format: text

text:
# Vertical distribution of Galactic disk stars Based on observations made at the Observatoire de Haute Provence (France). Data only available in electronic form at the CDS (Strasbourg, France

## 1 Introduction

The primary purpose of the observations described in this paper is to determine the potential from 300 pc to 1 kpc from the galactic plane using an homogeneous and complete sample of red clump giants. The measure of the potential close to the galactic plane has been recently improved thanks to the Hipparcos observations leading to an unbiased estimate of the local mass density $`0.076\pm 0.015`$M pc<sup>-3</sup> (based on A and F stars, Crézé et al. (1998a, b) , see also Pham (1998) and Holmberg & Flynn (2000)) constraining the potential shape up to 125 pc from the galactic plane. This result is consistent with previous and independent determinations based on distant F dwarfs and K giants at 0.5–1 kpc (Kuijken & Gilmore 1989). A direct implication of these results is that our galactic dark matter component cannot be strongly flattened and has a more or less spheroidal shape. In order to draw with an improved accuracy the potential at various heights from the galactic plane and confirm or not this property, new kinematical data appeared to be necessary.

For this task we have chosen to observe red clump giants which are well suited for galactic studies. The first and evident interest in studying giants is their intrinsic brightness, (m$`{}_{\mathrm{V}}{}^{}`$ 9.3 at 500 pc) that allows to obtain high-resolution spectroscopy on distant stars. Moreover clump giants have a high density in the solar neighbourhood as compared to other intrinsically bright stars, they dominate in the magnitude interval $`9m_\mathrm{v}10.5`$ and colour interval $`0.9BV1.1`$. Thanks to their strong-lined spectra, K stars are well adapted to the measure of accurate radial velocities and atmospheric parameters: effective temperature $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, logarithm of gravity $`\mathrm{log}g`$ and metallicity measured by the iron abundance \[Fe/H\]. In practice, atmospheric parameters were deduced from low S/N ($`20`$) ELODIE spectra using the automated method of parametrisation TGMET, based on a criterion of minimum distance to an empirical library of reference spectra (Katz et al. 1998; Soubiran et al. 1998). The same principle is used to estimate the absolute magnitude of the target stars, leading to distances with an accuracy better than 20%, unprecedented for K giants out of the 250 pc Hipparcos sphere.

This new sample has been used to determine the vertical force $`K_z`$ and the disk surface mass density as described in Paper II. These data have also provided an opportunity to probe the transition between the thin and thick disks and to investigate their properties. If the existence of a thick disk in our Galaxy is well established, its formation and connexion to the thin disk are still matter of debate. Several models of formation, ”top down” or ”bottom-up” are proposed which predict peculiar features for the spatial, chemical, kinematical and age distributions of the thick disk, including mean behaviour and dispersions, gradients, continuity-discontinuity with other populations. Such predictions are described for instance in Majewski (1993). Therefore, a detailed knowledge of properties of the thick disk is necessary to favour one of the proposed models of formation. Previous studies of the thick disk properties are numerous but most of them suffer from serious limitations: local samples of selected stars are biased in favour of metal-poor or high velocity stars, samples of tracers (clusters, RR Lyrae…) are small and not necessary representative of the whole thick disk population, while in situ surveys suffer from lower precision due to the lack of astrometric and spectroscopic observations for faint stars. As a consequence, the parameters of the thick disk are not precisely established. Its current status is given in Norris (1999). There is still a controversy between the partisans of a flat and dense thick disk, with typical scale height of 800 pc and local relative density of 6-7% (Reylé & Robin 2001), and the partisans of a thick disk with a higher scale height, typically 1300 pc and a lower local relative density, of the order of 2% (Reid & Majewski 1993; Chen 1997). Velocity ellipsoid, asymmetric drift and mean metallicity are the other parameters which characterize the thick disk. Velocity dispersions are generally found to span typical values between 30 and 50 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, sometimes up to 80 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ in the radial direction (Ratnatunga & Freeman 1989). The asymmetric drift ranges between -20 and -80 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ and the mean metallicity from –0.50 to –0.80 dex. The view of the thick disk has been complicated by the study of Morrison et al. (1990) who brought to the fore low-metallicity stars $`(1.6<`$\[Fe/H\]$`<1.0)`$ with disk-like kinematics. Chiba & Beers (2000) estimate that 30% of the stars with $`1.6<`$\[Fe/H\]$`<1.0`$ belong to the thick disk population. It remains unclear whether this population is separate from the thick disk or its metal-weak tail. Very recently, Gilmore et al. (2002) claimed to have observed the relics of a shredded satellite forming a thick disk rotating at 100 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ at several kpc from the plane. A better understanding of the thick disk population(s) can be achieved from accurate distances, 3D velocities and metallicities for large samples of stars, with no kinematical or chemical selection, far from the plane where the relative density of the thick disk is high. Thanks to our new complete and large sample of K giants at a mean height of 400 pc above the plane, the old thin disk and thick disk populations were investigated with an unprecedented accuracy on distances, velocities and metallicities. Combining metallicities and velocities, we were able to deconvolve the thin disk and thick disk distributions providing new estimates of their parameters.

The change of the velocity ellipsoid with respect to height above the plane and metallicity has also been investigated. If the stationarity and axisymmetry of the Galaxy is generally considered as a good approximation, large scale deviations produced by warps, bars, or triaxiality of the halo, are also often mentioned. The orientation of the velocity ellipsoid is an indicator of such deviations. In the case of axisymmetry and stationarity, the velocity ellipsoid of the oldest stars is supposed to point towards the Galactic Center. This is the case in our NGP sample.

The analysis of the sample has been carried out with different tools. For the validation of our methods and for the interpretation of the stellar content of our dataset, we have used simulations of the Besançon model of stellar population synthesis of the Galaxy (Robin & Crézé 1986; Robin et al. 2002). The deconvolution of the thin disk and thick disk distributions has been performed in the 4D velocity-metallicity space using a maximum likelihood algorithm assuming gaussian components.

In Sect. 2 we describe the selection of the sample to optimize the number of clump giants. Sect. 3 is devoted to the determination of stellar parameters: radial velocities, atmospheric parameters ($`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, $`\mathrm{log}g`$, $`[\mathrm{Fe}/\mathrm{H}]`$), absolute magnitudes $`M_\text{v}`$, distances, 3D velocities with respect to the Sun. In Sect. 4, observed vertical gradients are compared to simulations of the Besançon model, and the deconvolution of two components is described. Sect. 5 deals with the vertex deviation. Our conclusions are summarized in Sect. 6.

## 2 Selection of the sample

The bulk of our sample consists of stars selected out of the Tycho-2 catalogue (Høg et al. 2000). This catalogue provides $`V_T`$ magnitudes, $`B_TV_T`$ colours, accurate proper motions and related errors. Tycho-2 photometry can be transformed into Johnson photometry applying the transformation given in ESA (1997, chap. 1)

$`V=V_T0.090(B_TV_T)`$
$`BV=0.850(B_TV_T)\text{,}`$ (1)
A selection in $`BV`$ colour has been applied to increase the number of red clump stars with respect to dwarfs, subgiants, RGB and AGB stars. We have looked at several studies, based on Hipparcos data, which use and discuss the properties of the position of the red clump in the HR diagram, used for instance as distance indicator for the galactic center (Paczynski 1998) or nearby galaxies (Girardi & Salaris 2001). According to these studies, we have chosen the colour interval 0.9 $`<BV<`$ 1.1 that optimizes the detection of red clump stars. The lower $`BV`$ limit at 0.9 rejects the brightest main sequence stars ($`M_\text{v}<5`$), some subgiants and also most giants of the blue horizontal branch (the ”clump stars” with the lowest metallicities). The upper $`BV`$ limit at 1.1 rejects most of RGB and AGB stars. We have set the limiting magnitude at V=10.5 to limit the exposure time of the spectroscopic observations, also because dwarfs begin to be dominant at fainter magnitude. Observing conditions have finally lowered the limiting magnitude of the sample.

In order to have a regular distribution of stars versus distance to the galactic plane, the survey has been carried out on two circular fields towards the NGP. The two observed fields have different size and limiting apparent magnitude (Table 1). The first one is shifted by 10 degrees from the NGP to avoid the region of the Coma–Berenices open cluster ($`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}221}\mathrm{°},b=+84\mathrm{°}`$). A circular region of $`4.5\mathrm{°}`$ radius around the center of the cluster has been removed from the second field centred on the NGP. As the two fields overlap, the common region is defined as belonging to the deepest field. Some stars were excluded a priori from the observations: i) stars identified as dwarfs thanks to their accurate Hipparcos parallaxe, ii) stars identified as variable or multiple system.

A total of 387 stars have been observed with the Elodie echelle spectrograph at OHP, 8 of them have been observed twice. According to individual errors quoted in the Tycho-2 catalogue, the sample has a mean error of $`1.3\mathrm{mas}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ on proper motions, corresponding to an error of $`3.25\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ on tangential velocities at 500 pc. The characteristics of the two fields are summarized in Table 1.

## 3 Stellar parameters

### 3.1 Spectroscopic observations, radial velocities

The observations were carried out with the echelle spectrograph Elodie on the 1.93 m-telescope at the Observatoire de Haute Provence. The performances of this instrument are described in Baranne et al. (1996). A total of 22 nights was attributed to this program in March-April 2000 and April-May 2001. The exposure time on individual targets ranges from 90 seconds to 35 minutes, with a mean value of 9 minutes and a total of 61 hours. The resulting spectra cover the full range 390 – 680 nm at a resolving power of 42 000. Spectrum extraction, wavelength calibration and measurement of radial velocities have been performed at the telescope with the on-line data reduction software. The radial velocity accuracy is better than $`1\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ for the considered stars (K stars). Our sample spans radial velocities from –92 to 85 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ with a mean value of $`13.5`$ $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. The mean S/N of the spectra at 550 nm is 23.

### 3.2 Atmospheric parameters ($`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, $`\mathrm{log}g`$, $`[\mathrm{Fe}/\mathrm{H}]`$) and absolute magnitudes $`M_\mathrm{v}`$

#### 3.2.1 TGMET and its library of reference spectra

Atmospheric parameters and absolute magnitudes were obtained with the TGMET software (Katz et al. 1998). TGMET is a minimum distance method (reduced $`\chi ^2`$ minimisation) which measures similarities between spectra in a quantitative way and finds for a given target spectrum the most closely matching template spectra in a library. The TGMET library was built from the ELODIE database described in Prugniel & Soubiran (2001), selecting high S/N spectra of reference stars having well known atmospheric parameters from published detailed analyses listed in the Catalogue of \[Fe/H\] determinations (Cayrel de Strobel et al. 2001). The selection of reference stars was extended to stars with published $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ from the lists of Blackwell & Lynas-Gray (1998); di Benedetto (1998); Alonso et al. (1996a, 1999a) and to stars with available $`VK`$ colour index in the catalogue of Morel & Magnenat (1978), calibrated into $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ using the formulae of Alonso et al. (1996b, 1999b). Multiple determinations of atmospheric parameters for the same reference star were averaged, giving more weight to the most recent analyses.

Thanks to TGMET, absolute magnitudes $`M_\text{v}`$ were estimated simultaneously with the atmospheric parameters, based on the fact that stars having similar spectra have similar absolute magnitudes. Therefore, the TGMET reference library was completed with Hipparcos stars having parallaxes with a relative error lower than 30%. Their absolute magnitudes $`M_\text{v}`$ were derived from the Tycho-2 $`V_T`$ apparent magnitude, transformed into $`V`$ Johnson band, and these stars were used as reference stars for $`M_\text{v}`$. Finally the TGMET library which was used in this study included 1112 spectra of FGK stars, 598 with available $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ from the literature, 558 with available $`\mathrm{log}g`$, 577 with available \[Fe/H\], 1079 with available $`M_\text{v}`$ determined from Hipparcos (884 from a parallax with a relative error lower than 10%). The parameters ($`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, $`\mathrm{log}g`$, \[Fe/H\], $`M_\text{v}`$) of a target star processed by TGMET are given by the weighted mean of the parameters of the best matching reference spectra.

#### 3.2.2 TGMET external accuracy

The external accuracy of TGMET depends on the quality of the reference system defined by the library of spectra. Ideally the reference library should be a perfect grid, paving regularly the parameter space. In practice, an observed library does not describe all parts of the parameter space with the same sampling. For instance, very metal-poor stars or cool dwarfs are less represented in the library and results of lower quality are expected for this class of stars. Moreover, the reference spectra being parametrized from the literature (and Hipparcos), some errors affect their parameters (typical errors quoted in detailed spectral analyses of the literature range from 50 K to 150 K for $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, 0.1 to 0.3 for $`\mathrm{log}g`$, and 0.05 to 0.1 for \[Fe/H\]).

The quality of the library was assessed, and simultaneously the global accuracy of the TGMET atmospheric parameters and absolute magnitudes was estimated. We have tested the ability of TGMET to recover the parameters of stars considered as highly reliable reference stars. For this task we have selected in the library only stars with the smallest error bars on their external parameters, having several determinations of atmospheric parameters in agreement in the literature and a relative parallax error lower than 10% in Hipparcos. For each star of this subset, the corresponding spectrum was removed from the library, its TGMET parameters were estimated with respect to the rest of the library, and compared to the literature and Hipparcos ones, as shown in Fig. 1 for \[Fe/H\] and Mv. Differences between TGMET and literature parameters have a standard deviation of 0.16 in \[Fe/H\], and 0.36 in $`M_\text{v}`$. The standard deviation in $`M_\text{v}`$ is lower for dwarfs than for giants : 0.25 for dwarfs ($`M_\text{v}>4`$), 0.37 for subgiants ($`3<M_\text{v}4`$), 0.32 for clump giants ($`0.5<M_\text{v}<1`$), 0.47 for the other giants. Good results for clump giants are explained by the number of reference spectra in the library for this type of stars, with accurate Hipparcos parallaxes.

In practice only a fraction of the library was useful for TGMET to determine the parameters of the NGP targets : a subset of 117 reference spectra was selected on the basis of their similarity with the targets. These stars have parallax errors ranging from 0.45 to 1.7 mas, with a median of 0.8 mas. The median relative error on parallax of 3.45% for this subset ensures the high quality of our reference system for $`M_\text{v}`$. Several (16) stars with a relative error greater than 10% correspond to metal poor giants which have to be kept in the library to represent the low metallicity population. The iron abundance of the target stars was determined in practice from 73 reference stars. Their literature and TGMET metallicities are compared in Fig. 2. On average the TGMET metallicities are overestimated by 0.06 dex with an rms of 0.15.

Unfortunatly the absolute magnitudes from Hipparcos parallaxes are affected by the Lutz-Kelker bias, especially among giants. This causes an additional external error which must be taken into account. In paper II, the Lutz-Kelker bias is estimated for a local sample of clump giants. It is shown that on average their absolute magnitudes have to be corrected by -0.09 mag with an rms of 0.13 mag. We have not attempted to correct individual absolute magnitudes of the reference stars because the Lutz-Kelker bias is estimated from the luminosity function of the parent population which is unknown for most giants of the library, except for the clump ones. Combining the different sources of external errors, we estimate the TGMET absolute magnitudes of clump giants to be affected by a mean error of 0.35 mag, corresponding to an error in distance of 17%, with a systematic overestimation of distances by 4%.

#### 3.2.3 TGMET internal precision

We have investigated the internal precision of TGMET by comparing the parameters obtained on target stars in the case of double observations. The TGMET parameters of the 8 target stars observed twice are given in Table 2. Both solutions show a very good agreement. The results are however of lower quality for T2012-00935, because one of the exposures has the lowest S/N of our observations (S/N=5), at the limit of the possibilities of TGMET, and for T2010-01190 because its spectrum shows an enlarged profile (FWHM = $`15.6\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) probably indicating a spectroscopic binary (enlarged profiles with FWHM $`>14\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ were only observed for 6 target stars, 2 double lined spectroscopic binaries were detected). Excluding these 2 non-representative cases, we compute rms differences of 0.02 dex in metallicity and 0.075 in absolute magnitude, giving an estimate of the precision of the TGMET method.

#### 3.2.4 The (\[Fe/H\], $`M_\text{v}`$) distribution of the NGP sample

The parameters obtained with TGMET for the NGP targets range from 4322 K to 5698 K in $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, from 1.02 to 4.70 in $`\mathrm{log}g`$, from -1.49 to +0.38 in \[Fe/H\], from -0.621 to 7.490 in $`M_\text{v}`$. The most important parameters for this study are the metallicities and absolute magnitudes which lead to individual distances. Figure 3 represents the NGP sample in the plane (\[Fe/H\], $`M_\text{v}`$). Some comments have to be done about this plot:

* the sample spans the full range of luminosities, from dwarfs to bright giants
* the clump is clearly identified as an overdensity around $`M_\text{v}`$=0.81.
* the selection of giants was efficient : dwarfs or subgiants ($`M_\text{v}>\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}`$) represent only 6% of the sample
* there is no dependency of the absolute magnitude of clump giants on \[Fe/H\]
* there is a cut in the metallicity distribution at \[Fe/H\]=–0.65 with only one metal-poor star at \[Fe/H\]=–1.49.

We have checked if the lack of stars with \[Fe/H\] $`<0.65`$ could be due to the distribution of the TGMET reference stars in the parameter space. According to Fig. 2, several reference stars in the range $`1.00<`$ \[Fe/H\] $`<0.65`$ exhibit similarities with the targets, but the nearest neighbours are more metal-rich. Several clump giants with lower metallicity exist in the library (HD166161, HD175305, HD044007 for instance) but they have not been selected by TGMET to present similarities with the targets. We conclude that TGMET and its library cannot explain by their own the complete absence of target stars in this metallicity range, even if an overestimation of \[Fe/H\] by 0.06 was established (Sect. 3.2.2).

Basic data from Tycho2 and TGMET parameters of the 387 NGP targets are given in a table only available in electronic form at the CDS (http://cdsweb.u-strasbg.fr/Cats.html).

### 3.3 Distances and spatial velocities

Distances have been computed for all the target stars from the TGMET $`M_\text{v}`$ and Tycho-2 $`V_T`$ magnitude transformed into Johnson $`V`$ by relation 1. No correction of interstellar absorption was applied since it is supposed to be very low in the NGP direction. Proper motions, distances and radial velocities have been combined through the equations of Johnson & Soderblom (1987) to compute the 3 velocity components (U,V,W) with respect to the Sun (the U axis points towards the Galactic Center). Figure 4 shows the metallicity and velocity distributions of the whole sample in different combinations. For a sake of clarity, we have excluded from these plots 2 stars with extreme parameters which may belong to the halo: T2004-00702 (\[Fe/H\] = –1.49, z = 755 pc, U = –133.4 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, V = –145.1 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, W = –54.6 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) and T2524-01735 (\[Fe/H\] = –0.38, z = 475 pc, U = 40.8 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, V = –280.0 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, W = -37.8 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$). From these plots, it can be seen that stars with high radial motion ($`U<100\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) or slow rotation ($`V<80\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$) exist at all metallicities. The velocity dispersions are higher at low metallicities, especially for $`W`$. Here we recall that our W velocities are of an unprecedented accuracy for a survey at this mean distance as the contribution of the ELODIE accurate radial velocity to W is higher than 94% in the considered direction.

## 4 Distances, abundances and kinematics: stellar components

### 4.1 Expected relative densities

The median distance of the sample to the galactic plane is 400 pc. We expect to find at this distance a mixture of disk components, mainly the old thin disk and the thick disk. For instance, adopting exponential laws to modelise their vertical density, with a scale height of 300 pc for the older thin disk, 800 pc for the thick disk with a local density of 6.2% (Reylé & Robin 2001), proportions of 9, 13, 18 and 25% of thick disk stars are expected at mean distances of 200, 400, 600 and 800 pc respectively. For a scale height of 1400 pc and a local density of 2% (Reid & Majewski 1993) the proportions of thick disk stars fall to 3, 5, 8 and 13%. With a local relative density well below 1%, the halo population is expected to be marginally represented in the NGP sample. The aim of this section is to identify disk components in the NGP sample, investigate their behaviour up to 800 pc from the plane and determine their mean parameters.

### 4.2 Comparison with the Besançon model

The NGP sample was compared with several samples of pseudo-stars simulated with the most recent version of the Besançon model of population synthesis (Robin et al. 2002). This model is based on a semi-empirical approach, involving physical constraints and current knowledge of the formation and evolution of the Galaxy. For observing conditions given as inputs (direction and size of the fields, cuts in apparent magnitude and colour, observational errors on apparent magnitudes, proper motions and radial velocities), the model returns a list of pseudo-stars with their fundamental properties (distance, absolute magnitude, age, 3D velocity, metallicity) and the corresponding observables affected by errors. The fundamental properties coming from theoretical distributions, we had to degrade metallicities and absolute magnitudes with the typical errors of the NGP sample to mimic the real data. Metallicities were degraded with a gaussian error of 0.16 dex and absolute magnitudes with an error varying from 0.25 for dwarfs to 0.35 for clump giants and 0.47 for other giants (see Sect. 3.2.1). Then distances and space velocities were re-computed from degraded absolute magnitudes combined to simulated apparent magnitudes, proper motions and radial velocities.

The Besançon model involves 7 thin disk components with mean ages from 0.15 to 10 Gyr, a thick disk component, a halo and a bulge. We have chosen to test our data against 2 different models: one involving a metal-poor, kinematically hot thick disk (hereafter model 1) and another one less metal deficient and kinematically colder (hereafter model 2). The corresponding parameters used as inputs for the thin disk and the thick disk in both models are given in Table 3. In both cases, the scale height of the thick disk is 800 pc and its relative density in the solar neighbourhood is 6.2%. The asymetric drift of the different components with respect to the Sun ($`V_{\mathrm{lag}}`$) is based on $`V_{\mathrm{LSR}}=220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ and $`V_{}=6\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. For each model, 3 simulations with our observational conditions have been performed. We have obtained 422, 454, 433 pseudo-stars with model 1 and 395, 434, 422 pseudo-stars with model 2. These numbers have to be compared with the 387 stars of the NGP sample. According to the fact that the NGP sample is not complete down the limiting magnitude, and that several dwarfs and double stars were eliminated a priori, the model counts agree very well with the observations.

We compare in Fig. 5 the vertical gradients of \[Fe/H\], $`V,\sigma _U,\sigma _V,\sigma _W`$ which have been obtained by a simple statistic in several bins of distances in the NGP sample, and in the simulated ones which were merged to improve the statistics. In general, the data show a better agreement with model 2 than with model 1. But the error bars on the observed and simulated data are such that it is not possible to favour one of the 2 models from only these vertical gardients. In particular, the V dispersion in the NGP sample is much lower than in both models.

### 4.3 Deconvolution into gaussian components

#### 4.3.1 Stochastic Estimation Maximisation

In an attempt to identify more precisely the contribution of the thin disk and thick disk in the NGP sample, we have performed the deconvolution of these 2 components. We have used the SEM algorithm (Celeux & Diebolt 1986), a noninformative method which solves iteratively the maximum likelihood equations, with a stochastic step, in the case of multivariate mixture of gaussian distributions. This method has been previously used to deconvolve the thin and thick disk populations from velocity distributions (Soubiran 1993; Ojha et al. 1996). The algorithm is started with an initial position thrown at random, assuming that the sample is a mixture of 2 or 3 discrete components. Each deconvolution is repeated 150 times. Most of the time the algorithm converges the 150 times to the same solution. In case of multiple solutions, the most frequent one is adopted. The combinations of variables (\[Fe/H\],U,V,W) and (U,V,W) were used. Two bins of distance were considered (200 – 400 pc and 400 – 800 pc) to take into account the change of relative densities of the components at various distances to the plane.

#### 4.3.2 Testing SEM on simulated data

Provided that the simulated data represents a mixture of identified components, we have tested the ability of SEM to recover their undelying metallicity and velocity distributions. The SEM outputs are the relative density, mean and standard deviation of (U, V, W) and eventually \[Fe/H\] of each component to be compared to the model inputs. It is also possible to examine the ratios and orientation of principal axis of the velocity ellipsoid of each component but large error bars were obtained on these parameters which are not considered in this section. We have obtained 48 solutions with the simulated data (2 bins of distance, 2 models, 3 simulations per model, 3D and 4D deconvolution, 2 or 3 components assumed as initial condition). The deconvolution into 3 components was successful in very few cases, with a solution not physically realistic, one component having a very low standard deviation. Therefore we have only considered the deconvolutions into 2 components, all successful and stable. The corresponding averaged parameters are presented in Table 4, with their standard deviation. As expected, kinematical parameters and mean metallicities obtained for the thin disk in the 2 bins of distance are in the range of the Besançon model inputs (Table 3). However the relative density of the thin disk is found to be lower than expected in the first bin of distance. According to the density laws of the thin and thick disks adopted as inputs for the model, 87% of pseudostars should belong to the thin disk at 400 pc from the plane. On the other hand, we obtain a large error bar on this parameter, and the value of 78$`\pm `$10% agrees within $`1\sigma `$ with the input of the model.

The error bars obtained for the thick disk are quite large and illustrate the difficulty to deconvolve overlapping populations. The parameters of the deconvolved thick disk generally agree within $`1\sigma `$ with the model parameters in Table 3. For several parameters the agreement is within $`2\sigma `$. We conclude that SEM is able to recover the mean parameters of the thin disk and the thick disk, even if they strongly overlap as in model 2, using 3D or 4D small samples ($`N<200`$) affected by observational errors.

#### 4.3.3 The thin and thick disks in the NGP sample

After these tests on simulated data, SEM was applied to the NGP sample. Each bin of distance includes 166 stars. We had to remove from the second bin, 2 outlier stars previously mentionned in Sect. 3.3. Results are presented in Table 5 in the 4D and 3D cases.

The success of the deconvolution of the sample into 2 discrete components supports the notion of a thick disk as a separate population, by opposition to being the tail of a continuous disk. Together with the existence of vertical gradients, this is of importance to constrain models.

In the nearest bin of distance, all the kinematical parameters obtained with the 3D and 4D deconvolution agree within $`1\sigma `$, showing that \[Fe/H\] is less discriminant than velocities to separate the disk populations. In the 400 – 800 pc bin, a significant difference is observed in V when \[Fe/H\] is used in the deconvolution. However, the agreement being still within $`2\sigma `$, we adopt as the final parameters for the thin disk the average of the 4 solutions (Table 6). The velocity ellipsoid ($`\sigma _U,\sigma _V,\sigma _W)=(39\pm 2,20\pm 2,20\pm 1)\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ is typical of the old thin disk population. In their study of local kinematics from Hipparcos data, Dehnen & Binney (1998) and Bianaymé (1999) have determined dispersions for the oldest thin disk stars in the range 34 – 38$`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ in U, 23 – 25 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ in V, 17 – 21$`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ in W. From stars at larger distances, we obtain similar values, showing that no significant vertical gradient is present in velocity dispersions of the thin disk.

The proportion of thick disk stars is higher than expected in the 2 bins of distance. If an exponential law with scale height of 800 pc is able to modelise the vertical density of the thick disk, then a local relative density of 15% has to be adopted to reproduce our results. On another hand, due to the small size of the sample, the proportions of each component cannot be recovered with a high accuracy, as was also seen with the simulated data. According to the dispersion of the SEM solutions on real and simulated data, we estimate our error bar on local density to be 7%.

Chiba & Beers (2000) found in their metal-poor star sample a vertical gradient in the rotational velocity of the thick disk of $`30\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$ which is not observed in the NGP sample. We note however a higher $`\sigma _W`$ and lower \[Fe/H\] at 400 – 800 pc possibly indicating a vertical gradient. As the metallicity found for the thick disk (-0.27 and -0.42) is more metal-rich than expected, we have examined the eventuality of a bias in metallicity in our data. This high metallicity is mainly due to the lack of stars with \[Fe/H\] $`<`$ –0.65. As discussed in Sect. 3.2.4, our method to estimate metallicities cannot explain by its own the complete absence of metal-poor stars. The selection of the target stars in the colour range $`0.90<BV<1.10`$ may have also led to a lack of metal-poor stars. We have investigated the effect of this colour cut on metallicity on data simulated with the Besançon model and on giants of the TGMET library. If it is clear that deficient giants (\[Fe/H\] $`<`$ –1.0) are bluer, the effect is not so dramatic in the range –0.65 $`<`$ \[Fe/H\] $`<`$ –1.0. Selecting stars with $`0.90<BV`$ seems to eliminate about 30% of giants in this metallicity interval. Again, the lack of metal-poor stars cannot be completely explained by our colour cut. Besides, when testing the SEM algorithm on simulated data (Sect. 4.3.2), correct mean metallicities were recovered, despite a similar colour cut. If this lack of low metallicities is real, an explanation would be that the missing metal-poor stars belong to another population with a higher scale height and lower local density. However this hypothesis does not explain the high metallicity, \[Fe/H\]=-0.27, found for the thick disk in the nearest bin of distance. We interpret this value by the existence of stars with slow rotation but solar metallicity (Fig. 4). A population of metal-rich stars with thick disk kinematics is known to exist in the solar neighbourhood (Grenon 1999; Soubiran 1999). This population is found to have a flat distribution in the local disk and its origin near the bulge, with an orbital diffusion by a bar, is proposed (Martinet & Raboud 1999). These stars, which do not share the thick disk history, can also explain the lower $`\sigma _W`$ = 28$`\pm `$3 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ found for the thick disk in the nearest bin of distance, instead of $`\sigma _W`$= 39$`\pm `$4 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ farther from the plane. These considerations led us to adopt as the best parameters for the thick disk the average of the 4D and 3D SEM solutions obtained in the bin 400 – 800 pc. The mean metallicity of –0.42 is probably still overestimated but yet favours the idea of a metal-rich thick disk. Our estimate of the mean metallicity of this population is \[Fe/H\] = $`0.48\pm 0.05`$. The adopted parameters of the thick disk are given in Table 6. As mentionned previously, numerous determinations of the kinematical parameters of the thick disk exist in the literature and span a wide range of values. Our determination is also in this range, but on the cooler side with moderate dispersions in V and W, and moderate asymmetric drift. On the contrary, $`\sigma _U=63\pm 6\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{s}^1`$ is significantly higher than most of previous determinations which are often below $`50\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (e.g. Morrison et al. 1990; Soubiran 1993; Chen 1997; Chiba & Beers 2000).

We conclude that our results favour a dense, flat, metal-rich thick disk with moderate rotational and vertical kinematics, but significant dispersion in radial motions. Our thick disk parameters fit nicely those found by Bell (1996) which also rely on a spectroscopic survey of 570 K giants, but in the rotation and antirotation directions. Similarly to us, he finds a lack of stars with \[Fe/H\] $`<`$ -0.60. His sample is better described by a two-component disk model than by a continuous disk. He determines for the thick disk a mean abundance of $`0.35\pm 0.06`$, an asymmetric drift of $`43\pm 9\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, and a local normalization of $`13\pm 3\%`$. In terms of formation of the thick disk, the discreteness and absence of a vertical gradient suggest a quick heating of a precursor thin disk. This has to be replaced in a context where a merger is at present the prefered model for the origin of a thick disk in our galaxy and in other galaxies. The moderate parameters that we have determined favour the interpretation that we have observed in the NGP sample the puffed up early thin disk, whereas Gilmore et al. (2002) and Chiba & Beers (2000) have observed the relics of the disrupted satellite in the form of slower rotating metal-poor population. The existence of two components for the thick disk may reconcile the current inconsistent determinations of its scale height and normalisation.

## 5 Vertex deviation

The orientation of the velocity ellipsoid is of importance to test the axisymmetry and stationarity of the Galaxy. The vertex deviation, i.e. the inclination of the principal axis with respect to the direction of the Galactic Center is able to reveal distortions in the disk as described in Kuijken & Tremaine (1991). In order to follow the shape of the velocity ellipsoid with distance to the plane, the NGP sample was combined to a local sample constructed out of the Hipparcos catalogue. Its construction is described in Paper II. Briefly, this sample consists of mainly red clump giants, complete up to 125 pc, and corrected from the Lutz-Kelker bias. Radial velocities and metallicities were retrieved from the literature: 526 stars have radial velocities, 192 stars have metallicities from the literature and 111 have metallicities derived from Strömgren photometry. The NGP and local samples have been used to study the variations of the velocity ellipsoid with respect to \[Fe/H\] and distance to the plane, and were divided into 6 subsamples: \[Fe/H\]$`<`$0.25, \[Fe/H\]$`>`$0.25 and z $``$ 125 $`\mathrm{pc}`$, 200 $`<`$ z $`<`$400 $`\mathrm{pc}`$, z $`>`$ 400 $`\mathrm{pc}`$. The vertex deviation is determined by a linear fit in $`(U,V)`$ for each subsample. Results are presented in Table 7 and Fig. 6.

A positive vertex deviation (Fig. 6) is seen in the high metallicity sample in the 3 bins of distance, with however a smaller deviation in the highest bin. Kinematical groups are visible in the nearest bin of metal rich stars, suggesting a younger, partially mixed population. If we consider the inclination of the inner part of the ellipsoids, the vertex deviation is found to range between $`13\mathrm{°}`$ and $`25\mathrm{°}`$. On the contrary, the low metallicity sample, dominated by thick disk stars, has a vertex deviation near zero. We may also remark that metal rich stars have velocity dispersions and vertex deviation intermediate between old disk and and thick disk in the highest bin.

It is well established and recently confirmed from Hipparcos data (Dehnen & Binney 1998; Bienaymé 1999) that the vertex deviation declines from $`25\mathrm{°}`$ for young stellar populations to near zero for older and kinematically hotter disk populations. This deviation of the vertex orientation has been frequently discussed (Kuijken & Tremaine 1994; Dehnen & Binney 1998; Binney & Merrifield 1998) and may imply either a non-axisymmetric Galaxy or local spiral perturbations or more simply partially mixed populations. Since the vertex deviation is not constant, the decline suggests that the deviation is caused by a small scale peturbation like a nearby spiral arm or by non-stationarity, the deviation reflecting the recent condition of formation of young stars. From Hipparcos data, Bienaymé (1999) finds that the vertex deviation is compatible with zero (5$`\pm 5\mathrm{°}`$) for the reddest Hipparcos stars ($`B`$-$`V`$ 0.5–0.7), while Dehnen & Binney (1998) obtain a 10$`\pm 5\mathrm{°}`$ deviation for the same stars. From their respective result, they draw opposite conclusions concerning the axisymmetry or non-axisymmetry of the galactic disk, but we may remark that their measurements agree within $`1\sigma `$ error.

Here we find that the metallicity allows a more drastic separation of populations, and that the oldest and well-mixed population has a null vertex deviation. $`BV`$ colours do not allow to separate very efficiently Hipparcos populations by age and the red Hipparcos stars are a mixture of old and a small proportion of young stars producing a non strictly null vertex deviation. This is clearly established, here, with the Hipparcos sample of giants with known metallicities.

In conclusion the vertex orientation of the oldest stars points towards the galactic center, favouring the hypothesis of an axisymmetric galactic disk (however if the galactic disk is elliptic and the Sun is located on one of the symetry axis, the vertex will also point towards the Galactic Center).

## 6 Conclusion

We have presented a new sample of nearly 400 stars selected out of the Tycho–2 catalog and observed at high spectral resolution. This sample mainly consists of red clump giants. Their atmospheric parameters (T<sub>eff</sub>, $`\mathrm{log}g`$, \[Fe/H\]) and absolute magnitudes $`M_\text{v}`$ were estimated with the TGMET software by comparison to a reference library of spectra. The sample was used to investigate the kinematics and metallicity of the stellar disk up to 800 pc from the galactic plane with a typical error of 18% on distances, $`3\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ in U and V velocities, and lower than $`1\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ in W, at the mean distance of the sample (400 pc).

Our colour-magnitude cuts were efficient to select K giants since less than 6% of the sample consists in dwarfs or subgiants. We have observed in the sample a lack of metal-poor stars (\[Fe/H\] $`<`$ -0.65) which is only partially explained by the method used to estimate the metallicities and by the colour cut. Velocity and metallicity distributions were compared to simulations of the Besançon model using 2 models of thick disk: a metal-poor kinematically hot one and another one with parameters closer to the thin disk. The NGP sample is in a better agreement with the moderate thick disk model. Using a non-informative method in the case of a mixture of gaussian populations, we find our sample to be consistent with a superposition of two disks. The first one, associated the thin disk, has $`V_{\mathrm{lag}}=12\pm 2\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ with respect to the Sun, ($`\sigma _U,\sigma _V,\sigma _W)=(39\pm 2,20\pm 2,20\pm 1)\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, \[Fe/H\] = –0.17 $`\pm `$ 0.01, in agreement with previous studies from local samples. No vertical gradient is observed in the parameters of the thin disk.

The parameters of the thick disk were estimated to be $`V_{\mathrm{lag}}=51\pm 5\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, ($`\sigma _U,\sigma _V,\sigma _W)=(63\pm 6,39\pm 4,39\pm 4)\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, \[Fe/H\] = –0.48 $`\pm `$ 0.05. Compared to previous studies, these values are on the hot side for U, but on the cold, metal-rich side for V, W and \[Fe/H\]. The proportion of thick disk stars is found to be higher than expected with a local normalisation of 15$`\pm `$7%. Inconsistent determinations of the thick disk parameters in the recent literature may be reconcilied if 2 components are involved. In the context of the formation of the thick disc by a significant merger, we may have observed in the NGP sample the early heated thin disk, whereas other authors may have observed the relics of a shredded satellite.

The vertex deviation of the velocity ellipsoid has been studied with respect to distance above the plane and metallicity. For this task, the NGP sample was completed by a local Hipparcos sample for which metallicity and radial velocities were retrieved from the literature. A null vertex deviation is found for the low metallicity subsample whereas the high metallicity sample exhibit a positive one. This suggests no strong deviation from axisymmetry of the galactic disk at solar radius.

The next paper of this series will give a new derivation of the mass density in the galactic plane based on these observations combined to the local Hipparcos sample. The sample presented in this paper, together with its Hipparcos counterpart, provides a sample with unprecedented accuracy to study the vertical potential up to 800 pc.

###### Acknowledgements.

This research has made use of the SIMBAD and VIZIER databases, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France. It is based on data from the ESA Hipparcos satellite (Hipparcos and Tycho–2 catalogues). We thank A. Robin who provided simulated samples from of new version of the Besançon model before publication.


text:
# SOME DEVELOPMENTS IN LIGHT QUARK SPECTROSCOPY

## 1 Introduction

One important reason for continuing to study light quark spectroscopy is to search for glueballs and exotics predicted by QCD.

Unquenched lattice QCD computations, summarized in Figure 1(a), places the lightest Glueball with $`J^{PC}=0^{++}`$ at about 1.7 GeV. Unfortunately, much confusion persists on the existence and nature of scalar states in or below this region. They are wide enough to be mixtures of each other or with glueball states, so a better understanding of the scalar meson spectrum would help identify this state.

Fifteen scalar states, shown in Figure 1(b) are listed by the Particle Data Group  (PDG). The existence of the $`f_0(600)`$ has long been established, but its pole position has been difficult to pin down due to interference with $`s`$ wave background in $`\pi \pi `$ and $`K\overline{K}`$ systems in which it has been studied mostly. There is disagreement on whether this state is broad and above, or narrower and below the $`\rho `$ mass. The composition of the $`J^{PC}=0^{++}`$ states $`a_0(980)`$ and $`f_0(980)`$ \- $`K\overline{K}`$ molecule, $`q\overline{q}q\overline{q}`$ or $`q\overline{q}`$ \- is unknown. The spin of the $`f_J(1710)`$ has been controversial though most experiments now agree that $`J=0`$. Possibly as a result of some confusion on the identity of the state studied, a few results still hint at $`J=2`$.

Only one strange scalar meson is established to exist, allowing for only one nonet. The hint of a further, lower mass $`K^{}`$ (the “$`\kappa `$”) seen in the decay of the $`D^+`$ meson has recently been published . Should its existence be confirmed, a second, light scalar nonet may be established, casting new light on the identity of the scalar glueball. This, and other recent information on the scalar spectrum are the subject of this paper. Some prospects for the future are also discussed.

## 2 Data from Charmed Meson Decays

Until recently, the majority of knowledge of light quark systems has come from experiments dedicated to their study. Many of these are listed in Table 1.

Recently, decays of $`D`$ and $`D_s^+`$ 111Except where indicated otherwise, charge conjugate systems are implied in this paper. mesons to three pseudoscalar mesons have also begun to provide information. These decays often have large branching fractions providing good statistical accuracy, and generally proceed through intermediate, two meson systems with natural parity. Kinematics and angular momentum barrier factors generally favour scalar ($`J^P=0^+`$) over vector $`1^{}`$ or tensor $`2^+`$ systems resulting in an important source of new information on scalar states.

### 2.1 The Isobar Model

In most analyses, $`D`$ decays to three pseudoscalars $`i`$, $`j`$ and $`k`$ are described as a coherent sum of “isobar amplitudes” $`𝒜_R`$, each corresponding to a quasi two body decay $`DR(ij)k`$. $`𝒜_R`$ satisfies Lorentz invariance and conserves total spin and has the form $`𝒜_R(s_{ij},s_{ik})=F_D(q,r_D)F_R(p,r_R)\times BW_R(s_{ij})\times (2)^J|\stackrel{}{p}|^J|\stackrel{}{q}|^JP_J(\widehat{p}\widehat{q})`$ where $`\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{q}`$ are momenta of $`i`$ and $`k`$ in the $`(ij)`$ and $`D`$ rest frames, respectively. Form factors $`F_D`$ ($`F_R`$) for $`D`$ ($`R`$) are parametrized in terms of effective radii $`R_D`$ ($`R_R`$) for the decaying meson and the resonance $`R`$, respectively. A Breit Wigner (BW) propagator $`BW_R=\left[s_Rs_{ij}i\sqrt{s_R}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s_{ij})\right]^1`$ describes the resonance with spin $`J`$, mass $`M_R=\sqrt{s_R}`$. Suffix $`R`$ denotes a quantity evaluated at $`s_{ij}=s_R`$.

The distribution of decays in Dalitz plot coordinates $`(s_{ij},s_{ik})`$ (squared invariant mass combinations) is

$$𝒫_S(s_{ij},s_{ik})=\left|a_{NR}e^{i\delta _{NR}}+\underset{R}{}a_Re^{i\delta _R}𝒜_R(s_{ij},s_{ik})\right|^2$$

Decays directly to three bodies (NR), not involving a resonance, are described by a constant, “contact” amplitude $`a_{NR}e^{i\delta _{NR}}`$ in the expression above.

Fits are made to obtain values for complex coefficients $`ae^{i\delta }`$ and resonance parameters. Experimentally, incoherent backgrounds from sources other than $`D`$ decay, and efficiencies affecting the observed distributions are carefully modelled and incorporated into the fits.

## 3 A Hint of a “$`\kappa `$” Meson.

E791 reports  an isobar model analysis of a large sample of $`D^+K^{}\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ decays. The Dalitz plot in Figure 2(a)

shows strong $`K_1(890)`$, $`K_{_{}}(1430)`$, and $`K_2(1430)`$. The asymmetry pattern in the $`K_1(890)`$ indicates significant, underlying $`K^{}\pi ^+s`$wave interference.

Model A, with an NR contribution and only isobars found in the PDG listings, gives the results in Table 2. Masses and widths are fixed at their PDG values.

There are obvious problems with this model, many seen in earlier analyses . The NR contribution is large - an effect not usually seen in other three body $`D`$ decays - and fractions of the modes sum to $``$140%. This indicates significant interference, mostly with the NR component. Unlike the earlier analyses, E791’s statistical significance shows that this model gives an unacceptable fit, with $`\chi ^2/\text{dof}=2.7`$ in 63 bins in the Dalitz plot. The fit quality is worst in the low $`K\pi `$ mass region, and its reflection at $`2.5`$ GeV2 as seen in the $`K^{}\pi ^+`$ mass projection in Figure 2(b). In anlyzing $`D^{_{}}K^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ decay data, the CLEO collaboration  also obtain a poor fit in this region.

Introduction of another scalar resonance, with mass and width determined by the fit, is required to obtain a good fit. This fit (Model B) gives the results in Table 2, mass projections in Figure 2(c) and converges on a mass and width for $`\kappa `$ of $`M_\kappa =797\pm 19\pm 42MeV/c^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\kappa =410\pm 43\pm 85MeV/c^2`$. The $`\kappa `$$`\pi ^+`$ amplitude is dominant and the $`NR`$ fraction becomes insignificant ($`2\sigma `$). The sum of fractions is $`90`$% and very good fit quality is found in all Dalitz plot regions. However, the $`K_{_{}}(1430)`$ parameters from this fit (Table 3) are inconsistent with PDG values.

### 3.1 New $`K_{_{}}^{}(1430)`$ parameters.

Data for this state are dominated by results from LASS experiment E135  in which it was discovered. Recently, this collaboration reports  that new central values for mass and width, in Table 3, are obtained when the fit to their $`K^{}\pi ^+`$ scattering data is limited to the elastic range (below $`K\eta ^{}`$ threshold). This implies that a larger systematic uncertainty should be attributed to these parameters than indicated by the PDG listing.

## 4 Evidence for a Low Mass “$`\sigma `$”.

Analysis of $`D^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ decays by the E791 collaboration  provides an indication of a clear signal that may correspond to the $`f_{_{}}(600)`$, known as the $`\sigma `$ meson. The Dalitz plot was fit to isobars summarized in model A in Table 4 and shown in the $`\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$ mass projection in Figure 3(a).

In this model, no $`\sigma \pi ^+`$ amplitude is included. The fit is poor with $`\chi ^280`$ for 63 degrees of freedom. The NR decay is dominant and the amplitudes for $`\rho (1450)`$ and $`\rho (770)`$ are almost equally strong - an odd situation. The fit is particularly bad in the low mass $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ region. These results are generally compatible with the only previous measurements of this decay mode by the E687 collaboration .

In model B, a $`\sigma \pi ^+`$ amplitude with scalar BW parameters, $`M_\sigma ,\mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma `$, allowed to float freely, is introduced. Values for $`M_\sigma ,\mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma `$ that result are in Table 5, indicating a $`\sigma `$ below the $`\rho (770)`$.

The fit, whose results are in Table 4, is of a significantly improved quality, $`\chi ^257`$ for 63 degrees of freedom. It describes the low mass $`\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$ mass region shown in Figure 3(b) well. The $`\sigma \pi ^+`$ mode dominates the decay - but the $`NR`$ amplitude becomes neglibibly small as does that for the $`\rho (1450)\pi `$.

## 5 Comments on E791 $`\sigma `$ and $`\kappa `$ Signals.

Tests made by E791 reveal that the scalar BW phase motion is important in obtaining acceptable fits . Fits to a “real BW” (a peak, no phase motion) result in poor $`\chi ^2`$ and large sum of resonant fractions. Fits to vector and tensor forms are also significantly worse. Nevertheless, the isobar model used by E791 - with a scalar BW for the $`\sigma `$ and $`\kappa `$ \- may not be formally correct. 222Unitarity is ignored. It may be necessary to include constraints from $`\pi \pi `$ or $`K^{}\pi ^+`$ elastic scattering and from chiral symmetry.

E791 plans a model independent measurement of the $`s`$ wave $`\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$ and $`K^{}\pi ^+`$ magnitudes and phases as a function of mass, using interference between the two identical $`\pi ^+`$ (Bose symmetrized) amplitudes in these $`D`$ decays. This could help resolve whether or not poles really exist in these systems.

What can certainly be said is that E791 data clearly indicate the need for some phase motion in the $`s`$ wave meson- meson systems and that a scalar BW is one model that works well. The possibility that another parametrization, possibly with no scalar states at all, could also fit the data satisfactorily is not excluded.

## 6 Other evidence for $`\sigma `$.

In $`D^{_{}}K^{}(\overline{K}^{_{}})\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$ decays, CLEO  note that an acceptable fit requires a $`K^{}\sigma `$ contribution with mass and width similar to those found in E791. A fit without $`\sigma `$, shown in figure 3(c), fails to account for the low $`\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$ mass region.

Other instances where a $`\sigma `$ pole is added in the description of the neutral di-pion systems are summarized in table 5. The CLEO collaboration  observe, in $`\tau \nu _\tau \pi ^{}\left(\pi ^{_{}}\pi ^+_{}\right)`$ decays, that the three pion systems (dominantly $`J^P=1^+`$) require a $`\sigma \pi ^{}`$ amplitude to obtain an acceptable fit. In analyzing $`\varphi \pi ^{}\pi ^{}\gamma `$ radiative decays, the KLOE collaboration found the best fit among those tried was obtained if a $`\sigma `$ with parameters taken from E791 is included.

Low mass enhancements are observed in di-pion systems in $`J/\psi \omega \pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}\pi ^{}_{}{}^{}+`$, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(3S)\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(1S)\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$ decays and $`\pi ^{}\pi ^{}`$ from $`pp`$ central production. However, in other cases, the low mass di-pion system is suppressed. The “sigma collaboration” 333M. Y. Ishida, S. Ishida, T. Ishida, T. Komada, A. M. Ma, H. Shimizu, K. Takamatsu, T. Tsuru
Tokyo Inst. Tech., Nihon U, KEK, IHEP Beijing, Yamagata U., CROSS. They also fit  $`s`$ wave $`\pi \pi `$ and $`K^{}\pi ^+`$ elastic scattering data to this model with a “background” with a falling phase to accomodate the $`\sigma `$ and $`\kappa `$.  suggest that all these data can be fit with a model where interference between contact and $`\sigma `$ pole terms can cause either enhancement or suppression . Their fits to data in these channels, in table 5 indicate that in these systems, $`\sigma `$ masses group around the mass region $`500600`$ MeV/c2. Results from BES, with 58M $`J/\psi `$ should be an interesting test for these ideas which are not universally accepted in the theoretical community.

## 7 New $`f_{_{}}(980)`$ Data.

More information on the $`f_{_{}}(980)`$ and $`a_{_{}}(980)`$ have recently come from measurements at KLOE, SND and CMD-2 of radiative decays of $`\varphi `$. These results were reviewed in this conference . The radiative transition branching fractions are about an order of magnitude larger than expected for pure $`s\overline{s}`$ or $`K\overline{K}`$ composition, possibly indicating significant $`q\overline{q}q\overline{q}`$ content.

$`D_s^+f_{_{}}(980)\pi ^+`$ decays which would be expected to reveal information on the $`s\overline{s}`$ component of $`f_{_{}}(980)`$ have also been examined by both the E791  and FOCUS  collaborations. BaBar also plans to use their large data sample for this. In Figure 4(c), $`\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$ mass spectra and Dalitz plots for $`D_s^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ events are shown. Unlike the E791 and FOCUS plots, the BaBar data are a preliminary sample ($`20fb^1`$) and no results are yet available. The $`f_{_{}}(980)`$ signals are seen as clear peaks on a small background, in contrast with observations in $`\pi \pi `$ and $`KK`$ scattering where, due to the underlying background phase, the state usually appears as a dip in the cross section.

Both $`f_0(980)`$ and $`a_0(980)`$ have a line shape complicated by proximity to $`K\overline{K}`$ threshold. It is described approximately by $`CC(s)=\left[sm_{_{}}^2+im_{_{}}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_K+\mathrm{\Gamma }_\pi \right)\right]^1`$ where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\pi =g_\pi \sqrt{s/4m_\pi ^2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_K=\frac{g_K}{2}\left(\sqrt{s/4m_K^2}+\sqrt{sm_K^{}^2}\right)`$ In the fits to E791 and FOCUS data, account was taken of this, and measurement of the ratio of the $`\pi \pi `$ and $`K\overline{K}`$ couplings $`g_K`$ and $`g_\pi `$ was attempted. In E791 this line shape was fitted directly and in FOCUS a K matrix fit was used.

Results are summarized in Table 6 where they can be compared with $`pp`$ central production and radiative $`\varphi `$ decay results. Mass and width parameters from a simple $`s`$ wave BW are also given. There is considerable disagreement in these parameters, even between E791 and FOCUS. Apparently, large systematic effects arise both from the various production mechanisms and the fit methods. These differences may be due in part to assumptions made in background $`\pi \pi `$ $`s`$ wave shapes in $`pp`$ central production and $`\varphi `$ radiative decays. Probably the difficulty in including effective mass resolution in line shapes in the $`D_s`$ fits also plays a role 444Perhaps striking is that the signals observed in $`D_s`$ data, whose spectator model decays would be expected to produce an $`s\overline{s}`$ system, is narrow. If this signal were an $`s\overline{s}`$ state, the preferred decay to $`K\overline{K}`$ would be kinematically restricted, making the state narrow. One is tempted to question whether or not the $`f_{_{}}(980)`$ is really a unique state..

What is needed in future $`D_s`$ meson studies with larger samples is a coupled channel approach including $`\pi \pi `$, $`K\overline{K}`$ and $`\eta \pi `$ decay modes and the $`a_{_{}}(980)`$. The BaBar collaboration plans such an approach and this will hopefully help in sorting out this confusing situation.

## 8 Other $`f_{_{}}`$ Results

Both FOCUS and E791 see evidence for an additional $`f_{_{}}`$ signal at a mass above the $`f_{_{}}(980)`$. In fitting their Dalitz plots, mass and width parameters for a scalar BW for this isobar were allowed to float. Other discrepancies exist between the $`D_s`$ results from the two experiments, but they agree quite well on mass and width of this $`f_{_{}}`$.

It is not clear this state can be identified with $`f_0(1370)`$. Measurements in this mass range from $`\pi \pi \pi \pi `$$`K\overline{K},\eta \eta ,\sigma \sigma `$, etc scattering have suffered from interference with a large, uncertain $`s`$ wave background and indicate a broad pole near 1370 MeV/c2 whose parameters depend on interference with the narrower $`f_{_{}}(1500)`$. Neither E791 nor FOCUS find much evidence for $`f_0(1500)`$ in the $`D_s`$ fits.

The clean $`f_{_{}}(980)`$ signal observed in these decays suggests that a clearer interpretation of pole positions of $`f_{_{}}`$ states may be possible than before. However, this seems far from realization at this stage.

## 9 Summary

The hint of a $`\kappa `$ state in E791 is an important development. Equally important are a growing number of instances where a low mass, relatively narrow $`\sigma `$ amplitude can describe data that comes from a number of sources not examined in this way before. A number of discrepancies in $`f_{_{}}`$ parameters do remain, however.

These observations have required large samples of data. Hopefully they will be better understood when even more data, in other channels and in other charge states, are analyzed. These should come from FOCUS, BaBar and BELLE, BES, GSI and CLEO C in the foreseeable future.

Hopes for progress in defining the scalar spectrum hinge on the proof that a $`\kappa `$ pole really exists and on finding a reliable way to determine both $`\sigma `$ and $`\kappa `$ pole parameters. More data may come, but a consensus on the way to describe these observations and also $`s`$ wave $`I=1/2K\pi `$ and $`I=0\pi \pi `$ scattering data in a consistent way is badly needed.

## 10 Acknowledgements

This work was supported by NSF award number:0203262. The authors gratefully acknowledge valuable discussions with my E791 colleagues and with W. Dunwoodie.


text:
# 1 Overview

## 1 Overview

Let $`𝒜`$ be a coquasitriangular Hopf algebra with universal r-form $`r`$ and let $`𝒰(𝒜)`$ be the Hopf subalgebra of the Hopf dual $`𝒜^{}`$ generated by the set of all l-functionals $`l^+(a):=r(a)`$, $`l^{}(a):=\overline{r}(a)`$, $`a𝒜`$. We call it the FRT-dual of $`𝒜`$ as it was suggested in \[Ho\]. There it was shown (the finite-dimensional case is treated already in \[Ma\]) that there exists an injective algebra homomorphism

$$\iota :𝒰(𝒜𝒜)𝒰(𝒜)𝒰(𝒜)$$

and a surjective Hopf algebra homomorphism

$$\zeta :𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}𝒰(𝒜)𝒰(𝒜𝒜).$$

Here $`𝒜`$ denotes the quantum double of the skew-paired Hopf algebras $`𝒜`$ and $``$. The skew-pairing of $`𝒜`$ and $`𝒜`$ in $`𝒜𝒜`$ is the universal r-form $`r`$ and the skew-pairing of $`𝒰(𝒜)`$ and $`𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}`$ in $`𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}𝒰(𝒜)`$ is the restriction of the canonical pairing of $`𝒜^{}`$ and $`𝒜`$. The universal r-form on $`𝒜𝒜`$ used to define $`𝒰(𝒜𝒜)`$ is $`\widehat{r}:=\overline{r}_{41}\overline{r}_{31}r_{24}r_{23}`$ (see section 2 for details).
In this paper we continue the investigation of these maps under the assumption that $`𝒜`$ is the coordinate algebra $`_q[G]`$ of a standard quantum group associated to a connected complex semi-simple Lie group $`G`$ and $`q`$ is not a root of unity.
The main results are the following facts:

1. As conjectured in \[Ho\] $`\zeta `$ is an isomorphism in this case (Theorem 1).
2. There exists no bialgebra structure on $`𝒰(_q[G])𝒰(_q[G])`$ such that $`\iota `$ becomes a bialgebra homomorphism (Theorem 2).
In particular, $`\iota `$ is not an isomorphism (Corollary 1).

We retain the definition of the quantum enveloping algebra $`U_q(𝔤)`$ from \[Ho\]. It differs from the usual one by an extension of the Cartan part. Then $`U_q(𝔤)`$ can be identified with $`𝒰(_q[G])`$, if $`q`$ is not a root of unity (Proposition 2). Explicitly, one has

$$l^+(c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )=f^+(c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )K_\mu ,l^{}(c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )=f^{}(c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )K_\nu $$

for some $`f^\pm (c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )U_q(𝔫_\pm )`$ (Proposition 3). Here $`c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda _q[G]`$ are matrix coefficients of the irreducible representation of $`U_q(𝔤)`$ with highest weight $`\lambda `$.
If $`G`$ is one of the classical Lie groups, then there is a choice of the longest word of the Weyl group of $`𝔤`$, such that the corresponding root vectors of $`U_q(𝔤)`$ occur in the above formula as $`f^\pm (c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )`$ for some $`c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda `$ (Proposition 5). As a corollary one obtains a formula for their coproduct (Corollary 2).
There are at least two interpretations of the algebra $`_q[G]_q[G]`$.
For arbitrary $`q`$ it is a nonstandard deformation of $`[G\times G]`$. In \[Ho\] it is therefore denoted by $`_q[D(G)]`$ where $`D(G)`$ stands for the double group $`G\times G`$.
If $`q`$ is real, it becomes a Hopf $``$-algebra which is a deformation of the algebra of polynomial functions in holomorphic and antiholomorphic coordinates on $`G`$ and describes $`G`$ as a real Lie group. It appeared first in this role in the $`q`$-deformation of the action of $`SL(2)`$ on Minkowski space, see \[PW\] or \[CSSW\].
Many authors proposed definitions of a quantum enveloping algebra corresponding to $`_q[G]_q[G]`$, in particular, of a $`q`$-Lorentz algebra. All are based on the requirement that it should be a Hopf algebra dually paired with $`_q[G]_q[G]`$.
One direct approach to such a Hopf algebra is a dualization of the structure of $`_q[G]_q[G]`$ in form of a quantum codouble $`U_q(𝔤)U_q(𝔤)`$. It is shown in \[Ma\] that $`\iota `$ would be a Hopf algebra homomorphism into such a quantum codouble. Hence it cannot be well-defined by Theorem 2.
In view of the isomorphism $`𝒰(_q[G])U_q(𝔤)`$ it seems reasonable to consider the FRT-dual $`𝒰(_q[G]_q[G])`$ as a rigorously defined alternative. Theorem 1 is then a dual and purely algebraic form of the Iwasawa decomposition introduced in \[PW\] for the $`C^{}`$-completion of $`_q[G]_q[G]`$. Note that the images $`\mathrm{Im}\widehat{l}^+_q[G]^{\mathrm{op}}`$ and $`\mathrm{Im}\widehat{l}^{}U_q(𝔤)`$ of the l-functionals on $`_q[G]_q[G]`$ determine the Iwasawa decomposition.
The rest of this paper is divided into three sections: In order to be self-contained and to fix notations we first recall mainly from \[Ho\] and \[Ma\] some facts about $`𝒜𝒜`$ and $`𝒰(𝒜𝒜)`$ for an arbitrary coquasitriangular Hopf algebra $`𝒜`$. In the second section we focus on quantum groups and prove the main results. The last one deals with the relation between l-functionals on $`_q[G]`$ and root vectors of $`U_q(𝔤)`$.
We essentially retain the notations and conventions from \[Ho\]. We will freely use material that can be found in standard textbooks such as \[Mo\].
In the original version of this paper only the classical groups were treated. The author would like to thank T. Hodges and the referee for pointing out that the proof of Theorem 1 works with a minor modification for arbitrary semi-simple groups. They also noticed that the well-definedness of $`U_q(𝔤)U_q(𝔤)`$ was an open problem until now.

## 2 Preliminaries on $`𝒜𝒜`$ and $`𝒰(𝒜𝒜)`$

Let $`𝒜`$ be a coquasitriangular Hopf algebra with universal r-form $`r`$. Then the quantum double $`𝒜𝒜`$ is a Hopf algebra which is the tensor product coalgebra $`𝒜𝒜`$ endowed with the product

$$(ab)(cd):=(ac_{(2)}b_{(2)}d)\overline{r}(b_{(1)}c_{(1)})r(b_{(3)}c_{(3)}).$$

Here $`\overline{r}`$ denotes the convolution inverse of $`r`$ and we use Sweedlers notation for the coproduct on the right hand side. The antipode of $`𝒜𝒜`$ is given by $`S(ab):=(1S(b))(S(a)1)`$. See \[Ho\], \[Ma\] or \[KS1\] for more information about coquasitriangular Hopf algebras and quantum doubles.
Let $`𝒰(𝒜)`$ be the Hopf subalgebra of the Hopf dual $`𝒜^{}`$ generated by the set of all l-functionals

$$l^+(a):=r(a),l^{}(a):=\overline{r}(a),a𝒜.$$

Following the terminology from \[Ho\] we call $`𝒰(𝒜)`$ the FRT-dual of $`𝒜`$.
If $`r`$ is a universal r-form on $`𝒜`$, then $`\overline{r}_{21}`$ is a universal r-form as well. Note that some formulas in \[Ho\] differ from those in this paper1 r because there the latter r-form is used.
The Hopf algebra $`𝒜𝒜`$ is again coquasitriangular. We define its FRT-dual $`𝒰(𝒜𝒜)`$ with respect to the universal r-form $`\widehat{r}:=\overline{r}_{41}\overline{r}_{31}r_{24}r_{23}`$, that is,

$`\widehat{r}\left((ab)(cd)\right)`$
$`=`$ $`\overline{r}(d_{(1)}a_{(1)})\overline{r}(c_{(1)}a_{(2)})r(b_{(1)}d_{(2)})r(b_{(2)}c_{(2)})`$
$`=`$ $`\overline{r}(c_{(1)}d_{(1)}a)r(bc_{(2)}d_{(2)}).`$
Consider now the linear maps

$$\theta :𝒜𝒜𝒰(𝒜),abl^+\left(S^1(a)\right)l^{}\left(S^1(b)\right)$$

and

$$m:𝒜𝒜𝒜,abab.$$

Recall that the antipode of a coquasitriangular Hopf algebra is always bijective, so $`\theta `$ is well-defined.
Using the formulas $`\overline{r}(ab)=r\left(S(a)b\right)`$, $`r(ab)=r\left(S(a)S(b)\right)`$ (see, e.g. \[KS1\], Proposition 10.2) and the fact that the coproduct is an algebra homomorphism one gets

$`\widehat{r}\left((ab)(cd)\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{r}(c_{(1)}d_{(1)}a)r(bc_{(2)}d_{(2)})`$
$`=`$ $`l^+\left(S^1(a)\right),(cd)_{(1)}l^{}\left(S^1(b)\right),(cd)_{(2)}`$
$`=`$ $`\theta (ab),m(cd).`$
For the convolution inverse $`\overline{\widehat{r}}=\overline{r}_{23}\overline{r}_{24}r_{31}r_{41}`$ of $`\widehat{r}`$ one obtains similarly

$$\overline{\widehat{r}}\left((ab)(cd)\right)=S^1\left(\theta (ab)\right),m(cd).$$

We denote the l-functionals of $`𝒰(𝒜𝒜)`$ by $`\widehat{l}^\pm `$. The preceding equations imply

$$\widehat{l}^+=\theta ^{}m,\widehat{l}^{}=m^{}S^1\theta ,$$

where $`\theta ^{}:𝒜(𝒜𝒜)^{}`$ and $`m^{}:𝒰(𝒜)(𝒜𝒜)^{}`$ are linear maps dual to $`\theta `$ and $`m`$ in the sense

$$\theta ^{}(a),bc:=\theta (bc),a,m^{}(f),ab:=f,ab.$$

In particular, the images of $`\widehat{l}^+`$ and $`\widehat{l}^{}`$ are contained in those of $`\theta ^{}`$ and $`m^{}`$, respectively. The map $`m`$ is obviously surjective. But $`S^1\theta :abl^{}(b)l^+(a)`$ is also surjective by the definition of $`𝒰(𝒜)`$. Hence one even has

$$\mathrm{Im}\widehat{l}^+=\mathrm{Im}\theta ^{},\mathrm{Im}\widehat{l}^{}=\mathrm{Im}m^{}.$$

The definition of $`𝒰(𝒜𝒜)`$ now implies that the linear map

$$\zeta :𝒜𝒰(𝒜)𝒰(𝒜𝒜),\zeta (af):=\theta ^{}(a)m^{}(f)$$

is surjective. It is proven in \[Ho\] that $`\zeta `$ becomes a Hopf algebra homomorphism, if one considers $`𝒜𝒰(𝒜)`$ with the Hopf structure $`𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}𝒰(𝒜)`$. Here $`𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}`$ denotes the opposite algebra of $`𝒜`$ and the quantum double is constructed with respect to the canonical pairing of $`𝒰(𝒜)`$ and $`𝒜`$.
To avoid further notations we will use the product, coproduct and antipode of $`𝒜`$ to express those of $`𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}`$. So the product of $`a,b𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}`$ is $`ba`$ and the coproduct and the antipode of $`𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}`$ are $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`S^1`$, respectively.
It is also shown in \[Ho\] that the map

$$\iota :𝒰(𝒜𝒜)𝒜^{}𝒜^{},ff_{(1)},(1)f_{(2)},(1)$$
(2)
is an embedding of algebras and that $`\iota m^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (the coproduct in $`𝒰(𝒜)`$) and $`\iota \theta ^{}=(l^{}l^+)\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In particular, $`\mathrm{Im}\iota 𝒰(𝒜)𝒰(𝒜)`$.
If $`𝒜`$ is finite-dimensional, then any universal r-form $`r`$ is simultaneously a universal R-matrix $`R`$ for the dual Hopf algebra $`𝒜^{}`$ which therefore is quasitriangular.
This R-matrix can be used to form a quantum codouble $`𝒜^{}𝒜^{}`$ of two copies of $`𝒜^{}`$, see \[Ma\]. Its structure is completely dual to that of $`𝒜𝒜`$ \- it is the tensor product algebra $`𝒜^{}𝒜^{}`$ with a twisted coproduct

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(ab):=a_{(1)}R(b_{(1)}a_{(2)})R^1b_{(2)}.$$
(3)
The map $`\iota `$ becomes a Hopf algebra homomorphism into $`𝒜^{}𝒜^{}`$. If $`𝒜`$ is in addition factorizable, then both $`\iota `$ and $`\zeta `$ are isomorphisms (\[Ma\], Theorem 7.3.5). As we will see in the next section, there is no way to define the above coproduct in a rigorous way for arbitrary coquasitriangular Hopf algebras $`𝒜`$.
If $`𝒜`$ is a Hopf $``$-algebra and $`r`$ is of real type, i.e. $`r(a^{}b^{})=\overline{r(ba)}`$, then $`𝒜𝒜`$ is a Hopf $``$-algebra with involution defined by $`(ab)^{}:=b^{}a^{}`$ (\[Ma\], section 7.3, \[KS1\], section 10.2.7). This applies to the case of the coordinate algebras $`_q[G]`$ treated in the next section if $`q`$ is real. The involution on $`_q[G]`$ is the unique one, for which the pairing with the compact real form of $`U_q(𝔤)`$ (\[KS1\], section 6.1.7) is a pairing of Hopf $``$-algebras. Then there is a Hopf algebra embedding $`a1a`$ of $`𝒜`$ into $`𝒜𝒜`$ and any element of $`𝒜𝒜`$ can be written uniquely as $`a^{}b`$ with $`a,b𝒜𝒜𝒜`$. One says that $`𝒜𝒜`$ is a realification of $`𝒜`$ (in \[Ma\] it is called a complexification). There is an involution on $`𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}𝒰(𝒜)`$ defined by

$$(af)^{}:=(1f^{})\left(S^2(a)^{}1\right),$$

for which $`𝒜^{\mathrm{op}}𝒰(𝒜)`$ becomes a Hopf $``$-algebra and $`\zeta `$ a $``$-homomorphism (\[Ma\], Proposition 7.1.4 and Theorem 7.3.5).

## 3 Application to quantum groups

We now specialize the preceding considerations to the case where $`𝒜`$ is the coordinate algebra of a standard quantum group.
Throughout this section $`G`$ denotes a connected complex semi-simple Lie group with Lie algebra $`𝔤`$, $`\{\alpha _i\}_{i=1,\mathrm{},N}`$ a set of simple roots of $`𝔤`$, $`𝐐:=_{i=1}^N\alpha _i`$ the root lattice and $`𝐋`$ the character group of a maximal torus of $`G`$ which we identify with a sublattice of the weight lattice of $`𝔤`$ containing $`𝐐`$. For $`\lambda ,\mu 𝐋`$ we set $`\mu <\lambda `$ iff $`\lambda \mu `$ is a sum of positive roots. Furthermore, $`,`$ denotes the scalar product on $`𝐋`$ satisfying $`\alpha _i,\alpha _j=d_ia_{ij}`$, where $`a_{ij}`$ and $`d_ia_{ij}`$ are the entries of the Cartan matrix and the symmetrized Cartan matrix of $`𝔤`$, respectively.
We retain the convention from \[Ho\], where the quantum enveloping algebra $`U_q(𝔤)`$ has generators $`K_\lambda ,E_i,F_j`$, $`\lambda 𝐋,i,j=1,\mathrm{},N`$ fulfilling the relations

$`K_\lambda K_\mu =K_{\lambda +\mu },[E_i,F_j]=\delta _{ij}{\displaystyle \frac{K_iK_i^1}{q^{d_i}q^{d_i}}},K_i:=K_{\alpha _i},`$
$`K_\lambda E_iK_\lambda ^1=q^{\lambda ,\alpha _i}E_i,K_\lambda F_jK_\lambda ^1=q^{\lambda ,\alpha _j}F_j`$
and the $`q`$-Serre relations (\[KS1\], eqs. (6.8), (6.9)). The parameter $`q\{0\}`$ is assumed to be not a root of unity. See eqs. (6.19), (6.20) in \[KS1\] for the definition of the coproduct, the counit and the antipode of $`U_q(𝔤)`$.
Note that $`U_q(𝔤)`$ as used here is not the most common one, where $`K_\lambda `$ is defined only for $`\lambda 𝐐`$. It depends on the choice of $`G`$. For simply connected $`G`$ it coincides with $`\stackrel{ˇ}{U}`$ from \[Jo\] and for the classical groups with $`U_q^{\mathrm{ext}}(𝔤)`$ from \[KS1\].
There is a $`𝐐`$-grading on $`U_q(𝔤)`$ given by

$$U_q(𝔤)=\underset{\lambda 𝐐}{}U_q^\lambda (𝔤),U_q^\lambda (𝔤):=\{fU_q(𝔤)|K_\mu fK_\mu ^1=q^{\lambda ,\mu }f\mu 𝐋\}.$$

Let $`U_q(𝔥),U_q(𝔫_+),U_q(𝔫_{})`$ be the subalgebras generated by the $`K_\lambda `$, $`E_i`$ and $`F_j`$, respectively. Setting $`U_q^\lambda (𝔫_\pm ):=U_q^\lambda (𝔤)U_q(𝔫_\pm )`$ we have (\[Ja\], Lemma 4.12):

###### Proposition 1

For $`fU_q^\lambda (𝔫_+)`$ and $`gU_q^\lambda (𝔫_{})`$ there are $`f_i^{}U_q^{\mu _i}(𝔫_+)`$, $`f_i^{\prime \prime }U_q^{\lambda \mu _i}(𝔫_+)`$, $`0<\mu _i<\lambda `$ and $`g_j^{}U_q^{\lambda \nu _j}(𝔫_{})`$, $`g_j^{\prime \prime }U_q^{\nu _j}(𝔫_{})`$, $`0>\nu _j>\lambda `$, such that

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(f)=fK_\lambda +{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}f_i^{}f_i^{\prime \prime }K_{\mu _i}+1f,`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(g)=g1+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}g_j^{}K_{\nu _j}g_j^{\prime \prime }+K_\lambda g.`$
Proof. We can assume without loss of generality that $`f=E_{i_1}\mathrm{}E_{i_k}`$ and $`g=F_{i_1}\mathrm{}F_{i_k}`$ with $`\pm \lambda =\alpha _{i_1}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{i_k}`$, because $`U_q^\lambda (𝔫_\pm )`$ is spanned by such monomials. The proof is now an easy induction on $`k`$. See \[Ja\] for the details. $`\mathrm{}`$
Let $`W`$ be the Weyl group of $`𝔤`$ generated by the reflections $`r_i:\alpha _j\alpha _ja_{ij}\alpha _i`$. Let $`E_{\beta _k},F_{\beta _k},k=1,\mathrm{},n`$ be the root vectors of $`U_q(𝔤)`$ (see \[KS1\], section 6.2.3) associated to the ordering $`\beta _k:=r_{i_1}r_{i_2}\mathrm{}r_{i_{k1}}\alpha _{i_k}`$ of the set $`𝐑^+`$ of positive roots, where $`r_{i_1}r_{i_2}\mathrm{}r_{i_n}`$ is a reduced expression of the longest element of $`W`$. Then by the Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt (PBW) theorem the following monomials form a vector space basis of $`U_q(𝔤)`$:

$$K_\lambda F_𝐢E_𝐣:=K_\lambda F_{\beta _1}^{i_1}\mathrm{}F_{\beta _n}^{i_n}E_{\beta _1}^{j_1}\mathrm{}E_{\beta _n}^{j_n},\lambda 𝐋,𝐢,𝐣_0^n.$$

The coordinate algebra $`_q[G]`$ of the standard quantum group associated to $`G`$ is the Hopf subalgebra of $`U_q(𝔤)^{}`$ spanned by the functionals $`c_{u,v}(f):=u(fv)`$, $`fU_q(𝔤)`$, where $`v`$ is a vector in the irreducible representation of $`U_q(𝔤)`$ with highest weight $`\lambda 𝐋`$ and $`u`$ is a vector in the dual representation, see \[Ho\]. If $`\{u_n\},\{v_n\}`$ is a pair of dual bases in the representation space and its dual, then $`\mathrm{\Delta }(c_{u,v})=_nc_{u,v_n}c_{u_n,v}`$. If $`u,v`$ are weight vectors possessing weights $`\mu ,\nu `$, then $`c_{u,v}`$ is denoted by $`c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda `$ as well.
If $`G`$ is simply connected, $`_q[G]`$ equals $`R_q[G]`$ from \[Jo\]. The relation with $`𝒪(G_q)`$ from \[KS1\] will be discussed in the next section.
The Hopf algebras $`_q[G]`$ are all coquasitriangular. A universal r-form $`\beta `$ is derived in \[Ho\] from the Rosso form of $`U_q(𝔤)`$. To be compatible with \[FRT\] we use $`r:=\overline{\beta }_{21}`$. This simply exchanges $`l^+`$ and $`l^{}`$. It follows from the construction of $`r`$ that the l-functionals on $`_q[G]`$ can be identified with elements of $`U_q(𝔤)`$. That is, there is a Hopf algebra embedding of $`𝒰(_q[G])`$ into $`U_q(𝔤)`$. By Proposition 4.6 in \[HLT\] this embedding is in fact surjective. We therefore have:

###### Proposition 2

There is an isomorphism $`𝒰(_q[G])U_q(𝔤)`$.

This was used tacitly in \[Ho\]. In what follows, we will not distinguish between $`𝒰(_q[G])`$ and $`U_q(𝔤)`$ any more.
In \[Ho\] the following description of $`\mathrm{Ker}l^\pm `$ was given:

$$c_{u,v}\mathrm{Ker}l^\pm u(U_q(𝔟_{})v)=0.$$
(4)
We will use it to prove the next proposition. It generalizes Lemma 3.3 in \[Ho\].

###### Proposition 3

For $`c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda _q[G]`$ there are $`f^\pm (c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )U_q^{\nu \mu }(𝔫_\pm )`$ with

$$l^+(c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )=f^+(c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )K_\mu ,l^{}(c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )=f^{}(c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )K_\nu .$$

Proof. We treat only $`l^+`$, the other case is analogous. Let $`c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda =c_{u,v}`$ be given. Fix dual bases $`\{u_n\},\{v_n\}`$ as above consisting of weight vectors with weights $`\nu _n,\nu _n`$, such that $`v`$ is one of the $`v_n`$. Let $`v^{}`$ be a highest weight vector and $`c_{\mu ,\lambda }^\lambda =c_{u,v^{}}`$. Since $`l^+`$ is a coalgebra homomorphism, we have

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(l^+(c_{\mu ,\lambda }^\lambda ))=\underset{n}{}l^+(c_{\mu ,\nu _n}^\lambda )l^+(c_{\nu _n,\lambda }^\lambda ).$$
(5)
It is known that the proposition holds for $`\nu =\lambda `$ (\[Ho\], Lemma 3.3), so

$$l^+(c_{\mu ,\lambda }^\lambda )=f^+(c_{\mu ,\lambda }^\lambda )K_\mu ,l^+(c_{\nu _n,\lambda }^\lambda )=f^+(c_{\nu _n,\lambda }^\lambda )K_{\nu _n}.$$
(6)
By the first equality and Proposition 1 we can express $`\mathrm{\Delta }(l^+(c_{\mu ,\lambda }^\lambda ))`$ also as

$$f^+(c_{\mu ,\lambda }^\lambda )K_\mu K_\lambda +\underset{i}{}f_i^{}K_\mu f_i^{\prime \prime }K_{\xi _i+\mu }+K_\mu f^+(c_{\mu ,\lambda }^\lambda )K_\mu $$
(7)
with $`f_i^{}U_q^{\xi _i}(𝔫_+)`$, $`f_i^{\prime \prime }U_q^{\lambda \mu \xi _i}(𝔫_+)`$, $`0<\xi _i<\lambda \mu `$. If one compares the $`U_q(𝔥)`$-parts of the terms in (5) and (7) in the second tensor component, one gets by the second equality in (6) and the PBW theorem

$$\underset{j}{}l^+(c_{\mu ,\nu _{n_j}}^\lambda )l^+(c_{\nu _{n_j},\lambda }^\lambda )=\underset{k}{}f_{i_k}^{}K_\mu f_{i_k}^{\prime \prime }K_{\xi _{i_k}+\mu },$$

where the indices $`n_j`$ and $`i_k`$ are those with $`\nu _{n_i}=\xi _{i_k}+\mu =\nu `$.
We claim that the elements $`l^+(c_{\nu _n,\lambda }^\lambda )`$ are linearly independent. Indeed, assume that there are $`x_n`$ with $`_nx_nl^+(c_{u_n,v^{}})=l^+(c_{_nx_nu_n,v^{}})=0`$. Since $`v^{}`$ is a highest weight vector, (4) implies $`_nx_nu_n=0`$. Hence $`x_n=0`$ for all $`n`$, because $`\{u_n\}`$ is a basis. It follows that all $`l^+(c_{\mu ,\nu _{n_j}}^\lambda )`$ are linear combinations of $`f_{i_k}^{}K_\mu `$. The considered $`l^+(c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )`$ is one of them, so the proposition follows. $`\mathrm{}`$
Now we are ready to prove the main theorem.

###### Theorem 1

There is an isomorphism of Hopf algebras

$$𝒰(_q[G]_q[G])_q[G]^{\mathrm{op}}U_q(𝔤).$$

Proof. It suffices to prove the injectivity of the epimorphism $`\zeta `$ described in section 2. We prove that $`\zeta ^{}:=\iota \zeta :_q[G]^{\mathrm{op}}U_q(𝔤)U_q(𝔤)U_q(𝔤)`$ with $`\iota `$ from (2) is injective.
Suppose $`f\mathrm{Ker}\zeta ^{}`$, $`f=_{\lambda 𝐋,𝐢,𝐣_0^n}a_{\lambda \mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}K_\lambda F_𝐢E_𝐣`$ with $`a_{\lambda \mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}=0`$ for almost all $`\lambda \mathrm{𝐢𝐣}`$. We have to show that $`f`$ vanishes.
Order $`_0^n`$ in such a way that the weights $`\mu _𝐣`$ of $`E_𝐣`$ form a nondecreasing (with respect to $`<`$) sequence. Let $`𝐣_0`$ be the maximal $`𝐣`$ for which there exists an $`a_{\lambda \mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}0`$.
Recall that $`\iota m^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\iota \theta ^{}=(l^{}l^+)\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Set $`U_q(𝔟_\pm ):=U_q(𝔥)U_q(𝔫_\pm )`$ and note that by Proposition 3 and Proposition 1 we have

$$(l^{}l^+)\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{\lambda \mathrm{𝐢𝐣}})U_q(𝔟_{})U_q(𝔟_+),\mathrm{\Delta }(K_\lambda F_𝐢)U_q(𝔟_{})U_q(𝔟_{}).$$

Hence only $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E_𝐣)`$ contribute to the $`U_q(𝔫_+)`$-part in the first tensor component. Expand them according to Proposition 1. Then the PBW theorem implies that

$$\underset{\lambda 𝐢}{}(l^{}l^+)\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{\lambda \mathrm{𝐢𝐣}_0})\mathrm{\Delta }(K_\lambda F_𝐢)(E_{𝐣_0}K_{\mu _{𝐣_0}})$$

is linearly independent from the other terms occuring in $`\zeta ^{}(f)`$ and vanishes separately. Since $`U_q(𝔤)U_q(𝔤)=U_q(𝔤𝔤)`$ is free of zero divisors (\[DK\], Corollary 1.8), we get

$$\underset{\lambda 𝐢}{}(l^{}l^+)\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{\lambda \mathrm{𝐢𝐣}_0})\mathrm{\Delta }(K_\lambda F_𝐢)=0.$$

The same argument applied to the maximal $`𝐢_0`$ and the second tensor component shows

$$\underset{\lambda }{}(l^{}l^+)\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{\lambda 𝐢_0𝐣_0})\mathrm{\Delta }(K_\lambda )=0.$$

By Proposition 3 we can write $`(l^{}l^+)\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{\lambda 𝐢_0𝐣_0})`$ as $`_{\xi 𝐋}u_{\lambda \xi }K_\xi v_{\lambda \xi }K_\xi `$ for some $`u_{\lambda \xi }v_{\lambda \xi }U_q(𝔫_{})U_q(𝔫_+)`$. Then the last equation becomes

$$\underset{\xi \lambda }{}u_{\lambda \xi }K_{\xi +\lambda }v_{\lambda \xi }K_{\xi +\lambda }=0.$$

This implies $`u_{\lambda \xi }v_{\lambda \xi }=0`$ for all $`\lambda ,\xi `$. Finally,

$$(l^{}l^+)\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{\lambda 𝐢_\mathrm{𝟎}𝐣_\mathrm{𝟎}})=0$$

implies $`a_{\lambda 𝐢_\mathrm{𝟎}𝐣_\mathrm{𝟎}}=0`$ in contradiction with the assumption, because $`(l^{}l^+)\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is injective by the definition of $`𝒰(_q[G])`$. $`\mathrm{}`$
In contrast to their h-adic counterparts $`U_h(𝔤)`$ defined over the ring of formal power series $`[[h]]`$, the Hopf algebras $`U_q(𝔤)`$ over $``$ are not quasitriangular. Nevertheless, parts of the theory of $`U_h(𝔤)`$ carry over to $`U_q(𝔤)`$, since the l-functionals encode the R-matrix of $`U_h(𝔤)`$ to some extent. Hence it is not a priori clear that there is no way to define the twisted coproduct (3) as well on $`U_q(𝔤)U_q(𝔤)`$. But we show now that this is in fact impossible.

###### Theorem 2

There exists no bialgebra structure on $`U_q(𝔤)U_q(𝔤)`$ such that $`\iota `$ becomes a homomorphism of bialgebras.

Proof. Suppose that the opposite holds. Then $`\iota \theta ^{}`$ is a bialgebra homomorphism as well. Note that $`\pm (\nu \mu )_{i=1}^N_0\alpha _i`$ implies $`l^\pm (c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )=0`$ by (4). Using this and Proposition 3 one computes

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(K_\lambda K_\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }\iota \theta ^{}(c_{\lambda ,\lambda }^\lambda )`$
$`=`$ $`(\iota \theta ^{}\iota \theta ^{})\mathrm{\Delta }(c_{\lambda ,\lambda }^\lambda )`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}K_\lambda f^+(c_{\lambda ,\nu _n}^\lambda )K_\lambda f^{}(c_{\nu _n,\lambda }^\lambda )K_\lambda K_\lambda .`$
This must be an invertible element of $`U_q(𝔤)^4`$, because $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is an algebra homomorphism and $`K_\lambda K_\lambda `$ is invertible. Since $`K_\lambda K_\lambda K_\lambda K_\lambda `$ is invertible, $`_nf^+(c_{\lambda ,\nu _n}^\lambda )f^{}(c_{\nu _n,\lambda }^\lambda )`$ is an invertible element of $`U_q(𝔤)^2`$.
An invertible element of a graded algebra must be homogeneous - the product of the homogeneous components of highest degrees $`n_0,m_0`$ of the element and its inverse must be of degree zero, so $`m_0=n_0`$, the same must hold for the components of lowest degrees $`n_1,m_1`$, so $`m_1=n_1`$ and $`n_1n_0`$ and $`m_1m_0`$ implies then $`m_0=m_1=n_0=n_1`$. By Proposition 3 $`_nf^+(c_{\lambda ,\nu _n}^\lambda )f^{}(c_{\nu _n,\lambda }^\lambda )`$ is not homogeneous with respect to the $`𝐐\times 𝐐`$-grading of $`U_q(𝔤)U_q(𝔤)`$, so we obtain a contradiction. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 1

The map $`\iota `$ is not surjective.

## 4 L-functionals and root vectors

The root vectors of $`U_q(𝔤)`$ are defined in terms of the action of the braid group of $`𝔤`$ on $`U_q(𝔤)`$. Since this action is not given by coalgebra homomorphisms, it is not possible to compute their coproduct directly from their definition.
However, it is mentioned in \[KS1\] on p. 278 that for $`G=SL(N+1)`$ there is a choice of $`r_{i_1}r_{i_2}\mathrm{}r_{i_n}`$, such that the root vectors are certain $`f^\pm (c_{\mu ,\nu }^\lambda )`$ from Proposition 3. This allows to compute their coproduct explicitly.
In this section we generalize this result to the other classical Lie groups. The main tool will be the following proposition:

###### Proposition 4

For $`i<j`$ there are $`x_{ij}(𝐤),y_{ij}(𝐤)`$, such that

$`E_{\beta _i}E_{\beta _j}q^{\beta _i,\beta _j}E_{\beta _j}E_{\beta _i}={\displaystyle \underset{𝐤_0^{ji1}}{}}x_{ij}(𝐤)E_{\beta _{i+1}}^{k_1}\mathrm{}E_{\beta _{j1}}^{k_{ji1}},`$ (8)
$`F_{\beta _i}F_{\beta _j}q^{\beta _i,\beta _j}F_{\beta _j}F_{\beta _i}={\displaystyle \underset{𝐤_0^{ji1}}{}}y_{ij}(𝐤)F_{\beta _{i+1}}^{k_1}\mathrm{}F_{\beta _{j1}}^{k_{ji1}}.`$ (9)
If $`\beta _i+\beta _j_{l=1}^{j1}k_l\beta _{i+l}`$, then $`x_{ij}(𝐤)=y_{ij}(𝐤)=0`$.

Proof. The two relations (8), (9) are proven in \[KS2\], Theorem 3.2.3.
Conjugating (8) with $`K_\lambda `$ one gets

$$\underset{𝐤}{}(q^{\lambda ,\beta _i+\beta _j}q^{\lambda ,k_1\beta _{i+1}+\mathrm{}+k_{ji1}\beta _{j1}})x_{ij}(𝐤)E_{\beta _{i+1}}^{k_1}\mathrm{}E_{\beta _{j1}}^{k_{ji1}}=0.$$

The PBW theorem implies $`q^{\lambda ,\beta _i+\beta _j}=q^{\lambda ,k_1\beta _{i+1}+\mathrm{}+k_{ji1}\beta _{j1}}`$ or $`x_{ij}(𝐤)=0`$. Since $`q`$ is not a root of unity and $`\lambda `$ was arbitrary, the additional claim follows for the $`x_{ij}(𝐤)`$. The same argument applies to the $`y_{ij}(𝐤)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$
We will use a special ordering of the positive roots, in which most if not all terms on the right hand side of (8), (9) vanish. To define it, we first arrange the positive roots in the following way as parts of matrices:

$$\beta _{ij}=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\begin{array}{c}_{k=i}^{j1}\alpha _k\hfill \end{array}\hfill & & 𝔤=𝔰𝔩_{N+1},\hfill \\ \begin{array}{c}_{k=i}^{j1}\alpha _k\hfill \\ _{k=i}^N\alpha _k+_{k=j^{}}^N\alpha _k\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \begin{array}{c}jN+1\hfill \\ j>N+1\hfill \end{array}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N+1},\hfill \\ \begin{array}{c}_{k=i}^{j1}\alpha _k\hfill \\ _{k=i}^N\alpha _k+_{k=j^{}}^{N1}\alpha _k\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \begin{array}{c}jN+1\hfill \\ j>N+1\hfill \end{array}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},\hfill \\ \begin{array}{c}_{k=i}^{j1}\alpha _k\hfill \\ _{k=i}^{N2}\alpha _k+\alpha _N\hfill \\ _{k=i}^N\alpha _k\hfill \\ _{k=i}^N\alpha _k+_{k=j^{}}^{N2}\alpha _k\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \begin{array}{c}jN\hfill \\ j=N+1\hfill \\ j=N+2\hfill \\ j>N+2\hfill \end{array}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N},\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`j^{}:=2N+2j`$ for $`𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N+1}`$, $`j^{}:=2N+1j`$ for $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},𝔰𝔬_{2N}`$ and the indices take the values

$$\begin{array}{cc}i=1,\mathrm{},N,j=i+1,\mathrm{},N+1\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔩_{N+1},\hfill \\ i=1,\mathrm{},N,j=i+1,\mathrm{},i^{}1\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N+1},\hfill \\ i=1,\mathrm{},N,j=i+1,\mathrm{},i^{}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},\hfill \\ i=1,\mathrm{},N1,j=i+1,\mathrm{},i^{}1\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Now we fix the expression $`_{k=N}^1a_k`$ for the longest word of $`W`$, where

$$a_k:=\{\begin{array}{cc}\begin{array}{c}_{i=1}^kr_i\hfill \end{array}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔩_{N+1},\hfill \\ \begin{array}{c}(_{i=k}^Nr_i)(_{j=N1}^kr_j)\hfill \end{array}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N+1},𝔰𝔭_{2N},\hfill \\ \begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & k=N\hfill \\ (_{i=k}^{N2}r_i)r_N(_{j=N1}^kr_j)\hfill & Nk0\text{ odd}\hfill \\ (_{i=k}^{N1}r_i)r_N(_{j=N}^kr_j)\hfill & Nk0\text{ even}\hfill \end{array}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Then the induced ordering $``$ of $`𝐑^+`$ is as follows:

$$\beta _{ij}\beta _{kl}\{\begin{array}{cc}\begin{array}{c}i<k\text{ or }i=k,j<l\hfill \end{array}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔩_{N+1},\hfill \\ \begin{array}{c}k<i\text{ or }i=k,l<j\hfill \end{array}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N+1},𝔰𝔬_{2N},\hfill \\ \begin{array}{c}k<i\text{ or }i=k,j=N+1\text{ or}\hfill \\ i=k,l<j,jN+1,lN+1\hfill \end{array}\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Originally the quantum group coordinate algebras were defined only for the classical groups in terms of generators and relations \[FRT\]. The generators are the matrix coefficients $`u_j^i`$ of the vector representation of $`U_q(𝔤)`$ (the first fundamental representation which defines $`𝔤`$ as a matrix Lie algebra) with respect to some basis. For the relations we refer to chapter 9 of \[KS1\]. There the resulting Hopf algebras are denoted by $`𝒪(G_q)`$.
If $`q`$ is not a root of unity, then $`𝒪(G_q)`$ defined in this way is isomorphic to $`_q[G]`$ as used in the last section for all $`G`$ except $`G=SO(2N+1)`$. In this case one has $`𝒪(G_{q^2})_q[G]`$.
This is a consequence of the Peter-Weyl theorem (\[KS1\], Theorem 11.22). The latter is stated in \[KS1\] under the assumption that $`q`$ is transcendental. According to Remark 3 on p. 415 of \[KS1\] and Corollaries 4.15 and 5.22 from \[LR\] the result holds also for $`q`$ not a root of unity.
We abbreviate $`fg`$ iff $`f=xg`$ with some $`x\{0\}`$ and $`(l^\pm )_j^i:=l^\pm (u_j^i)`$. Then the following statement holds:

###### Proposition 5

If $`ij`$ appear as indices of a positive root $`\beta _{ij}`$, then

$$(l^+)_j^i(l^+)_i^iE_{\beta _{ij}},(l^{})_i^j(l^{})_i^iF_{\beta _{ij}},$$

except if $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N}`$ and $`j=i^{}`$. In this case, there are $`x,y`$, such that

$`(l^+)_i^{}^i(l^+)_i^i(E_{\beta _{ii^{}}}xE_{\beta _{ii^{}1}}E_i),`$
$`(l^{})_i^i^{}(l^{})_i^i(F_{\beta _{ii^{}}}yF_{\beta _{ii^{}1}}F_i).`$
Proof. Since this is known for $`𝔤=𝔰𝔩_{N+1}`$, we consider only the remaining cases. We also will consider only the $`E_{\beta _{ij}}`$. The $`F_{\beta _{ji}}`$ are treated similarly.
The proof is by induction over $`ji`$. By the lists of $`(l^\pm )_j^i`$ in section 8.5.2 of \[KS1\] the claim holds for $`ji=1`$. All occurring $`(l^+)_j^i`$ except $`(l^+)_{N+1}^{N1}`$ for $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},𝔰𝔬_{2N}`$ can be calculated from the recurrence relation

$$(qq^1)(l^+)_j^i=[(l^+)_k^i,(l^+)_j^k](l^{})_k^k.$$
(10)
Here $`k`$ with $`i<k<j`$ is arbitrary with $`ki^{},j^{}`$ (\[KS1\], Proposition 8.29).
We choose $`k=j1`$. This is admissible in all cases except $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},𝔰𝔬_{2N}`$ and $`j=N+1`$. These must be treated separately afterwards.
By the explicit lists of the $`(l^\pm )_j^i`$ in \[KS1\] there are $`\lambda _k𝐋`$ such that

$$(l^\pm )_k^k=K_{\pm \lambda _k},(l^+)_j^{j1}(l^+)_{j1}^{j1}E_{f(j1)},f(k):=\{\begin{array}{cc}k\hfill & kN,\hfill \\ k^{}1\hfill & k>N.\hfill \end{array}$$

Inserting this and the induction hypothesis into (10) we get

$$(l^+)_j^i(l^+)_i^i(E_{f(j1)}E_{\beta _{ij1}}q^{g(i,j1)}E_{\beta _{ij1}}E_{f(j1)})$$
(11)
with $`g(i,j1)=\lambda _{j1},\beta _{ij1}\lambda _i,\alpha _{f(j1)}`$.
Inserting the explicit formulas for $`\lambda _k,\beta _{ij}`$, $`\alpha _i,\alpha _j`$ one gets after some lengthy calculations

$$g(i,j1)=\{\begin{array}{cc}2\hfill & 𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},j=i^{}\hfill \\ \alpha _{f(j1)},\beta _{ij1}\hfill & \text{otherwise}\hfill \end{array}.$$
(12)
In our ordering of $`𝐑^+`$ we have $`\alpha _{f(j1)}\beta _{ij1}`$ for $`i<j1`$ and $`ji^{}`$ which holds in all cases except $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},j=i^{}`$. Since $`𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N},j=N+1`$ was excluded we furthermore have $`\alpha _{f(j1)}+\beta _{ij1}=\beta _{ij}`$ and there is no other linear combination of roots between $`\alpha _{f(j1)}`$ and $`\beta _{ij1}`$ equal to $`\beta _{ij}`$. Hence the exponent in (11) is in all considered cases except $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},j=i^{}`$ the same as the one which appears on the left hand side of (8) and the claim reduces to Proposition 4 (note that for the classical groups $`(l^+)_j^i0`$ for all $`ij`$, as follows for example from \[KS1\], Theorem 8.33).
For $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},j=i^{}`$ we obtain

$$(l^+)_i^{}^i(l^+)_i^i(E_iE_{\beta _{ii^{}1}}q^2E_{\beta _{ii^{}1}}E_i)(l^+)_i^i(E_{\beta _{ii^{}}}xE_{\beta _{ii^{}1}}E_i)$$

for some $`x`$, because $`\alpha _i,\beta _{ij1}=0`$.
It remains to treat the excluded cases $`(l^+)_{N+1}^i`$ for $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N},𝔰𝔬_{2N}`$.
By the explicit lists of $`(l^+)_j^i`$ in \[KS1\] we have for $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N}`$, $`i=N1`$

$`(l^+)_{N+1}^{N1}`$ $``$ $`(l^+)_{N1}^{N1}(E_NE_{N1}q^2E_{N1}E_N)`$
$`=`$ $`(l^+)_{N1}^{N1}(E_NE_{N1}q^{\alpha _{N1},\alpha _N}E_{N1}E_N)`$
$``$ $`(l^+)_{N1}^{N1}E_{\alpha _{N1}+\alpha _N}`$
by the same argument as above. For $`𝔤=𝔰𝔬_{2N}`$ the lists directly contain

$$(l^+)_{N+1}^{N1}(l^+)_{N1}^{N1}E_N,$$

so the proposition holds in these cases.
For $`i<N1`$ we need a second induction on $`i`$ starting with $`i=N1`$. We again use the recurrence relation (10), but now with $`k=i+1`$ (which is possible for $`i<N1`$) getting by induction

$`(l^+)_{N+1}^i`$ $``$ $`[(l^+)_{i+1}^i,(l^+)_{N+1}^{i+1}](l^{})_{i+1}^{i+1}`$
$``$ $`(l^+)_i^i(E_iE_{\beta _{i+1N+1}}q^{\lambda _{i+1},\alpha _i\lambda _i,\beta _{i+1N+1}}E_{\beta _{i+1N+1}}E_i).`$
In all cases $`\lambda _{i+1},\alpha _i=1`$ and the second term in the exponent vanishes, since in $`\beta _{i+1N+1}`$ only $`\alpha _j`$ with $`j>i`$ occur. Since $`\alpha _i,\beta _{i+1N+1}=1`$ and $`\alpha _i\beta _{i+1N+1}`$, the same argumentation as above yields

$`(l^+)_{N+1}^i`$ $``$ $`(l^+)_i^i(E_{\beta _{i+1N+1}}E_iq^{\alpha _i,\beta _{i+1N+1}}E_iE_{\beta _{i+1N+1}})`$
$``$ $`(l^+)_i^iE_{\beta _{iN+1}}.`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 2

We have

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(E_{\beta _{ij}})((l^{})_i^i(l^{})_i^i){\displaystyle \underset{k=i}{\overset{j}{}}}(l^+)_k^i(l^+)_j^k,`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(F_{\beta _{ij}})((l^+)_i^i(l^+)_i^i){\displaystyle \underset{k=i}{\overset{j}{}}}(l^{})_k^j(l^{})_i^k`$
except when $`𝔤=𝔰𝔭_{2N}`$ and $`j=i^{}`$. In this case, we have

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(E_{\beta _{ii^{}}})x\mathrm{\Delta }(E_{\beta _{ii^{}1}}E_i)+((l^{})_i^i(l^{})_i^i){\displaystyle \underset{k=i}{\overset{i^{}}{}}}(l^+)_k^i(l^+)_i^{}^k,`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(F_{\beta _{ii^{}}})y\mathrm{\Delta }(F_{i\beta _{i^{}1}}F_i)+((l^+)_i^i(l^+)_i^i){\displaystyle \underset{k=i}{\overset{i^{}}{}}}(l^{})_k^i^{}(l^{})_i^k.`$