text:
# The affine 𝐴_{𝑛-1}⁽¹⁾ Toda fields with boundary reflection

## 1 Introduction

For without-boundary field theory, integrability is ensured by the factorized scattering theory . The factorized scattering theory for boundary field theory was developed by . More precisely, I.Cherednik  proposed the boundary Yang-Baxter equation, and S.Ghoshal, A.Zamolodchikov  proposed the boundary crossing symmetry. B.Hou, K.Shi and W.Yang  proposed higher rank generalization of the boundary crossing symmetry. E.Sklyanin  began Bethe Ansatz treatment and introduced the commuting transfer matrix for boundary model. M.Jimbo et al.  developed these ideas for boundary model,  and established the free field approach  for boundary integrable model. They diagonalized the Hamiltonian of the massive $`XXZ`$ model with a boundary, and derived integral representations for the spin correlation functions. The $`U_q(\widehat{sl_n})`$ generalization of reference  was achieved in .

In this paper we study the affine $`A_{n1}^{(1)}`$ Toda fields with boundary reflection, by means of the free field approach. For $`A_1^{(1)}`$ symmetry case, Hou et al.  studied the affine $`A_1^{(1)}`$ Toda fields (SG model) with boundary reflection, in terms of the free field approach, and constructed the boundary state. They derived integral representations for form factors of local fields. In reference , constructions of the boundary state started with Lukyanov’s ultra-violet cut-off realization of Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators , and the form factors were derived after removing the cut-off parameter at the final stage. In this paper we prefer to work directly with operators with cut-off parameter removed, as the same manner as reference , in which the massless $`XXZ`$ chain with a boundary was studied. Using free field realizations of the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators  and the local operators , we construct the free field realizations of the boundary state and its dual, and give integral representations for form factors of local fields of the affine $`A_{n1}^{(1)}`$ Toda fields with boundary reflection. In this paper we consider the case where the deformation parameter of quantum gruop $`U_q(\widehat{sl_n})`$ is

$`q=e^{\frac{2\pi ^2i}{\rho n}},\rho >0.`$ (1.1)
In a limiting case $`\rho \mathrm{}`$, our integral representations reproduce those of form factors for the $`SU(n)`$ invariant massive Thirring model with boundary reflection . For $`n=2`$ case (SG model), it is possible to generalize the boundary condition of this paper (Appendix C).

Now a few words about the organization of this paper. In section 2 we set up problem. In section 3 we present the free field realizations of Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators , and local operators . In section 4 we construct the free field realizations of the boundary state and its dual (4.3), (4.24). In section 5 we derive the boundary qKZ equations (LABEL:BQKZ1), (LABEL:BQKZ2), which govern form factors, and present integral representations for form factors of local fields (5.17), (LABEL:special), (5.39). In Appendix A we summarize the multiple gamma functions. In Appendix B we summarize the contraction relations of the basic operators. In Appendix C we summarize a generalization of the boundary condition for the affine $`A_1^{(1)}`$ Toda fields (SG model).

## 2 Model

The purpose of this section is to set up the problem, and present briefly necessary tools concering the completely integral models of quantum field theory with massive spectra. The affine $`A_{n1}^{(1)}`$ Toda fields with boundary reflection is described by the bulk $`S`$-matrix and the boundary $`K`$-matrix , where the amplitudes of the bulk $`S`$-matrix and the boundary $`K`$-matrix are related by the boundary crossing symmetry . Let $`V`$ be $`n`$-dimensional vector space $`V=_{j=0}^{n1}v_j`$. The bulk $`S`$-matrix $`S(\beta )\mathrm{End}(VV)`$ of the present model is given by

$`S(\beta )v_{j_1}v_{j_2}={\displaystyle \underset{k_1,k_2=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}v_{k_1}v_{k_2}S(\beta )_{k_1,k_2}^{j_1,j_2},`$ (2.1)
where nonzero entries are given by

$`S(\beta )_{jj}^{jj}`$ $`=`$ $`s(\beta ),`$ (2.2)
$`S(\beta )_{jk}^{jk}`$ $`=`$ $`s(\beta )\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\rho }}\beta \right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\rho }}(\beta {\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{n}})\right)}},(jk),`$ (2.3)
$`S(\beta )_{jk}^{kj}`$ $`=`$ $`s(\beta )\times \{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{\pi }{\rho }}\beta }\mathrm{sh}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2i}{\rho n}}}{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\rho }}\left(\beta {\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{n}}\right)\right)},& (j>k),\\ \frac{e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{\pi }{\rho }}\beta }\mathrm{sh}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2i}{\rho n}}}{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\rho }}\left(\beta {\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{n}}\right)\right)},& (j<k),\end{array}`$ (2.6)
Here we have set

$`s(\beta )={\displaystyle \frac{S_2(i\beta |\rho ,2\pi )S_2(i\beta +\frac{2(n1)\pi }{n}|\rho ,2\pi )}{S_2(i\beta |\rho ,2\pi )S_2(i\beta +\frac{2(n1)\pi }{n}|\rho ,2\pi )}}.`$ (2.7)
The double trigonometric function $`S_2(x|\omega _1\omega _2)`$ is summarized in Appendix A. The boundary $`K`$-matrix $`K(\beta )\mathrm{End}(V)`$ of the present model is given by

$`K(\beta )v_j={\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}v_kK(\beta )_k^j,`$ (2.8)
where

$`K(\beta )_j^k=\phi (\beta )^1\times \delta _{j,k},\phi (\beta )={\displaystyle \frac{S_2(2i\beta |\rho ,4\pi )S_2(2i\beta +\frac{2(n1)\pi }{n}|\rho ,4\pi )}{S_2(2i\beta |\rho ,4\pi )S_2(2i\beta +\frac{2(n1)\pi }{n}|\rho ,4\pi )}}.`$ (2.9)
The boundary $`K`$-matrix $`K(\beta )`$ satisfies the boundary Yang-Baxter equation ,

$`K_2(\beta _2)S_{21}(\beta _1+\beta _2)K_1(\beta _1)S_{12}(\beta _1\beta _2)=S_{21}(\beta _1\beta _2)K_1(\beta _1)S_{12}(\beta _1+\beta _2)K_2(\beta _2),`$ (2.10)
and the unitary condition,

$`K(\beta )K(\beta )=id.`$ (2.11)
For general $`n2`$ case, the $`K`$-matrix $`K(\beta )`$ satisfies the boundary crossing symmetry proposed by , in a limiting case $`\rho \mathrm{}`$. Precisely, set the matrix $`\stackrel{~}{S}(\beta )\mathrm{End}(VV)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{K}(\beta )\mathrm{End}(V)`$ by

$`\stackrel{~}{S}(\beta )v_{j_1}v_{j_2}=\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle \underset{k_1,k_2=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}v_{k_1}v_{k_2}S(\beta )_{k_1,k_2}^{j_1,j_2}(1)^{\delta _{j_1,j_2}+\delta _{j_1,k_1}},\stackrel{~}{K}(\beta )=\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}K(\beta ).`$ (2.12)
The matrix $`\stackrel{~}{S}(\beta )`$ and the matrix $`\stackrel{~}{K}(\beta )`$ satisfy Yang-Baxter equation and the Boundary Yang-Baxter equation, too. The pair $`\stackrel{~}{K}(\beta )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{S}(\beta )`$ exist in the class which Hou et al. studied , because the matrix $`\stackrel{~}{S}(\beta )`$ satisfies the projection property, $`\stackrel{~}{S}\left(\frac{2\pi i}{n}\right)P_2^{()},`$ where $`P_2^{()}`$ is antisymmetric project operator in $`VV`$. The matrix $`\stackrel{~}{S}(\beta )`$ and the $`K`$-matrix $`\stackrel{~}{K}(\beta )`$ satisfy boundary crossing symmetry. See notation in reference .

$`\stackrel{~}{K}^{}(\beta )_j^k={\displaystyle \underset{l,m=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}\stackrel{~}{S}(2\beta 2\pi i)_{k,m}^{l,j}\stackrel{~}{K}(\beta +2\pi i)_l^m.`$ (2.13)
For example, $`n=3`$ case of the relation (2.13) in a limiting case $`\rho \mathrm{}`$, becomes

$`\phi \left(\beta {\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{3}}\right)\phi (\beta )\phi \left(\beta +{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{3}}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{S_1(2i\beta \frac{4\pi }{3}|\rho )}{S_1(2i\beta \frac{4\pi }{3}|\rho )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta +\frac{2\pi i}{3}}{\beta +\frac{2\pi i}{3}}}.`$ (2.14)
For the description of the space of the physical states, we use the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators. The Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta ),Z_j(\beta ),(j=0,\mathrm{},n1)`$ of the present model are characterized by the following three conditions.

$`Z_{j_1}^{}(\beta _1)Z_{j_2}^{}(\beta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k_1,k_2=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}Z_{k_2}^{}(\beta _2)Z_{k_1}^{}(\beta _1)S(\beta _1\beta _2)_{j_1,j_2}^{k_1,k_2},`$ (2.15)
$`Z_{j_1}(\beta _1)Z_{j_2}(\beta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k_1,k_2=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}S(\beta _1\beta _2)_{k_1,k_2}^{j_1,j_2}Z_{k_2}(\beta _2)Z_{k_1}(\beta _1),`$ (2.16)
The Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators $`Z_j(\beta ),Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ satisfy the inversion relation.

$`Z_j^{}(\beta _1)Z_k(\beta _2+\pi i)={\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{j,k}}{\beta _1\beta _2}}+\mathrm{},(\beta _1\beta _2),`$ (2.17)
where $`{}_{}{}^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}^{\prime \prime }`$ means regular term. Free field realizations of the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators were given in .

In terminology of quantum field theory, the operator $`𝒪`$ which commutes with the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators up to scalar multiplicity, is called the local operator.

$`Z_j^{}(\beta )𝒪=m(\beta )𝒪Z_j^{}(\beta ).`$ (2.18)
In this paper we restrict our attention to a class of local operators $`Z_j^{}(\delta ),(j=0,\mathrm{},n1)`$ which commuts with the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators as follows.

$`Z_j^{}(\beta )Z_k^{}(\delta )=(\beta \delta )Z_k^{}(\delta )Z_j^{}(\beta ),(\delta )={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\delta +\frac{\pi i}{n})}{\mathrm{sh}(\delta +\frac{\pi i}{n})}}.`$ (2.19)
Free field realizations of a class of local operators $`Z_k^{}(\delta ),(k=0,\mathrm{},n1)`$ were given in the reference , in which the authors considered spin chain problem.

For the description of the space of the physical state we use the boundary state $`|B`$. The boundary state $`|B`$ and its dual $`B|`$ are characterized by the following conditions.

$`K(\beta )_j^jZ_j^{}(\beta )|B`$ $`=`$ $`Z_j^{}(\beta )|B,(j=0,\mathrm{},n1),`$ (2.20)
$`K(\beta )_j^jB|Z_j(\beta +\pi i)`$ $`=`$ $`B|Z_j(\beta +\pi i),(j=0,\mathrm{},n1).`$ (2.21)
In this paper we shall construct the free field realizations of the boundary state and its dual. The space of state is spanned by the vectors,

$`Z_{j_1}^{}(\beta _1)\mathrm{}Z_{j_N}^{}(\beta _N)|B.`$ (2.22)
Let us set the local operator $`𝒵`$ by

$`𝒵=Z_{k_1}^{}(\delta _1)\mathrm{}Z_{k_Q}^{}(\delta _Q).`$ (2.23)
Consider the matrix element,

$`B|𝒵Z_{j_1}^{}(\beta _1)\mathrm{}Z_{j_N}^{}(\beta _N)|B.`$ (2.24)
We call the above matrix elements “form factors”. In this paper we give integral representations for form factors of local fields.

In this section we have introduced the basic tools of boundary field theory, i.e. the $`S`$-matrix $`S(\beta )`$, the boundary $`K`$-matrix $`K(\beta )`$, the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$, local operator $`𝒵`$, the boundary state $`|B`$, its dual $`B|`$, and form factors.

## 3 ZF operators, Local operators

The puropose of this section is to give the free field realizations of Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators  and local operators  of the present model.

### 3.1 ZF operators

The purpose of this subsection is to give free field realizations of the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta ),Z_j(\beta ),(j=0,\mathrm{},n1)`$. Let us introduce the free bosons, $`a_j(t)(j=1,\mathrm{},n1;t)`$, satisfying the commutation relations,

$`[a_j(t),a_k(t^{})]=A_{jk}(t)\delta (t+t^{}),A_{jk}(t)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{(a_j|a_k)\pi t}{n}\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n}\right)t}{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\pi t}{n}\mathrm{sh}\frac{\rho t}{2}}}.`$ (3.1)
Here $`((a_j|a_k))_{1j,kn1}`$ is the Cartan matrix of type $`A_{n1}`$. Explicitly the Cartan matrix of type $`A_{n1}`$, $`((a_j|a_k))_{1j,kn1}`$, is written as

$`\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}2& 1& 0& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 1& 2& 1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 0& 1& 2& 1& 0& \mathrm{}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& 0& 1& 2& 1\\ 0& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& 0& 1& 2\end{array}\right)`$ (3.8)
Let us introduce the Fock space $``$ generated by the vacuum vector $`|vac`$ satisfying

$`a_j(t)|vac=0\mathrm{for}t>0.`$ (3.9)
A normal ordering $`:A:`$ of an element $`A`$ is defined as usual ; annihilation operators $`a_j(t)(t>0)`$ are replaced on the right of the creation operators $`a_j(t)(t>0)`$, for example,

$`:a_j(t_1)a_k(t_2):=a_k(t_2)a_j(t_1),(t_1,t_2>0).`$ (3.10)
Let us introduce the basic operators $`V_j(\alpha )(j=0,1,\mathrm{},n)`$ by

$`V_j(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`:\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}a_j(t)e^{i\alpha t}dt\right):(j=1,\mathrm{},n1),`$ (3.11)
$`V_0(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`:\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}a_1^{}(t)e^{i\alpha t}dt\right):,`$ (3.12)
$`V_n(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`:\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}a_{n1}^{}(t)e^{i\alpha t}dt\right):,`$ (3.13)
where

$`a_1^{}(t)={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}a_j(t){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{(nj)\pi t}{n}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}},a_{n1}^{}(t)={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}a_j(t){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{j\pi t}{n}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}.`$ (3.14)
We have

$`[a_1^{}(t),a_j(t^{})]=\delta _{1,j}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n}\right)t}{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\rho t}{2}}}\delta (t+t^{}),[a_j(t),a_{n1}^{}(t^{})]=\delta _{j,n1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n}\right)t}{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\rho t}{2}}}\delta (t+t^{}).`$
Free field realizations of the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators $`Z_j(\beta )`$, of the affine $`A_{n1}^{(1)}`$ Toda fields are given by

$`Z_j(\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`c_j{\displaystyle _{C_{j+1}}}𝑑\alpha _{j+1}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _{C_{n1}}}𝑑\alpha _{n1}:V_{j+1}(\alpha _{j+1})\mathrm{}V_{n1}(\alpha _{n1})V_n(\beta ):`$ (3.16)
$`\times `$ $`e^{\frac{\pi }{\rho }(\alpha _{j+1}\beta )}{\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n1}{}}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\alpha _{k+1}\alpha _k)}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n\rho }}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\alpha _k\alpha _{k+1})}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n\rho }}\right),`$
where $`\beta =\alpha _n`$. Here the integral contour $`C_k,(k=1,\mathrm{},n1)`$ for $`\alpha _k`$ is chosen so that the poles at $`\alpha _{k+1}\frac{\pi i}{n}+\rho i_0`$ are above $`C_k`$, and that the poles at $`\alpha _{k+1}+\frac{\pi i}{n}\rho i_0`$ are below $`C_k`$. Here constant $`c_j`$ is chosen so that the inversion relation (2.17) holds.

Free fields realizations of the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ are given by

$`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{C_1^{}}}𝑑\alpha _1\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _{C_j^{}}}𝑑\alpha _j:V_0(\beta )V_1(\alpha _1)\mathrm{}V_j(\alpha _j):`$ (3.17)
$`\times `$ $`e^{\frac{\pi }{\rho }(\beta \alpha _j)}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\alpha _{k1}\alpha _k)}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n\rho }}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\alpha _k\alpha _{k1})}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n\rho }}\right),`$
where $`\beta =\alpha _0`$. Here the integral contour $`C_k^{},(k=1,\mathrm{},n1)`$ for $`\alpha _k`$ is chosen so that the poles at $`\alpha _{k1}\frac{\pi i}{n}+\rho i_0`$ are above $`C_k^{}`$, and that the poles at $`\alpha _{k1}+\frac{\pi i}{n}\rho i_0`$ are below $`C_k^{}`$.

Proof of the commuation relation (2.15) was given in . The commutation relation (2.16) is derived as the same manner as (2.15). The inversion relation (2.17) is derived as the same manner as those of local operators in .

In what follows we use the following abberiviations, $`(j=1,\mathrm{},n1)`$.

$`V_j^a(\alpha )=\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}a_j(t)e^{i\alpha t}𝑑t\right),V_j^c(\alpha )=\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}a_j(t)e^{i\alpha t}𝑑t\right),`$ (3.18)
$`V_0^a(\alpha )=\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}a_1^{}(t)e^{i\alpha t}𝑑t\right),V_0^c(\alpha )=\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}a_1^{}(t)e^{i\alpha t}𝑑t\right),`$ (3.19)
$`V_n^a(\alpha )=\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}a_{n1}^{}(t)e^{i\alpha t}𝑑t\right),V_n^c(\alpha )=\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}a_{n1}^{}(t)e^{i\alpha t}𝑑t\right).`$ (3.20)
Note. Free field realizations of the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ were given in . In this paper we give free field realizations of the dual operators $`Z_j(\beta )`$.

### 3.2 Local operators

In terminology of quantum field theory, the local operator is the one which commutes with the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators, up to scalar function multiplicity. In this subsection we present free field realization of a class of local operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ constructed in . The local operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta ),(j=0,\mathrm{},n1)`$ commute with the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators, up to multiplicity function.

$`Z_j^{}(\beta )Z_k^{}(\delta )=(\beta \delta )Z_k^{}(\delta )Z_j^{}(\beta ),`$ (3.21)
where we have set

$`(\beta )={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\beta +\frac{\pi i}{n})}{\mathrm{sh}(\beta +\frac{\pi i}{n})}}.`$ (3.22)
Let ue set the auxiliary fields $`b_j(t),(1jn1;t)`$ by

$`b_j(t)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\rho t}{2}}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n}\right)t}}\times a_j(t).`$ (3.23)
The bose field $`b_j(t)`$ satisfies the following commutation relation.

$`[b_j(t),b_k(t^{})]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{(a_j|a_k)\pi t}{n}\mathrm{sh}\frac{\rho t}{2}}{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\pi t}{n}\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n}\right)t}}\delta (t+t^{}).`$ (3.24)
Let us set

$`b_1^{}(t)={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}b_j(t){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{(nj)\pi t}{n}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}.`$ (3.25)
We have

$`[b_1^{}(t),b_j(t^{})]=\delta _{j,1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\rho t}{2}}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n}\right)t}}\delta (t+t^{}).`$ (3.26)
Let us set the basic operators.

$`U_j(\delta )`$ $`=`$ $`:\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}b_j(t)e^{i\delta t}):,(1jn1),`$ (3.27)
$`U_0(\delta )`$ $`=`$ $`:\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}b_1^{}(t)e^{i\delta t}dt):.`$ (3.28)
Free field realizations of the local operators $`Z_j^{}(\delta ),(j=0,\mathrm{},n1)`$ are given by

$`Z_j^{}(\delta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\gamma _1\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\gamma _j:U_0(\delta )U_1(\gamma _1)\mathrm{}U_j(\gamma _j):`$ (3.29)
$`\times `$ $`e^{\frac{\pi }{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}(\gamma _j\delta )}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\gamma _k\gamma _{k1})+\frac{\pi }{n}}{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\gamma _{k1}\gamma _k)+\frac{\pi }{n}}{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}}\right).`$
Here we set $`\gamma _0=\delta `$.

Note. Free field realizations of operators $`Z_j^{}(\delta )`$ were given in the reference , in which authors considered correlation functions of the critical $`A_{n1}^{(1)}`$ chain.

## 4 Boundary state

The purpose of this section is to give the free field realizations of the boundary state $`|B`$ and its dual $`B|`$. We give free field realizations of the boundary state $`|B`$,

$`K(\beta )_j^jZ_j^{}(\beta )|B=Z_j^{}(\beta )|B,(j=0,\mathrm{},n1),`$ (4.1)
and its dual state $`B|`$,

$`K(\beta )_j^jB|Z_j(\beta +\lambda i)=B|Z_j(\beta +\lambda i),(j=0,\mathrm{},n1;\lambda >0).`$ (4.2)
Here we have used $`K(\beta )_j^j`$ given in (2.9). When we set $`\lambda =\pi `$, dual state $`B|`$ becomes the dual boundary state of the affine $`A_{n1}^{(1)}`$ Toda fields. When we set $`\lambda =0`$, vacuum expectation value, $`B|Z_{j_1}^{}(\beta _1)\mathrm{}Z_{j_N}^{}(\beta _N)|B`$ produces an eigenvector of $`A_{n1}^{(1)}`$ analogue of finite XXZ chain with double boundaries. See reference .

### 4.1 Boundary state

In this subsection we give the free field realization of the boundary state $`|B`$, and show the reflection realtion (4.1).
The boundary state $`|B`$ is realized as follows.

$`|B=e^B|vac.`$ (4.3)
Here $`B`$ is a quadratic part of free bosons.

$`B={\displaystyle \underset{j,k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\alpha _{j,k}(t)a_j(t)a_k(t)𝑑t+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\beta _j(t)a_j(t)𝑑t,`$ (4.4)
where scalars $`\alpha _{j,k}(t)(j,k=1,\mathrm{},n1)`$ and $`\beta _j(t)(j=1,\mathrm{},n1)`$ are given by

$`\alpha _{j,k}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{t}{2}}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho t}{2}}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n}}\right)t\right)}}\times I_{j,k}(t),`$ (4.5)
$`\beta _j(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho t}{4}}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2n}}\right)t\right)}}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{2}}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}(\pi t)}}\times I_{j,j}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{2}}\right)`$ (4.6)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{2n}}\right)\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho t}{4}}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2n}}\right)t\right)}}\times {\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}I_{k,j}(t).`$
Here we have set the symmetric matrix $`\left(I_{j,k}(t)\right)_{1j,kn1}`$ by

$`I_{j,k}(t)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{j\pi t}{n}}\right)\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(nk)\pi t}{n}}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{n}}\right)\mathrm{sh}\left(\pi t\right)}}=I_{k,j}(t),(1jkn1).`$ (4.7)
We remark that the matrix $`(I_{j,k}(t))_{1j,kn1}`$ is the inverse matrix of $`\left(\frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{(a_j|a_k)\pi t}{n}}{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\pi t}{n}}\right)_{1j,kn1}`$.

Let us show that the boundary state $`|B`$ satisfies the following reflection relations.

$`Z_j^{}(\beta )|B=\phi (\beta )Z_j^{}(\beta )|B.`$ (4.8)
The presence of $`e^B`$ has an effect of a Bogoliubov transformation.

$`e^Ba_l(t)e^B`$ $`=`$ $`a_l(t)+a_l(t)+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_{lj}(t)\beta _j(t),(t0)`$ (4.9)
$`=`$ $`a_l(t)+a_l(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2n}}\right)t\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho t}{4}}\right)}}\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{2n}}\right),`$
$`e^Ba_l(t)e^B`$ $`=`$ $`a_l(t),(t>0).`$ (4.10)
Therefore the basic operators $`V_j(\alpha )`$ act on the boundary state $`|B`$ as follows.

$`V_j^a(\alpha )|B=G_j(\alpha )V_j^c(\alpha )|B,(j=0,1,\mathrm{},n).`$ (4.11)
We have set

$`G_j(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`i2^{1+\frac{2\pi }{n\rho }}e^\gamma \times \alpha ,(j=1,\mathrm{},n1),`$ (4.12)
$`G_0(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`2^{\frac{\pi }{\rho }\frac{n1}{n}}e^{\gamma \frac{n1}{2n}(1+\frac{2\pi (n+1)}{\rho n})}`$ (4.13)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\left(2i\alpha +2\pi \frac{2\pi }{n}|\rho ,4\pi \right)\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\left(2i\alpha +\rho +2\pi +\frac{2\pi }{n}|\rho ,4\pi \right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\left(2i\alpha |\rho ,4\pi \right)\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\left(2i\alpha +\rho +4\pi |\rho ,4\pi \right)}},`$
$`G_n(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`G_0(\alpha ).`$ (4.14)
Using the above formuale of the action of the basic operators, we get the actions of the Vertex opertaors $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ as follows.

$`Z_j^{}(\beta )|B`$ $`=`$ $`(2\pi )^j(\rho e^\gamma e^{\frac{\pi i}{2}})^{(1+\frac{2\pi }{n\rho })j}{\displaystyle _{C_1^{}}}𝑑\alpha _1\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _{C_j^{}}}𝑑\alpha _j{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}}V_k^c(\alpha _k)V_k^c(\alpha _k)|B`$ (4.15)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}}G_k(\alpha _k){\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _{k1},\alpha _k){\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}S(\alpha _{k1},\alpha _k).`$
Here we have set the auxiliary functions $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ and $`S(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ by

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_1,ϵ_2=\pm }{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(ϵ_1\alpha _1+ϵ_2\alpha _2)}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n\rho }}\right),`$ (4.16)
$`S(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{2\pi }{\rho }\alpha _1}qe^{\frac{2\pi }{\rho }\alpha _2},q=e^{\frac{2\pi ^2i}{\rho n}}.`$ (4.17)
The auxiliary function $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ is invariant under the change of variables $`\alpha _j\alpha _j`$,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _1,\alpha _2).`$ (4.18)
Now we arrive at

$`Z_j^{}(\beta )|B\phi (\beta )Z_j^{}(\beta )|B`$ (4.19)
$`=`$ $`2^{j+1}\pi ^j(\rho e^\gamma e^{\frac{\pi i}{2}})^{(1+\frac{2\pi }{n\rho })j}\times \mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\rho }}\beta \right)G_0(\beta ){\displaystyle _{C_1^{}}}𝑑\alpha _1\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _{C_j^{}}}𝑑\alpha _j`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}}V_k^c(\alpha _k)V_k^c(\alpha _k)|B{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _{k1},\alpha _k){\displaystyle \underset{k=2}{\overset{j}{}}}S(\alpha _{k1},\alpha _k){\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}G_k(\alpha _k).`$
Here we have used the relation,

$`\phi (\beta )={\displaystyle \frac{G_0(\beta )}{G_0(\beta )}}.`$ (4.20)
We change the integral variable $`\alpha _k\alpha _k`$, and the corresponding new contour $`\stackrel{~}{C}_k^{}`$. We find that the corresponding new contour $`\stackrel{~}{C}_k^{}`$ can be deformed to the same as $`C_k^{}`$. We find that the following part in the integrand :

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _{k1},\alpha _k){\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}}V_k^c(\alpha _k)V_k^c(\alpha _k)|B,`$ (4.21)
is invariant under the change of variable $`\alpha _k\alpha _k`$. Summning up all changing of integral variables $`\pm \alpha _k,(k=1,\mathrm{},j)`$, we know that a sufficient condition of the relation,

$`Z_j^{}(\beta )|B\phi (\beta )Z_j^{}(\beta )|B=0,`$ (4.22)
becomes the following polynomial identity,

$`{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_1,\mathrm{},ϵ_j=\pm }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=2}{\overset{j}{}}}S(ϵ_{k1}\alpha _{k1},ϵ_k\alpha _k){\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}G_k(ϵ_k\alpha _k)=0.`$ (4.23)
Now we have derived the reflection relation (4.1).

### 4.2 Dual Boundary State

The dual boundary state $`B|`$ is realized as follows.

$`B|=vac|e^G.`$ (4.24)
Here $`G`$ is a quadratic form of free bosons.

$`G={\displaystyle \underset{j,k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\gamma _{j,k}(t)a_j(t)a_k(t)𝑑t+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\delta _j(t)a_j(t)𝑑t,`$ (4.25)
where scalar $`\gamma _{j,k}(t)(j,k=1,\mathrm{},n1)`$ and $`\delta _j(t)(j=1,\mathrm{},n1)`$ are given by

$`\gamma _{j,k}(t)=e^{2\lambda t}\alpha _{j,k}(t),\delta _j(t)=e^{\lambda t}\beta _j(t).`$ (4.26)
Here $`\alpha _{j,k}(t)`$ and $`\beta _j(t)`$ are introduced in (4.5) and (4.6).

Let us show the dual boundary state $`B|`$ satisfies the following reflection relations.

$`B|Z_j(\beta +\lambda i)=\phi (\beta )B|Z_j(\beta +\lambda i),(j=0,\mathrm{},n1).`$ (4.27)
The precence of $`e^G`$ has an effect of a Bogoliubov transformation.

$`e^Ga_l(t)e^G`$ $`=`$ $`a_l(t)+e^{2\lambda t}a_l(t)+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_{l,j}(t)\delta _j(t),(t0)`$ (4.28)
$`=`$ $`a_l(t)+e^{2\lambda t}a_l(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\lambda t}}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2n}}\right)t\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho t}{4}}\right)}}\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{2n}}\right),`$
$`e^Ga_l(t)e^G`$ $`=`$ $`a_l(t),(t>0).`$ (4.29)
Therefore the basic operators $`V_j(\alpha )`$ act on the dual boundary state $`B|`$ as follows.

$`B|V_j^c(\alpha +\lambda i)`$ $`=`$ $`G_j^{}(\alpha )B|V_j^a(\alpha +\lambda i),(j=0,\mathrm{},n).`$ (4.30)
We have set

$`G_j^{}(\alpha )=G_j(\alpha ),(j=0,\mathrm{},n).`$ (4.31)
Here $`G_j(\alpha )`$ is defined in (4.12), (4.13) and (4.14).
We get the actions of the Vertex operators $`Z_j(\beta )`$ as follows.

$`B|Z_j(\beta +\lambda i)`$ $`=`$ $`c_j(2\pi )^{(nj1)}(\rho e^\gamma e^{\frac{\pi i}{2}})^{(1+\frac{2\pi }{\rho n})(n1j)}{\displaystyle _{C_{j+1}}}𝑑\alpha _{j+1}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _{C_{n1}}}𝑑\alpha _{n1}`$ (4.32)
$`\times `$ $`B|{\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n}{}}}V_k^a(\alpha _k+\lambda i)V_k^a(\alpha _k+\lambda i)`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n}{}}}G_k^{}(\alpha _k){\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n1}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _k,\alpha _{k+1}){\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n1}{}}}S(\alpha _k,\alpha _{k+1}),`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ and $`S(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ are given in (4.16) and (4.17). Now we have

$`B|Z_j(\beta +\lambda i)\phi (\beta )^1B|Z_j(\beta +\lambda i)`$ (4.33)
$`=`$ $`2^{n+j+2}c_je^{\frac{2\pi ^2i}{\rho n}}\pi ^{n+j+1}(\rho e^\gamma e^{\frac{\pi }{2}})^{(1+\frac{2\pi }{\rho n})(n1j)}\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\rho }}\beta \right)G_n^{}(\beta )`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle _{C_{j+1}}}𝑑\alpha _{j+1}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _{C_{n1}}}𝑑\alpha _{n1}B|{\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n}{}}}V_k^a(\alpha _k+\lambda i)V_k^a(\alpha _k+\lambda i)`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n1}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha _k,\alpha _{k+1}){\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n2}{}}}S(\alpha _k,\alpha _{k+1}){\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n1}{}}}G_k^{}(\alpha _k).`$
As the same arguments as the case of the boundary state, we get a sufficient condition of the reflection relation (4.2),

$`{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_{j+1}\mathrm{}ϵ_{n1}=\pm }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n2}{}}}S(ϵ_k\alpha _k,ϵ_{k+1}\alpha _{k+1}){\displaystyle \underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n1}{}}}G_k^{}(ϵ_k\alpha _k)=0.`$ (4.34)
Now we have derived the reflection relation (4.2).

In this section, we have constructed free field realizations of the boundary state $`|B`$ and its dual $`B|`$.

## 5 Form factors

The purpose of this section is to derive the difference equations which govern the form factors, and to give integral representations for form factors.

Let us introduce matrix element, called form factors.

$`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)_{j_1\mathrm{}j_N}={\displaystyle \frac{B|𝒵Z_{j_1}^{}(\beta _1)\mathrm{}Z_{j_N}^{}(\beta _N)|B}{B|B}}.`$
Here $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ is the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators, $`|B`$ is the boundary state, and $`𝒵=Z_{k_1}^{}(\delta _1)\mathrm{}Z_{k_Q}^{}(\delta _Q),(k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q=0,\mathrm{},n1)`$. Let us set

$`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)={\displaystyle \underset{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}v_{j_1}\mathrm{}v_{j_N}f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)_{j_1\mathrm{}j_N}.`$ (5.1)
### 5.1 Boundary qKZ equations

The purpose of this section is to derive the difference equations which govern form factors. Let us introduce notation $`Z^{}(\beta ),Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)Z^{(2)}(\beta _2)`$ and $`Z^{(2)}(\beta _2)Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)`$ as follows.

$`Z^{}(\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}Z_j^{}(\beta )v_j,`$ (5.2)
$`Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)Z^{(2)}(\beta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j_1,j_2=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}Z_{j_1}^{}(\beta _1)Z_{j_2}^{}(\beta _2)v_{j_1}v_{j_2},`$ (5.3)
$`Z^{(2)}(\beta _2)Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j_1,j_2=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}Z_{j_2}^{}(\beta _2)Z_{j_1}^{}(\beta _1)v_{j_1}v_{j_2}.`$ (5.4)
In this notation the commutation relation of the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators is written by

$`Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)Z^{(2)}(\beta _2)=S_{12}(\beta _1\beta _2)Z^{(2)}(\beta _2)Z^{(1)}(\beta _1),`$ (5.5)
where the $`S`$-matrix $`S_{12}(\beta )`$ acts on the space $`VV`$. As the same manner we write the reflection relations (4.1), (4.2) as follows.

$`Z^{}(\beta )|B`$ $`=`$ $`K(\beta )Z^{}(\beta )|B,`$ (5.6)
$`B|Z(\beta +i\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`K(\beta )B|Z(\beta +i\lambda ).`$ (5.7)
As the same manner as (4.1), (4.2), we have the following reflection relations.

$`B|Z^{}(\beta +i\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`K(\beta )B|Z^{}(\beta +i\lambda ),`$ (5.8)
$`Z(\beta )|B`$ $`=`$ $`K(\beta )Z(\beta )|B.`$ (5.9)
In this notation the function $`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)`$ is written as

$`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)={\displaystyle \frac{B|𝒵Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)\mathrm{}Z^{(N)}(\beta _N)|B}{B|B}}.`$ (5.10)
Let us derive the difference equations, which govern the form factor $`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)`$. Consider the vacuum expectation value,

$`B|𝒵Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)\mathrm{}Z^{(r)}(\beta _r)\mathrm{}Z^{(N)}(\beta _N)|B.`$ (5.11)
Moving ZF operator $`Z^{(r)}(\beta _r)`$ to the right of ZF operators $`Z^{(r+1)}(\beta _{r+1})\mathrm{}Z^{(N)}(\beta _N)`$, and acting ZF operator $`Z^{(r)}(\beta _r)`$ on state $`|B`$, we have

$`S_{r,r+1}(\beta _r\beta _{r+1})\mathrm{}S_{r,N}(\beta _r\beta _N)K_r(\beta _r)`$ (5.12)
$`\times `$ $`B|𝒵Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)\mathrm{}Z^{(r1)}(\beta _{r1})Z^{(r+1)}(\beta _{r+1})\mathrm{}Z^{(N)}(\beta _N)Z^{(r)}(\beta _r)|B.`$
Moving ZF operator $`Z^{(r)}(\beta _r)`$ to the left and acting the dual state $`B|`$, we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}(\delta _k+\beta _r)\times S_{r,r+1}(\beta _r\beta _{r+1})\mathrm{}S_{r,N}(\beta _r\beta _N)K_r(\beta _r)`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{N,r}(\beta _N+\beta _r)\mathrm{}S_{r+1,r}(\beta _{r+1}+\beta _r)S_{r1,r}(\beta _{r1}+\beta _r)\mathrm{}S_{1,r}(\beta _1+\beta _r)K_r(\beta _ri\lambda )`$
$`\times `$ $`B|Z^{(r)}(\beta _r+2i\lambda )𝒵Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)\mathrm{}Z^{(r1)}(\beta _{r1})Z^{(r+1)}(\beta _{r+1})\mathrm{}Z^{(N)}(\beta _N)|B.`$
Moving ZF operators $`Z^{(r)}(\beta _r)`$ to the right, we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}(\delta _k+\beta _r)\times S_{r,r+1}(\beta _r\beta _{r+1})\mathrm{}S_{r,N}(\beta _r\beta _N)K_r(\beta _r)`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{N,r}(\beta _N+\beta _r)\mathrm{}S_{r+1,r}(\beta _{r+1}+\beta _r)S_{r1,r}(\beta _{r1}+\beta _r)\mathrm{}S_{1,r}(\beta _1+\beta _r)K_r(\beta _ri\lambda )`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}(\beta _r\delta _k+2i\lambda )\times S_{r,1}(\beta _r+2i\lambda \beta _1)\mathrm{}S_{r,r1}(\beta _r+2i\lambda \beta _{r1})`$
$`\times `$ $`B|𝒵Z^{(1)}(\beta _1)\mathrm{}Z^{(r1)}(\beta _{r1})Z^{(r)}(\beta _r+2i\lambda )Z^{(r+1)}(\beta _{r+1})\mathrm{}Z^{(N)}(\beta _N)|B.`$
Now we arrive at the following system of difference equations.

$`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _{r1},\beta _r2i\lambda ,\beta _{r+1},\mathrm{},\beta _N)={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}(\delta _k+\beta _r2i\lambda )(\beta _r\delta _k)`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{r,r+1}(\beta _r\beta _{r+1}2i\lambda )\mathrm{}S_{r,N}(\beta _r\beta _N2i\lambda )K_r(\beta _r+2i\lambda )`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{N,r}(\beta _N+\beta _r2i\lambda )\mathrm{}S_{r+1,r}(\beta _{r+1}+\beta _r2i\lambda )`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{r1,r}(\beta _{r1}+\beta _r2i\lambda )\mathrm{}S_{1,r}(\beta _1+\beta _r2i\lambda )K_r(\beta _r+i\lambda )`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{r,1}(\beta _r\beta _1)\mathrm{}S_{r,r1}(\beta _r\beta _{r1})f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _{r1},\beta _r,\beta _{r+1},\mathrm{},\beta _N).`$
As the same argument as (LABEL:BQKZ1), we get a similar equation.

$`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _{r1},\beta _r+2i\lambda ,\beta _{r+1},\mathrm{},\beta _N)={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}(\delta _k\beta _r2i\lambda )(\beta _r\delta _k)`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{r1,r}(\beta _{r1}\beta _r2i\lambda )\mathrm{}S_{1,r}(\beta _1\beta _r2i\lambda )K_r(\beta _r+i\lambda )`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{r,1}(\beta _r\beta _1)\mathrm{}S_{r,r1}(\beta _r\beta _{r1})`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{r,r+1}(\beta _r\beta _{r+1})\mathrm{}S_{r,N}(\beta _r\beta _N)K_r(\beta _r)`$
$`\times `$ $`S_{N,r}(\beta _N\beta _r)\mathrm{}S_{r+1,r}(\beta _{r+1}\beta _r)f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _{r1},\beta _r,\beta _{r+1},\mathrm{},\beta _N).`$
We call this systems of difference equations (LABEL:BQKZ1), (LABEL:BQKZ2) “boundary quantum Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov equations” (boundary qKZ equations). When we set parameter $`\lambda =\pi `$, boundary qKZ equations (LABEL:BQKZ1), (LABEL:BQKZ2) describe form factors for the affine $`A_{n1}^{(1)}`$ Toda fields with boundary reflection.

### 5.2 Integral Representations

The purpose of this section is to give integral representations of form factors $`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)`$. In order to evaluate the above vacuum expectation value, we invoke free field realization of various quantities, the Zamolodchikov- Faddeev operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$, the local operators $`Z_k^{}(\delta )`$, the boundary state $`|B`$ and its dual $`B|`$.

At first we present results of simple cases.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{B|Z_0^{}(\delta )|B}{B|B}}=\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle _C}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{2\pi it}}\mathrm{log}(t){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1e^{\lambda t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}(\frac{\rho t}{4})}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{4}+\frac{\pi }{2n})t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\pi t}{2}\mathrm{sh}\frac{(n1)\pi t}{2}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}(e^{\lambda ti\delta t}+e^{i\delta t})`$
$`{\displaystyle _C}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{2\pi it}}\mathrm{log}(t){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1e^{2\lambda t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho t}{2})}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n})t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{(n1)\pi t}{n}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}e^{2\lambda t2i\delta t}+e^{2\lambda t}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}e^{2i\delta t})),`$
(5.17)
and

$`f^{Z_0^{}(\delta )}(\beta )_0={\displaystyle \frac{B|Z_0^{}(\delta )Z_0^{}(\beta )|B}{B|B}}`$
$`=`$ $`e^{(\gamma +\mathrm{log2}\pi )\frac{n1}{n}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{\delta \beta }{2\pi i}+\frac{1}{2n})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{\delta \beta }{2\pi i}+1\frac{1}{2n})}}\times \mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle _C}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{2\pi it}}\mathrm{log}(t){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1e^{\lambda t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\pi t}{2}\mathrm{sh}\frac{(n1)\pi t}{2n}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}`$
$`\times `$ $`\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}(\frac{\rho }{4}+\frac{\pi }{2n})t}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho t}{4})}}(e^{i\beta t}+e^{\lambda ti\beta t}){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}(\frac{\rho t}{4})}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{4}+\frac{\pi }{2n})t}}(e^{i\delta t}+e^{\lambda ti\delta t})\right\}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _C}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{2\pi it}}\mathrm{log}(t){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1e^{2\lambda t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{(n1)\pi t}{n}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}\{(e^{2\lambda ti\beta ti\delta t}+e^{2\lambda t+i\beta ti\delta t}+e^{2\lambda ti\beta t+i\delta t}+e^{i\beta t+i\delta t})`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho t}{2})}{2\mathrm{s}\mathrm{h}(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n})t}}(e^{2\lambda t2i\delta t}+2e^{2\lambda t}+e^{2i\delta t}){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n})t}{2\mathrm{s}\mathrm{h}(\frac{\rho t}{2})}}(e^{2\lambda t2i\beta t}+2e^{2\lambda t}+e^{2i\beta t})\}).`$
Here the integrand contour $`C`$ is given in Appendix A. It is easily seen that the above formula is re-written by multiple Gamma functions $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_r(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)`$ summarized in Appendix A. When we set $`\lambda =\pi `$, we get form factor of the affine $`A_{n1}`$ Toda fields with boundary reflection. In a limiting case $`\rho \mathrm{}`$, our formula reproduce form factor for the $`SU(n)`$ invariant massive Thirring model with boundary reflection . When we set $`\lambda 0`$, the quantity $`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)`$ produces an eigenvector of $`A_{n1}^{(1)}`$ analogue of finite XXZ chain with double boundaries .

Next we present general formulae of the form factors $`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}`$, and, at the same time, explain how to evaluate the vacuum expectation values. Let us fix the indexes $`\{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N\}`$, where $`j_1,\mathrm{},j_N\{0,1,\mathrm{},n1\}`$, and $`\{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q\}`$, where $`k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q\{0,1,\mathrm{},n1\}`$. We associate the integration variables $`\alpha _{j,r},(1rN,1jj_r)`$ to the basic operator $`V_j(\alpha _{j,r})`$ contained in the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operator $`Z_{j_r}^{}(\beta _r)`$. We also use the notation $`\alpha _{0,r}=\beta _r`$. We associate the integration variables $`\gamma _{k,s},(1sQ,1kk_s)`$ to the basic operator $`U_k(\alpha _{k,s})`$ contained in the local operators $`Z_{k_s}^{}(\delta _s)`$. We also use the notation $`\gamma _{0,s}=\delta _s`$. Let us set the index set $`𝒜_j`$ and $`𝒢_k`$ by

$`𝒜_j=\{r|j_rj\},𝒢_k=\{s|k_sk\}.`$ (5.19)
By normal-ordering the product of the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators and the local operators, we have the following formulae.

$`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}`$ (5.20)
$`=`$ $`E(\{\beta \}|\{\delta \}){\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{j_r}{}}}{\displaystyle _{C_j^{}}}𝑑\alpha _{j,r}{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{k_s}{}}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\gamma _{k,s}I(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}.`$
Here the integral contour $`Cȷ^{}`$ was defined below (3.17).
Here we set the leading factor $`E(\{\beta \}|\{\delta \})`$ by

$`E(\{\beta \}|\{\delta \})=e^{\frac{\pi }{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}(\delta _1+\mathrm{}+\delta _Q)+\frac{\pi }{\rho }(\beta _1+\mathrm{}+\beta _N)}`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{1k_1<k_2Q}{}}C_{0,0}^{UU}(\delta _{k_1}\delta _{k_2}){\displaystyle \underset{1j_1<j_2N}{}}C_{0,0}^{VV}(\beta _{j_1}\beta _{j_2}){\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}C_{0,0}^{UV}(\delta _k\beta _j).`$
Here we used abbreviations $`C_{0,0}^{UU}(\delta ),C_{0,0}^{VV}(\beta )`$, and $`C_{0,0}^{UV}(\delta )`$, which were introduced in Appendix B. Here we set the integrand function by

$`I(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}`$ (5.22)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}e^{\frac{\pi }{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}\gamma _{k_s,s}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{k_s}{}}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\gamma _{k,s}\gamma _{k1,s})+\frac{\pi }{n}}{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\gamma _{k1,s}\gamma _{k,s})+\frac{\pi }{n}}{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}}\right)`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{\frac{\pi }{\rho }\alpha _{j_r,r}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{j_r}{}}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\alpha _{j,r}\alpha _{j1,r})\frac{\pi }{n}}{\rho }}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\alpha _{j1,r}\alpha _{j,r})\frac{\pi }{n}}{\rho }}\right)`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s_1𝒢_k,s_2𝒢_{k1}}{s_1<s_2}}{}}C_{k,k1}^{UU}(\gamma _{k,s_1}\gamma _{k1,s_2}){\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s_1𝒢_{k1},s_2𝒢_k}{s_1<s_2}}{}}C_{k1,k}^{UU}(\gamma _{k1,s_1}\gamma _{k,s_2})`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s_1,s_2𝒢_k}{s_1<s_2}}{}}C_{k,k}^{UU}(\gamma _{k,s_1}\gamma _{k,s_2}){\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r_1,r_2𝒜_j}{r_1<r_2}}{}}C_{j,j}^{VV}(\alpha _{j,r_1}\alpha _{j,r_2})`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r_1𝒜_j,r_2𝒜_{j1}}{r_1<r_2}}{}}C_{j,j1}^{VV}(\alpha _{j,r_1}\alpha _{j1,r_2}){\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r_1𝒜_{j1},r_2𝒜_j}{r_1<r_2}}{}}C_{j1,j}^{VV}(\alpha _{j1,r_1}\alpha _{j,r_2})`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_k,r𝒜_k}{}}C_{k,k}^{UV}(\gamma _{k,s}\alpha _{k,r}){\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_k,r𝒜_{k1}}{}}C_{k,k1}^{UV}(\gamma _{k,s}\alpha _{k1,r})`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_{k1},r𝒜_k}{}}C_{k1,k}^{UV}(\gamma _{k1,s}\alpha _{k,r})\times J(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}.`$
Here we used abbereviations $`C_{j_1,j_2}^{VV}(\beta ),C_{j_1,j_2}^{UU}(\beta )`$ and $`C_{j_1,j_2}^{UV}(\beta )`$, which were introduced in Appendix B. Here we have set

$`J(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{B|B}}\times B|\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}X_j(t)a_j(t)dt\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}Y_j(t)a_j(t)dt\right)|B,`$
where

$`X_j(t)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{(nj)\pi t}{n}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{i\beta _rt}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho t}{2})}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n})t}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}e^{i\delta _st}\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{r𝒜_j}{}}e^{i\alpha _{j,r}t}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho t}{2})}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n})t}}{\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_j}{}}e^{i\gamma _{j,s}t},`$ (5.24)
$`Y_j(t)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{(nj)\pi t}{n}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{i\beta _rt}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho t}{2})}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n})t}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}e^{i\delta _st}\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{r𝒜_j}{}}e^{i\alpha _{j,r}t}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho t}{2})}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n})t}}{\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_j}{}}e^{i\gamma _{j,s}t}.`$ (5.25)
Next we evaluate the vacuum expectation value, $`J(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}`$, and get a formulae without free field operators. For our purpose we use the coherent state, $`|\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{n1}`$ and its dual state $`\overline{\xi }_1,\mathrm{},\overline{\xi }_{n1}|`$, defined by

$`|\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{n1}=\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\xi _k(s)a_k(s)𝑑s\right)|vac,`$ (5.26)
$`\overline{\xi }_1,\mathrm{},\overline{\xi }_{n1}|=vac|\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\overline{\xi }_k(s)a_k(s)𝑑s\right).`$ (5.27)
The coherent state enjoy

$`a_j(t)|\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{n1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_{j,k}(t)\xi _k(t)|\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{n1},(t>0),`$ (5.28)
$`\overline{\xi }_1,\mathrm{},\overline{\xi }_{n1}|a_j(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_{j,k}(t)\overline{\xi }_k(t)\overline{\xi }_1,\mathrm{},\overline{\xi }_{n1}|,(t>0).`$ (5.29)
The following completeness relation by means of Feynmann path integral is useful.

$`id`$ $`=`$ $`c_F\times {\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\underset{s>0}{}d\xi _k(s)d\overline{\xi }_k(s)}`$ (5.30)
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \underset{k_1,k_2=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}A_{k_1,k_2}(s)\xi _{k_1}(s)\overline{\xi }_{k_2}(s)𝑑s\right)|\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{n1}\overline{\xi }_1,\mathrm{},\overline{\xi }_{n1}|.`$
Here the integration $`𝑑\xi 𝑑\overline{\xi }`$ is taken over the entire complex plane with the measure $`d\xi d\overline{\xi }=2idxdy`$ for $`\xi =x+iy`$. Here $`c_F`$ is a constant.
In what follows we use the abberiviations, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }_j(t),\stackrel{~}{\delta }_j(t)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{X}_j(t)`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_j(t)`$ defined by

$`\stackrel{~}{\beta }_j(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{2n}}\right)\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2n}}\right)t\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho t}{4}}\right)}}=t\times {\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_{j,k}(t)\beta _k(t),`$ (5.31)
$`\stackrel{~}{\delta }_j(t)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\lambda t}\times \stackrel{~}{\beta }_j(t)=t\times {\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_{j,k}(t)\delta _k(t),`$ (5.32)
$`\stackrel{~}{X}_j(t)=t\times {\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_{j,k}(t)X_k(t)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n})t}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho t}{2})}}\times \left\{{\displaystyle \underset{r𝒜_{j1}}{}}e^{i\alpha _{j1,r}t}+{\displaystyle \underset{r𝒜_{j+1}}{}}e^{i\alpha _{j+1,r}t}(e^{\frac{\pi }{n}t}+e^{\frac{\pi }{n}t}){\displaystyle \underset{r𝒜_j}{}}e^{i\alpha _{j,r}t}\right\}`$
$``$ $`\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_{j1}}{}}e^{i\gamma _{j1,s}t}+{\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_{j+1}}{}}e^{i\gamma _{j+1,s}t}(e^{\frac{\pi }{n}t}+e^{\frac{\pi }{n}t}){\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_j}{}}e^{i\gamma _{j,s}t}\right\},`$
and

$`\stackrel{~}{Y}_j(t)=t\times {\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_{j,k}(t)Y_k(t)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n})t}{\mathrm{sh}(\frac{\rho t}{2})}}\times \left\{{\displaystyle \underset{r𝒜_{j1}}{}}e^{i\alpha _{j1,r}t}+{\displaystyle \underset{r𝒜_{j+1}}{}}e^{i\alpha _{j+1,r}t}(e^{\frac{\pi }{n}t}+e^{\frac{\pi }{n}t}){\displaystyle \underset{r𝒜_j}{}}e^{i\alpha _{j,r}t}\right\}`$
$``$ $`\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_{j1}}{}}e^{i\gamma _{j1,s}t}+{\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_{j+1}}{}}e^{i\gamma _{j+1,s}t}(e^{\frac{\pi }{n}t}+e^{\frac{\pi }{n}t}){\displaystyle \underset{s𝒢_j}{}}e^{i\gamma _{j,s}t}\right\}.`$
Here we understand $`𝒜_n,𝒢_n=\varphi `$.
Changing the order of the bosonic operators, we have

$`J(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}`$ (5.35)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{vac|e^Ge^B|vac}}\times vac|e^G\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}Y_j(t)a_j(t)dt\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}X_j(t)a_j(t)dt\right)e^B|vac`$
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _C}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}(t)}{2\pi it}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho t}{2}}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n}}\right)t\right)}}{\displaystyle \underset{l_1,l_2=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}\stackrel{~}{X}_{l_1}(t)I_{l_1,l_2}(t)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{k_l}(t)dt\right).`$
When we insert the completeness relation of the coherent states, we have without-operator formula.

$`vac|e^G\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}Y_j(t)a_j(t)dt\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}X_j(t)a_j(t)dt\right)|vac`$
$`=`$ $`c_F\times {\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\underset{t>0}{}d\xi _j(t)d\overline{\xi }_j(t)}`$
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}(\stackrel{~}{Y}_j(t)+\stackrel{~}{\delta }_j(t))\xi _j(t)dt+{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}(\stackrel{~}{X}_j(t)+\stackrel{~}{\beta }_j(t))\overline{\xi }_j(t)dt`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{l_1,l_2=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_{l_1,l_2}(t)({\displaystyle \frac{e^{2\lambda t}}{2}}\xi _{l_1}(t)\xi _{l_2}(t)\xi _{l_1}(t)\overline{\xi }_{l_2}(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\xi }_{l_1}(t)\overline{\xi }_{l_2}(t))dt).`$
Performing the Gauss integral calculation, $`_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}e^{x^2}𝑑x=\sqrt{\pi }`$, (LABEL:J') becomes the following, up to constant multiplicity.

$`\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle _C}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{2\pi it}}\mathrm{log}(t){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1e^{2\lambda t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho t}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{n}\right)t}}`$
$`\times `$ $`({\displaystyle \underset{l_1,l_2=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}I_{l_1,l_2}(t)({\displaystyle \frac{e^{2\lambda t}}{2}}(\stackrel{~}{X}_{l_1}(t)+\stackrel{~}{\beta }_{l_1}(t))(\stackrel{~}{X}_{l_2}(t)+\stackrel{~}{\beta }_{l_2}(t))`$
$`+`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{X}_{l_1}(t)+\stackrel{~}{\beta }_{l_1}(t))(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l_2}(t)+\stackrel{~}{\delta }_{l_2}(t))+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l_1}(t)+\stackrel{~}{\delta }_{l_1}(t))(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l_2}(t)+\stackrel{~}{\delta }_{l_2}(t))))).`$
Now we arrive at the following formula.

$`J(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle _C}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{2\pi it}}\mathrm{log}(t){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1e^{2\lambda t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho t}{2}}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n}}\right)t\right)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{n}}\right)\mathrm{sh}\left(\pi t\right)}}`$
$`\times `$ $`({\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi lt}{n}}\right)\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(nl)\pi t}{n}}\right)({\displaystyle \frac{e^{2\lambda t}}{2}}\stackrel{~}{X}_l(t)^2+e^{2\lambda t}\stackrel{~}{X}_l(t)\stackrel{~}{Y}_l(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l(t)^2)`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{1l_1<l_2n1}{}}\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi l_1t}{n}}\right)\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(nl_2)\pi t}{n}}\right)(e^{2\lambda t}\stackrel{~}{X}_{l_1}(t)\stackrel{~}{X}_{l_2}(t)+e^{2\lambda t}\stackrel{~}{X}_{l_1}(t)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l_2}(t)`$
$`+`$ $`e^{2\lambda t}\stackrel{~}{X}_{l_2}(t)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l_1}(t)+\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l_1}(t)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l_2}(t))){\displaystyle }_C{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{2\pi it}}\mathrm{log}(t){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1e^{\lambda t}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho t}{4}}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2n}}\right)t\right)}}`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{2}}\right)}{\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{2n}}\right)\mathrm{sh}(\pi t)}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{l\pi t}{2n}}\right)\mathrm{sh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(nl)\pi t}{2n}}\right)(e^{\lambda t}\stackrel{~}{X}_l(t)+\stackrel{~}{Y}_l(t))).`$
Here $`\stackrel{~}{X}_l(t),\stackrel{~}{Y}_l(t)`$ are defined in (5.2), (5.2). Here the integral contour $`C`$ is as the same as those given in Appendix A. By this result, it is easily seen that $`J(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{}.j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}`$ is evaluated by multi-Gamma functions $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_r(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)`$, summarized in Appendix A. In a limiting case $`\rho \mathrm{}`$, our integral formulae reproduce those of form factors for the $`SU(n)`$ invariant massive Thirring model with boundary reflection .

Let us summarize the result of this section. We present integral representations (5.20) for form factors of the local fields.

$`f^𝒵(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N)_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}`$ (5.39)
$`=`$ $`E(\{\beta \}|\{\delta \}){\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{j_r}{}}}{\displaystyle _{C_j^{}}}𝑑\alpha _{j,r}{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{Q}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{k_s}{}}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\gamma _{k,s}I(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}.`$
Here the factor $`E(\{\beta \}|\{\delta \})`$ is given by (LABEL:def:E). The integrand $`I(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}`$ is given in (5.22), where the factor $`J(\{\alpha \}|\{\gamma \})_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_N}^{k_1,\mathrm{},k_Q}`$ is given in (LABEL:result:J), and $`C_{j_1,j_2}^{UU}(\alpha ),C_{j_1,j_2}^{VV}(\alpha )`$ and $`C_{j_1,j_2}^{UV}(\alpha )`$ are given in Appendix B. The integral contour $`C_j^{}`$ is given below (3.17). For special cases we present more explicit formulae in (5.17), (LABEL:special).

Fateev et al. proposed an expression for vacuum expectation values of the special field, for boundary SG model, which is described by the following action

$`𝒜_{FLZZ}={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑y\left((_x\phi )^2+(_y\phi )^2\right)\mu {\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x\mathrm{cos}(\beta \phi (x,0)).`$ (5.40)
In this paper and Hou et al., boundary SG model (affine $`A_1^{(1)}`$ Toda fields) is the model which is described by the following action

$`𝒜_{BSG}={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑y\left((_x\phi )^2+(_y\phi )^2\mu \mathrm{cos}(\beta \phi )\right).`$ (5.41)
Our considering boundary SG model $`𝒜_{BSG}`$ is different from Fateev et al.’s model $`𝒜_{FLZZ}`$. V.Fateev, A.Zamolodchikov, Al.Zamolodchikov  studied Boundary Liouville conformal field theory. For a particular application, they present one point function of the special operator in the boundary SG model $`𝒜_{BSG}`$. To reveal the connection between two formulae  and  is our future problem.

Acknowledgement This work was partly supported by Grant-in-Aid for Encouragements for Young Scientists (A) from JSPS (11740099).

## Appendix A Multiple Gamma function

Here we summarize the multiple gamma and the multiple sine functions, following . Let us set the multiple Gamma function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_r(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)`$ by

$`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Gamma }_r(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^r}{r!}}\gamma B_{r,r}(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)+{\displaystyle _C}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{xt}\mathrm{log}(t)}{_{j=1}^r(1e^{\omega _jt})}}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{2\pi it}},`$ (A.1)
where the functions $`B_{jj}(x)`$ are the multiple Bernoulli polynomials defined by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{t^re^{xt}}{_{j=1}^r(e^{\omega _jt}1)}}={\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{t^n}{n!}}B_{r,n}(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r).`$ (A.2)
Here $`\gamma `$ is Euler’s constant, $`\gamma =lim_n\mathrm{}(1+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{3}+\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{log}n)`$.
Here the contor of integral is given by

Let us set the multiple sine function $`S_r(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)`$ by

$`S_r(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_r(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_r(\omega _1+\mathrm{}+\omega _rx|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)^{(1)^r}.`$ (A.3)
The multiple Gamma function and the multiple sine function satisfy the recursion relations,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_r(x+\omega _1|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_r(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{r1}(x|\omega _2\mathrm{}\omega _r)}},`$ (A.4)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{S_r(x+\omega _1|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)}{S_r(x|\omega _1\mathrm{}\omega _r)}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S_{r1}(x|\omega _2\mathrm{}\omega _r)}}.`$ (A.5)
Here we understand $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0=x`$. We have the following conditions.

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(x|\omega )=\omega ^{\frac{x}{\omega }\frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{x}{\omega })}{\sqrt{2\pi }}},S_1(x|\omega )=2\mathrm{s}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}({\displaystyle \frac{\pi x}{\omega }}).`$ (A.6)
We have

$`\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}S_1(x|\rho )=e^\gamma x,\underset{\rho \mathrm{}}{lim}S_2(x|\rho ,\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^{\frac{1}{2}}(\omega e^\gamma )^{\frac{1}{2}\frac{x}{\omega }}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{x}{\omega }\right)}}.`$ (A.7)
Explicitly the multiple Bernoulli polynomials are written by

$`B_{11}(x|\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{x}{\omega }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},`$ (A.8)
$`B_{22}(x|\omega _1,\omega _2)={\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{\omega _1\omega _2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega _1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega _2}}\right)x+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\omega _1}{\omega _2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _2}{\omega _1}}\right).`$ (A.9)
## Appendix B Normal Ordering

Here we list the formulas of the form

$`X(\beta _1)Y(\beta _2)=C^{XY}(\beta _1\beta _2):X(\beta _1)X(\beta _2):,`$ (B.1)
where $`X,Y=U_j`$, and $`C_{XY}(\beta )`$ is a meromorphic function on $``$. These formulae follow from the commutation relation of the free bosons. When we compute the contraction of the basic operators, we often encounter an integral

$`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}F(t)𝑑t,`$ (B.2)
which is divergent at $`t=0`$. Here we adopt the following prescription for regularization : it should be understood as the countour integral,

$`{\displaystyle _C}F(t){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}(t)}{2\pi i}}𝑑t.`$ (B.3)
Here we used the same contour $`C`$ as the same as those in Appendix A.

The basic operators $`U_j(\beta ),V_j(\beta )`$ have the contraction relations, for $`0j_1,j_2n`$.

$`U_{j_1}(\beta _1)U_{j_2}(\beta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`C_{j_1,j_2}^{UU}(\beta _1\beta _2):U_{j_1}(\beta _1)U_{j_2}(\beta _2):,`$ (B.4)
$`V_{j_1}(\beta _1)V_{j_2}(\beta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`C_{j_1,j_2}^{VV}(\beta _1\beta _2):V_{j_1}(\beta _1)V_{j_2}(\beta _2):,`$ (B.5)
$`U_{j_1}(\beta _1)V_{j_2}(\beta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`C_{j_1,j_2}^{UV}(\beta _1\beta _2):U_{j_1}(\beta _1)V_{j_2}(\beta _2):,`$ (B.6)
$`V_{j_1}(\beta _1)U_{j_2}(\beta _2)`$ $`=`$ $`C_{j_1,j_2}^{VU}(\beta _1\beta _2):V_{j_1}(\beta _1)U_{j_2}(\beta _2):.`$ (B.7)
Here nonzero entries are given by

$`C_{j,j}^{UU}(\alpha )={\displaystyle \frac{i\alpha }{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}}e^{\frac{2\pi }{n\rho +2\pi }(\gamma +\mathrm{log}(\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}))}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{i\alpha +\rho }{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{i\alpha +\frac{2\pi }{n}}{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}\right)}},(j=1,\mathrm{},n1),`$
(B.8)
$`C_{j,j1}^{UU}(\alpha )=C_{j1,j}^{UU}(\alpha )=e^{\frac{n\rho }{n\rho +2\pi }(\gamma +\mathrm{log}(\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}))}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{i\alpha +\frac{\pi }{n}}{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{i\alpha +\rho +\frac{\pi }{n}}{\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}}\right)}},(j=1,\mathrm{},n),`$
(B.9)
$`C_{0,0}^{UU}(\alpha )=C_{n,n}^{UU}(\alpha )=e^{\gamma \frac{n1}{n}\frac{n\rho }{n\rho +2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}|\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n},2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +2\pi |\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n},2\pi )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\frac{2\pi }{n}|\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n},2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +2\pi +\rho |\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n},2\pi )}},`$
(B.10)
$`C_{0,n}^{UU}(\alpha )=C_{n,0}^{UU}(\alpha )=e^{\gamma \frac{\rho }{n\rho +2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\pi +\rho |\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n},2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\pi +\frac{2\pi }{n}|\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n},2\pi )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\pi |\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n},2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\pi +\frac{2\pi }{n}+\rho |\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n},2\pi )}}.`$
$`C_{j,j}^{VV}(\alpha )=i\rho e^{2\gamma }e^{\frac{4\pi }{n\rho }(\gamma +\mathrm{log}\rho )}\alpha \times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{i\alpha }{\rho }+1+\frac{2\pi }{n\rho }\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{i\alpha }{\rho }\frac{2\pi }{n\rho }\right)}},(j=1,\mathrm{},n1),`$
(B.12)
$`C_{j,j1}^{VV}(\alpha )=C_{j1,j}^{VV}(\alpha )=e^{\frac{2\pi +n\rho }{n\rho }(\gamma +\mathrm{log}\rho )}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{i\alpha }{\rho }\frac{\pi }{n\rho }\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{i\alpha }{\rho }+1+\frac{\pi }{n\rho }\right)}},(j=1,\mathrm{},n),`$
(B.13)
$`C_{0,0}^{VV}(\alpha )=C_{n,n}^{VV}(\alpha )=e^{\gamma \frac{n1}{n}(1+\frac{2\pi }{n\rho })}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\rho +\frac{2\pi }{n}|\rho ,2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +2\pi \frac{2\pi }{n}|\rho ,2\pi )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha |\rho ,2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +2\pi +\rho |\rho ,2\pi )}},`$
(B.14)
$`C_{0,n}^{VV}(\alpha )=C_{n,0}^{VV}(\alpha )=e^{\gamma \frac{1}{n}(1+\frac{2\pi }{n\rho })}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\pi |\rho ,2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\pi +\rho |\rho ,2\pi )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\pi \frac{2\pi }{n}|\rho ,2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +\pi +\frac{2\pi }{n}+\rho |\rho ,2\pi )}}.`$
$`C_{j,j}^{UV}(\alpha )=e^{2\gamma }\left(\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{\pi i}{n}}\right)^1\left(\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{\pi i}{n}}\right)^1,(j=1,\mathrm{},n1),`$ (B.16)
$`C_{j,j1}^{UV}(\alpha )=C_{j1,j}^{UV}(\alpha )=i\alpha e^\gamma ,(j=1,\mathrm{},n),`$ (B.17)
$`C_{0,0}^{UV}(\alpha )=C_{n,n}^{UV}(\alpha )=e^{(\gamma +\mathrm{log2}\pi )\frac{n1}{n}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\alpha }{2\pi i}+\frac{1}{2n}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\alpha }{2\pi i}+1\frac{1}{2n}\right)}},`$ (B.18)
$`C_{0,n}^{UV}(\alpha )=C_{n,0}^{UV}(\alpha )=e^{\frac{1}{n}(\gamma +\mathrm{log2}\pi )}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\alpha }{2\pi i}+\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2n}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\alpha }{2\pi i}+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2n}\right)}},`$ (B.19)
and

$`C_{j_1,j_2}^{VU}(\beta )=C_{j_1,j_2}^{UV}(\beta ),(0j_1,j_2n).`$ (B.20)
Here we have set the supplemental basic operators $`U_n(\alpha )`$ by

$`U_n(\alpha )=:\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}b_{n1}^{}(t)e^{i\beta t}dt):,b_{n1}^{}(t)={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}b_j(t){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{j\pi t}{n}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}.`$ (B.21)
## Appendix C $`U_q(\widehat{sl_2})`$ Case

In this Appendix we give an additional result for $`U_q(\widehat{sl_2})`$ case, and give some comments for $`U_q(\widehat{sl_n})`$ case. Let us introduce the operators $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta ),(j=0,1)`$ by

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_0^{}(\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`V_0(\beta ),`$ (C.1)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_1^{}(\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{C_1^{}}}𝑑\alpha :V_0(\beta )V_1(\alpha ):e^{\frac{\pi }{\rho }\beta }\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\beta \alpha )}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2\rho }}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\alpha \beta )}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2\rho }}\right),`$ (C.2)
where the integral contour $`C_1^{}`$ is given in section 3. The operators $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )`$ is slightly different from realizations of $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ (3.17). Factor $`e^{\frac{\alpha }{\rho }}`$ drops in $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )`$. However the operators $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )`$ satisfy the same commutation relation (2.15), too. Let us introduce the boundary $`K`$-matrix $`\widehat{K}(\beta )\mathrm{End}(^2)`$ by

$`\widehat{K}(\beta )={\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{G}_0(\beta )}{\widehat{G}_0(\beta )}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& \frac{e^{\frac{2\pi }{\rho }\beta }e^{\frac{2\pi }{\rho }\mu }}{e^{\frac{2\pi }{\rho }\beta }e^{\frac{2\pi }{\rho }\mu }}\end{array}\right),`$ (C.5)
where $`\widehat{G}_0(\beta )`$ is given by (C.12). $`\widehat{K}(\beta )`$ is the general diagonal boundary $`K`$-matrix associated with $`S`$-matrix $`S(\beta )`$ (2.1), (See ). Let us set the state $`|\widehat{B}`$ by

$`|\widehat{B}=e^{\widehat{B}}|vac.`$ (C.6)
Here we have set

$`\widehat{B}={\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\widehat{\alpha }_{1,1}(t)a_1(t)a_1(t)𝑑t+{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\widehat{\beta }_1(t)a_1(t)𝑑t,`$ (C.7)
where

$`\widehat{\alpha }_{1,1}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{t}{2}}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\rho t}{2}}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{2}\right)t}}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\pi t}{2}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}.`$ (C.8)
$`\widehat{\beta }_1(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}\frac{\pi t}{2}}{\mathrm{sh}\pi t}}\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sh}(i\mu \frac{\rho }{2}\frac{\pi }{2})t}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2}+\frac{\pi }{2}\right)t}}+\mathrm{sh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi t}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}\frac{\rho t}{4}}{\mathrm{sh}\left(\frac{\rho }{4}+\frac{\pi }{4}\right)t}}\right).`$ (C.9)
We have

$`V_0(\beta )|\widehat{B}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{G}_0(\beta )V_0(\beta )|\widehat{B},`$ (C.10)
$`V_1(\alpha )|\widehat{B}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{G}_1(\alpha )V_1(\alpha )|\widehat{B},`$ (C.11)
where

$`\widehat{G}_0(\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`2^{\frac{\pi }{2\rho }}e^{\frac{\gamma }{4}(1+\frac{\pi }{\rho })}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(2i\alpha +\pi |\rho ,4\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(2i\alpha +\rho +3\pi |\rho ,4\pi )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(2i\alpha |\rho ,4\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(2i\alpha +\rho +4\pi |\rho ,4\pi )}}`$ (C.12)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +i\mu |\rho ,2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha i\mu +\rho +2\pi |\rho ,2\pi )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha i\mu +\rho +\pi |\rho ,2\pi )\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(i\alpha +i\mu +\pi |\rho ,2\pi )}},`$
$`\widehat{G}_1(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`ie^\gamma 2^{1+\frac{\pi }{\rho }}(\rho e^\gamma )^{1+\frac{\pi }{\rho }\frac{2i\mu }{\rho }}\times \alpha \times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+\frac{\pi }{2\rho }+\frac{i(\mu \alpha )}{\rho }\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{\pi }{2\rho }+\frac{i(\mu \alpha )}{\rho }\right)}}.`$ (C.13)
As the same arguments as this paper we get

$`\widehat{K}(\beta )_j^j\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )|\widehat{B}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )|\widehat{B},(j=0,1).`$ (C.14)
It seems that this result is “homogeneous” version of paper .

At last we give some comments on $`U_q(\widehat{sl_n})`$ case. Let us introduce the operators $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta ),(j=0,\mathrm{},n1)`$ by

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{C_1^{}}}𝑑\alpha _1\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _{C_j^{}}}𝑑\alpha _j:V_0(\beta )V_1(\alpha _1)\mathrm{}V_j(\alpha _j):`$ (C.15)
$`\times `$ $`e^{\frac{\pi }{\rho }\beta }{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\alpha _{k1}\alpha _k)}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n\rho }}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i(\alpha _k\alpha _{k1})}{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{n\rho }}\right).`$
The operators $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )`$ are slightly different from realizations of $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ (3.17). Factor $`e^{\frac{\alpha _j}{\rho }}`$ drops in $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )`$. It is possible to construct “boundary state” $`|\widehat{B}`$ for general diagonal boundary $`K`$-matrix $`\widehat{K}(\beta )`$, associated with the $`S`$-matrix $`S(\beta )`$ (2.1), as the same manner as $`n=2`$ case. Relating to general diagonal boundary $`K`$-matrix, see Appendix of the paper .

$`\widehat{K}(\beta )_j^j\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )|\widehat{B}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )|\widehat{B},(j=0,\mathrm{},n1).`$ (C.16)
However we cannot derive the commutation relations (2.15) for $`n>2`$, under the scheme of the papers . Therefore we select the realizations of $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ in section 3. When we consider a limiting case $`\rho \mathrm{}`$, two kind of operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(\beta )`$ become free field realizations of the Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators $`Z_j^{}(\beta )`$ given in . Therefore, in this limiting case, we have constructed the boundary state $`|B`$ for general diagonal boundary $`K`$-matrix. See the papers .


format: text

text:
# Gravitational collapse of null fluid on the brane

## 1 Introduction

General relativity (GR) is a successful theory of gravitation in the energy range accessible to observation. However, at very high energies where all fields are expected to move towards unification, considerations of modification to GR would be quite in order. In this context, string theory proposes a grand framework for unification of all forces and it requires dimensions larger than the usual four. That is, at ultra high energy, there should be a new theory of gravitation, of which GR should turn out to be the low energy limit. Of course we are far from that theory, yet it has inspired considerable interest in higher dimensional gravity.

The canonical scenario in the higher dimensional models is that the matter fields are confined to a $`1+3`$-dimensional $`3`$-brane in $`1+3+d`$ dimensional spacetime, while gravitational field propogates in the extra $`d`$ dimensions as well . Earlier the extra dimensions were taken to be very compact, but recently this condition has also been relaxed by Randall and Sundrum . They have shown for $`d=1`$ gravitational field could be confined in the neighbourhood of the $`3`$-brane without any restriction of finiteness of the fifth extra dimension (see also ). Shiromizu, Maeda and Saski  have worked out an elegant geometric framework for the R-S brane model. The $`5`$-dimensional spacetime is called bulk while the Universe we live in brane, in which the standard models and theories of fields and matter enjoy the observational support. In the R-S model, it is envisaged that the bulk is a solution of the Einstein equation with negative cosmological constant, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Gravitational field gets ”reflected” from the bulk onto the brane through the projection of the bulk Weyl curvature on the brane. This projection would appear as trace free matter field on the brane. By ”reflection” from bulk the effective Einstein equation on the brane would in addition to the usual stresses include quadratic terms in them plus the trace free part which arises from free gravitational field . For seeking solution of a problem in the brane world model is first to find the solution with negative $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the bulk and then solution of the effective equation on the brane which has to be matched with the bulk solution satisfying the proper boundary conditions .

In view of the involved process of finding solution, it would be understandably quite difficult to find the complete solution. A solution for a black hole on the brane has recently been proposed , which takes into account the trace free matter field induced on the brane from the bulk. It is given by the Reissner-Nordstr$`\ddot{o}`$m metric for a charged black hole. Here the induced charge is the tidal gravitational charge, and not the electric charge, and it is the measure of ”reflected” gravitational field energy as a matter field on the brane. The solution was obtained by solving for the trace free condition and null energy condition on the brane. It has not been matched with the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ vacuum in the bulk. The null energy condition is required to hold good on the horizon and not necessarily everywhere off the horizon. It is however an approximate solution which is good in the neighbourhood of the horizon . It has been argued that induced energy density on the brane must be negative so as to strengthen hole’s gravity and as well as not to radically change the singularity structure of spacetime. When an isolated object is sitting in an energy distribution which vanishes asymptotically, it would contribute in line with object’s gravity only when its energy density is negative . The modification ensuing from bulk’s back-reaction would thus strengthen black hole’s gravitational field. It would therefore be pertinent to study gravitational collapse in this model. Would the parameter window in the initial data set giving rise to naked singularity shrink owing to effective strengthening of gravity? This is the question we wish to address in this letter.

The cosmic censorship conjecture (CCC) is one of the most important unresolved question in classical general relativity . It is of course well-known that gravitational collapse under very general conditions in GR ultimately leads to a singularity . The question arises whether singularity so formed is visible to asymptotic observer or hidden behind an event horizon. The CCC states that the latter is the case. In its strong form, it demands spacetime to be globally hyperbolic (and hence its invisibility to any observer), while the weak form demands formation of a horizon and its invisibility only to an asymptotic observer (see , for reviews on CCC). In view of its profound importance, the question also attains pertinence in situations that may call for modification of GR. We shall therefore like to address this question for the brane world model. That is, what effect would the back-reaction of the bulk cause on gravitational collapse on the brane?

We shall consider collapse of the null fluid described by the Vaidya solution onto a flat Minkowski cavity. The exterior to the Vaidya region would be the Schwarzschild region. That is the brane-generalized Vaidya would be matched to the brane-generalized Schwarzschild solution. For this we shall first find the analogue of the Vaidya solution on the brane taking into account the bulk induced trace free matter field. In finding the end product of collapse, we need only to know the generalized Vaidya solution on the brane. In the next section, we write the effective Einstein equation on the brane and the generalized Vaidya solution on the brane, which would be followed by discussion of occurrence of naked singularity. We conclude with a discussion.

## 2 Vaidya solution on the brane

The Einstein equation for the 5-dimensional bulk spacetime with a negative $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and brane energy-momentum as source :

$$\stackrel{~}{G}_{AB}=\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^2[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\stackrel{~}{g}_{AB}+\delta (\xi )(\lambda g_{AB}+T_{AB})]$$
(1)
The tildes indicate the 5-dimensional bulk analogous of the standard GR quantities, and $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^2=8\pi /\stackrel{~}{M}_p^3`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{M}_p`$ is the fundamental 5-dimensional Planck mass, which is much less than the brane Planck mass, $`M_p=1.2\times 10^{19}GeV`$. The brane is located at $`\xi =0`$ which suggests the coordinates $`(x^\mu ,\xi )`$ where $`x^\mu =(t,x^i)`$ are the spacetime coordinates on the brane. $`\lambda `$ is the brane tension and induced metric on the brane is given by $`g_{AB}=\stackrel{~}{g}_{AB}n_An_B`$ where $`n_A`$ is the space-like unit normal to the brane. The brane stress tensor $`T_{AB}`$ refers to the brane confined matter fields with $`T_{AB}n^A=0`$.

The effective equation on the brane is obtained by Shiromizu et al.  by using the Gauss-Codacci equations, the matching conditions and the $`Z_2`$ symmetry of the spacetime. It reads as follows:

$$G_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }+\kappa ^2T_{\mu \nu }+\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4S_{\mu \nu }_{\mu \nu },$$
(2)
where

$$S_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{12}T_\alpha ^\alpha T_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{4}T_{\mu \alpha }T_\nu ^\alpha +\frac{1}{24}g_{\mu \nu }\left[3T_{\alpha \beta }T^{\alpha \beta }(T_\alpha ^\alpha )^2\right]$$
(3)
and

$$_{AC}=\stackrel{~}{C}_{ABCD}n^Bn^D.$$
(4)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{C}_{ABCD}`$ is the bulk Weyl curvature and hence $`_{AB}=_{BA}`$, $`_A^A=0`$, $`_{AB}n^B=0`$. The induced modifications from the bulk are of two kinds, one the quadratic stress corrections and the other nonlocal effects of the free gravitational filed in the bulk transmitted through the projection of the bulk Weyl curvature. Thus $`_{\mu \nu }`$ represents reflected nonlocal gravitational degrees of freedom from bulk to the brane and it includes tidal (Coulomb), gravito-magnetic as well as transverse traceless (gravitational wave) effects.

The energy scales are related by

$$\lambda =6\frac{\kappa ^2}{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4},\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{4\pi }{\stackrel{~}{M}_p^3}\left[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}+\left(\frac{4\pi }{3\stackrel{~}{M}_p^3}\right)\lambda ^2\right]$$
(5)
where $`\kappa ^2=8\pi /M_p^2`$.

For obtaining the analogue of the Vaidya solution  on the brane, we note that $`T_{\mu \nu }=\sigma k_\mu k_\nu ,k_\mu k^\mu =0`$ where $`\sigma `$ is the density of null fluid. We set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, and the equation we need to solve is

$$G_{\mu \nu }=\kappa ^2\sigma k_\mu k_\nu _{\mu \nu }$$
(6)
because for the null fluid $`S_{\mu \nu }=0`$. The solution in $`(v,r,\theta ,\varphi )`$ coordinates is given by

$$ds^2=(1\frac{2m(v)}{r}\frac{e^2(v)}{r^2})dv^2+2dvdr+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2$$
(7)
where $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^2=d\theta ^2+sin^2\theta d\varphi ^2`$, $`v`$ represents advanced Eddington time, in which $`r`$ is decreasing towards the future along a ray $`v=const.`$, the two arbitrary functions $`m(v)=M(v)/M_p^2`$ and $`e(v)^2=M^2(v)/\stackrel{~}{M}_p^4`$ refer respectively to the mass and reflected tidal charge at advanced time $`v`$. They would be only restricted by the proper energy conditions . In contrast to the positive energy density of electric field for the charged black hole, the energy density of reflected gravitational field is negative which accounts for the negative sign before $`e^2/r^2`$ term in the metric.

We have thus obtained an analogue of the Vaidya solution on the brane in the same manner as the Schwarzschild’s analogue . It would also attract the same criticism that it would be valid only close to the horizon. In our analysis the behaviour of solution near the horizon is most relevant. Thus even though this solution may not be valid globally, it would be good enough for our purpose here to probe occurrence of naked singularity or black hole.

## 3 Collapse on the brane

In this section, we employ the above metric for investigation of formation of black hole or naked singularity in collapse of null fluid in the context of CCC. The physical situation is that of a radial influx of null fluid in an initially empty region of the Minkowski spacetime. The first shell arrives at $`r=0`$ at time $`v=0`$ and the final at $`v=T`$. A central singularity of growing mass is developed at $`r=0`$. For $`v<0`$ we have $`m(v)=e(v)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}`$, i.e., an empty Minkowski metric, and for $`v>T`$, $`\dot{m}(v)=\dot{e}(v)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}`$, $`m(v)ande^2(v)`$ are positive definite. The metric for $`v=0`$ to $`v=T`$ is the brane-generalised Vaidya, and for $`v>T`$ we have the brane-generalised Schwarzschild solution.

In order to proceed further we would require the specific forms of the functions $`m(v)`$ and $`e^2(v)`$ which we choose as follows:

$$m(v)=\{\begin{array}{cc}0,\hfill & v<0,\hfill \\ \lambda v(\lambda >0)\hfill & 0vT,\hfill \\ m_0(>0)\hfill & v>T.\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
and

$$e^2(v)=\{\begin{array}{cc}0,\hfill & v<0,\hfill \\ \mu ^2v^2(\mu ^2>0)\hfill & 0vT,\hfill \\ e_0^2(>0)\hfill & v>T.\hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
Then the space-time is self-similar , admitting a homothetic Killing vector

$$\xi ^a=r\frac{}{r}+v\frac{}{v}$$
(10)
which is given by the Lie derivative

$$Ł_\xi g_{ab}=\xi _{a;b}+\xi _{b;a}=2g_{ab}$$
(11)
$`Ł`$ denotes the Lie derivative. Let $`K^a=dx^a/dk`$ be the tangent vector to the null geodesics, where $`k`$ is an affine parameter. Then

$$g_{ab}K^aK^b=0.$$
(12)
It follows that along null geodesics, we have

$$\xi ^aK_a=rK_r+vK_v=C$$
(13)
Following , we introduce

$$K^v=\frac{P}{r}$$
(14)
and, from the null condition, we obtain

$$K^r=\left[1\frac{2m(v)}{r}\frac{e^2(v)}{r^2}\right]\frac{P}{2r}.$$
(15)
To study the singularity we employ the method developed by Dwivedi and Joshi . Consider the equation for radial, outgoing null geodesics

$$\frac{dr}{dv}=\frac{1}{2}\left[1\frac{2m(v)}{r}\frac{e^2(v)}{r^2}\right].$$
(16)
This is an ordinary differential equation with a singular point $`v=0,r=0`$. This singularity is (at least locally) naked if there are geodesics starting at it with a definite tangent. If no geodesic exists, then singularity is not naked and strong CCC holds. To investigate the behaviour near singular point, define

$$y=\frac{v}{r}.$$
(17)
Eq. (16), upon using eqs. (8), (9) and (17), turns out to be

$$\frac{dr}{dv}=\frac{1}{2}\left[12\lambda y\mu ^2y^2\right].$$
(18)
If singularity is naked, there exists some value of $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ such that at least one positive finite value $`y_0`$ exists which solves the algebraic equation

$$y_0=\underset{r0v0}{lim}y=\underset{r0v0}{lim}\frac{v}{r}.$$
(19)
Using (18) and L’Hôpital’s rule we get

$$y_0=\underset{r0v0}{lim}y=\underset{r0v0}{lim}\frac{v}{r}=\underset{r0v0}{lim}\frac{dv}{dr}=\frac{2}{12\lambda y_0\mu ^2y_0^2}$$
(20)
which can be written in explicit form as,

$$\mu ^2y_0^3+2\lambda y_0^2y_0+2=0.$$
(21)
The central shell focusing singularity is naked, if eq. (21) admits one or more positive real roots. Hence in the absence of positive real roots, the collapse will always lead to a black hole. It can be shown that real roots of eq. (21) exist only when $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\lambda ^218\lambda \mu ^216\lambda ^3+\mu ^227\mu ^40`$. It is easy to check that two of three real roots of eq. (21) are always positive. We have summarised the results in the following table. Hence we can say that the nature of the singularity (naked or covered) depends on the behaviour of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The behaviour of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in $`(\lambda ,\mu )`$ space is shown in Figs. I-III.

Table I: Roots $`X_0`$ for different $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$

| $`\lambda `$ | $`\mu `$ | $`Roots(X_0)`$ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`0.06`$ | $`0.03`$ | $`3.57311,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4.40124}`$ |
| $`0.05`$ | $`0.05`$ | $`2.90554,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}5.66840}`$ |
| $`1/16`$ | $`0.00`$ | $`4,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}`$ |
| $`0.0005`$ | $`0.19`$ | $`2.80212,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}3.25127}`$ |
| $`0.0`$ | $`0.10`$ | $`2.09149,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}8.78885}`$ |

It can be seen that collapse always leads to naked singularity if $`\lambda 0.06`$ and $`\mu 0.03`$ (Fig. I). Whereas for $`\mu >0.19`$ it is always a black hole for all values of $`\lambda `$ (Fig. II). When $`\mu =0`$, we come back to the Vaidya metric, and eq. (21) admit positive roots for $`0<\lambda 1/16`$ and hence singularities are naked for this range of $`\lambda `$ .

### Strength of Naked Singularities:

A singularity is termed gravitationally strong or simply strong, if it destroys by crushing or stretching any object to zero volume which falls into it. A sufficient condition  for a strong singularity as given by Tipler  is that for at least one non-spacelike geodesic with affine parameter $`k`$, in limiting approach to singularity, we must have

$$\underset{k0}{lim}k^2\psi =\underset{k0}{lim}k^2R_{ab}K^aK^b>0$$
(22)
where $`R_{ab}`$ is the Ricci tensor. Eq. (22) can be expressed as

$$\underset{k0}{lim}k^2\psi =\underset{k0}{lim}2\left[\dot{m}(v)+\frac{e(v)\dot{e}(v)}{r}\right]\left[\frac{kP}{r^2}\right]^2$$
(23)
Our purpose here is to investigate the above condition along future directed null geodesics coming out from the singularity. For this, solution $`P`$ is required. Eq. (13), because of eqs. (8), (14) and (15), yields

$$P=\frac{2C}{2y+2\lambda y^2+\mu ^2y^3}$$
(24)
and the geodesics are then completely known. Further, we note that

$$\frac{dy}{dk}=\frac{1}{r}K^v\frac{X}{r}K^r$$
(25)
which, on inserting the expressions for $`K^v`$ and $`K^v`$, become

$$\frac{dy}{dk}=(2y+\lambda y^2+\mu y^3)\frac{P}{2r^2}=\frac{C}{r^2}.$$
(26)
Using the fact that as singularity is approached, $`k0`$, $`r0`$ and $`Xa_+`$ (a root of (21)) and using L’Hôpital’s rule, we observe

$$\underset{k0}{lim}\frac{kP}{r^2}=\frac{2}{1+\mu y_0^2}$$
(27)
and hence eq. (23) gives

$$\underset{k0}{lim}k^2\psi =\frac{8\lambda }{(1+\mu y_0^2)^2}>0.$$
(28)
Thus along radial null geodesics strong curvature condition is satisfied. Therefore, one may say that generically, the naked singularity is gravitationally strong . Having seen that the naked singularity in our model is a strong curvature singularity, we also examine its scalar polynomial character. The Kretschmann scalar ($`K=R_{abcd}R^{abcd}`$, $`R_{abcd}`$ is the Riemann tensor) with the help of eqs. (8) and (9), takes the form

$$K=\frac{48}{r^4}\left[\lambda ^2y^2+2\lambda \mu ^2y^3+\frac{7}{6}\mu ^4y^4\right]$$
(29)
which diverges at the naked singularity and hence the singularity is a scalar polynomial singularity .

Finally, we compute the Ricci scalar ($`R=R_a^a`$) for the metric (7) is

$$R=4\left[\frac{\mu ^4y^4}{r^4}\right]$$
(30)
The Ricci scalar, which vanishes in $`4D`$ Vaidya case, has the same divergence rate as the Kretschmann scalar.

## 4 Discussion

We have generalized the Vaidya solution in the same spirit as the Schwarzschild solution done in  to describe a null fluid on the brane. The reflected energy density of free gravitational field from the bulk is negative and hence it would contribute positively to gravity of the collapsing null radiation . This should cover part of the parameter window in the initial data set for naked singularity. This is what has been demonstrated.gv That is, the parameter set which gave rise to naked singularity in GR collapse may now lead to black hole on the brane. The window gets covered with the increased strength of the reflected tidal charge. There exists a threshold value for $`\mu `$, as shown in Fig. II, the parameter window gets fully covered ensuring formation of black hole for all values of $`\lambda `$. That is when $`\mu >0.19`$ the CCC is always respected. On the other hand the CCC is always violated for $`\lambda 0.06`$ and $`\mu 0.03`$ (Fig. I). The singularity is always Tipler strong curvature singularity. Of course the tidal charge goes as $`M^2/\stackrel{~}{M}_p^2`$ which cannot take arbitrarily large value. The important point is that collapse on the brane would favour black hole in comparison to naked singularity. This is what was however expected because of strengthening of gravity resulting from the back-reaction of the bulk.

One of the important issues about existence of naked singularities is their stability, and there exists no well formulated criterion for it. In such a situation, it is prudent to examine the question under various conditions. For instance very recently, the effect of immersing the Vaidya null fluid collapsing sysetm into a constant potential bath was considered  and was shown that naked singularity does persist. The present consideration could as well be considered from this viewpoint. That is, how does it fare with respect to the possible high energy modifications to GR in the brane world model? It seems to be stable with partially covered parameter window in the initial data set for naked singularity.

It would thus be fair to say that the brane inspired modification of GR at high energies seems to have tendency towards the CCC. However, the parameter window allowing violation of the CCC gets fully covered only for very large “reflected” charge, which may not be realistically sustainable. This is the issue for further probing in future.

Acknowledgement: One of the authors (SGG) would like to thank IUCAA for hospitality and Science College, Congress Nagar, Nagpur for granting leave.