format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

One fruitful approach to generalize the original AdS/CFT correspondence  to more “realistic” gauge theories with less supersymmetries is based on considering D3-branes on conifold singularities . To get non-conformal theories one may add  “fractional”  D3-branes.

Recently, exact supergravity solutions representing such configurations were constructed with the 6-d space transverse to the D3-brane being a conifold , its deformation  and its resolution .

The deformed conifold  and resolved conifold  backgrounds are two different (deformation $`ϵ`$ and resolution $`a`$) one-parameter generalizations of the conifold  one. The three solutions coincide for large values of the radial coordinate $`\rho `$, or in the UV in the language of gauge theory duals. However, the small-distance or IR behavior is different in each case. In particular, the conifold and the resolved conifold solutions have naked singularities at finite $`\rho `$, while (a special case of) the deformed conifold solution is regular .

In view of the interest of these solutions both from the supergravity and the gauge theory points of view (see  for some recent related work) it is important to study their various generalizations. That may help to clarify which of their features are truly universal, in particular, regarding singularities and IR behavior.

Here we shall point out that there exists a very natural one-parameter extension of the three solutions of . The key observation is that the most general Ricci-flat Kähler 6-d metrics on the three conifolds  (with non-trivial dependence on radial direction only) contain  one extra parameter (called $`b`$ below). This parameter was set equal to zero in the previous discussions of D3-branes on conifolds. 111For $`b0`$ the conifold metric is no longer that of a cone over $`T^{1,1}`$. These metrics have the same $`R\times S^2\times S^3`$ topology as their $`b=0`$ limits, in particular, they again allow introduction of fractional 3-branes (D5-branes wrapped over 2-cycle). For $`b0`$ the conifold and resolved conifold metrics have regular curvature; it is possible to remove their bolt-type singularity by imposing a $`𝐙_2`$ identification on the coordinate of the $`U(1)`$ fiber thus obtaining non-singular 6-d metrics. In contrast, the $`b0`$ generalization of the (regular) deformed conifold metric  has a curvature singularity at the origin.

As was shown in , for any zero or non-zero value of $`b`$ these 6-d metrics preserve the same fraction (1/4) of type II supersymmetry, so that the corresponding D3-brane solutions should also have  the same amount of supersymmetry as the solutions of . 222Preservation of supersymmetry is obvious for the pure D3-brane solutions. For the fractional D3-branes, it was claimed in  that the resolved conifold solution of  breaks all supersymmetry.

When $`b0`$, the “standard” (no 3-form flux) D3-brane on the conifold solution has the small $`\rho `$ limit which is no longer $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ as was in the standard $`b=0`$ case . As a result, the conformal invariance is broken and $`b`$ plays the role of a “mass scale”. An interesting feature of these solutions is that they have a curvature singularity coinciding with the horizon at $`\rho =b`$, like in the “standard” ($`b=0`$) resolved conifold case discussed in  (where the singularity and the horizon were located at $`\rho =0`$).

Including fractional D3-branes changes the situation radically. As in the conifold  and the resolved conifold  cases there is a naked singularity of a repulson type  located behind the “zero-charge” ($`F_5=0`$) locus. The gauge theory interpretation of these solutions should probably go along the lines of the discussion in . It would be very interesting to understand the meaning of the parameter $`b`$ on the gauge theory side.

Since the simplest (though non-supersymmetric ) Ricci flat 6-d space with the same topology $`R\times S^2\times S^3`$ is the cone over $`T^{1,0}=S^2\times S^3`$, we shall, for comparison, consider also the corresponding D3-brane solution.

In section 2 we shall present the explicit form of the Ricci-flat metrics with the $`R\times S^2\times S^3`$ topology referred to above. In section 3 we shall construct the generalizations of the standard D3-brane solution  to the case when the transverse 6-d spaces are the generalized ($`b0`$) standard, resolved and deformed conifolds.

The fractional D3-brane solutions which are the $`b0`$ analogs of the conifold and resolved conifold backgrounds of  will be found in section 4. In section 5 we shall study, following , the energy of a static fundamental string (with both ends at the “boundary” $`\rho =\mathrm{}`$) in these backgrounds and argue that the corresponding Wilson loop has confining (area law) behavior. This conclusion seems robust since the “bent” string does not reach the singular region.

## 2 Ricci-flat metrics with topology $`R\times S^2\times S^3`$

One natural way to construct Ricci flat spaces of topology $`R\times S^2\times S^3`$ is to consider cones over Einstein spaces with topology $`S^2\times S^3`$. Examples of the latter are $`T^{1,1}`$ (supersymmetric) and $`T^{1,0}`$ (non-supersymmetric). In what follows we shall start with these simplest examples and consider their natural generalizations.

### 2.1 Cone over $`S^3\times S^2`$

$`T^{1,0}`$ is not only $`S^3\times S^2`$ topologically, but geometrically too. The resulting 6-d Ricci-flat metric is (the radii of the two spheres are adjusted to make the whole space Einstein one)

$$ds_6^2=d\rho ^2+\rho ^2\left[\frac{1}{8}\left(e_{\psi _1}^2+e_{\theta _1}^2+e_{\varphi _1}^2\right)+\frac{1}{4}\left(e_{\theta _2}^2+e_{\varphi _2}^2\right)\right],$$
(2.1)
where the vielbein is

$$e_{\theta _i}=d\theta _i,e_{\varphi _i}=\mathrm{sin}\theta _id\varphi _i,e_{\psi _1}=d\psi _1+\mathrm{cos}\theta _1d\varphi _1.$$
(2.2)
### 2.2 Conifold

The standard conifold metric, i.e. the metric of the cone over $`T^{1,1}=\frac{SU(2)\times SU(2)}{U(1)}`$ is

$$ds_6^2=d\rho ^2+\rho ^2\left[\frac{1}{9}e_\psi ^2+\frac{1}{6}\left(e_{\theta _1}^2+e_{\varphi _1}^2+e_{\theta _2}^2+e_{\varphi _2}^2\right)\right],$$
(2.3)
where $`e_{\theta _i}`$ and $`e_{\varphi _i}`$ are the same as in (2.2) and

$$e_\psi =d\psi +\mathrm{cos}\theta _1d\varphi _1+\mathrm{cos}\theta _2d\varphi _2.$$
(2.4)
To get a more general class of Ricci flat metrics on the conifold let us recall some basic relations from  (where further details and notation may be found). The conifold can be described as a quadric in $`𝐂^4`$: $`_{i=1}^4w_i^2=0`$, or a solution of $`\text{det}𝒲=0`$. In terms of the $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`𝒲`$ and the potential $`K`$ the Kähler metric on the conifold is ($`r^2=\text{tr}(𝒲^{}𝒲)=_{i=1}^4|w_i|^2`$)

$$ds^2=K^{}\text{tr}(d𝒲^{}d𝒲)+K^{\prime \prime }|\text{tr}(𝒲^{}d𝒲)|^2,(\mathrm{})^{}\frac{d}{dr^2}(\mathrm{}).$$
(2.5)
The Ricci tensor for a Kähler metric is $`R_{p\overline{q}}=_p_{\overline{q}}\mathrm{ln}\text{det}g`$, where for the metric in (2.5)

$$\text{det}g=\frac{1}{|w_4|^2}(K^{})^2r^2(K^{}+r^2K^{\prime \prime }).$$
(2.6)
The Ricci-flatness condition implies

$$[(r^2K^{})^3]^{}=2r^2,$$
(2.7)
which is integrated to give

$$(r^2K^{})^3=r^4+c.$$
(2.8)
We shall assume that the constant $`c`$ is non-negative to avoid a curvature singularity at finite $`r`$.

The conifold metric (2.5) then is 333The coordinate $`r`$ here was denoted $`\rho `$ in .

$$ds^2=\frac{2}{3}(c+r^4)^{2/3}(r^2dr^2+\frac{1}{4}r^4e_\psi ^2)+\frac{1}{4}(c+r^4)^{1/3}(e_{\theta _1}^2+e_{\varphi _1}^2+e_{\theta _2}^2+e_{\varphi _2}^2).$$
(2.9)
For $`c>0`$, writing the metric in terms of $`z=\frac{1}{2}r^2`$ we get near $`r=0`$

$$(ds^2)_{r0}=\frac{2}{3}c^{2/3}(dz^2+z^2e_\psi ^2)+\frac{1}{4}c^{1/3}(e_{\theta _1}^2+e_{\varphi _1}^2+e_{\theta _2}^2+e_{\varphi _2}^2).$$
(2.10)
Thus (i) near the apex $`(r=0)`$ the 2-cycles stay finite, and (ii) it is possible to avoid the conical curvature singularity at $`r=0`$ by changing the range of $`\psi `$ from the original one $`[0,4\pi )`$ to $`[0,2\pi )`$.

The generalized conifold with $`b0`$ (2.9) is the 6-d analogue of the Eguchi-Hanson metric  where to avoid the singularity one is to change $`S^3S^3/𝐙_2=𝐏^3`$. Here $`\psi `$ is the coordinate of the fiber of the $`U(1)`$ bundle over $`S^2\times S^2`$. Taking $`\psi [0,2\pi )`$ one finds that for large $`r`$ the space is now the cone over $`T^{1,1}/𝐙_2`$; this is an example of asymptotically locally Euclidean metric.

To establish the analogy with the Eguchi-Hanson metric more explicitly let us define the constant $`b0`$ by

$$c(\frac{2}{3}b^2)^3,$$
(2.11)
and introduce the new radial coordinate $`\rho `$ through the relation

$$\rho ^6=[\frac{3}{2}r^2K^{}(r)]^3=(\frac{3}{2})^3r^4+b^6.$$
(2.12)
Since $`0r<\mathrm{}`$ the range of variation of $`\rho `$ is $`b\rho <\mathrm{}`$.

The metric (2.5),(2.9) then becomes

$$ds_6^2=\kappa ^1(\rho )d\rho ^2+\frac{1}{9}\kappa (\rho )\rho ^2e_\psi ^2+\frac{1}{6}\rho ^2\left(e_{\theta _1}^2+e_{\varphi _1}^2+e_{\theta _2}^2+e_{\varphi _2}^2\right),$$
(2.13)
where

$$\kappa (\rho )=1\frac{b^6}{\rho ^6}.$$
(2.14)
Note that $`0\kappa 1`$. The analysis of this metric follows closely that of the Eguchi-Hanson metric in . It is straightforward to establish that this Ricci-flat metric does not have any scalar curvature singularity, e.g., $`R_{ijkl}R^{ijkl}=96\rho ^{16}(\rho ^{12}+20b^{12})`$ is finite for $`0<b\rho <\mathrm{}`$, so that introducing the parameter $`b`$ smoothens the curvature singularity of the original conifold metric. In that sense the $`b`$-generalized conifold introduced above may be called “regularized conifold” (by analogy with resolved and deformed conifolds which also contain an extra parameters eliminating the curvature singularity).

The point $`\rho =b`$ is a removable bolt singularity, as can be seen by introducing the coordinate $`u^2=\frac{1}{9}\rho ^2\kappa (\rho )`$ and considering the $`\rho b`$ limit.

### 2.3 Resolved conifold

Following , one finds the analogous one new parameter ($`b`$) extended metric on the resolved conifold (cf. (2.13))

$$ds^2=\kappa ^1(\rho )d\rho ^2+\frac{1}{9}\kappa (\rho )\rho ^2e_\psi ^2+\frac{1}{6}\rho ^2\left(e_{\theta _1}^2+e_{\varphi _1}^2\right)+\frac{1}{6}(\rho ^2+6a^2)\left(e_{\theta _2}^2+e_{\varphi _2}^2\right).$$
(2.15)
Here $`a`$ is the resolution parameter and

$$\kappa (\rho )=\frac{1+\frac{9a^2}{\rho ^2}\frac{b^6}{\rho ^6}}{1+\frac{6a^2}{\rho ^2}}.$$
(2.16)
For $`a=0`$ this metric reduces to the above conifold metric (2.13),(2.14). For $`\rho `$ much greater than any of the two length scales $`a`$ and $`b`$ we get the standard conifold metric (2.3).

The coordinate $`\rho `$ and the original coordinate $`0r<\mathrm{}`$ of the conifold (see ) are related according to (cf. (2.12))

$$\rho ^6+9a^2\rho ^4=(\frac{3}{2})^3r^4+b^6.$$
(2.17)
The range of $`\rho `$ is thus $`\rho _0\rho <\mathrm{}`$, where $`\rho _0=\rho _0(a,b)0`$ corresponds to the apex $`r=0`$, i.e. is the solution of $`\rho _0^6+9a^2\rho _0^4b^6=0`$ which is positive and becomes zero when $`b=0`$. 444Explicitly, $`\rho _0^2=9a^4\nu ^{1/3}+\nu ^{1/3}3a^2`$, where $`\nu =\frac{1}{2}\left[b^654a^6+b^6\sqrt{1108\frac{a^6}{b^6}}\right]`$ (see ). We shall assume again that $`\psi [0,2\pi )`$ to avoid the conical bolt singularity at $`\rho =\rho _0`$.

The curvature invariants for the metric (2.15) are regular (unless both $`a`$ and $`b`$ are zero when we get back to the original singular conifold metric (2.3)). In particular,

$$R_{ijkl}R^{ijkl}=\frac{96}{\rho ^{12}(\rho ^2+6a^2)^6}[b^{12}(5184a^8+4320a^6\rho ^2+1440a^4\rho ^4+240a^2\rho ^6+20\rho ^8)$$

$$+144b^6a^4\rho ^{10}+\rho ^{12}(6480a^8+2160a^6\rho ^2+360a^4\rho ^4+30a^2\rho ^6+\rho ^8)],$$

which is non-singular at $`\rho \rho _0`$ (for $`a=0`$ this expression reduces to the one conifold one given at the end of the previous subsection, and for $`b=0`$ it givbes the curvature invariant for the resolved conifold metric of ).

To understand the short-distance $`\rho \rho _0`$ ($`r0`$) behavior of the $`b0`$ resolved conifold metric we introduce as in (2.10) the coordinate $`z=\frac{1}{2}r^20`$ thus getting

$$(ds_6^2)_{r0}=\frac{3}{8\rho _0^2(\rho _0^2+6a^2)}\left(dz^2+z^2e_\psi ^2\right)+\frac{1}{6}\rho _0^2\left(e_{\theta _1}^2+e_{\varphi _1}^2\right)+\frac{1}{6}(\rho _0^2+6a^2)\left(e_{\theta _2}^2+e_{\varphi _2}^2\right).$$
(2.18)
For fixed $`\theta _i`$ and $`\varphi _i`$ the metric is thus proportional to $`dz^2+z^2d\psi ^2`$, so that to avoid a conical singularity we need again to apply a $`𝐙_2`$ identification to $`\psi [0,4\pi )`$. 555Note that in the $`\rho \rho _0`$ limit the metric is topologically the same as that of the generalized conifold (2.10), i.e. $`𝐑^2\times S^2\times S^2`$, but geometrically the two metrics are different (e.g., the radii of the two 2-spheres spanned by $`(\theta _i,\varphi _i)`$ are different).

The short-distance limit of the $`b=0`$ resolved conifold metric (which is to be considered separately as $`\rho _0=0`$ for $`b=0`$) is  ($`\rho ^2\sqrt{\frac{3}{8a^2}}r^2`$)

$$(ds_6^2)_{\rho 0}=\frac{2}{3}d\rho ^2+\frac{1}{6}\rho ^2(e_\psi ^2+e_{\theta _1}^2+e_{\varphi _1}^2)+(a^2+\frac{1}{6}\rho ^2)(e_{\theta _2}^2+e_{\varphi _2}^2).$$
(2.19)
This metric has regular curvature invariants, e.g., $`(R_{ijkl}R^{ijkl})_{\rho 0}\frac{40}{3a^4}`$, illustrating that the parameter $`a0`$ indeed resolves the curvature singularity of the standard conifold.

### 2.4 Deformed conifold

The $`b`$-parameter family of metrics on the deformed conifold is found in a similar way . Using the basis of  the metric can be written as ($`g_5=e_\psi `$)

$$ds_6^2=\kappa ^1(\rho )d\rho ^2+\frac{1}{9}\kappa (\rho )\rho ^2e_\psi ^2+\frac{1}{6}\rho ^2\left[\sqrt{\frac{r^2ϵ^2}{r^2+ϵ^2}}(g_1^2+g_2^2)+\sqrt{\frac{r^2+ϵ^2}{r^2ϵ^2}}(g_3^2+g_4^2)\right],$$
(2.20)
where $`\rho `$ is related to $`r`$ according to (cf. (2.12),(2.17))

$$\rho ^6=(\frac{3}{2})^3r^4\left[\sqrt{1\frac{ϵ^4}{r^4}}\frac{ϵ^4}{r^4}\mathrm{ln}\frac{r^2+\sqrt{r^4ϵ^4}}{ϵ^2}\right]+b^6,$$
(2.21)
and (cf. (2.14),(2.16))

$$\kappa (\rho )=(\frac{3}{2})^3\frac{r^4}{\rho ^6}(1\frac{ϵ^4}{r^4})=1\frac{b^6}{\rho ^6}+O(ϵ).$$
(2.22)
Since $`ϵr\mathrm{}`$ we have $`b\rho <\mathrm{}`$. This metric reduces to the generalized conifold metric (2.13) for $`ϵ0`$. For $`r`$ greater than any of the two length scales $`b`$ and $`ϵ`$, it becomes the standard conifold metric (2.3).

It is useful also to present the deformed conifold metric in terms of the radial coordinate $`\tau `$ used in

$$r^2=ϵ^2\mathrm{cosh}\tau ,\rho ^6=(\frac{3}{2})^3ϵ^4[\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{sinh}(2\tau )\tau ]+b^6,0\tau <\mathrm{},$$
(2.23)
$$ds_6^2=\frac{1}{2}𝒦\left[(3𝒦^3)^1ϵ^4(d\tau ^2+g_5^2)+\mathrm{sinh}^2\frac{\tau }{2}(g_1^2+g_2^2)+\mathrm{cosh}^2\frac{\tau }{2}(g_3^2+g_4^2)\right],$$
(2.24)
where

$$𝒦(\tau )=\frac{[c+\frac{1}{2}ϵ^4(\mathrm{sinh}(2\tau )2\tau )]^{1/3}}{\mathrm{sinh}\tau }=\frac{2}{3}\rho ^2(\mathrm{sinh}\tau )^1,c=(\frac{2}{3})^3b^6.$$

For large $`\tau `$ we again get the standard conifold metric, while for small values of $`\tau `$ we get (for $`b0`$)

$$(ds)_{\tau 0}^2=\frac{3ϵ^4}{8b^4}\tau ^2(d\tau ^2+g_5^2)+\frac{b^2}{12}\tau (g_1^2+g_2^2)+\frac{b^2}{3}\tau ^1(g_3^2+g_4^2),$$
(2.25)
or, in terms of $`\rho b`$

$$(ds_6^2)_{\rho b}=\kappa ^1(\rho )d\rho ^2+\frac{1}{9}\kappa (\rho )\rho ^2e_\psi ^2+\frac{1}{6}\rho ^2\left[(\frac{\rho ^6b^6}{18ϵ^4})^{1/3}(g_1^2+g_2^2)+(\frac{\rho ^6b^6}{18ϵ^4})^{1/3}(g_3^2+g_4^2)\right],$$
(2.26)
where for $`\kappa =\kappa _{\rho b}=[(\frac{3}{2})^5ϵ^4]^{1/3}\frac{(\rho ^6b^6)^{2/3}}{\rho ^6}0`$. Note that the volume of the 2-cycle $`(g_1,g_2)`$ shrinks to zero, while volume of the 3-cycle $`(g_3,g_4,g_5)`$ stays constant (=$`\frac{ϵ^2}{\sqrt{6}}`$). This metric has a curvature singularity at $`\tau =0`$ for any $`b0`$.

For comparsion, the small $`\tau `$ limit of the standard $`b=0`$ deformed conifold metric is

$$(ds)_{\tau 0}^2=(\frac{ϵ^4}{12})^{1/3}\left[\frac{1}{2}(d\tau ^2+g_5^2)+g_3^2+g_4^2+\frac{1}{4}\tau ^2(g_1^2+g_2^2)\right],$$

and is regular at $`\tau =0`$. Indeed, computing the curvature invariant $`R_{ijkl}R^{ijkl}`$ for the general form of the metric (2.24) and then expanding it near $`\tau =0`$ (i.e. $`r=ϵ`$) one finds a singular expression for $`b0`$ 666Here $`\rho `$ and $`b`$ have canonical length $`l`$ dimensions while $`rl^{3/2}`$, $`ϵl^{3/2}`$, $`\tau l^0`$. Note that the leading term in the expression below is what one finds directly from the metric (2.25).

$$(R_{ijkl}R^{ijkl})_{\tau 0}=\frac{5120b^8}{9ϵ^8}\frac{1}{\tau ^8}\left[1\frac{8}{15}\tau ^2+\frac{3ϵ^4}{4b^6}\tau ^3+O(\tau ^4)\right],$$

and a regular expression for $`b=0`$:

$$(R_{ijkl}R^{ijkl})_{\tau 0}=\frac{192(18)^{1/3}}{5ϵ^{8/3}}\left[1\frac{4}{5}\tau ^2+\frac{202}{525}\tau ^4+O(\tau ^5)\right].$$

### 2.5 Remarks

The three one-parameter families of the Ricci-flat metrics presented above (2.13), (2.15) and (2.20) are the most general solutions (with non-trivial dependence on the radial coordinate only) for Ricci-flat metrics on respective conifolds . As was shown in , they define supersymmetric backgrounds of type II supergravity. This is in contrast to what happens in the case of the metric of a cone over $`S^3\times S^2`$ (2.1) which breaks all supersymmetries and thus may lead to unstable D3-brane solutions.

The analogy with the Eguchi-Hanson metric elucidates the geometrical meaning of the “mass” parameter $`b`$. From the perspective of dual gauge theories associated with D3-brane solutions on these generalized conifolds which will be discussed below this parameter should play the role of an IR “mass” or “confinement” scale.

A feature of the conifold (2.13) and the resolved conifold (2.15) is that near the apex $`(r=0)`$ the respective metrics effectively “factorize” into $`𝐑^2\times S^2\times S^2`$ part. This will have consequences for the structure of D3-brane solutions in the IR region.

We have seen that while the $`b=0`$ conifold had curvature singularity at the origin, its $`b0`$ generalization has regular curvature (and have no conical singularity after changing the period of the angle $`\psi `$). The resolved conifold metric depending on two parameters $`(a,b)`$ is regular for all of their values except $`a=b=0`$. Curiously, this is different from the situation for the deformed conifold: while the standard $`b=0`$ deformed conifold metric was regular (with the parameter $`ϵ`$ playing the role of the “cutoff”), its $`b0`$ generalization has a curvature singularity at the origin $`r=ϵ`$. This implies, in particular, that one is unlikely to find a direct $`b0`$ generalization of the regular fractional D3-brane on deformed conifold solution of  (which is thus a very special point in the parameter space of solutions). For that reason in what follows we shall mostly concentrate on the resolved conifold case.

Finally, let us note that the conifold solutions discussed above can be derived as special cases of the following “interpolating” ansatz for 6-d metric (see )

$$ds_6^2=e^{2z+3x}du^2+e^{z+x}[e^g(e_{\theta _1}^2+e_{\varphi _1}^2)+e^g(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_1^2+\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_2^2)]+e^{2zx}e_\psi ^2,$$
(2.27)
where $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_1=ϵ_1a(u)e_{\theta _1},\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_2=ϵ_2+a(u)e_{\varphi _1}`$, $`ϵ_1=\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta _2d\varphi _2+\mathrm{cos}\psi d\theta _2,`$ $`ϵ_2=\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta _2d\varphi _2\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta _2`$, and $`e_{\theta _1},e_{\varphi _1},e_\psi `$ are as in (2.2),(2.4). Resolved and deformed conifold metrics are special cases of this ansatz  corresponding to $`a=0`$ and $`a^2=1e^{2g}`$ respectively. The unknown functions $`x,z,g,a`$ of the radial coordinate $`u`$ representing Ricci-flat 6-d spaces are subject to equations following from the following 1-d action (plus the “zero-energy” constraint)

$$S_1=𝑑u[x^2z^2g^2e^{2g}a^2V(x,z,g,a)],$$
(2.28)
$$V=\frac{1}{2}e^{2z}[e^{2g}+(a^21)^2e^{2g}]4e^{z+2x}\mathrm{cosh}g+a^2(e^ze^{2z+2xg})^2.$$
(2.29)
For the special cases corresponding to the resolved and the deformed conifolds one finds that this system admits a superpotential $`W`$ , i.e. $`V=G^{ij}\frac{W}{q^i}\frac{W}{q^j},`$ where $`q^i=(x,z,g,a)`$$`G_{ij}=(1,1,1,e^{2g})`$, so that one gets a first-order system $`q^i=G^{ij}\frac{W}{q^j}`$. For example, in the resolved conifold case ($`a=0`$$`W=e^z\mathrm{cosh}g+e^{2z+2x}`$. It would be very interesting to find new solutions of the sytem (2.28) representing 6-d Ricci-flat spaces that “interpolate” between the generalized resolved and deformed conifold metrics discussed above. dd

## 3 Pure D3-brane solutions

### 3.1 General remarks

As is well known, given a Ricci flat 6-d space with metric $`g_{mn}`$, one can construct the following generalization of the standard  3-brane solution (see, e.g., )

$$ds_{10}^2=h^{1/2}(y)dx^\mu dx^\mu +h^{1/2}(y)g_{mn}(y)dy^mdy^n,$$
(3.1)
$$F_5=(1+)dh^1dx^0dx^1dx^2dx^3,\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{const},$$
(3.2)
where $`h`$ is a harmonic function on the transverse 6-d space:

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}_m\left(\sqrt{g}g^{mn}_nh\right)=0.$$
(3.3)
In the case of a Ricci-flat cone with the metric

$$g_{mn}(y)dy^mdy^n=d\rho ^2+\rho ^2\gamma _{ij}(z)dz^idz^j,$$
(3.4)
one can choose $`h`$ to depend only on $`\rho `$, thus getting the single-center solution

$$h=h_0+\frac{L^4}{\rho ^4}.$$
(3.5)
Here and below we assume that $`h_00`$. Then in the near-core region the space becomes $`AdS_5\times X^5`$, where $`X^5`$ is the Einstein space which is the base of the cone with the metric $`\gamma _{ij}`$. Particular examples are provided by the standard cone metrics (2.1) and (2.3) where $`X^5=T^{1,0}=S^2\times S^3`$ and $`X^5=T^{1,1}`$.777Compactifications of IIB supergrativity on such $`X^5`$ were discussed in  where it was pointed out that in the family of $`T^{p,q}`$ spaces only $`T^{1,1}`$ preserves supersymmetry.

In the general case when the transverse 6-space is not a cone, one will not find the near-core geometry having $`AdS_5`$ factor and thus the dual gauge theory will have broken conformal invariance.

### 3.2 Conifold case

Let us determine the harmonic function $`h`$ that solves (3.3) for the generalized conifold metric (2.13) assuming $`h=h(\rho )`$. Using that $`\sqrt{g_6}=\frac{1}{108}\rho ^5\mathrm{sin}\theta _1\mathrm{sin}\theta _2,`$ $`g^{\rho \rho }=1\frac{b^6}{\rho ^6}`$ we get

$$h=h_0\frac{2L^4}{b^4}\left[\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{ln}\frac{(\overline{\rho }^21)^3}{\overline{\rho }^61}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(\frac{\pi }{2}\mathrm{arctan}\frac{2\overline{\rho }^2+1}{\sqrt{3}})\right],$$
(3.6)
$$\overline{\rho }\frac{\rho }{b}.$$

For $`\frac{\rho }{b}1`$ we recover the standard metric of D3-branes on the conifold (3.5), i.e.

$$h(\rho \mathrm{})=h_0+\frac{L^4}{\rho ^4}.$$
(3.7)
For small values of $`\rho `$ we get $`h\mathrm{}`$

$$h(\rho b)=\frac{2L^4}{3b^4}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\rho }{b}1\right)+h_1,h_1=h_0+\frac{L^4}{9b^4}(\sqrt{3}\pi +3\mathrm{ln}\frac{4}{3}).$$
(3.8)
Recalling from (3.1) that the 00-component of the metric is $`h^{1/2}`$ we see that $`\rho =b`$ is a horizon. It is also a curvature singularity. Thus, starting with $`𝐑^{1,3}\times M^6`$ where $`M^6`$ is the generalized $`b0`$ conifold, the introduction of D3-branes creates a back reaction that transform the previously nonsingular point $`\rho =b`$ into a curvature singularity coinciding with horizon. In contrast, for $`b=0`$  the near-core geometry was regular – $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$.

This is similar to what was found for the D3-brane on $`b=0`$ resolved ($`a0`$) conifold in . Below we will see that this behavior extends also to the case of the resolved conifold with $`b0`$.

One of the generic features of D3-branes on the conifold and the resolved conifold is the logarithmic form of $`h(\rho )`$ at small distances. The origin of this lies in the fact (noted in section 2.5) that for small $`\rho `$ the transverse geometry becomes effectively 2-dimensional as far as the dependence on the radial coordinate is concerned, so that one finds the the harmonic function $`h`$ has the “7-brane-like” $`\mathrm{log}(\rho \rho _0)`$ structure.

### 3.3 Resolved conifold case

Starting with the resolved conifold metric (2.15) and solving (3.3) one finds the following expression for $`h(\rho )`$

$$h=h_0\frac{2L^4}{\alpha b^4}\left[\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{ln}\frac{(\overline{\rho }^2\overline{\rho }_0^2)^3}{\overline{\rho }^6+3q^2\overline{\rho }^41}+\frac{\beta +q^2}{\lambda }(\frac{\pi }{2}\mathrm{arctan}\frac{2\overline{\rho }^2+\sigma }{\lambda })\right],$$
(3.9)
where as in (3.6) ($`\rho _0`$ is the same as in section 2.3)

$$\overline{\rho }=\frac{\rho }{b},\overline{\rho }_0=\frac{\rho _0}{b},$$

and for simplicity of presentation we have introduced the following constants depending on the ratio $`a/b`$

$`q=\sqrt{3}{\displaystyle \frac{a}{b}},\beta =q^4\mu ^1+\mu q^2,\mu [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(12q^6+\sqrt{14q^6})]^{1/3},`$
$`\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(2\beta ^2+3q^2\beta +\beta ^1),\sigma =\beta +3q^2,\lambda =\sqrt{4\beta ^1\sigma ^2}.`$ (3.10)
We have assumed that $`14q^6>0`$ (the opposite case is discussed below).

The behavior for $`\rho \rho _0`$ is the same as in (3.8)

$$h(\rho \rho _0)=\frac{2L^4}{3\alpha b^4}\mathrm{ln}(\overline{\rho }\overline{\rho }_0)+O(1),$$
(3.11)
i.e., as in the previous case, at $`\rho =\rho _0`$ there is a horizon coinciding with curvature singularity.

Compared to (3.6) here the function $`h`$ contains another (resolution) scale $`a`$ represented by the parameter $`q[0,\mathrm{})`$. Depending on the value of $`q`$, i.e. on the ratio of $`a`$ and $`b`$, one may distinguish three regions: $`b`$-dominated, intermediate, and $`a`$-dominated. The metric defined by (3.9),(3.10) is valid in the $`b`$-dominated region where $`4q^6<1`$, i.e., $`b>3^{1/2}2^{1/3}a`$. For $`q=0`$ ($`a=0`$) we get back to the conifold case (3.6) which should be viewed as the limiting case of the $`b`$-dominated resolved conifold solution (3.9). In the intermediate region, i.e. $`4q^6=1`$ (this corresponds to $`\lambda =0`$ in (3.9),(3.10)) we get

$$h=h_0\frac{2L^4}{81a^4}\left(\frac{9a^2}{\rho ^2+6a^2}+\mathrm{ln}\frac{\rho ^23a^2}{\rho ^2+6a^2}\right),$$
(3.12)
where $`\sqrt{3}a\rho <\mathrm{}`$. This metric also has a curvature singularity and the horizon at $`\rho =\rho _0=\sqrt{3}a`$. In the $`a`$-dominated region $`4q^6>1`$, i.e. $`a>3^{1/2}2^{1/3}b`$, we find

$$h=h_0\frac{2L^4}{9a^4\alpha }\left[\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{ln}\frac{(\overline{\rho }^2\overline{\rho }_0^2)^3}{\overline{\rho }^6+\overline{\rho }^4q^6}\frac{\beta +1}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}\frac{2\overline{\rho }^2+\sigma \lambda }{2\overline{\rho }^2+\sigma +\lambda }\right],$$
(3.13)
where888 Note that since $`|\mu |=1`$, the combination $`\mu +\mu ^1`$ is always real so that $`\beta ,\sigma ,\lambda `$ and $`\alpha `$ are always real and $`\rho _0`$ is positive real root of the cubic equation.

$`\overline{\rho }={\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{\sqrt{3}a}},\beta =\mu +\mu ^11,\mu e^{i\pi /3}[1(2q^6)^1iq^3\sqrt{1(4q^6)^1}]^{1/3},`$
$`\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}[2\beta ^2+3\beta +(q^6\beta )^1],\sigma =\beta +3,\lambda =\sqrt{\sigma ^24(q^6\beta )^1}.`$ (3.14)
This solution has the same generic logarithmic behavior near $`\rho _0`$, indicating the existence of a horizon and a singularity.

In $`a`$-dominated expression (3.13) we are able to take $`q\mathrm{}`$ ($`b0`$) limit to get back to the “standard” resolved conifold case. The function $`h`$ in the metric of D3-branes on $`b=0`$ resolved conifold found in  is

$$h_{b=0}=h_0+\frac{2L^4}{81a^4}\left[\frac{9a^2}{\rho ^2}\mathrm{ln}(1+\frac{9a^2}{\rho ^2})\right].$$
(3.15)
Again, here $`\rho =0`$ is both the horizon and the singularity.

### 3.4 Deformed conifold case

In the deformed conifold case (2.20),(2.21) the harmonic function $`h`$ in (3.1) is found to be

$$h=h_0\frac{2^5}{3^3}L^4\frac{\rho d\rho }{r^4ϵ^4},$$
(3.16)
where the explicit form of $`r(\rho )`$ in (2.21) is transcendental. For $`rϵ`$ we have $`r^4=(2\rho ^2/3)^3`$ and therefore recover the D3-brane on the conifold metric with $`h=h_0+\frac{L^4}{\rho ^4}`$. For $`rϵ`$ ($`\rho b`$) we get

$$ds_{10}^2=h^{1/2}dx^\mu dx^\mu +h^{1/2}(ds_6^2)_{\rho b},$$
(3.17)
where $`(ds_6^2)_{\rho b}`$ is given by (2.26) and

$$h=h_1h_2\rho ^2+O(\rho ^4),h_2=\frac{2^{8/3}L^4}{3^{5/3}b^2ϵ^{4/3}}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(\frac{1}{3},\frac{2}{3};\frac{4}{3};1),$$
(3.18)
and $`h_1=h_0+O(\frac{L^4}{b^4})`$. 999Here $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(\frac{1}{3},\frac{2}{3};\frac{4}{3};1)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{3})\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{4}{3})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{2}{3})}1.77`$. This $`b0`$ case is different from the $`b=0`$ deformed conifold case  where $`\rho =0`$ was a horizon. Here for $`\rho b`$ the space factorizes into $`𝐑^{1,3}\times M^6`$ where $`M^6`$ has $`\rho =b`$ as its curvature singularity.

## 4 Fractional D3-brane solutions

Let us now construct the $`b0`$ generalization of the fractional D3-brane on resolved conifold solution of , i.e. the extension of the D3 brane solution of the previous section to the case of additional (self-dual) 3-form flux. The resolved conifold solution includes the conifold one as a special ($`a=0`$) case. The first-order system corresponding to this background was already obtained in . It is straightforward also to construct a similar $`b0`$ generalization of the solution  in the deformed conifold case (see ), but we shall not discuss the details of this here.

For comparison, we shall start with a similar case of 3-branes on the cone over $`S^2\times S^3`$. This solution was previously discussed in  (see also ).

### 4.1 $`S^2\times S^3`$ cone case

The 3-brane ansatz for the metric with transverse part given by (2.1) is

$$ds^2=h^{1/2}dx^\mu dx^\mu +h^{1/2}\left(d\rho ^2+\frac{1}{8}\rho ^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_3^2+\frac{1}{4}\rho ^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2\right),$$
(4.1)
and the natural ansatz for the form fields is similar to the one in the conifold  case

$`B_2`$ $`=`$ $`f(\rho )e_{\theta _2}e_{\varphi _2}H_3=f^{}(\rho )d\rho e_{\theta _2}e_{\varphi _2},`$
$`F_3`$ $`=`$ $`Pe_\psi e_{\theta _1}e_{\varphi _1},`$
$`F_5`$ $`=`$ $`+,=\mathrm{K}(\rho )e_\psi e_{\theta _1}e_{\varphi _1}e_{\theta _2}e_{\varphi _2}.`$ (4.2)
The 10-d duals of these fields are

$$=\frac{2^{13/2}\mathrm{K}}{\rho ^5h^2}d\rho dx^0dx^1dx^2dx^3,$$
(4.3)
$$F_3=\frac{2^{5/2}P}{\rho h}d\rho dx^0dx^1dx^2dx^3e_{\theta _2}e_{\varphi _2},$$
(4.4)
$$H_3=\frac{\rho f^{}}{2^{5/2}h}dx^0dx^1dx^2dx^3e_\psi e_{\theta _1}e_{\varphi _1}.$$
(4.5)
We shall assume that the dilaton $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is constant. Then the $`F_3`$ equation of motion $`d(e^\mathrm{\Phi }F_3)=F_5H_3`$ is satisfied automatically, and from the $`H_3`$ equation $`d(e^\mathrm{\Phi }H_3)=F_5F_3`$ one obtains the following equation ($`e^\mathrm{\Phi }=g_s`$)

$$\left(\frac{f_1^{}\rho }{h}\right)^{}=\frac{2^9g_sP\mathrm{K}}{h^2\rho ^5}.$$
(4.6)
The constant dilaton condition implies $`H_3^2=e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }}F_3^2`$, i.e. using (2.13) we get 101010As in , the axion equation is satisfied automatically since $`H_3F_3=0`$. $`\rho f^{}=2^{5/2}g_sP.`$ The Bianchi identity for the 5-form $`dF_5=dF_5=H_3F_3`$ gives $`\mathrm{K}^{}=Pf^{},`$ i.e. $`\mathrm{K}=Q+Pf.`$ The two linearly independent Einstein equations are a consequence of this system of first order differential equations. The solution is thus very similar to the original conifold one

$`f`$ $`=`$ $`2^{5/2}g_sP\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{\rho _0}},\mathrm{K}=Q+2^{5/2}g_sP^2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{\rho _0}},`$
$`h`$ $`=`$ $`h_0+{\displaystyle \frac{2^{9/2}}{\rho ^4}}\left[Q+2^{5/2}g_sP^2(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{\rho _0}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}})\right].`$ (4.7)
Note that as in , the complex 3-form $`G_3=g_sF_3+iH_3`$ is selfdual in 6-d sense. Like the conifold solution , this solution has a naked singularity located at $`\rho =\rho _h`$, $`Q+2^{5/2}g_sP^2(\mathrm{ln}\frac{\rho _h}{\rho _0}+\frac{1}{4})=0`$, i.e. very close to the origin if the number of fractional D3-branes is small, $`Qg_sP^2`$. In this case the singularity is behind the “zero charge” ($`\mathrm{K}=0`$) locus.

### 4.2 Resolved conifold case

The ansatz for the metric will be the same as in (3.1),

$$ds_{10}^2=h^{1/2}(\rho )dx^\mu dx^\mu +h^{1/2}(\rho )ds_6^2,$$
(4.8)
where $`ds_6^2`$ will be the metric of the generalized $`b0`$ resolved conifold (2.15). Our ansatz for the NS-NS 2-form will be as in , i.e. a natural generalization of the ansatz in  motivated by an asymmetry between the two $`S^2`$ parts of the resolved conifold metric

$$B_2=f_1(\rho )e_{\theta _1}e_{\varphi _1}+f_2(\rho )e_{\theta _2}e_{\varphi _2},$$

$$H_3=dB_2=d\rho [f_1^{}(\rho )e_{\theta _1}e_{\varphi _1}+f_2^{}(\rho )e_{\theta _2}e_{\varphi _2}].$$
(4.9)
The conifold case ($`a=0`$) corresponds  to $`f_1=f_2`$. The forms $`F_3`$ and $`F_5`$ will also have the same structure as in  (we follow the notation of )

$$F_3=Pe_\psi (e_{\theta _2}e_{\varphi _2}e_{\theta _1}e_{\varphi _1}),$$
(4.10)
$$F_5=+,=\mathrm{K}(\rho )e_\psi e_{\theta _1}e_{\varphi _1}e_{\theta _2}e_{\varphi _2}.$$
(4.11)
The rest of the discussion is essentially the same as in  with $`\kappa `$ in the 6-d metric now being dependent also on $`b`$ according to (2.16).

Assuming that the dilaton $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is constant, the $`F_3`$ equation of motion $`d(e^\mathrm{\Phi }F_3)=F_5H_3`$ is satisfied automatically, and from the $`H_3`$ equation $`d(e^\mathrm{\Phi }H_3)=F_5F_3`$ one obtains the following three equations ($`e^\mathrm{\Phi }=g_s`$)

$$\left(\frac{f_1^{}\rho \kappa \mathrm{\Gamma }}{h}\right)^{}=\frac{324g_sP\mathrm{K}}{h^2\rho ^5\kappa \mathrm{\Gamma }},\left(\frac{f_2^{}\rho \kappa }{h\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right)^{}=\frac{324g_sP\mathrm{K}}{h^2\rho ^5\kappa \mathrm{\Gamma }},$$
(4.12)
$$f_1^{}+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2f_2^{}=0,\mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{\rho ^2+6a^2}{\rho ^2},$$
(4.13)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the ratio of the squares of the radii of the two spheres in the resolved conifold metric (2.15). The constant dilaton condition implies $`H_3^2=e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }}F_3^2`$, i.e.

$$f_1^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2f_2^2=\frac{9g_s^2P^2}{k^2\rho ^2}(1+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2).$$
(4.14)
Combined with (4.13) that gives

$$f_1^{}=\frac{3g_sP}{\rho \kappa \mathrm{\Gamma }},f_2^{}=\frac{3g_sP\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\rho \kappa }.$$
(4.15)
The Bianchi identity for the 5-form $`dF_5=dF_5=H_3F_3`$ implies

$$\mathrm{K}^{}=P(f_1^{}f_2^{}),\mathrm{i}.\mathrm{e}.\mathrm{K}=Q+P(f_1f_2).$$
(4.16)
As in , to determine the metric function $`h(\rho )`$ it is sufficient to consider the trace of the Einstein equations,111111More precisely, there are two linearly independent Einstein equations: one is the square of eqn. (4.13) and another, written above, can be expressed in terms of the first derivative of (4.13) using (4.16).$`R=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }h=\frac{1}{24}(e^\mathrm{\Phi }H_3^2+e^\mathrm{\Phi }F_3^2)`$, i.e.

$$h^{3/2}\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}_\rho \left(\sqrt{g}g^{\rho \rho }_\rho h\right)=\frac{1}{12}(g_s^1H_3^2+g_sF_3^2)=\frac{1}{6}g_sF_3^2,$$
(4.17)
or

$$\left(\rho ^5\kappa \mathrm{\Gamma }h^{}\right)^{}=324g_sP^2\frac{(1+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2)}{\rho \kappa \mathrm{\Gamma }}.$$
(4.18)
Integrating this we get

$$h^{}=\frac{108\mathrm{K}}{\rho ^5\kappa \mathrm{\Gamma }}.$$
(4.19)
Plugging in the function $`\kappa `$ in (2.16) the system (4.15),(4.19) of first-order differential equations can be directly integrated.

Here we shall present the explicit form of the solution only in the $`a=0`$ limit, i.e. the $`b`$-generalized conifold case (2.14). For $`a=0`$ one finds $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1`$, implying $`f_2=f_1`$, and with $`\kappa =1\frac{b^6}{\rho ^6}`$ we obtain

$$f_1=f_2=\frac{1}{2}g_sP\mathrm{ln}(\overline{\rho }^61)+f_0,\mathrm{K}=Q+g_sP^2\mathrm{ln}(\overline{\rho }^61),$$
(4.20)
$$h=h_0\frac{54Q}{b^4}\left[\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{ln}\frac{(\overline{\rho }^21)^3}{\overline{\rho }^61}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(\frac{\pi }{2}\mathrm{arctan}\frac{2\overline{\rho }^2+1}{\sqrt{3}})\right]$$

$$+\frac{27g_sP^2}{b^4(\overline{\rho }^61)^{2/3}}\left[\frac{3}{2}{}_{3}{}^{}F_{2}^{}(\frac{2}{3},\frac{2}{3},\frac{2}{3};\frac{5}{3},\frac{5}{3};\frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^61})+{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(\frac{2}{3},\frac{2}{3};\frac{5}{3};\frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^61})\mathrm{ln}(\overline{\rho }^61)\right],$$
(4.21)
where $`\overline{\rho }=\frac{\rho }{b}`$ (cf. (3.6)) and $`{}_{p}{}^{}F_{q}^{}`$ is the hypergeometric function.

The large $`\rho `$ behavior of $`h`$ is

$$h(\rho \mathrm{})=h_0+\frac{27}{\rho ^4}\left[Q+6g_sP^2(\mathrm{ln}\frac{\rho }{b}+\frac{1}{4})\right],$$
(4.22)
i.e. this solution has the same UV asymptotic as the $`b=0`$ conifold one of . In the short-distance limit $`\rho b`$ limit we have, to the leading order,

$$h(\overline{\rho }1)=h_0\frac{18Q}{b^4}\mathrm{ln}(\overline{\rho }^21)\frac{9g_sP^2}{b^4}\mathrm{ln}^2(\overline{\rho }^21).$$
(4.23)
At $`\overline{\rho }_h1+e^{2Q/(g_sP^2)}`$ the solution has a naked singularity of a repulson type. The “zero charge” locus $`(\mathrm{K}=0)`$ is located at $`\overline{\rho }_\mathrm{K}=1+e^{Q/(g_sP^2)}`$, i.e. $`\overline{\rho }_\mathrm{K}>\overline{\rho }_h`$.

We can thus conclude, based on the analysis in  $`(b=a=0)`$, in  $`(b=0,a0)`$ and here $`(a=0,b0)`$, that generically fractional 3-branes on the conifold and resolved conifold have a repulson-type naked singularity which is located behind the “zero-charge” locus.

## 5 Wilson Loop behavior

Let us now investigate, following , the behavior of the Wilson loop corresponding to “quark-antiquark” potential in the dual gauge theory. It is given by the exponential of the classical fundamental string action in these D3-brane backgrounds evaluated for a static configuration of open string ending on the probe D3-brane placed at the “boundary” $`\rho =\mathrm{}`$.

We will show that one gets an area law (confining) behavior for the “pure” D3-brane backgrounds of section 3, assuming at least one of the scales of the transverse space is kept non-zero. This is different from what is found in the standard conifold case  where the near-core geometry has $`AdS_5`$ factor and thus the potential is Coulombic as in  (in the single-center case as well as in the multicenter case ).

For simplicity, we shall consider only the D3-brane background with the resolved conifold as the transverse space. The corresponding metric (2.15),(3.9) depends on the two scale parameters $`b`$ and $`a`$. Expressed in terms of $`\overline{\rho }=\rho /b`$ it depends only on their ratio $`q=\sqrt{3}a/b`$. It is sufficient to analyze the Wilson loop in the two limiting cases $`q=0`$ and $`q=\mathrm{}`$: (i) $`a=0,b0`$, i.e. D3-brane on generalized conifold (2.13),(3.6), and (ii) $`a0,b=0`$, i.e. D3-brane on “standard” resolved conifold (3.15). In both special cases the scale of the transverse space ($`b`$ or $`a`$) determines the confinement scale. The behavior of the Wilson loop for general values of $`q`$ will be similar, given that the behavior of $`h`$ is generic. Let us emphasize that in contrast to other supergravity solutions dual to confining $`𝒩`$=1 gauge theories , this confinement behavior is found for the pure D3-brane background which does not have any non-trivial 3-form fluxes.

### 5.1 General set-up

All examples we have discussed above have metrics of the type

$$ds^2=h^{1/2}(\rho )(dx_0^2+dx_kdx_k)+h^{1/2}(\rho )[\kappa ^1(\rho )d\rho ^2+ds_5^2],$$
(5.1)
where $`ds_5^2`$ is the metric of the corresponding 5-d compact space. The Nambu-Goto string action which determines the expression for the Wilson loop depends on this 10-d metric $`G_{MN}`$ as $`𝑑\tau 𝑑\sigma \sqrt{det(G_{MN}_aX^M_bX^N)}`$. In the static gauge ($`x_0=\tau ,x_1x=\sigma `$) and assuming that the string is stretched only in the radial direction, i.e. only $`\rho `$ coordinate depends on $`\sigma `$, we get 121212$`T`$ is the time interval and the string tension is set equal to 1.

$$S=T𝑑x\sqrt{G_{00}G_{xx}+G_{00}G_{\rho \rho }(_x\rho )^2}=T𝑑x\sqrt{h^1+\kappa ^1(_x\rho )^2}.$$
(5.2)
Since the Lagrangian of this “mechanical system” does not depend explicitly on “time” $`x`$, we have a conserved quantity $`\frac{h^1}{\sqrt{h^1+\kappa ^1(_x\rho )^2}},`$ i.e. the first integral is ($`c_0=\mathrm{const}`$)

$$dx=\frac{d\rho }{\sqrt{\kappa h^1\left(\frac{h^1}{c_0^2}1\right)}}.$$
(5.3)
The energy of a static string configuration is thus

$$E=\frac{S}{T}=𝑑x\sqrt{h^1+\kappa ^1(_x\rho )^2}=\frac{d\rho }{\sqrt{\kappa \left(1c_0^2h\right)}}.$$
(5.4)
Following , the question about confinement is then reduced to finding the dependence of the energy $`E`$ on the distance $`\mathrm{}`$ between the string end-points (between “quark” and the “antiquark”).

### 5.2 Conifold case

For the generalized conifold metric with the scale $`b`$ (2.13),(2.14) the function $`h`$ of D3-brane solution is given by (3.6). Introducing the new coordinate

$$y=\overline{\rho }^2=\frac{\rho ^2}{b^2},$$
(5.5)
and removing the asymptotically flat region (i.e. dropping $`h_0`$) we obtain the following relation for the quark-antiquark separation

$$\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}=\frac{L^2}{\sqrt{2}b}\underset{y_{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑y\frac{y}{\sqrt{y^31}}\frac{f(y)}{\sqrt{f(y_{})f(y)}},$$
(5.6)
where $`y_{}`$ is the turning point and

$$f(y)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\mathrm{arctan}\frac{2y+1}{\sqrt{3}}\frac{\pi }{2}\right)\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{ln}\frac{(y1)^3}{y^31},f(y_{})=\frac{b^4}{2L^4c_0^2}.$$
(5.7)
Note that for any finite value of $`f(y_{})`$ one has $`y_{}>1`$, meaning that the minimal surface does not reach the $`\rho =b`$ which is the horizon and the curvature singularity. The energy of the string configuration is

$$E=\frac{b^3}{2^{3/2}L^2c_0}\underset{y_{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{ydy}{\sqrt{y^31}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{f(y_{})f(y)}}.$$
(5.8)
Evaluating the integrals as in , i.e. assuming that the main contribution comes from the region near $`y_{}`$, we find the “area law”, i.e. the linear confinement behavior

$$E\frac{c_0}{2}\mathrm{}.$$
(5.9)
### 5.3 Resolved conifold case

Let us first consider the “standard” $`b=0`$ version of the D3-brane solution on resolved conifold , i.e. (3.15). Introducing the new coordinate

$$y=\frac{\rho ^2}{9a^2},$$
(5.10)
and setting $`h_0=0`$ we get

$$h=\frac{2L^4}{81a^4}f(y),f(y)y^1\mathrm{ln}(1+y^1),\kappa =\frac{y+1}{y+\frac{2}{3}}.$$
(5.11)
Then the analog of (5.6) is

$$\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}=\frac{L^2}{3\sqrt{2}a}\underset{y_{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{dy}{y^{1/2}}\sqrt{\frac{y+\frac{2}{3}}{y+1}}\frac{f(y)}{\sqrt{f(y_{})f(y)}},$$
(5.12)
where $`f(y_{})=\frac{81a^4}{2L^4c_0^2}.`$ We have used that from the form of the denominator in the analogue of eq. (5.3) (cf. (5.12)) it follows that there is a turning point for $`y`$, i.e. $`y`$ changes from $`\mathrm{}`$ ($`\rho =\mathrm{}`$) to $`y_{}`$. Note that $`f(y)`$ is a positive function and it increases monotonically from zero at $`y=\mathrm{}`$. Therefore, for any positive constant $`d_0`$ there is $`y=y_{}`$ that solves $`d_0^2=y^1\mathrm{ln}(1+y^1)`$.

Similar behavior is found when we switch on the $`b`$-parameter, i.e. start with $`\kappa `$ and $`h`$ given in (2.16) and (3.9). Thus the minimal surface does not reach the curvature singularity located at $`\rho _0`$. 131313For $`b=0`$ one can estimate the value of $`y_{}`$ as follows. For small $`d_0`$ we expand $`f(y)`$ near zero and find $`y_{}=(\sqrt{2}d_0)^1`$, i.e. $`\rho _{}L\sqrt{c_0}.`$ For large $`d_0`$, we expand $`f(y)`$ for large $`y`$ to find $`y_{}=d_0^2`$, i.e. $`\rho _{}\frac{\sqrt{2}L^2c_0}{3a}.`$ The expression for the energy is (for $`b=0`$)

$$E=\frac{27a^3}{2^{3/2}L^2c_0}\underset{y_{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{dy}{y^{1/2}}\sqrt{\frac{y+\frac{2}{3}}{y+1}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{f(y_{})f(y)}}.$$
(5.13)
Assuming that the main contribution comes from the region near $`y_{}`$ and expanding $`f(y)f(y_{})+f^{}(y_{})(yy_{})`$ we again get the area law behavior, i.e. the relation (5.9). Analogous result is found when one switches on the dependence of the background metric on the parameter $`b`$.

## Acknowledgments

We are grateful to I. Klebanov and G. Papadopoulos for useful discussions and comments. LAPZ would like to acknowledge the Office of the Provost at the University of Michigan and the High Energy Physics Division of the Department of Energy for support. The work of AAT was supported in part by the DOE grant DE-FG02-91ER40690, INTAS project 991590 and PPARC SPG grant PPA/G/S/1998/00613.


text:
# Fractional exclusion statistics and shot noise in ballistic conductors

## I Introduction

The concept of fractional exclusion statistics (FES) was introduced by Haldane as a phenomenological description of excitations with mixed statistical properties (intermediate between fermions and bosons) in strongly correlated many-body systems. FES is based on the assumption that the change of the number of available one-particle states in a system, for a given volume and with fixed boundary conditions, $`\mathrm{\Delta }D`$, depends linearly on the change of the number of quasiparticles $`\mathrm{\Delta }N`$, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Delta }D=g\mathrm{\Delta }N`$. Here, $`g`$ is the statistical parameter with the properties of: (i) being independent of the number of quasiparticles and, (ii) being determined solely by the interaction strength between particles. In spite of its phenomenological ground, FES has been shown to be realized by, or directly related to, several physical models, as for instance: (i) models for strongly correlated particles in one dimension and two dimensions, (ii) anyons  and, (iii) quasi-particle excitations in the fractional quantum Hall effect (FQHE) systems.

The quantum statistical mechanics of a generalized gas of particles obeying FES was pioneered in Refs.\[\]. Since then, a series of works were devoted to the thermodynamic properties of this generalized system. In addition, transport properties have been widely investigated. The linear response of one dimensional systems obeying FES has been addressed by means of the Landauer approach and the correlation function method. The non linear response for edge excitations in the FQHE in terms of FES has been also analyzed.

By contrast, the fluctuation properties of systems satisfying FES have received only a minor consideration. A significative attempt to this subject was presented in Ref.\[\] where a generalization of the first quantized Landauer approach to conductance and noise was proposed for particles obeying FES. The application of the formalism to the case of strongly degenerate systems revealed that the effects of carrier statistics on the noise properties is only appreciated in the transition region between thermal and shot noise. Surprisingly enough, the shot noise suppression factor was found to be independent of the particle statistics. Thus, no evidence of the ”attractive” or ”repulsive” nature of the different statistics was expected.

The aim of the present paper is, precisely, to analyze under which conditions the noise properties of systems obeying FES are expected to depend on the statistics of the carriers, thus shedding new light on the attractive or repulsive nature of FES. To this purpose, we investigate the noise properties of a one dimensional ballistic system obeying FES with current voltage ($`IV`$) characteristics ranging from linear to current saturation regimes. As prototype of a one dimensional ballistic system, we consider a perfectly transmitting channel where the random injection of carriers from the contacts is the only source of noise. Being related to the occupation probabilities, this noise source is only present at temperatures different from zero and it depends on the carrier statistics. Therefore, the above prototype represents the simplest system where to study the inter-relations between FES and noise.

The content of the paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II we detail the system under study. In Sec. III we analyze the transport and noise properties for the case of strongly degenerate conditions. In Sec. IV the case of weakly degenerate conditions are considered. Finally, in Sec. V we sum up the main conclusions of the paper.

## II System under study

We consider a standard two terminal experiment where two reservoirs are adiabatically inter-connected by a one-dimensional channel with the following assumptions. (i) The channel is ballistic and perfectly coupled with the reservoirs acting as ideal contacts so that no reflections take place at the interfaces. (ii) Each reservoir is in quasi-equilibrium at a temperature $`T`$, and electrochemical potential $`\varphi `$. (iii) All the band bending occurs in the channel and the relative position of the conduction band and the electrochemical potential does not change in the contacts, i.e. the chemical potential $`\mu =\varphi E_C`$, with $`E_C`$ the bottom of the conduction energy band, is independent of the applied bias (for simplicity we assume the same value for the two contacts). Therefore, when the bias $`qV=\varphi _2\varphi _1`$, with $`q`$ the carriers charge (taken as negative), is changed, the potential can vary exclusively inside the ballistic channel, and the contacts can be excluded from consideration.

The carriers in the system are assumed to satisfy FES and are injected from the reservoirs into the channel in accordance with the corresponding equilibrium distribution function. For a generalized gas satisfying FES, standard quantum statistics shows that its equilibrium distribution function, $`f_g(\epsilon \mu )`$, satisfies the implicit equation

$$\left(1gf_g(z)\right)^g\left(1+(1g)f_g(z)\right)^{1g}=f_g(z)e^{\frac{z}{k_BT}}\text{,}$$
(1)
where $`\epsilon `$ is the carrier energy, $`k_B`$ the Boltzmann constant and $`T`$ the temperature. The limiting values $`g=1`$ and $`g=0`$ correspond to the Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein statistics, respectively. Valuable approximations of the above distributions are: (i) under strongly degenerate conditions $`f_g(\epsilon \mu )=(1/g)\theta (\mu \epsilon )`$ with $`\theta `$ the Heaviside function, (ii) under non-degenerate conditions, $`f_g(\epsilon \mu )=\mathrm{exp}((\epsilon \mu )/k_BT)`$, which being the Maxwell-Boltzman distribution is independent of $`g`$ . Here, for the sake of convenience we will take $`\mu >3k_BT`$ and $`\mu <3k_BT`$ as synonymous of strongly degenerate and non-degenerate conditions, respectively. These conditions are well verified for all FES. Finally, we note that the charge of carriers, $`q`$, is here taken to be independent of carrier statistics to allow us focusing only on purely statistical effects. To include the combined effect of fractional charge and fractional statistics one only needs to substitute $`q`$ by $`ge`$ in the final results.

## III Strongly degenerate systems

For the sake of simplicity we first consider the case of strongly degenerate conditions (i.e., $`\mu >3k_BT`$). Under these conditions, one can neglect long range Coulomb interaction effects on the fluctuations, thus simplifying considerably the calculations.

### A Transport properties

Under the conditions that long range coulomb interaction can be neglected, the average current flowing through a ballistic one dimensional channel can be written as:

$$I=(2s+1)\frac{q}{h}_0^+\mathrm{}\left[f_g(\epsilon \mu )f_g(\epsilon +qV\mu )\right]𝑑\epsilon \text{,}$$
(2)
where $`s`$ is the spin factor, $`h`$ is the Planck constant and use is made that $`\varphi _2\varphi _1=qV`$. For FES, with the help of the relation

$$f_g^{}(z)=\frac{1}{k_BT}f_g(z)\left(1gf_g(z)\right)\left(1+(1g)f_g(z)\right)\text{,}$$
(3)
which follows from Eq. (1), one can integrate the current equation obtaining the $`IV`$ characteristics in explicit form

$`I`$ $`=`$ $`I_0[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+(1g)f_g(\mu )}{1gf_g(\mu )}}\right)`$ (5)
$`\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+(1g)f_g(qV\mu )}{1gf_g(qV\mu )}}\right)]\text{.}`$
Here, $`I_0=(2s+1)\frac{q}{h}k_BT=G_0\frac{k_BT}{q}`$, with $`G_0=(2s+1)\frac{q^2}{h}`$.

The $`IV`$ characteristics given by Eq. (5) is plotted in Fig. 1 for different statistics and strongly degenerate conditions given by $`\mu /k_BT=8`$. In all the cases we found, that the $`IV`$ characteristics are linear for applied potentials lower than the chemical potential, while they tend to saturate for applied potentials higher than the chemical potential. The occurrence of current saturation is due to the fact that: (i) all carriers injected from the contact at higher voltage are collected by the opposite contact and, (ii) all carriers injected from the contact at lower voltage return back to the same contact. We anticipate, that the saturation condition plays a determinant role in evidencing the effects of the statistics on the noise properties of the system. As can be seen in Fig. 1, the main effect of the carrier statistics is to determine the slope of the linear regime (i.e. the conductance) and the value of the saturation current. The dependence of these quantities on the statistical parameter can be obtained straightforwardly. Indeed, from Eq.(2) the (differential) conductance is given by:

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dI}{dV}}=G_0{\displaystyle _0^+\mathrm{}}\left[f_g^{}(\epsilon +qV\mu )\right]𝑑\epsilon `$ (6)
$`=`$ $`G_0f_g(qV\mu )\text{,}`$ (7)
thus yielding for the (linear) conductance (when $`qV\mu `$)

$$G^{eq}=G_0f_g(\mu )\text{.}$$
(8)
Under strongly degenerate conditions the conductance thus becomes

$$G^{eq,\mathrm{deg}}=\frac{G_0}{g}=(2s+1)\frac{q^2}{gh}\text{.}$$
(9)
Therefore, $`G^{eq,\mathrm{deg}}`$ is found to depend inversely upon the statistical parameter, in agreement with existing results.

For the saturation current we obtain the expression:

$`I_s`$ $`=`$ $`(2s+1){\displaystyle \frac{q}{h}}{\displaystyle _0^+\mathrm{}}f(\epsilon \mu )𝑑\epsilon `$ (10)
$`=`$ $`I_0\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+(1g)f_g(\mu )}{1gf_g(\mu )}}\right)\text{,}`$ (11)
which, under strongly degenerate conditions, leads to:

$$\text{ }I_s^{\mathrm{deg}}=G^{eq,\mathrm{deg}}\frac{\mu }{q}=(2s+1)\frac{q\mu }{gh}\text{.}$$
(12)
The saturation current is a function of the statistical parameter only through the value of $`G^{eq,\mathrm{deg}}`$, and thus it also depends inversely upon the statistical parameter. This dependence is due to the fact that for a given value of $`g`$ the occupation number goes as $`1/g`$ while the velocity of the injected carries remains the same for all the statistics, once a value of the chemical potential is given. We remark, that if the unit charge of carriers depends on the statistical parameter as $`q=ge`$, then the value of the saturation current is independent of carrier statistics.

It is worth noting that, a part from the values of the linear conductance and the saturation current, the effects of the carrier statistics is also manifested in the shape of the region of transition between the linear and the saturation regimes. This effect is evidenced in Fig. 2, where we report the current normalized to its saturation value as a function of the applied voltage. For the sake of comparison, in this figure we also plot the $`IV`$ characteristics at $`T=0`$ which, with the used normalization, becomes a universal function, independent of statistics, given by:

$$\frac{I}{I_s}|_{T=0}=\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{qV}{\mu }\text{ for }\frac{qV}{\mu }<1\\ 1\text{ for }\frac{qV}{\mu }>1\end{array}\text{.}$$
(13)
As can be seen in the figure, the difference between the different statistics amounts to a few percent of the value in the transition region.

### B Noise properties

As stated before, in the present structure current fluctuations originate solely from the randomness of carrier injection from the contacts. The carrier injection into the ballistic region must be, of course, consistent with the statistics of the quasi-particles. For the case of contacts at equilibrium, this consistency is satisfied by assuming that the low frequency current spectral density in the energy range $`(\epsilon ,\epsilon +d\epsilon )`$, is given by $`s_I(\epsilon \mu )d\epsilon `$, with

$$s_I(\epsilon \mu )=2G_0k_BT\frac{f_g(\epsilon \mu )}{\mu }\text{.}$$
(14)
This expression is reminiscent of that for the variance of the mean occupation number at equilibrium, $`\delta f_g^2=k_BT\frac{f_g(\epsilon \mu )}{\mu }`$, whose validity for FES was proved in Ref.\[\]. Note that, for the case of Fermi-Dirac statistics one has $`s_I=2G_0f_{FD}(1f_{FD})`$, which shows the familiar term $`f(1f)`$, while for FES in general it is $`s_I=2G_0`$ $`f_g\left(1gf_g\right)\left(1+(1g)f_g\right)`$. In all the cases with $`g>0`$, in the zero temperature limit the low frequency noise vanishes since $`f_g1/g\theta (\mu \epsilon )`$, and hence the transport becomes fully coherent.

The current fluctuations can be computed as:

$$S_I=_0^+\mathrm{}\left[s_I(\epsilon \mu )+s_I(\epsilon +qV\mu )\right]𝑑\epsilon \text{,}$$
(15)
where we have used that the channel is perfectly ballistic and transmitting and that, because of strongly degenerate conditions, long range Coulomb interaction can be neglected. After substituting Eq.(14) in Eq.(15), one obtains

$`S_I`$ $`=`$ $`2G_0k_BT\left[f_g(\mu )+f_g(qV\mu )\right]`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`2k_BT(G^{eq}+G)\text{.}`$ (17)
We note that, independently of carrier statistics, at thermal equilibrium one always has:

$`S_I^{eq}`$ $`=`$ $`4k_BTG_0f_g(\mu )`$ (18)
$`=`$ $`4k_BTG^{eq}\text{,}`$ (19)
thus recovering Nyquist theorem, as it should be. In addition, under current saturation conditions one can neglect the contribution from one of the contacts and obtain

$`S_I^s`$ $`=`$ $`2G_0k_BTf(\mu )`$ (20)
$`=`$ $`2k_BTG^{eq}\text{,}`$ (21)
which corresponds to half of Nyquist thermal noise. Similarly to the case of the $`IV`$ characteristics, the effects of the statistics are noticeable in both the linear and saturation regimes through $`G^{eq}`$. In addition, the transition region between these two regimes also shows a slight but significant dependence on the statistics, as evidenced in Fig. 3. Here we plot the low frequency spectral density of current fluctuations as given in Eq.(17) normalized to its saturation value, as a function of the applied potential, for strongly degenerate conditions.

It is worth noting that, by using Eqs.(9), (12) and (21), the saturation value of the current spectral density under strongly degenerate conditions can be written as:

$$\left(S_I^s\right)^{\text{deg}}=\frac{2G_0k_BT}{g}=2q\left(\frac{k_BT}{\mu }\right)I_s\text{,}$$
(22)
which can be interpreted as shot noise suppressed by the degeneracy factor $`k_BT/\mu `$.

A convenient figure of merit of shot noise is the Fano factor, $`\gamma `$, defined as

$$\gamma =\frac{S_I}{2qI}\text{.}$$
(23)
In Fig. 4 we plot the Fano factor for different statistics as a function of the applied potential under strongly degenerate conditions. Here, at the lowest and highest potentials the Fano factor is independent of statistics. More precisely, in the former limit it decreases inversely with the applied voltage according to Nyquist relation as:

$$\gamma =2\frac{k_BT}{qV}\text{ for }qV/\mu 1\text{.}$$
(24)
By contrast, in the latter limit the Fano factor is found to saturate taking the value

$$\gamma =\frac{k_BT}{\mu }\text{ for }qV/\mu 1\text{.}$$
(25)
Between these limits, the Fano factor displays a transition region which depends slightly on the carrier statistics. We note that the value reached by $`\gamma `$ at the highest voltages is always less than one, thus corresponding to suppressed shot noise, independently of carrier statistics.

In a certain sense, the picture emerging from the previous analysis is close to that presented in Ref. \[\]. Indeed, in both cases the system displays thermal noise at low bias and suppressed shot noise at higher bias, both limits being independent of carrier statistics, and with the effect of carrier statistics becoming only noticeable in the transition region between low and high bias voltages. The difference between the present results and those of Ref.\[\] is that in our case, being the channel ballistic, the shot noise is reached under current saturation conditions when $`qV>\mu `$ and displays a suppression factor equal to $`k_BT/\mu `$, while in Ref.\[\] being the channel non-ballistic, the shot noise is reached for $`qV<\mu `$ and displays a suppression factor $`1t`$, where $`t`$ is the transmission of the channel.

At first sight the previous results are somewhat surprising. Because of the sensitivity of shot noise to carrier correlations, one would have expected a strong dependence of the Fano factor on carrier statistics. In particular, one would have expected some evidence of the attractive or repulsive nature of different statistics in the results obtained for strongly degenerate conditions. However, the weak dependence of the noise properties on the statistical parameter found above is a direct consequence of the strongly degenerate conditions assumed. This conclusion will be better clarified in the next section where the case of weakly degenerate conditions is investigated.

## IV Weakly degenerate systems

Under weakly degenerate conditions (i.e. $`\mu <3k_BT`$), to evidence the effects of carrier statistics on the noise properties it suffices to consider the current saturation regime. This limit offers the advantage that the effects of long range Coulomb interaction on fluctuations can be neglected, thus allowing us to resume results obtained in the previous section.

The general expression for the saturation current is given in Eq.(11). We note that under non-degenerate conditions (i.e. $`\mu <3k_BT`$) one has $`I_s^{n\mathrm{deg}}=I_0f_g(\mu )=I_0\mathrm{exp}(\mu /k_BT)`$, which is independent of $`g`$ as it should be. For intermediate values of the chemical potential, the values of $`I_s`$ follow Eq.(11), thus interpolating between the non-degenerate and the strongly degenerate values, given in Eq.(12).

Furthermore, under saturation conditions the current spectral density is given in general by Eq.(20), and the Fano factor under saturation by

$$\gamma _S=\frac{f_g(\mu )}{\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{1+(1g)f_g(\mu )}{1gf_g(\mu )}\right)}\text{,}$$
(26)
where we have used Eqs.(11), (20) and (23). The previous results can be written explicitly in terms of the saturation current, by combining Eqs.(11), (20) and 26. One then obtains the following expressions

$`S_I^s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2G_0k_BT}{g+\left[exp(I_s/I_0)1\right]^1}}\text{,}`$ (27)
$`\gamma _s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{I_0/I_s}{g+\left[exp(I_s/I_0)1\right]^1}}\text{.}`$ (28)
The above expressions give $`S_I^s`$ and $`\gamma _s`$ as a function of $`I_s`$, $`q`$ (through $`G_0`$ and $`I_0`$) and $`g`$, and can be used to obtain direct information on particle statistics. When the injection of carriers occurs under strongly degenerate conditions (i.e., $`\mu /k_BT>3`$, $`I_s/I_01`$) we recover the results obtained in the previous section, that is:

$`\left(S_I^s\right)^{\text{deg}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2G_0k_BT}{g}}=2q\left({\displaystyle \frac{k_BT}{\mu }}\right)I_s\text{,}`$ (29)
$`\left(\gamma _s\right)^{\text{deg}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k_BT}{\mu }}\text{,}`$ (30)
thus corresponding to suppressed shot noise, with a Fano factor independent of carrier statistics given by $`k_BT/\mu `$. Furthermore, under non-degenerate conditions (i.e $`\mu /k_BT<3`$, $`I_s/I_01`$) we can approximate Eqs. (27) and (28) by

$`\left(S_I^s\right)^{\text{non-deg}}`$ $`=`$ $`2qI_s\text{,}`$ (31)
$`\left(\gamma _s\right)^{\text{non-deg}}`$ $`=`$ $`1\text{,}`$ (32)
thus recovering full shot noise. This result is a direct consequence of the fact that the distribution function for non-degenerate conditions is the Maxwell-Boltzmann one. Obviously, in this limit the results are independent of carrier statistics.

In the transition region between weakly and strongly degenerate conditions (i.e., $`|\mu |<3k_BT`$) one must use the full expressions given in Eqs.(20) and (26), or alternatively in Eqs.(27) and (28). Figure 5 reports the Fano factor under current saturation conditions versus the chemical potential, as obtained from Eq.(26), with the values of the distribution function being computed from Eq.(1). Here, the Fano factor is found to depend significantly on particle statistics. In particular, in the transition region $`|\mu |<3k_BT`$ the ”attractive” or ”repulsive” nature of the exclusion statistics becomes manifest by the fact that the Fano factor takes values larger or smaller than one, respectively. By analyzing Eq.(26) it can be shown that for $`0<g<1/2`$ one has

$`\gamma _s`$ $`>`$ $`1\text{ for }\mu <\mu _c\text{,}`$ (33)
$`\gamma _s`$ $`<`$ $`1\text{ for }\mu >\mu _c\text{,}`$ (34)
where $`\mu _c`$ is the value of the chemical potential for which $`\gamma _s=1`$, and that can be calculated for each statistics from Eqs.(26). On the other hand, for $`1/2g1`$ we obtain

$$\gamma _s<1\text{ for all }\mu \text{.}$$
(35)
Therefore, for carriers following FES with $`0<g<1/2`$ we have proved their possibility to display enhanced shot noise ($`\gamma _s>1`$), thus evidencing the positive correlation (bunching) induced by the exclusion statistics. Remarkably, these positive correlations are only manifested under weakly degenerate conditions and when $`\mu <\mu _c`$. Under strongly degeneracy conditions, the shot noise is always suppressed since the system tends to a coherent transport, which implies noiseless conditions.

By contrast, for carriers following FES with $`1/2g1`$ we have obtained always suppressed shot noise ($`\gamma _s<1`$), thus evidencing the negative correlation (anti-bunching) induced by the exclusion statistics.

## V Conclusions

We have studied the noise properties of perfect ballistic, one-dimensional channels with carriers satisfying FES. We have found that the attractive or repulsive nature of the carrier statistics can be really appreciated only in the case of systems which are under weakly degenerate conditions, that is with a chemical potential $`\mu `$ in the contacts satisfying the condition $`|\mu |<3k_BT`$. Then, under current saturation regime the Fano factor is found to display enhanced shot noise ($`\gamma _s>1`$), or suppressed shot noise ($`\gamma _s<1`$) depending on whether the statistical parameter is in the range $`0<g<1/2`$ , or in the range, $`1/2g1`$, respectively. These results show that for particles with $`0<g<1/2`$ the statistics tends to bunch the carriers, while for particles with $`1/2g1`$ it tends to antibunch them.

In the remaining range of values of the chemical potential ($`|\mu |>3k_BT`$) we have found that the effects of the statistics on the noise properties are less pronounced. For the case of strongly degenerate systems ($`\mu >3k_BT`$) the information on the particle statistics is mostly contained in the linear region of the $`IV`$ characteristics, and to a less extent in the transition region between linear and current saturation conditions. In particular, independently of carrier statistics the system always displays suppressed shot noise under current saturation conditions, with a Fano factor $`\gamma _s=k_BT/\mu <1`$. On the other hand, for the case of non-degenerate systems, ($`\mu <3k_BT`$), the distribution function is well approximated by the Maxwell-Boltzman distribution, and hence the results are independent of the carrier statistics. In this case, under current saturation conditions the system displays full shot noise, $`\gamma _s=1`$.

Present results suggest that to evidence the nature of the FES one should consider situations in which the system is under weakly degenerate conditions. This conclusion is expected to remain basically valid also for one dimensional channels with transmission less than one.

## VI Acknowledgments

This work has been performed within the framework of the EC Improving Human Research Potential program through contract No. HPMF-CT-1999-00140.