text:
# Spin Effects and Transport in Quantum Dots with overlapping Resonances

## I  Introduction.

In this paper we consider the transmission through a multilevel quantum dot LKCM  having only one broad level well coupled to the leads. Such a model has been suggested in Ref. SI  in order to provide an explanation for the behavior of the transmission phase through a quantum dot observed in the experiment Ref. Heiblum2 . Within that model, electrons are transferred from the leads to the broad level in the quantum dot within the charging peaks, and are then transferred to and ”stored” in the narrow levels via sharp transitions in-between peaks. Thus the charging (or conductance) peaks are very similar to each other, in the behaviors of both the conductance and the transmission phase. In the present paper we treat the effects associated with the spin-degeneracy of the levels for such QD-s.

Many of the sharp rearrangements of the electronic configuration in the QD, which we will consider, take place due to spin, or are sufficiently modified compared to the spinless case to make the discussion of spin rather interesting. The strong coupling of one level to the leads leads now to the tendency to have this “valence” level either doubly occupied or completely empty. However, the total number of electrons in the dot may change only by one at any charging resonance. In particular the resolution of this formal contradiction leads to prediction of singular behavior of the conductance just at the top of charging resonance.

The peculiar temperature (bias) dependence of the Kondo effect KondoT1 ; KondoT2 ; KondoT3 , which takes place in the transport through the quantum dot with nonzero spin, may facilitate the experimental verification of our predictions. Moreover, in the experiments (see e.g. Kondo1 ; Kondo2 ; Kondo3 ) designed to observe the Kondo effect, in order to measure the conductance in the Coulomb blockade valley the dot is strongly coupled to the leads. Thus it may naturally happen that the widths of some accidentally close levels will exceed the inter level energy difference. However, the new effects which we consider in this paper either take place in the mixed valence regime, or should be seen already at the temperature sufficiently higher than the Kondo temperature.

In general, we consider the situation when the transport through the quantum dot has well defined resonance structure with pronounced peaks and Coulomb blockade valleys. However, the coupling to the leads of the single broad level is already strong enough to change the usual formation of the many-electron ground state of the dot via the consecutive occupation of single particle levels. The energetics of such a system is described in the following section. In Section III we consider the conductance of such a quantum dot in the limit of vanishing width of all narrow “spectator” levels. In the Sec. IV we investigate the smearing of the sharp features of the conductance predicted in the Sec. III due to the finite temperature or width of narrow level. Following the experimental tendency for miniaturisation of the QD-s we mainly consider only a two-level dot (with one narrow level and one having the width exceeding the interlevel energy spacing). However, in Section V we consider the effect of spin for the transport in the quantum dot having many narrow and one broad level with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ being the width of the broad level and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the interlevel spacing). Discussion and conclusions are given in the Section VI.

## II  The ground state energy.

To model the quantum dot we use the tunnelling Hamiltonian in the constant interaction ($`U`$) approximation

$`H={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\epsilon _ia_i^+a_i+U{\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{}}a_i^+a_ia_j^+a_j+`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\epsilon ^L(k)b_k^{L+}b_k^L+{\displaystyle \underset{k,j}{}}[t_j^La_j^+b_k^L+H.c.]+LR.`$
Here $`a`$ and $`b^{L(R)}`$ are the annihilation operators for the electrons in the dot and in the left(right)lead, respectively. We will use $`\epsilon (k)=k^2/2mE_F`$ and will not introduce any $`k`$ dependence of the tunnelling matrix elements $`t_j`$. All summations in eq. (II) include also the summation over spin. Only one level, $`\epsilon _1`$, is well coupled to the leads, having the width

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }_1=2\pi \underset{i=L,R}{}|t_1^i|^2dn^i/d\epsilon >\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
(2)
We take $`\mathrm{\Gamma }U`$. Since we have in mind the experiments with really very small quantum dots, let us consider only two levels in the dot (e.g. having accidentally close energies). The generalisation to many narrow levels will be considered in the Sec. V. We assume that coupling between the dot and the gate electrode is pure capacitive. Then the levels flow uniformly with the gate voltage $`d\epsilon _i/dV=const`$ and without a loss of generality we may put

$$\epsilon _1=V,\epsilon _2=V+\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
(3)
There are four charging resonances of the conductance $`G(V)`$ at $`V0,U,2U`$ and $`3U`$ (see for the review on the Coulomb blockade in quantum dots e.g. the ref. Coulomb ).

Our first aim will be to find the ground state of the system (II) at different values of $`V`$. In the limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_20`$ the number of electrons on the level $`2`$ is a good quantum number. Let us denote by $`E^{(0)},E^{(1)},E^{(2)}`$ the total energy of the lowest state of the quantum dot interacting with the leads, with the narrow level populated by, respectively, $`0,1`$ and $`2`$ electrons (more precisely, $`E^{(i)}`$ is defined as the eigenenergy of the Hamiltonian (II) minus the trivial energy of the electrons in the leads $`\epsilon (k)`$). The functions $`E^{(i)}(V)`$ evolve smoothly with the gate voltage and the (averaged) occupation number of the broad level $`1`$ also changes continuously. For example, the branch $`E^{(0)}`$ corresponds to an empty level $`1`$ at $`V<0`$, singly occupied at $`0<V<U`$ and doubly occupied at $`U<V`$. For $`t_2^{L,R}=0`$ the functions $`E^{(i)}`$ may cross at some values of $`V`$, which in particular may lead to a sharp change of ground state.

With the use of perturbation theory in $`t_1^{L,R}`$ it is easy to find $`E^{(i)}`$ far from the charging peaks. Below the first resonance (at $`V\mathrm{\Gamma }`$) the true ground state is evidently $`E^{(0)}`$. However, already here the virtual jumps of the electrons from the wire to the level $`1`$ give rise to the correction

$`E^{(0)}=2{\displaystyle \underset{k<k_F}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{|t^{L,R}|^2}{\epsilon (k)\epsilon _1}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\pi }}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4E_F}{\epsilon _1}}\right),`$
$`E^{(1)}\epsilon _2,E^{(2)}2\epsilon _2+U.`$
The overall factor $`2`$ in $`E^{(0)}`$ accounts for the spin. It is clear that $`E^{(0)}`$ in this region lies significantly below $`E^{(1)}`$ and $`E^{(2)}`$ ($`E^{(0)}`$ is the true ground state). The factor of four in the argument of the logarithm, is specific to the dispersion of the conduction electrons we took. It does not appear in the physical results.

When the (increasing) voltage crosses the region $`|V|\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the dot is charged by the first electron. However, this electron may stay in the dot on the level $`1`$ (described by $`E^{(0)}`$) or on the level $`2`$ ($`E^{(1)}`$). Depending on what level is occupied the perturbation theory gives, in this range of V

$`E^{(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`\epsilon _1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2\pi }}\left\{\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4E_F}{|\epsilon _1|}}\right)+\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4E_F}{\epsilon _1+U}}\right)\right\},`$ (5)
$`E^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`\epsilon _2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\pi }}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4E_F}{\epsilon _1+U}}\right),E^{(2)}2\epsilon _2+U.`$
The first logarithm in $`E^{(0)}`$ accounts for the virtual jumps of an electron from the level $`1`$ in the dot to the wire. The other logarithms correspond to virtually adding the second electron to the dot (having $`\epsilon _1+U`$ instead of $`\epsilon _1`$ in the denominator). The two levels $`E^{(0)}`$ and $`E^{(1)}`$ cross at a gate voltage given by SI

$$V=V^I=\frac{U}{\mathrm{exp}\{2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }/\mathrm{\Gamma }\}+1}.$$
(6)
This result is valid for both signs of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. For $`\mathrm{\Gamma }|\mathrm{\Delta }|`$, eq. (6) reduces to $`\epsilon _1U/2`$. At $`V=V^I`$ the electron in the dot jumps from the broad level to the narrow one SI . We will describe the consequences of such a “jump” for the transmission, below.

In the second valley, $`U<V<2U`$ the dot is charged already by two electrons, which may populate the two doubly degenerate levels in the dot in different ways. Thus,

$`E^{(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`2\epsilon _1+U{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\pi }}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4E_F}{|\epsilon _1+U|}}\right),`$ (7)
$`E^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`\epsilon _1+\epsilon _2+U`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2\pi }}\left\{\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4E_F}{|\epsilon _1+U|}}\right)+\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4E_F}{\epsilon _1+2U}}\right)\right\},`$
$`E^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`2\epsilon _2+U{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\pi }}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4E_F}{\epsilon _1+2U}}\right).`$
First of all, we see that just after the charging peak, at $`V>U`$ the true ground state is $`E^{(0)}`$. This is in contrast with the situation at $`V<U`$, where the ground state was $`E^{(1)}`$ (5). Thus we may conclude, that within the resonance not only is one electron gradually transmitted from the wire to the level $`1`$ in the dot, but also a second electron is taken from the narrow level $`2`$ to the broad one $`1`$ (see fig. 1). In the limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_20`$ this second “transfer” is abrupt and takes place at some $`V=W^IU`$ (we remind the reader that we consider only the ground state energy in this section and therefore $`T0`$). This prediction of the possibility to have sharp features within the charging resonance is probably the main new result of this paper.

All the three energies (7) cross at the same value of gate voltage (c.f. (6))

$$V^{II}=U+\frac{U}{\mathrm{exp}\{2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }/\mathrm{\Gamma }\}+1}$$
(8)
and the true ground state become $`E^{(2)}`$. Now already two electrons jump together from the broad level to the narrow one.

At $`V>V^{II}`$ (8) the occupation of the quantum dot proceeds in a fashion which is almost symmetric under particle–hole replacement. At the third peak the third electron is added to the dot. Were the branch $`E^{(2)}`$ the stable one, this would have been the uncoupled electron at the level $`1`$. However, $`E^{(2)}`$ and $`E^{(1)}`$ cross at the top of the third peak (at $`V=W^{II}=W^I+U`$) and the ground state for the first half of last valley has a single unpaired electron at the narrow level. Finally, at

$$V^{III}=2U+\frac{U}{\mathrm{exp}\{2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }/\mathrm{\Gamma }\}+1}$$
(9)
$`E^{(2)}`$ and $`E^{(1)}`$ cross and the broad level became singly occupied again. The fourth peak ($`V3U`$) completes the charging of two levels in the quantum dot by four electrons.

To summarise the discussion of this Section we show schematically in fig. 1 the averaged occupation numbers of our two levels $`n_1+n_1`$ and $`n_2+n_2`$. The four charging resonances correspond to $`V/U0,1,2,3`$. One may see on the figure many abrupt changes in the population of both broad and narrow levels. Unfortunately, the averaged occupation number of the given level is not measured directly in the typical experiments with the quantum dots. In order to make the connection with possible experiments we consider in the following sections the transport properties of the quantum dot described by the Hamiltonian eq. (II).

## III  Conductance, leading order.

The zero bias conductance $`G`$ of our two-level quantum dot is shown schematically in fig. 2. In the limit of ”invisible” level $`2`$ ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }_20`$), we may introduce three conductances $`G^{(0,1,2)}`$ corresponding to empty, singly- and doubly-occupied narrow level (corresponding to the three ”ground state” energies $`E^{(0,1,2)}`$ of the previous section). The role of electrons at the level $`2`$ reduces in this case to simply raising the current-transmitting level $`1`$ via the Coulomb repulsion. Thus

$$G^{(0)}(V)=G^{(1)}(V+U)=G^{(2)}(V+2U).$$
(10)
We have shown schematically the function $`G^{(0)}`$ on the same fig. 2 (slightly offset vertically). In the limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ the curve for two-level dot is obtained simply by cutting and horizontally shifting the parts of the curve for single-level dot, in agreement with eq. (10), as shown in the figure. Thus the relations eq. (10) allow one to describe the singular behavior of the conductance even without the explicit calculation of $`G^{(0)}`$. This result is particularly useful at low temperatures close to the charging resonances and in the Kondo valleys, where simple analytical formulas are not available.

Simple analytical expressions for the conductance may be found by means of perturbation theory only far from the resonances. In particular, below the first resonance ($`V<0`$) and above the second ($`V>U`$) one has for $`G^{(0)}`$

$$G^{(0)}=2G_Q\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\mathrm{\Gamma }_R}{\epsilon ^2}\mathrm{and}G^{(0)}=2G_Q\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\mathrm{\Gamma }_R}{(\epsilon +U)^2}.$$
(11)
Here $`G_Q=e^2/h`$. Because of eq. (11) being valid only far from the resonance, there is no need to distinguish between $`\epsilon _1`$ and $`\epsilon _2`$. The first formula here accounts for the virtual jump of the electron (with any spin orientation) from the left lead first to the dot and then to the right lead. For $`V>U`$, first one of the $`2`$ electrons jumps from the dot to the right lead, then another electron from the left lead fills in its place in the quantum dot.

In the valley $`0<V<U`$ one electron stays at the level $`1`$ in the dot. Let it have e.g. a spin up $``$. (The total current is evidently the “average” of two equal currents for the dot up $``$ and the dot down $``$). We calculate the current via the transmission of electrons from the left to the right lead. There are two contributions to the spin-conserving current: either an electron with spin down $``$ goes from the left lead to the dot and then to the right lead (energy denominator $`\epsilon +U`$), or the $``$ electron from the quantum dot goes to the right lead (energy denominator $`\epsilon `$) and then a $``$ electron jumps to the dot from the left lead. The probabilities of these two processes should be added. Then, there are two spin-flip processes, whose total current should be added to the spin-conserving one above: either a $``$ electron goes from the left lead to the dot (energy denominator $`(\epsilon +U)`$ and then the $``$ electron goes to the right lead, or the $``$ electron goes to the right lead first (energy denominator $`\epsilon `$) and then the $``$ electron goes from the left lead to the dot. The amplitudes for these two last contributions, which simply accounts for the two different intermediate states, has to be added. Thus the total conductance is given by:

$$G^{(0)}=G_Q\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\mathrm{\Gamma }_R\left[\left(\frac{1}{\epsilon }\frac{1}{\epsilon +U}\right)^2+\frac{1}{\epsilon ^2}+\frac{1}{(\epsilon +U)^2}\right].$$
(12)
The quantum dot in the regime described by eq. (12) contains one electron on the broad level $`1`$. Effective antiferromagnetic interaction of this electron with the electrons in the lead conduction bands, leads to a strong enhancement of conductance at low temperature. This is the Kondo effect in quantum dots KondoT1 ; KondoT2 ; KondoT3 . With the use of Schrieffer-Wolf transformation one easily maps the Anderson impurity model Hamiltonian (eq. (II) with only one level) onto the Kondo Hamiltonian (see e.g. Hewson ). Far from the resonances the Kondo corrections to eq. (12) are of the relative order $`\mathrm{ln}(T^1)\mathrm{\Gamma }/U`$ where $`T`$ is a (small) temperature. At $`TT_K=(U\mathrm{\Gamma }/2)^{1/2}e^{\pi \epsilon _d(\epsilon _d+U)/2\mathrm{\Gamma }U}`$ the renormalised antiferromagnetic coupling diverges and the conductance reaches the unitarity limit $`GG_Q`$. Explicit calculation of $`G`$ in this regime may be done only by means of numerical renormalisation group. Still even in this extreme case the eq. (10) allows for qualitative description of singular behavior of $`G`$.

Two kinds of sharp features are seen in fig. 2. First, there are a cusp and a jump at the peaks $`W^I`$, where the curve $`G^{(1)}`$ is replaced by $`G^{(0)}`$ and $`W^{II}`$, where $`G^{(2)}`$ is replaced by $`G^{(1)}`$. Accurate analytical description of $`G(V)`$ in this mixed valence regime is possible only at $`T\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. (Although at such a high temperature the singularity becomes smeared out, see the next Section.) The jump vanishes for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, but the pronounced cusp survives even for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$.

Besides that, there are three jumps in the valleys. The values of the conductance at $`V=V^I\pm 0`$ ($`V^{III}0`$) are (assuming $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$)

$$G48G_Q\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\mathrm{\Gamma }_R}{U^2}\mathrm{and}G16G_Q\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\mathrm{\Gamma }_R}{U^2}.$$
(13)
The contribution from the spin flip processes for $`V<V^I`$ is twice that from the elastic processes. Therefore, the conductance drops near $`V=V^I`$ by a factor of 3. At $`V=V^{II}`$ the two electrons jump from the broad to narrow level. The discontinuity at $`V^{II}`$, which follows from the small difference in the probability of the electron-like and hole-like processes, vanishes for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (restoration of particle-hole symmetry at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$).

In this paper we consider mainly the zero bias effects. The finite bias conductance $`G_b`$ may also be found easily, assuming that the same model eq. (II) describes the quantum dot at finite bias (see however Levinson  for a discussion of self-consistent screening, strictly valid for small bias only). In the limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12},\mathrm{\Gamma }_2=0`$, the differential conductance $`G_b`$ acquires a cusp at the bias voltage $`V_b`$ coinciding with the energy difference between the lowest and first excited state for the corresponding valley. This singularity should be seen as two lines inside the Coulomb blockade diamond relatively close to the zero bias diagonal ($`V_bU`$) crossing correspondingly at the gate voltage $`V=V^I,V^{II},V^{III}`$. Namely this is $`V_b=\pm |E^{(0)}E^{(1)}|`$ for the first valley, $`V_b=\pm |E^{(2)}E^{(1)}|`$ for the third valley and $`V_b=\pm |E^{(0)}E^{(1)}|=\pm |E^{(2)}E^{(1)}|`$ for the second valley. The explicit calculation of $`G_b(V_b)`$ may be done with the use of standard master equation techniques.

## IV  Resolving sharp features.

So far, we have considered only the case of an “invisible” second level in the dot $`t_2^{L,R}0`$. However, even in this limit the sharp features shown on fig. 2 should be smoothed due to the finite temperature. We show this smoothening for the cusp$`+`$jump at $`V=W^I`$ on the left panel of the fig 3. The corresponding analytic expression

$$G=\frac{G^{(1)}\mathrm{exp}\{E^{(1)}/T\}+G^{(0)}\mathrm{exp}\{E^{(0)}/T\}}{\mathrm{exp}\{E^{(1)}/T\}+\mathrm{exp}\{E^{(0)}/T\}}.$$
(14)
accounts simply for a different probability of thermal populations of the states $`E^{(1)}`$ and $`E^{(0)}`$ of the dot. The same formula describes the jump of the conductance in the middle of the left ($`VV^I`$) valley. Here the smoothed conductance has a form of a Fermi function $`(\mathrm{exp}\{(E^{(0)}E^{(1)})/T\}+1)^1`$.

The crossings of energy levels $`E^{(i)}`$ both at the peaks($`W^i`$) and in the valleys($`V^i`$) become ”avoided”due to the finite coupling $`t_2^{L,R}`$ of the level 2 to the leads. This effect determines the smearing of the conductance at very low temperatures. Unfortunately we do not have a simple way to take into account the coupling of the narrow level in the mixed valence regime at $`VW^{I,II}`$. On the other hand, taking the second coupling into account at the valley, turns out to be relatively easy footnote . Consider for example the first crossing at $`VV^I`$ (6). First, in a way analogous to eq. (2) one may introduce the width of the second level $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ and the interlevel width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ (defined as $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}=2\pi _{i=L,R}t_1^it_2^idn^i/d\epsilon `$). In the first valley where is (almost) always one electron in the dot either on the level 1, or on the level 2. Hence we may introduce the effective single-particle Hamiltonian, accounting also for the coupling to the leads. A simple calculation in the second order of perturbation theory gives for the elements of this Hamiltonian

$`H_{11}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}{2\pi }}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon +U}{|\epsilon |}}\right),H_{22}=\mathrm{\Delta }{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2}{2\pi }}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon +U}{|\epsilon |}}\right),`$
$`H_{12}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}}{2\pi }}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon +U}{|\epsilon |}}\right)=H_{21}^{}.`$ (15)
In particular here $`H_{11}`$ and $`H_{22}`$ are nothing more than the renormalised single particle energies $`\epsilon _1`$ and $`\epsilon _2`$ given by the first two formulae in eq. (5) (with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ included) minus a proper constant (see also Haldane ; Kaminski ). Moreover, the small $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ may be omitted in the eq. (IV). Only $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ is important, since it is responsible for the mixing. We expect also that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\Gamma }_2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$. Close to $`V=V^I`$, the logarithms in eq. (IV) may be expanded in series. Now by simple diagonalization of the $`2\times 2`$ matrix one finds the closest level splitting $`\delta E`$ and the width $`\gamma `$ (in gate voltage) of the avoided crossing.

$$\delta E=2\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }};\gamma =\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}\mathrm{\Delta }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}\pi U\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}}U.$$
(16)
The temperature is taken to be small compared to $`\delta E`$.

In the leading order coupling to the leads of the two levels found after diagonalisation of the $`2\times 2`$ Hamiltonian (IV) is simply determined by the amplitude of the broad level $`1`$ in the corresponding wave function ($`\delta V=VV^I`$)

$$t_\pm ^{L,R}=t_1^{L,R}\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}\left(1\pm \frac{\delta V}{\sqrt{\delta V^2+\gamma ^2}}\right)}.$$
(17)
The calculation of the conductance with this $`V`$-dependent coupling analogous to the derivation of the eq. (12) gives

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`2G_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\mathrm{\Gamma }_R}{(U/2)^2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{\delta V}{\sqrt{\delta V^2+\gamma ^2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta V^2}{\delta V^2+\gamma ^2}}`$
$`+`$ $`(1{\displaystyle \frac{\delta V}{\sqrt{\delta V^2+\gamma ^2}}})^3{\displaystyle \frac{3\mathrm{\Gamma }}{4\pi U}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{U}{T}}\right)).`$
This result is illustrated in the central part of fig. 2. The first line in the eq. (IV) is the result of the calculation in the leading order of perturbation theory, interpolating between the limiting values (eq. (13)) at $`\delta V\gamma `$ and $`\delta V\gamma `$. In addition to the smearing of the step at $`VV^I`$ the conductance eq. (IV) acquires a narrow minimum at $`\delta V=\gamma /\sqrt{3}`$.

The last term in eq. (IV) is the (first) Kondo correction. The Kondo effect is present to the left of the drop of $`G`$ (where the electron stays on the broad level), and vanishes (became proportional to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^{3}`$) to the right of that drop. Calculation of this low temperature Kondo correction is straightforward. The factor $`(1\delta V/\sqrt{\delta V^2+\gamma ^2})^3`$ accounts for the renormalised coupling of spin to the leads (17). As usually this presence of the Kondo correction only at $`V<V^I`$ may be easily checked by applying the small bias $`V_b>T`$.

The same effective Hamiltonian (IV) describes the electronic configuration of the quantum dot in the second valley. In this case one simply has always two electrons with opposite spins occupying one of the two levels in the dot. The coupling of these two levels to the leads changes rapidly at $`VV^{II}\gamma `$. Since we always have a zero total spin, $`S=0`$, here, there is no Kondo effect. The transmission amplitude includes two competing contributions, electron-like and hole-like, which lead to the vanishing of the conductance at $`V=V^{II}`$ (see fig. 3, right frame)

$$G\frac{(VV^{II})^2}{(VV^{II})^2+\gamma ^2}.$$
(19)
This formula is valid for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, but $`G`$ has a node for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as well.

In the constant interaction model, eq. (II), the transition at the second valley is a triple crossing $`E^{(0)}=E^{(1)}=E^{(2)}`$. This degeneracy is easily lifted if, e.g., in addition to the direct Coulomb interaction (II) one introduces the exchange interaction of the usual form

$$H_{exchange}=J\underset{\sigma ,\sigma ^{}}{}a_{1,\sigma }^+a_{2,\sigma }a_{2,\sigma ^{}}^+a_{1,\sigma ^{}}.$$
(20)
As long as $`J`$ is sufficiently small ($`J\mathrm{\Gamma }`$) the level crossing at $`V=V^{II}`$ will be splitted into two close crossings with a spin $`1`$ ground state of the quantum dot in between. The conductance in the three parts of the valley is now proportional to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{(\epsilon +U)^2}};`$ (21)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\epsilon +U)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\epsilon +2U)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\epsilon +U}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\epsilon +2U}}\right)^2;`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{(\epsilon +2U)^2}}.`$
The derivation of this result essentially repeats the proof of eqs. (11,12). The second expression in (21) corresponds to the transmission through the dot having total spin $`S=1`$. Although only one of the two electrons constituting this $`S=1`$ is visible (i.e. well coupled to the leads) the spin conservation within transition leads to a factor $`1/2`$ in the spin-flip contribution. Since in eq. (21) we describe the states with different spin, the crossing of the eigenstates is not avoided and the transitions are abrupt (at low $`T`$). Due to the eq. (21) the current is enhanced around the transition in the second valley. The Kondo effect (at $`S=1`$) leads to a further increase of the transmission. The interesting physics of the Kondo effect at the triplet-singlet transition was investigated recently both experimentally Sasaki  and theoretically Pustilnik1 ; Nazarov ; Pustilnik2 .

## V  Transmission through a multilevel dot ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Delta }`$).

It is generally believed that the Coulomb blockade in multilevel quantum dot may be seen only if the connection of the dot to the leads is weak enough. Namely one expects the parameters of the dot to be chosen to satisfy the inequality

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Delta }<U,$$
(22)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`U`$ are the typical width, the level spacing and the charging energy. Just in order to fulfill this condition and still to have a larger $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, very small quantum dots with large $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ were prepared for the Kondo experiments Kondo1 ; Kondo2 ; Kondo3 . However, in the case when only one level in the dot has an anomalously large width, the inequality (22) may be weakened to SI :

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }<U,$$
(23)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the width of single anomalously broad level. Still $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\mathrm{\Delta }`$ for all other levels. Such rare dominant levels are common for integrable dots and for dots with the mixed (partly regular and partly chaotic) classical dynamics. Thus, instead of miniaturisation of the quantum dot, one may try to look for the new physics by making the dot more clean and symmetric Esteve .

The model (23) with spinless electrons was used in ref. SI  in order to explain the transmission phase behavior observed in the double slit experiment of the ref. Heiblum2 . Here we briefly discuss the modification of the same scenario due to the spin.

In general for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Delta }`$, charging of the quantum dot for a large series of resonances resembles that for adding of the second and third electron into the two level dot considered in the previous sections. In the case of large $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the electron taken to the dot from the leads within the charging resonance always occupies the broad level (even if there are empty narrow levels with smaller single-particle energies). This effect may be understood by introducing the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ logarithmic correction to the single-particle energies in the dot arising due to the coupling to the leads (see the eq. (IV)). Due to the spin degeneracy of the single-particle levels a larger gain in energy is achieved if after the charging resonance the broad level becomes occupied by two electrons. Since only one external electron may be added to the dot at the resonance, the second electron is taken to the broad level from the narrow one (of course, if there is such electron with close enough energy). This fast rearrangement of the electronic configuration within the resonance leads to a new structure of the conductance peaks (see two central peaks on the fig. 2). In the middle of the valley both two electrons from the broad level jumps to the narrow level (again if there is such an empty close level). However, this double jump corresponds to the triple level crossing of the states of the quantum dot (7) and may be easily splitted into two jumps by going beyond the constant interaction model (fig. 3, right).

In SI  it was found that for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the transmission phase $`\varphi `$ through the quantum dot increases by $`\pi `$ through each charging peak and sharply decreases by $`\pi `$ in $`(2\mathrm{\Gamma }/\pi \mathrm{\Delta })\mathrm{ln}(U/\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ valleys. In the limit of vanishing width of all the narrow levels the function $`\varphi (V)`$ may be constructed simply from the function $`\varphi ^{(0)}(V)`$ describing the charging of single level. The procedure is similar to the way we found the conductance $`G`$ from the single level function $`G^{(0)}(V)`$ on fig. 2 with the use of eq. (10). In the spinless case the function $`\varphi ^{(0)}(V)`$ is described by the Breit-Wigner formula. For the spin $`S=1/2`$ (the Anderson impurity model) the $`\varphi ^{(0)}(V)`$ may be taken e.g. from ref. Delft . Compared to the case of the ref. SI  the main new effect taking place due to spin is the sharp depopulation of the narrow level at the charging resonance. The phase at the peak now first increases smoothly from $`\varphi 0`$ to the value somewhat below $`\pi /2`$, then jumps up by some fraction of $`\pi `$ and then continues the smooth increase towards $`\varphi \pi `$. The finite temperature tends to smear this three-stage increase of phase. The plateau with $`\varphi \pi /2`$ at the Kondo valley predicted in ref. Delft  does not appear in the model (23). The crude behavior of the transmission phase remains the same as in refs. SI  (and consistent with the experiment Heiblum2 ). The phase increases by $`\pi `$ at the resonance (although now the increase contains both smooth and abrupt component) and drops down abruptly close to the middle of the valley.

Thus taking into account spin does not lead to a serious revision of the explanation SI  of the transmission phase behaviour of the experiment of ref. Heiblum2 . The sequence of resonances accompanied by the $`\pi `$ jumps in the valley is even doubled because of doubling of single particle density of states due to spin. Other attempts to explain the same experiment may be found in ref. other . Although, none of the mechanisms presented so far is capable to explain by itself the observed phase behaviour.

## VI  Conclusions.

In this paper we have considered the effects of the spin on transport through a quantum dot having one level which is strongly coupled to the leads. If this coupling is strong enough, the coupled level will play an essential role for the energetics of the dot and it can change the distribution of electrons over the discrete single-particle levels. We introduced the model for multilevel quantum dot (II,2) with one level having its Breit-Wigner width larger than the level spacing $`\mathrm{\Gamma }>\mathrm{\Delta }`$. For spinless electrons (and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Delta }`$) the analogous model was investigated in our recent paper SI . Here we were mostly interested in the effect of spin for electronic transport. Following the experimental tendency towards miniaturisation of the quantum dots we also mainly considered the sequence of charging resonances corresponding to occupation of only two levels by four electrons.

The main new effect taking place due to spin in our model is the fast change of electronic configuration close to the top of the charging resonance (in the mixed valence). Within this transition one of the electrons in the dot jumps from the narrow level to the well coupled one Kulik . The population of narrow levels in our model takes place in the Coulomb blockade valleys and also leads to the peculiar behaviour of the conductance (fig. 3).

Finally, due to a tendency to a double occupation(depopulation) of well coupled levels we predict the suppression of the usual (odd valley $`S=1/2`$) Kondo effect for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }>\mathrm{\Delta }`$. On the other hand, the possibility to observe the new sharp features in the mixed-valence regime, as well as $`S=1`$ Kondo effect and singlet-triplet transitions in the valley, should partially compensate this drawback.

We acknowledge K. Kikoin and D. Esteve for valuable discussions. This project was supported by the Israel Science Foundation, Jerusalem by the German-Israeli Foundation (GIF) and by a joint grant from the Israeli Ministry of Science and the French Ministry of Research and Technology. The work of P.G.S. was supported by Dutch Science Foundation NWO/FOM.


format: text

text:
# Strings on Orbifold Lines

## 1 Introduction and Summary

Some string theory backgrounds are known to possess discrete variants. In particular, certain orbifolds have discrete torsion variants , which can be thought of as arising from finite discrete fluxes of the NSNS two form field $`B`$ concentrated at the fixed points. More recently it has been realized that discrete RR fluxes can also give rise to orbifold variants. In particular, the orbifolds $`^8/_8`$ and $`^8/_8(1)^{F_L}`$ of Type IIA and Type IIB string theory, respectively, admit a set of variants corresponding to the possible discrete RR fluxes at infinity. These fluxes were originally classified in integer cohomology, and found to correspond to torsion elements .

It has also been proposed recently that RR fields take values in K-theory rather than integer cohomology . It is not surprising that RR charges, or D-branes, are described by K-theory , since one needs to specify a gauge bundle on the D-brane, as well as the homology cycle it wraps, to fully characterize it. On the other hand D-branes are sources for RR fields, so it is natural that the latter should be valued in K-theory as well. Since K-theory differs from cohomology only in discrete torsion, it becomes relevant for the study of the above types of variants.

This paper was partly motivated by the study of discrete torsion variants of orientifolds (see also ). In this approach, the choice of orientifold projection leading to an $`SO`$ or $`Sp`$ gauge group corresponds to a discrete torsion of the $`B`$ field. The objective of  was to list all possible variants by identifying the background fields which allow for discrete torsion. However, the analysis there relied on cohomology, and some questions were left unsettled. In particular, questions were raised about the variants of the above orbifold lines (which are related to orientifolds by dualities), which were denoted $`OF1_A`$ (IIA on $`^8/_8`$) and $`OF1_B`$ (IIB on $`^8/_8(1)^{F_L}`$). These were found to have some variants which carry fundamental string (NSNS) charge (hence the ’F’ in their names), but a general formula relating the RR fluxes to the NSNS charge was not obtained. The main purpose of this paper is to derive precisely such a relation.

We begin in section 2 by reviewing the results of  on the discrete torsion variants of the above orbifolds. For $`OF1_A`$, the RR fluxes were enumerated in reduced cohomology by $`H_R^{even}(\mathrm{P}^7)=_2_2_2`$,111Reduced cohomology is defined as $`H_R^{}H^{}/H^0=H^{}/`$. and were interpreted as arising from intersections with a fractional D2-brane, D4-brane and D6-brane. The intersection point serves as a “domain wall” on the orbifold line, across which its tension, and accordingly its fundamental string charge, can jump. The tension jump for the three cases is given as follows

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{Brane}\text{D6}\text{D4}\text{D2}\\ \text{Tension jump}& 1/16& 1/4& 1\end{array}.$$
(1)
We will review the derivation of these results, and explain how they are consistent with T-duality. The review also includes some basic examples of discrete torsion for completeness.

We then explain how re-interpreting RR fields in K-theory corrects this picture. In particular, for the IIA orbifold, reduced cohomology is replaced by the reduced K-theory group $`\stackrel{~}{K}__2(𝐒^{8,0})=\stackrel{~}{K}(\mathrm{P}^7)=_8`$. The “enhancement” of the discrete torsion group from cohomology to K-theory actually has an interesting physical interpretation. While in cohomology it appears that two fractional D$`p`$-branes have a trivial discrete torsion, in K-theory we see that two fractional D$`p`$-branes correspond to the same discrete torsion as one D$`(p2)`$-brane. So, for example, adding two D4’s gives a D2 class instead of a trivial one. K-theory also allows us to make a distinction between RR fields at infinity, which take values in $`\stackrel{~}{K}__2(𝐒^{8,0})=_8`$, and RR fields in the total (singular) transverse space, which take values in $`\stackrel{~}{K}__2(^{8,0})=`$.222The latter space is usually not analyzed by ordinary cohomology (“ordinary” here is “non equivariant”), since it is singular. The two groups are related, and as a consequence the generator $`x`$ of the latter group satisfies that $`8x`$ is invisible at infinity.333Invisible at infinity means that it is mapped to zero by the natural mapping into $`\stackrel{~}{K}__2(𝐒^{8,0})`$. The analogous groups in the IIB orbifold are $`K_\pm ^1(𝐒^{8,0})=_{16}`$ and $`K_\pm ^1(^{8,0})=`$, so 16 times the generator of the latter group is trivial at infinity.

In section 3 we analyze in detail the orbifolds $`^8/_8`$ and $`^8/_8(1)^{F_L}`$ for both Type IIA and Type IIB. We determine both the perturbative closed string spectrum and the D-brane spectrum of these theories. In particular, it is shown that the $`_8`$ orbifold of IIA ($`OF1_A`$) and the $`_8(1)^{F_L}`$ orbifold of IIB ($`OF1_B`$) contain a massless vector field $`A`$ in the twisted RR sector. Since this field lives in two dimensions it has no dynamics, but it does allow for charged point-like defects, across which the scalar field strength $`F=dA`$ jumps by a discrete amount. These defects are precisely the fractional D$`p`$-branes of $`OF1_A`$ and $`OF1_B`$ (and a non-BPS D-particle in $`OF1_B`$). The corresponding jump in the value of $`F`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }F_p=2^{p/2}$$
(2)
for the fractional D$`p`$-branes, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }F_{\stackrel{~}{0}}=\sqrt{2}`$ for the non-BPS D-particle.

These jumps can now be identified with the integral charges in $`\stackrel{~}{K}__2(^{8,0})`$ (and $`K_\pm ^1(^{8,0})`$) above, since both are generated by intersections with fractional D-branes. In the IIA case, the generator $`x`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{K}__2(^{8,0})`$ corresponds to the fractional D6-brane, which carries a charge $`\mathrm{\Delta }F=1/8`$ , and the element $`8x`$ is equivalent to the fractional D-particle, which has a charge $`1`$, and is invisible at infinity. In the IIB case, the generator corresponds to the fractional D7-brane (with charge $`\sqrt{2}/16`$), and the element $`16x`$ is the non-BPS D-particle (with charge $`\sqrt{2}`$). This is an example of how K-theory correlates different RR fields; in this case the different fields are the twisted sector and bulk RR fields.

Section 4 contains our main result, namely the tension and NSNS charge of the orbifold lines as a function of the twisted sector scalar field $`F`$. We find that

$$Q(F)=4F^2\frac{1}{16},$$
(3)
which together with (2) is consistent with the earlier results (1). The constant $`Q(0)=1/16`$ was computed in  based on the term $`BY_8(R)`$ in the effective Type IIA action  (see section 3 for more detail, and  for related work). This value ties well with the known charges of objects related by dualities to orbifold lines; both the orientifold line and the $`OM2^{}`$ have the same tension444$`OM2^{}`$ denotes $`M/_8`$. (for the $`OM2`$ see ). Our concern here is to derive the $`F`$ dependence of $`Q(F)`$, that is to derive $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q(F)=Q(F)Q(0)`$.

The relation (3) is first obtained from the low-energy effective action. The kinetic term for $`F`$ gives a vacuum energy per unit length, i.e. a tension, proportional to $`F^2`$. The correct normalization is determined by the sphere closed string diagram with two insertions of $`F`$, which is related to a simple one-loop open string amplitude that computes the supersymmetry index of the internal ($`^8/_2`$) CFT.

In an alternative approach, we use the fact that pairs of fractional D-branes in these orbifolds are linked, and therefore exhibit the phenomenon of string creation . We consider specifically the case of two fractional D-particles in $`OF1_A`$. This system is similar to the D0-D8 system in ten dimensions, in which a single string is created when the branes cross. The number of strings created can be understood in terms of the supersymmetric index of the 0-8 open string. Our case is a bit more subtle, in that the particle and domain wall are both D-particles, but the number of strings which are created is still given by the supersymmetry index, which in this case is $`n=8`$. The number of strings ending on a single D-particle, and therefore the tension jump of the orbifold line, can then be determined from a consistency condition for the process of exchange, and the result is consistent with (3).

Note that the constant $`n=8`$ is determined in two seemingly unrelated ways - the first from K-theory, and the second as an open string index. We argue in the same section that the two are actually related, by considering a source term for $`B_{NS}`$ in the Type IIA action, which depends on a certain self-intersection number. Here we assume that $`^8/_2`$ has a singular (shrunk) 4-cycle $`C`$, such that the fractional D-particle is a D4-brane wrapping $`C`$, and that its self-intersection number must be $`\pm 8`$. On one hand the self intersection number is geometric and determined by K-theory, but on the other hand when two such D4-branes are exchanged the number of strings created is exactly the self-intersection number, so the two approaches are connected.

The case of $`OF1_B`$ is similar to $`OF1_A`$, and the reader may concentrate his / her attention on the latter in a first reading. Collecting the results for the $`OF1_B`$ we find that the K group at infinity is $`_{16}`$, replacing the cohomological $`(_2)^4`$ which arises from intersections with the fractional D7, D5, D3, and D1. The normalization for $`F`$ is that the fractional D7 (the generator) has charge $`\sqrt{2}/16`$, while the non-BPS D-particle, which is invisible at infinity, has charge $`\sqrt{2}`$. The formulas (2) and (3) are the same for both orbifold lines.

## 2 RR discrete torsion

### 2.1 Discrete torsion

It was observed in  that for certain orbifolds one can multiply the twisted components of the string partition function by phases, while maintaining consistency, and in particular modular invariance. For an orbifold $`M/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where is $`M`$ is the covering space on which a discrete group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts, the possibilities for adding such phases were found to be classified by the second cohomology group of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with $`U(1)`$ coefficients $`H^2(\mathrm{\Gamma },U(1))`$. The simplest example is $`H^2(_n\times _n,U(1))=_n`$.

Alternatively, discrete torsion can be viewed as arising from spacetime cohomology rather than group cohomology (see  for a rigorous treatment). The phases are due to a non-trivial topology of the NSNS $`B`$ field. The contribution of $`B`$ to the functional integral is through the term $`\mathrm{exp}(\frac{i}{2}B_{\mu \nu }_\alpha X^\mu _\beta X^\nu ϵ^{\alpha \beta })=\mathrm{exp}(\frac{i}{2}B^{induced})`$, and therefore in the presence of a flat $`B`$ field all world-sheets in the same spacetime homology class will receive the same contribution. Thus, by definition, the phases are classified by the cohomology $`H^2(M/\mathrm{\Gamma },U(1))`$. This can be further simplified by observing that the sequence $`0U(1)0`$ identifies the components of $`H^2(M/\mathrm{\Gamma },U(1))`$ with the discrete torsion part of $`H^3(M/\mathrm{\Gamma },`$). It is natural to identify this class with the class of the field strength $`[H]=[dB]H^3(M/\mathrm{\Gamma },)`$.

By analogy, if we replace the world-sheet of the fundamental string with the world-volume of a D-brane, we expect that the full non-perturbative partition function will have additional discrete torsion degrees of freedom. Namely, for any RR $`p`$-form field strength $`G^{(p)}`$, one expects to see variants classified by $`H^p(M/\mathrm{\Gamma },)`$. For Type IIA this implies $`H^{even}(M/\mathrm{\Gamma },)`$ variants, while for IIB $`H^{odd}(M/\mathrm{\Gamma },)`$ variants are expected. We will soon see that this picture is in fact corrected when we re-interpret RR fields, and in particular RR discrete torsion, in K-theory.

The simplest example of discrete torsion corresponds to a vector field on $`^d/_2`$, where the $`_2`$ acts as $`xx`$. In this case $`H^2((^d\backslash \{0\})/_2,)=_2`$, so a non-trivial configuration for the gauge field is possible. Such a configuration would be detected by sending a charged particle on a closed path from a point to its antipode, and observing a phase of $`1`$, even though the field strength is locally zero. In other words we have a flat circle bundle $`(^d\times 𝐒^1)/_2`$, with the $`_2`$ acting on the circle $`0\theta 1`$ by $`\theta \theta +1/2`$.

### 2.2 Previous results from cohomology

Let us review the results obtained in  regarding the classification and properties (namely the tension and NSNS charge) of the orbifolds $`OF1_A`$ and $`OF1_B`$. The relevant cohomologies for $`OF1_A`$ are $`H^{even}(\mathrm{P}^7,)=H^0H^2H^4H^6=_2_2_2`$, corresponding respectively to the RR fields $`G^{(0)},G^{(2)},G^{(4)}`$, and $`G^{(6)}`$. In $`OF1_B`$ all the RR forms are twisted in the sense that they switch sign upon inversion. The relevant cohomologies are therefore $`H^{odd}(\mathrm{P}^7,\stackrel{~}{})=\stackrel{~}{H}^1\stackrel{~}{H}^3\stackrel{~}{H}^5\stackrel{~}{H}^7=_2_2_2_2`$, corresponding to $`G^{(1)},\mathrm{},G^{(7)}`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ is the twisted bundle (or sheaf) of integers on $`\mathrm{P}^7`$.

Discrete torsion fluxes can be interpreted as arising from fractional branes. In order to create a $`_2`$ flux for a $`p`$-form field strength $`G^{(p)}`$ one takes a D$`(8p)`$-brane which is its source, and moves it onto the orbifold where the D-brane can split into two halves. By sending the two halves far away in opposite directions one constructs a new orbifold which carries the required discrete torsion.

According to this interpretation $`OF1_A`$ can be intersected by D8, D6, D4 and a D2. The D8 is special as it changes the cosmological constant. It is represented by the $``$ factor in $`H^{even}(\mathrm{P}^7,)`$. The $`OF1_B`$ on the other hand can be intersected by the D7, D5, D3 and D1. Note that all of the above intersection configurations are supersymmetric, and that in all cases the flux from a jump in the fundamental string charge can be carried away by fields in the world-volume of the brane.

Let us see how the jump in fundamental string charge was determined in some cases by an ad-hoc series of dualities.

* The intersection of the $`OF1_A`$ with a D4-brane lifts in M theory to an intersection in 11d of the OM2 with an M5-brane. This is known to cause a jump of $`+1/4`$ in the membrane charge , which upon compactification becomes the fundamental string charge.
* The intersection of the $`OF1_B`$ with a D5-brane is S-dual to an intersection of the orientifold line with an NS5-brane. This intersection is known to change an $`O1^{}`$ ($`SO`$ projection) into an $`O1^+`$ ($`Sp`$ projection), causing a jump of $`1/16(1/16)=+1/8`$ in the D-string charge, which is mapped into the F-string charge in the original picture.
* The intersection with the D3 can be analyzed in the same way: after S-duality one gets an orientifold line $`O1^{}`$ which is transformed by the D3-brane into an $`\stackrel{~}{O1}^{}`$, which is an $`O1^{}`$ with an extra half D1-brane. Therefore the jump here is by $`+1/2`$.
* In agreement with the trend, one also expects the intersection with a D6 to lead to a tension jump of $`+1/16`$. For that one needs to assume that the tension of the “bare” $`OF1_A`$ is $`1/16`$ (see section 3). The intersection with a D6 is equivalent to a discrete torsion for the vector field of Type IIA. When lifted to M theory, it is described by a smooth manifold $`(^8\times 𝐒^1)/_2`$ (as explained in the example in previous subsection), and is not expected to carry any charges.
* For the D2-brane it was found by a less direct method that the jump is $`+1`$.

We summarize the results in the following table

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{Brane}\text{D6}\text{D5}\text{D4}\text{D3}\text{D2}\\ \text{Tension jump, }\mathrm{\Delta }Q& 1/16& 1/8& 1/4& 1/2& 1\end{array}.$$
(4)
The pattern that emerges can be explained by T-duality. Consider the orbifold to act on a torus, that is $`𝐓^8/_2`$, rather than $`^8/_2`$ as we did so far. In this case the number of fixed points on the torus is $`2^8=256`$. When we perform a T-duality in one of the directions of the torus, the 256 $`OF1_A`$ lines are replaced by 256 $`OF1_B`$ lines (or vice versa), and D-branes are replaced according to the usual rule. Since the total tension jump (the sum of jumps for all 256 lines) is invariant under T-duality, and since a D$`p`$-brane intersects $`2^p`$ lines, it follows that the jump on a single orbifold line is proportional to $`2^p`$, in agreement with the table.

### 2.3 K-theory corrections

It has become clear in the past year that RR fields and charges take values in K-theory, rather than integer cohomology. This was suggested by the fact that the states which carry RR charges, namely D-branes, possess an internal structure which includes a gauge bundle , and from the conjecture that a brane and an anti-brane which carry isomorphic bundles annihilate into the vacuum . It follows that D-branes are classified by isomorphism class groups of gauge bundles, i.e. K-theory. In particular, D-branes on a smooth space $`X`$ are classified by the compactly supported K-theory groups $`K_{cpct}^1(X)`$ and $`K_{cpct}(X)`$ in Type IIA and Type IIB string theory, respectively.555To be precise, consistent (tadpole-free) RR charges in Type IIB are actually given by the kernel of the natural map $`K_{cpct}(X)K(X)`$ (with the obvious generalization to Type IIA). Moreover, since D-branes are sources of RR fields, the latter also take values in K-theory . In particular, source free RR fluxes in a space $`Y`$ are classified by $`K(Y)`$ in Type IIA, and by $`K^1(Y)`$ in Type IIB.

K-theory is also well-suited to handle singular spaces such as orbifolds and orientifolds, and it is in these cases where K-theory generally differs from cohomology. In orbifold backgrounds RR charges and fields take values in equivariant K-theory. In particular , for orbifolds of the type $`^n/_n`$ the relevant groups are $`K__2`$ and $`K__2^1`$, and for orbifolds of the type $`^n/_n(1)^{F_L}`$ the corresponding groups are $`K_\pm `$ and $`K_\pm ^1`$.

For the orbifolds $`OF1_A`$ and $`OF1_B`$ K-theory differs from cohomology in two ways. First, RR fluxes at infinity take values in666The notation $`𝐒^{l,m}`$ refers to the sphere at infinity in the space $`^{l,m}`$, which corresponds to $`^{l+m}/_2`$, where the $`_2`$ inverts $`l`$ coordinates. In particular $`𝐒^{l,0}\mathrm{P}^{l1}`$, but the former notation reminds us that the $`_2`$ acts on the bundles as well.

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill \stackrel{~}{K}__2(𝐒^{8,0})& =& _8\hfill & \text{for}OF1_A\hfill \\ \hfill K_\pm ^1(𝐒^{8,0})& =& _{16}\hfill & \text{for}OF1_B.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)
The discrete torsion corresponding to the fields $`G^{(8p)}`$, with $`1p7`$, is different from cohomology. Recall that in cohomology the torsion subgroup was $`(_2)^3`$ and $`(_2)^4`$ for $`OF1_A`$ and $`OF1_B`$, respectively. The dimensions agree with K-theory, but the group structure is different. Let us denote the $`_2`$ generator in the $`n`$’th cohomology group by $`x^{(n)}`$, where $`n=2,4,6`$ for $`OF1_A`$, and $`n=1,3,5,7`$ for $`OF1_B`$. In cohomology these satisfy

$$2x^{(n)}=0.$$
(6)
This can be understood physically by the fact that two fractional D$`p`$-branes (with $`p7`$) can combine into a bulk D$`p`$-brane, which can separate from the orbifold line, and thereby remove the flux from the $`\mathrm{P}^7`$ at infinity. On the other hand, the above results suggest loosely that in K-theory

$$2x^{(n)}=x^{(n+2)}$$
(7)
(see the Appendix for a more rigorous derivation). Physically this means that the RR flux at infinity due to two fractional D$`p`$-branes ($`p7`$) is not trivial, but rather corresponds to the RR flux of a fractional D$`(p2)`$-brane.777Two comments are in order here. First, for $`OF1_A`$ there is also an integral $`G^{(0)}`$ flux, which is apparent in the unreduced group $`K__2(𝐒^{8,0})=_8`$, and which agrees with unreduced cohomology. However, the cohomology generator satisfies $`2x^{(0)}=\{G^{(0)}=2\}`$, whereas the K-theory generator satisfies $`2x^{(0)}=\{G^{(0)}=2\}+x^{(2)}`$. The second comment is that torsion group structure in K-theory implies that each fractional D$`p`$-brane carries $`1/2`$ unit of fractional D$`(p2)`$-brane charge, which in turn requires an anomalous Dirac quantization condition for the gauge field on the $`p`$-brane
$$_{\mathrm{P}^2\mathrm{P}^7}\frac{F}{2\pi }=\frac{1}{2}+.$$
The latter can be viewed as a manifestation of the difference between K-theory torsion and cohomology torsion. We could still recover a bulk D-brane, however, by combining two fractional D-branes with opposite twisted charge (corresponding to $`x^{(n)}`$ and $`x^{(n)}`$) if they carry the same bulk charge.

The second K-theory correction appears in the spectrum of RR fields in the total transverse space, specifically when we compare fields which are compactly supported to the more general case. The former take values in

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill K_{_2,cpct}(^{8,0})& =& \hfill & \text{for}OF1_A\hfill \\ \hfill K_{\pm ,cpct}^1(^{8,0})& =& \hfill & \text{for}OF1_B.\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
Since the only compactly supported RR fields are associated with D-particles, it is clear that one of the integral fluxes in $`OF1_A`$ corresponds to $`G^{(8)}`$. As we shall see in the next section, the other integral flux, as well as the flux in $`OF1_B`$, corresponds to a twisted sector RR field $`F`$, under which all fractional D-branes (as well as a stable non-BPS D-particle in $`OF1_B`$) are charged. Both of these fluxes are absent on the $`\mathrm{P}^7`$ at infinity (5); the 8-form cannot be supported on a 7-manifold, and the twisted sector field is supported only at the origin. On the other hand, the fluxes which were visible at infinity are absent here because they are not compact in the transverse space. If we relax the condition of compact support we get

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill \stackrel{~}{K}__2(^{8,0})& =& \hfill & \text{for}OF1_A\hfill \\ \hfill K_\pm ^1(^{8,0})& =& \hfill & \text{for}OF1_B.\hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
This is surprising at first, since one expects all the fluxes to contribute in this case, but clearly (9) is not the direct sum of (5) and (8). In fact, the three groups are part of a long exact sequence (Appendix), which shortens to

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}0& & K__2^1(𝐒^{8,0})& & K_{_2,cpct}(^{8,0})& \stackrel{i}{}& \stackrel{~}{K}__2(^{8,0})& & \stackrel{~}{K}__2(𝐒^{8,0})& & 0\\ & & & & & & & & & & \\ & & ^{}& & ^{}_y& \stackrel{\times 8}{}& _x& & _8& & \end{array}$$
(10)
for $`OF1_A`$, and to

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & K_{\pm ,cpct}^1(^{8,0})& \stackrel{i}{}& K_\pm ^1(^{8,0})& & K_\pm ^1(𝐒^{8,0})& & 0\\ & & & & & & & & \\ & & _y& \stackrel{\times 16}{}& _x& & _{16}& & \end{array}$$
(11)
for $`OF1_B`$.888In the first sequence the first two K groups are actually equal to their reduced versions. We have labeled the different integral fluxes according to how they map in the sequence. It follows that $``$ and $`^{}`$ are identified with $`F`$ and $`G^{(8)}`$, respectively.999Note that the flux of $`G^{(8)}`$ ($`^{}`$) is present in $`K_{_2,cpct}(^{8,0})`$, but absent in $`\stackrel{~}{K}__2(^{8,0})`$. This should follow from an argument analogous to the one given in  for the triviality of D-brane charge in non-compactly supported K-theory (see footnote 6). The sequences show that the generator $`y`$ of $``$ in the compactly supported group is related to the generator $`x`$ of $``$ in the general group by

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill y& =& 8x\hfill & \text{for}OF1_A\hfill \\ \hfill y& =& 16x\hfill & \text{for}OF1_B.\hfill \end{array}$$
(12)
The element $`y`$ corresponds to the $`F`$-flux of a fractional (stable non-BPS) D-particle in $`OF1_A`$ ($`OF1_B`$), and is therefore trivial on the $`\mathrm{P}^7`$ away from the orbifold line. On the other hand $`x`$ maps to the generator of the torsion group on $`\mathrm{P}^7`$, and therefore corresponds to the $`F`$-flux of a fractional D6-brane (D7-brane) in $`OF1_A`$ ($`OF1_B`$). It then follows that the element $`2^kx`$ (for $`k3`$) of the non-compactly supported group corresponds to the $`F`$-flux of the fractional D$`(62k)`$-brane (D$`(72k)`$-brane). The relative $`F`$-fluxes of the fractional D$`p`$-branes are therefore given by

$$F2^{p/2}.$$
(13)
We will make this more precise in the following section.

## 3 Perturbative orbifold lines

In this section we analyze in detail the perturbative $`_2`$ orbifold lines $`^{1,1}\times ^8/_8`$ and $`^{1,1}\times ^8/_8(1)^{F_L}`$ for both Type IIA and Type IIB string theory. The Type IIA orbifolds are denoted $`OF1_A`$ and $`OP1_A`$, respectively, and the Type IIB orbifolds are denoted $`OP1_B`$ and $`OF1_B`$, respectively. The four theories are related by T-duality if we compactify some of the directions. In particular, $`OF1_A`$ is related to $`OF1_B`$ by T-duality of a coordinate along $`^8`$, and to $`OP1_B`$ by T-duality along the line. These orbifolds preserve 1/2 of the supersymmetry of Type II string theory. In particular, from the point of view of the invariant subspace $`^{1,1}`$, $`OF1_{A,B}`$ possess $`𝒩=(8,8)`$ supersymmetry, and $`OP1_{A,B}`$ have $`𝒩=(16,0)`$ (or $`(0,16)`$) supersymmetry.

### 3.1 Perturbative spectrum

We begin by describing the closed string spectrum of these theories. The untwisted sector is obtained simply by acting on the spectrum of Type II string theory by the orbifold projection

$$P=\frac{1}{2}(1+g),(g=_8\text{or}_8(1)^{F_L}).$$
(14)
Before orbifolding, the Type II spectrum in light-cone gauge consists of states created from a ground state in one of four sectors (NS-NS, NS-R, R-NS, and R-R) by left and right-moving oscillators of the form $`\alpha _n^i`$, $`\psi _n^i`$ (R), $`\psi _{n+1/2}^i`$ (NS), where $`n0`$, and $`i=1,\mathrm{},8`$ (the fixed line is taken to lie along the longitudinal coordinate $`x^9`$). The ground state of the NS sector is non-degenerate and tachyonic, with $`m^2=1/2`$, whereas the presence of 8 fermionic zero modes in the R sector give rise to a 16-fold degenerate massless ground state, i.e. a massless spinor. Consistency (and spacetime supersymmetry) requires that this spectrum be projected by $`P_{GSO}\stackrel{~}{P}_{GSO}`$, where

$$P_{GSO}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \frac{1}{2}(1+(1)^f)& \text{NS}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{2}(1+(1)^f)& \text{R}\hfill \end{array}\stackrel{~}{P}_{GSO}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \frac{1}{2}(1+(1)^{\stackrel{~}{f}})& \text{NS}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{2}(1\pm (1)^{\stackrel{~}{f}})& \text{R}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(15)
In the last line the $`+`$ sign corresponds to Type IIB and the $``$ sign to Type IIA. In particular, the projection on the R ground state reduces it to a chiral 8-component spinor (either $`\mathrm{𝟖}_s`$ or $`\mathrm{𝟖}_c`$ of $`SO(8)`$).

In the twisted sector the moding of the oscillators in the inverted directions changes, and becomes half-odd-integral for the bosons $`\alpha _{n+1/2}^i`$ and Ramond fermions $`\psi _{n+1/2}^i`$ (R), and integral for the Neveu-Schwarz fermions $`\psi _n^i`$ (NS). The ground state of the R sector, as usual, is massless, due to a cancellation between the bosonic and fermionic contributions. Now this state is a singlet of $`SO(8)`$, since there are no fermionic zero modes. The ground state of the NS sector on the other hand is 16-fold degenerate, but is massive, with $`m^2=+1/2`$. The only massless field is therefore a real RR scalar $`\varphi `$. Since the $`SO(1,1)`$ chirality is fixed in light-cone gauge, this is actually a chiral boson.

A-priori this field exists in all four cases, but supersymmetry only allows it in the $`𝒩=(16,0)`$ theories. We therefore expect it to be removed from the other two theories by the GSO projection. This is most easily seen in a covariant gauge, where the $`SO(1,1)`$ chirality is not fixed. The R ground state is then a two-component Majorana spinor of $`SO(1,1)`$, which decomposes as $`\mathrm{𝟐}=\mathrm{𝟏}_{+1/2}\mathrm{𝟏}_{1/2}`$. The spectrum of fields in the twisted RR sector is then given by

$$\mathrm{𝟐}\times \mathrm{𝟐}=\mathrm{𝟏}_{+1}\mathrm{𝟏}_12\mathrm{𝟏}_0.$$
(16)
The first term corresponds to a chiral (self-dual) boson $`\varphi ^+`$, and the second to an anti-chiral (anti-self-dual) boson $`\varphi ^{}`$. The third term is an unphysical state, and is removed in light-cone gauge. The GSO projection in the twisted sector of the $`_8`$ orbifold is the same as in the untwisted sector above, which means that the chiral and anti-chiral bosons are removed from Type IIA, but one of them remains in Type IIB. In the twisted sector of the $`_8(1)^{F_L}`$ orbifold the left-moving GSO projection is reversed relative to the untwisted sector, so one of the bosons remains in Type IIA, and both are removed from Type IIB. We therefore find a massless chiral (or anti-chiral) RR boson only in the twisted sector of $`OP1_{A,B}`$. Finally, we must again project by (14), but this does not affect the above state.

The orbifolds $`OF1_{A,B}`$ do not have any massless propagating fields in the twisted sector. They may however possess non-dynamical fields, which are consistent with $`𝒩=(8,8)`$ supersymmetry. An example in ten dimensions is the RR 9-form potential in Type IIA string theory. This field is not dynamical, but is crucial for describing massive Type IIA backgrounds in which D8-branes are present. The analogous field in two dimensions is a vector potential $`A`$. We claim that precisely such a field exists in the twisted RR sector of the orbifolds $`OF1_{A,B}`$. In support of this claim we shall offer in the next subsection precisely the same argument which appeared in support of the 9-form in ten dimensions , namely the existence of a corresponding D-brane, which in our case is a (fractional) D-particle.

In the compact case, $`𝐓^8/_2`$, there are additional fields corresponding to 16 fundamental strings, which must be added to cancel a one loop tadpole of the form $`BY_8(R)`$  (see also ). This sets the NSNS charge (and tension) of a single bare orbifold line to $`1/16`$. That the $`OF1_B`$ has the same $`Q(0)=1/16`$ is a consequence of T duality (in some direction in the $`𝐓^8`$) which preserves both the number of orbifold lines and the number of fundamental strings needed to cancel the tadpole. This charge is also consistent with dualities: the $`OF1_A`$ lifts in M theory to the orbifold 2-plane (OM2), whose tension was determined to be $`1/16`$ in ; the $`OF1_B`$ is S dual to the bare orientifold line which has tension $`1/16`$ as well. Later we will find out that for the $`OF1_A`$ one gets an orbifold with zero tension by adding a D6-brane ($`G^{(2)}`$ torsion) to the bare (i.e. perturbative) orbifold. This lifts to a smooth orbifold in M-theory of the form $`(^8\times 𝐒^1)/_2`$, where the $`_2`$ acts as a half-shift along the M-circle.

### 3.2 D-branes

The analysis of the D-brane spectrum follows closely the boundary state techniques of . We will use the convention of defining a D$`p`$-brane of type $`(r,s)`$, where $`r+s=p`$, to have $`r`$ spatial world-volume directions along the orbifold line101010$`r=1`$ corresponds to a Dirichlet boundary condition in time, i.e. a D-instanton., and $`s`$ along $`^8`$. The spectrum of D-branes on $`_2`$ orbifolds contains two kinds of irreducible D-brane states: fractional D-branes and truncated D-branes. The former are linear combinations of boundary states in the untwisted NSNS and RR sectors, and the twisted NSNS and RR sectors,

$$|D(r,s)=\frac{1}{2}\left(|B(r,s)_{NSNS}+ϵ_1|B(r,s)_{RR}+ϵ_1ϵ_2|B(r,s)_{NSNS,T}+ϵ_2|B(r,s)_{RR,T}\right),$$
(17)
and the latter contain only an untwisted NSNS state and a twisted RR state,

$$\stackrel{~}{|D(r,s)}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|B(r,s)_{NSNS}+ϵ_2|B(r,s)_{RR,T}\right).$$
(18)
The numerical factors in front are fixed by the requirement that, for any pair of D-branes, the cylinder amplitude corresponds to an open string partition function . The signs $`ϵ_1,ϵ_2`$ determine the charges of the D-brane with respect to the appropriate massless RR field in the untwisted and twisted sector, respectively. The presence of twisted sector charge means that these D-branes are “stuck” to the orbifold line. By combining two fractional D-branes with opposite $`ϵ_2`$ one can form a bulk D-brane, which can separate from the orbifold line.

In a supersymmetric orbifold, such as the ones we are considering, fractional D-branes are BPS states, and truncated D-branes describe non-BPS states. The latter may or may not be stable, depending on whether their spectrum includes tachyons. In the non-compact case we are considering, truncated D-branes will only be stable for $`s=0`$, i.e. if their world-volume is entirely transverse to the $`^8`$.

The spectrum of physical D-brane states is determined by requiring GSO and orbifold invariance. This has been done for the general case of $`n`$ inverted directions in . The results for $`n=8`$ are summarized in the following table

| D-brane | $`OF1_A`$ | $`OP1_A`$ | $`OP1_B`$ | $`OF1_B`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`|D(r,s)`$ | $`r=0`$, $`s`$ even | $`r=\pm 1`$, $`s`$ odd | $`r=\pm 1`$, $`s`$ even | $`r=0`$, $`s`$ odd |
| $`\stackrel{~}{|D(r,s)}`$ |  | $`r=\pm 1`$, $`s=0`$ |  | $`r=s=0`$ |

(19)
In particular both $`OF1_A`$ and $`OF1_B`$ admit a D-particle with a twisted RR component. In the first case it is a BPS fractional D-particle, and in the second case it is a stable non-BPS truncated D-particle. This confirms the existence of a non-dynamical vector field $`A`$ in the twisted sector of these theories.

In addition, $`OF1_A`$ contains fractional D$`p`$-branes with $`p=2,4,6,8`$, which are transverse to the orbifold line and intersect it at a point. All of these are charged under $`A`$, as well as under the respective RR field $`C^{(p+1)}`$ in the untwisted sector. Similarly, $`OF1_B`$ contains transverse fractional D$`p`$-branes with $`p=1,3,5,7`$, which are all charged under $`A`$, as well as the respective $`C^{(p+1)}`$. The two-dimensional scalar field strength $`F=dA`$ can be thought of as a cosmological constant in the twisted sector, by analogy with the ten-dimensional cosmological constant $`G^{(0)}=dC^{(9)}`$ in Type IIA string theory. The above fractional branes form domain walls on the $`OF1`$ orbifolds, across which the value of $`F`$ jumps. The magnitude of the jump depends on the size of the fractional D-brane as follows:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }F_{Dp}=2^{p/2}.$$
(20)
This is most easily determined by replacing $`^8`$ with the compact $`𝐓^8`$. In this case there are $`2^8`$ fixed lines, each containing a RR 1-form in the twisted sector. The correctly normalized fractional D-brane states are (ignoring the volume factors)

$`|D(r,s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[|B(r,s)_{NSNS}+ϵ_1|B(r,s)_{RR}`$ (21)
$`+2^{s/2}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2^s}{}}}ϵ_2^{(i)}(ϵ_1|B(r,s)_{NSNS,T_i}+|B(r,s)_{RR,T_i})],`$
where $`i`$ labels the orbifold lines which the D-brane intersects. Equation (20) follows by noting that $`s=p`$ for the $`OF1`$ fractional D-branes. In particular, for the fractional D-particle in Type IIA the jump is $`\mathrm{\Delta }F=1`$. On the other hand, for the truncated D-particle in Type IIB the jump is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }F_{\stackrel{~}{D0}}=\sqrt{2}.$$
(22)
This follows by comparing its boundary state (18) to that of the Type IIA fractional D-particle (17). Alternatively, this also follows from the realization of the non-BPS D-particle as a bound state of two BPS D-strings with opposite untwisted RR charge and equal twisted RR charge .

## 4 Orbifold line tension and NSNS Charge

The perturbative orbifold lines (with $`F=0`$) carry both an NSNS charge and tension given by $`Q(0)=1/16`$. That the two are equal is guaranteed by the fact that the orbifold lines are BPS objects, i.e. they preserve 1/2 of the underlying supersymmetry.111111More precisely they preserve 16 supersymmetries. This will continue to be true for non-zero values of $`F`$, since $`F`$ does not have a fermionic partner, and therefore does not appear in the SUSY variation equations. As we shall see, the tension, and therefore the charge, depends on the value of $`F`$.

### 4.1 Effective action

The low-energy effective action of the orbifold theories contains a standard kinetic term for the twisted sector vector field

$$S_F=\frac{n}{2}F^2,$$
(23)
where the coefficient $`n`$ remains to be determined, though a $`1/2`$ prefactor is inserted with hindsight. This implies that the tension jump due to a D$`p`$-brane is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_{Dp}=(n/2)\mathrm{\Delta }F_{Dp}^2`$. The normalization factor $`n`$ could a-priori be different for IIA and IIB, but T-duality actually shows it is the same. Consider a fractional D$`p`$-brane in IIA intersecting $`𝐓^8/_2`$. Since a fractional D$`p`$-brane intersects $`2^p`$ orbifold lines, the total tension jump is $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q=2^p(n_A/2)\mathrm{\Delta }F_{Dp}^2=n_A/2`$. After T-duality the same computation yields $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q=n_B/2`$, but since tension is invariant under T-duality we have $`n_A=n_B`$.

To determine $`n`$ we could in principle compute the closed string sphere amplitude with two insertions of $`F`$. Alternatively, it can also be deduced from the cylinder amplitude involving the twisted RR component of a fractional D-particle,

$$A_{RR,T}=\frac{1}{4}B0|e^{lH_{closed}}|B0_{RR,T},$$
(24)
which in the limit $`l\mathrm{}`$ is equivalent to the sphere amplitude. On the other hand, the cylinder amplitude can be re-expressed as a one loop open string amplitude, which in the above limit reduces to the supersymmetry index of the internal CFT, giving

$$n=\text{Tr}_{NSR}^{00}(1)^f\left(\frac{1+g}{2}\right)=8.$$
(25)
The computation proceeds as follows. There are 8 massless states in the NS sector $`\psi _{1/2}^i|0_{NS}`$ prior to the projection, where the index $`i=1,..,8`$ is transverse to the $`OF1_A`$. However since $`\psi _{1/2}^i`$ is odd under the orbifold projection, all these states are projected out, and no spacetime bosons remain. In the R sector there are 8 fermionic zero modes $`\psi _0^i`$, which upon quantization yield 16 massless states. The action of $`g`$ on the R ground state is given by $`_i\psi _0^i`$, i.e. it is the same as the action of $`(1)^f`$ on the R ground state in the internal CFT, so the only non-vanishing contribution comes from $`\frac{1}{2}\text{Tr}_R(1)^fg=\frac{1}{2}\text{Tr}_R\mathrm{𝟏}=8`$.

The tension jump is therefore given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }Q_{Dp}=4\mathrm{\Delta }F_{Dp}^2=\{\begin{array}{cc}2^{p+2}\hfill & \text{for a fractional D}p\text{-brane}\hfill \\ 8\hfill & \text{for the non-BPS D-particle}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(26)
Taking into account that $`Q(0)=1/16`$ the absolute tension (and NSNS charge) as a function of the background RR field $`F`$ is then given by

$$Q(F)=4F^2\frac{1}{16}.$$
(27)
### 4.2 String creation

A physical picture for the tension and charge jumps (and our original derivation of the above formula) is provided by the string creation phenomenon. This phenomenon is an example of the Hanany-Witten effect , in which two linked D-branes, i.e. two D-branes which have a single mutually transverse direction, cross each other . In order to conserve the linking number, a string must be created between the two D-branes.

An example of a linked pair is the D0-D8 system in Type IIA. From the D8-brane point of view, the linking number corresponds to a world-volume electric charge induced by the D-particle, which flips sign when the branes cross. Similarly, the D8-brane induces a charge on the D-particle, which flips sign when the branes cross. A unique feature of this particular linked brane system is that, since the D-particle cannot support a net charge, the induced charge must be cancelled by strings ending on it. For a single D8-brane this requires an unusual $`\pm 1/2`$ string (depending on which side of the D8-brane the D-particle sits), so the corresponding system is presumably unphysical (a system with two D8-branes is more physical), but the net change when the branes cross is the creation of a single string.

The process of string creation can also be understood dynamically. The ground state of the D0-D8 open string is a single massless fermion, which leads to a repulsive one-loop effective potential in the world-line theory of the D-particle,121212The full string effective potential vanishes by supersymmetry. From the D-particle point of view there exists a tree-level term which cancels the one-loop potential . The former can be understood as coming from the (1/2) string attached to the D-particle.

$$V(x)=|x|/2.$$
(28)
This gives a jump in the force at $`x=0`$, which is exactly compensated by the creation of a single string between the D-particle and the D8-brane. More generally, the number of strings which are created is given by the number of (massless) R ground states of the open string between the two D-branes in the linked system. This is equivalent to the supersymmetry index of the open string, since the NS ground state is always massive in such a system.

In our orbifold lines any two fractional D-branes are linked, and therefore exhibit string creation. In particular, for a pair of fractional D-particles on $`OF1_A`$ there are $`n=8`$ massless R ground states, and therefore 8 strings are created.

We will now use this fact to compute the tension jump due to a single D-particle. The two D-particles divide the orbifold line into three regions (see figure 1): a semi-infinite line with $`F1`$ field strength, a finite segment with $`F`$, and another semi-infinite line with $`F+1`$. We denote the corresponding tensions (or charges) $`Q(F1),Q(F)`$ and $`Q(F+1)`$, respectively. Next, we exchange the positions of the two D-particles, and demand that $`Q(F)`$ remains unchanged in the middle segment,

$$Q(F)=Q(F1)Q(F)+Q(F+1)8.$$
(29)
The general solution to this recursion equation is $`Q(F)=4F^2+aF+Q(0)`$, which is consistent with (27).

To determine the value of the constant $`a`$ requires knowledge of how many strings are attached to the D-particle to begin with, and not just the number of strings which are created in the exchange. As in the D0-D8 system, this is given by (minus) the electric charge induced on a D-particle by a background field $`F`$. By analogy with the D0-D8 system, we expect this charge to be of the form $`8F`$. The situation here is somewhat more subtle, in that the D-particle is both a source and a probe for the field $`F`$. It is therefore not clear what should be taken as the background value of $`F`$. A natural choice in the above case of the two D-particles is the average of the two sides, $`F+1/2`$. The net number of strings attached to the probe D-particle is then given by $`Q(F+1)Q(F)=8(F+1/2)`$, which gives $`Q(F)=4F^2+Q(0)`$.

### 4.3 The self intersection number

Here we offer an alternative point of view for the computation of $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q(F)`$ which uses the self intersection in K-theory. Type IIA includes the following coupling131313We thank E. Witten for suggesting this. The normalization is inherited from the term $`1/6CGG`$ in 11d.

$$\frac{1}{2}B_{NS}G^{(4)}G^{(4)},$$
(30)
where $`G^{(4)}`$ is the 4-form RR field strength, and all forms are normalized to have integral fluxes. This term contributes $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q=(1/2)G^{(4)}G^{(4)}`$ to the fundamental string charge. We would like to perform this integral by using a Poincaré duality to exchange $`G^{(4)}`$ with the dual 4-cycle, and trade the wedge product with the intersection product. However, since $`^8/_8`$ is singular, one needs to be careful.

The eight-dimensional orbifold $`^8/_8`$, unlike $`^4/_4`$, cannot be resolved in the usual manner. The necessary ”blow-up” moduli, which appear as massless scalars in the twisted NSNS sector of $`^4/_4`$, are absent for $`^8/_8`$. The twisted NSNS sector of the orbifold line is purely massive. This orbifold therefore corresponds to an isolated point in the moduli space of Type II compactifications to two dimensions, i.e. it is not a limit of Calabi-Yau four-folds.

Nevertheless, one expects it to correspond to a limit of some smooth eight-dimensional manifold $`X`$, which is not Ricci-flat. Since the only massless field in the twisted sector of this orbifold for Type IIA ($`OF1_A`$) is a RR vector, we expect the above eight-dimensional manifold to possess a single homology cycle $`C`$ of dimension four. The IIA vector then corresponds to the reduction of $`C^{(5)}`$ on the four-cycle.

Assuming that such a manifold $`X`$ exists, and that it has a 4 cycle $`C`$, we can take the dual of $`G^{(4)}`$ for the orbifold with $`F=1`$ to be $`C`$. From (30) we then find $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q(F)=(1/2)(FC)(FC)=(1/2)(CC)F^2`$, from which we deduce

$$|(CC)|=n=8.$$
(31)
To be more precise one should replace the cohomological formula (30) by a K-theoretic one $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q(F)=(1/2)(Fy)(Fy)`$, where $`y`$ is the class of the D-particle, i.e. the generator of $`K_{_2,cpct}(^{8,0})`$, and $`yy`$ is a K-theory product. It follows from (12) that $`yy=8`$.

We should point out, however, that so far we have not been able to identify the manifold $`X`$. We found two manifolds $`X`$ satisfying $`X=\mathrm{P}^7`$, but neither one has the right properties. Presumably these are not the right manifolds that can be continuously deformed (continuous with respect to K-theory data) into the singular $`^4/_2`$. The first, $`X_1`$, is the disk bundle $`𝒪(2)`$ over $`\mathrm{P}^3`$, which was discussed in . It is gotten from the circle fibration $`𝐒^1\mathrm{P}^7\mathrm{P}^3`$, by filling the $`𝐒^1`$. It does have a 4 cycle $`C`$, but it also has a redundant 2 cycle and a redundant 6 cycle. Moreover, the self intersection number of $`C`$ is $`2`$. Another space, $`X_2`$, can be gotten from the fibration $`𝐒^3𝐒^7𝐒^4`$, which induces $`\mathrm{P}^3\mathrm{P}^7𝐒^4`$. By filling the fiber with an Eguchi-Hanson space (EH) one gets $`\text{EH}X_2𝐒^4`$. However, $`X_2`$ inherits a redundant 2 cycle and a redundant 6 cycle from the 2 cycle of EH. Thus neither $`X_1`$ nor $`X_2`$ meets our expectations.

## Appendix A An Orbifold K-theory Primer

### A.1 Equivariant K-theory

Consider a space $`X`$ acted on by a discrete symmetry group $`G`$. A vector bundle $`E`$ over $`X`$, acted on by $`G`$ such that the projection $`EX`$ commutes with the action of $`G`$, is called a G-equivariant bundle over $`X/G`$. Pairs of such bundles $`(E,F)`$, modulo the usual identification $`(EH,FH)`$ (where $`H`$ is also a $`G`$-equivariant bundle), are classified in equivariant K-theory $`K_G(X)`$. These groups satisfy many of the properties of ordinary K-theory, such as Bott-periodicity,

$$K_G^k(X)=K_G^{k+2}(X).$$
(32)
Two basic identities in equivariant K-theory which we will use are

$$K_G(pt.)=R[G],$$
(33)
where $`R[G]`$ is the representation ring of $`G`$, and

$$K_G(X)=K(X/G)$$
(34)
if $`G`$ acts freely on $`X`$. As in ordinary K-theory, one can also define the notion of reduced equivariant K-theory, $`\stackrel{~}{K}_G(X)`$, by requiring $`E`$ and $`F`$ to have equal rank, or equivalently by removing the group evaluated at a ($`G`$-orbit of a) generic point,

$$\stackrel{~}{K}_G(X)=\text{ker}[K_G(X)K_G(_ig_ipt.)](g_iG).$$
(35)
Using (34) we see that the latter group is simply $`K(pt.)=`$, so the usual decomposition holds,

$$K_G(X)=\stackrel{~}{K}_G(X).$$
(36)
Let $`X=^n`$ and $`G=_2`$, where the non-trivial element inverts $`l`$ of the $`n`$ coordinates. The corresponding group is denoted $`K__2(^{l,m})`$, where $`m=nl`$. Since $`^n`$ is (equivariantly) contractable to a point,

$$K__2(^{l,m})=R[_2]=.$$
(37)
If the bundles $`E`$ and $`F`$ are isomorphic at infinity, the pair $`(E,F)`$ is said to be compactly supported, and the classifying groups are given by

$$K_{_2,cpct}(^{l,m})=K__2(^{l,m},𝐒^{l,m})=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & m\text{odd}\hfill \\ \hfill & m\text{even},l\text{odd}\hfill \\ \hfill & m,l\text{even},\hfill \end{array}$$
(38)
where $`𝐒^{l,m}`$ denotes the $`(n1)`$-sphere (at infinity) in the space $`^n/_2`$. There is no further reduction of these groups, as the compact support condition already implies that $`E`$ and $`F`$ have equal rank. Higher K-theory groups are obtained by the suspension isomorphism,

$$K_{_2,cpct}^k(^{l,m})=K_{_2,cpct}(^{l,m+k}),$$
(39)
and are related by the usual Bott-periodicity (32). In particular this implies that

$$K__2^1(^{l,m})=K__2^1(pt.)=K_{_2,cpct}(^{0,1})=0.$$
(40)
The computation of equivariant K-theory groups for the spheres $`X=𝐒^n`$ is somewhat more involved in general. However, for an $`(n1)`$-sphere corresponding to the boundary of the completely reflected space $`^{n,0}`$, denoted $`𝐒^{n,0}`$, the action of $`_2`$ is free, and we can use (34) to get

$$K__2(𝐒^{n,0})=K(\mathrm{P}^{n1})=_{2^{[(n1)/2]}}.$$
(41)
The discrete torsion part corresponds to the reduced group $`\stackrel{~}{K}(\mathrm{P}^{n1})`$, and can be determined as follows. The generator of $`\stackrel{~}{K}(\mathrm{P}^{n1})`$ is $`(_{},\mathrm{𝟏})`$, where $`_{}`$ is the complexification of the canonical (real) line bundle $``$ over $`\mathrm{P}^{n1}`$. Recall that a point $`p`$ in $`\mathrm{P}^{n1}`$ corresponds to a real line through the origin in $`^n`$. The fiber of $``$ above the point $`p`$ is defined to be precisely this line. The line bundle can also be expressed as $`(𝐒^{n1}\times )/_2`$, where the $`_2`$ generator simultaneously reflects the sphere and the line. (For example, the canonical line bundle over $`\mathrm{P}^1𝐒^1`$ is the Möbius strip.) One can, as usual, define local frames over subsets $`U_i`$ of $`\mathrm{P}^{n1}`$ which trivialize the bundle locally, but the $`_2`$ twist prevents these frames from combining into a global non-degenerate frame. Such a frame can however be constructed by considering multiple copies of the bundle, and is given by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^i\widehat{x}^i`$, where $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. This requires $`2^{[(n1)/2]}`$ copies of $`_{}`$, since that is the dimension of the irreducible complex spinor representation of $`SO(n)`$. (Note that for $`n=2`$, $`_{}`$ is twice the real Möbius bundle, and is therefore trivial.)

The different groups are part of a long exact sequence given by

$`\mathrm{}K__2^1(^{l,m})`$ $``$ $`K__2^1(𝐒^{l,m})K_{_2,cpct}(^{l,m})`$ (42)
$`\stackrel{i}{}`$ $`\stackrel{~}{K}__2(^{l,m})\stackrel{~}{K}__2(𝐒^{l,m})K_{_2,cpct}^1(^{l,m})\mathrm{},`$
which, for $`l=n`$ and $`m=0`$ reduces to

$$0K__2^1(𝐒^{n,0})^{}\stackrel{i}{}_{2^{[(n1)/2]}}0.$$
(43)
It follows that $`K__2^1(𝐒^{n,0})=^{}`$, and that the map $`i`$ is a multiplication by $`2^{[(n1)/2]}`$.

### A.2 Atiyah-Hirzebruch spectral sequence

There is a useful technique of successive approximations to K-theory known as the Atiyah-Hirzebruch spectral sequence (AHSS). We start by triangulating the $`n`$-dimensional space $`X`$ with successive trees $`X^p`$, where $`p=0,\mathrm{},n`$, and forming the filtration

$$K_n(X)K_{n1}(X)\mathrm{}K_0(X)=K(X),$$
(44)
where $`K_p(X)`$ is defined to contain classes which are trivial on the $`(p1)`$-tree $`X^{p1}`$. For example $`K_1(X)=\stackrel{~}{K}(X)`$. Analogous filtrations can be formed for $`K^1(X)`$, and for equivariant K-theory. The second step is to define a graded complex associated to the K-theory group in question, e.g.

$$\text{Gr}K^k(X)=_pK_p^k(X)/K_{p+1}^k(X).$$
(45)
The successive ratios forming the graded complex are computed using a spectral sequence of groups $`E_r^{p,q}`$ with differential maps $`d_r:E_r^{p,q}E_r^{p+r,qr+1}`$, such that each $`E_{r+1}^{p,q}`$ is the cohomology of $`d_r`$. The first terms in the sequence $`E_1^{p,q}`$ are given by singular $`p`$-cochains on $`X`$ with values in $`K^q(pt.)`$,

$$E_1^{p,q}=C^p(X;K^q(pt.))=\{\begin{array}{cc}C^p(X;)\hfill & q\text{even}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & q\text{odd}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(46)
The differential $`d_1`$ can be identified with the simplicial co-boundary operator acting on these co-chains. The second set of terms in the sequence is therefore given by

$$E_2^{p,q}=H^p(X,K^q(pt.))=\{\begin{array}{cc}H^p(X;)\hfill & q\text{even}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & q\text{odd}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(47)
The successive ratios are given by the limit of this sequence,

$$K_p^k(X)/K_{p+1}^k(X)=E_{\mathrm{}}^{p,(p+k)},$$
(48)
although in the cases we are interested in the sequence terminates at $`E_2^{p,q}`$. For example, for $`𝐒^{8,0}`$ we get

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\text{Gr}K__2(𝐒^{8,0})\hfill & =& H^{even}(\mathrm{P}^7;)\hfill & =& _2_2_2\hfill \\ \text{Gr}K__2^1(𝐒^{8,0})\hfill & =& H^{odd}(\mathrm{P}^7;)\hfill & =& .\hfill \end{array}$$
(49)
Once we have the graded complex, computing the filter groups $`K_p^k`$, and in particular the K-theory group itself, requires a solution of extension problems of the form

$$0K_{p+1}^k(X)K_p^k(X)K_p^k(X)/K_{p+1}^k(X)0.$$
(50)
In the second case the solution is unique, and gives

$$K__2^1(𝐒^{8,0})=,$$
(51)
but in the first case there are three possible solutions: $`_2^3`$, $`_2_4`$, and $`_8`$. From the previous discussion we know that the correct answer is $`K__2(𝐒^{8,0})=_8`$.

Although the extension problem precludes the AHSS as a useful way of computing the latter group, it does offer some physical insight into the nature of the discrete torsion “enhancement” in K-theory compared to cohomology. The point is that the filter groups $`K_p`$ ($`p1`$) can also be thought of as K-theory groups which classify RR fields starting with a D$`(9p)`$-$`\overline{\text{D}(9p)}`$-brane pair. The filter groups for $`K__2(𝐒^{8,0})`$ are therefore given by

$$K_p(𝐒^{8,0})=\stackrel{~}{K}__2(𝐒^{9p,0}).$$
(52)
Using (41) we get

$`K_1`$ $`=`$ $`K_2=_8`$
$`K_3`$ $`=`$ $`K_4=_4`$
$`K_5`$ $`=`$ $`K_6=_2=H^6(\mathrm{P}^7;)`$
$`K_7`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (53)
where the identification of the $`_2`$ above with $`H^6`$ follows from (47), (48), and the fact that $`K_7=0`$. Consider now the two sequences of the form (50) with $`p=4`$ and $`p=2`$,

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & K_5& & K_4& & H^4(\mathrm{P}^7;)& & 0\\ & & & & & & & & \\ & & _2& & _4& & _2& & \\ 0& & K_3& & K_2& & H^2(\mathrm{P}^7;)& & 0\\ & & & & & & & & \\ & & _4& & _8& & _2& & \end{array}$$
(54)
Denote the generator of $`_8`$ by $`x`$, the generator of $`_4`$ by $`y`$, and the generators of the three even ($`_2`$) cohomologies $`x^{(2)},x^{(4)}`$, and $`x^{(6)}`$. It then follows from the above sequences that

$$x=x^{(2)},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}x=x^{(4)},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}x=x^{(6)},$$
(55)
which gives equation (7).

### A.3 Hopkins’ groups $`K_\pm `$

If the generator of the $`_2`$ includes the operator $`(1)^{F_L}`$ in addition to inversion, the bundles are not equivariant, but rather we are given an isomorphism $`\lambda :(E,F)(g^{}F,g^{}E)`$ with $`(\lambda g^{})^2=1`$. The corresponding groups are denoted $`K_\pm (X)`$. These groups have not been studied as extensively as equivariant K-theory, so far less is known about them (see  for related results).

A theorem due to Hopkins (unpublished) asserts that

$$K_{\pm ,cpct}(X)=K_{_2,cpct}(X\times ^{1,1}).$$
(56)
This relation can be understood as the failure of ordinary Bott periodicity $`K_{cpct}(X)=K_{cpct}(X\times ^2)`$, due to the orientation reversal of the $`^2`$.141414This was pointed out to us by M. Atiyah. It should be contrasted with the case in which the orientation is preserved,

$$K_{_2,cpct}(X)=K_{_2,cpct}(X\times ^{0,2}).$$
(57)
In particular this implies

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}K_\pm (^{l,m})\hfill & =& K_\pm (pt.)\hfill & =& K_{\pm ,cpct}(^{0,0})\hfill & =& 0\\ K_\pm ^1(^{l,m})\hfill & =& K_\pm ^1(pt.)\hfill & =& K_{\pm ,cpct}^1(^{0,0})\hfill & =& ,\end{array}$$
(58)
where in the last step we used the suspension isomorphism (39), which continues to hold for $`K_\pm `$.

For the spheres, one can again try the AHSS. The analysis is very similar to the one above for equivariant K-theory, except that the singular cochains and cohomologies valued in $``$ are replaced by those valued in the twisted $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. This is because all RR fields are odd under $`(1)^{F_L}`$. The corresponding graded complexes are therefore given by

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\text{Gr}K_\pm (𝐒^{8,0})\hfill & =& H^{even}(\mathrm{P}^7;\stackrel{~}{})\hfill & =& 0\hfill \\ \text{Gr}K_\pm ^1(𝐒^{8,0})\hfill & =& H^{odd}(\mathrm{P}^7;\stackrel{~}{})\hfill & =& _2_2_2_2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(59)
In particular, this implies that $`K_\pm (𝐒^{8,0})=0`$. The second group $`K_\pm ^1(𝐒^{8,0})`$ suffers from the same extension problems as $`K__2(𝐒^{8,0})`$, and it is reasonable to guess that a complete enhancement occurs to $`_{16}`$. From (56) it follows that

$$K_\pm ^1(𝐒^{n,0})=K_{_2,cpct}^1(𝐒^{n,0}\times ^{1,1})=K_{_2,cpct}(𝐒^{n,0}\times ^{1,0}),$$
(60)
where in the second equality we have used the suspension isomorphism and Bott periodicity. The action on the space $`X=𝐒^{n,0}\times ^{1,0}`$ is free, and gives $`X/_2_{n1}`$, where $`_{n1}`$ is the canonical real line bundle over $`\mathrm{P}^{n1}`$. Since the compactification of $`_{n1}`$ is topologically the same as $`\mathrm{P}^n`$ we find

$$K_\pm ^1(𝐒^{n,0})=\stackrel{~}{K}(\mathrm{P}^n)=_{2^{[n/2]}},$$
(61)
and in particular $`K_\pm ^1(𝐒^{8,0})=_{16}`$. Similarly, one can show that $`K_\pm (𝐒^{n,0})=0`$.151515We thank M. Atiyah for discussions on these issues.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank E. Witten, M. Atiyah and S. Sethi for useful conversations. B.K. would like to thank I. Brunner, A. Hanany, A. Schwarz, and members of the IAS group, especially K. Dasgupta, E. Diaconescu, J. Maldacena and N. Seiberg for discussions. B.K. also thanks the Hebrew University in Jerusalem for hospitality during the course of the work. E.G. would like to thank the ITP at Santa Barbara which is supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY99-07949 for their hospitality while this work was being completed.

O.B. was supported in part by the DOE under grant no. DE-FG03-92-ER40701, and by a Sherman Fairchild Prize Fellowship. The work of E.G. was supported by NSF grant no. 0070928 and by Frank and Peggy Taplin. The work of B.K. was supported by DOE grant no. DE-FG02-90ER4052 and by a Raymond and Beverley Sackler Fellowship.