text:
# Soliton Equations Extracted from the Noncommutative Zero-Curvature Equation

## 1 Introduction

The Moyal algebra seems to have a rich structure in it. It was first considered as an alternate way of the quantization. The parameter appearing there was the Planck $`h`$. The vanishing limit of the parameter in the Moyal bracket, which means taking the classical limit of the quantum theory, leads to the Poisson bracket. In this paper we shall study the formulation of the soliton equations derived from the equation including the Moyal algebra, which would help us to understand the implication of the algebra. We shall introduce a parameter through the Moyal algebra into the present soliton formulation, but it is not assumed to be the Planch $`h`$. We shall study the role of the parameter in the present formulation and show that the role of the parameter is simply the lattice spacing of the discrete soliton equation case and the coefficients of higher derivative terms in the continuous soliton equation case. The comparison of the role of the parameter in the Moyal quantizaiton with that in the soliton formulation is quite interesting. In the Moyal quantization, the energy levels are discrete by the order of the Planck $`h`$, while in the discrete soliton equation, or the completely integrable case, the space is discrete by the order of the parameter.

It has been well known that the soliton equations are formulated as the two dimensional zero-curvature equation and the divergenceless equation.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{A_\nu }{x_\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{A_\mu }{x_\nu }}+[A_\mu ,A_\nu ]`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{A_\mu }{x_\mu }}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (2)
where $`A_\mu =A_\mu (x_0,x_1)`$($`\mu =0,1`$) are $`sl(N,C)`$ valued potentials. When the potentials include the spectral parameter, this is the inverse scattering method. The potentials are algebra-valued functions of two variables $`x_0`$ and $`x_1`$. The Lax pair formulation can also be viewed to fall into this category when the potentials include the differential operators instead of the spectral parameter. In the previous papers we considered the ”zero-curvature equation” where the ordinary commutation relation appearing in the equation is replaced by the Moyal bracket and the potentials are the functions of 4 variables, $`x_0`$, $`x_1`$ and new variables $`x`$ and $`p`$, which makes the equation the 4-dimensional one. In order to distinguish the equation from the 2-dimensional zero-curvature equation, we call the 4-dimensional equation the noncommutative zero-curvature equation. The loss of the matrix form of the potentials accounts for the increase of the variables. In the previous papers, we considered the dimensional reduction of the equation and showed how the soliton equations on the one-dimensional lattce and their continuous limits are extracted from the noncommutative zero-curvature equation. Included were the Toda lattice equation, the Bogomolny equation, and KM equation. In these equations, the parameter sneaked in through Moyal bracket plays the role of the one-dimensional lattice spacing. Their continuous counterparts were also obtained by simply taking the vanishing limit of the parameter appearing in the definition of the Moyal bracket. We thus showed that the Moyal bracket formulation of the soliton equations comprise both the discrete and continuous soliton equations with a parameter interpolating them. The idea obtaining those equations exemplified above were based on the expansion of the functions of $`x`$ and $`p`$ in terms of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$ and this implies to extract the $`su(N)`$ structure from the Moyal bracket. In the previous papers we gave the coefficient functions a priori and did not show how the potentials leading to the various soliton equations are determined. We did not show how the KdV equation, which is one of the most well known soliton equations, can be derived in the previous papers either.

In the present paper, we shall discuss the reduction of the noncommutative zero-curvature equation to derive the 2-dimensional soliton equations. We shall show how the coefficients when the potentials are expanded in terms of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$ are to be determined. They are the reduction leading to the equations relevant to the Toda lattice equation. In order to point out the extensive validity of the extraction of the soliton equations from the noncommutative zero-curvature equation, we shall investigate the dimensional reduction by the power series expansion by the variable $`p`$, which also leads to the typical soliton equation known as the KdV equation and its higher order equations.

This paper is constructed as follows. Next section is devoted to the summary of the definitions, notations and formula which we shall use in the following sections. We shall discuss the KdV and MKdV hierarchy equations in section 3. In section 4 we show the expansion of potentials in terms of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$ leads to the Toda lattice equation, Bogomolny equation and KM equation. The difficulty in obtaining the hierarchy of Toda lattice equation is also discussed in this section. The last section would be devoted to the summary and the discussion.

## 2 Formulation

We first recapitulate the notation of the Moyal algebra. The star product for functions $`f=f(x,p)`$ and $`g=g(x,p)`$ is defined by

$$fg=\mathrm{exp}\left[\kappa \left(\frac{}{x}\frac{}{\stackrel{~}{p}}\frac{}{p}\frac{}{\stackrel{~}{x}}\right)\right]f(𝐱)g(\stackrel{~}{𝐱})|_{𝐱=\stackrel{~}{𝐱}},$$
(3)
where $`𝐱=(x,p)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝐱}=(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{p})`$ and they are set equal after the derivatives are taken. Here $`\kappa `$ is the parameter of which the physical meaning is not specified yet but would be discussed later. The Moyal bracket is defined by using the star product as

$$\{f,g\}=\frac{fggf}{2\kappa },$$
(4)
which turns out to be the Poisson bracket of $`f`$ and $`g`$ in the vanishing limit of $`\kappa `$.

In the following sections, we expand the functions of $`x`$ and $`p`$ in terms of the powers of $`p`$ in the next section and $`\mathrm{e}^p`$ in section 4. When the functions are expanded in terms of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$, the Moyal bracket reads

$`\{e^{mp}f,e^{np}g\}`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}\mathrm{exp}\{(m+n)p\}\left[f(x+n\kappa )g(xm\kappa )g(x+m\kappa )f(xn\kappa )\right],`$
where $`m`$ and $`n`$ are integers. We can naturally obtain the $`\kappa 0`$ limit of the bracket:

$$\underset{\kappa 0}{lim}\{e^{mp}f,e^{np}g\}=\left(n\frac{df}{dx}gm\frac{dg}{dx}f\right)\mathrm{exp}\{(m+n)p\}.$$
(6)
The soliton equations are known to be formulated as the 2-dimensional zero-curvature equation which emerges as a compatibility condition of two linear equations. The well known inverse scattering method and the Lax equation fall into the formulation. On the other hand, it was argued that the Moyal bracket can reproduce $`su(N)`$ algebra when we specify the geometry of the base space where the potentials are defined. This fact motivated us to propose the equation which replaces the commutation relation in the zero-curvature equation with the Moyal bracket. The potentials are no more algebra valued. Instead they are now functions of new variables $`x`$ and $`p`$ besides old variables $`x_0`$ and $`x_1`$, and so they are the 4-dimensional fields. The equation reads

$$\frac{A_\nu }{x_\mu }\frac{A_\mu }{x_\nu }+\{A_\mu ,A_\nu \}=0,$$
(7)
where $`A_\mu =A_\mu (x_0,x_1;x,p),(\mu =0,1)`$. Here we assume the potentials do not include either the differential operators nor the spectral parameter, but include a parameter coming in through the Moyal braket. We shall call this 4-dimensinal equation the noncommutative zero-curvature equation to distinguish this from the 2-dimensional zero-curvature equation. The noncommutative zero-curvature equation seems to have a rich algebraic structure despite that the potentials are not the algebra-valued. It is well known that many of the 2-dimensional soliton equations are formulated by the inverse scattering problem, and they are characterized by the algebra. What we shall show in this paper is essentially the reduction of the noncommutative zero-curvature equation to derive the 2-dimensional soliton equations. This would turn out to reveal the rich algebraic and geometric structure of the noncommutative zero-curvature equation.

In order to show that the well known 2-dimensional soliton equations are derived from the noncommutative zero-curvature equation, we first assume the $`x_0`$-independence or $`x_1`$-independence and then expand the potentials of the remaining 3 variables in terms of power series of the variable $`p`$ or $`\mathrm{e}^p`$ and determine coefficient functions by substituting them into the noncommutative zero-curvature equation. We thus obtain the 2-dimensional equations.

## 3 KdV hierarchy equations

In this section we make the power expansion of the potentials in terms of the variable $`p`$, and show that the specification of the expansions of potentials and their substitution into the noncommutative zero-curvature equation determines the coefficient functions of the expansion and so it leads to the specific soliton equation. We also assume that the potentials are independent of either $`x_1`$ or $`x_0`$. We first consider the $`x_1`$-independent case. We shall denote the potentials by $`f`$ and $`g`$ to avoid the troublesome suffix of the potentials:

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`A_1(t;x,p),`$ (8)
$`g`$ $`=`$ $`A_0(t;x,p),`$ (9)
where $`t=x_0`$. Then the Eq.(7) reads

$$f_t=\{f,g\},$$
(10)
where $`f_t=f/t`$. When we assume that the functions are $`x_0`$-independent and denote $`x_1`$ as $`s`$:

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`A_1(s;x,p),`$ (11)
$`g`$ $`=`$ $`A_0(s;x,p),`$ (12)
we obtain

$$g_s=\{f,g\}.$$
(13)
We can extract the soliton equations from the Eq. (10) or (13) by the power series expansions of $`f`$ and $`g`$ as:

$`f(t;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{N}{}}}p^nf_n(t;x),`$ (14)
$`g(t;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{M}{}}}p^ng_n(t:x),`$ (15)
where we assume that $`f_N=1`$ and $`g_M=1`$. The specification of $`M`$ and $`N`$ in the Eqs.(14) and (15) determines the specific equation.

As the first example, we shall see how the KdV equation and the Boussinesque equation are obtained. They are derived in a pair. Expanding $`f=f(t;x,p)`$ and $`g=g(t;x,p)`$ as

$`f(t;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`p^2+u(t;x),`$ (16)
$`g(t;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`p^3+p^2g_2(t;x)+pg_1(t;x)+g_0(t;x),`$ (17)
we insert them into Eq.(10). Then the coefficient functions $`g_k`$(k=0,1,2) are determined in terms of $`u`$ and its $`x`$-derivatives by comparing the both sides of the equation at each order of power of $`p`$. Eq.(10) thus leads to the KdV equation:

$$u_t=\frac{3}{2}u^{}u+\kappa ^2u^{\prime \prime \prime }.$$
(18)
where $`u^{}=u/x`$.

When we assume the $`t`$ independence of the potentials and expand them as

$`f(s;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`p^2+u(s;x),`$ (19)
$`g(s;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`p^3+p^2g_2(s;x)+pg_1(s;x)+g_0(;x),`$ (20)
we obtain the Boussinesque equation by inserting them into Eq.(13):

$$u_{ss}+(uu^{}+\kappa ^2u^{\prime \prime \prime })^{}=0.$$
(21)
We should note that these soliton equations are obtained by the same specification of $`M`$ and $`N`$. The only difference is the assumption on which variables the potentials depend. In this sense they are obtained in a pair.

The above observation motivates us to study more extensive and systematic study of the noncommutative zero-curvature equation to derive the soliton equations. We shall show that the following power series expansions of the potentials lead to the KdV hierarchy equations:

$`f(t;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`p^2+u(t;x),`$ (22)
$`g(t;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{2N+1}{}}}p^kg_k(t;x).`$ (23)
Here and hereafter we denote $`g_k(t;x)`$ as $`g_k`$. Substituting above expansions into the Moyal bracket, we are left with

$`\{f,g\}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{N}{}}}\kappa ^{2m}{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{2(Nm)}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k+2m+1}{2m+1}}\right)p^ku^{(2m+1)}g_{2k+2m+1}`$ (24)
$`2{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{2N+1}{}}}p^k{\displaystyle \frac{g_{n1}}{x}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{N}{}}}\kappa ^{2m}u^{(2m+1)}g_{2m+1}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{2N+1}{}}}p^k\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{[\frac{2Nk}{2}]}{}}}\kappa ^{2m}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k+2m+1}{2m+1}}\right)u^{(2m+1)}g_{k+2m+1}2{\displaystyle \frac{g_k}{x}}\right\}`$
$`2p^{2N+1}{\displaystyle \frac{g_{2N}}{x}},`$
where $`[a]`$ is the integer number which does not exceed $`a`$. The comparison of the both sides of Eq.(10) at each order of power of $`p`$ shows that

$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\kappa ^{2m}u^{(2m+1)}g_{2m+1},`$ (25)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{g_{k1}}{x}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{[\frac{2Nk}{2}]}{}}}\kappa ^{(2m)}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k+2m+1}{2m+1}}\right)u^{(2m+1)}g_{k+2m+1},`$
$`(k=1,2,\mathrm{},2N)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{g_{2N}}{x}}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (27)
where $`u^{(k)}=^ku/x_k`$. The first equation is the soliton equation of the KdV hierarchy series. The functions $`g_l`$ appearing on the RHS are completely determined by other equations. Those equations solve $`g_{2k}`$ as

$$g_{2k}=0,(k=1,2,\mathrm{},N).$$
(28)
On the other hand, $`g_l`$ with odd number of suffix $`l`$ are determined by

$$\frac{g_{2k1}}{x}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{m=0}{\overset{Nk}{}}\kappa ^{(2m)}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2k+2m+1}{2m+1}\right)u^{(2m+1)}g_{2(k+m)+1},$$
(29)
which shows that $`g_{2k1}`$ is expressed in terms of $`g_{2l1}(l>k)`$ and the derivatives of $`u(t;x)`$, and so we can obtain all the $`g_{2k1}`$ recursively when the equations are combined with the condition $`g_{2N+1}=1`$. By substituting the results, we obtain the KdV hierarchy equations. Though we have not yet proven that all the series are completely the same as the KdV known hierarchy series at each order, we have obtained completely identical equations for the first 4 equations. Here we list them below. Denoting the RHS of Eq.(25) by $`𝒦_{2N+1}`$ for each $`N`$, we get

$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`u^{(1)}=𝒦_1,`$ (30)
$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}uu^{(1)}+\kappa ^2u^{(3)}=𝒦_3,`$ (31)
$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{15}{8}}u^2u^{(1)}+5\kappa ^2u^{(1)}u^{(2)}+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{2}}\kappa ^2uu^{(3)}+\kappa ^4u^{(5)}=𝒦_5,`$ (32)
$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{35}{16}}u^3u^{(1)}+{\displaystyle \frac{35}{8}}\kappa ^2(u^{(1)})^3+{\displaystyle \frac{35}{2}}\kappa ^2uu^{(1)}u^{(2)}+{\displaystyle \frac{21}{2}}\kappa ^4u^{(1)}u^{(4)}`$ (33)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{35}{8}}\kappa ^2u^2u^{(3)}+{\displaystyle \frac{35}{2}}\kappa ^4u^{(2)}u^{(3)}+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{2}}\kappa ^4uu^{(5)}+\kappa ^6u^{(7)}=𝒦_7.`$
Here we note that the power of $`\kappa `$ measures the order of derivatives. Let us introduce an integro-differential operator defined by

$$𝒪=\kappa ^2D^2+u+u^{(1)}I,$$
(35)
where $`D=/x`$ and $`I=^x𝑑x`$. The operator relates $`𝒦_{2k+1}`$ and $`𝒦_{2k1}`$. Then, by using the operator, we can rewrite the above series as

$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`𝒦_1,`$ (36)
$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`𝒦_3=𝒪𝒦_1,`$ (37)
$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`𝒦_5=𝒪𝒦_3=𝒪^2𝒦_1,`$ (38)
$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`𝒦_7=𝒪𝒦_5=𝒪^3𝒦_1.`$ (39)
When $`\kappa =1/2`$, the integro-differential operator is identical to that found in the Hamiltonian formulation for the KdV equation given by

$$u_t=6uu^{(1)}+u^{(3)}.$$
(40)
This is obtained by setting the same value $`1/2`$ to $`\kappa `$ in Eq.(31) together with the scaling of $`t`$. We have thus extracted the KdV hierarchy equations from the Moyal bracket zero-curvature equation by assuming the expansions by (22) and (23).

We next study different type of the expansions expecting to get the MKdV hierarchy equations. Instead of the expansions given by (22) and (23) we exploit other series obtained by the following expansions:

$`f(t;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`p+u(t;x),`$ (41)
$`g(t;x,p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{M}{}}}p^kg_k(t;x),`$ (42)
with the condition that $`g_M=1`$. In the similar way as the KdV equation, we obtain the MKdV equation for M=3 case. We shall study the higher series of equations in the similar way as in the KdV hierarchy equations. Two of the series are obtained as

$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^2u^{(3)}+3u^2u^{}=\stackrel{~}{𝒦}_3,`$ (43)
$`u_t`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^5u^{(5)}+20\kappa ^2uu^{}u^{(2)}+10\kappa ^2u^2u^{(3)}+5u^4u^{}=\stackrel{~}{𝒦}_5.`$ (44)
In order to see whether these are the first few MKdV hierarchy series, they are to be compared with the known MKdV series by adjusting the value of $`\kappa `$. The result shows that the terms appearing in the above results are the same but the coefficients can not be adjusted to be the same as the known MKdV series. They are slightly different, which should not be overlooked. In contrast with the KdV case, we can not construct the operator connecting $`\stackrel{~}{𝒦}_n`$. According to the Sato theory, the $`𝒦_n`$ in the KdV hierarchy equations are regarded as the generators of the infinite number of symmetries of the KdV equations. Then we can write the equations by introducing the infinite number of times $`t_{2n+1}`$ by

$$u_{t_{2n+1}}=𝒦_{2n+1},(n=1,2,\mathrm{}).$$
(45)
They should be compatible, which requires

$$\frac{𝒦_{2n+1}}{t_{2m+1}}=\frac{𝒦_{2m+1}}{t_{2n+1}}.$$
(46)
These are satisfied by the KdV series obtained above, but the similar equations do not hold for $`\stackrel{~}{𝒦}`$ of the MKdV hierarchy equations. From these reasons we conclude the expansions (41) and (42) do not give rise to the MKdV hierarchy equations, though the first non-trivial equation is the MKdV equation.

## 4 Toda Lattice hierarchy equations

In the previous section, the power series expansion of the potentials are found to lead to the KdV hierarchy equations. Here we exploit other expansions which lead to the Toda lattice equation and other relevant equations. One may expect to obtain the Toda lattice hierarchy equations like the KdV hierarchy equations which are supposed to incorporate the interactions of a particle on one lattice site with other particles sitting on other sites farther than the neighboring sites. In this section we shall study the case where the potentials are expressed as

$`A_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\mathrm{e}^{kp}a_k,`$ (47)
$`A_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\mathrm{e}^{kp}b_k.`$ (48)
Another assumption is that $`A_i=A_i(x_0=t;x,p)`$,(i=1,2). Then the Eq.(7) reads

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}A_1}{\mathrm{d}t}=\{A_1,A_0\}.$$
(49)
This might be replaced by the following equation for the potentials given by $`A_i=A_i(x_1=r;x,p)`$,(i=1,2). Eq.(7) reads

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}A_0}{\mathrm{d}r}=\{A_1,A_0\}.$$
(50)
We shall first expand the potentials as:

$`A_0`$ $`=`$ $`a_0(t;x)+a_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p+a_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p,`$ (51)
$`A_1`$ $`=`$ $`b_0(t;x)+b_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p+b_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p,`$ (52)
and substitute them into the Eq.(49) to obtain at each power of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`a_1(x\kappa )b_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x\kappa )a_1(x+\kappa ),`$ (53)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}b_1(x)}{\mathrm{d}t}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}[a_1(x)(b_0(x+\kappa )b_0(x\kappa ))`$ (54)
$`b_1(x)(a_0(x+\kappa )a_0(x\kappa ))],`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}b_0(x)}{\mathrm{d}t}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}[(a_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x\kappa )a_1(x\kappa ))`$ (55)
$`(a_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x\kappa )a_1(x\kappa ))],`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}b_1(x)}{\mathrm{d}t}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}[a_1(x)(b_0(x+\kappa )b_0(x\kappa ))`$ (56)
$`b_1(x)(a_0(x+\kappa )a_0(x\kappa ))],`$
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`a_1(x\kappa )b_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x\kappa )a_1(x+\kappa ).`$ (57)
Here and hereafter we abbreviate $`t`$-dependence of the functions and denote them like $`a_i`$ and $`b_i`$ unless the specification is necessary. In order to solve these equations we assume that $`b_{\pm 1}`$ are proportional to $`a_{\pm 1}`$:

$$b_{\pm 1}=\gamma _{\pm 1}a_{\pm 1},$$
(58)
where $`\gamma _{\pm 1}`$ are non-zero constants. These solve Eqs.(53) and (57) and the remaining equations are written as

$`\mathrm{lna}_{\pm 1}(\mathrm{x})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}[(a_0(x+\kappa )a_0(x\kappa ))`$ (59)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\gamma _{\pm 1}}}(b_0(x+\kappa )b_0(x\kappa ))],`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}b_0(x)}{\mathrm{d}t}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}(\gamma _1\gamma _1)[a_1(x+\kappa )a_1(x+\kappa )`$ (60)
$`a_1(x\kappa )a_1(x\kappa )].`$
Introducing $`\rho (t;x)`$ by

$$\rho (t;x)=\mathrm{ln}a_1(t;x)a_1(t;x),$$
(61)
we obtain from above equations

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}^2\rho (t;x)}{\mathrm{d}t^2}=\frac{(\gamma _1\gamma _1)^2}{\gamma _1\gamma _1}\frac{1}{(2\kappa )^2}\left(\mathrm{e}^{\rho (x2\kappa )}2\mathrm{e}^{\rho (x)}+\mathrm{e}^{\rho (x+2\kappa )}\right).$$
(62)
When we denote the discrete space by $`x=\kappa n`$,(n=1,2,$`\mathrm{}`$) and write $`\rho (t;x)`$ as $`\rho _n(t)`$, we get the Toda lattice equation of which the spacing is given by $`\kappa `$:

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}^2\rho _n(t)}{\mathrm{d}t^2}=\frac{(\gamma _1\gamma _1)^2}{\gamma _1\gamma _1}\frac{1}{(2\kappa )^2}\left(\mathrm{e}^{\rho _{n2}(t)}2\mathrm{e}^{\rho _n(t)}+\mathrm{e}^{\rho _{n+2}(t)}\right).$$
(63)
In the similar way, when we assume that the potentials are the functions of not $`t`$, $`x`$ and $`p`$ but $`r`$, $`x`$ and $`p`$ in Eqs.(51) and (52), we obtain from Eq.(50)

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}^2\rho _n(r)}{\mathrm{d}r^2}=(\gamma _1\gamma _1)^2\frac{1}{(2\kappa )^2}\left(\mathrm{e}^{\rho _{n2}(r)}2\mathrm{e}^{\rho _n(r)}+\mathrm{e}^{\rho _{n+2}(r)}\right),$$
(64)
which may be called the Bogomolny equation when the overall sign of the RHS is set to be positive, which might be realized by choosing the pure imaginary $`\gamma _i`$. Eqs.(63) and (64) are obtained in pairs as in the KdV and Boussinesque equations in the previous section. But in the present case there is no significant difference between them, because the potentials are expanded in a symmetric way in deriving these equations. Actually Eq.(63) is also regarded as the Bogomolny equation by regarding the time variable as the radial variable and choosing $`\gamma _0`$ and $`\gamma _1`$ with different signs. We can take the limit that $`\kappa 0`$ in the above equations. Then we get the continuous Toda lattice equation and the continuous Bogomolny equations, respectively:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2\rho }{t^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{^2\mathrm{e}^\rho }{x^2}},`$ (65)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2\rho }{r^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{^2\mathrm{e}^\rho }{x^2}}.`$ (66)
They were shown to have an infinite number of conserved currents. This means that the noncommutative zero-curvature equation leads to the completely integrable system under the expansion of the potentials in terms of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$ irrespective of the value of $`\kappa `$.

We next expand the potentials in an asymmetric way as

$`A_0`$ $`=`$ $`a_0(t;x)+a_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p+a_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p`$ (67)
$`+a_2(t;x)\mathrm{e}^{2p}+a_2(t;x)\mathrm{e}^{2p},`$
$`A_1`$ $`=`$ $`b_0(t;x)+b_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p+b_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p,`$ (68)
where we assume that $`a_{\pm 2}`$ are not zero. By substituting these into Eq.(49) we obtain at each order of power of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$;

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`a_2(x\kappa )b_1(x\pm 2\kappa )b_1(x2\kappa )a_2(x\pm \kappa ),`$ (69)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`a_1(x\kappa )b_1(x\pm \kappa )b_1(x\kappa )a_1(x\pm \kappa )`$ (70)
$`+a_2(x)(b_0(x\pm 2\kappa )b_0(x2\kappa )),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}b_1(x)}{\mathrm{d}t}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}[a_1(x)(b_0(x+\kappa )b_0(x\kappa ))`$ (71)
$`b_1(x)(a_0(x+\kappa )a_0(x\kappa ))`$
$`+(a_2(x\pm \kappa )b_{\pm 1}(x\pm 2\kappa )b_{\pm 1}(x2\kappa )a_2(x\kappa ))],`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}b_0(x)}{\mathrm{d}t}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}[a_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x\kappa )a_1(x\kappa ))`$ (72)
$``$ $`(a_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x+\kappa )b_1(x\kappa )a_1(x\kappa ))].`$
The last equation is the same as Eq.(55) in the previous case, while other equations are subject to the changes due to the inclusion of $`a_{\pm 2}(x)`$ terms to $`A_0`$. We assume as before that

$$b_{\pm 1}(x)=\gamma _{\pm 1}a_{\pm 1}(x),$$
(73)
where $`\gamma _{\pm 1}`$ are constants. Then the Eqs.(69) and (70) lead to

$`a_{\pm 2}(x+\kappa )a_{\pm 1}(x2\kappa )a_{\pm 1}(x+2\kappa )a_{\pm 2}(x\kappa )`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (74)
$`a_{\pm 2}(x)(b_0(x+2\kappa )b_0(x2\kappa ))`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (75)
These are solved by

$`a_{\pm 2}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`k_{\pm 2}a_{\pm 1}(x\kappa )a_{\pm 1}(x+\kappa ),`$ (76)
$`b_0(x)`$ $`=`$ $`C,`$ (77)
where $`k_{\pm 2}`$ and $`C`$ are constants. By substituting these into Eqs.(71) and (72), we can rewrite them as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{dln}a_1(x)}{\mathrm{d}t}}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}[(a_0(x+\kappa )a_0(x\kappa ))+{\displaystyle \frac{k_{\pm 2}\gamma _1}{\gamma _{\pm 1}}}\times `$ (78)
$`(a_1(x+2\kappa )a_1(x+2\kappa )a_1(x2\kappa )a_1(x2\kappa ))],`$
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma _1\gamma _1)}{2\kappa }}\times `$ (79)
$`(a_1(x+\kappa )a_1(x+\kappa )a_1(x\kappa )a_1(x\kappa )).`$
In order to obtain the non-trivial solutions, we require that $`\gamma _1=\gamma _1`$. Introducing $`\rho (t;x)`$ by

$$\rho (t;x)=\mathrm{ln}a_1(t;x)a_1(t;x),$$
(80)
as in the preceding example, we obtain

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho (x)}{\mathrm{d}t}=\frac{(k_2k_2)}{2\kappa }(\mathrm{e}^{\rho (x+2\kappa )}\mathrm{e}^{\rho (x2\kappa )}),$$
(81)
which is the well-known KM equation.

When we assume the $`r`$ dependence instead of the $`t`$ dependence in Eqs.(51) and (52) and use Eq.(50) instead of Eq.(49), we can not derive any non-trivial equation under the assumptions $`b_{\pm 1}(r;x)=\gamma _{\pm 1}a_{\pm 1}(r;x)`$. Therefore there is no pairwise equation with the KM equation.

The next example of the expansions of the potentials are given by

$`A_0`$ $`=`$ $`a_0(t;x)+a_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p+a_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p`$ (82)
$`+a_2(t;x)\mathrm{e}^{2p}+a_2(t;x)\mathrm{e}^{2p}`$
$`+a_3(t;x)\mathrm{e}^{3p}+a_3(t;x)\mathrm{e}^{3p},`$
$`A_1`$ $`=`$ $`b_0(t;x)+b_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p+b_1(t;x)\mathrm{e}^p,`$ (83)
The substitution of the expansions into Eq.(49) yields the equations determining $`a_k(t;x)`$ and $`b_k(t;x)`$ at each order of power of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$ as in the previous examples. The newly appearing and the modified equations are given by

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`a_3(x\kappa )b_1(x\pm 3\kappa )b_1(x3\kappa )a_3(x\pm \kappa ),`$ (84)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`a_2(x\kappa )b_1(x\pm 2\kappa )b_1(x2\kappa )a_2(x\pm \kappa )`$ (85)
$`a_3(x)(b_0(x\pm 3\kappa )b_0(x3\kappa )),`$
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`a_1(x\kappa )b_1(x\pm \kappa )b_1(x\kappa )a_1(x\pm \kappa )`$ (86)
$`+a_2(x)(b_0(x\pm 2\kappa )b_0(x2\kappa ))`$
$`+a_3(x\pm \kappa )b_{\pm 1}(x\pm 3\kappa )b_{\pm 1}(x3\kappa )a_3(x\kappa ).`$
The other equations at $`O(\mathrm{e}^{\pm p})`$ and $`O(1)`$ are not subject to the modification even if we add the $`a_{\pm 3}`$ terms and so the Eqs.(71) and (72) still hold. We then assume as before that

$$b_{\pm 1}=\gamma _{\pm 1}a_{\pm 1}.$$
(87)
Then the above three equations are reduced to

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`a_3(x\kappa )a_1(x\pm 3\kappa )a_1(x3\kappa )a_3(x\pm \kappa ),`$ (88)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _{\pm 1}(a_2(x\kappa )a_1(x\pm 2\kappa )a_1(x2\kappa )a_3(x\pm \kappa ))`$ (89)
$`a_3(x)(b_0(x\pm 3\kappa )b_0(x3\kappa )),`$
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`a_2(x)(b_0(x\pm 2\kappa )b_0(x2\kappa ))`$ (90)
$`+\gamma _{\pm 1}(a_3(x\pm \kappa )a_{\pm 1}(x\pm 3\kappa )a_{\pm 1}(x3\kappa )a_3(x\kappa )).`$
These are solved by

$`a_{\pm 3}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`k_{\pm 3}a_{\pm 1}(x2\kappa )a_{\pm 1}(x)a_1(x+2\kappa ),`$ (91)
$`a_{\pm 2}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`k_{\pm 2}a_{\pm 1}(x\kappa )a_1(x+\kappa ),`$ (92)
$`b_0(x)`$ $`=`$ $`C,`$ (93)
where $`k_{\pm 3}`$, $`k_{\pm 2}`$ and $`C`$ are constants. The fact that the Eqs.(71) and (72) are not subject to the modification from the previous KM equation case and the fact that $`a_{\pm 2}(x)`$ are the same solution as the KM equation case show that we obtain the same KM equation. Therefore in this case we can solve the equations without inconsistency, although there appears no new equation.

## 5 Summary and Discussions

We have investigated the derivation the soliton equations from the noncommutative zero-curvature equation, which is based upon the various expansions of the potentials. It is intriguing that we can extract various soliton equations, which is known as the zero-curvature equations, from the noncommutative zero-curvature equation. We showed the KdV hierarchy equations in section 2 and Toda lattice equation and its related equations in section 3. Besides these equations we also studied other combinations of the expansions of the potentials. As for the MKdV equation, we obtained a series of equations. However we could not regard them as the MKdV series as we discussed in section 3. While the expansions adopted for the KdV hierarchy equations derive the zero-curvature equations from the noncommutative zero-curvature equation, the other choice of expansions could not extract MKdV series properly. This shows that arbitrary choice of the expansions of the potentials in the noncommutative zero-curvature equations does not necessarily lead to the soliton equation which is known to be the zero-curvature equation. For the moment, we have not found the definite criterion for choosing the proper expansions of the potentials leading to the soliton equations.

As for the expansions in terms of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$, we also studied the equation obtained by the following expansions, expecting to obtain the Toda lattice type equation which incorporates interaction of a particle on one-dimensional lattice with other particles on further sites than those of the Toda lattice equation:

$`A_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=3}{\overset{3}{}}}\mathrm{e}^{kp}a_k(t;x),`$ (94)
$`A_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=3}{\overset{3}{}}}\mathrm{e}^{kp}b_k(t;x).`$ (95)
As far as we assume that $`b_i=\gamma _ia_i`$,(i=1,2,3), we could not obtain any new equation. This is because the inclusion of new terms to $`A_0`$ and $`A_1`$ brings about more strict restrictions to the coefficient functions at each order of power of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$ in comparative with the Toda lattice equation case and so this does not allow for the emergence of the interaction besides those of the Toda lattice equation. This should be contrasted with the KdV case. The expansion in terms of $`\mathrm{e}^p`$ is regarded as the infinite series expansions in terms of $`p`$. The inclusion of other terms as above corresponds to the alternation of the coefficient values of the infinite series expansions. The fact that they are not allowed, though under our assumptions, might suggest the uniqueness of the Toda lattice equation, or the uniqueness of the completely integrable equation of this type.


format: text

text:
# Derivation of preliminary IBIS response matrices with the INTEGRAL Simulator

## 1 The Simulator

The IBIS Simulator (developed in collaboration by IFC/CNR Milan, Southampton University and ISDC) can perform the following steps. It first generates a model of the gamma-ray sky with the possibility of defining position, intensity and spectral properties of the celestial sources. Then different observation strategies (pointing directions, observation length, dithering patterns, etc.) can be defined. After these preliminary steps the interaction of all the source photons with the active and passive materials of the instruments are simulated. An estimate of the background is also added, based on the results of the INTEGRAL Mass Model (Lei et al. 1999), which is a detailed Monte Carlo simulation that takes into account the interaction of the particle and photon flux with the whole INTEGRAL spacecraft. The Simulator finally produces a data set in a format fully compatible with the ISDC analysis system. For the analysis of the output data we have developed some prototype programs, which perform image deconvolution and spectral extraction.

## 2 Building the response matrices

To build the response matrices of ISGRI and PICsIT (Ubertini et al. 1999), two sets of simulations of on-axis monochromatic sources have been performed at different energies (20 values for ISGRI between 15 keV and 600 keV and 18 for PICsIT between 100 keV and 5 MeV). An example of the resulting data for some sample energies can be seen in Figures 1 and 2.

The simulations clearly show the photopeak, the Compton edge and, in the case of PICsIT the backscattering peak (see Figure 3). These three features have been fitted separately with analytical functions. The photopeak required a Gaussian function, while the other two required a Gaussian plus a quadratic function.

The resulting set of parameters as a function of the energy have been then interpolated over the entire range of energies of the two instruments (see Figure 4).

Finally these results have been used to create two FITS files (for each detector): an RMF file containing the normalized matrix and an ARF file which contains the information about the efficiency of the instruments. These two files have been created in such a way that they are compatible with the XSPEC data analysis package (OGIP standard ver. 1992a).

The matrices have been tested with different input spectra. An example is the following: a $``$100mCrab, on-axis source with a power law spectrum observed for 1050 s (input parameters: photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$=2, A100keV = 9$`\times `$$`10^5`$ ph cm-2 s-1 keV-1). The best fit with XSPEC yielded $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ = 1.987 $`\pm `$ 0.0483 , A100keV = (8.744 $`\pm `$ 0.6357)$`\times `$$`10^5`$ ph cm-2 s-1 keV-1, Reduced $`\chi ^2`$ = 0.942394. The confidence contours of the fit are presented in Figure 5.

## 3 Scientific applications

### 3.1 Nova Muscae (GRS 1124-684)

The X-ray transient GRS 1124-684 (Nova Muscae) was discovered in 1991 with the GRANAT and GINGA satellites. Measurement of its mass function during quiescence established the presence of a black hole (Remillard et al. 1992). GRS 1124-684 was observed several times by the SIGMA telescope during its outburst (Goldwurm et al. 1992). An emission feature at $``$500 keV was discovered during the last 13 hours of the January 20th observation.

We have simulated IBIS observations of this spectral feature, with exposure times ranging from 125 s to 15,000 s, using as input parameters the values measured by SIGMA. An example of a 2000 s simulation (see Table 1) is shown in Figure 6. The simulations show that the $``$500 keV feature can be appreciated ($``$3 $`\sigma `$) for observations as short as 500 s.

### 3.2 IBIS line sensitivity

We have performed simulations with different exposure times and spectral parameters to determine the sensitivity to detect an emission line at $``$ 500 keV over a continuum. Figure 7 shows the minimum exposure time that is required for a $``$3 $`\sigma `$ detection of such a feature as a function of the line flux and width ($`\sigma `$). The continuum used is that of Nova Muscae (see Table LABEL:table\_1). A feature like that observed in 1E 1740-2942 during October 13-14 1990 with the SIGMA telescope (Bouchet et al. 1991), for example, can already be detected with an exposure time of $``$250 s. We have also performed some simulations of this object. The parameters, that we have used, were a Gaussian line (center = 480 keV, $`\sigma `$ = $``$100 keV, flux = 1.3$`\times `$$`10^2`$ ph cm-2 s-1) over a comptonization continuum (kT = 27 keV, $`\tau `$ = 3.2). In Figure 8 we present a 4 ks simulated IBIS spectrum of 1E1740-2942.

## 4 Conclusions

Of course the matrices presented here, being obtained trough simulations and not by real calibration data, are intrinsically limited in their accuracy owing to the simplifications inherent to the simulator programs. Nevertheless they can be used to analyze simulated data and to obtain an estimate of the observation time required to achieve specific scientific objectives.

Future work will include the following effects that are not yet implemented in the current version:

1) Charge loss in ISGRI, caused by the different mobility of the charge/hole pairs in semiconductors;
2) Pixel disuniformity and/or gain variations;
3) Multiple interactions in PICsIT;
4) Angular dependence of the spectral response;
5) Background spatial disuniformity;


text:
# New Limits on Doubly Charged Bileptons from LEP Data, and Search at Future Electron–Positron and Electron–Photon Colliders

## I Introduction

Bileptons are bosons carrying double leptonic number that are predicted by some extensions of the Standard Model like $`SU(15)`$ based GUT theory , 3-3-1 model , and left–right symmetric models . They can either be scalar or vector particles with different charges, i.e. neutral, singly, or doubly charged. In the 3-3-1 model, the symmetry breaking $`SU(3)_L\times U(1)_XSU(2)_L\times U(1)`$ is responsible for the appearance of vector bileptons, while in the left-right model, based on $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R\times U(1)_{BL}`$, the bileptons correspond to the doubly charged scalar bosons present in the symmetry breaking sector.

Bileptons can participate in a large variety of processes, both at low and high energies. However, no signal has yet been found, and bounds on their masses and couplings could be obtained from the analysis of lepton number violating processes , and muonium–antimuoniuon ($`M`$$`\overline{M}`$) conversion  experiments. The existing mass limits for both singly and doubly charged bosons  are all model dependent. These bounds still allow the existence of low–mass bileptons with a small coupling constant. The limits from high energy experiments  like $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions are, in principle, less restrictive than the low energy bounds.

In this paper we explore the production of doubly charged bileptons in both $`e^+e^{}`$ and $`e\gamma `$ colliders, looking for the most promising signature for identifying these particles: an isolated same sign, planar, and $`p_T`$ balanced two muons(antimuons) event . We made a model independent analysis, working in the context of a general effective $`SU(2)_L\times U(1)_Y`$ Lagrangian that couples bileptons to leptons

$$=\lambda _1\overline{\mathrm{}}^ci\sigma _2\mathrm{}L_1+\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_1\overline{e}^ce\stackrel{~}{L}_1+\lambda _2\overline{\mathrm{}}^c\gamma ^\mu eL_{2\mu }+\lambda _3\overline{\mathrm{}}^ci\sigma _2\stackrel{}{\sigma }\mathrm{}\stackrel{}{L}_3+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.,$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{}=(e_L,\nu _L)`$ are left–handed $`SU(2)_L`$ lepton doublets, and $`e=e_R`$ are right–handed charged singlet leptons. The charge conjugated fields are defined as $`\overline{\mathrm{}}^c=(\mathrm{}^c)^{}\gamma ^0=\mathrm{}^TC^1`$. The subscript of the bilepton fields $`L=1,2,3`$ indicates whether they are singlet, doublet, or triplet under $`SU(2)_L`$. The terms concerning the doubly charged bileptons can be written as

$$^{}=\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_1^{ij}\overline{e}_i^cP_Re_j\stackrel{~}{L}_1^{}+\lambda _2^{ij}\overline{e}_i^c\gamma ^\mu P_Re_jL_{2\mu }^{}+\sqrt{2}\lambda _3^{ij}\overline{e}_i^cP_Le_jL_3^{}+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.,$$
(2)
where $`e_i`$ represent the charged leptons with flavor indices $`i,j=1,2,3`$, and $`P_{R(L)}=(1\pm \gamma _5)/2`$ are the helicity projectors. We will consider here only flavor diagonal bilepton couplings since very restrictive bounds are imposed by low–energy experiments when flavor violation can take place . These couplings will also be considered real to avoid CP violating processes.

## II Limits from LEP

The whole LEP program has been very successful. They were able to achieve both energy and luminosity beyond the values initially expected. However no evidence for new physics has yet been found. From the non observation of pair produced bileptons model independent lower limits on the masses of these particles can be established to be close to 100 GeV. However, the present most stringent bounds on the mass and coupling of doubly charged bileptons come from the results of muonium–antimuonium conversion experiments . For flavor diagonal couplings, these measurements require that the ratio of the bilepton coupling and its mass must satisfy $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_1/M_B<0.20`$ TeV-1 ($`90\%`$ C.L.), $`\lambda _2/M_B<0.27`$ TeV-1 ($`95\%`$ C.L.), and $`\lambda _3/M_B<0.14`$ TeV-1 ($`90\%`$ C.L.).

We found that these limits can be overridden for the mass range kinematically accessible at LEP collider. The occurrence of a high–energy event presenting just a $`p_T`$ balanced co–planar pair of same–sign leptons, notably muons or antimuons, would be a striking evidence for the presence of a bilepton. Since there is no Standard Model background for this kind of process, the observation of one of such dimuon event would already constitute a important step towards the bilepton discovery. From the non observation of such event a $`90(95)\%`$ C.L. upper bound on the values of $`\lambda `$ and $`M_B`$ can be obtained based on the predited number of $`2.3(3.0)`$ events.

This signature results predominantly from the process depicted in Fig. 1(a), and its cross-section has been evaluated in the equivalent particle approximation . The deviation from the exact calculation is expected to be small since this process is dominated by events where the incident particle is scattered at a very small angle. The relevant cross-section is given by,

$$\sigma (E_{e^+},\widehat{s})_{e^+e^{}\mu ^{}\mu ^{}}=_{x_{\mathrm{min}}}^1𝑑xF_{e^+}^e^{}(x,E_{e^+})\sigma (\widehat{s})_{e^{}e^{}\mu ^{}\mu ^{}},$$
(3)
where $`F_{e^+}^e^{}(x,E_{e^+})`$ is the equivalent electron distribution function of the initial positron. It gives the probability that an electron with energy $`E_e^{}=xE_{e^+}`$ is emitted from a positron beam with energy $`E_{e^+}`$. The same holds true for the positron contents of the electron. This distribution is

$$F_{e^+}^e^{}(x,E_{e^+})=\frac{1}{2}\left\{\frac{\alpha }{2\pi }[\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{E_{e^+}}{m_e}\right)^21]\right\}^2\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)(\frac{4}{3}+xx^2\frac{4}{3}x^3+2x(1+x)\mathrm{ln}x).$$
(4)
The cross-section for the subprocess $`e^{}e^{}\mu ^{}\mu ^{}`$ is

$$\sigma (\widehat{s})=S\frac{\lambda ^4\widehat{s}}{24\pi [(\widehat{s}M_B^2)^2+M_B^2\mathrm{\Gamma }^2]},$$
(5)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=G\lambda ^2M_B/(8\pi )`$ is the $`s`$-channel resonance width for a bileptons of mass $`M_B`$, $`\widehat{s}=xs`$ is the subprocess squared center of mass energy, $`S=3,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}12}`$ and $`G=3,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}6}`$ for $`\stackrel{~}{L}_1^{},L_{2\mu }^{}`$ and $`L_3^{}`$, respectively.

We present in Tab. I the integrated luminosities for the different LEP energies we used in our calculations . The total number of expected events (pairs of muons or antimuons with total invariant mass $`M_B`$) is calculated considering the luminosities obtained at center of mass energies that are larger than the bilepton mass, i.e.,

$$N(M_B)=2\underset{i}{}\mathrm{\Theta }(\sqrt{s_i}M_B)(\sqrt{s_i})_{\widehat{s}=4m_\mu ^2}^{s_i}𝑑\widehat{s}\sigma (\sqrt{s_i}/2,\widehat{s})_{e^+e^{}\mu ^{}\mu ^{}}$$
(6)
where $`N(M_B)`$ is the number of expect events with mass $`M_B`$, $`(\sqrt{s_i})`$ assumes the values in Tab. I. The factor $`2`$ stands for the fact that $`\sigma _{e^+e^{}\mu ^{}\mu ^{}}=\sigma _{e^+e^{}\mu ^+\mu ^+}`$.

In Fig. 2(a) and (b) we present, respectively, the limits on $`L_{2\mu }^{}`$ and $`L_3^{}`$ coupling constant that are imposed by the LEP data as a function of the bilepton mass. The solid line corresponds to 2.7 fb-1 of integrated luminosity collected at energies ranging from 130 GeV up to 206 GeV, by the four LEP collaborations. We also show the exclusion areas in the $`\lambda `$$`M_B`$ parameter space imposed by $`M`$$`\overline{M}`$ conversion experiments. The limits from the LEP data on $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_1`$, and the region already excluded by $`M`$$`\overline{M}`$ conversion, corresponding to $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_1/M_B<0.20`$ TeV-1 are not shown in Fig. 2 but can be readily obtained from the limits for $`\lambda _3`$ using the fact that $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda _1}=\sqrt{2}\lambda _3`$. In order to obtain these results we have taken into account an efficiency of $`90\%`$ for dimuon reconstruction and a geometric acceptance of $`|\mathrm{cos}\theta |<0.9`$. This was a conservative choice for the geometric acceptance since we assumed the L3 value and all other experiments have larger acceptances. The maximum allowed values of $`\lambda /M_B`$ at LEP are smaller than those obtained from muonium–antimuonium conversion by a factor of two for most of the bilepton mass range.

## III Search at Future Linear Colliders

### A Electron-Positron Collider

Amid the efforts that are under way to determine the potentiality of proposed linear colliders to discover new physics , studies on bilepton searches have been carried out mostly for its $`e^{}e^{}`$ collider operation mode . We concentrate here on the potential of the $`e^+e^{}`$ and $`e\gamma `$ operation modes to discover doubly charged bileptons. We have assumed some representative values for the energy and luminosity of new electron–positron machine , namely $`\sqrt{s}=500`$, $`800`$, and $`1000`$ GeV with $`=500`$ fb-1. This integrated luminosity is expected to be achieved in one or two years of the collider operation.

We evaluated the $`e^+e^{}`$ operation mode in a similar way we did for LEP. In Fig. 3, we plot the $`95\%`$ confidence level discovery region in the $`\lambda `$$`M_B`$ parameter space. In this figure, we also plotted the region of the parameter space already excluded by muonium–antimuonium conversion experiments. We considered a $`90\%`$ dimuon reconstruction efficiency. We did not consider a particular value for the geometric acceptance, since we estimated that a $`5^{}`$ aperture in the beam pipe region would not lead to more than $`2\%`$ event loss.

If bileptons are indeed observed, and profusely produced, it will be possible to determine their mass, and to learn whether they are vector or scalar particles. In Fig. 4, we present the expected dimuon invariant mass differential cross section, for some specific values of the vector bilepton coupling, which shows the resonant peak on the bilepton mass. We have chosen for $`\lambda _2`$ the maximum value allowed by the present $`M`$$`\overline{M}`$ limits, i.e., $`\lambda _2=0.27M_B`$.

The discrimination between vector and scalar can be done based on the fact that the cross section for the process $`e^{}e^{}\mu ^{}\mu ^{}`$ changes with the polarization of the initial electron beams according to which of the three kind of bileptons participates in the reaction. The discrimination can also be done using the fact that a vector bilepton leads to an angular distribution of the final state muons that is different from the angular distribution that would be observed if bileptons were scalars. The dependences on the initial beam polarizations ($`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$) are shown in Tab. II, as well as the dependence on the angular distribution of the produced muons.

A discrimination based on the initial beam polarization is very promising since in the next generation of linear colliders one expects up to $`80\%`$ of polarization for the electron beam. Assuming that the electron emitted from the positron beam is kept unpolarized ($`P_2=0`$), we can see that, as the polarization of the electron beam ($`P_1`$) increases, the cross section for the process mediated by $`\stackrel{~}{L}_1^{}`$ increases while the cross section for the process mediated by $`L_3^{}`$ decreases. On the other hand, the insensitivity to $`P_1`$ would indicate the presence of a vector bilepton, as can be seen from Tab. II. However, if $`\stackrel{~}{L}_1^{}`$ and $`L_3^{}`$ get mixed, the dependence on $`P_1`$ can be too small ($`\stackrel{~}{\lambda _1}=\sqrt{2}\lambda _3`$) to be observed, and it would not be possible to distinguish between vectors and scalars by looking at the electron beam polarization dependence of the cross-section.

The alternative would be to examine the angular distribution of the final state muons. In Fig. 5 we can see the difference between the angular distribution of reactions mediated by scalar and vectorial bileptons at $`\sqrt{s}=500`$ GeV. However, when the bilepton mass is relatively small, like for a $`150`$ GeV bilepton depicted in Fig. 5, the angular distributions for vector and scalar bileptons are quite similar. In this case, to distinguish vector from scalar particle it will require the knowledge of the bilepton mass with good accuracy. Fortunately, as can be seen from Fig. 5, the smaller the bilepton mass the bigger is the production cross-section. This may help to make the identification task easier since more events are expected in this case for a given value of the coupling constant.

### B Electron-Photon Collider

Projects for future linear colliders include the possibility to transform the initial $`e^+e^{}`$ machine into an $`e\gamma `$ or $`\gamma \gamma `$ collider with comparable energy and luminosity . In these machines, a highly energetic photon beam is generated by Compton backscattering low energy photons emitted by a laser. The high energy backscattered photons are then made to collide with the opposite incoming beam. For a non–polarized collider, the backscattered photon distribution function is given by ,

$$f_e^\gamma (x)=\frac{2}{\sigma ^0}\left[\frac{1}{1x}+1x4r(1r)\right],$$
(7)
where $`x`$ is the fraction of the electron momentum carried by the photon, $`r=x/[y(1x)]`$, and

$$\sigma ^0=\left(2\frac{8}{y}\frac{16}{y^2}\right)\mathrm{ln}(y+1)+1+\frac{16}{y}\frac{1}{(y+1)^2},$$
(8)
where $`y15.3E_B\omega _0`$, with the parent electron energy $`E_B`$ expressed in TeV, and the laser energy $`\omega _0`$ in eV. A maximum value $`y=4.8`$ is usually adopted to avoid electron regeneration through pair production. This is the $`y`$ value we used in our analysis.

In the $`e\gamma `$ collider, bileptons would be produced as a $`s`$-channel resonance through the diagram depicted in Fig. 1(b). Similarly to the treatment we employed for $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders, we also assumed here that the positron escapes unobserved down the beam pipe. The cross-section for the process $`e^{}\gamma \mu ^{}\mu ^{}`$ in the equivalent particle approximation is given by,

$$\sigma _{e^{}\gamma \mu ^{}\mu ^{}}=_{x_1^{\mathrm{min}}}^{x_1^{\mathrm{max}}}_{x_2^{\mathrm{min}}}^1𝑑x_1𝑑x_2f_e^\gamma (x_1)F_\gamma ^e(x_2)\widehat{\sigma }_{e^{}e^{}\mu ^{}\mu ^{}}$$
(9)
where $`f_e^\gamma (x_1)`$ is given by Eq. (7), and $`F_\gamma ^e(x_2)`$ is the distribution function of the equivalent electron carrying a fraction $`x_2`$ of the photon energy,

$$F_\gamma ^e(x_2)=\frac{\alpha }{\pi }\left[x_2^2+(1x_2)^2\right]\mathrm{ln}\frac{E_\gamma }{m_e}.$$
(10)
We also determined the potential of the $`e\gamma `$ collider to discover bileptons considering the observation of a single event. It has been assumed that the luminosity of the $`e\gamma `$ mode will be comparable to its parent $`e^+e^{}`$ mode. In Fig. 6 we plot the $`95\%`$ confidence level discovery region in the $`\lambda `$$`M_B`$ parameter space. In this figure, we also plotted the region of the parameter space already excluded by muonium–antimuonium conversion experiments. We can see that an $`e\gamma `$ collider is more efficient for the search of bileptons than the $`e^+e^{}`$ collider. This is expected since the laser backscattering mechanism (Fig. 1(b)) is capable to generate a large amount of hard photons when compared with the usual bremsstrahlung subprocess (Fig. 1(a)).

If the bileptons are discovered and a fairly large amount of events is collected, we can use the same procedure, based on the electron polarization and angular distribution of final state muons, to determine their mass and spin. In Fig. 7, we present the expected event distribution as a function of the muon (or antimuon) pair invariant mass. As in Fig. 4 the value of $`\lambda `$ is the maximum allowed by the present $`M`$$`\overline{M}`$ limits, i.e., $`\lambda _2=0.27M_B`$. The angular distribution follows the same pattern as the one presented in Fig. 5.

## IV Discussions and Conclusions

In this article we have shown that new and more stringent limits on the coupling constants and masses of doubly charged bileptons can be obtained from LEP-II data. As for the limits from $`M`$$`\overline{M}`$ conversion, our results apply to the case of flavor–diagonal bilepton couplings. These stringent bounds result from the fact that the integrated luminosity collected by the LEP Collaborations at energies above 189 GeV is very large. In order to obtain the new limits on $`\lambda `$ and $`M_B`$ we have applied the equivalent particle approximation method. It is expected that an exact tree level calculation of the cross-section would lead to only minor corrections to our results . A few percent uncertainty in the cross-sections translates into even smaller corrections to the curves in Figs. 2, 3 and 6 because the cross-sections are proportional to $`\lambda ^2`$. Our results suggest that an accurate analysis taking into account detailed LEP detectors and data sample properties will be able to establish bounds on bilepton couplings and masses that overcome the present ones.

We have also shown that the construction of high energy linear accelerators could lead to a large increase in the sensitivity to the doubly charged bileptons. If these new particles are in the reach of these machines, a quite evident resonance peak should be observed without the need to scan the collision energy. The sensitivity to bileptons of the general purpose $`e\gamma `$ collider is of the same order of magnitude as the $`e^{}e^{}`$ operating mode. In order to compare both operation modes we updated the results presented at Ref.  on bilepton search in $`e^{}e^{}`$ colliders, to the luminosity of 500 fb-1 considered here. The reanalysis is straightforward and is based on the fact that the cross-section for the process $`e^{}e^{}\mu ^{}\mu ^{}`$ is proportional to the square of the bilepton coupling and the limits on $`\lambda `$ will be proportional to $`\sqrt{1/}`$, where $``$ is the collider luminosity. In Tab. III we compare the limits on $`\lambda _2`$ for the two kind of colliders operating at $`\sqrt{s}=0.5`$ and 1 TeV, with $`=500`$ fb-1. As it would be expected, the $`e^{}e^{}`$ mode is, in general, more sensible than the $`e\gamma `$ mode. This advantage may be however illusory. The instantaneous luminosity delivered by the $`e^{}e^{}`$ collider is expected to be half that of the $`e^+e^{}`$ with same beam characteristics because of the anti-pinch effect. This fact slightly diminishes the advantage of the $`e^{}e^{}`$ mode over the $`e\gamma `$ mode for bilepton production. By comparing Fig. 3 with the values in Tab. III, we can see that the direct $`e^+e^{}`$ mode is clearly less sensitive than the other two operation modes. Nevertheless, it is much more sensitive than the present experiments.

In conclusion, a collider operating at $`e^+e^{}`$ or $`e\gamma `$ modes is quite sensitive to the resonant production of doubly charged bileptons. If bileptons are indeed observed in these machines we will probably be able to get a lot of information about then. Later, their properties could be thoroughly studied using the $`e^{}e^{}`$ mode operating at $`\sqrt{s}=M_B`$.

###### Acknowledgements.

E.M.G. is grateful to University of Wisconsin for its kind hospitality. A.G. would like to thanks the hospitality at the Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular (IFIC-UV) were part of this work was carried on. S.F.N. is grateful to Fermilab for its hospitality. This work was supported by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP), by Programa de Apoio a Núcleos de Excelência (PRONEX), and by Fundação para o Desenvolvimento da UNESP (FUNDUNESP). A.G. was partially supported by Fundação Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES).


text:
# Halo Star Abundances and r-Process Synthesis

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Element abundance patterns in very metal-poor halo field stars and globular cluster stars play a crucial role in guiding and constraining theoretical models of nucleosynthesis . Nowhere is this more true than for the case of the neutron-capture processes that are understood to be responsible for the synthesis of the bulk of the heavy elements in the mass region A

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 60: the s-process and the r-process. Nucleosynthesis theory identifies quite different astrophysical sites for these two distinct processes. r-Process nuclei (at least the heavy (A

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 140) r-process isotopes) are primary nucleosynthesis products, presumed to have been formed in an environment associated with the evolution of massive stars (M

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 10 M) to supernova explosions of Type II and the formation of neutron star remnants. s-Process nuclei are understood to be products of neutron captures on preexisting silicon-iron “seed” nuclei, occurring both in the helium burning cores of massive stars and particularly in the thermally pulsing helium shells of asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars. In this picture, the first heavy (A

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 60) elements introduced into the interstellar gas component of our Galaxy are expected to have been r-process nuclei formed in association with massive stars, on timescales $`\tau _{}`$ $`<`$ 108 years .

That the general features of this simple model are correct is confirmed by the finding that r-process contributions dominate the heavy element abundances in extremely metal-poor halo stars. This issue is discussed in the next section. The implications of trends in the heavy element abundances as a function of \[Fe/H\] for the early star formation history of the Galaxy and Galactic chemical evolution are then examined. The interpretation of the observed trends in \[Ba/Eu\] in the context of models of Galactic chemical evolution is discussed in section 3. The implications of the increasingly pronounced scatter in the ratio of the abundance of r-process nuclei to iron \[r-process/Fe\] with decreasing metallicity are explored in section 4. Evidence of and a possible model for a second (weak) r-process nucleosynthesis event  are discussed in section 5. Discussion and conclusions follow.

## 2 R-PROCESS ABUNDANCES IN METAL-POOR HALO STARS

Significant progress in our understanding of the site of operation of r-process nucleosynthesis has followed from studies of the abundances of elements from barium through bismuth in metal-poor stars. Both ground-based  and space based  observational studies have confirmed that the abundances of the heavy neutron-capture products (A

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 130-140) in the most metal deficient halo field stars and globular cluster stars (\[Fe/H\]

<

<

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$<$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} -2.5) were formed in a robust r-process event. This is most clearly reflected in the abundance pattern for the ultra metal poor (\[Fe/H\] = -3.1), but r-process enriched (\[r-process/Fe\] $``$ 30-50), halo star CS 22892-052  shown in Figure 1. Note the truly remarkable agreement of the elemental abundance pattern in the region from barium through bismuth with the solar system elemental pattern.

It is also important to recognize that this detailed level of agreement of the metal-poor star heavy element abundance pattern with (solar system) r-process abundances is a feature of all studied stars of \[Fe/H\]

<

<

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$<$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} -2.5. The heavy element abundance patterns for the two stars CS 22892-052  and HD 115444  are compared with the solar system r-process abundances in Figure 2.

The robustness of the r-process mechanism operating in the early Galaxy is reflected in the close agreement of these two stellar patterns (which represent the nucleosynthesis products of, at most, a relatively small number of earlier stars) with the solar system r-process pattern (which represents the accumulated production of r-process elements over billions of years of Galactic evolution). Note the extraordinary agreement with solar system r-process abundances over this range, for the eighteen elements for which abundance data is available. These data provide conclusive evidence for the operation of an r-process at the earliest Galactic epochs that synthesizes the heavy r-process nuclei (barium and beyond), including the long lived isotope 232Th critical to dating. The identification with massive stars seems compelling, although it is possible that neutron star mergers rather than a supernova environment may be responsible.

## 3 CHEMICAL EVOLUTION OF R-PROCESS AND S-PROCESS ABUNDANCES

Studies of the time history of the heavy (neutron capture) elements have historically been driven by observations. Early trends in the s-process element patterns as a function of \[Fe/H\], noted by Pagel , motivated theoretical consideration of such trends in the context of models of Galactic chemical evolution . The great increase in abundance data for metal-poor stars over the past decade has similarly motivated considerable theoretical activity . The ratio \[Ba/Eu\], which reflects the ratio of s-process to r-process elemental abundances, is displayed in Figure 3 as a function of \[Fe/H\], for a large sample of halo and disk stars from the survey by Burris et al. . Note that at the lowest metallicities the \[Ba/Eu\] ratio is consistent with that for pure r-process matter. The subsequent increase in the \[Ba/Eu\] ratio with increasing \[Fe/H\] (i.e. increasing time) to its solar value reflects the input to the interstellar medium of the products of s-process nucleosynthesis in intermediate mass stars of lifetimes greater than those of the massive star sites of r-process nucleosynthesis. This data provides important clues to the history of s-process and r-process nucleosynthesis over the course of Galactic evolution.

## 4 IMPLICATIONS OF SCATTER IN \[r-Process/Fe\]

r-Process abundances in low metal stars also provide an important further clue to the nature of the r-process site. The ratio \[r-process/Fe\] is displayed as a function of \[Fe/H\] for a large sample of halo and disk stars  in Figure 4. The increasing level of scatter of this ratio with decreasing metallicity, most pronounced at values below \[Fe/H\] $``$ -2.0, makes clear that not all early stars are sites for the formation of both r-process nuclei and iron. In the absence of other sources for either iron peak nuclei or r-process nuclei in the early Galaxy, this scatter is consistent with the view that the r-process operates in only a small fraction ($``$ 1/10th to 1/50th) of the massive stars that produce iron . Note again that this refers only to the nucleosynthesis sites for the heavy r-process isotopes (barium and beyond), and not to any possible site for the production of the lighter r-process nuclei.

The scatter in the $`r`$/Fe trend is itself interesting and can teach us much about the formation of the first supernovae and their spatially inhomogeneous enrichment of the halo stars. The scatter has been studies in detailed models, by Ishimaru & Wanajo , Raiteri et al. , and Argast et al. . The essence of what is going on is captured in a simple, stripped-down model we have constructed for the enrichment of the halo stars.

The $`r`$-process abundance data in extremely metal poor (i.e., low \[Fe/H\]) stars drives the model assumptions in a fairly direct manner. Namely, (1) from low metallicity of \[Fe/H\] $`3`$ or less, we conclude that each star samples only a few (perhaps only one or two?) nucleosynthesis events (Audouze & Silk ; see also Wasserburg, these proceedings). (2) The low metallicities also imply short-lived progenitors of both the Fe and $`r`$-process observed; we will refer to these progenitors as supernovae, though NS-NS binaries are also possible . (3) From the large scatter in observed $`r`$/Fe, we infer that not all supernovae make both the (heavy) $`r`$-process and iron. (4) Finally, from the stunningly solar ratios among the different $`r`$-process elements within single stars (see, e.g., our Figure 2), we conclude that the $`r`$-process is universal–i.e., the events that produce the $`r`$-process always closely reproduce the solar system r-process pattern.

We therefore posit that there are two populations of supernovae, one of which yields mostly the heavy (A

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 140) $`r`$-process isotopes (more specifically, a high $`r`$/Fe ratio), while the other yields iron (i.e., a low $`r`$/Fe). The $`r`$/Fe yield of each population is a parameter, but is constrained by the data which sets a lower limit on $`(r/\mathrm{Fe})_{\mathrm{high}}`$, and an upper limit on $`(r/\mathrm{Fe})_{\mathrm{low}}`$. Furthermore, an additional and key constraint comes from the fact that, averaged over many events of both types, the final $`r`$/Fe ratio has to be that which is observed at \[Fe/H\] = -1 (the highest metallicity at which Fe is not contaminated by Type Ia supernova debris). This ratio, $`(r/\mathrm{Fe})_{\mathrm{avg}}3(r/\mathrm{Fe})_{}`$ sets the fraction $`f`$ of high $`r`$/Fe events, since $`r/\mathrm{Fe}_{\mathrm{avg}}=f(r/\mathrm{Fe})_{\mathrm{high}}+(1f)(r/\mathrm{Fe})_{\mathrm{low}}`$. Also, for simplicity we assume that each supernovae of either population produces the same iron yield.

Our model then consists of a Monte-Carlo simulation of halo-star enrichment by supernovae. For each star, we impose a total number $`N`$ of supernova ancestors; this fixes the \[Fe/H\] for the star. Of these, the numbers of high and low $`r`$/Fe progenitors are taken to be random variables. This is meant to encode the stochastic and inhomogeneous nature of the halo. Thus, a star’s supernova antecedents are chosen from a binomial distribution, whose means are the expected values $`fN`$ and $`(1f)N`$; this fixes $`r`$/Fe for the star. The Poisson noise in the high/low ancestry leads to scatter in $`r`$/Fe, which scales as $`1/\sqrt{N}1/\sqrt{\mathrm{Fe}/\mathrm{H}}`$ and thus increases with decreasing Fe/H, as observed. The results of a typical run are shown in Figure 5, which also shows the observed scatter. We see that this very simple model nicely accounts for the scatter simply by allowing for stochastic, inhomogeneous mixing of the $`r`$-process and iron from two populations.

## 5 EVIDENCE FOR AND A MODEL FOR A SECOND R-PROCESS EVENT

Recently, Sneden et al.  obtained detections of six new elements in the relatively unexplored elemental regime from Z = 41–48 in CS 22892–052. These data are displayed in our Figure 1. Note particularly that the close agreement of the abundance pattern for the heavier n-capture elements with the solar system r-process pattern does not extend to the lighter elements, e.g. the region below Ba. This suggests that, perhaps, a second r-process site may be required.

It is also interesting to note that there exists evidence for a second, weak r-process component from another source. Wasserburg, Busso, & Gallino  have pointed out that the abundance levels of the short-lived isotopes 107Pd and 129I in primordial solar system matter are inconsistent with their having been formed in uniform production together with the heavy r-process radioactivities (specifically, 182Hf, 235U, 238U and 232Th). They suggest that these two different mass ranges of nuclei require different timescales for production and therefore suggest two distinct r-process sites. This seems entirely compatible with the weak (A $``$ 130-140) and main (A $``$ 130-140) r-process components as we have identified them above.

The appearance of r-process nuclei in the oldest known stars in our Galaxy strongly suggests the identification of the site of the main r-process component (A

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 130-140) with massive stars and associated Type II supernova environments. We note that the three mechanisms currently considered for the r-process are all associated in some way with this environment. This includes nucleosynthesis associated with: (i) neutrino-driven winds from forming neutron stars ; (ii) neutron star mergers ; and (iii) magnetic jets from collapsing stellar cores .

An alternative possible site for r-process synthesis is that associated with the helium and carbon shells of massive stars undergoing supernovae . Shock processing of these regions can give rise to significant neutron production via such reactions as $`{}_{}{}^{13}C(\alpha ,n)^{16}O`$, $`{}_{}{}^{18}O(\alpha ,n)^{21}Ne`$, and $`{}_{}{}^{22}Ne(\alpha ,n)^{25}Mg`$, involving residues of hydrostatic burning phases. The early studies cited above were motivated by the desire to produce the entire range of r-process nuclei through uranium and thorium. It was found, however, that this could be accomplished only with the use of excessive and quite unrealistic concentrations of e.g. 13C .

The observational and theoretical considerations discussed previously serve to ease these demands: we need now only to be able to produce the r-process nuclei in the mass range through A $``$ 130-140. Guided by stellar models for massive stars at the end of their hydrostatic evolution , we have calculated the r-process history of matter processed through the shock heated helium shell for two choices of the initial abundance of 13C: X13=0.1 and 0.01. The initial (post shock) temperature and density were taken to be 7x108 oK and 104 g/cc, respectively. Here we have assumed an active 13C($`\alpha `$,n)16O neutron source acting on a preexisting solar abundance pattern as seed nuclei, and calculated nucleosynthesis occurring on an expansion time scale. (We note that we might also expect important contributions from the $`{}_{}{}^{18}O(\alpha ,n)^{21}Ne`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{22}Ne(\alpha ,n)^{25}Mg`$ reactions.) The results are displayed in Figure 6, where the calculated abundance patterns for the two choices of X13 are compared with the solar system r-process pattern. We note that for the more realistic case of X13=0.01, the element abundance enrichments fall sharply in the range A

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 130. The r-process products formed under these conditions are thus confined to the light mass region that seems not to receive significant contributions from the main r-process component.

## 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

r-Process abundances in low metal stars provide several important clues to the nature of the r-process site:

* r-Process synthesis of A

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 130-140 isotopes happens early in Galactic history , prior to input from AGB stars to the abundances of heavy s-process isotopes.
* The chemical evolution of the main sources of s-process and r-process nuclei is reflected in the evolution of \[Ba/Eu\] with respect to \[Fe/H\], shown in Figure 3 . The stellar data indicate that, at metallicities \[Fe/H\]

<

<

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$<$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} -2.5, the abundance pattern of the heavy n-capture products is consistent with purely r-process nucleosynthesis production. s-process contributions are first seen in some stars at metallicities as low as \[Fe/H\] $``$ -2.75, and are observed in most stars with metallicities \[Fe/H\] $`>`$ -2.3. This identifies the delayed entry of Ba from the low mass AGB stars that represent the site of operation of the main s-process component, on a timescale $``$ 109 years.
* The observed scatter in the ratio \[r-Process/Fe\] is quite large at low metallicities , while at high metallicities it essentially disappears. We have shown that this behavior can be understood as a reflection of the increasing level of inhomogeneity of Galactic matter at earlier epochs.
* The r-process mechanism for the synthesis of the A

>

>

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$>$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 130-140 isotopes (which we will refer to as the ‘main’ component) is extremely robust. This is reflected in the fact that the abundance patterns in the most metal deficient (oldest) stars, which may have received contributions from only one or a few r-process events, are nevertheless entirely consistent with the r-process abundance pattern which characterizes solar system matter. (The abundance patterns for the two stars CS 22892-052  and HD 115444  shown in Figure 2 reveal this remarkable agreement for two stars of low metallicity but high \[r-Process/Fe\].)
* The abundance pattern in the mass regime below A $``$ 130 does not exhibit this consistency. It is the source of these lighter r-nuclei (the ‘weak’ component) that we have sought to identify in our very preliminary survey of r-process nucleosynthesis conditions in the helium and carbon shells of Type II supernovae .
* Our numerical results confirm that the helium and carbon layers of massive stars, when subjected to outgoing shocks characteristic of Type II supernovae, can represent an important nucleosynthesis site - specifically for the light r-process nuclei. The great sensitivity to conditions of temperature, density, and initial composition that we have found in our exploratory survey strongly suggest that this r-process mechanism will prove less robust in its ability to reproduce the observed r-process pattern in the mass range A

<

<

\mathrel{\vbox{
\offinterlineskip\hbox{$<$}
\kern 1.29167pt\hbox{$\sim$} }} 130-140.

This research was funded in part by NSF grants AST-9618332 and AST-9986974 (JJC), by grant GO-08342 from the Space Science Telescope Institute, and by the Department of Energy, under Grant No. B342495 to the Center for Astrophysical Flashes at the University of Chicago.