^e/\sqrt{2}\\ (3A^e+A^g)/2\sqrt{3}& A^g/\sqrt{6}& A^e/\sqrt{2}& 0\end{array}\right).$$

Block of form $`D`$ was introduced first in  for invariant subspace of quantum-stochastic states antisymmetrical with respect to time inversion (we denote this subspace as 0-) in the case $`N=8`$. Remarkably, that other blocks of superoperator $`\widehat{L}`$ (that have another symmetry, i.e., that obtain factor $`c_n`$ under turning of coordinate system on angle $`\frac{\pi }{2}(\frac{2\pi }{3}`$)) have the same form. Moreover, one can show that the same form of elementary block remains for certain other symmetries, for example for tetrahedron symmetry, cylindrical symmetry and some others. So elementary block $`D`$ is in some sense universal.

## 4 Spectral Analysis of Quantum-Stochastic Superoperator

Last paragraph is devoted to reduction of quantum-stochastic superoperator to block-diagonal form convenient for calculations its spectral characteristics (eigenvalues and eigenvectors). This problem can be solved under assumption that one of terms $`\widehat{L}`$ or $`\widehat{P}`$ composite superoperator $`\widehat{G}^1`$ is small in comparison with another. It is naturally to assume smallness of stochastic term $`\widehat{P}`$. Note that eigenvalues of unperturbed superoperator $`\widehat{L}`$ are known explicitly. These eigenvalues are the super-fine transition frequencies $`\lambda _{\pm i}=\pm b_i`$, where $`b_1=\frac{1}{2}(3A^eA^g)`$ , $`b_2=\frac{1}{2}(A^eA^g)`$, $`b_3=\frac{1}{2}(A^e+A^g)`$, $`b_4=\frac{1}{2}(3A^e+A^g)`$. Corresponding eigenfunctions have the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\pm 1}=\frac{1}{2}|1+0+\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}|3+\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}|4\pm (\frac{1}{6}|5+\frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}|6+\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}|7+\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}|8)$$

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\pm 2}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}|1\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}|2\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}|3+0\pm (\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}|5\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}|6+\frac{1}{2}|7+0)$$

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\pm 3}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}|1+\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}|2+0\frac{1}{2}|4\pm (\frac{1}{2\sqrt{5}}|5\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}|6+0+\frac{1}{2}|8)$$

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\pm 4}=0\frac{1}{2}|2+\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}|3\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}|4\pm (\frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}|5\frac{1}{6}|6+\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}|7\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}|8).$$

Standard perturbation theory in the case of absence of degeneration let us calculate eigenvalues corrections

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _k=\mathrm{\Psi }_ki\widehat{P}\mathrm{\Psi }_k$$

and also eigenvectors corrections. In our case for eigenvalues this leads to results reduced in Tab.1 of eigenvalues corrections.

Tab.1a. Eigenvalues corrections for 4-axis case.

|  | block $`0\pm `$ | block $`1,3\pm `$ | block $`2\pm `$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`\delta \lambda _1`$ | $`i(19/9p+26/9q+r)`$ | $`i(31/9p+26/9q+r)`$ | $`i(3p+10/3q+r)`$ |
| $`\delta \lambda _2`$ | $`i(3p+8/3q+r)`$ | $`i(3p+8/3q+r)`$ | $`i(3p+4q+r)`$ |
| $`\delta \lambda _3`$ | $`i(3p+10/3q+r)`$ | $`i(3p+10/3q+r)`$ | $`i(3p+2q+r)`$ |
| $`\delta \lambda _4`$ | $`i(35/9p+28/9q+r)`$ | $`i(23/9p+28/9q+r)`$ | $`i(3p+8/3q+r)`$ |

Tab.1b. Eigenvalues corrections for 3-axis case.

|  | block $`0\pm `$ | block $`1,2\pm `$ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`\delta \lambda _1`$ | $`i(3,5p+q)`$ | $`i(4,25p+q)`$ |
| $`\delta \lambda _2`$ | $`i(4p+q)`$ | $`i(4p+q)`$ |
| $`\delta \lambda _3`$ | $`i(4,5p+q)`$ | $`i(3,75p+q)`$ |
| $`\delta \lambda _4`$ | $`i(5p+q)`$ | $`i(3,5p+q)`$ |

## 5 $`J`$-Selfadjointness and Qualitative Spectrum Behavior

Reductions of operator matrix $`\widehat{L}+i\widehat{P}`$ to block-diagonal form at mentioned basis permit to receive effective way of calculating of line shape reduce to inversion of matrices of $`8\times 8`$-order corresponding to each block. In the case of equilibrium initial distribution resonance absorption spectrum is described by the only block of the superoperator $`\widehat{L}+i\widehat{P}`$, namely by that, which is invariant with respect to turns on angle $`\frac{\pi }{2}(\frac{2\pi }{3})`$ and antisymmetrical relatively time inversion. But if the initial distribution is arbitrary one it is necessary to know all blocks of the superoperator $`\widehat{L}+i\widehat{P}`$ for line shape determination.

The superoperator $`\widehat{L}+i\widehat{P}`$ spectrum is, generally speaking, complex one, nevertheless, it is possible to get qualitative information on spectrum behavior at different relations between parameters of magnetic and electron spin systems. The superoperator $`\widehat{L}+i\widehat{P}`$ spectrum lies at lower half-plane and is placed symmetrically relatively imaginary axis. This follows from $`J`$-selfadjointness of $`\widehat{L}+i\widehat{P}`$. Really

$$J\left(\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& D\\ D^{}& 0\end{array}\right)+i\widehat{P}\right)J=\left(\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& D\\ D^{}& 0\end{array}\right)+i\widehat{P}\right)^{},$$

when $`J`$=i$`diag(1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1)`$.

Let us consider for illustration the case of equilibrium initial distribution, which is described by block 0-. At the limit case of fast relaxation (at high temperatures) eigenvalues of this block (just as of any other block) belong to imaginary axis, and this case corresponds to resonance absorption spectrum consisting of the only line of Lorentz width on the frequency $`\omega `$. At diminishing of relaxation eigenvalues as before some time belong to imaginary axis moving on it, because at fast relaxation limit there are two single and two triple eigenvalues both in 4- and 3-axial case (7),(8), but due to the $`J`$-selfadjointness eigenvalues can leave imaginary axis only by pairs. At certain moment one of pairs will diverge (and also this can be not one pair from initially existing pairs in triple eigenvalues but one of anew formed in a process of random walk along imaginary axis). In this connection resonance absorption spectrum will have a form of two lines of certain width, symmetrical relatively frequency $`\omega `$. Under further diminishing of relaxation parameters new pairs of lines appear, and the width is decreased. At limit all eigenvalues of the matrix come down from imaginary axis and are dropped on real axis, that on resonance absorption spectrum correspond to line shape with peaks on frequencies $`\omega +b_{\pm i}`$ (frequencies $`b_{\pm 4}`$ are prohibited and don’t appear on spectrum), the width is decreased as far as eigenvalues approach real axis, i.e., under diminishing of relaxation or, that is the same, of temperature.

It is necessary to note that symmetrical line shape corresponds to potential drift field (in DOM — to symmetrical matrices $`P`$). Calculations using non-symmetrical transition probabilities demonstrate non-symmetrical line shape with respect to main frequency $`\omega `$.

Author is grateful to K.A.Makarov and B.S.Pavlov for useful discussions. This work is supported by RFBR grant 00-01-00480.

fig. 1. Mutual disposition of the easy magnetization directions and coordinate system (4-axis case, N=8).

Values of unit vector $`\stackrel{}{m}`$ of particle magnetization

$`\stackrel{}{m}=\pm \stackrel{}{m}_i,i=1,2,3,4.`$

$`\stackrel{}{m}_1=(\sqrt{2/3},0,1/\sqrt{3}),\stackrel{}{m}_2=(0,\sqrt{2/3},1/\sqrt{3}),`$

$`\stackrel{}{m}_3=(\sqrt{2/3},0,1/\sqrt{3}),\stackrel{}{m}_4=(0,\sqrt{2/3},1/\sqrt{3}).`$

Easy magnetization directions coincide with ones from the center of cube to its vertices.

fig. 2. Mutual disposition of the easy magnetization directions and coordinate system (3-axis case, N=6).

Values of unit vector $`\stackrel{}{m}`$ of particle magnetization

$`\stackrel{}{m}=\pm \stackrel{}{m}_i,i=1,2,3.`$

$`\stackrel{}{m}_1=(\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}},0,\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}),\stackrel{}{m}_2=(\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}},\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}},\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}),\stackrel{}{m}_3=(\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}},\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}},\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}).`$

Easy magnetization directions coincide with ones from the center of cube to the centers of its faces.