text:
# Interaction of global and local monopoles

## I Introduction

Magnetic monopoles have raised a large interest since their first construction by Dirac . While the Dirac-monopole has a singularity, the so-called Dirac string, ’t Hooft and Polyakov  came up with the construction of a particle-like magnetic monopole in SU(2) Yang-Mills-Higgs (YMH) theory with triplet Higgs scalar. The magnetic charge of this object results from the topological properties of the solution and is directly proportional to the degree of the map from space-time infinite to the vacuum manifold of the theory. Minimal coupling of the SU(2) YMH model to gravity leads (for suitable choice of the boundary conditions) to globally regular gravitating monopoles  which exist up to a maximal value of the gravitational coupling. For higher values of that coupling, the Schwarzschild radius of the solution becomes larger than the radius of the monopole core.

Considering only the theory with a scalar Goldstone field leads to a different type of topological defect , the so-called global monopole. Like all global defects this has infinite energy resulting from the $`\frac{1}{r^2}`$ fall-off of the energy density. Coupling to gravity  leads to the observation that the effective mass of the system becomes negative.

Recently, a self-gravitating magnetic monopole in the spacetime of a global monopole has been considered . In both papers the potential is the sum of the Higgs potential and the analog Goldstone field potential. Thus, the interaction between the global Goldstone field and the local Higgs field is only indirect, namely through the coupling to gravity.

Considering the composite topological defect, the effective mass was found to be positive or negative, depending on the coupling constants of the model.

In this paper we continue the investigation of this system, allowing a direct interaction between the matter fields. This extra interaction is implemented by adding to the potential a gauge invariant term as follows :

$$V_3(\varphi ^a,\chi ^a)=\frac{\lambda _3}{2}(\varphi ^a\varphi ^a\eta _1^2)(\chi ^a\chi ^a\eta _2^2).$$
(1)
Here, we are mainly interested in the analysis of the critical behaviour of the composite system considering now the most general, gauge invariant potential. Because of the high non-linearity of the set of coupled differential equation, an analytical analysis becomes impossible and only a numerical analysis can provide the results.

This paper is organized as follows. In Section II we describe our model and the Ansatz. In Section III, we give the equations of motion, the boundary conditions and the analysis of the asymptotic behaviour of the Goldstone and Higgs field functions. We present our numerical results in Section IV and describe how the extra term (1) in the potential provides new results concerning the behaviour of the fields near the defect’s core as well as concerning the effective mass of the system. We observe e.g. a strong dependence of the mass on the coupling constant $`\lambda _3`$. We give our conclusions in Section V.

## II The Extended Model

This model is described by the following action which is composed of the action for the gravitating global monopole and the action of the gravitating local monopole:

$$S=S_G+S_M=_G\sqrt{g}d^4x+_M\sqrt{g}d^4x,$$
(2)
with the gravity Lagrangian $`_G`$:

$$_G=\frac{1}{16\pi G}R$$
(3)
and $`G`$ denotes Newton’s constant.

The matter Lagrangian $`_M`$ of the extended model with extra direct interaction between the global Goldstone field $`\chi ^a`$ and the Higgs field $`\varphi ^a`$ reads ($`a=1,2,3`$):

$$_M=\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }^aF^{\mu \nu ,a}\frac{1}{2}(D_\mu \varphi ^a)(D^\mu \varphi ^a)\frac{1}{2}(_\mu \chi ^a)(^\mu \chi ^a)V(\varphi ^a,\chi ^a),$$
(4)
with covariant derivative of the Higgs field

$$D_\mu \varphi ^a=_\mu \varphi ^aeϵ_{abc}A_\mu ^b\varphi ^c,$$
(5)
field strength tensor

$$F_{\mu \nu }^a=_\mu A_\nu ^a_\nu A_\nu ^aeϵ_{abc}A_\mu ^bA_\nu ^c,$$
(6)
and $`e`$ being the gauge coupling constant. The potential $`V(\varphi ^a,\chi ^a)`$ is given by:

$`V(\varphi ^a,\chi ^a)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _1}{4}}\left(\varphi ^a\varphi ^a\eta _1^2\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _2}{4}}\left(\chi ^a\chi ^a\eta _2^2\right)^2`$ (7)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _3}{2}}\left(\varphi ^a\varphi ^a\eta _1^2\right)\left(\chi ^a\chi ^a\eta _2^2\right),`$ (8)
where the third term on the rhs couples the two sectors directly to each other with coupling constant $`\lambda _3`$. $`\lambda _1`$, $`\lambda _2`$ denote the self-coupling constants of the Higgs and Goldstone field, respectively, while $`\eta _1`$, $`\eta _2`$ are the corresponding vacuum expectation values.

The potential (7) has different properties according to the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _1\lambda _2\lambda _3^2`$. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$ the potential has positive values and its minima are attained for $`\varphi _a^2=\eta _1^2`$, $`\chi _a^2=\eta _2^2`$, for which (7) is obviously zero. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$, these configurations become saddle points and two minima occur for

$$\varphi _a^2=0,\chi _a^2=\eta _2^2+\frac{\lambda _1}{\lambda _3}\eta _1^2$$
(9)
and

$$\chi _a^2=0,\varphi _a^2=\eta _2^2+\frac{\lambda _2}{\lambda _3}\eta _2^2.$$
(10)
The potential’s values for these extrema are, respectively,

$$V_{min}=\frac{\eta _1^4}{4\lambda _1}\mathrm{\Delta },V_{min}=\frac{\eta _2^4}{4\lambda _2}\mathrm{\Delta }$$
(11)
which are negative since $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$.

### A The Ansatz

The Ansatz for the metric tensor in Schwarzschild-like coordinates reads:

$$ds^2=A^2(r)N(r)dt^2+N^1(r)dr^2+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}\theta ^2d\varphi ^2)$$
(12)
where we define for later convenience the mass function $`m(r)`$ as follows :

$$N(r)=12\alpha ^2q^2\frac{2m(r)}{r}.$$
(13)
The Ansatz for the global Goldstone field $`\chi ^a`$, the Higgs field $`\varphi ^a`$ and the gauge field $`A_\mu ^a`$ in Cartesian coordinates reads:

$$\varphi ^a(x)=\eta _1h(r)\widehat{x}^a,$$
(14)
$$\chi ^a(x)=\eta _1f(r)\widehat{x}^a,$$
(15)
$$A_i^a(x)=ϵ_{iaj}\widehat{x}^j\frac{1u(r)}{er},$$
(16)
and

$$A_0^a(x)=0.$$
(17)
Substituting the above configurations into the matter Lagrangian density we obtain:

$$_M=4\pi _0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑rr^2A\left[N𝒦(f,h,u)+𝒰(f,h,u)\right],$$
(18)
where

$$𝒦(f,h,u)=\frac{1}{2}\eta _1^2(f^{})^2+\frac{1}{2}\eta _1^2(h^{})^2+\frac{(u^{})^2}{e^2r^2},$$
(19)
and

$`𝒰(f,h,u)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(u^21)^2}{2e^2r^4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\eta _1^2u^2h^2}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\eta _1^2f^2}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _1\eta _1^4}{4}}(h^21)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _2\eta _1^4}{4}}(f^2q^2)^2`$ (20)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _3\eta _1^4}{2}}(h^21)(f^2q^2).`$ (21)
The prime denotes the derivative with respect to $`r`$.

The gravity Lagrangian $`_G`$ is given by

$$_G=\frac{1}{2G}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑rr(N1)A^{}.$$
(22)
## III Equations of Motion

Varying (2) with respect to the matter fields and gravitational fields and introducing the dimensionless variable $`x`$ and dimensionless mass function $`\mu (x)`$ :

$$x=e\eta _1r,\mu (x)=e\eta _1m(r)$$
(23)
we obtain the following set of differential equations:

$$\frac{d}{dx}\left[x^2AN\frac{df}{dx}\right]=A\left[2f+x^2\beta _2^2f(f^2q^2)+x^2\beta _3^2(h^21)f\right],$$
(24)
$$\frac{d}{dx}\left[x^2AN\frac{dh}{dx}\right]=A\left[2u^2h+x^2\beta _1^2(h^21)h+x^2\beta _3^2h(f^2q^2)\right],$$
(25)
$$\frac{d}{dx}\left[AN\frac{du}{dx}\right]=A\left[\frac{u(u^21)}{x^2}+uh^2\right],$$
(26)
$$\frac{d}{dx}(xAN)=[12\alpha ^2x^2\overline{U}]A,$$
(27)
with

$`\overline{U}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(u^21)^2}{2x^4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{u^2h^2}{x^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{x^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1^2}{4}}(h^21)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _2^2}{4}}(f^2q^2)^2`$ (28)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _3^2}{2}}(h^21)(f^2q^2),`$ (29)
and

$$\frac{dA}{dx}=2\alpha ^2Ax\overline{K}$$
(30)
with

$$\overline{K}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{df}{dx}\right)^2+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{dh}{dx}\right)^2+\frac{1}{x^2}\left(\frac{du}{dx}\right)^2.$$
(31)
The equations only depend on the dimensionless coupling constants:

$$\alpha ^2=4\pi G\eta _1^2,\beta _i^2=\lambda _i/e^2,i=1,2,3,q=\eta _2/\eta _1.$$
(32)
With the definition (13), Eq. (27) can be brought to the form

$$\mu ^{}=\alpha ^2x^2(\overline{K}+(\overline{U}\frac{q^2}{x^2})).$$
(33)
The finite energy of the solution can then be obtained by taking the value of $`\mu (x)`$ at infinity.

### A Boundary conditions

The boundary conditions at the origin which follow from the requirement of regularity read:

$$u(x=0)=1,f(x=0)=0,h(x=0)=0,\mu (x=0)=0.$$
(34)
In fact the behaviour of the function $`\mu (x)`$ near the origin is $`\mu (x)\alpha ^2q^2x`$. The requirement of finite energy solutions leads to:

$$f(x=\mathrm{})=q,h(x=\mathrm{})=1,u(x=\mathrm{})=0,N(x=\mathrm{})=12\alpha ^2q^2.$$
(35)
### B Asymptotic behaviour

The integration of the equations for generic values of the parameters needs a better understanding of the asymptotic behavior of the functions $`f(x)`$ and $`h(x)`$. Two different types of behaviour for the functions $`f`$ and $`h`$ in flat space seem possible. Either:

$`h(x)=1+{\displaystyle \frac{A}{x^2}}+O({\displaystyle \frac{1}{x^3}}),`$ $`A={\displaystyle \frac{\beta _3^2}{\beta _2^2\beta _1^2\beta _3^4}}`$ (36)
$`f(x)=q+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{x^2}}+O({\displaystyle \frac{1}{x^3}}),`$ $`B={\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1^2}{q(\beta _2^2\beta _1^2\beta _3^4)}}`$ (37)
or

$`h(x)`$ $`=1+C_1\mathrm{exp}(\rho _1x)+C_2\mathrm{exp}(\rho _1x)+C_3\mathrm{exp}(\rho _2x)+C_4\mathrm{exp}(\rho _2x),`$ (38)
$`f(x)`$ $`=q+\stackrel{~}{C}_1\mathrm{exp}(\rho _1x)+\stackrel{~}{C}_2\mathrm{exp}(\rho _1x)+\stackrel{~}{C}_3\mathrm{exp}(\rho _2x)+\stackrel{~}{C}_4\mathrm{exp}(\rho _2x),`$ (39)
where $`\rho _1^2`$, $`\rho _2^2`$ are the eigenvalues of the matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\beta _1^2& q\beta _3^2\\ q\beta _3^2& q^2\beta _2^2\end{array}\right).$$
(40)
Our numerical analysis strongly suggests the following results :

* for $`\beta _1^2\beta _2^2\beta _3^4>0`$ the solutions obey the asymptotic behaviour (36) for $`f`$ and $`h`$,
* for $`\beta _1^2\beta _2^2\beta _3^4<0`$ the functions $`f`$ and $`h`$ have the asymptotic behaviour (38). In this case, however, one of the eigenvalues of (40) becomes negative, consequently its square root is complex and the functions $`f,h`$ thus oscillate. This behaviour is clearly observed when we set $`\beta _1=0`$, $`\beta _20`$ and increase $`\beta _3`$ from 0. For $`\beta _3=0`$, the solutions exist and $`f,h`$ increase monotonically, as soon as $`\beta _30`$, however, oscillations occur.

## IV Numerical results

Because of the reasons given previously, we restrict our analysis in the following to the case $`\beta _1^2\beta _2^2\beta _3^4>0`$.

The limit $`\beta _3=0`$ was studied in detail in , . Here we discuss how the new term influences the behaviour of the solutions. One of the main features is that the Higgs function $`h(x)`$ does not reach its asymptotic value $`h(x=\mathrm{})=1`$ monotonically. It first reaches a maximum $`h_{max}>1`$ for $`x<\mathrm{}`$ and then decreases to 1. This phenomenon, which can be expected from the inspection of (36) since $`A>0`$ for $`\beta _30`$, is illustrated in Fig. 1. This is different from the phenomena observed in , . There, for all values of the coupling constants, the function $`h(x)`$ was observed to be monotonically increasing from 0 to 1 as indicated in Fig. 1 for $`\beta _3=0`$. The Goldstone field functions $`f(x)`$ reaches its asymptotic value $`q`$ for increasing values of the coordinate $`x`$ when $`\beta _3`$ is increasing. This again can be explained by (36) since the value $`B`$ is a decreasing function of $`\beta _3`$ with a sharp drop at $`\beta _31`$. Thus, the function $`f(x)`$ decays less strong for higher values of $`\beta _3`$.

At the same time, the minimum of the metric function $`N`$ decreases with increasing $`\beta _3`$, while the matter function $`\mu `$ reaches a maximum at roughly the same $`x`$ at which the function $`N`$ attains its minimum and than drops down to its asymptotic value which determines the mass of the solution. Clearly, for $`\beta _3=0`$, this asymptotic value is positive, while for increasing $`\beta _3`$, it decreases and becomes negative for large enough $`\beta _3`$.

Another feature of the new term is that, for all parameters but $`\beta _3`$ fixed, the classical mass of the solution decreases when $`\beta _3`$ increases. This is illustrated by means of Fig. 2 where we have plotted the evolution of the mass as a function of $`\beta _3`$ for three different combinations of the coupling constants $`\alpha ,q`$. For $`q=1.0`$, $`\alpha =0.4`$, the mass of the solution is already negative for $`\beta _3=0`$ indicating that the influence of the global monopole is already dominating in the limit of vanishing direct interaction of the Higgs field and Goldstone field. For smaller $`q`$, the mass becomes negative at some finite value $`\beta _3=\beta _3^0`$. For fixed $`q`$, this value is increasing for decreasing $`\alpha `$. Since the local and global monopole are still “indirectly” coupled over gravity, a stronger gravitational coupling, of course, couples the two objects in a stronger way. For small gravitational coupling, $`\beta _3`$ thus has to be raised further to make the influence of the global monopole dominating. When the combination $`\beta _1^2\beta _2^2\beta _3^4`$ becomes negative, the mass of the solution reaches $`\mathrm{}`$, independent of the combination of $`q`$ and $`\alpha `$. This again can be related to the fact that we observe the solutions to become oscillating for $`\beta _1^2\beta _2^2\beta _3^4<0`$.

We also studied the way the solution bifurcates into a black hole when the parameter $`\alpha `$ increases while the others are fixed. Fixing $`q=0.4`$ we have analyzed the critical behaviour of the solution and checked that, like for the case $`\beta _3=0`$, the solution bifurcates into a black hole for a finite value of $`\alpha `$, say $`\alpha =\alpha _c`$. As demonstrated in Fig. 3 for $`\beta _1=\beta _2=1`$, $`q=0.4`$ and $`\beta _3=0.8`$, the function $`N`$ develops a minimum which becomes deeper while $`\alpha `$ increases and becomes zero for $`\alpha =\alpha _c`$. The limiting solution thus represents an extremal black hole solution with horizon $`x_h`$. In Fig. 3, we also show the evolution of the mass with $`\alpha `$. Finally, the critical solution corresponding to $`\beta _3=0.8`$ and $`\alpha _c1.085`$ is displayed in Fig. 4. This figure clearly suggests that the limiting solution is not an abelian black hole for $`x>x_h`$ like e.g. in the case of the pure local monopole , where the solutions bifurcate with the branch of Reissner-Nordström (RN) solutions and consequently the functions reach their RN values for $`x>x_h`$. Here, the function $`f`$ is equal to zero for $`0xx_h`$ and non-trivial for $`x_hxx_0`$. Similarly, the functions $`A`$ and $`h`$ are non-trivial for $`xx_0`$ and are equal to their asymptotic values for $`x>x_0`$, while the gauge field function $`u`$ reaches its asymptotic value for $`xx_h`$. This solution thus represents a “black hole inside a global monopole” as was observed previously for the $`\beta _3=0`$ limit .

## V Conclusions

In this paper we have analyzed the composite system of a global and a local gravitating monopole considering the most general gauge-invariant potential. This potential contains a direct interaction between the Golstone and the Higgs field. This term leads to important consequences concerning the local behaviour of the fields themselves as well as concerning the global properties of the system. One of the most relevant consequences is related to the effective mass associated with the composite topological defect. The numerical results show a strong dependence of this mass on the coupling constant $`\lambda _3`$. Although the Goldstone and Higgs fields are indirectly coupled through gravity, the extra direct interaction is more effective. Increasing the parameter $`\lambda _3`$, the mass becomes negative, indicating the dominance of the global sector over the local one. Compared to the results of the $`\lambda _3=0`$ case , we observe the modulus of the negative mass to become very large in our system. Another point which deserves to be mentioned is that the extra direct interaction term is not positive definite. Denoting by $`x_{h=1}`$ the value of $`x`$ for which the Higgs field function $`h`$ is equal to one, $`h`$ becomes bigger than one for $`x>x_{h=1}`$ and the new term in the potential becomes negative. However, for a particular choice of the self-coupling constants such that they fulfill $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda _1\lambda _2\lambda _3^2>0`$, the total potential is positive, vanishing only at the minima $`\varphi _a^2=\eta _1^2`$, $`\chi _a^2=\eta _2^2`$.

As possible extensions of the model studied here, let us mention the coupling to a scalar dilaton which arises naturally in low energy effective actions of string theory. The gravitating local monopole was studied recently coupled to a dilaton  and it was found that in the limit of critical gravitational coupling, the solutions bifurcate with the branch of extremal Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton (EMD) solutions which are associated with naked singularities. It would be interesting to see what sort of critical solution the composite system of a global and local monopole reaches since our analysis indicates that the behaviour of the functions close to the core of the local monopole is strongly influenced by the global monopole.


format: text

text:
# hep-th/0210169 On spectral density of Neumann matrices

## 1 Introduction

The basic ingredient in the construction of the covariant string field theory is Witten’s star product . In the algebraic formulation this star product is specified by a string three-vertex. This vertex has factorized form and its matter part has the following expression

$$\begin{array}{c}|V_3^{\text{matter}}=d^{26}p^{(1)}d^{26}p^{(2)}d^{26}p^{(3)}\delta (p^{(1)}+p^{(2)}+p^{(3)})\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{2}\underset{r,s=1}{\overset{3}{}}\underset{m,n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}a_n^{(r)}V_{nm}^{rs}a_m^{(s)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\underset{r,s=1}{\overset{3}{}}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p^{(r)}V_{0n}^{rs}a^{(s)}\frac{1}{4}V_{00}^{}\underset{r}{}(p^{(r)})^2]\underset{r=1}{\overset{3}{}}|p^{(r)}.\end{array}$$
(1.1)
The infinite matrices $`V^{rs}`$ are called Neumann matrices. Let $`C`$ be the twist matrix: $`C_{mn}^{}=(1)^n\delta _{mn}`$. Denote

$$M_{nm}^{rs}=(C^{}V^{rs})_{nm},n,m=1,2,\mathrm{}$$

The matrices $`M^{rs}`$ commute with each other, have real entries and are symmetric. Their spectrum was found in . The set of its eigenvectors $`v_n^{(\kappa )}`$ is labeled by a continuous parameter $`\mathrm{}<\kappa <\mathrm{}`$. The value of this parameter is an eigenvalue of the operator

$$K_1=L_1+L_1$$

which commutes with matrices $`M^{rs}`$. We have

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}M_{mn}^{rs}v_n^{(\kappa )}=\mu ^{rs}(\kappa )v_m^{(\kappa )}$$

where the eigenvalues $`\mu ^{rs}(\kappa )`$ are

$$\mu ^{rs}(\kappa )=\frac{1}{1+2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi \kappa }{2}}\left[12\delta _{r,s}+e^{\frac{\pi \kappa }{2}}\delta _{r+1,s}+e^{\frac{\pi \kappa }{2}}\delta _{r,s+1}\right].$$
(1.2)
The eigenvectors $`v_n^{(\kappa )}`$ are given by their generating function

$$f^{(\kappa )}(z)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{v_n^{(\kappa )}}{\sqrt{n}}z^n=\frac{1}{\kappa \sqrt{𝒩(\kappa )}}(1e^{\kappa \mathrm{tan}^1z})$$
(1.3)
where

$$𝒩(\kappa )=\frac{2}{\kappa }\mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{\pi \kappa }{2}\right).$$

It was also shown in ,  that this set of eigenvectors is orthogonal and complete

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}v_n^{(\kappa )}v_n^{(\kappa ^{})}`$ $`=\delta (\kappa \kappa ^{}),`$ (1.4a)
$`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa v_n^{(\kappa )}v_m^{(\kappa )}`$ $`=\delta _{n,m}.`$ (1.4b)
Let us also note that the spectral representation for Neumann coefficients $`V_{0n}^{rs}`$ can be also worked out using the standard relations between these coefficients and matrices $`M^{rs}`$. In the basis $`v_n^{(\kappa )}`$ these coefficients can be considered as vectors in $`l_{\mathrm{}}`$ space and the coordinates for these vectors with respect to the basis $`v_n^{(\kappa )}`$ can be found (see for example  formulae (3.9), (3.10)). Notice that the vertex (1.1) can also be written in the alternative form, which can be obtained by integrating over momentum. In this case the vertex is specified by matrices $`M^{rs}`$ whose matrix indices run from $`0`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$. The spectral representation of these matrices was found in . In the present paper we will construct spectral density related to matrices $`M^{rs}`$.

The spectral measure for spectral parameter $`\kappa `$ was first considered in . It was shown that if one truncates the matrix $`(K_1)_{mn}`$ to a finite $`L\times L`$ matrix by restricting $`n,m=1,\mathrm{}L`$ the eigenvalues have a uniform distribution with density

$$\rho ^L(\kappa )\frac{\mathrm{log}L}{2\pi }$$

in the limit $`L\mathrm{}`$. There are however corrections to the density at finite $`L`$ and as it was already noted in  these corrections become large for large $`|\kappa |`$ (and fixed $`L`$).

In  we presented a numerical study of the spectral density function that indicates that there is a nontrivial part $`\rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )`$ of the spectral density that stays finite in the limit $`L\mathrm{}`$. More precisely using the orthogonality and completeness relations (1.4) one can write the following expression for the level truncated distribution function

$$\rho ^L(\kappa )=\underset{n=1}{\overset{L}{}}v_n^{(\kappa )}v_n^{(\kappa )}.$$
(1.5)
This expression stems from the fact that for a given symmetric matrix $`A_{nm}`$ with spectral representation $`A(\kappa )`$ the following identity is true

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{L}{}}A_{nn}=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\rho ^L(\kappa )𝑑\kappa A(\kappa ).$$
(1.6)
One can then numerically study the difference $`\rho ^L(\kappa )\frac{\mathrm{log}L}{2\pi }`$. The numerical evidence we obtained in  suggests that for large $`L`$ this difference converges, at least in the vicinity of $`\kappa =0`$ to a well- defined continuous function. We will formally define this function as

$$\rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )=\underset{L\mathrm{}}{lim}\rho ^{2L}(\kappa )\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{n=1}{\overset{L}{}}\frac{1}{n}$$
(1.7)
where the limit $`2L`$ instead of $`L`$ and the use of the sum of $`1/n`$ instead of the logarithm are dictated solely by technical convenience.

By using the known formula for coefficients $`v_n^{(0)}`$ it is easy to show analytically that $`\rho _{\text{fin}}(0)=\frac{\mathrm{log}2}{\pi }`$.

Our goal in this paper is to obtain an exact analytic expression for $`\rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )`$. To achieve that goal we use a separate regularization for both terms in (1.7) defining

$$\rho ^q(\kappa )=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}v_n^{(\kappa )}q^nv_n^{(\kappa )}$$
(1.8)
and

$$\rho _{\text{fin}}^q(\kappa )=\rho ^q(\kappa )\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{q^{2n}}{n}=\rho ^q(\kappa )+\frac{1}{2\pi }\mathrm{log}(1q^2)$$

where $`q`$ is a positive number less than one. We are looking then for a limit $`q1`$ of this expression. In fact it is technically more advantageous, but leads to the same result, if we consider the limit $`q1`$ of the quantity

$$\rho _{\text{fin}}^q=\rho ^q(\kappa )\rho ^q(0)+\frac{\mathrm{log}2}{\pi }.$$
(1.9)
The computation of this quantity is done in the next section by performing a certain contour integration. Taking the limit $`q1`$ one obtains

$$\rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )=\frac{2\mathrm{log}2\gamma _E}{2\pi }\frac{1}{4\pi }\left[\psi \left(1+\frac{\kappa }{2i}\right)+\psi \left(1\frac{\kappa }{2i}\right)\right]$$
(1.10)
where $`\gamma _E`$ is the Euler constant and $`\psi (z)`$ is the logarithmic derivative of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-function. Formula (1.10) arises in computations as an integral representation

$$\rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )=\frac{\mathrm{log}2}{\pi }+\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\frac{\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\kappa t}{2}\right)1}{e^t1}.$$
(1.11)
Formulae (1.10), (1.11) are the main result of this paper. A particular SFT computation involving $`\rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )`$ is a computation of an overlap of two surface states discussed in . Even with the use of the exact analytic expression (1.10) this computation still seems to be at odds with CFT results . We hope to return to this issue in the nearest future.

## 2 Computation

We need to find an analytic expression for the regulated spectral density $`\rho ^q(\kappa )`$ defined in (1.8). Let us start by computing a more general expression

$$\rho ^q(\kappa ,\kappa ^{})=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}v_n^{(\kappa )}q^nv_n^{(\kappa ^{})}.$$

It can be expressed via a contour integral (see Figure 1a)

$$\rho ^q(\kappa ,\kappa ^{})=\frac{q}{2\pi i}_{C_r}(f)^{(\kappa )}(qz)f^{(\kappa ^{})}\left(\frac{1}{z}\right).$$
(2.1)
Here

$$(f)^{(\kappa )}(qz)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{𝒩(\kappa )}}\frac{1}{1+(qz)^2}\mathrm{exp}(\kappa \mathrm{tan}^1(qz))$$

is an analytic function defined on a complex plane with cuts going along the imaginary axis from $`i/q`$ to $`+i\mathrm{}`$ and from $`i/q`$ to $`i\mathrm{}`$ and the branch of

$$\mathrm{tan}^1(qz)=\frac{1}{2i}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{1+iqz}{1iqz}\right)$$

is chosen by the standard series expansion within the circle $`|z|<1/q`$, i.e. one takes main branches for both logarithms. The function

$$f^{(\kappa ^{})}\left(\frac{1}{z}\right)=\frac{1}{\kappa ^{}\sqrt{𝒩(\kappa ^{})}}\left(1\mathrm{exp}(\kappa ^{}\mathrm{tan}^1(1/z))\right)$$

is defined on a complex plane with a cut going along the imaginary axis from $`i`$ to $`i`$ and the branch is fixed by the standard series expansion outside of the circle $`|z|=1`$. The contour $`C_r`$ in (2.1) is chosen to be a circle centered at the origin and of radius $`1<r<1/q`$, as both functions are holomorphic within the annulus $`1<|z|<1/q`$. The contour and the cuts are depicted on Figure 1a. We can deform the circle $`C_r`$ to the contour $`C_ϵ=\{z=ixϵ\}\{z=ix+ϵ\}C_iC_i`$, $`1x1`$ depicted on Figure 1b. We obtain then

$$\begin{array}{c}\rho ^q(\kappa ,\kappa ^{})=\frac{q}{2\pi }_1^1𝑑x(f)^{(\kappa )}(qix)\left[f^{(\kappa ^{})}\left(\frac{1}{ix+ϵ}\right)f^{(\kappa ^{})}\left(\frac{1}{ixϵ}\right)\right]\hfill \\ \hfill =\frac{q}{\pi }\sqrt{\frac{𝒩(\kappa ^{})}{𝒩(\kappa )}}_1^1\frac{dx}{1(qx)^2}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{i\kappa }{2}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{1qx}{1+qx}\right)+\frac{i\kappa ^{}}{2}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{1+x}{1x}\right)\right]\end{array}$$
(2.2)
where the last expression is evaluated in the limit $`ϵ0`$, we used the fact the integral over half circle of radius $`ϵ`$ $`C_i`$ and $`C_i`$ is zero and

$$\mathrm{tan}^1\left(\frac{1}{ix\pm 0}\right)=\frac{1}{2i}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{1+x}{1x}\right)\pm \frac{\pi }{2},1x1.$$

If at this point we make in (2.2) a substitution

$$y=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{1qx}{1+qx}\right)$$

we arrive at the expression

$$\rho ^q(\kappa ,\kappa ^{})=\frac{1}{2\pi }\sqrt{\frac{𝒩(\kappa ^{})}{𝒩(\kappa )}}_R^R𝑑y\mathrm{exp}\left[iy(\kappa \kappa ^{})\right]\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{i\kappa ^{}}{2}g_q(y)\right]$$
(2.3a)
where
$$g_q(y)=\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{(q\mathrm{tanh}y)}{(q+\mathrm{tanh}y)}\frac{(1+\mathrm{tanh}y)}{(1\mathrm{tanh}y)}\right)$$
(2.3b)
and
$$R=R(q)=\mathrm{arctanh}(q)\mathrm{}\text{as}q1.$$
(2.3c)
Using the last expression it can be shown that

$$\underset{q1}{lim}\rho ^q(\kappa ,\kappa ^{})=\delta (\kappa \kappa ^{}).$$

On a formal level we note that the support of the function $`g_q(y)`$ is pushed to $`|y|=\mathrm{}`$ as $`q1`$. On the other hand if we consider an integral $`_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \rho ^q(\kappa ,\kappa ^{})t(\kappa )`$ where $`t(\kappa )`$ is a Schwartz class test function, then the Fourier transform $`T(y)`$ of the function $`t(\kappa )/\sqrt{𝒩(\kappa )}`$ provides a damping factor at $`y\mathrm{}`$ that allows one to drop out the function $`g_q(y)`$ in the limit $`q1`$. This provides an alternative (and in our opinion a cleaner) derivation of the orthogonality property (1.4).

This being noted we set now $`\kappa =\kappa ^{}`$ in (2.2) and rewrite it as

$$\rho ^q(\kappa )=\frac{1}{\pi }_0^q\frac{dx}{1x^2}\mathrm{cos}\left[\frac{i\kappa }{2}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{1\frac{1q}{1+x}}{1\frac{1q}{1x}}\right)\right]$$
(2.4)
As the function

$$\mathrm{log}\left(1\frac{1q}{1+x}\right)$$

uniformly converges to zero on $`_+`$ in the limit $`q1`$ we can safely drop it in the above expression. After a substitution

$$t=\mathrm{log}\left(1\frac{1q}{1x}\right)$$

we obtain using (1.9)

$$\rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )=\frac{\mathrm{log}2}{\pi }+\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{q1}{lim}_{\mathrm{log}q^1}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\frac{\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\kappa t}{2}\right)1}{e^t1+\frac{q1}{2}e^t}$$

that uniformly converges to the function (1.11). This completes the derivation of that formula.

## 3 Verification of the analytic expression

In this section we present two consistency checks verifying that (1.10) gives the right finite part of the spectral density.

### 3.1 Numerical check

Using equation (1.7) for finite value of $`L`$ one can calculate the finite part of the spectral density in the vicinity of zero. On Figure 2 we present the result of this calculation for $`L=91`$ (circled line). One sees that the numeric result is in a very good agreement with our analytic expression for the finite part of the spectral density (solid line). The exact analytic expression also gives the asymptotic behavior of $`\rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )`$ not captured by the numerical results. Namely $`\rho _{\text{fin}}\frac{1}{\pi }\mathrm{log}|\kappa |`$ as $`|\kappa |\mathrm{}`$.

### 3.2 Analytic check. Trace of operator $`B`$.

In  a certain operator denoted by $`B`$ was introduced for which both the matrix elements and the eigenvalues are of a simple form and known explicitly. Namely we have

$$B_{nm}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{(1)^{\frac{mn}{2}}\sqrt{nm}}{(m+n)^21},\hfill & n+m\text{even;}\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & n+m\text{odd.}\hfill \end{array}$$

while the eigenvalues corresponding to eigenvectors $`v_n^{(\kappa )}`$ reads

$$\beta (\kappa )=\frac{1}{4}\frac{\pi \kappa }{\mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{\pi \kappa }{2}\right)}=\frac{\pi }{2𝒩(\kappa )}.$$

We can use these representations to check the asymptotic form of relation (1.6). Namely from (1.6) we have

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{2L}{}}B_{nn}=\underset{n=1}{\overset{2L}{}}\frac{n}{4n^21}=_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑\kappa \beta (\kappa )\left[\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{n=1}{\overset{L}{}}\frac{1}{n}+\rho _{\text{fin}}^{2L}(\kappa )\right]$$

and therefore

$$_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑\kappa \rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )\beta (\kappa )=\underset{L\mathrm{}}{lim}\left[\underset{n=1}{\overset{L}{}}\frac{1}{4n}\underset{n=1}{\overset{2L}{}}\frac{n}{4n^21}\right]=\frac{1}{4}\frac{3\mathrm{log}2}{4}.$$
(3.1)
On the other hand if we use our analytic expression (1.11) for $`\rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )`$ we have

$$_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑\kappa \rho _{\text{fin}}(\kappa )\beta (\kappa )=\frac{\mathrm{log}2}{\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑\kappa \beta (\kappa )+\frac{1}{2\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑\kappa _0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\frac{\beta (\kappa )(\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\kappa t}{2}\right)1)}{e^t1}.$$

The first integral can be evaluated in a straightforward way with the result $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}2`$ while in the second term we can first evaluate the integral over $`\kappa `$ by summing up residues in the upper half plane:

$$_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑\kappa \frac{e^{i\kappa t}}{𝒩(\kappa )}=\frac{1}{\mathrm{cosh}^2t}$$

and then take the integral over $`t`$

$$\frac{1}{4}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\frac{1e^t}{e^t+e^t+2}=\frac{1}{4}\frac{\mathrm{log}2}{4}.$$

Combining both terms together we obtain the same number as in (3.1).

Note added: While this paper was nearing completion, the paper  appeared, which contains in Section 3 the same result (1.10) we obtained. The calculations in that paper are technically different from the ones we present.

## Acknowledgments

The work of D.B. was supported in part by RFBR grant 02-01-00695. The work of A.K. was supported in part by BSF-American-Israel Bi-National Science Foundation, the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities-Centers of Excellence Program, the German-Israel Bi-National Science Foundation.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

This paper is devoted to the study of a particular class of $`\sigma `$-models living on group manifolds. The metric and the three-form $`H`$ of such a model are left-invariant, however, the model is Poisson-Lie symmetric with respect to the right action of the group on itself. We shall refer to such $`\sigma `$-models as to the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-models for reasons which will become clear in what follows.

The Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-models have interesting algebraic properties. First of all, they have a very rich T-duality story because they can be dualized either from the left (by the traditional non-Abelian T-duality ) or from the right (by the Poisson-Lie T-duality ). They have also another remarkable feature: the phase space of a Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model can be represented by two Drinfeld doubles nonisomorphic as groups. This leads e.g. to some insights about the structure of the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW theory.

In what follows, we describe the general formalism and then study the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-models on a simple compact Lie group $`K`$ and on the group $`AN`$ in the Iwasawa decomposition of the complexified group $`K^𝐂=KAN`$. For $`K^𝐂=SL(2,𝐂)`$, the former example turns out to be the anisotropic principal chiral model (known to be integrable ) and the latter the (conformal) $`SL(2,𝐂)`$/$`SU(2)`$ WZW model describing the strings on the Euclidean $`AdS_3`$ target. The $`AdS_3`$ model turns out to have the de Sitter background $`dS_3`$ (with an appropriate three-form field) as its Poisson-Lie T-dual.

In section 2, we review the notion of the (right) Poisson-Lie symmetry of nonlinear $`\sigma `$-models and show how the model enjoying this property can be rewritten in a first order form by using the concept of the Drinfeld double. Then we show that the additional left symmetry generically means that the geometry of the target is given by the elements of the $`r`$-matrix defining the Poisson-Lie structure on the PL symmetry group. This gives the name to our models. We finish the section by considering the Poisson-Lie symmetry of (non-unitary) $`\sigma `$-models having a real Euclidean action.

In section 3, we explicitely describe the Poisson-Lie symmetry of our two principal examples of the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-models: the anisotropic principal chiral model on compact groups $`K`$ and the $`K^𝐂/K`$ WZW theory. In section 4, we explain why the Poisson-Lie symmetry generically means the T-dualizability of the model and we describe the T-duals of the anisotropic model on $`SU(2)`$ and of the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model. Then we show how the rich Kac-Moody symmetry of the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model translates under the duality to the same symmetry of the de Sitter model. We finish by short conclusions.

## 2 Poisson-Lie symmetry

In this section, we give a method for the construction of the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-models.

1. As it is well-known, a two-dimensional non-linear $`\sigma `$-model is a field theory canonically associated to a metric ( symmetric tensor) $`G_{ij}`$ and a two-form (antisymmetric) tensor $`B_{ij}`$ on some manifold $`M`$. Its action is given (in some local coordinates $`x^i`$) as

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (G_{ij}(x)+B_{ij}(x))_+x^i_{}x^j\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau E_{ij}(x)_+x^i_{}x^j,$$
$`(1)`$
where

$$_\pm =_\tau \pm _\sigma ,\xi ^\pm =\frac{1}{2}(\tau \pm \sigma )$$

and $`\tau `$ and $`\sigma `$ are respectively the worldsheet time and space coordinates. Suppose that there is a free right action of a Lie group $`G`$ on $`M`$ generated by vector fields $`v_a(x)`$ on $`M`$ and consider the variation of the action (1) with respect to the $`G`$-transformations with the world-sheet dependent parameters $`\epsilon ^a(\sigma ,\tau )`$:

$$\delta SS(x+\epsilon ^av_a)S(x)=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau \epsilon ^a(_{v_a}E_{ij})_+x^i_{}x^j+J_ad\epsilon ^a.$$

Here $`_{v_a}`$ means the Lie derivative with respect to $`v_a`$ and the worldsheet current one-forms $`J_a`$ are

$$J_a=v_a^i(x)E_{ij}(x)_{}x^jd\xi ^{}+v_a^i(x)E_{ji}(x)_+x^jd\xi ^+.$$
$`(2)`$
We say (following ) that the $`\sigma `$-model (1) is $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$-Poisson-Lie symmetric if

$$\delta S=\epsilon ^a(dJ^a\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{f}_a^{kl}J_kJ_l),$$
$`(3)`$
where $`\stackrel{~}{f}_a^{kl}`$ are the structure constantes of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}Lie(\stackrel{~}{G})`$. The Poisson-Lie symmetry condition can be written also in terms of the $`\sigma `$-model tensor $`E_{ij}`$ as follows

$$_{v_a}E_{ij}=\stackrel{~}{f}_a^{kl}v_k^mv_l^nE_{mj}E_{in}.$$
$`(4)`$
2. If the manifold $`M`$ is itself the group $`G`$, there is a powerful method  of finding the right Poisson-Lie symmetric $`\sigma `$-models (i.e. of solving the condition (4)). It uses the crucial concept of the Drinfeld double111The Drinfeld double $`D`$ is a $`2n`$-dimensional Lie group whose Lie algebra $`𝒟=Lie(D)`$, viewed as the linear space, can be decomposed into a direct sum of vector spaces $`𝒢`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$, which are themselves maximally isotropic subalgebras of $`D`$ with respect to a non-degenerate symmetric invariant bilinear form $`(.,.)_𝒟`$ on $`𝒟`$ . The Lie groups corresponding to the Lie algebras $`𝒢`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$ we denote as $`G`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ and we shall suppose, that each element $`l`$ of $`D`$ can be decomposed in unique way as the product $`l=gb`$, where $`gG`$ and $`b\stackrel{~}{G}`$. Moreover, the induced map $`DG\times \stackrel{~}{G}`$ should be a diffeomorphism. In the same way we suppose that there is a dual global smooth and unambiguous decomposition $`D=\stackrel{~}{G}G`$. of $`G`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ and constructs the $`\sigma `$-model (1) by starting from its first order Hamiltonian action written on the phase space. Recall that (for any dynamical system) the latter has always the form

$$S=(\theta Hd\tau ),$$
$`(5)`$
where $`d\theta `$ is the symplectic form and $`H`$ a Hamiltonian fonction.

The crucial statement  is as follows: the phase space of right $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$-Poisson-Lie symmetric $`\sigma `$-model on a Lie group target $`G`$ can be identified with the loop group $`LD`$ of the Drinfeld double $`D`$ . Thus a trajectory in the phase space is a map $`l(\sigma ,\tau )`$ from the worldsheet into $`D`$ where $`\tau `$ is interpreted as the evolution parameter. The first order action (5) of the right $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$-Poisson-Lie symmetric $`\sigma `$-model on a Lie group target $`G`$ then reads

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (_\tau ll^1,_\sigma ll^1)_𝒟+\frac{1}{12}d^1(dll^1\stackrel{}{,}[dll^1\stackrel{}{,}dll^1])_𝒟$$

$$\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (_\sigma ll^1,_\sigma ll^1)_𝒟.$$
$`(6)`$
The (chiral) WZW action in the first line correspond the term $`\theta `$ in (5) and the Hamiltonian term is on the second line. It involves the operator $`:𝒟𝒟`$ fulfilling

1) $`(x,y)_𝒟=(x,y)_𝒟`$ ($``$ is a selfadjoint);

2) $`^2=Id`$ ($``$ squares to the identity operator);

3) The $`G`$-dependent operator $`𝒥_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥}:\stackrel{~}{𝒢}𝒢`$ is invertible.

Here $`𝒥(\stackrel{~}{𝒥}):𝒟𝒟`$ is the projector to $`𝒢`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$) with the kernel $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$ ($`𝒢`$) and $`_gAd_{g^1}Ad_g`$. It is important to stress that $`Ad_g`$ means the adjoint action of an element $`gG(D)`$ on $`𝒟`$.

3. Let us sketch the derivation of the second order Lagrangian of the type (1) from the first order action (6). Our assumptions about the structure of the Drinfeld double $`D`$ allow to decompose each trajectory $`l(\sigma ,\tau )`$ as

$$l(\sigma ,\tau )=g(\sigma ,\tau )\stackrel{~}{h}(\sigma ,\tau ),gG,\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{G}.$$
$`(7)`$
Inserting this decomposition into the action (6) and using the standard Polyakov-Wiegmann formula ($`g^{},\stackrel{~}{h}^{}`$ mean the pull-backs of the maps $`g,\stackrel{~}{h}:DD`$)

$$(g\stackrel{~}{h})^{}c=g^{}c+\stackrel{~}{h}^{}cd(g^{}(l^1dl)\stackrel{}{,}\stackrel{~}{h}^{}(dll^1))_𝒟;$$

$$c=\frac{1}{6}(dll^1\stackrel{}{,}[dll^1\stackrel{}{,}dll^1])_𝒟,$$

we obtain

$$S=(_\sigma \stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}^1,g^1_\tau g)_𝒟\frac{1}{2}(g^1_\sigma g+_\sigma \stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}^1,_g(g^1_\sigma g+_\sigma \stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}^1))_𝒟,$$
$`(8)`$
where and we tacitly suppose the measure $`d\sigma d\tau `$ present in the formula. Now we note that the expression (8) is Gaussian in the $`Lie(\stackrel{~}{G})`$-valued variable $`_\sigma \stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}^1`$ which permits us to solve it away and to obtain a $`\sigma `$-model

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (g^1_+g,(𝒥_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1(𝒥+𝒥_g𝒥)g^1_{}g)_𝒟.$$
$`(9)`$
In this derivation we have used the self-adjointness of $``$ and the following consequences of the identity $`^2=_g^2=Id`$ :

$$(𝒥_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1=\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_g𝒥\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥}(𝒥_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1𝒥_g𝒥;$$

$$(𝒥_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1𝒥_g𝒥=\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥}(𝒥_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1.$$

We invite the reader to check, that, indeed, the resulting $`\sigma `$-model (9) is right $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$-Poisson-Lie symmetric. It is also immediate that the left invariance of (9) takes place if $`_g=`$, i.e. if $``$ is a $`G`$-invariant operator on $`𝒟`$.

Conclusion: let $`D`$ be the Drinfeld double of the group $`G`$ and $``$ the self-adjoint, unipotent, $`G`$-invariant operator on $`𝒟`$, such that $`𝒥\stackrel{~}{𝒥}`$ is invertible. Then the action

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (g^1_+g,\stackrel{~}{R}g^1_{}g)_𝒟,$$
$`(10)`$
with

$$\stackrel{~}{R}(𝒥\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1(𝒥+𝒥𝒥)$$

defines the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model on $`G`$.

4. The reader might wish to see a direct demonstration that the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model (10) is right Poisson-Lie symmetric. For this, let us first calculate the current forms $`J_a`$ according to (2):

$$J_aT^a=\stackrel{~}{R}g^1_{}gd\xi ^{}+\stackrel{~}{R}^{}g^1_+gd\xi ^+,$$

where $`T^a`$ is the basis of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$ in which the structure constants are $`\stackrel{~}{f}_a^{kl}`$. It is easy to see that the Hamiltonian field equations derived from the first order action (6) read

$$(Id)_\pm ll^1=0.$$

Using the decomposition $`l=g\stackrel{~}{h}`$, the $`G`$-invariance of $``$ an the the fact that $`\stackrel{~}{R}^{}=(𝒥\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1(𝒥𝒥𝒥)`$, we obtain

$$_{}\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}^1=\stackrel{~}{R}g^1_{}g,_+\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}^1=\stackrel{~}{R}^{}g^1_+g$$
$`(11)`$
and from (11) it clearly follows that the field equations of the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model have the zero-curvature form (3):

$$dJ_a=\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{f}_a^{kl}J_kJ_l.$$

5. Now we turn to the explication of the title of this article. Suppose that the operator $`\stackrel{~}{R}:𝒢\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$ has an inverse $`R:\stackrel{~}{𝒢}𝒢`$. The properties of $``$ then imply the following identity

$$𝒥Ad_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥}Ad_{g^1}\stackrel{~}{𝒥}=𝒥Ad_g𝒥R\stackrel{~}{𝒥}Ad_{g^1}\stackrel{~}{𝒥}R.$$
$`(12)`$
The $`g`$-dependent operator from $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$ into $`𝒢`$ on the l.h.s. of (12) deserves a special name; we call it $`\mathrm{\Pi }_g`$:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_g=𝒥Ad_g\stackrel{~}{𝒥}Ad_{g^1}\stackrel{~}{𝒥}.$$
$`(13)`$
In fact, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_g`$ turns out to be the Poisson-Lie structure on $`G`$ induced by the double $`D`$ . For completeness, we write the corresponding Poisson-Lie bracket of two functions $`\varphi ,\psi `$ on $`G`$:

$$\{\varphi ,\psi \}_G=(_L\varphi ,\mathrm{\Pi }_g_L\psi )_𝒟.$$
$`(14)`$
Here the differential operator $`_L`$ is considered to live in $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$. It is defined by

$$(_L,x)_𝒟=_L^x,$$

where $`_L^x`$ is the differential operator acting on functions on $`G`$ and corresponding to the left infinitesimal action of the Lie algebra element $`x𝒢`$.

Now note that the relations (12,13) mean that the Poisson-Lie bracket (14) on $`G`$ can be rewritten in the following form

$$\{\varphi ,\psi \}_G=(_R\varphi ,R_R\psi )_𝒟(_L\varphi ,R_L\psi )_𝒟,$$

where $`_{R(L)}`$ corresponds to the right (left) infinitesimal action on $`G`$. It is now clear that $`R`$ gives rise to an element $`r𝒢𝒢`$ such that the Poisson-Lie bracket can be rewritten in the quasitriangular way:

$$\{\varphi ,\psi \}_G=r,_R\varphi _R\psi r,_L\varphi _L\psi .$$

Here $`.,.`$ denotes the canonical pairing between the vector space and its dual. Since the Poisson bracket is antisymmetric, we see that the symmetric part $`r_S`$ of $`r`$ is $`G`$-invariant. The Jacobi identity, in turn, then implies the (modified ) Yang-Baxter equations for the antisymmetric part $`r_A`$ of $`r`$:

$$Ad_G[r_A,r_A]_{Sch}=0,$$

where $`[.,.]_{Sch}`$ is the algebraic Schouten bracket.

Thus we observe that the choice of the $`G`$-invariant selfadjoint unipotent $``$ with invertible $`\stackrel{~}{R}`$ gives rise to the $`r`$-matrix encoding the (quasitriangular) Poisson-Lie structure on $`G`$. This explains the adjective ”Yang-Baxter” which we have attributed to the left-invariant and right Poisson-Lie symmetric $`\sigma `$-models (10). By a slight abuse of the terminology, we stick to this name also in cases where $`\stackrel{~}{R}`$ is not invertible.

6. It is well-known that the unitary $`\sigma `$-models do not have a real action on the Euclidean world-sheet. Nevertheless, there is a class of important (though non-unitary) Euclidean models which do have the real action. The most prominent example of such a theory is the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model describing strings on the Euclidean $`AdS_3`$. Here we define the notion of the Poisson-Lie symmetry for the class of the Euclidean $`\sigma `$-models with the real action

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau E_{ij}(x)_zx^i_{\overline{z}}x^j,$$

where

$$_z=_\tau +i_\sigma ,_{\overline{z}}=_\tau i_\sigma .$$

The reality of the Lagrangian require the matrix $`E_{ij}`$ to be Hermitean ($`E_{ij}=\overline{E}_{ji}`$). The definition (2) of the current one-forms $`J_a`$ now gives

$$J_a=iv_a^i(x)E_{ji}(x)_zx^jdziv_a^i(x)E_{ij}(x)_{\overline{z}}x^jd\overline{z},$$

where

$$z=\frac{1}{2}(\tau i\sigma ),\overline{z}=\frac{1}{2}(\tau +i\sigma ).$$

With this notation, the condition of the right Euclidean Poisson-Lie symmetry is given by the same expression (3) as in the Minkowski case. The Euclidean analogue of (4) reads

$$_{v_a}E_{ij}=i\stackrel{~}{f}_a^{kl}v_k^mv_l^nE_{mj}E_{in}.$$
$`(15)`$
In the Euclidean case, it is also easy to generate right Poisson-Lie symmetric models from the action (6) on the double. The only modification is that now $``$ in (6) has to fulfil $`^2=Id`$. In particular, the resulting Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model on the Euclidean worldsheet has the Lagrangian

$$L=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (g^1_zg,\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}g^1_{\overline{z}}g)_𝒟$$
$`(16)`$
with

$$\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}=(𝒥\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1(𝒥i𝒥𝒥).$$

## 3 Examples

### 3.1 Anisotropic principal chiral model

1. Now it is time to give examples. For the group $`G`$ we take a simple connected and simply connected compact group $`K`$ and for its Drinfeld double $`D`$ its complexification $`D=K^𝐂`$. So, for instance, the double of $`SU(2)`$ is $`SL(2,𝐂)`$. The invariant bilinear form on $`𝒟=Lie(D)`$ is given by

$$(x,y)_𝒟=\mathrm{Im}T(x,y),$$

or, in other words, it is just the imaginary part of the Killing-Cartan form $`T(.,.)`$ normalized in the way that the square of the lenght of the longest root is equal to two. Since $`G`$ is the real form of $`K^𝐂`$, clearly, the imaginary part of $`T(x,y)`$ vanishes if $`x,y𝒢`$. Hence, $`G=K`$ is isotropically embedded in $`K^𝐂`$.

The dual group $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ coincides with the so called $`AN`$ group in the Iwasawa decomposition of $`K^𝐂`$:

$$K^𝐂=KAN.$$
$`(17)`$
For the groups $`SL(n,𝐂)`$ the group $`AN`$ can be identified with upper triangular matrices of determinant $`1`$ and with positive real numbers on the diagonal. In general, the elements of $`AN`$ can be uniquely represented by means of the exponential map as follows

$$b=\mathrm{e}^\varphi \mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\alpha >0}v_\alpha E_\alpha ]\mathrm{e}^\varphi n.$$
$`(18)`$
Here $`\alpha `$’s denote the roots of $`𝒦^𝐂`$, $`v_\alpha `$ are complex numbers and $`\varphi `$ is an Hermitian element222Recall that the Hermitian element of any complex simple Lie algebra $`𝒦^𝐂`$ is an eigenvector of the involution which defines the compact real form $`𝒦`$; the corresponding eigenvalue is $`(1)`$ . This involution comes from the group involution $`g(g^1)^{}`$. The anti-Hermitian elements that span the compact real form are eigenvectors of the same involution with the eigenvalue equal to $`1`$. For elements of $`sl(n,\mathrm{C})`$ Lie algebra, the Hermitian element is indeed a Hermitian matrix in the standard sense of this term. of the Cartan subalgebra of $`𝒦^𝐂`$. Loosely said, $`A`$ is the ”noncompact part” of the complex maximal torus of $`K^𝐂`$. The isotropy of the Lie algebra $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{G}=AN`$ follows from (18); the fact that $`𝒢`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$ generate together the Lie algebra $`𝒟`$ of the whole double is evident from (17).

2. We wish to construct (Minkowskian) Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-models on the compact target $`K`$. Consider the following $`𝐑`$-linear operator $`_1:𝒟𝒟`$:

$$_1x=x^{}.$$
$`(19)`$
Here $``$ it is the multiplication by the imaginary unit on $`𝒦^𝐂`$( viewed as the real Lie algebra). It is easy to see that $`_1^2=Id`$ and $`_1`$ is selfadjoint, i.e. for any $`x,y𝒟`$ it holds $`(_1x,y)_𝒟=(x,_1y)_𝒟`$. Moreover, $`_1`$ is $`K`$-invariant as

$$_1Ad_kx=_1(kxk^{})=kx^{}k^{}=Ad_k_1x.$$

Thus, $`P_1=\frac{1}{2}(1+_1)`$ is the $`K`$-invariant idempotent. In fact, it belongs to a one-parametric family of the invariant idempotents denoted $`P_\alpha `$ who project on the subspaces $`(\alpha Id)𝒦𝒦^𝐂,\alpha >0`$ and whose kernels are $`(\alpha Id+)𝒦`$. Since the kernel is clearly orthogonal to the image of the projector, the idempotent $`P_\alpha `$ is selfadjoint. Moreover $`P_\alpha `$ is $`K`$-invariant, since both its image and kernel are $`K`$-invariant. Finally, it can be easily verified that $`𝒥(2P_\alpha Id)\stackrel{~}{𝒥}`$ is invertible. Thus the choice $`_\alpha =2P_\alpha Id`$ gives a one parameter family of the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model on $`G`$ with the Lagrangian given by (10).

3. The reader may wish to visualize more explicitely what the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model is about for the simplest case of $`K=SU(2)`$. For this, it is convenient to choose a basis $`T^i=\frac{1}{2}i\sigma ^i,i=1,2,3`$ in $`su(2)Lie(SU(2))`$, where $`\sigma ^i`$ are the standard Pauli matrices:

$$T^1=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& i\\ i& 0\end{array}\right),T^2=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),T^3=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}i& 0\\ 0& i\end{array}\right).$$
$`(20a)`$
The dual basis in $`Lie(AN)`$ is then

$$t_1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 2\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),t_2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 2i\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),t_3=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$
$`(20b)`$
Here by the duality we mean the following relation between the two basis:

$$(T^i,t_j)_𝒟=\delta _j^i.$$

It is not difficult to evaluate the operator $`\stackrel{~}{R}_\alpha =(𝒥_\alpha \stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1(𝒥+𝒥_\alpha 𝒥)`$, where $`_\alpha =2P_\alpha 1`$. It is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{R}_\alpha T^1=\frac{(\alpha t_1t_2)}{2(\alpha ^2+1)},\stackrel{~}{R}_\alpha T^1=\frac{(\alpha t_2+t_1)}{2(\alpha ^2+1)},\stackrel{~}{R}_\alpha T^3=\frac{1}{2\alpha }t_3.$$
$`(21)`$
The Lagrangian (xy) of the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model on $`SU(2)`$ can be now written as

$$L=\frac{1}{4\alpha }(k^1_+k)_3(k^1_{}k)_3+$$

$$+\frac{\alpha }{4(\alpha ^2+1)}(k^1_+k)_1(k^1_{}k)_1+\frac{\alpha }{4(\alpha ^2+1)}(k^1_+k)_2(k^1_{}k)_2.$$
$`(22)`$
Here we have decomposed $`k^1dk`$ as $`(k^1dk)_jT^j`$ and neglected the total derivatives. By the way, the model (22) is known to be integrable and it is usually referred to as the anisotropic principal chiral model. It is interesting to note that we have discovered a new algebraic structure of this model which will probably contribute to a better understanding of its quantum properties.

It is also important to remark, that the obtained model (22) is singular for $`\alpha =0`$ and $`\alpha \mathrm{}`$. Indeed, for these values of the parametres the idempotents $`P_\alpha `$ are not well defined (the kernel would be the same as the image!) The singularities can be very naturally interpreted also from the geometrical point of view. Indeed, for $`\alpha 0`$, the ratio of the (anisotropic) third coefficient with respect to the first (or second) one goes to infinity. This is the extreme anisotropic limit where the $`\sigma `$-model geometry degenerates in one direction. In the case $`\alpha \mathrm{}`$ this ratio approaches $`1`$, which corresponds the standard (isotropic) principal chiral model. However, the singularity shows up in the overall coefficient going to zero.

### 3.2 $`K^𝐂/K`$ WZW model

1. Our next example has the real action in the Euclidean signature. Its underlying Drinfeld double is the same group $`K^𝐂`$ as in the previous one but the role of the groups $`G`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ gets reversed. This means that the $`K^𝐂/K`$ WZW model lives on the group $`G=AN`$ and it is right Poisson-Lie symmetric with respect to the dual group $`\stackrel{~}{G}=K`$.

The first order action of the $`K^𝐂/K`$ WZW model is given by the expression (6) with $`=`$ (cf. (19)). Clearly, $``$ is selfadjoint (yes, it sometimes happens that the multiplication by the imaginary unit is a selfadjoint operator…), $``$ is $`K^𝐂`$-invariant, $`^2=Id`$ and $`𝒥\stackrel{~}{𝒥}`$ is invertible. Thus $`K^𝐂/K`$ WZW theory is the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model with the second order real Euclidean Lagrangian (16) and $`\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}=(𝒥\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1(𝒥i𝒥𝒥).`$

2. As in the previous example, we give the detailed description of the case $`K^𝐂=SL(2,𝐂)`$. We shall work with the same basis of $`𝒟`$ as before but now we remember that the basis $`t_a`$ is that of $`𝒢=Lie(AN)`$ and the dual one $`T^a`$ that of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}=𝒦`$. The operator $``$ reads

$$t_1=t_2,t_2=t_1,t_3=2T^3;$$

$$T^1=\frac{1}{2}t_1+T^2,T^2=\frac{1}{2}t_2T^1,T^3=\frac{1}{2}t_3.$$
$`(23)`$
It can be directly checked that $``$ is selfadjoint with respect to the form $`(.,.)_𝒟`$, it is $`SL(2,𝐂)`$-invariant and it evidently holds $`^2=Id`$. With the choice $`=`$, the first order action (6) takes the form:

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau \mathrm{ImTr}(_\tau ll^1_\sigma ll^1)+\frac{1}{12}d^1\mathrm{ImTr}(dll^1[dll^1\stackrel{}{,}dll^1])$$

$$\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau \mathrm{ReTr}(_\sigma ll^1_\sigma ll^1)$$

or, even more simply,

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau \mathrm{ImTr}(_{\overline{z}}ll^1_\sigma ll^1)+\frac{1}{12}d^1\mathrm{ImTr}(dll^1[dll^1\stackrel{}{,}dll^1]).$$
$`(24)`$
In words: the first order action of the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model can be written as a sort of semi-chiral WZW model on the complex group $`SL(2,𝐂)`$.

3. The resulting second order Lagrangian on $`G=AN`$ can be obtained by decomposing

$$l=bk,bAN,kSU(2),$$
$`(25)`$
and eliminating $`_\sigma kk^1`$. The result is (cf. (16)) written as

$$\stackrel{~}{L}=\frac{1}{2}(b^1_zb,\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}b^1_{\overline{z}}b)_𝒟,$$
$`(26)`$
with

$$\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}=(𝒥\stackrel{~}{𝒥})^1(𝒥i𝒥𝒥).$$

From (20ab) and (23), it is easy to calculate the operator $`\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}:𝒢\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}t_1=2(T^1+iT^2),\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}t_2=2(T^2iT^1),\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}t_3=2T^3.$$
$`(27)`$
Using the following parametrization of the group $`AN`$:

$$b=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^\varphi & 2e^\varphi (u_1iu_2)\\ 0& e^\varphi \end{array}\right),$$
$`(28)`$
we calculate $`b^1db=(b^1db)^jt_j`$:

$$(b^1db)^1=e^{2\varphi }du_1,(b^1db)^2=e^{2\varphi }du_2,(b^1db)^3=d\varphi .$$
$`(29)`$
Putting together (26), (27) and (29) and setting $`u=u_1+iu_2`$, we obtain that the Yang-Baxter Lagrangian (26) gives the action of the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model (cf.):

$$S=𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (_z\varphi _{\overline{z}}\varphi +e^{4\varphi }_zu_{\overline{z}}\overline{u}).$$
$`(30)`$
Up to an unimportant overall normalization, the background metric and $`H`$-field of the model (xy) are

$$ds_{AdS}^2=d\varphi d\varphi +e^{4\varphi }dud\overline{u},H=2e^{4\varphi }d\varphi dud\overline{u}.$$
$`(31)`$
If we set $`\stackrel{~}{R}_{ab}=(t_a,\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}t_b)_𝒟`$, the condition (15) expressing the right Poisson-Lie symmetry of (26) can be rewritten as

$$f_{ca}^n\stackrel{~}{R}_{nb}+f_{cb}^n\stackrel{~}{R}_{an}=i\stackrel{~}{f}_c^{kl}\stackrel{~}{R}_{kb}\stackrel{~}{R}_{al}.$$
$`(32)`$
Here $`f_{ca}^n`$ are the structure constants of $`Lie(AN)`$ in the basis (20b) and $`\stackrel{~}{f}_c^{kl}`$ of $`su(2)`$ in the basis (20a). It is easy to verify that our operator $`\stackrel{~}{R}_{eu}`$ given by (27) satisfies (32).

The $`su(2)`$-valued Poisson-Lie current $`J`$ is given by

$$J=i\stackrel{~}{R}^{}g^1_zgdzi\stackrel{~}{R}g^1_{\overline{z}}gd\overline{z}=$$

$$=2ie^{2\varphi }_zu(T^1iT^2)dz2i_z\varphi T^3dz+2ie^{2\varphi }_{\overline{z}}\overline{u}(T^1+iT^2)dz+2i_{\overline{z}}\varphi T^3d\overline{z}.$$

It is easy to verify that the zero curvature condition $`dJ=JJ`$ is equivalent to the field equations of the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model:

$$_z_{\overline{z}}\varphi +2e^{4\varphi }_zu_{\overline{z}}\overline{u}=0,$$

$$_z(e^{4\varphi }_{\overline{z}}\overline{u})=0,_{\overline{z}}(e^{4\varphi }_zu)=0.$$

4. Note: The Yang-Baxter property of the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW-model leads naturally to two different representations of the phase space of the theory: either as the complex loop group $`LSL(2,𝐂)`$ or as the loop group of the cotangent bundle of $`AN`$. The latter representation (which is naturally induced by the left invariance) is well-known and discussed in literature (cf. ). Here we advance the former one. Its advantage may consist in the fact that the first order action is the WZW action on the complex group, hence it allows the Wakimoto free field representation (cf. ). Of course, the symplectic form in the cotangent bundle representation can also be written in Darboux coordinates , but the Hamiltonian is not Gaussian. In the loop group $`LSL(2,𝐂)`$ representation, the whole action (not only the symplectic form part) can be written in the Gaussian way.

## 4  Poisson-Lie T-duality

1. The important structural feature of the $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$-Poisson-Lie symmetric $`\sigma `$-models on $`G`$ is their generic T-dualizability, i.e. (if a condition 4 below is fulfilled then) there is the dual $`\sigma `$-model on $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ which is moreover $`G`$-Poisson-Lie symmetric. In general, T-duality is a dynamical equivalence between two (or more) $`\sigma `$-models living on targets with different geometry and/or topology. The Poisson-Lie T-duality is the particular form of the T-duality, in which the common dynamics of all equivalent $`\sigma `$-models is given by the first order action (6) living on the Drinfeld double $`D`$. Why the action (6) can encode more than one $`\sigma `$-model (9)? The point is simple, set $`_{\stackrel{~}{g}}=Ad_{\stackrel{~}{g}^1}Ad_{\stackrel{~}{g}}`$ and suppose that the conditions 1)-3) on page 4 are supplemented by another one:

4) the $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$-dependent operator $`\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_{\stackrel{~}{g}}𝒥`$ is invertible.

Then we may insert into the action (6) the dual counterpart of the decomposition (7):

$$l(\sigma ,\tau )=\stackrel{~}{g}(\sigma ,\tau )h(\sigma ,\tau ),\stackrel{~}{g}\stackrel{~}{G},hG.$$

Mimicking the derivation after Eq. (7), we eliminate the quantity $`_\sigma hh^1`$ and obtain the $`\sigma `$-model living on $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{S}=\frac{1}{2}(\stackrel{~}{g}^1_+\stackrel{~}{g},(\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_{\stackrel{~}{g}}𝒥)^1(\stackrel{~}{𝒥}+\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_{\stackrel{~}{g}}\stackrel{~}{𝒥})\stackrel{~}{g}^1_{}\stackrel{~}{g})_𝒟.$$
$`(33)`$
2. The duality between the $`\sigma `$-models (9) and (33) is the original Poisson-Lie T-duality described in . It was later generalized in  by noting, that one can sometimes extract from the first order action (6) also $`\sigma `$-models whose targets are not Lie group manifolds. Indeed, suppose that there is a subgroup $`M`$ of the double $`D`$, whose Lie algebra $``$ is maximally isotropic (it has thus the same dimension as $`𝒢`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$). The group $`D`$ is then called the Manin double333 Note a subtlety: we do not require the existence of the complementary dual group $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ whose Lie algebra $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ would be maximally isotropic and $`𝒟`$ could be represented as the direct sum of the vector spaces $``$ and $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. If such a complementary group existed we would say that $`D`$ is the Drinfeld double of $`M`$. of $`M`$ . Consider then the right coset $`D/M`$ and parametrize444If there exists no global section of this fibration, we can choose several local sections covering the whole base space $`D/M`$. it by the elements $`f`$ of $`D`$. With this parametrization of $`D/M`$, we may parametrize the surface $`l(\tau ,\sigma )`$ in the double as follows

$$l(\tau ,\sigma )=f(\tau ,\sigma )m(\tau ,\sigma ),mM.$$
$`(34)`$
The action (6) then becomes

$$S=\frac{1}{2}(f^1_\tau f,f^1_\sigma f)_𝒟+\frac{1}{12}d^1(dff^1,[dff^1,dff^1])_𝒟+$$

$$+(_\sigma mm^1,f^1_\tau f)_𝒟\frac{1}{2}(f^1_\sigma f+_\sigma mm^1,_f(f^1_\sigma f+_\sigma mm^1))_𝒟,$$
$`(35)`$
where $`_f=Ad_{f^1}Ad_f`$ and we tacitly suppose the measure $`d\sigma d\tau `$ present in the formula. Now we note that the expression (35) is Gaussian in the $``$-valued variable $`_\sigma mm^1`$. In order to solve it away, we do not use a projector on $``$ (an analogue of $`𝒥`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{𝒥}`$) since there is no canonically given kernel. The most useful strategy is to pick up some basis $`S^a`$ in $``$, write $`_\sigma mm^1=\mu _aS^a`$ and integrate away $`\mu _a`$. This gives

$$S=\frac{1}{4}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (_+ff^1,_{}ff^1)_𝒟+\frac{1}{12}d^1(dff^1,[dff^1,dff^1])_𝒟+$$

$$+\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (f^1_+f,S^a_fS^a)_𝒟(A_f^1)_{ab}(S^b,f^1_{}f)_𝒟,$$
$`(36)`$
where

$$A_f^{ab}=(S^a,_fS^b)_𝒟.$$
$`(36b)`$
We thus conclude that a $`\sigma `$-model (36) can be associated to every maximally isotropic subalgebra of $`𝒟`$ provided the matrix $`A_f`$ is invertible. The target of this $`\sigma `$-model is the coset $`D/M`$. It turns out  that the maximally isotropic subgroups $`M`$ and $`M^{}`$ related by a conjugation by a fixed element of the group $`D`$ give rise respectively to the same $`\sigma `$-models. The problem of classifying the Poisson-Lie dual (or plural) models thus reduces to the search of all maximally isotropic subalgebras of $`𝒟`$ up to conjugation .

We finish this section by giving the Euclidean analogue of the formula (36), taking place for $`^2=Id`$:

$$S=\frac{i}{4}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (_zff^1,_{\overline{z}}ff^1)_𝒟+\frac{1}{12}d^1(dff^1,[dff^1,dff^1])_𝒟+$$

$$+\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (f^1_zf,S^a+i_fS^a)_𝒟(A_f^1)_{ab}(S^b,f^1_{\overline{z}}f)_𝒟.$$
$`(37)`$
In spite of the explicit presence of the imaginary unit in this formula, the action (37) is always real.

### 4.1 T-duality and the anisotropic model

The Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model (22) on the compact group $`K=SU(2)`$ is left invariant and right Poisson-Lie symmetric. The left invariance can be also interpreted  as the (left) Poisson-Lie symmetry corresponding to a trivial (null) Poisson bracket on $`K`$. The dual group is then the dual space $`𝒦^{}`$ of $`𝒦=Lie(K)`$ and the group law of $`𝒦^{}`$ is just the addition of vectors. The Lie algebra of the dual group $`𝒦^{}`$ is thus clearly Abelian.

So the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model can be dualized with respect to the left $`𝒦^{}`$-Poisson-Lie symmetry. The dual $`\sigma `$-model has the well-known action :

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau _+\chi ^aM_{ab}(\chi )_{}\chi ^b.$$
$`(38)`$
Here $`\chi ^a`$ are the coordinates on the target $`𝒦^{}`$ with respect to some chosen basis $`t_a^{}𝒦^{}`$. The matrix $`M(\chi )`$ is the inverse of

$$(M^1)^{ab}=(\stackrel{~}{R})^{ab}+f_c^{ab}\chi ^c,$$
$`(39)`$
where $`f_c^{ab}`$ are the structure constants of $`𝒦=Lie(K)`$ in the basis $`T^a`$ dual to $`t_a^{}`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{R})^{ab}=(T^a,\stackrel{~}{R}T^b)_𝒟`$. We note that the duality between (22) and (38) is also referred to as the traditional non-Abelian T-duality .

The dualization of the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model with respect to the right Poisson-Lie symmetry gives the model (33). Note, however, that the operator $``$, though being $`K`$-invariant, need not be $`AN`$-invariant. In other words, the dual model need not be Yang-Baxter from the point of view of the dual group $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$. In any case, the action of the dual model can be rewritten in the following nice way :

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau (_+bb^1,(\stackrel{~}{R}+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_b)^1_{}bb^1)_𝒟.$$
$`(40)`$
Here $`b(\tau ,\sigma )`$ is the map from the worldsheet into the group $`\stackrel{~}{G}=AN`$ and the operator $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_b:𝒦\stackrel{~}{𝒢}`$ is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_b=\stackrel{~}{𝒥}Ad_b𝒥Ad_{b^1}𝒥.$$
$`(41)`$
We realize (cf. (13) and (14)) that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_b`$ defines the Poisson-Lie bracket on $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$. It turns out also that the dual $`\sigma `$-model is right $`G`$-Poisson-Lie symmetric with respect to the right action of $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ on itself .

We thus observe that the Yang-Baxter $`\sigma `$-model (22) living on $`K`$ has two different duals (38) and (40) living respectively on the groups $`𝒦^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{G}=AN`$. We may call this phenomenon the enhanced Poisson-Lie $`T`$-duality. The dual $`\sigma `$-models are either of the form (40), if we dualize (22) with respect to the right $`AN`$-Poisson-Lie symmetry (the Drinfeld double is $`K^𝐂`$), or of the form (38) if we dualize with respect to the left $`𝒦^{}`$-Poisson-Lie symmetry or, in other words, with respect to the traditional non-Abelian duality (the Drinfeld double is the cotangent bundle $`T^{}K`$).

We give for completeness also the explicit description of the dual model (40) living on $`AN`$. The matrices $`\stackrel{~}{R}_\alpha `$ in (40) are given by (21) and the Poisson-Lie operator (41) is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_bT^1=u_2t_3[u_1^2+u_2^2+\frac{1}{4}e^{4\varphi }\frac{1}{4}]t_2;$$

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_bT^2=u_1t_3+[u_1^2+u_2^2+\frac{1}{4}e^{4\varphi }\frac{1}{4}]t_1;$$

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_bT^3=u_1t_2u_2t_1.$$

Finally, in the parametrization (28), we have

$$(dbb^1)^1=e^{2\varphi }d(e^{2\varphi }u_1),(dbb^1)^2=e^{2\varphi }d(e^{2\varphi }u_2),(dbb^1)^3=d\varphi .$$

### 4.2 T-duality and the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model

Since the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model has the Yang-Baxter property, it can be dualized either with respect to the ordinary left symmetry or with respect to the right Poisson-Lie symmetry. In the former case the Drinfeld double is the cotangent bundle $`T^{}AN`$ of the group $`AN`$, which has, up to conjugacy, seven maximally isotropic subalgebras, and in the latter it is $`SL(2,𝐂)`$ with three maximally isotropic subalgebras. One such subalgebra of $`Lie(T^{}AN)`$ and one of $`sl(2,𝐂)`$ give the same SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW theory. Thus it remains eight potentially new models.

From the eight cases we must remove one isotropic subalgebra ($`Lie(AN)`$) of $`SL(2,𝐂)`$ and one of $`T^{}AN`$ because the respective matrices $`A_f`$ are not invertible (cf (36b)). Thus there remains six $`\sigma `$-models, but one of them is not conformal due to tracefulness of its structure constants (cf. for general discussion of this issue) and other three of them can be obtained also by Abelian duality with spectators so we shall not discuss them in any detail. Thus there remains a couple of possibly interesting $`\sigma `$-models, dual in a truly non-Abelain way to the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model. One of them is based on the double $`T^{}AN`$ and the other on $`SL(2,𝐂)`$. Here are the details:

#### 4.2.1 The double $`T^{}AN`$

The group law of $`AN`$ can be obtained from the matrix multiplication in the parametrization (28). Replacing $`\varphi `$ by $`\lambda `$ and $`u_{1,2}`$ by $`L_{1,2}`$, the law reads

$$(L_1,L_2,\lambda )(K_1,K_2,\kappa )=(L_1+e^{2\lambda }K_1,L_2+e^{2\lambda }K_2,\lambda +\kappa ).$$

The group law on the cotangent bundle $`T^{}AN`$ is the standard one: the semidirect product of $`AN`$ acting in the coadjoint way on the dual of $`Lie(AN)`$ viewed as the Abelian additive group. The resulting group is six-dimensional, it has the topology $`𝐑^6`$, and, in the suitable parametrization, the group law turns out to be

$$(L,\lambda ,l,w)(K,\kappa ,k,y)=(L+e^{2\lambda }K,\lambda +\kappa ,l+e^{2\lambda }k,w+y+2(L,k)e^{2\lambda }),$$

where $`L=(L^1,L^2)`$, $`K=(K^1,K^2)`$ and $`(K,L)=K^1L^1+K^2L^2`$. We have

$$M^1(L,l,w,\lambda )^1=(e^{2\lambda }L,\lambda ,e^{2\lambda }l,w+2(L,l))$$

and the unit element is $`e_d=(0,0,0,0)`$.

The set of the left invariant vector fields: The right multiplication by $`(\delta L^\alpha ,0,0,0)`$ induces

$$_{t_\alpha }^R=e^{2\lambda }\frac{}{L^\alpha };$$

by $`(0,0,\delta l_\alpha ,0)`$ gives

$$_{\tau ^\alpha }^R=e^{2\lambda }\left(\frac{}{l_\alpha }+2L^\alpha \frac{}{w}\right);$$

and by $`(0,0,0,\delta w)`$ and $`(0,\delta \lambda ,0,0)`$ yields respectively

$$_{\tau ^0}^R=\frac{}{w},_{t_0}^R=\frac{}{\lambda }.$$

Hence we obtain the following bracket on $`Lie(T^{}AN)`$:

$$[t_0,t_\alpha ]=2t_\alpha ,[t_\alpha ,t_\beta ]=0,[\tau ^i,\tau ^j]=0,i,j=0,1,2;$$

$$[t_i,\tau ^0]=0,[t_0,\tau ^\alpha ]=2\tau ^\alpha ,[t_\alpha ,\tau ^\beta ]=2\delta _\alpha ^\beta \tau ^0,\alpha ,\beta =1,2.$$

There is a non-degenerate symmetric invariant bilinear form on $`Lie(T^{}AN)`$ defined by

$$(\tau ^i,\tau ^j)_d=(t_i,t_j)_d=0,(\tau ^i,t_j)_d=\delta _j^i.$$
$`(42)`$
It is this form that makes $`T^{}AN`$ the Drinfeld double of $`AN`$.

Now we would like to write down the duality invariant first order action (6) on the double $`T^{}AN`$. Such action leads to $`\sigma `$-models which are right symmetric or Poisson-Lie symmetric. Since we wish to dualize with respect to the left symmetry of our SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model we have to generalize our formalism in order to be able to take into account also the left Poisson-Lie symmetric models. This generalization is very easy: if $`L_R(g)`$ is the Lagrangian of a right Poisson-Lie symmetric $`\sigma `$-model then $`L_L(g)=L_R(g^1)`$ is left Poisson-Lie symmetric.

Thus we can consider the action (6) for the double $`T^{}AN`$ and we choose the following operator $``$:

$$t_1=t_2,t_2=t_1,t_0=2\tau ^0;$$

$$\tau ^1=\frac{1}{2}t_1+\tau ^2,\tau ^2=\frac{1}{2}t_2\tau ^1,\tau ^0=\frac{1}{2}t_0.$$

One easily checks that $``$ is selfadjoint with respect to the form (42) and it holds $`^2=Id`$.

The maximally isotropic subalgebras of $`Lie(T^{}AN)`$ have been classified (up to conjugacy) in . There are two one-parametric families of them and five singular cases. Here is the list

$$1\gamma )Span(\tau ^0,\gamma _1\tau ^1+\gamma _2\tau ^2,\gamma _2t_1+\gamma _1t_2),\gamma _1^2+\gamma _2^2=1;$$

$$2\delta )Span(t_0,\delta _1t_1+\delta _2t_2,\delta _2\tau ^1+\delta _1\tau ^2),\delta _1^2+\delta _2^2=1;$$

$$3)Span(t_0,\tau ^2+t_1,\tau ^1t_2);4)Span(t_0,\tau ^2t_1,\tau ^1+t_2);$$

$$5)Span(\tau ^0,\tau ^1,\tau ^2);6)Span(\tau ^0,t_1,t_2)7)Span(t_0,t_1,t_2).$$

First of all, the choice of the subalgebra 5) leads to the $`\sigma `$-model (37) living on the target $`T^{}AN/Lie^{}(AN)=AN`$. Performing on it the transformation $`ff^1`$ leading from the right to the left symmetric model, we obtain precisely the action (30) of the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model. The choices 7) leads to a nonconformal $`\sigma `$-model since the structure constants are tracefull. The possibility 6) must be also rejected since the matrix (36b) is not invertible in this case. The choices $`1\gamma )`$, 3) and 4) lead to $`\sigma `$-models which can be also obtained by using the standard Abelian T-duality with respect to the isometries of the $`u,\overline{u}`$ plane (cf. (30)). We do not detail the corresponding $`\sigma `$-model metrics and $`H`$-fields here.

Thus the only truly non-Abelian case is $`2\delta )`$. It turns out that all choices of $`\delta `$ gives the same $`\sigma `$-model, hence we take $`\delta _1=1,\delta _2=0`$. The corresponding subgroup will be denoted as $`C=\mathrm{exp}(Span(t_0,t_1,\tau ^2))`$. The $`\sigma `$-model target is then $`T^{}AN/C`$ and can be identified with the group $`\stackrel{~}{C}=\mathrm{exp}(x_0\tau ^0+x_1\tau ^1+x_2t_2)`$, where $`x_j`$ are coordinates on the group manifold $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$. Note that $`C`$ is the Poincaré group in two dimension and $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ is Abelian. Inserting a decomposition $`l=\stackrel{~}{c}c`$ ($`cC,\stackrel{~}{c}\stackrel{~}{C}`$) in the first order action (6) and eliminating the variable $`c`$ gives the following $`\sigma `$-model action:

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau _zx_kN^{kl}(x)_{\overline{z}}x_l,$$

where

$$(N^1)_{kl}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2& 2ix_1& 2ix_2\\ 2ix_1& 0& 1\\ 2ix_2& 1& \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right).$$

In particular, the metric part of the $`\sigma `$-model background is

$$ds^2=\frac{dx_0^2(1+4x_2^2)dx_1^24x_1^2dx_2^2+(24x_1x_2)dx_1dx_2}{22x_1^28x_1x_2}.$$

This metric changes signature (in some domain of the space-time it is Riemannian in another pseudo-Riemannian). It is the matter of taste to say that it is either its very interesting or rather pathological feature. We adopt the latter (and more coservative) viewpoint and turn to the investigation of the double $`SL(2,𝐂)`$.

### 4.3  The double $`SL(2,𝐂)`$: $`dS_3/AdS_3`$ duality

There are (up to conjugacy) three maximally isotropic subalgebras of $`sl(2,𝐂)`$: $`su(2)`$, $`sl(2,𝐑)`$ and $`Lie(AN)`$. For $`Lie(AN)`$, the matrix $`A_f`$ (cf. (36b)) is not invertible, hence it remains the T-duality between two $`\sigma `$-models living respectively on the cosets $`SL(2,𝐂)/SU(2)=AN`$ and $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL(2,𝐑)`$. The former model is just the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model with the action (30), describing strings in the Euclidean $`AdS_3`$ target and we shall see soon that the $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL(2,𝐑)`$ model captures the dynamics of strings in the three-dimensional de Sitter space $`dS_3`$. We recall that here the Poisson-Lie T-duality is Euclidean, or, in other words, it relates two $`\sigma `$-models with real Euclidean action. This means that the de Sitter $`H`$-field is imaginary.

The action of the $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL(2,𝐑)`$ model is of course given by the general formula (37). To make it more explicit we have to specify the sections $`f`$ of the fibration $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL(2,R)`$. This requires some preliminary exposition of the geometry of this coset:

For convenience, we first embed $`SL(2,𝐑)`$ into $`SL(2,𝐂)`$ in a nonstandard way

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mu & i\nu \\ i\rho & \lambda \end{array}\right)SL(2,C),\mu ,\nu ,\rho ,\lambda 𝐑,\mu \lambda +\nu \rho =\mathrm{𝟏}.$$

We shall refer to the atypically embedded group $`SL(2,𝐑))`$ as to $`SL^a(2,𝐑)`$. We recall that $`\sigma `$-models (37) on $`D/M`$ and $`D/M^{}`$ have the same target geometry if $`M`$ and $`M^{}`$ are conjugated in $`D`$. In fact, our embedding $`SL^a(2,𝐑)`$ is conjugated to the standard one (real matrices with unit determinant) by the following element of $`SL(2,𝐂)`$ :

$$\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1+i& 1+i\\ i1& 1i\end{array}\right).$$

Consider a space $`dS_3`$ of Hermitian 2$`d`$-matrices with determinant equal to $`(1)`$. They can be written as

$$s=\left(\begin{array}{cc}u& w\\ \overline{w}& v\end{array}\right),uv\overline{w}w=1.$$
$`(43)`$
Clearly, $`dS_3`$ is nothing but the de Sitter space, if it is equipped with the Minkowski metric

$$ds_{dS}^2=dudvd\overline{w}dw,$$
$`(44)`$
restricted to the surface $`uv\overline{w}w=1`$. There exists a natural map $`s:SL(2,𝐂)dS_3`$ defined as

$$s(l)=l\sigma _1l^{},\sigma _1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$

It is clear that the preimage of the point $`\sigma _1dS_3`$ under the map $`s`$ is a group, in fact, it is our group $`SL^a(2,𝐑)`$. Thus we see that the map $`s`$ defines also an injective map from the coset $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL^a(2,R)`$ to the de Sitter space $`dS_3`$. By a small abuse of notation we call this map also $`s`$. It is not difficult to prove that the map $`s:SL(2,𝐂)/SL^a(2,R)dS_3`$ is also surjective.

Our next goal is to find the section $`f`$ of the fibration $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL^a(2,R)`$ to be inserted in the action (6). To do this, we consider first the Iwasawa decomposition of $`SL^a(2,R)`$ :

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mu & i\nu \\ i\rho & \lambda \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\theta & i\mathrm{sin}\theta \\ i\mathrm{sin}\theta & \mathrm{cos}\theta \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& iM\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^\varphi & 0\\ 0& e^\varphi \end{array}\right),\varphi ,M𝐑,0\theta 2\pi ,$$

and the Iwasawa decomposition of $`SL(2,𝐂)`$:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& c\\ b& d\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \overline{\beta }\\ \beta & \overline{\alpha }\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& L\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& iM\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^\varphi & 0\\ 0& e^\varphi \end{array}\right),$$
$`(45)`$
where $`a,b,c,d𝐂`$, $`\varphi ,L,M𝐑`$ and $`\alpha ,\beta 𝐂`$ with $`\alpha \overline{\alpha }+\beta \overline{\beta }=1`$. We recognize in the first matrix on the r.h.s. of (45) an element of the group $`SU(2)`$. Comparing those two Iwasawa decompositions, we arrive at the conclusion, that we can choose $`f`$ within the form $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \overline{\beta }\\ \beta & \overline{\alpha }\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& L\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)`$. We remark the following identity

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\theta +i\frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\theta & i\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \\ i\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\theta & \mathrm{cos}\theta i\frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& L\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)=$$

$$=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& L\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\theta & i\sqrt{L^2+1}\mathrm{sin}\theta \\ i\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\theta & \mathrm{cos}\theta \end{array}\right).$$
$`(46)`$
The second matrix on the r.h.s. of (46) is clearly in $`SL^a(2,𝐑)`$, hence the product of two matrices on the l.h.s. is in the same coset as $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& L\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)`$. Moreover, the first matrix on the l.h.s. of (46) is in $`SU(2)`$. We call it $`R_L(\theta )`$ and we note that

$$R_L(\theta _1+\theta _2)=R_L(\theta _1)R_L(\theta _2).$$

For $`\theta `$ close to zero it holds

$$R_L(\theta )=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)+i\frac{\theta }{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}L& 1\\ 1& L\end{array}\right)+O(\theta ^2)$$
$`(47)`$
and it is true also that

$$Tr\left\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}L& 1\\ 1& L\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)\right\}=0.$$
$`(48)`$
The facts (47) and (48) imply that there is an $`L`$-dependent global Gaussian decomposition of $`SU(2)`$:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \overline{\beta }\\ \beta & \overline{\alpha }\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\vartheta +i\frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta & i\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta \\ i\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta & \mathrm{cos}\vartheta i\frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta \end{array}\right)\times $$

$$\times \left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\chi & \mathrm{sin}\chi \\ \mathrm{sin}\chi & \mathrm{cos}\chi \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\theta +i\frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\theta & i\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \\ i\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\theta & \mathrm{cos}\theta i\frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\theta \end{array}\right),$$

where $`0\vartheta ,\theta \pi `$ and $`0\chi \pi /2`$. Regarding the identity (46), we find immediately the needed section $`f`$:

$$f=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\vartheta +i\frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta & i\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta \\ i\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta & \mathrm{cos}\vartheta i\frac{L}{\sqrt{L^2+1}}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\chi & \mathrm{sin}\chi \\ \mathrm{sin}\chi & \mathrm{cos}\chi \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& L\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right),$$
$`(49)`$
where $`0\vartheta \pi `$, $`0\chi \pi /2`$ and $`L𝐑`$.

The map $`s(f)`$ now gives the transformation between the ”cylindrical” coordinates $`\vartheta ,\chi ,L`$ and the de Sitter parametrization (43):

$$\frac{1}{2}(u+v)=L,\frac{1}{2}(uv)=L\mathrm{cos}2\chi +\mathrm{sin}2\chi \mathrm{cos}2\vartheta ,$$
$`(50a)`$
$$w=\mathrm{cos}2\chi L\mathrm{sin}2\chi \mathrm{cos}2\vartheta i\sqrt{L^2+1}\mathrm{sin}2\chi \mathrm{sin}2\vartheta .$$
$`(50b)`$
The reader may verify that, indeed, it holds $`uv\overline{w}w=1`$.

Now we read off from (37) the metric and the three-form field $`H`$ of the $`\sigma `$-model on $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL^a(2,𝐑)`$:

$$ds^2=(f^1df,S^a)_𝒟(A_f^1)_{ab}(S^b,f^1df)_𝒟;$$

$$H=+\frac{i}{2}d\{(f^1df,_fS^a)_𝒟(A_f^1)_{ab}(S^b,f^1df)_𝒟\}i\frac{1}{12}(dff^1\stackrel{}{,}[dff^1\stackrel{}{,}dff^1])_𝒟.$$

We choose the following basis of the $`Lie(SL^a(2,𝐑))`$:

$$S^+=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& i\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),S^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ i& 0\end{array}\right),S^0=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$

Recall that the operator $`=`$ is $`SL(2,𝐂)`$-invariant, hence $`_f=`$ and the matrix $`A_f`$ (cf. (36b)) is also independent on $`f`$. The non-zero components of its inverse are

$$(A_f^1)_+=(A_f^1)_+=1,(A_f^1)_{00}=2.$$

Considering (49), it is straightforward to calculate the form $`f^1df`$ and hence the metric and the $`H`$-field of the $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL^a(2,𝐑)`$ model:

$$ds^2=\frac{1}{2}\frac{(dL)^2}{L^2+1}\mathrm{sin}^22\chi \mathrm{sin}^22\vartheta +2(L^2+1)(d\chi ^2+\mathrm{sin}^22\chi d\vartheta ^2)+$$

$$+2\mathrm{cos}2\vartheta dLd\chi \mathrm{sin}4\chi \mathrm{sin}2\vartheta dLd\vartheta ;$$
$`(51a)`$
$$H=4i\sqrt{L^2+1}\mathrm{sin}2\chi dLd\chi d\vartheta .$$
$`(51b)`$
By using (50ab), we can check easily that (up to a normalization factor $`1/2`$) the metric (51a) is nothing but the standard de Sitter metric (44).

Because the Lie algebra $`sl(2,𝐑)`$ does not have the traceful structure constants (i.e. $`f_b^{ab}=0`$), we expect to find a dilaton $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ such that the background (51ab) will satisfy the following conditions  of the conformal invariance

$$R_{mn}\frac{1}{4}H_{mpq}H_n^{pq}+2D_mD_n\mathrm{\Phi }=0,\frac{1}{2}D_nH_{pq}^n+_n\mathrm{\Phi }H_{pq}^n=0.$$
$`(52)`$
Here $`R_{mn}`$ means the Ricci tensor and $`D_n`$ the covariant derivative. The computation indeed shows that the conditions (52) are satisfied for $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$.

### 4.4 T-duality and loop group symmetry

It is well-known that the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model has a $`SL(2,𝐂)`$ current symmetry. It can be very transparently understood in the first order formalism, where the action reads (cf. (24))

$$S(l)=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau \mathrm{ImTr}(_{\overline{z}}ll^1_\sigma ll^1)+\frac{1}{12}d^1\mathrm{ImTr}(dll^1[dll^1\stackrel{}{,}dll^1]).$$
$`(24)`$
By using the Polyakov-Wiegmann formula

$$S(l_1l_2)=S(l_1)+S(l_2)+𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau \mathrm{ImTr}(l_1^1_{\overline{z}}l_1_\sigma l_2l_2^1),$$
$`(53)`$
the field equations of the first order model (24) can now be easily obtained. We set in (53) $`l_1=l`$ and $`l_2=1+\chi (z,\overline{z})`$, with $`\chi sl(2,𝐂)`$ being infinitesimal and we find

$$\delta S=𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau \mathrm{ImTr}(l^1_{\overline{z}}l_\sigma \chi ).$$

Since $`_\sigma \chi `$ is arbitrary and the form $`\mathrm{ImTr}`$ non-degenerate, we conclude that the first order field equations have extremely simple form:

$$l^1_{\overline{z}}l=0.$$
$`(54)`$
The symmetries of the first order equation (54) are evident: a solution $`l(z)`$ becomes clearly another solution upon the transformation

$$l(z)g(z)l(z),g(z)SL(2,𝐂).$$
$`(55)`$
Our next goal is to visualize the huge symmetry (55) in the second order SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW model and its $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL^a(2,𝐑)`$ de Sitter dual.

1. $`SL(2,𝐂)/SU(2)`$ model. Recall that the target space is the group $`AN`$ and the Lagrangian is given by (30). We can perform the change of variables on the target $`AN`$ as follows

$$h=bb^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{2\varphi }+4e^{2\varphi }u\overline{u}& 2e^{2\varphi }\overline{u}\\ 2e^{2\varphi }u& e^{2\varphi }\end{array}\right).$$

In terms of the matrix $`h`$, the $`\sigma `$-model background (31) can be rewritten as

$$ds_{AdS}^2=\frac{1}{8}\mathrm{Tr}(dhh^1dhh^1),$$
$`(56a)`$
$$H=\frac{1}{48}\mathrm{Tr}(dhh^1[dhh^1\stackrel{}{,}dhh^1]).$$
$`(56b)`$
In other words, the SL(2,C)/SU(2) WZW action (30) can be rewritten as

$$S=i𝑑zd\overline{z}\mathrm{Tr}(_zhh^1_{\overline{z}}hh^1)+\frac{i}{6}d^1\mathrm{Tr}(dhh^1[hh^1\stackrel{}{,}dhh^1]).$$
$`(57)`$
Note that in (56ab) and (57) there is the full trace, not only its imaginary part.

How the loop symmetry (55) manifests itself from the point of view of the second order action (57)? First note that from the first order trajectory $`l`$ we obtain the second order trajectory $`b`$ by the Iwasawa decomposition $`l=bk`$, $`bAN`$, $`kSU(2)`$ (cf. (25)). This means that

$$h=ll^{}$$

and the symmetry (55) becomes

$$h(z,\overline{z})g(z)h(z,\overline{z})g^{}(\overline{z}).$$
$`(58)`$
Indeed, by the direct use of the corresponding Polyakov-Wiegmann formula, we see that the model (57) has the symmetry (58).

1. $`SL(2,𝐂)/SL^a(2,𝐑)`$ model. Recall that the target is the space $`dS_3`$ of Hermitian matrices with determinant (-1):

$$s=\left(\begin{array}{cc}u& w\\ \overline{w}& v\end{array}\right),uvw\overline{w}=1.$$

Using the parametrization (50) and ignoring an unimportant overall normalization, the $`\sigma `$-model metric and $`H`$-field (51ab) can be rewritten as

$$ds_{dS}^2=\mathrm{Tr}(dss^1dss^1),$$

$$H=\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{Tr}(dss^1[dss^1\stackrel{}{,}dss^1]).$$

In other words, the de Sitter $`\sigma `$-model action can be written as

$$S=i𝑑zd\overline{z}\mathrm{Tr}(_zss^1_{\overline{z}}ss^1)+\frac{i}{6}d^1\mathrm{Tr}(dss^1[dss^1\stackrel{}{,}dss^1]).$$
$`(59)`$
Note that the only distiction of the $`AdS_3`$ action (57) and its $`dS_3`$ dual (59) is the sign of the respective determinants of the Hermitian matrices $`h`$ and $`s`$.

How the loop symmetry (55) manifests itself from the point of view of the second order action (59)? First note that from the first order trajectory $`l`$ we obtain the second order trajectory $`f`$ by the decomposition $`l=fm`$, $`mSL^a(2,𝐑)`$ (cf. (34)). This means that

$$s=f\sigma _1f^{}=l\sigma _1l^{}.$$

and the symmetry (55) becomes

$$s(z,\overline{z})g(z)s(z,\overline{z})g^{}(\overline{z}).$$
$`(60)`$
Indeed, by the direct use of the Polyakov-Wiegmann formula, we see that the model (59) has the symmetry (60).

## 5 Conclusions and outlook

We have shown that the simultaneous presence of the ordinary (left) symmetry and the Poisson-Lie (right) symmetry of $`\sigma `$-models on group targets results in a rich $`T`$-duality picture. Our main example of a unitary theory was the anisotropic principal chiral model (22) and its duals (38) and (40). However, it seems that a better candidate for settling the quantum status of Poisson-Lie T-duality would be the dual pair of $`AdS_3`$ and $`dS_3`$ models (57) and (59). There is a surprising feature of this duality, namely, the $`dS_3`$ background has a different signature than the (Euclidean) $`AdS_3`$ one. Further investigations are needed to elucidate this fact.

In the subsequent paper, we plan to describe how the $`dS_3/AdS_3`$ T-duality works for open strings and $`D`$-branes.