text:
# The extraordinarily bright optical afterglow of GRB 991208 and its host galaxy

## 1 Introduction

Gamma–ray bursts (GRBs) are flashes of cosmic high energy ($`1`$ keV–10 GeV) photons (Fishman and Meegan 1995). For many years they remained without any satisfactory explanation since their discovery in 1967, but with the advent of the Italian–Dutch X–ray satellite BeppoSAX, it became possible to conduct deep counterpart searches only a few hours after a burst was detected. This led to the first detection of X-ray and optical afterglow for GRB 970228 (Costa et al. 1997, van Paradijs et al. 1997) and the determination of the cosmological distance scale for the bursts on the basis of the first spectroscopic measurements taken for GRB 970508, implying $`z`$ $``$ 0.835 (Metzger et al. 1997).

Subsequent observations in 1997-2000 have shown that about a third of the well localized GRBs can be associated with optical emission that gradually fades away over weeks to months. Now it is widely accepted that long duration GRBs originate at cosmological distances with energy releases of 1051–1053 ergs. The observed afterglow satisfies the predictions of the ”standard” relativistic fireball model, and the central engines that power these extraordinary events are thought to be the collapse of massive stars (see Piran (1999) and van Paradijs et al. (2000) for a review).

The detection of GRB host galaxies is most essential in order to understand the nature of hosts (morphology, star forming rates) and to determine the energetics of the bursts (redshifts) and offsets with respect to the galaxy centres. About 25 hosts galaxies have been detected so far, with redshifts $`z`$ in the range 0.43-4.50 and star-forming rates in the range 0.5-60 M year-1. See Klose (2000), Castro-Tirado (2001) and references therein.

Here we report on the detection of the optical afterglow from GRB 991208 as well as its host galaxy. This GRB was detected at 04:36 universal time (UT) on 8 Dec 1999, with the Ulysses GRB detector, the Russian GRB Experiment (KONUS) on the Wind spacecraft and the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) detectors (Hurley et al. 2000) as an extremely intense, 60 s long GRB with a fluence $`>`$ 25 keV of $`10^4`$ erg cm-2 and considerable flux above 100 keV. Radio observations taken on 1999 December 10.92 UT with the Very Large Array (VLA) at 4.86 GHz and 8.46 GHz indicated the presence of a compact source which became a strong candidate for the radio afterglow from GRB 991208 (Frail et al. 1999).

## 2 Observations and data reduction

We have obtained optical images centered on the GRB location starting 2.1 days after the burst (Table 1). Photometric observations were conducted with the 1.04-m Sampurnanand telescope at Uttar Pradesh State Observatory, Nainital, India (1.0 UPSO); the 1.2-m Schmidt telescope at Tautenburg, Germany (1.2 TBG); the 1.5-m telescope at Observatorio de Sierra Nevada (1.5 OSN), Granada, Spain; the 2.5-m Isaac Newton Telescope (2.5 INT), the 2.56-m Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT), the 3.5-m Telescopio Nazionale Galileo (3.5 TNG) and the 4.2-m William Herschel Telescope (4.2 WHT) at Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos, La Palma, Spain; the 1.23-m, 2.2-m and 3.5-m telescopes at the German-Spanish Calar Alto Observatory (1.2, 2.2 and 3.5 CAHA respectively), Spain; the 3.5-m telescope operated by the Universities of Wisconsin, Indiana, Yale and the National Optical Astronomical Observatories (3.5-m WIYN) at Kitt Peak, USA; and the 6.0-m telescope at the Special Astrophisical Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Nizhnij Arhyz, Russia.

For the optical images, photometry was performed by means of SExtractor (Bertin and Arnouts 1996), making use of the corrected isophotal magnitude, which is appropriate for star-like objects. The DAOPHOT (Stetson 1987) profile-fitting technique was used for the magnitude determination on the later epoch images, when the source is much fainter. Zeropoints, atmospheric extinction and color terms were computed using observations of standard fields taken throughout the run. Magnitudes of the secondary standards in the GRB fields agree, within the uncertainties, with those given in Henden (2000). Zeropoint uncertainties are also included in the given errors.

Prompt follow up spectroscopy of the OA was attempted at several telescopes (Table 2), but we only got a reasonable good signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) at the 6-m telescope SAO RAS using an integral field spectrograph MPFS (Dodonov et al. 1999a). One 2700-sec spectrum and one 4500-sec spectrum were obtained on 13 and 14 Dec 1999 UT. On the latter, the observing conditions were good: the seeing was $``$ 1.5$`^{^{\prime \prime }}`$ (at a zenithal distance of 60), and there was good transparency. We used 300 lines/mm grating blazed at 6000 Å giving a spectral resolution of about 5 Å/pixel and effective wavelength coverage of 4100 - 9200 Å. The spectrophotometric standards HZ44 and BD+75325 (Oke et al. 1995) were used for the flux calibration.

## 3 Results and discussion

### 3.1 The optical afterglow

At the same location of the variable radiosource, a bright optical afterglow (OA) was identified on the images taken at Calar Alto, La Palma and Tautenburg (Castro-Tirado et al. 1999a,b). The astrometric solution was obtained using 16 USNO-A stars, and coordinates were $`\alpha _{2000}=16^h33^m53.^s50;\delta _{2000}=+46^{}27^{^{}}21.0^{^{\prime \prime }}`$ ($`\pm 0.2^{^{\prime \prime }}`$). A comparison among optical images acquired on 10 and 11 Dec allowed us to confirm the variability in intensity of the proposed OA. About 2.1 d after the burst, we measured R = 18.7 $`\pm `$ 0.1 for the OA, and 19 h later we found R = 19.60 $`\pm `$ 0.03. In these images the object is point-like (resolution $``$ 1′′) and there is no evidence of any underlying extended object as seen at later epochs (Fig. 1). Coincident (within errors) with the location of optical and radio afterglows, Shepherd et al. (1999) detected at millimeter wavelengths the brightest afterglow of a GRB reported so far. At 15 GHz and 240 GHz, the GRB 991208 afterglow was observed at Ryle (Pooley et al. 1999) and Pico Veleta (Bremer et al. 1999a,b), respectively.

Our $`B,V,R,I`$ light curve (Fig. 2) shows that the source was declining in brightness. The optical decay slowed down in early 2000, indicating the presence of an underlying source of constant brightness: the host galaxy. The decay of previous GRB afterglows appears to be well characterized by a power law (PL) decay $`F(t)(tt_0)^\alpha `$, where $`F(t)`$ is the flux of the afterglow at time $`t`$ since the onset of the event at $`t_0`$ and $`\alpha `$ is the decay constant. Assuming this parametric form and by fitting least square linear regressions to the observed magnitudes as function of time, we derive below the value of flux decay constant for GRB 991208. The fits to the $`B`$, $`V`$, $`R`$ and $`I`$ light curves are given in Table 3, but the poor quality of the PL fit is reflected in the relatively large reduced chi-squared values. This is specially noticeable in the R-band light curve, due to the data obtained after one month, that will be discussed in Section 3.1.2.

#### 3.1.1 The existence of two breaks

The $`R`$ and $`I`$-band data up to $`t_0`$ \+ 10 days are better fit by a broken PL with a break time $`t_{break}`$ $``$ 5 days. For the B and V-band such a fit is not possible due to the scarcely of the data in these bands. See Table 4. Hence we adopt a value of $`\alpha _1`$ = $``$2.30$`\pm `$0.07 for 2 days $`<`$ $`(tt_0)`$ $`<`$ 5 days and $`\alpha _2`$ = $``$3.2$`\pm `$0.2 for 5 days $`<`$ $`(tt_0)`$ $`<`$ 10 days as flux decay constants in further discussions.

Further support for the existence of an additional break at $`(tt_0)`$ $`<`$ 2 days in GRB 991208 comes from the extrapolation of the R-band data towards earlier epochs (Fig. 3), that predicts an optical flux that should have been seen at naked eye by observers in Central Europe.

The optical event exceeding magnitude 11 could be detected by the Czech stations of the European Fireball Network. Unfortunately, it was completely cloudy during the night of Dec 8/9 in the Czech Republic, so none of the 12 stations of the network was able to take all-sky photographs. The first photographs after the GRB trigger were taken on Dec 8, 16:25 UT, i.e. nearly 12 h after the event, and shows no object at its position brighter than mag $`V`$ 10. However, sky patrol films taken for meteor research were exposed in Germany during Dec 8/9, 1999 but no OA exceeding $`R`$ 4 with a duration of 10 s or more is detected simultaneously to the GRB event. This upper limit derived from the films implies that this additional break in the power-law decay of GRB 991208 has to be present at 0.01 days $`<`$ $`(tt_0)`$ $`<`$ 2 days although a maximum in the light curve similar to GRB 970508 (Castro-Tirado et al. 1998) cannot be excluded.

The flux decay of GRB 991208 is one of the steepest of all GRBs observed so far (Sagar et al. 2000). Before deriving any conclusion from the flux decays of these GRBs, we compare them with other well studied GRBs. Most OAs exhibit a single power-law decay index, generally $``$ $``$ 1.2, a value reasonable for spherical expansion of a relativistic blast wave in a constant density interstellar medium (Mészáros and Rees 1997, Wijers et al. 1997, Waxman 1997, Reichart 1997) . For other bursts, like GRB 990123, the value of $`\alpha `$ = $``$1.13$`\pm `$0.02 for the early time (3 hr to 2 day) light curve becomes $``$1.75$`\pm `$0.11 at late times (2-20 day) (Kulkarni et al. 1999, Castro-Tirado et al. 1999c, Fruchter et al. 1999) while the corresponding slopes for GRB 990510 are $``$0.76$`\pm `$0.01 and $``$2.40$`\pm `$0.02 respectively with the $`t_{break}`$ $``$ 1.57 day (Stanek et al. 1999, Harrison et al. 1999). If the steepening observed in both cases is due to beaming, then one may conclude that it occurs within $`<`$ 2 days of the burst.

Rapid decays in OAs have been seen in GRB 980326 with $`\alpha `$ = $``$2.0$`\pm `$0.1 (Bloom et al. 1999a), GRB 980519 with $`\alpha `$ = $``$2.05$`\pm `$0.04 (Halpern et al. 1999), GRB 990510 with $`\alpha `$ = $``$2.40 $`\pm `$ 0.02 (Stanek et al. 1999, Harrison et al. 1999) and GRB 000301C with $`\alpha `$ = $``$2.2$`\pm `$ 0.1 (Masetti et al. 2000, Jensen et al. 2001, Rhoads and Fruchter 2001), and have been interpreted by the sideways expansion of a jet (Rhoads 1997, 1999, Mészáros and Rees 1999). For GRB 991208, $`\alpha _1`$ = $``$2.30$`\pm `$0.07 and we therefore argue that the observed steep decay in the optical light curve up to $``$ 5 days may be due to a break which occurred before our first optical observations starting $``$ 2.1 day after the burst. The break is expected in several physical models, but beaming is the most likely cause in GRB 991208 taking into account that the rapid fading of optical afterglows is considered as an evidence for beaming in GRBs (Huang, Dai and Lu 2000).

According to the current view, the forward external shock wave would have led to the afterglow as observed in all wavelengths. The population of electrons is assumed to be a power-law distribution of Lorentz factors $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$ following d$`N`$/d$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e^p`$ above a minimum Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$, corresponding to the synchrotron frequency $`\nu _m`$. The value of $`p`$ can be determined taking into account the occurrence of the jet effect: the break due to a lateral expansion in the decelerating jet occurs when the initial Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ drops below $`\theta _0`$-1 (with $`\theta _0`$ the initial opening angle), i.e. the observer “sees” the edge of the jet. A change in the initial power-law decay exponent $`\alpha _0`$ (unknown to us) from $`\alpha _0`$ = $`3(1p)/4`$ to $`\alpha _1`$ = $`p`$ (for $`\nu _m`$ $`<`$ $`\nu `$ $`<`$ $`\nu _c`$), or from $`\alpha _0`$ = $`(23p)/4`$ to $`\alpha _1`$ = $`p`$ (for $`\nu `$ $``$ $`\nu _c`$) is expected (Rhoads 1997, 1999). If this is the case, then $`p`$ = $`\alpha _1`$ = 2.30 $`\pm `$ 0.07, in the observed range for other GRBs.

Whether the jet was expanding into an constant density medium or in an inhomogeneus medium (Chevalier and Li 1999, Wei and Lu 2000) is not possible to know with our data alone, as we do not have information on $`\alpha _0`$. For a density gradient of $`s`$ = 2, as expected from a previously ejected stellar wind ($`\rho r^s`$), the light curve should steepen by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha `$ = ($`\alpha _1\alpha _0`$) = (3-$`s`$)/(4-$`s`$) = 0.5 whereas $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha `$ = 0.75 for a constant density medium.

But which is the reason of the second break observed in GRB 991208 after $``$ 5 days ? The passage of the cooling frequency $`\nu _c`$ through the optical band (that would steepen the light curve by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha `$ $``$ 0.25, Sari et al. 1998) can be discarded: following Sari, Piran & Halpern (1999), if $`\nu <\nu _c`$ then we should expect a spectral index $`\beta `$ ($`F_\nu \nu ^\beta `$) such as $`\beta `$ = (p$``$1)/2 = 0.65 $`\pm `$ 0.04 and if $`\nu >\nu _c`$ then $`\beta `$ = p/2 = 1.15 $`\pm `$ 0.04 which is compatible with $`F_\nu \nu ^{1.05\pm 0.08}`$ on 12 Dec (see Section 3.3). Hence we conclude that $`\nu _c`$ has already passed the optical band 4 days after the burst onset.

The difference between the mid and late time decay slopes is $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha `$ = ($`\alpha _2\alpha _1`$) = 0.9 $`\pm `$ 0.3. A possible explanation could be two superposed events: a major burst followed by a minor burst, expected from some SN-shock models (Mészaros, Rees and Wijers 1998) similarly to what has been proposed for GRB 000301C (Bhargavi and Cowsik 2000). Li and Chevalier (2001) find that a spherical wind model (with $`\rho r^2`$) and a jet model fit the radio data when using a steepening of the electron spectrum, invoking a non-standard, broken PL around a break Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{break}`$: $`dN_e/d\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ = $`C_1\mathrm{\Gamma }^{p_1}`$ if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{min}<\mathrm{\Gamma }<\mathrm{\Gamma }_{break}`$ and $`dN_e/d\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ = $`C_2\mathrm{\Gamma }^{p_2}`$ if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }>\mathrm{\Gamma }_{break}`$. They derive $`p_1`$ = 2.0 and $`p_2`$ = 3.3, being the later value consistent with $`\alpha _2`$.

#### 3.1.2 The late–time light curve: another underlying SN?

If an underlying supernova (SN) would be present in the GRB 991208 light curve, this is expected to peak at $``$ 15(1+$`z`$) days $``$ 25 days. GRB 990128 is a good candidate for such a search thanks to the rapid decay. Indeed, the late–time light curve in the optical band (specially in the R-band) cannot be acceptably fitted just with the power-law decline expected for the OA plus the constant contribution of the host galaxy ($`\chi ^2`$/dof = 8.32). The data is much better fitted when considering a third component, a type Ic SN1998bw-like component (Galama et al. 1998) at $`z`$ = 0.706 ($`\chi ^2`$/dof = 1.88). See Fig. 4. We have used SN1998bw because its likely relationship to GRB 980425.

Thus, GRB 991208 would be the sixth event for which contribution from a SN is proposed, after GRB 970228 (Reichart 1999, Galama et al. 2000b), GRB 970508 (Sokolov et al. 2001a), GRB 980326 (Castro-Tirado and Gorosabel 1999, Bloom et al. 1999a), GRB 990712 (Hjorth et al. 1999, Sahu et al. 2000) and GRB 000418 (Klose et al. 2000, Dar and De Rújula 2001). This reinforces the GRB-SN relationship for some long duration bursts and support the scenario in which the death of a massive star produces the GRB in the “collapsar” model (MacFadyen & Woosley 1999). Our results do not support the “supranova” model (Vietri & Stella 1998) for this event as the SN should have preceeded the GRB by few months.

But could the observations be explained by a dust echo instead ? Esin and Blandford (2000) presented an alternative explanation for the excess of red flux observed 20-30 days after GRB 970228 and GRB 980326, being scattering off dust grains, peaking around $``$ 4000 Å in the rest frame (i.e. in the R-band at $`z`$ = 0.706, as observed in GRB 991208). On the basis of VRIJK observations for GRB 970228, Reichart (2001) has concluded that the late-time afterglow of that event cannot be explained by a dust echo. For GRB 991208, only V- and R-band data (plus an upper limit in the I-band) are available at the time of the maximum, i.e. the light curve is not sufficiently well sampled to distinguish between a SN and a dust echo.

### 3.2 The host galaxy

Evidence for a brigh host galaxy came from the BTA/MPSF 4500-s spectrum of the GRB 991208 optical transient taken on 14 Dec (see Fig. 5). We found four emission lines at $`\lambda `$ = 6350 Å, 8300 Å, 8550 Å, and 8470 Å, with the most likely identifications of these emission lines being: \[OII\] 3727 Å, Hβ 4861 Å, \[OIII\] 4959 Å, 5007 Å at a redshift of z = 0.7063 $`\pm `$ 0.0017 (Dodonov et al. 1999b), a value confirmed by other measurements later on (Djorgovski et al. 1999). Line parameters are measured with Gaussian fit to the emission line and a flat fit to the continuum.

Considering the redshift of z = 0.7063 $`\pm `$ 0.0017, H0 = 60 km s-1 Mpc-1, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ = 1 and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ = 0, the luminosity distance to the host is dL = 1.15 $`\times `$ 1028 cm, implying an isotropic energy release of 1.15 $`\times 10^{53}`$ erg. Taking into accout the time of the break, tbreak $`<`$ 2 d, this implies an upper limit on the jet half-opening angle $`\theta _0`$ $`<`$ 8 n1/8 with $`n`$ the density of the ambient medium (in cm-3) (see Wijers and Galama 1999), and thus the energy release should be lowered by $`>`$ 100, i.e. the energy released is $`<`$ 1.15 $`\times 10^{51}`$ erg.

For the galaxy, which is present in the late images (March-April 2000), the astrometric solution also obtained using the same 16 USNO-A stars was $`\alpha _{2000}=16^h33^m53.^s53;\delta _{2000}=+46^{}27^{^{}}21.0^{^{\prime \prime }}`$ ($`\pm 0.2^{^{\prime \prime }}`$), which is consistent with the OA position. See also Fruchter et al. (2000).

Our broad-band measurements of B = 25.19 $`\pm `$ 0.17, V = 24.55 $`\pm `$ 0.16, R = 24.27 $`\pm `$ 0.15 on 31.9 Mar and I = 23.3 $`\pm `$ 0.2 on 4.2 Apr, once derredened by the Galactic extinction imply a spectral distribution $`F_\nu `$ $``$ $`\nu ^\beta `$ with $`\beta `$ = $``$1.45 $`\pm `$ 0.33 ($`\chi ^2`$ per degree of freedom, $`\chi ^2/`$dof = 1.20). See Sokolov et al. (2000) for further details. The unobscured flux density at 7510 Å, the redshifted effective wavelength of the B-band, is $``$ 0.65 $`\mu `$Jy, corresponding to an absolute magnitude of MB = $``$18.2, well below the knee of the galaxy luminosity function, MB $``$ $``$20.6 (Schechter 1976).

The star-forming rate (SFR) can be estimated in different ways. Again, we have assumed H0 = 60 km s-1 Mpc-1 and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ = 1, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ = 0. From the Hβ flux which is (3.84 $`\pm `$ 0.33) x 10-16 erg cm-2 s-1, this corresponds to (18.2 $`\pm `$ 0.6) M yr-1 (Pettini et al. 1998). From the \[O II\] 3727 Å flux (Kennicutt 1998), which is (1.79 $`\pm `$ 0.22) x 10-16 erg cm-2 s-1 we get (4.8 $`\pm `$ 0.2) M yr-1. The mean value, (11.5 $`\pm `$ 7.1) M yr-1, is much larger than the present-day rate in our Galaxy. In any case, this estimate is only a lower limit on the SFR due to the unknown rest frame host galaxy extinction. See also Sokolov et al. (2001b).

### 3.3 The multiwavelength spectrum on Dec 12.0

We have determined the flux distribution of the GRB 991208 OA on Dec 12.0, 1999 UT by means of our broad-band photometric measurements (Dec 12.2) and other data points at mm and cm wavelengths (Dec 11.6-11.8) (Fig. 6). We fitted the observed flux distribution with a power law $`F_\nu \nu ^\beta `$, where $`F_\nu `$ is the flux at frequency $`\nu `$, and $`\beta `$ is the spectral index. Optical flux at the wavelengths of $`B,V,R`$ and $`I`$ passbands has been derived substracting the contribution of the host galaxy and assuming a reddening E(B-V) = 0.016 (Schlegel et al. 1998). In converting the magnitude into flux, the effective wavelengths and normalizations given in Bessell (1979) and Bessell and Brett (1988) were used. The flux densities, are 11.5, 16.7, 22.0 and 24.2 $`\mu `$Jy at the effective wavelengths of $`B,V,R`$ and $`I`$ passbands, not corrected for possible intrinsic absorption in the host galaxy. The fit to the optical data Fν $``$ $`\nu ^\beta `$ gives $`\beta =1.05\pm 0.09`$ ($`\chi ^2/`$dof = 5.7). This about 2$`\sigma `$ above the value of $`\beta =0.77\pm 0.14`$ given on Dec 16.6 with the Keck telescope (Bloom et al. 1999b) and $`\beta =1.4\pm 0.4`$ for the spectral index between optical to IR wavelengths (that differs from the one given by Sagar et al. 2000) when considering $`\alpha _2`$.

From the maximum observed flux (Shepherd et al. 1999), we derive a rough value of $`\nu _m`$ $``$ 100 GHz. The low-frequency spectrum below $`\nu _m`$ ($`F_\nu \nu ^{1/3}`$) is in agreement with the expected tail of the synchrotron radiation plus a self absorption that becomes important below a critical frequency $`\nu _a`$ $``$ 13 GHz, taking into account that $`F_\nu `$ $``$ $`\nu ^{1.4}`$ in the range 4.86-8.46 GHz (Frail et al. 1999), deviating from $`F_\nu \nu ^{1/3}`$ as seen for 15 GHz $`<`$ $`\nu `$ $`<`$ 100 GHz (Pooley et al. 1999). Much more accurate estimates for $`\nu _a`$ and $`\nu _m`$ are given by Galama et al. (2000a). Above $`\nu _m`$, the IRAM observations (Bremer et al. 1999a,b) indicate a Fν $``$ $`\nu ^{0.6}`$, with a cooling frequency 3 $`\times `$ 1011 GHz $`<`$ $`\nu _c`$ $`<`$ 3 $`\times `$ 1014 GHz. Then we expect a slope between $`\nu _m`$ and $`\nu _c`$ of $`\beta `$ = (p$``$1)/2 = 0.68 $`\pm `$ 0.06, consistent with the observed value. As we have already mentioned, if the $`p`$ = 2.3 jet model is correct, by this time (Dec 12.0 UT), the cooling break should be already below the optical band, with an optical synchrotron spectrum $`F_\nu `$ $``$ $`\nu ^{p/2}`$ = $`\nu ^{1.15}`$ that is in agreement with our optical data ($`\beta =1.05\pm 0.09`$). Therefore our Dec 12.0 observations support a jet model with $`p`$ = 2.30 $`\pm `$ 0.07, marginally consistent with $`p`$ = 2.52 $`\pm `$ 0.13 as proposed by Galama et al. (2000a) on the basis of a fit to the multiwavelength spectra from the radio to the R-band data.

## 4 Conclusion

Most currently popular theories imply a direct correlation between star formation and GRB activity. How does GRB 991208 fit into this picture ? The angular coincidence of the OA and the faint host argues against a compact binary merger origin of this event (Fryer et al. 1999) and in favor of the involvement of a massive star (Bodenhaimer and Woosley 1983, Woosley 1993, Dar and De Rújula 2001). The very rapid photometric decline of the afterglow of GRB 991208 provided hope for the detection of the much fainter light contamination from the underlying supernova, what we have confirmed on the basis of the late-time R-band measurements, thus giving further support to the massive star origin. There are still many unsolved riddles about GRBs, like the second break in the light curve of this event, i.e. responsible for the steep decay seen after 5 days. The community continues to chase GRB afterglows, and with every new event we make progress by finding more clues and creating even more new puzzles.

Acknowledgements. The Calar Alto German-Spanish Observatory is operated jointly by the Max-Planck Institut für Astronomie in Heidelberg, and the Comisión Nacional de Astronomía, Madrid. The Sierra Nevada Telescope is operated by the Instituto de Astrofísica de Andalucía (IAA). The Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT) is operated on the island of La Palma jointly by Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos (ORM) of the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias (IAC). The data presented here have been taken using ALFOSC, which is owned by the IAA and operated at the NOT under agreement between the IAA and the NBIfA of the Astronomical Observatory of Copenhagen. This paper is also based on observations made with the Italian Telescopio Nazionale Galileo (TNG) operated on the island of La Palma by the Centro Galileo Galilei of the CNAA (Consorzio Nazionale per l’Astronomia e l’Astrofisica) at the Spanish ORM of the IAC. We thank P. Garnavich and A. Noriega-Crespo for making available to us the VATT image taken on Dec. 12.52 UT, A. Fruchter for his comments and appreciate the generous allocation of observing time at the Calar Alto, Roque and Teide observatories. We are grateful to R. Gredel, U. Thiele, J. Aceituno, A. Aguirre, M. Alises, F. Hoyos, F. Prada and S. Pedraz for their support at Calar Alto, C. Packham (INT Group) for his help to obtain the WHT spectra, the TNG staff for their support and to J. M. Trigo (Univ. Jaime I) for pointing us the existence of the German meteor films. KH is grateful for Ulysses support under JPL Contract 95805. J. Gorosabel acknowledges the receipt of a Marie Curie Research Grant from the European Commission. This research was partially supported by the Danish Natural Science Research Council (SNF) and by a Spanish CICYT grant ESP95-0389-C02-02. V. V. Sokolov, T. A. Fatkhullin and V. N. Komarova thank the RFBR N98-02-16542 (”Astronomy” Foundation grant 97/1.2.6.4) and INTAS N96-0315 for financial support of this work.


format: text

text:
# COLOURED EXTENSION OF 𝐺𝐿_𝑞(2) AND ITS DUAL ALGEBRA

## 1 Introduction

The quantum group $`GL_q(2)`$ is known to admit a coloured extension by introducing some continuously varying colour parameters associated to the generators. In such an extension, the associated algebra and the coalgebra are defined in a way that all Hopf algebraic properties remain preserved. Such extensions have been introduced in ge ; bh ; oht  and studied by various authors kb ; jagan ; quesne ; preeti  in recent years. However, some of the basic algebro-geometric structure underlying these coloured extensions still needs to be established. As such, we shall focus on the coloured extension of the most intuitive quantum group $`GL_q(2)`$. While some aspects of this example have already been studied from both, the standard $`q`$-deformations as well as the Jordanian (nonstandard) $`h`$-deformations quesne ; preeti , it has only recently been shown deeps  that the contraction procedure could be used to obtain the coloured Jordanian quantum groups from their coloured $`q`$-deformed counterparts. In particular, the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$ was treated in detail in deeps  to obtain a new coloured extension of Jordanian $`GL_h(2)`$.
In the present paper, we investigate the algebra dual to the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$ by generalising two well-known approaches to the problem: the (algebraic) $`R`$-matrix approach frt  and the geometric approach sud ; dob  due to Sudbery and Dobrev. We first clarify the notion of duality between a coloured quantum group and its dual i.e. the coloured quantised universal enveloping algebra. We then generalise the $`R`$-matrix approach to establish duality for the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$ and we obtain a new coloured quantum algebra corresponding to $`gl(2)`$ and exhibit its Hopf algebra structure. The coloured $`R`$-matrix procedure naturally leads us to formulate a constructive differential calculus jurco  on the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$.
Furthermore, we propose a coloured generalisation of the geometric notion of duality for quantum groups i.e. regarding the dual algebra as the algebra of tangent vectors at the identity of the group. This generalisation could also be of significance in establishing the duality for the coloured extension of Jordanian quantum groups.

## 2 Coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$

The coloured extension of the quantum group $`GL_q(2)`$ is governed by the coloured $`R`$-matrix kb ,

$$R_q^{\lambda ,\mu }=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}q^{1(\lambda \mu )}& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& q^{\lambda +\mu }& 0& 0\\ 0& qq^1& q^{(\lambda +\mu )}& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& q^{1+(\lambda \mu )}\end{array}\right)$$
(1)
which is nonadditive i.e. $`R^{\lambda ,\mu }R(\lambda \mu )`$. It satisfies the so-called coloured quantum Yang-Baxter equation

$$R_{12}^{\lambda ,\mu }R_{13}^{\lambda ,\nu }R_{23}^{\mu ,\nu }=R_{23}^{\mu ,\nu }R_{13}^{\lambda ,\nu }R_{12}^{\lambda ,\mu }$$
(2)
which is in general multicomponent and $`\lambda `$, $`\mu `$, $`\nu `$ are considered as ‘colour’ variables. The $`RTT`$ relations are also extended to incorporate the coloured extension as

$$R_q^{\lambda ,\mu }T_{1\lambda }T_{2\mu }=T_{2\mu }T_{1\lambda }R_q^{\lambda ,\mu }$$
(3)
(where $`T_{1\lambda }=T_\lambda \mathrm{𝟏}`$ and $`T_{2\mu }=\mathrm{𝟏}T_\mu `$) in which the entries of the $`T`$ matrices carry colour dependence i.e. $`T_\lambda =\left(\begin{array}{cc}a_\lambda & b_\lambda \\ c_\lambda & d_\lambda \end{array}\right)`$, $`T_\mu =\left(\begin{array}{cc}a_\mu & b_\mu \\ c_\mu & d_\mu \end{array}\right)`$. The coproduct and counit for the coalgebra structure are given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }(T_\lambda )=T_\lambda \dot{}T_\lambda `$, $`\epsilon (T_\lambda )=\mathrm{𝟏}`$. The quantum determinant $`D_\lambda =a_\lambda d_\lambda r^{(1+2\lambda )}c_\lambda b_\lambda `$ is group-like but not central. The antipode is given by

$$S(T_\lambda )=D_\lambda ^1\left(\begin{array}{cc}d_\lambda & r^{1+2\lambda }b_\lambda \\ r^{12\lambda }c_\lambda & a_\lambda \end{array}\right)$$
(4)
and depends on one colour variable at a time. The full Hopf algebraic structure can be constructed resulting in a coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$ within the framework of the $`FRT`$ formalism. Since $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ are continuous variables, this implies the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$ has an infinite number of generators. The colourless limit $`\lambda =\mu =0`$ gives back the ordinary single-parameter deformed quantum group $`GL_q(2)`$, and the monochromatic limit $`\lambda =\mu 0`$ gives rise to the uncoloured two-parameter deformed quantum group $`GL_{p,q}(2)`$.

## 3 Duality (R-matrix approach)

In this section, we investigate in detail the dual structure for the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$ employing the $`R`$-matrix approach. In doing so, let us denote the generators of the yet unknown dual algebra by $`\{A_\lambda ,B_\lambda ,C_\lambda ,D_\lambda \}`$ and $`\{A_\mu ,B_\mu ,C_\mu ,D_\mu \}`$. The following pairings hold

$$A_{\lambda |\mu },a_{\lambda |\mu }=B_{\lambda |\mu },b_{\lambda |\mu }=C_{\lambda |\mu },c_{\lambda |\mu }=D_{\lambda |\mu },d_{\lambda |\mu }=\mathrm{𝟏}$$
(5)
All other pairings give zeroes and the notation $`\lambda |\mu `$ in the subscript in the above relations means either $`\lambda `$ or $`\mu `$. The $`R^+`$ and $`R^{}`$ matrices corresponding to the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$ are

$`R^+`$ $`=`$ $`c^+q^{1/2}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}q^{1/2}q^{1\lambda +\mu }& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& q^{1/2}q^{(\lambda +\mu )}& q^{1/2}(qq^1)& 0\\ 0& 0& q^{1/2}q^{\lambda +\mu }& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& q^{1/2}q^{1+\lambda \mu }\end{array}\right)`$ (6)
$`R^{}`$ $`=`$ $`c^{}q^{1/2}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}q^{1/2}q^{(1\lambda +\mu )}& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& q^{1/2}q^{(\lambda +\mu )}& 0& 0\\ 0& q^{1/2}(qq^1)& q^{1/2}q^{\lambda +\mu }& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& q^{1/2}q^{(1+\lambda \mu )}\end{array}\right)`$ (7)
where $`R^+=c^+R_{21}`$ and $`R^{}=c^{}R_{12}^1`$ by definition. The coloured $`L^\pm `$ functionals can be expressed as

$`L_{\lambda (\mu )}^+`$ $`=`$ $`c^+q^{1/2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}q^{H_{\lambda (\mu )}/2}q^{\mu H_{\lambda (\mu )}\lambda H_{\lambda (\mu )}^{}}& q^{1/2}(qq^1)C_{\lambda (\mu )}\\ 0& q^{H_{\lambda (\mu )}/2}q^{\mu H_{\lambda (\mu )}+\lambda H_{\lambda (\mu )}^{}}\end{array}\right)`$ (8)
$`L_{\lambda (\mu )}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`c^{}q^{1/2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}q^{H_{\lambda (\mu )}/2}q^{\lambda H_{\lambda (\mu )}\mu H_{\lambda (\mu )}^{}}& 0\\ q^{1/2}(q^1q)B_{\lambda (\mu )}& q^{H_{\lambda (\mu )}/2}q^{\lambda H_{\lambda (\mu )}+\mu H_{\lambda (\mu )}^{}}\end{array}\right)`$ (9)
where $`H_\lambda =A_\lambda D_\lambda `$, $`H_\lambda ^{}=A_\lambda +D_\lambda `$ and $`H_\mu =A_\mu D_\mu `$, $`H_\mu ^{}=A_\mu +D_\mu `$. The notation $`\lambda (\mu )`$ in the subscript means $`\lambda `$ (respectively $`\mu `$). So, $`L_{\lambda (\mu )}^+`$ means $`L_\lambda ^+`$ (resp. $`L_\mu ^+`$) Each one of $`L_\lambda ^\pm `$ and $`L_\mu ^\pm `$ depends on both $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$. The notation $`L_\lambda ^\pm `$ implies that the generators of the dual carry $`\lambda `$ dependence, and similarly $`L_\mu ^\pm `$ implies that the generators of the dual carry $`\mu `$ dependence. The duality pairings are then given by the action of the functionals $`L_\lambda ^\pm `$ and $`L_\mu ^\pm `$ on the $`T`$-matrices $`T_\lambda `$ and $`T_\mu `$

$`(L_{\lambda |\mu }^+)_b^a(T_{\lambda |\mu })_d^c=(R^+)_{bd}^{ac}`$ (10)
$`(L_{\lambda |\mu }^{})_b^a(T_{\lambda |\mu })_d^c=(R^{})_{bd}^{ac}`$ (11)
Again, according to the notation introduced $`T_{\lambda |\mu }`$ implies $`T_\lambda `$ or $`T_\mu `$ and $`L_{\lambda |\mu }^\pm `$ implies $`L_\lambda ^\pm `$ or $`L_\mu ^\pm `$. For vanishing colour variables, the coloured $`L^\pm `$ functionals reduce to the ordinary $`L^\pm `$ functionals for $`GL_q(2)`$. The commutation relations of the algebra dual to a coloured quantum group can be obtained from the modified or the coloured $`RLL`$ relations

$`R_{12}L_{2\lambda }^\pm L_{1\mu }^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`L_{1\mu }^\pm L_{2\lambda }^\pm R_{12}`$ (12)
$`R_{12}L_{2\lambda }^+L_{1\mu }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`L_{1\mu }^{}L_{2\lambda }^+R_{12}`$ (13)
using the coloured $`L^\pm `$ functionals where $`L_{1\mu }^\pm =L_\mu ^\pm \mathrm{𝟏}`$ and $`L_{2\lambda }^\pm =\mathrm{𝟏}L_\lambda ^\pm `$. Using the above formulae, we obtain the commutation relations between the generating elements of the algebra dual to the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$.

$$\begin{array}{ccc}[A_\lambda ,B_\mu ]=B_\mu \hfill & [D_\lambda ,B_\mu ]=B_\mu \hfill & \\ [A_\lambda ,C_\mu ]=C_\mu \hfill & [D_\lambda ,C_\mu ]=C_\mu \hfill & \\ [A_\lambda ,D_\mu ]=0\hfill & [H_\lambda ,H_\mu ]=0\hfill & [H_\lambda ^{},]=0\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
$$q^{(\lambda +\mu )}C_\lambda B_\mu q^{\lambda +\mu }B_\mu C_\lambda =\frac{q^{\lambda H_\mu +\mu H_\lambda }}{qq^1}\left[q^{\frac{1}{2}(H_\lambda +H_\mu )}q^{\lambda H_\lambda ^{}\mu H_\mu ^{}}q^{\frac{1}{2}(H_\lambda +H_\mu )}q^{\lambda H_\lambda ^{}+\mu H_\mu ^{}}\right]$$
(15)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}A_\lambda A_\mu \hfill & =\hfill & A_\mu A_\lambda \hfill \\ B_\lambda B_\mu \hfill & =\hfill & q^{2(\mu \lambda )}B_\mu B_\lambda \hfill \\ C_\lambda C_\mu \hfill & =\hfill & q^{2(\lambda \mu )}C_\mu C_\lambda \hfill \\ D_\lambda D_\mu \hfill & =\hfill & D_\mu D_\lambda \hfill \end{array}$$
(16)
where $`H_\lambda `$ and $`H_\lambda ^{}`$ are as before. The relations satisfy the $`\lambda \mu `$ exchange symmetry. The associated coproduct of the elements of the dual algebra is given by

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(A_{\lambda (\mu )})`$ $`=`$ $`A_{\lambda (\mu )}\mathrm{𝟏}+\mathrm{𝟏}A_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ (17)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(B_{\lambda (\mu )})`$ $`=`$ $`B_{\lambda (\mu )}q^{A_{\lambda (\mu )}D_{\lambda (\mu )}}+\mathrm{𝟏}B_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ (18)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(C_{\lambda (\mu )})`$ $`=`$ $`C_{\lambda (\mu )}q^{A_{\lambda (\mu )}D_{\lambda (\mu )}}+\mathrm{𝟏}C_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ (19)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(D_{\lambda (\mu )})`$ $`=`$ $`D_{\lambda (\mu )}\mathrm{𝟏}+\mathrm{𝟏}D_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ (20)
The counit $`\epsilon (Y_{\lambda |\mu })=0;`$ where $`Y_{\lambda (\mu )}=\{A_{\lambda (\mu )},B_{\lambda (\mu )},C_{\lambda (\mu )},D_{\lambda (\mu )}\}`$ and the antipode is

$`S(A_{\lambda (\mu )})`$ $`=`$ $`A_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ (21)
$`S(B_{\lambda (\mu )})`$ $`=`$ $`B_{\lambda (\mu )}q^{(A_{\lambda (\mu )}D_{\lambda (\mu )})}`$ (22)
$`S(C_{\lambda (\mu )})`$ $`=`$ $`C_{\lambda (\mu )}q^{(A_{\lambda (\mu )}D_{\lambda (\mu )})}`$ (23)
$`S(D_{\lambda (\mu )})`$ $`=`$ $`D_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ (24)
Thus we have defined a new single-parameter coloured quantum algebra corresponding to $`gl(2)`$, which in the monochromatic limit defines the standard uncoloured two-parameter quantum algebra for $`gl(2)`$.

## 4 Constructive calculus

We now proceed towards a coloured generalisation of the constructive differential calculus jurco ; cast  for the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$. Analogous to the standard uncoloured quantum group, a bimodule $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (space of quantum one-forms $`\omega `$) is characterised by the commutation relations between $`\omega `$ and $`a_{\lambda (\mu )}𝒜`$, the coloured quantum group corresponding to $`GL_q(2)`$

$$\omega a_{\lambda (\mu )}=(\mathrm{𝟏}f_{\lambda ,\mu })\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{\lambda (\mu )})\omega $$
(25)
and the linear functional $`f_{\lambda ,\mu }`$ is defined in terms of the coloured $`L^\pm `$ matrices

$$f_{\lambda ,\mu }=S(L_{\lambda |\mu }^+)L_{\lambda |\mu }^{}$$
(26)
Thus, we have

$$\omega a_{\lambda (\mu )}=[(\mathrm{𝟏}S(L_{\lambda |\mu }^+)L_{\lambda |\mu }^{})\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{\lambda (\mu )})]\omega $$
(27)
In terms of components, this can be written as

$$\omega _{ij}a_{\lambda (\mu )}=[(\mathrm{𝟏}S(l_{(\lambda |\mu )ki}^+)l_{(\lambda |\mu )jl}^{})\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{\lambda (\mu )})]\omega _{kl}$$
(28)
using the expressions $`L^\pm =l_{ij}^\pm `$ and $`\omega =\omega _{ij}`$ where $`i,j=1,2`$. From these relations, one can obtain the commutation relations of all the left-invariant one-forms with the elements of the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$ The left-invariant vector fields $`\chi _{ij}`$ on $`𝒜`$ are given by the expression

$$\chi _{ij}=S(l_{(\lambda |\mu )ik}^+)l_{(\lambda |\mu )kj}^{}\delta _{ij}\epsilon $$
(29)
The vector fields act on the elements $`a_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ of the coloured quantum group as

$$\chi _{ij}a_{\lambda (\mu )}=(S(l_{(\lambda |\mu )ik}^+)l_{(\lambda |\mu )kj}^{}\delta _{ij}\epsilon )a_{\lambda (\mu )}$$
(30)
Furthermore, using the formula $`𝐝a_{\lambda (\mu )}=_i(\chi _ia_{\lambda (\mu )})\omega ^i`$, we obtain the action of the exterior derivative on the generating elements

$`𝐝a_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ $`=`$ $`(𝗌q^{2+2(\lambda \mu )}1)a_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^1+𝗌(q^1q)q^{\lambda +\mu }b_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^+`$
$`+(𝗌1)a_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^2`$
$`𝐝b_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ $`=`$ $`(𝗌(q^1q)^2+𝗌1)b_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^1+𝗌(q^1q)q^{(\lambda +\mu )}a_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^{}`$
$`+(𝗌q^{2+2(\mu \lambda )}1)b_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^2`$
$`𝐝c_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ $`=`$ $`(𝗌q^{2+2(\lambda \mu )}1)c_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^1+𝗌(q^1q)q^{\lambda +\mu }d_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^+`$
$`+(𝗌1)c_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^2`$
$`𝐝d_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ $`=`$ $`(𝗌(q^1q)^2+𝗌1)d_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^1+𝗌(q^1q)q^{(\lambda +\mu )}c_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^{}`$
$`+(𝗌q^{2+2(\mu \lambda )}1)d_{\lambda (\mu )}\omega ^2`$
where $`\omega ^1=\omega _{11}`$, $`\omega ^+=\omega _{12}`$, $`\omega ^{}=\omega _{21}`$, $`\omega ^2=\omega _{22}`$ and $`𝗌=(c^+)^1c^{}`$. $`𝐝𝒜`$ generates $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as a left $`𝒜`$-module. This defines a first order differential calculus $`(\mathrm{\Gamma },𝐝)`$ on the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$. Since the colour variables $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ are continuously varying, the differential calculus obtained is infinite-dimensional. The differential calculus on the uncoloured single-parameter quantum group $`GL_q(2)`$ is easily recovered in the colourless limit and that of the uncoloured two-parameter quantum group $`GL_{p,q}(2)`$ in the monochromatic limit.

## 5 Dual basis (Geometric Approach)

It is well-known that two bialgebras $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒜`$ are in duality if there exists a doubly nondegenerate bilinear form

$$,:𝒰𝒜𝐂;,:(u,a)u,a;u𝒰,a𝒜$$
(35)
such that for $`u,v𝒰`$ and $`a,b𝒜`$, we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}u,ab=\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒰(u),ab\hfill & \\ uv,a=uv,\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒜(a)\hfill & \end{array}$$
(36)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒰,a=\epsilon _𝒜(a)\hfill & \\ u,\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜=\epsilon _𝒰(u)\hfill & \end{array}$$
(37)
For the two bialgebras to be in duality as Hopf algebras, $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒜`$ further satisfy

$$S_𝒰(u),a=u,S_𝒜(a)$$
(38)
It is enough to define the pairing between the generating elements of the two algebras. Pairing for any other elements of $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒜`$ follows from these relations and the bilinear form inherited by the tensor product. The geometric approach for duality for quantum groups was motivated by the fact that, at the classical level, an element of the Lie algebra corresponding to a Lie group is a tangent vector at the identity of the Lie group. Let $``$ be a given Hopf algebra generated by non-commuting elements $`a`$, $`b`$, $`c`$, $`d`$. The $`q`$-analogue of tangent vector at the identity would then be obtained by first differentiating the elements of the given Hopf algebra $``$ (polynomials in $`a`$, $`b`$, $`c`$, $`d`$) and then putting $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)`$ later on (i.e., taking the counit operation analogous to the unit element at the group level). The elements thus obtained would belong to the dual Hopf algebra $`^{}`$. The approach is due to Sudbery sud  and Dobrev dob  and has proved to be quite a powerful tool in understanding the quantum group duality from a geometric point of view. In what follows in this section, we propose to give a coloured generalisation of such a geometric picture of duality using the example of $`GL_q(2)`$. Let $`𝒜_q^{\lambda ,\mu }`$ denote the coloured extension of $`GL_q(2)`$. Then, as a Hopf algebra $`𝒜_q^{\lambda ,\mu }`$ is generated by elements $`y_\lambda =\{a_\lambda ,b_\lambda ,c_\lambda ,d_\lambda \}`$ and $`y_\mu =\{a_\mu ,b_\mu ,c_\mu ,d_\mu \}`$. The dual basis is given by all monomials of the form

$$\begin{array}{cc}g_\lambda =g_{\lambda ;klmn}=a_\lambda ^kd_\lambda ^lb_\lambda ^mc_\lambda ^n\hfill & \\ g_\mu =g_{\mu ;klmn}=a_\mu ^kd_\mu ^lb_\mu ^mc_\mu ^n\hfill & \end{array}$$
(39)
where $`k,l,m,nZ_+`$, and $`\delta _{0000}`$ is the unit of the algebra $`\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜`$. We use a normal ordering as follows; first put the diagonal elements from the $`T_{\lambda (\mu )}`$\- matrix then use the lexicographic order for the others. Let $`𝒰_q^{\lambda ,\mu }`$ be the algebra generated by tangent vectors at the identity of $`𝒜_q^{\lambda ,\mu }`$. Then $`𝒰_q^{\lambda ,\mu }`$ is dually paired with $`𝒜_q^{\lambda ,\mu }`$. The pairing is defined through the coloured $`q`$-tangent vectors as follows

$`Y_\lambda ,g_\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g_\lambda }{y_\lambda }}|_{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a_\lambda & b_\lambda \\ c_\lambda & d_\lambda \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)}=\epsilon ({\displaystyle \frac{g_\lambda }{y_\lambda }})`$ (40)
$`Y_\mu ,g_\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g_\lambda }{y_\lambda }}|_{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a_\lambda & b_\lambda \\ c_\lambda & d_\lambda \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)}=\epsilon ({\displaystyle \frac{g_\lambda }{y_\lambda }})`$ (41)
$`Y_\lambda ,g_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g_\mu }{y_\mu }}|_{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a_\mu & b_\mu \\ c_\mu & d_\mu \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)}=\epsilon ({\displaystyle \frac{g_\mu }{y_\mu }})`$ (42)
$`Y_\mu ,g_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g_\mu }{y_\mu }}|_{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a_\mu & b_\mu \\ c_\mu & d_\mu \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)}=\epsilon ({\displaystyle \frac{g_\mu }{y_\mu }})`$ (43)
where $`Y_\lambda =\{A_\lambda ,B_\lambda ,C_\lambda ,D_\lambda \}`$ and $`Y_\mu =\{A_\mu ,B_\mu ,C_\mu ,D_\mu \}`$ are the sets of generating elements of the dual algebra (which has unit $`\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒰`$). More compactly, one can write

$$Y_{\lambda |\mu },g_{\lambda (\mu )}=\epsilon (\frac{g_{\lambda (\mu )}}{y_{\lambda (\mu )}})$$
(44)
Explicitly, we obtain

$`A_{\lambda |\mu },g_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ $`=`$ $`\epsilon ({\displaystyle \frac{g_{\lambda (\mu )}}{a_{\lambda (\mu )}}})=k\delta _{m0}\delta _{n0}`$ (45)
$`B_{\lambda |\mu },g_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ $`=`$ $`\epsilon ({\displaystyle \frac{g_{\lambda (\mu )}}{b_{\lambda (\mu )}}})=\delta _{m1}\delta _{n0}`$ (46)
$`C_{\lambda |\mu },g_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ $`=`$ $`\epsilon ({\displaystyle \frac{g_{\lambda (\mu )}}{c_{\lambda (\mu )}}})=\delta _{m0}\delta _{n1}`$ (47)
$`D_{\lambda |\mu },g_{\lambda (\mu )}`$ $`=`$ $`\epsilon ({\displaystyle \frac{g_{\lambda (\mu )}}{d_{\lambda (\mu )}}})=l\delta _{m0}\delta _{n0}`$ (48)
where differentiation is from the right. As a consequence of the above pairings, the following relations hold

$`A_{\lambda |\mu },T_{\lambda |\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right)`$ (49)
$`B_{\lambda |\mu },T_{\lambda |\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right)`$ (50)
$`C_{\lambda |\mu },T_{\lambda |\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)`$ (51)
$`D_{\lambda |\mu },T_{\lambda |\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)`$ (52)
where $`T_\lambda =\left(\begin{array}{cc}a_\lambda & b_\lambda \\ c_\lambda & d_\lambda \end{array}\right)`$ and $`T_\mu =\left(\begin{array}{cc}a_\mu & b_\mu \\ c_\mu & d_\mu \end{array}\right)`$ as before. Furthermore,

$$Y_{\lambda |\mu },\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒜=0;\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒰,g_{\lambda |\mu }=\epsilon _𝒜(g_{\lambda |\mu })=\delta _{m0}\delta _{n0}$$
(53)
The action of the monomials in $`𝒰_q^{\lambda ,\mu }`$ on $`g_\lambda `$ and $`g_\mu `$ then lead to the coloured $`q`$-commutation relations between the generators of the dual algebra.

## 6 Concluding remarks

We have investigated the structure of the coloured extension of the quantum group $`GL_q(2)`$ and its dual algebra. After establishing the notion of duality, the dual algebra has been derived explicitly using the $`R`$-matrix approach. We not only obtain a new coloured quantum algebra corresponding to $`gl(2)`$ but also show that such a coloured generalisation of the $`R`$-matrix approach leads to formulating a constructive differential calculus for the coloured case. The colourless and the monochromatic limits of both the dual algebra as well as the differential calculus are in agreement with already known results for $`GL_q(2)`$ and $`GL_{p,q}(2)`$.
In the later part of the paper, we have proposed a generalisation of the geometric picture of duality to incorporate the coloured extensions of quantum groups. It would be interesting to investigate in detail this setting in the context of the coloured Jordanian quantum groups. The results easily extend to the higher-dimensional and multi-parametric cases.


text:
# The influence of the oscillations of the chemical potential on the de Haas - van Alphen effect in quasi-two-dimensional compounds

## Abstract

The de Haas - van Alphen effect in quasi-two-dimensional metals is studied at arbitrary parameters. The oscillations of the chemical potential may substantially change the temperature dependence of harmonic amplitudes that is usually used to determine the effective electron mass. Hence, the processing of the experimental data using the standard Lifshitz-Kosevich formula (that assumes the chemical potential to be constant) may lead to substantial errors even in the limit of strong harmonic damping. This fact may explain the difference between the effective electron masses, determined from the de Haas - van Alphen effect and the cyclotron resonance measurements. The oscillations of the chemical potential and the deviations from the Lifshitz-Kosevich formula depend on the reservoir density of states, that exists in organic metals due to open sheets of Fermi surface. This dependence can be used to determine the density of electron states on open sheets of Fermi surface. We present the analytical results of the calculations of harmonic amplitudes in some limiting cases that show the importance of the oscillations of the chemical potential. The algorithm of the simple numerical calculation of the harmonic amplitudes at arbitrary reservoir density of states, arbitrary warping, spin-splitting, temperature and Dingle temperature is also described.

The quantum magnetization oscillations (or the de Haas - van Alphen (dHvA) effect) was discovered long ago and has been used a lot as a powerful tool for studying the Fermi surfaces and single electron properties in metals. In three dimensional (3D) metal the good quantitative description of this effect is given by the Lifshitz-Kosevich(L-K) formula . In two- or quasi-two-dimensional compounds the deviations from the L-K formula are possible for three reasons: the harmonic damping in two-dimensional (2D) case is different, the impurity scattering may not be described by the usual Dingle law and the chemical potential becomes also an oscillating function of the magnetic field. The first problem is important only when the harmonic damping is weak and can be easily solved by using the 2D harmonic expansion. The second problem concerns with an accurate calculation of the density of states (DoS) with electron-electron interactions and the impurity scattering. The electron-electron interactions are not very important when many Landau levels are occupied (we consider the case when the Fermi energy $`ϵ_F`$ is much greater than the Landau level separation and temperature). The impurity scattering in 3D case adds an imaginary part $`i\mathrm{\Gamma }(B)`$ to the electron spectrum that means that an electron may leave its quantum state with probability $`w=\mathrm{\Gamma }(B)/\pi \mathrm{}`$ per second. If one assumes this width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(B)`$ of energy levels to be independent of the magnetic field $`B`$ he gets the Dingle law of harmonic damping

$$A_l\mathrm{exp}\left(2\pi l\mathrm{\Gamma }/\mathrm{}\omega _c\right)$$

where $`A_l`$ is the amplitude of the harmonic number $`l`$ and $`\omega _c=eB/m^{}c`$ is the cyclotron frequency. This Dingle law has been proved by many experiments on 3D metals. In 2D case this law may be incorrect and the problem of the DoS distribution in 2D metals has not been solved yet, although many theoretical works have been devoted to this subject (for example, ,,). The problem is complicated because even the exact calculation of the point-like impurity scattering is not enough since the long-range impurities (and, probably, the electron-electron interactions) are also important in 2D case. The procedure of extracting the DoS distribution from the dHvA measurements has been proposed recently. In the present paper we focus on the third question, so, we assume the Dingle law to be valid and in this approximation we consider the influence of the oscillations of the chemical potential on the harmonic amplitudes of the dHvA oscillations. Since we consider the quasi-2D case, the Dingle law is not a bad approximation. We shall show that the oscillations of the chemical potential change substantially the temperature and Dingle temperature dependence of the harmonic amplitudes even in the limit of strong harmonic damping. Hence, the estimate of the effective electron mass based on the L-K formula may lead to the errors up to 30%. This can be an explanation of the difference of the effective electron masses obtained from the dHvA effect and cyclotron resonance measurements (for example, in  and ). This problem was examined numerically by N. Harrison et al. at zero warping $`W`$ of Fermi surface(FS). In this paper we derive the explicit formulas that describe the quantum magnetization oscillations at arbitrary parameters. The analytical study of this result is made in some limiting cases. It shows the importance of the oscillations of chemical potential on the harmonic amplitudes.

The energy spectrum of quasi-two-dimensional electron gas is

$$E_{n,k_z,\sigma }=\mathrm{}\omega _c(n+\frac{1}{2})+\frac{W}{2}\mathrm{cos}(k_zd)+\sigma \mu _eB$$
(1)
where $`W`$ is the warping of quasi-cylindrical Fermi surface. The DoS distribution with impurity scattering may be written as

$$\rho (E,B)=\rho _0(E,B)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }(E,B)$$

where the oscillating part of the DoS at $`E\mathrm{}\omega _c`$ is

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }(E,B)=\frac{4g}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}\underset{l=1}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^l\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi l\frac{E}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}\right)J_0\left(\pi l\frac{W}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}\right)\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi l\frac{\mu _eB}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\pi l\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}\right)$$
(2)
In this formula $`g=B/\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ is the Landau level(LL) degeneracy, the factor $`\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi l\mu _eB/\mathrm{}\omega _c\right)`$ is due to spin-splitting and the factor $`J_0\left(\pi lW/\mathrm{}\omega _c\right)`$ comes from the finite warping $`W`$ of quasi-cylindrical Fermi surface. $`J_0(x)`$ is the Bessel function of zeroth order. The last factor in (2) is the usual Dingle factor.

The non-oscillating part of the DoS

$$\rho _0(E,B)=\frac{2g}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}(1+n_R(E))$$

where $`n_R(E)`$ is the ratio of the reservoir density of states to the average DoS on quasi-2D part of FS. The reservoir density of states exists in quasi-2D organic metals due to open sheets of Fermi surface. These quasi-one-dimensional states do not contribute to magnetization oscillations since they form a continuous spectrum.

If the DoS is known one can calculate the thermodynamic potential

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(\mu ,B,T)=T_0^{\mathrm{}}\rho (E,B)\mathrm{ln}\left[1+\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mu E}{T}\right)\right]𝑑E=\mathrm{\Omega }_0(\mu ,B,T)+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}(\mu ,B,T)$$
(3)
where $`\mu (B)`$ is the chemical potential and the oscillating part of the thermodynamic potential is

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}=2gT\underset{l=1}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^l}{l}\mathrm{cos}(2\pi l\frac{\mu }{\mathrm{}\omega _c})\frac{\lambda l}{\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda l)}J_0(\pi l\frac{W}{\mathrm{}\omega _c})\mathrm{cos}(2\pi l\frac{\mu _eH}{\mathrm{}\omega _c})\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\pi l\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}\right)$$

where $`\lambda 2\pi ^2T/\mathrm{}\omega _c.`$ The total particle number is usually constant:

$$N=\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }(\mu ,B,T)}{\mu }\right)_{T,B}=_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\rho (E,B)}{1+\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{E\mu }{T}\right)}𝑑E=const$$

This is an equation on the chemical potential as a function of magnetic field. Separating the oscillating part of the DoS and substituting

$$N=_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\rho _0(E,B)}{1+\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{E\epsilon _F}{T}\right)}𝑑E$$

($`\epsilon _F`$ is the Fermi energy at zero magnetic field) we get

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}\left(\frac{1}{1+\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{E\epsilon _F}{T}\right)}\frac{1}{1+\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{E\mu }{T}\right)}\right)\rho _0(E,B)𝑑E=_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }(E,B)}{1+\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{E\mu }{T}\right)}𝑑E$$
(4)
Now we use the fact that the reservoir DoS $`n_R(E)`$ does not change appreciably on the scale of $`T`$ or $`|\mu \epsilon _F|<\mathrm{}\omega _c/2`$ (this is true if many LLs are occupied because $`n_R(E)`$ changes substantially on the scale of Fermi energy). Then $`n_R(E)n_R(\epsilon _F)=constn_R`$ . The left hand side of equation (4) now simplifies and after substitution of (2) we get the equation on the oscillating part $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }(B)`$ of the chemical potential

$$\stackrel{~}{\mu }(B)\mu (B)\epsilon _F=\frac{\mathrm{}\omega _c}{\pi (1+n_R(\epsilon _F))}\times $$
(5)
$$\times \underset{l=1}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^{l+1}}{l}\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{2\pi l(\epsilon _F+\stackrel{~}{\mu }(B))}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}\right)\frac{\lambda l}{\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda l)}\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi l\frac{\mu _eH}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}\right)\mathrm{exp}(\frac{2\pi l\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{}\omega _c})J_0\left(\pi l\frac{W}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}\right)$$

This nonlinear equation can not be solved analytically without any approximations but it determines the oscillations of the chemical potential arbitrary parameters (only $`ϵ_FT,\mathrm{}\omega _c`$ is assumed).

The magnetization oscillations at constant electron density $`N=const`$

$$M=\frac{d(\mathrm{\Omega }+N\mu )}{dB}_{N=const}=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{B}_{\mu ,N=const}$$

$$\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mu }_{N,B=const}+N\right)\frac{d\mu }{dB}_{N=const}=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{B}_{\mu ,N=const}$$

The oscillating part of the magnetization

$`\stackrel{~}{M}(B)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}}{B}}_{\mu ,N=const}={\displaystyle \frac{2g}{\pi B}}\epsilon _F{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{l+1}}{l}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda l}{\mathrm{sinh}\lambda l}}\mathrm{cos}(2\pi l{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _eH}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}})\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi l\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}})\times `$
$`\times \left\{\mathrm{sin}(2\pi l{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (B)}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}})J_0(\pi l{\displaystyle \frac{W}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}})+{\displaystyle \frac{W}{2\mu }}\mathrm{cos}(2\pi l{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (B)}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}})J_1(\pi l{\displaystyle \frac{W}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}})\right\}`$
where $`\mu (B)`$ is given by equation (5) and contains the dependence of magnetization on the reservoir DoS. The formulas (5) and (The influence of the oscillations of the chemical potential on the de Haas - van Alphen effect in quasi-two-dimensional compounds  ) describe the magnetization oscillations at arbitrary parameters. The only approximation, used in these formulas is the Dingle law of harmonic damping. In quasi-2D organic metals with warping $`W>T_D`$ the Dingle law is believed to be a quite good approximation.

The formulas (5) and (The influence of the oscillations of the chemical potential on the de Haas - van Alphen effect in quasi-two-dimensional compounds  ) are the good starting point for the numerical calculations. From these formulas we see that in the limit $`W/\mu 1`$ the oscillating parts of magnetization and chemical potential are connected by the simple relation

$$\stackrel{~}{M}(B)=\frac{\epsilon _F}{B}\frac{2g}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}(1+n_R)\stackrel{~}{\mu }(B)$$

At zero warping this was obtained in .

The nonlinear equation (5) for $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }(B)`$ can be solved analytically only in some simple approximations. We shall do this to illustrate the influence of the oscillations of the chemical potential on the temperature and Dingle temperature dependence of the harmonic amplitudes. So, we consider zero warping, zero spin-splitting and zero temperature. Then the sum in the right-hand side of equation (5) can be calculated and we get

$$\frac{x}{2}=\frac{1}{(1+n_R)}\mathrm{arctan}\left(\frac{\mathrm{sin}(y+x)}{\mathrm{cos}(y+x)+e^b}\right)$$
(7)
where $`x2\pi \stackrel{~}{\mu }(B)/\mathrm{}\omega _c`$, $`y2\pi \epsilon _F/\mathrm{}\omega _c`$ and $`b2\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }/\mathrm{}\omega _c`$.

At very large electron reservoir $`n_R=\mathrm{}`$ , $`x=0`$ and we have the limit of fixed chemical potential. In this case the magnetization is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{M}(B)=\frac{2g\epsilon _F}{\pi B}\mathrm{arctan}\left(\frac{\mathrm{sin}(y)}{e^b+\mathrm{cos}(y)}\right)$$
(8)
The temperature dependence of the harmonic amplitudes is given by the L-K formula:

$$A_l(T)=\frac{2\pi ^2Tl/\mathrm{}\omega _c}{\mathrm{sinh}(2\pi ^2Tl/\mathrm{}\omega _c)}$$
(9)
It is possible to solve analytically the equation (7) also at $`n_R=0`$ and $`n_R=1`$. At zero electron reservoir $`n_R=0`$ the solution of this equation is

$$\frac{x}{2}=\pi \frac{\stackrel{~}{\mu }(B)}{\mathrm{}\omega _c}=\mathrm{arctan}\left(\frac{\mathrm{sin}(y)}{e^b\mathrm{cos}(y)}\right)$$

It gives the oscillations of the chemical potential. The magnetization at zero electron reservoir

$$\stackrel{~}{M}(B)=\frac{2g\epsilon _F}{\pi B}\mathrm{arctan}\left(\frac{\mathrm{sin}(y)}{e^b\mathrm{cos}(y)}\right)$$
(10)
It coincides with (8) after the phase shift $`yy+\pi `$ and the sign change $`\stackrel{~}{M}\stackrel{~}{M}`$ . This means that the harmonic damping law

$$A_l(1/l)\mathrm{exp}\left(lb\right)$$
(11)
does not change, and only the sign of all even harmonics turns to inverse. This symmetry between the cases of fixed chemical potential $`\mu =const`$ and constant particle density $`N=const`$ is a feature of special exponential law of harmonic damping. Any finite temperature and the density of electron reservoir breaks this symmetry.

Let us consider now the intermediate case $`n_R=1`$. The equation (7) becomes

$$\frac{\mathrm{sin}x}{\mathrm{cos}x}=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(y+x)}{\mathrm{cos}(y+x)+e^b}$$
(12)
It gives

$$x=\mathrm{arcsin}\left(e^b\mathrm{sin}y\right)$$

and the magnetization becomes

$$\stackrel{~}{M}(y)=\frac{g\epsilon _F}{\pi B}\mathrm{arcsin}\left(e^b\mathrm{sin}y\right)$$
(13)
To say how the harmonic damping has changed we have to calculate the amplitudes of several first harmonics of this expression.

The amplitude of the first harmonic is

$$A_1(b)=\frac{1}{\pi }_\pi ^\pi \mathrm{arcsin}\left(e^b\mathrm{sin}y\right)\mathrm{sin}ydy$$

after integration by parts we get

$$A_1(b)=\frac{4}{\pi }_0^{\pi /2}\frac{\mathrm{cos}^2ye^bdy}{\sqrt{1e^{2b}\mathrm{sin}^2y}}$$

This is the superposition of two elliptic integrals:

$$A_1(b)=\frac{4}{\pi }\left[e^bE(e^b)2\mathrm{sinh}bK(e^b)\right]$$
(14)
At $`b1`$ the deviations of $`A_1(b)`$ from the L-K formula are small:

$$A_1(b)=e^b+e^{3b}/8+..$$

In the opposite limit $`b1`$ we get

$$A_1(b)=\frac{4}{\pi }\left\{1b\left(\mathrm{ln}\frac{4}{\sqrt{2b}}\frac{1}{2}\right)+O(b^2)\right\}$$
(15)
This is substantially different from the L-K dependence $`A_1(b)=\mathrm{exp}(b)1b`$. For example, the value $`A_1(0)`$ is $`4/\pi `$ times larger than the L-K prediction.

The amplitudes of the next harmonics reveal the stronger deviation from the L-K formula (11). All even harmonics disappear since the expression (13 ) has the symmetries $`\stackrel{~}{M}(\pi y)=\stackrel{~}{M}(y)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{M}(y)=\stackrel{~}{M}(y).`$

The amplitude of third harmonic can also be calculated. At $`b1`$, $`e^b1,`$

$$A_3(b)=e^{3b}/12+O(e^{5b})$$

This result is in contrast to the cases $`n_R=0`$ or $`n_R=\mathrm{}`$ where we had $`A_3(b)=e^{3b}/3`$ . It is not surprising since in the symmetric case $`n_R=1`$ the oscillations should be much smoother and more sinusoidal. Hence one should have an increase of first harmonic and a decrease of higher harmonics. At $`b=0`$

$$A_3(0)=\frac{4}{3\pi }_0^{\pi /2}\frac{\mathrm{cos}3y\mathrm{cos}ydy}{\mathrm{cos}y}=\frac{4}{9\pi }$$
(16)
which is $`2.35`$ times less than the Lifshitz-Kosevich prediction $`A_3(0)=1/3`$ and has the opposite sign. So, in the case $`n_R=1`$ the first harmonic is increased while the others are strongly decreased in amplitude compared to the cases of zero and infinite electron reservoir. The deviation from the L-K formula reduces as the warping of FS increases. The above analysis shows also that the harmonic ratios at low temperature and Dingle temperature can give a quantitative estimate of the electron reservoir density which is much more precise than just a note about the slope of the magnetization curve.

To include correct temperature dependence, warping and spin-splitting and consider arbitrary reservoir density one can perform the numerical calculations, based on the solution of the equation (5) for the chemical potential and substitution of this solution into the formula (The influence of the oscillations of the chemical potential on the de Haas - van Alphen effect in quasi-two-dimensional compounds  ) for the magnetization. This can be done at arbitrary parameters, available on the experiment. The temperature dependence of the first three harmonic amplitudes is given in fig.1 for the following set of parameters, close to the real experiments on $`\alpha `$-$`(BEDTTTF)_2KHg(SCN)_4`$: the reservoir density $`n_R=1`$, the dHvA frequency $`F=700`$ Tesla, the effective mass $`m^{}=2m_0`$, the Dingle temperature $`T_D=0.2K`$ and the warping $`W=1K`$. We see the substantial deviation from the Lifshitz-Kosevich dependence. The obtained amplitude of the first harmonic at $`T0`$ is about $`1.1`$ times larger than the Lifshitz-Kosevich prediction. If we put also $`T_D0`$ and $`W0`$ their ratio becomes $`4/\pi =1.27`$ in agreement with the analytical result (15). The second harmonic amplitude is close to zero at $`T=0`$. The amplitude of the third harmonic changes the sign at $`T0.8K`$ and deviates very strongly from the L-K formula. It is damped much stronger than the L-K predictions. At $`T=0`$ and $`W=0`$ it also coincides with the prediction (16).

To conclude, it was shown both analytically and numerically that the oscillations of the chemical potential are essential for the temperature dependence of harmonic amplitudes of dHvA oscillations in quasi-two-dimensional compounds. The accurate determination of the effective electron mass from the dHvA effect should take this effect into account. This can be done by the simple numerical calculation based on the formulas (5) and (The influence of the oscillations of the chemical potential on the de Haas - van Alphen effect in quasi-two-dimensional compounds  ). The oscillations of the chemical potential depend on the reservoir density of states according to the formula (5). This fact may be used for the estimate of the reservoir density of states in organic metals.

The author thanks A.M. Dyugaev and M.V. Kartsovnik for useful discussions. The work was supported by RFBR grant N 00-02-17729a.