text:
# Optimization of perturbative similarity renormalization group for Hamiltonians with asymptotic freedom and bound states

## I Introduction

The matrix of canonical QCD Hamiltonian is too large for a direct diagonalization using computers. One cause of the forbidding size is the dynamical coupling among bare degrees of freedom across an infinite range of energy scales. This difficulty is manifest in all local quantum field theories of physical interest through ultraviolet divergences. One possible method to attack the divergence problem in the case of asymptotically free theories is to first evaluate an effective Hamiltonian and then attempt diagonalization of the corresponding effective matrix. For some well adjusted effective degrees of freedom may interact over only a limited range of energy scales, whereby a definition of a finite effective eigenvalue sub-problem becomes conceivable and its subsequent solution using computers is not immediately excluded. To derive the effective Hamiltonians one can use similarity renormalization group (RG) procedure SGKW1 . This article discusses the accuracy that the similarity procedure can achieve in evaluating the effective Hamiltonians in perturbation theory. The latter is the only systematic method that exists for handling the initial canonical QCD Hamiltonian.

Having a perturbatively calculated effective Hamiltonian, $`(\lambda )`$, that strongly couples effective basis states only if their free energies, i.e. eigenvalues of certain $`_0(\lambda )`$, do not differ by more than a finite width parameter $`\lambda `$, one can cut out a sub-matrix $`W_\lambda `$ from the matrix of $`(\lambda )`$ in the effective basis. The energy range of the sub-matrix $`W_\lambda `$ can be limited to few or several widths $`\lambda `$. Such $`W_\lambda `$ contains only a fraction of the matrix elements of $`(\lambda )`$, which is why $`W_\lambda `$ is called a window. One can diagonalize the window numerically and obtain the part of the spectrum of $`(\lambda )`$ that is matched by the selected window. For example, the energy range of the window matrix $`W_\lambda `$ can be limited to the region where a bound state is formed. The question is then how accurate the perturbative RG derivation of $`(\lambda )`$ can be for the matrix elements in such $`W_\lambda `$.

The issue was studied previously SGKW2  using a particularly elegant version of the similarity transformation generator, which was taken from Wegner’s flow equation for Hamiltonians in solid state physics FW . In the model studied in Ref. SGKW2 , the Hamiltonian $`(\lambda )`$ could be calculated numerically with arbitrary accuracy. One could also calculate the same Hamiltonian in perturbation theory. Then, one could compare results of numerical diagonalization of the resulting windows cut out from the exact and from the perturbative results for $`(\lambda )`$.

The model study SGKW2  showed that Wegner’s generator produced quite useful first three terms in an effective coupling constant expansion for the window Hamiltonian, $`W_\lambda =W_0+g_\lambda W_{\lambda 1}+g_\lambda ^2W_{\lambda 2}`$. Diagonalization of this $`W_\lambda `$ produced surprisingly good accuracy on the order of 10%. The bound state eigenvalue of $`W_\lambda `$ matched the exact one with so small error even when $`\lambda `$ was reduced down to the range that corresponded to 1 GeV in QCD. Moreover, only a handful of basis states were sufficient in the numerical diagonalization. However, $`g_\lambda `$ grew in the asymptotically free model when $`\lambda `$ was made small, which is a generic feature for asymptotic freedom, and $`g_\lambda `$ became comparable with 1 for $`\lambda `$ 1 GeV. At the same time, the coefficients of the perturbative expansion for matrix elements of $`W_\lambda `$ beyond the first three terms turned out to form an alternating series with growing coefficients and, eventually, for $`\lambda `$ still much larger than 1 GeV, results including terms proportional to $`g_\lambda ^3`$, $`g_\lambda ^4`$, etc. turned out to be useless. Higher-than-second order terms led to erratic behavior of $`W_\lambda `$ and its eigenvalues. This result required a closer inspection to decide if one could improve the perturbative part of the similarity approach by using other generators than Wegner’s, and whether any serious investment in a vastly more complex QCD calculations should ever be made using this method. The problem was not only quantitative, with details depending on the model chosen for study, but also qualitative. Namely, one needed to know if any significant improvement was possible in principle, because the growth of $`g_\lambda `$ for decreasing $`\lambda `$ in asymptotically free theories is in basic conflict with the goal of reducing the width $`\lambda `$ down to the binding scale using perturbation theory. Since there are not many exactly soluble models with asymptotic freedom and bound states, it was important to find out if any improvement could be obtained in the model of Ref. SGKW2 .

The optimization task may be attempted in similarity RG procedure by taking advantage of the fact that the generator of the similarity transformation can be chosen in infinitely many different ways. It is plausible that the convergence problems emerged in the Wegner case because interactions with large energy changes were very quickly eliminated and such rapid elimination could produce large feedback in the low-energy dynamics, too large for easy reproduction through a perturbative expansion. Therefore, this work is focused on the question if varying the similarity generator, especially the rate at which the off-diagonal terms are removed, can improve convergence of at least the first five terms in the expansion, i.e. all terms up to and including order $`g_\lambda ^4`$. The number 4 is distinguished by the fact that one needs at least four orders of perturbation theory to simultaneously account for effective masses and running coupling in quark-gluon dynamics in QCD. The answer found in the model studied here is positive. Namely, it is shown below that one can obtain a systematic expansion for $`W_\lambda `$ into powers of $`g_\lambda `$, and the sum of first 5 terms in the expansion produces at least three times better accuracy than in Ref. SGKW2 . When an optimized version of the similarity generator is identified, one can include higher order terms than 4th. For example, it will be shown here that 6th order improves the accuracy to 10 times better than achieved previously using Wegner’s generator in the model. Sensitivity of the effective theory to the finite bare cutoff in numerical calculations is also reduced by at least an order of magnitude (this will be explained later) and control over numerical instabilities that emerge in the RG evolution is also enhanced (this aspect is only mentioned). The main result reported here, however, is not that a class of similarity generators leads to improvement in the model chosen for this study, but that the flexibility available in the similarity renormalization group procedure does lead to considerable options for improved convergence pattern.

Since the similarity approach to QCD has already evolved in the effective particle version to third order terms DEG  and systematic studies of bound states will become possible once the fourth order terms are brought under numerical control SGMW , the options for improving convergence need to be further explored in more complex models. Also, the development of Wegner’s flow equations in solid state physics and field theory AM ; AMDC ; FWPR ; SM ; SP , has already demonstrated that new options for optimization may have much broader range of applicability than the QCD bound state problem could suggest by itself. Besides, if the window Hamiltonians of interest could be reliably evaluated using perturbation theory, the standard quantum mechanical calculus could then be employed to describe with them the time evolution of selected states with efficiency probably hard to match by any other method.

This paper is organized as follows. Section II describes the model. Section III discusses results concerning perturbation theory and optimization of the similarity generator, which is followed by concluding remarks in Section IV.

## II Model

Matrix elements of the model studied here are (see Ref. SGKW2  for introduction)

$$H_{mn}=E_m\delta _{mn}g\sqrt{E_mE_n},$$
(1)
where $`E_n=b^n`$, $`b>1`$, and $`n`$ is an integer, with a convention that energy equal 1 corresponds to 1 GeV. The model is cut off in infrared and ultraviolet regimes by limiting the subscripts, $`Mm,nN`$, $`M`$ being negative and $`N`$ positive, both of much larger magnitude than 1. The ultraviolet renormalizability of the model, its asymptotic freedom, and its lack of sensitivity to the infrared cutoff, were discussed in SGKW2 . The bare coupling constant, $`g=0.060600631`$, is adjusted to obtain a bound state with eigenvalue -1 GeV with 8 digits of accuracy for $`b=2`$, $`M=21`$ and $`N=16`$, in exactly the same way as in Ref. SGKW2 . With these choices, the Hamiltonian $`H`$ is a 38 $`\times `$ 38 matrix with 37 positive eigenvalues, and one negative. The largest energy scale reaches 65 TeV, and the smallest one is 0.5 KeV. This energy range saturates the needs of contemporary theories where asymptotic freedom and bound states are of interest.

The differential similarity RG procedure is based on a class of equations that can be written as

$$\frac{d}{d\lambda }=[F_\lambda \{\},],$$
(2)
with the initial condition set at $`\lambda =\mathrm{}`$, forcing the RG trajectory to start from the initial Hamiltonian, $`(\mathrm{})=H`$, of the bare theory with counterterms. The generator of the similarity transformation can be written as ($`𝒟_m=_{mm}`$)

$$\left[F_\lambda \{\}\right]_{mn}=f_{mn}(𝒟_m𝒟_n)_{mn},$$
(3)
where different choices of $`f_{mn}`$ lead to different results for the trajectory of effective Hamiltonians. $`f_{mn}=\varphi _{mn}ds/d\lambda `$, where $`s=1/\lambda ^2`$ and $`\varphi _{mn}1`$, gives Wegner’s equation, which has a considerable record of applications in solid state physics FW ; AMDC ; AM ; FWPR ; SM , independently of the similarity renormalization group studies of asymptotically free theories. Note also, that multiplication of $`\varphi _{mn}`$ by a constant, say $`a`$, is equivalent to change of variables from $`\lambda `$ to $`\lambda ^{}=\lambda /\sqrt{a}`$, and corresponds to mere shift on logarithmic scale.

Behavior of matrix elements $`_{mn}(\lambda )`$ as functions of $`\lambda `$ has already been extensively discussed in the case of Wegner’s generator in Ref. SGKW2 . For $`\varphi _{mn}`$ that is independent of $`\lambda `$, it can be qualitatively represented as

$`_{mn}(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`E_m\delta _{mn}g_\lambda \sqrt{E_mE_n}`$ (4)
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left[\varphi _{mn}(E_mE_n)^2/\lambda ^2\right],`$
where $`g_\lambda `$ is the effective coupling constant. The Gaussian-like fall-off function is not exact, but it is not far from the actual form factor that makes the interaction Hamiltonian matrix narrow on the energy scale, i.e., of width $`\lambda `$. It is clear that in the case of Eq. (4) the effective coupling constant could be evaluated from the following formula,

$$g_\lambda =1\frac{_{M,M}(\lambda )}{E_M}.$$
(5)
The same definition is applied in the case of exact solution. The resulting effective coupling $`g_\lambda `$ can be computed numerically in all cases considered here and its dependence on $`\lambda `$ is known, see Fig. 1.

For $`\lambda 1`$, one has $`g_\lambda 1/\mathrm{log}\lambda `$, and the growth of $`g_\lambda `$ toward smaller $`\lambda `$ continues in case of Wegner’s generator until the coupling constant slightly exceeds 1, which happens when the effective Hamiltonian width becomes comparable to the momentum-space width of the bound eigenstate wave function. For comparison, the optimized generator result is labeled $`c=1`$. It will be discussed later.

Near $`\lambda =1`$ GeV the bound state eigenvalue begins to build up on the diagonal of $``$, with participation of a limited number of neighboring matrix elements. The limitation comes from the size of $`\lambda `$ and the actual wave function width. Thus, when one extracts a sub-matrix from $`(\lambda 1)`$, which forms a window, $`W_\lambda `$, that embraces all matrix elements that count in the bound state dynamics, the diagonalization of that window alone can produce the right value of the bound state energy. This is shown in Figure 2 in case of Wegner’s equation for three different choices of the window matrix, i.e. for three different choices of $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{N}`$ that limit $`W_\lambda `$ in the same fashion as $`M`$ and $`N`$ limit $`H`$ in Eq. (1).

Figure 2 demonstrates that an exactly calculated small window may provide correct results when $`\lambda `$ is appropriately small, i.e. below about 4 GeV. The only problem is that the calculation of a window Hamiltonian with finite $`\lambda `$ in realistic theories is not feasible beyond perturbation theory. Thus, one is led to the question how well the same small windows can be calculated perturbatively. The question is of key importance to QCD because the region of $`\lambda 4`$ GeV is where a significant raise of the effective coupling constant $`g_\lambda `$ is expected. But the question may also be relevant in other areas of physics than strong interactions.

## III Perturbation Theory

This Section describes difficulties that similarity approach encounters with convergence of perturbation theory, treating the case with similarity transformation generator taken from Wegner’s flow equation as a benchmark, and shows how one can optimize the convergence by changing the generator. The quality of the perturbative expansions is established in the model by comparing the negative eigenvalue of perturbatively calculated windows $`W_\lambda `$ with the exact value of $`1`$ GeV.

Perturbation theory is constructed in the following way. First one writes a series for $`(\lambda )`$ in the form

$$(\lambda )=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}g^n^{(n)}(\lambda ),$$
(6)
where $`g`$ is the bare coupling constant from $`H`$ of Eq. (1). For example, in second order expansion the solution of Eq. (2) with $`\varphi _{mn}`$ independent of $`\lambda `$, reads

$`(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`E_m\delta _{mn}`$ (7)
$``$ $`g\sqrt{E_mE_n}\mathrm{exp}\left[\varphi _{mn}(E_mE_n)^2/\lambda ^2\right]`$
$`+`$ $`g^2\sqrt{E_mE_n}\mathrm{exp}\left[\varphi _{mn}(E_mE_n)^2/\lambda ^2\right]`$
$`\times `$ $`[{\displaystyle \underset{k=M}{\overset{N}{}}}E_k{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi _{mk}(E_mE_k)\varphi _{kn}(E_kE_n)}{A_{mnk}}}`$
$`\times `$ $`[1\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{A_{mnk}}{\lambda ^2}}\right)]2\varphi _{mn}{\displaystyle \frac{(E_mE_n)^2}{\lambda ^2}}]`$
$`+`$ $`corrections,`$
where

$`A_{mnk}`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{mk}(E_mE_k)^2+\varphi _{nk}(E_nE_k)^2`$ (8)
$``$ $`\varphi _{mn}(E_mE_n)^2,`$
and corrections are of higher order in $`g`$ than second. The latter terms are also calculable analytically in orders 3rd, 4th, and higher, but they are too complex to display here and hardly useful in the analytic form for numerical calculations in the present study, because they involve combinations of mutually canceling terms that contain ratios of functions that approach zero in numerator and denominator and require careful evaluation. Instead of such analytic expressions, which are discussed here only to demonstrate what the required expansion consists in, it is more practical in the model to apply a numerical algorithm and generate matrices $`^{(n)}(\lambda )`$ order by order through Runge-Kutta integration of $`(NM+1)(NM)/2`$ coupled non-linear differential equations.

Once the expansion of Eq. (6) is calculated to some order, one uses Eq. (5) to express $`g_\lambda `$ as a series in powers of $`g`$ to the same order and one inverts that series to obtain $`g`$ in the form of a new series in powers of $`g_\lambda `$ up to that same order. The latter series is then inserted into Eq. (6), which provides the desired effective coupling constant expansion for the whole matrix $`(\lambda )`$, i.e. the expansion in terms of powers of $`g_\lambda `$. Note that this procedure can be carried out without detailed analytic knowledge of how the matrices $`^{(n)}(\lambda )`$ depend on $`\lambda `$, although such knowledge and selection of relevant, marginal, and irrelevant matrices may be of great help in calculations with more than one coupling constant if one can reliably identify correlations among the couplings. In fact, the accuracy achieved here in plain perturbation theory can most probably be further enhanced using techniques similar to the ones employed in Ref. SP .

The accuracy of the perturbative procedure for evaluating effective Hamiltonians in case of Wegner’s equation, i.e. with $`\varphi _{mn}1`$, is shown in Fig. 3, in terms of the negative eigenvalues of a selected window $`W_\lambda `$. While the window matrix elements are evaluated in perturbation theory, the eigenvalues of the window are obtained from non-perturbative diagonalization. Note that the vertical axis has logarithmic scale. While the second order result produces about 10% accuracy after diagonalization, the next orders in the expansion are wrong by huge factors and completely unacceptable, including the fact that they render spurious negative eigenvalues. Since it is not known how to select the right negative eigenvalue of the windows obtained in third and fourth order calculation, all negative eigenvalues of the windows are displayed, labeled with the number that indicates the order of the expansion for $`W_\lambda `$.

The window $`W_\lambda `$ used in Fig. 3 was selected on the basis of results analogous to those shown in Fig. 2. An arbitrarily set requirement was adopted, that a good window should produce the negative eigenvalue with accuracy around 0.5 percent for $`4\lambda 1`$ when calculated exactly. The 0.5% may be considered a large error but it is introduced taking into account that low order perturbation theory for $`W_\lambda `$ is expected to lead to much larger errors. The bound state energies calculated by diagonalization of exact windows with different values of $`\stackrel{~}{N}`$ and one value of $`\stackrel{~}{M}=8`$ are shown in Figure 2. It is clear that one should choose $`\stackrel{~}{N}=2`$ to make sure that the correct result is contained in the window of choice when $`\lambda 4`$. For $`\stackrel{~}{N}`$ kept equal 2 at $`\lambda =2`$, one obtains the eigenvalue $`9.9599`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{M}=8`$, $`9.9199`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{M}=7`$, and $`9.8398`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{M}=6`$. Therefore, $`\stackrel{~}{M}=8`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{N}=2`$ were selected in Fig. 3.

The summary of results obtained for $`W_\lambda `$ from the perturbative expansion of Wegner’s equation is that the expansion produces accuracy on the order of 10% in second order but completely fails in higher orders. Therefore, it is important to verify what happens when one considers $`f_{mn}`$ with $`\varphi _{mn}1`$ in Eq. (3). Two basic options can be considered. One is to make $`\varphi _{mn}>1`$, which accelerates changes in the matrix elements $`_{mn}(\lambda )`$ as functions of $`\lambda `$, and the other is to make $`\varphi _{mn}<1`$, which slows down the changes.

Numerical calculations show that the acceleration with a factor of the type $`\varphi _{mn}=1+c|mn|`$ with $`c`$ ranging between 0.01 and 100 does not change the erratic behavior of the window to any better. In contrast, slowing down the evolution by the factor of the type

$$\varphi _{mn}=\frac{1}{1+cmn},$$
(9)
produces significant improvements. The type of results one obtains from the slowed down similarity transformation is illustrated by an example in Fig. 4, using Eq. (9) with $`c=1`$. In this case, one obtains only one negative eigenvalue in the range $`[2,0]`$ (no spurious negative eigenvalues appear in that range). Moreover, the accuracy of the eigenvalue calculated by diagonalization of the fourth order window reaches 3%, which is unattainable using Wegner’s generator.

The particular choice of $`c=1`$ follows from the observation that 4th order results are less accurate than the 3rd order for $`c0.5`$, while for $`c2`$ no further improvement is obtained in the accuracy of the 4th order terms. Figure 4 shows also results of including orders 5th and 6th for $`c=1`$. Inclusion of 6th order contribution achieves the accuracy of 1% for the bound state eigenvalue, which is 10 times better than with the Wegner generator. Since the contribution of 6th order is larger than 5th, one may consider larger $`c`$, around $`2`$, to obtain a more systematic inclusion of successive orders as required. This issue will not be further discussed here, since already the 4th order of rigorous perturbation theory (two loops) for effective Hamiltonians in QCD is currently not known.

Finally, one has to address the issue of renormalizability since for $`c\mathrm{}`$ the similarity transformation generator approaches zero within the bounds set by the ultraviolet cutoff $`N`$ and no RG evolution occurs. The question is then how strongly the effective window Hamiltonians $`W_\lambda `$ for $`c1`$ and $`\lambda 4`$ GeV, depend on $`N`$. This can be studied by inspection of examples and the result is that the generator with $`c=1`$ produces considerably more efficient approach to renormalized effective theory than Wegner’s. The measure of how quickly the renormalized effective theory is achieved is found by evaluating 64 matrix elements of the exact window $`W_\lambda `$ with $`\stackrel{~}{M}=4`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{N}=3`$ for $`N=16`$, and for $`N=20`$. These matrix elements are most important in the formation of bound-state in the effective dynamics. In both cases the bare coupling constant is adjusted to produce the same bound state eigenvalue of -1 (one obtains $`g=0.04878048667`$ in the case $`N=20`$). Then, one evaluates

$$r^2(\lambda )=\frac{1}{(\stackrel{~}{N}\stackrel{~}{M})^2}\underset{m,n=\stackrel{~}{M}}{\overset{\stackrel{~}{N}}{}}\left[\frac{W_{\lambda mn}(N=16)}{W_{\lambda mn}(N=20)}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}1}\right]^2,$$
(10)
in the range of $`\lambda `$ between 4 and 1 GeV where, as indicated by Figs. 3 and 4, the chosen window is most suitable for diagonalization. One cannot rely on a comprison at one value of $`\lambda `$ because, as it is visible in Fig. 1, the formation of bound states occurs in Wegner’s case ($`c=0`$) and for $`c0`$ at different values of $`\lambda `$, being shifted toward smaller values of $`\lambda `$ for $`c=1`$. It turns out that the resulting measure $`r(\lambda )`$ for the Wegner generator varies between $`10^5`$ and $`10^4`$, with numerical accuracy being of significance, while for $`c=1`$ one obtains a numerically stable result, approximately equal $`10^6`$ in the whole range between 4 and 1 GeV.

The utility of logarithmic (i.e. depending on exponents $`m`$ and $`n`$ of the base $`b`$) slowing down of RG evolution of the off-diagonal matrix elements originates from two sources. One is the smaller size of the effective coupling constant in the region where the bound state is formed, as seen in Fig. 1. For example, at $`\lambda =2`$ GeV, in Wegner’s case $`g_\lambda =0.72373722`$, and the slowed down case with $`c=1`$ gives $`g_\lambda =0.28518167`$, which is about 2.5 times smaller and produces about 40 times smaller result for $`g_\lambda ^4`$. The other source is that coefficients of the perturbative series in powers of $`g_\lambda `$ for matrix elements of $`(\lambda )`$ derived with slower generator are not growing with the order as they do in Wegner’s case. This is illustrated in Tab. 1 on two generic examples. Namely, the matrix elements of coefficient matrices $`a_i`$ with $`i=0`$, 1, 2, 3, and 4, in

$$(\lambda )=a_0+a_1g_\lambda +a_2g_\lambda ^2+a_3g_\lambda ^3+a_4g_\lambda ^4+...,$$
(11)
are tabulated for $`(m,n)`$ equal $`(1,1)`$ and $`(2,1)`$ at $`\lambda =2`$ GeV, in Wegner’s case and for $`c=1`$, as indicated. It is visible that the ratios $`a_4/a_3`$ are about an order of magnitude smaller in size for $`c=1`$ than in Wegner’s case.

## IV Conclusion

Similarity renormalization group approach to solving asymptotically free theories could employ various generators of the similarity transformation to calculate effective Hamiltonians. The calculation can be carried out in perturbation theory and then the Hamiltonians can be diagonalized using computers with a reasonable chance for obtaining accurate answers, if the perturbative procedure for evaluating effective Hamiltonians is sufficiently precise. It was shown here, using Wegner’s generator as a benchmark, that in order to obtain stable 3% accuracy in the bound state spectrum one needs to slow down the rate of elimination of the off-diagonal matrix elements. In the model study, the rate of change of bare Hamiltonian matrix elements with largest energy changes was slowed down 38 times. The stabilizing effect of slowing down the RG flow is evident from comparison of Figs. 3 and 4. Perturbation theory including sixth order terms with $`c=1`$ in Eq. (9) achieved 1% accuracy in evaluating effective dynamics, as measured by the bound state eigenvalue.

However, there is a stiff price to pay. Namely, the second order perturbative expansions with slower generators produce only about 30% accuracy, in comparison to 10% in Wegner’s case, and to take advantage of the improved convergence one has to go to higher orders, which requires considerably more effort. On the other hand, orders higher than second are not attainable using Wegner’s generator, and the outstanding accuracy of about 10%, achievable already in the second order, cannot be improved by including higher orders in a plain expansion in one running coupling constant. Moreover, the slower generator with $`c=1`$ leads also to less sensitivity of the numerically evaluated effective theory to the bare cutoff, when the latter is kept large but finite.

Detailed studies will disclose how much work is actually required to achieve the few-percent accuracy with realistic Hamiltonians. However, the model study described here shows already that optimization of the similarity generator may in principle lead to a desired convergence pattern in the case of bound states in asymptotically free theories. Perhaps, the optimization found here may turn out to be useful also in other applications of similarity than QCD.


format: text

text:
# CHIRAL SYMMETRY RESTORATION IN HADRON SPECTRA *footnote **footnote *Invited talk given at International School on Nuclear Physics ”Quarks in Hadrons and Nuclei”,16th -24th September 2002, Erice/Sicily/Italy; to appear in Progr. Part. Nucl. Phys., vol. 50

## I Chiral symmetry restoration of the second kind

It has recently been suggested that the parity doublet structure seen in the spectrum of highly excited baryons may be due to effective chiral symmetry restoration for these states . This phenomenon can be understood in very general terms from the validity of the operator product expansion (OPE) in QCD at large space-like momenta and the validity of the dispersion relation for the two-point correlator, which connects the spacelike and timelike regions (i.e. the validity of Källen-Lehmann representation) .

Consider a two-point correlator $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{J_\alpha }`$ of the current $`J_\alpha (x)`$ (that creates from the vacuum the hadrons with the quantum numbers $`\alpha `$) at large spacelike momenta $`Q^2`$, where the language of quarks and gluons is adequate and where the OPE is valid. The only effect that chiral symmetry breaking can have on the correlator is through the nonzero value of condensates associated with operators which are chirally active (i.e. which transform nontrivially under chiral transformations). To these belong $`\overline{q}q`$ and higher dimensional condensates that are not invariant under axial transformation. At large $`Q^2`$ only a small number of condensates need be retained to get an accurate description of the correlator. Contributions of these condensates are suppressed by inverse powers of $`Q^2`$. At asymptotically high $`Q^2`$, the correlator is well described by a single term—the perturbative term. The essential thing to note from this OPE analysis is that the perturbative contribution knows nothing about chiral symmetry breaking as it contains no chirally nontrivial condensates. In other words, though the chiral symmetry is broken in the vacuum and all chiral noninvariant condensates are not zero, their influence on the correlator at asymptotically high $`Q^2`$ vanishes. This is in contrast to the situation of low values of $`Q^2`$, where the role of chiral condensates is crucial.

This shows that at large spacelike momenta the correlation function becomes chirally symmetric. In other words, two correlators $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{J_1}(Q^2)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{J_2}(Q^2)`$, where $`J_1=UJ_2U^{}`$, $`USU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$, become essentially the same at large $`Q^2`$. The dispersion relation provides a connection between the spacelike and timelike domains. In particular, the large $`Q^2`$ correlator is completely dominated by the large $`s`$ spectral density $`\rho (s)`$. (The spectral density has the physical interpretation of being proportional to the probability density that the current when acting on the vacuum creates a state of a mass of $`\sqrt{s}`$.) Hence the large $`s`$ spectral density must be insensitive to the chiral symmetry breaking in the vacuum. I.e. $`\rho _1(s)`$ and $`\rho _2(s)`$ must coincide at asymptotically large $`s`$. This is in contrast to the low $`s`$ spectral functions which are crucially dependent on the quark condensates in the vacuum. This manifests a smooth chiral symmetry restoration from the low-lying spectrum, where the chiral symmetry breaking in the vacuum is crucial for physics, to the high-lying spectrum, where chiral symmetry breaking becomes irrelevant and the spectrum is chirally symmetric.

Microscopically this is because the typical momenta of valence quarks should increase higher in the spectrum and once it is high enough the valence quarks decouple from the chiral condensates of the QCD vacuum and the dynamical (quasiparticle or constituent) mass of quarks drops off and the chiral symmetry gets restored . This phenomenon does not mean that the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry in the QCD vacuum disappears, but rather that the chiral asymmetry of the vacuum becomes irrelevant sufficiently high in the spectrum. The physics of the highly excited states is such as if there were no chiral symmetry breaking in the vacuum. One of the consequences is that the concept of constituent quarks (which are directly related to the quark condensates of the QCD vacuum), which is adequate low in the spectrum, becomes irrelevant high in the spectrum.

How should one refer to such a phenomenon? Typically under chiral symmetry restoration people understand that the chiral properties of the vacuum are changed with temperature or/and density. E.g. at critical temperature the phase transition occurs and the quark vacuum becomes trivial: all the quark condensates of the vacuum vanish. On the contrary, in our case one does not affect the QCD vacuum by exciting the hadrons. The symmetry restoration is achieved via different mechanism. Namely, by exciting the hadrons one decouples the valence degrees of freedom from the QCD vacuum. So even if the quark condensates of the vacuum (which break the chiral symmetry) are not zero, their role gets smaller and smaller once we go up in the spectrum and smoothly the chiral symmetry gets restored. We can refer to such a phenomenon as chiral symmetry restoration of the second kind.

All this is in a very good analogy with the similar phenomenon in condensed matter physics. Consider a metal which is in a superconducting phase. There is a condensation of the Cooper pairs - which is analogous to the condensation of right-left quark pairs in the QCD vacuum - and as a consequence the low-lying excitations of the system are the excitations of quasiparticles - which are analogous to the constituent quarks in the low-lying hadrons. Now we want to study this superconductor by external probe, e.g. by photons. If we probe the superconductor by the low-energy photons $`\mathrm{}\omega \mathrm{\Delta }`$, then the condensation of the Cooper pairs and the quasiparticle structure of the low-lying excitations are of crucial importance. One clearly sees a gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and a quasiparticle structure in the response functions. However, if one probes the same superconductor by the high-energy photons $`\mathrm{}\omega \mathrm{\Delta }`$, then the response of the superconductor is the same as of the normal metal - the high energy photons do not see quasiparticles and instead they are absorbed by the bare electrons. This is because the long-range phase coherent correlations in the superconductor become irrelevant in this case and the external probe sees a bare particle rather than a quasiparticle. Similar, in the QCD case in order to create a hadron of a large mass one has to probe the QCD vacuum by the high energy (frequency) external probe (current) and hence the physics (masses) of the highly excited hadrons should be insensitive to the condensation of the chiral pairs in the vacuum.

## II A simple pedagogical example

It is instructive to consider a very simple quantum mechanical example of symmetry restoration high in the spectrum. Though there are conceptual differences between the field theory with spontaneous symmetry breaking and the one-particle quantum mechanics (where only explicit symmetry breaking is possible), nevertheless this simple example illustrates how this general phenomenon comes about.

The example we consider is a two-dimensional harmonic oscillator. We choose the harmonic oscillator only for simplicity; the property that will be discussed below is quite general one and can be seen in other systems. The Hamiltonian of the system is invariant under $`U(2)=SU(2)\times U(1)`$ transformations. This symmetry has profound consequences on the spectrum of the system. The energy levels of this system are trivially found and are given by

$$E_{N,m}=(N+\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1});m=N,N2,N4,\mathrm{},(N2),N,$$
(1)
where $`N`$ is the principle quantum number and m is the (two dimensional) angular momentum. As a consequence of the symmetry, the levels are $`(N+1)`$-fold degenerate.

Now suppose we add to the Hamiltonian a $`SU(2)`$ symmetry breaking interaction (but which is still $`U(1)`$ invariant) of the form

$$V_{\mathrm{SB}}=A\theta (rR),$$
(2)
where $`A`$ and $`R`$ are parameters and $`\theta `$ is the step function. Clearly, $`V_{\mathrm{SB}}`$ is not invariant under the $`SU(2)`$ transformation. Thus the $`SU(2)`$ symmetry is explicitly broken by this additional interaction, that acts only within a circle of radius $`R`$. As a result one would expect that the eigenenergies will not reflect the degeneracy structure of seen in eq. (1) if the coefficients $`R,A`$ are sufficiently large. Indeed, we have solved numerically for the eigenstates for the case of $`A=4`$ and $`R=1`$ in dimensionless units and one does not see a multiplet structure in the low-lying spectrum as can be seen in Fig. 1.

What is interesting for the present context is the high-lying spectrum. In Fig. 1 we have also plotted the energies between 70 and 74 for a few of the lower $`m`$’s. A multiplet structure is quite evident—to very good approximation the states of different $`m`$’s form degenerate multiplets and, although we have not shown this in the figure these multiplets extend in $`m`$ up to $`m=N`$.

How does this happen? The symmetry breaking interaction plays a dominant role in the spectroscopy for small energies. Indeed, at small excitation energies the system is mostly located at distances where the symmetry breaking interaction acts and where it is dominant. Hence the low-lying spectrum to a very large extent is motivated by the symmetry breaking interaction. However, at high excitation energies the system mostly lives at large distances, where physics is dictated by the unperturbed harmonic oscillator. Hence at higher energies the spectroscopy reveals the $`SU(2)`$ symmetry of the two-dimensional harmonic oscillator.

## III Implications for baryon spectra

If chiral symmetry restoration of the second kind happens in the regime where the spectrum is still quasidescrete (i.e. the successive excitations with the given spin are well separated), then the symmetry restoration imposes very strong constraints on the spectrum, which will be discussed below. A question then arises as to which extent and where the hadron spectrum is still quasidescrete? Clearly it is the case for the low-lying resonances. However, the resonances with the given spin are still well separated in the mass region $`M2`$ GeV and higher, which can be seen from the nucleon spectrum, see Fig. 2, as well as from the meson spectrum . In addition, if the linear-like behaviour of both angular ($`M^2J`$) and radial ($`M^2n`$, where $`n`$ numerates radial excitations of the states with the given spin) Regge trajectories is valid up to large masses, then the spectrum should be still quasidescrete in the region of validity of Regge phenomenology.

What are the implications of the chiral symmetry restoration for a quasidiscrete spectrum? The equality of the spectral functions $`\rho _1(s)`$ and $`\rho _2(s)`$ means that both masses $`m_1`$ and $`m_2`$ as well as the amplitudes $`0|J_1|n_1`$ and $`0|J_2|n_2`$ coincide for all the successive radial excitations. In other words, the excited states must fill in the irreducible representations of the parity-chiral group . Thus the task is to find all possible representations of the $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ group that are compatible with the definite parity of the physical state. We emphasize parity because the irreducible representations of the chiral group $`(I_L,I_R)`$ ( with $`I_L`$ and $`I_R`$ being isospins of the left and right subgroups) are not generally eigenstates of the parity operator, because under parity operation the left quarks transform into the right ones and vice versa. However, a direct sum of two irreducible representations $`(I_L,I_R)(I_R,I_L)`$ does contain eigenstates of the parity operator and hence the corresponding multiplet should be considered as a set of basis states for physical hadrons. What crucially important is that such a multiplet necessarily includes baryons with opposite parity.

Since the total isospin $`I`$ of a baryon can be obtained from the left and right isospins $`I_L`$ and $`I_R`$ according to a standard angular momentum addition rules and since there are no baryons with isospin greater than 3/2, one immediately obtains the following allowed parity-chiral multiplets $`(1/2,0)(0,1/2)`$, $`(3/2,0)(0,3/2)`$, $`(1/2,1)(1,1/2)`$. The first multiplet corresponds to parity doublets of any spin in the nucleon spectrum. The second one describes the parity doublets of any spin in the delta spectrum. However, the latter multiplet combines one parity doublet in the nucleon spectrum with the parity doublet in the delta spectrum with the same spin.

Summarizing, the phenomenological consequence of the chiral symmetry restoration of the second kind high in $`N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ spectra is that the baryon states will fill out the irreducible representations of the parity-chiral group. If $`(1/2,0)(0,1/2)`$ and $`(3/2,0)(0,3/2)`$ multiplets were realized in nature, then the spectra of highly excited nucleons and deltas would consist of parity doublets. However, the parity doublet with given spin in the nucleon spectrum a-priori would not be degenerate with the doublet with the same spin in the delta spectrum; these doublets would belong to different representations , i.e. to distinct multiplets and their energies are not related. On the other hand, if $`(1/2,1)(1,1/2)`$ were realized, then the high-lying states in $`N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ spectrum would have a $`N`$ parity doublet and a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ parity doublet with the same spin and which are degenerate in mass. In either of cases the high-lying spectrum must systematically consist of parity doublets. We stress that this classification is the most general one and does not rely on any model assumption about the structure of baryons. What is interesting is that the same classification can be trivially obtained if one assumes that the chiral properties of baryons in the chirally restored regime are determined by three massless valence quarks.

Now we have to analyze an empirical spectrum of baryons in order to see whether there are signs of chiral symmetry restoration. What is immediately evident from the empirical low-lying spectrum is that positive and negative parity states with the same spin are not nearly degenerate. Even more, there is no one-to-one mapping of positive and negative parity states of the same spin with masses below 1.7 GeV. This means that one cannot describe the low-lying spectrum as consisting of sets of chiral partners. It is not so surprising since the low-lying spectrum is mostly driven by the chiral symmetry breaking effects. The absence of parity doublets low in the spectrum is one of the most direct pieces of evidence that chiral symmetry in QCD is spontaneously broken (and very strongly).

Starting at the mass $`M1.7`$ GeV one observes three almost perfect parity doublets with spins $`J=1/2,3/2,5/2`$. It is important that all these states are well established and have \**** or \*** status according to PDG classification. The next excitations with the same quantum numbers are not yet established though existing crude data support parity doubling phenomenon. The lowest excitations with spin 9/2 are also well established states and they represent another good example of parity doubling. There are well established states with $`J=7/2`$ and $`J=11/2`$ where the chiral partners have not yet been identified. According to a chiral symmetry restoration scenario they must exist. So it is a very interesting and important experimental task to find such states as well as to clear up a situation for $`J=1/2,3/2,5/2`$ resonances around 2 GeV.

In the delta spectrum there are also obvious parity doublets starting from the mass region 1.9 - 2 GeV. Again, there are well established states (like $`J^P=7/2^+`$ at 1950 MeV) where the chiral partner has not yet been identified. So similar to the nucleon spectrum, the upper part of the delta spectrum must be experimentally explored.

## IV Implications for meson spectra

Recent data on highly excited mesons also suggest an evidence for chiral symmetry restoration in hadron spectra . Consider, as an example, the pseudoscalar and scalar mesons $`\pi ,f_0,a_0,\eta `$ within the two-flavor QCD. The corresponding currents (interpolating fields) $`J_\pi (x)`$, $`J_{f_0}(x)`$,$`J_{a_0}(x)`$ and $`J_\eta (x)`$ belong to the $`(1/2,1/2)(1/2,1/2)`$ irreducible representation of the $`U(2)_L\times U(2)_R=SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R\times U(1)_V\times U(1)_A`$ group. Specifically the pairs $`(J_\pi (x)`$, $`J_{f_0}(x))`$ and $`(J_{a_0}(x),J_\eta (x))`$ form the basis of the $`(1/2,1/2)`$ representation of the chiral group $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$. If the vacuum were invariant with respect to $`U(2)_L\times U(2)_R`$ transformations, then all four mesons, $`\pi ,f_0,a_0`$ and $`\overline{\eta }`$ would be degenerate (as well as all their excited states). Once the $`U(1)_A`$ symmetry is broken explicitly through the axial anomaly, but the chiral $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ symmetry is still intact in the vacuum, then the spectrum would consist of degenerate $`(\pi ,f_0)`$ and $`(a_0,\overline{\eta })`$ pairs.$`\overline{\eta }`$ represents the two-flavor singlet state; its mass for the lowest mesons can be extracted from the physical $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ states. If in addition the chiral $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ symmetry is spontaneously broken in the vacuum, the degeneracy is also lifted in the pairs above and the pion becomes a (pseudo)Goldstone boson. Indeed, the masses of the lowest mesons are

$$m_\pi 140MeV,m_{f_0}4001200MeV,m_{a_0}985MeV,m_{\overline{\eta }}782MeV.$$

This immediately tells that both $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ and $`U(1)_V\times U(1)_A`$ are broken in the QCD vacuum to $`SU(2)_I`$ and $`U(1)_V`$, respectively.

Systematic data on highly excited mesons are still missing in the PDG tables. We will use recent results of the partial wave analysis of mesonic resonances from 1.8 GeV to 2.4 GeV obtained in $`p\overline{p}`$ annihilation at LEAR, see Table below. We note that the $`f_0`$ state at $`2102\pm 13`$ MeV is not considered by the authors as a $`q\overline{q}`$ state (but rather as a candidate for glueball) because of its very unusual decay properties and very large mixing angle. This is in contrast to all other $`f_0`$ mesons in this region, for which the mixing angles are small. Therefore these mesons are regarded as predominantly $`u,d=n`$ states. Hence, in the following we will exclude the $`f_0`$ state at $`2102\pm 13`$ from our analysis which applies only to $`n\overline{n}`$ states.

| Meson | I | $`J^P`$ | Mass (MeV) | Width (MeV) | Reference |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`f_0`$ | 0 | $`0^+`$ | $`1770\pm 12`$ | $`220\pm 40`$ |  |
| $`f_0`$ | 0 | $`0^+`$ | $`2040\pm 38`$ | $`405\pm 40`$ |  |
| $`f_0`$ | 0 | $`0^+`$ | $`2102\pm 13`$ | $`211\pm 29`$ |  |
| $`f_0`$ | 0 | $`0^+`$ | $`2337\pm 14`$ | $`217\pm 33`$ |  |
| $`\eta `$ | 0 | $`0^{}`$ | $`2010_{60}^{+35}`$ | $`270\pm 60`$ |  |
| $`\eta `$ | 0 | $`0^{}`$ | $`2285\pm 20`$ | $`325\pm 30`$ |  |
| $`\pi `$ | 1 | $`0^{}`$ | $`1801\pm 13`$ | $`210\pm 15`$ |  |
| $`\pi `$ | 1 | $`0^{}`$ | $`2070\pm 35`$ | $`310_{50}^{+100}`$ |  |
| $`\pi `$ | 1 | $`0^{}`$ | $`2360\pm 25`$ | $`300_{50}^{+100}`$ |  |
| $`a_0`$ | 1 | $`0^+`$ | $`2025\pm \mathrm{?}`$ | $`320\pm \mathrm{?}`$ |  |

The prominent feature of the data is an approximate degeneracy of the three highest states in the pion spectrum with the three highest states in the $`f_0`$ spectrum:

$$\pi (1801\pm 13)f_0(1770\pm 12),$$
(3)
$$\pi (2070\pm 35)f_0(2040\pm 38),$$
(4)
$$\pi (2360\pm 25)f_0(2337\pm 14).$$
(5)
This can be considered as a manifestation of chiral symmetry restoration high in the spectra. The approximate degeneracy of these physical states indicates that the chiral $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ transformation properties of the corresponding currents are not violated by the vacuum. This means that the chiral symmetry breaking of the vacuum becomes irrelevant for the high-lying states and the physical states above form approximately the chiral pairs in the $`(1/2,1/2)`$ representation of the chiral group. The physics of the high-lying hadrons is such as if there were no spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking.

A similar behaviour is observed from a comparison of the $`a_0`$ and $`\eta `$ masses high in the spectra:

$$a_0(2025\pm \mathrm{?})\eta (2010_{60}^{+35}).$$
(6)
Upon examining the experimental data more carefully one notices not only a degeneracy in the chiral pairs, but also an approximate degeneracy in $`U(1)_A`$ pairs $`(\pi ,a_0)`$ and $`(f_0,\eta )`$ (in those cases where the states are established). If so, one can preliminary conclude that not only the chiral $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ symmetry is restored, but the whole $`U(2)_L\times U(2)_R`$ symmetry of the QCD Lagrangian. Then the approximate $`(1/2,1/2)(1/2,1/2)`$ multiplets of this group are given by:

$$\pi (1801\pm 13)f_0(1770\pm 12)a_0(\mathrm{?})\eta (\mathrm{?});$$
(7)
$$\pi (2070\pm 35)f_0(2040\pm 40)a_0(2025\pm \mathrm{?})\eta (2010_{60}^{+35});$$
(8)
$$\pi (2360\pm 25)f_0(2337\pm 14)a_0(\mathrm{?})\eta (2285\pm 20).$$
(9)
This preliminary conclusion would be strongly supported by a discovery of the missing $`a_0`$ meson in the mass region around 2.3 GeV as well as by the missing $`a_0`$ and $`\eta `$ mesons in the 1.8 GeV region. That these missing mesons should indeed exist is also supported by the hypothesis of the linear radial Regge trajectories for highly excited states . We have to stress, that the $`U(1)_A`$ restoration high in the spectra does not mean that the axial anomaly of QCD vanishes, but rather that the specific gluodynamics (e.g. instantons) that are related to the anomaly become unimportant there. It should also be emphasized that the only restoration of $`U(1)_V\times U(1)_A`$ symmetry (without the $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$) is impossible. This was discussed in ref. . The reason is that even if the effects of the explicit $`U(1)_A`$ symmetry breaking via the axial anomaly vanish, the $`U(1)_V\times U(1)_A`$ would still be spontaneously broken once the $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ were spontaneously broken. This is because the same quark condensates in the QCD vacuum that break $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ do also break $`U(1)_V\times U(1)_A`$.

## V Implications for modeling of hadrons

It is quite natural to assume that the physics of the highly excited hadrons is due to confinement in QCD. If so it follows that the confining gluodynamics is still important in the regime where chiral symmetry breaking in the vacuum has become irrelevant. Then it follows that the mechanisms of confinement and chiral symmetry breaking in QCD are not the same.

The phenomenon of chiral symmetry restoration high in the spectra rules out the potential description of high-lying hadrons in the spirit of the constituent quark model. Clearly, the chiral symmetry restoration by itself implies that constituent quarks as effective degree of freedom (whose mass is directly related to spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking in the vacuum) become inadequate high in the spectrum, though it is a fruitful concept for the low-lying hadrons. That the potential description is incompatible with the parity doubling is also seen from the following.

Consider, for instance, mesons. Within the potential description of mesons the parity of the state is unambiguously prescribed by the relative orbital angular momentum $`L`$ of quarks. For example, all the states on the radial pion Regge trajectory are $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ $`q\overline{q}`$ states, while the members of the $`f_0`$ trajectory are the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ states. Clearly, such a picture cannot explain the systematical parity doubling as it would require that the stronger centrifugal repulsion in the case of $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ mesons (as compared to the $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ ones) as well as the strong and attractive spin-spin force in the case of $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ states (as compared to the weak spin-spin force in the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ channel) must systematically lead to an approximate degeneracy for all radial states. This is very improbable. Similar conclusions can be easily obtained for baryons . More generally, the chiral symmetry restoration of the second kind is in contradiction with all models where chiral symmetry breaking is induced by confinement.

The potential picture also implies strong spin-orbit interactions between quarks while the spin-orbit splittings are absent or very small for excited mesons and baryons in the $`u,d`$ sector. The strong spin-orbit interactions inevitably follow from the Thomas precession (once the confinement is described through a scalar confining potential) Note also that a scalar potential explicitly breaks the chiral symmetry in contradiction to the requirement that the chiral symmetry must be restored high in the spectra., and this very strong spin-orbit force must be practically exactly compensated by other strong spin-orbit force from e.g. the one-gluon-exchange interaction in this picture. In principle such a cancellation could be provided by tuning the parameters for some specific (sub)families of mesons. However, in this case the spin-orbit forces become very strong for other (sub)families. This is a famous spin-orbit problem of constituent quark model.

This picture should be contrasted with the string description of highly excited hadrons . Within the latter one these hadrons are the relativistic strings (with the color-electric field in the string) with practically massless bare quarks at the ends; these massless quarks are combined into parity-chiral multiplets. The string picture is compatible with the chiral symmetry restoration because there always exists a solution for the right-handed and left-handed quarks at the end of the string with exactly the same energy and total angular momentum. Since the nonperturbative field in the string is pure electric and the electric field is ”flavor-blind”, the string dynamics itself is not sensitive to the specific flavor of a light quark once the chiral limit is taken. This picture explains the empirical parity-doubling because for every intrinsic quantum state of the string there necessarily appears parity doubling of the states with the same total angular momentum of hadron. Hence the string picture is compatible not only with the $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ restoration, but more generally with the $`U(2)_L\times U(2)_R`$ one. In addition, there is no spin-orbit force at all once the chiral symmetry is restored. This is because the helicity operator does not commute with the spin-orbit operator and a motion of a quark with the fixed helicity is not affected by the spin-orbit force.


text:
# BNL-71005-2003-JASUNY-NTG-02/33 Melting the Diquark Condensate in Two-Color QCD: A Renormalization Group Analysis

## I Introduction

During the last few years, a considerable amount of interest has been devoted to the phases of QCD at a nonzero baryonic chemical potential $`\mu `$. Based on either one-gluon exchange or instanton induced interactions, there are compelling theoretical indications that a direct attractive quark-quark channel gives rise to diquark condensation at asymptotically large $`\mu `$, similar in spirit to the BCS-scenario . In particular, very dense quark matter is unstable to the formation of a diquark condensate, and thus is generally believed to be a color superconductor at large $`\mu `$. The QCD-based predictions rely on perturbation theory and are trustworthy when the coupling constant is small, $`g(\mu )1`$, i.e. $`\mu \mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$ is the hadronic scale (see ). To analytically study the properties of QCD at more moderate densities, where the quark chemical potential is only a few times $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$, one has to rely on other methods. For instance, one can resort to phenomenological models that are inspired by, but not derived from, QCD. An alternative approach would be to use numerical simulations, since lattice gauge theory is a first-principle method capable of making quantitative predictions of strong-coupling QCD. At $`T>0`$ and $`\mu =0`$, the numerical results show that there is a phase transition between the confined and deconfined phases of pure glue matter, at a critical temperature $`T_c270`$ MeV . With massless quarks, there is a transition to a chirally symmetric phase at $`T_c155175`$ MeV , and recent simulations also show that deconfinement occurs simultaneously with the chiral phase transition . However, at a nonzero chemical potential the results have so far been very limited, due to the severe problems lattice gauge theory encounters at nonzero $`\mu `$. These difficulties arise from the fact that the action in the SU(3) gauge theory becomes complex-valued when $`\mu 0`$ , which in turn inhibits the importance sampling in the Monte-Carlo method. Although different computational schemes have been implemented  the problem with large–scale simulations at nonzero chemical remains unsettled.

For $`N_c=2`$, the situation is much more favorable for numerical simulations. In this case, the fundamental representation is pseudoreal, and as a consequence the lattice measure remains real-valued even at $`\mu 0`$ . Since the fermion determinant is real, it is possible to perform lattice calculations for an even number of flavors using the standard Monte-Carlo algorithms. Although two-color QCD is worthwhile to study in its own right, the fact that it is a four-dimensional, confining non-Abelian theory makes it particularly interesting as a toy model for real QCD. Naturally, some caution is needed, since while there are some important commonalities between two– and three–color QCD, there are some striking differences. For example, hadron spectroscopy will be completely unrelated since for $`N_c=2`$ two quarks can form a color singlet. Likewise, the diquark condensate is a color singlet for $`N_c=2`$, while for $`N_c=3`$ it is not. Finally, in contrast to the color superconducting state of dense quark matter for $`N_c=3`$, diquark condensation for $`N_c=2`$ only gives rise to superfluidity.

Despite these differences, two-color QCD is still useful for testing general ideas and comparing analytical calculations with lattice simulations. Indeed, early lattice studies of two-color QCD yielded interesting results at both nonzero chemical potential and temperature . In recent years, an extensive numerical program has been undertaken and a consistent picture of two–color QCD at nonzero $`T`$ and $`\mu `$ has emerged . For $`T=0`$, as the chemical potential is increased, a colorless diquark condensate, $`\psi \psi `$, forms at $`\mu _cm_\pi /2`$, where $`m_\pi `$ is the pion mass. For $`\mu \mu _c`$, the condensate spontaneously breaks baryon number and gives rise to superfluidity. This phase transition is most likely second order, at least for one and two flavors of staggered quarks for which the simulations have been performed. Alternatively, two–color QCD can be studied analytically using chiral perturbation theory. This effective theory describes the dynamics of the Goldstone modes associated with the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry and is valid for energies well below the chiral symmetry breaking scale. In particular, the critical baryonic chemical potential, $`\mu _c=m_\pi /2`$, is well within the effective range and indeed the onset of baryon density and diquark condensation at zero temperature is fully understood in this context at both the classical  and one–loop level . The analytical predictions agree well with the lattice results, thus further strengthening our current understanding as well as showing the great utility of having both analytical and numerical tools available.

Although the different phases and associated phase transitions at $`T=0`$ and $`\mu 0`$ have been investigated in some detail, less is known about the phase structure of two–color QCD in the $`(\mu ,T)`$-plane. Analytical results employing renormalization group arguments for the chiral symmetry restoring phase transition at nonzero temperature but vanishing chemical potential were presented in Ref. , and the phase diagram at nonzero $`T`$ and $`\mu `$ has been studied within a random matrix model . On the lattice, simulations corresponding to $`N_f=4`$ continuum flavors indicate that as $`T`$ increases at a fixed moderate ratio $`x=2\mu /m_\pi `$, the system undergoes a second order phase transition where $`\psi \psi `$ vanishes . As this ratio increases, this line of second order phase transitions passes through a tricritical point and the phase transition becomes first order . Recently the one loop calculation within chiral perturbation theory was extended to nonzero temperature , and the temperature dependence of the critical chemical potential for $`\mu m_\pi /2`$ was calculated. Furthermore, the presence of a tricritical endpoint of this line of second order phase transitions was confirmed. The tricritical point was predicted to occur at $`Tm_\pi `$  in qualitative agreement with the lattice results .

In this paper we further study the phase diagram at nonzero temperature and baryonic chemical potential by using a Landau theory combined with one–loop renormalization group arguments . The Landau theory is fundamentally different from the chiral perturbation theory analysis in that it attempts to include all modes which become massless at the critical temperature. In addition to being a different approach, we are also considering a different range of the $`(\mu ,T)`$-plane than in Ref. . Here, we study the chiral limit with a nonzero baryonic chemical potential. Since we consider the deep diquark phase a large temperature limit is of interest (in the chiral perturbation theory approach the low temperature limit was used for $`\mu m_\pi /2`$). Our motivation is twofold. First of all, as mentioned above, the phase diagram of two-color QCD needs to be better understood, and one of our objectives is to provide a step in that direction. In particular, the emergence of the tricritical point at intermediate values of $`T`$ and $`\mu `$ requires further explanation. Although the discussion will be concerned with the case of massless quarks, $`m_q=0`$, for simplicity, our results and predictions are expected to apply also for nonzero degenerate quark masses as long as $`N_f`$ is even and $`\mu m_\pi /2`$. Secondly, further comparisons between different analytical approaches and numerical simulations on the lattice will hopefully increase our understanding of both methods, and lay the groundwork for future attempts in full $`N_c=3`$ QCD at nonzero baryon density.

We assume throughout that the gauge group is $`SU(2)`$ and that there are an even number $`N_f`$ of massless flavors. In the next section, we discuss the pseudoreal representation of $`SU(2)`$ and its implications for the $`N_c=2`$ QCD action and the symmetry breaking patterns. We then incorporate these properties into an effective Lagrangian. In Sec. III, we present our renormalization group analysis and discuss the order of the phase transition for various $`N_f`$. We first assume the absence of the chiral anomaly and later consider its implications. We end with our conclusions and an outlook in Sec. IV.

## II Two–Color QCD and Effective Theories

### A The microscopic action

The matter part of the QCD action with massless quarks and at zero chemical potential is

$`S_0=i{\displaystyle \underset{f=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}}{\displaystyle d^4x\overline{\psi }_f^i\left(_\mu \delta _i^jigA_\mu ^a(T^a)_i^j\right)\gamma ^\mu \psi _{jf}}=i{\displaystyle \underset{f=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}}{\displaystyle d^4x\overline{\psi }_fD/\psi _f},`$ (1)
where the Minkowski metric is $`g_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{diag}(+)`$ and the color matrices are given by $`T^a=\sigma ^a/2`$, with $`\sigma ^a`$ the usual Pauli matrices. Defining $`\sigma _\mu =(1,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ and $`\overline{\sigma }_\mu =(1,\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$, we have in the two-component formalism,

$`\psi _{if}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _\alpha \\ \overline{\lambda }^{\dot{\alpha }}\end{array}\right)_{if},\gamma ^\mu \left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \sigma ^\mu \\ \overline{\sigma }^\mu & 0\end{array}\right).`$ (2)
Rewriting the action in Eq. (1) in this Weyl notation gives, after a partial integration,

$`S_0=i{\displaystyle \underset{f=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}}{\displaystyle d^4x\left[\overline{\lambda }_{jf}\overline{\sigma }^\mu \left(_\mu \delta _i^j+igA_\mu ^a(T^a)_i^j\right)\lambda _f^i+\overline{\xi }_f^i\overline{\sigma }^\mu \left(_\mu \delta _i^jigA_\mu ^a(T^a)_i^j\right)\xi _{jf}\right]}.`$ (3)
Using the pseudo–reality relation in SU(2), $`\sigma _2\sigma _a\sigma _2=\sigma _a^T`$, where the superscript $`T`$ denotes the transpose, the interaction term for $`\lambda `$ can be reorganized as

$`\overline{\lambda }_{jf}(T^a)_i^j\lambda _f^i=\overline{\lambda }_fT_a^T\lambda _f=(\overline{\lambda }_f\sigma _2)T_a(\sigma _2\lambda _f).`$ (4)
Since $`\lambda _f`$ transforms as $`\overline{\mathrm{𝟐}}`$ under a gauge transformation, $`\sigma _2\lambda _f`$ transforms as $`\xi `$, i.e. like 2. Thus, by making the following flavor decomposition within the same color representation,

$$Q_f\{\begin{array}{cc}\xi _f& f=1,\mathrm{},N_f\\ \sigma _2\lambda _f& f=N_f+1,\mathrm{},2N_f\end{array},\overline{Q}_f\{\begin{array}{cc}\overline{\xi }_f& f=1,\mathrm{},N_f\\ \overline{\lambda }_f\sigma _2& f=N_f+1,\mathrm{},2N_f\end{array},$$
(5)
we can write the action in Eq. (3) as,

$`S_0=i{\displaystyle \underset{f=1}{\overset{2N_f}{}}}{\displaystyle d^4x\overline{Q}_f\left(_\mu igA_\mu ^aT^a\right)\overline{\sigma }^\mu Q_f}.`$ (6)
As can be seen from Eq. (6), the naïve global symmetry SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{L}{}^{}\times `$SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{R}{}^{}\times `$U(1)B is in fact enlarged to SU(2$`N_f`$) in two-color QCD, as a direct consequence of the pseudo-reality condition.

However, this enlarged symmetry exists only as long as $`\mu =0`$. By introducing a common nonzero baryonic chemical potential $`\mu `$, the action in Eq. (1) is augmented by an additional term,

$`S_0\stackrel{\mu >0}{}S=S_0\mu {\displaystyle \underset{f=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}}{\displaystyle d^4x\overline{\psi }_f^i\gamma ^0\psi _{if}}=S_0\mu {\displaystyle d^4x\overline{Q}𝐁Q},`$ (7)
where $`𝐁`$ is the (2$`N_f`$)$`\times `$(2$`N_f`$) diagonal baryonic charge matrix,

$`𝐁\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟎}\\ \mathrm{𝟎}& \mathrm{𝟏}\end{array}\right),`$ (8)
and $`\mathrm{𝟎}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ are $`N_f\times N_f`$ matrices. The $`\mu `$-dependent term is not an SU(2$`N_f`$) singlet, since the block-diagonal form is only invariant under rotations that do not mix the different blocks. In other words, when $`\mu 0`$ the global symmetry is reduced to the more familiar SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{L}{}^{}\times `$SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{R}{}^{}\times `$U(1)B. Furthermore, in the presence of a common quark mass, $`m_q`$, the symmetry is reduced even further, since the mass term explicitly breaks the axial symmetry. The global symmetry in this case is only SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{V}{}^{}\times `$U(1)B.

### B Spontaneous breaking of symmetries

When $`\mu =m_q=0`$, we assume, as indicated by lattice simulations , that the chiral SU(2$`N_f`$) symmetry is spontaneously broken at low temperatures. A Lorentz and gauge invariant chiral condensate must be of the form

$`\overline{\psi }\psi Q_i𝐄^{ij}Q_j,`$ (9)
with $`i`$ and $`j`$ the flavor indices and $`𝐄`$ a (2$`N_f`$)$`\times `$(2$`N_f`$) antisymmetric matrix. Assuming a maximal flavor symmetry scenario , the standard form for $`𝐄`$ is given by

$`𝐄\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{𝟎}& \mathrm{𝟏}\\ \mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟎}\end{array}\right).`$ (10)
If the chiral condensate is nonvanishing, the global symmetry is spontaneously broken to the subgroup that leaves $`𝐄`$ invariant, namely Sp(2$`N_f`$), and the symmetry breaking pattern SU(2$`N_f`$)$``$Sp(2$`N_f`$) gives rise to $`(2N_f^2N_f1)`$ Goldstone bosons.

On the other hand, when $`\mu >0`$ and the quark mass $`m_q0`$, there is only a SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{V}{}^{}\times `$U(1)B symmetry. Although the chiral condensate does not break any of these symmetries, the lattice results show that the preferred ground-state configuration is still the chirally broken one in the region where $`\mu m_\pi /2`$ . However, at a baryonic chemical potential $`\mu =m_\pi /2`$, on-shell baryons are produced out of the vacuum, the chiral condensate begins to decrease and a diquark condensate appears:

$`\psi \psi Q^T𝚺Q,`$ (11)
where $`𝚺`$ is a (2$`N_f`$)$`\times `$(2$`N_f`$) matrix given by

$`𝚺i\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝐈& \mathrm{𝟎}\\ \mathrm{𝟎}& 𝐈\end{array}\right),\mathrm{with}𝐈\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{𝟎}& \mathrm{𝟏}\\ \mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟎}\end{array}\right),`$ (12)
and $`𝐈`$ is an $`N_f\times N_f`$ matrix. A nonvanishing diquark condensate ($`m_q0`$ and $`\mu m_\pi /2`$) breaks the SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{V}{}^{}\times `$U(1)B symmetry down to Sp($`N_f`$) and gives rise to a Bose condensed phase.

When the quark mass $`m_q=0`$, $`m_\pi `$ also vanishes. This situation requires some additional considerations for the diquark condensate. There is an interesting relationship, peculiar to two-color QCD, between the chiral and diquark condensates, at $`\mu =0`$. Consider the particular flavor transformation matrix $`M_1`$SU(2$`N_f`$),

$`M_1=\mathrm{exp}\left[(3\pi i/4)𝐗\right];𝐗=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{𝟎}& 𝐈\\ 𝐈& \mathrm{𝟎}\end{array}\right).`$ (13)
Under an SU(2$`N_f`$) rotation, the chiral condensate transforms as

$`𝐄M_1𝐄M_1^T=𝚺.`$ (14)
Hence, there is no distinction between the chiral and diquark condensate, and due to this identity we may as well define the symmetry breaking at $`\mu =0`$ (and $`m_q=0`$) to be caused by a diquark condensate. There is no difference, and the breaking pattern remains SU(2$`N_f`$)$``$Sp(2$`N_f`$). (For further discussion see .)

### C The Landau theory at $`\mu =0`$

To model the $`m_q=0`$ symmetry breaking, and its restoration as the temperature is increased for $`\mu =0`$, one can start from a Landau theory . We assume that the Landau field can be parameterized by an antisymmetric, complex-valued (2$`N_f`$)$`\times `$(2$`N_f`$) matrix $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }QQ^T`$, that transforms under the SU(2$`N_f`$) symmetry as $`\mathrm{\Phi }M\mathrm{\Phi }M^T`$ with $`M`$SU(2$`N_f`$). The effective LagrangianWe thank F. Sannino for access to his notes in which this effective Lagrangian was first written down. which is renormalizable and invariant under the global SU($`2N_f`$) flavor symmetry is

$`L_0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[(_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^{})(^\mu \mathrm{\Phi })\right]{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right]\lambda _1\left(\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right]\right)^2\lambda _2\mathrm{Tr}\left[\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right)^2\right]c\left[\mathrm{Pf}(\mathrm{\Phi })+\mathrm{Pf}(\mathrm{\Phi }^{})\right].`$ (15)
The last term in Eq. (15) is the so-called Pfaffian ,

$`\mathrm{Pf}(\mathrm{\Phi })={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2^{N_f}N_f!}}{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}(1)^P\mathrm{\Phi }_{i_1i_2}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{i_{(2N_f1)}i_{(2N_f)}},`$ (16)
where $`i_k=1,\mathrm{},2N_f`$, and $`P`$ denotes a summation over all permutations of $`\{i_1,\mathrm{},i_{2N_f}\}`$ with $`(1)^P`$ the sign of the permutation. This term ensures that the axial U(1)A is explicitly broken, since if $`c=0`$ the Lagrangian is actually invariant under the larger U(2$`N_f`$) group. Stability of the classical potential requires that $`\lambda _20`$ and $`\lambda _1+\lambda _2/(2N_f)0`$, and by choosing $`m^2<0`$ at $`T=0`$ the potential is minimized by a nonzero expectation value $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=\rho _0𝚺`$, with $`\rho _0^2=m^2/(8N_f\lambda _1+4\lambda _2)`$ for $`c=0`$. This gives the correct symmetry breaking pattern SU(2$`N_f`$)$``$Sp(2$`N_f`$), where we for definiteness took $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ to be proportional to $`𝚺`$ instead of $`𝐄`$. As discussed above, these are equivalent choices.

### D The Landau theory at $`\mu 0`$

We now introduce a nonzero baryonic chemical potential into the effective theory. The global symmetry SU(2$`N_f`$) is reduced to SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{L}{}^{}\times `$SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{R}{}^{}\times `$U(1)B and consequently there is a distinction between the chiral and the diquark condensate. Since we set $`m_\pi =0`$, the ground state has $`\psi \psi 0`$ and $`\overline{\psi }\psi =0`$ at any $`\mu >0`$, breaking the symmetry spontaneously down to Sp($`N_f`$)$`\times `$Sp($`N_f`$). These aspects must of course be reflected in the effective Lagrangian when a chemical potential is added to it. A general discussion of Landau theories and the $`ϵ`$-expansion at nonzero chemical potential is given in Ref. . The important point to note here is that due to the pseudoreality of the representation, the order parameter is the sameWe consider values for the chemical potential which are not asymptotically large so that the effective degrees of freedom are given by bosonic diquark bound states and not by the quarks and gluons themselves. A more restrictive upper bound on $`\mu `$ is given by half of the mass of the lightest vector meson. At this value of the chemical potential, the formation of a vector condensate is expected . as at $`\mu =0`$, namely $`QQ^T`$. As in mean field theory, we assume that the quartic coupling constants remain unaffected by the introduction of $`\mu `$, although we will later consider the possible influence of $`\mu `$ on the coupling $`c`$ in Eq. (15). The dependence of the Lagrangian on $`\mu `$ is fixed uniquely by the symmetries and renormalizability. The transformation properties of the order parameter field is identical to that of the Goldstone field in chiral perturbation theory. Hence, the coupling of $`\mu `$ to $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ enters through the covariant derivative

$`_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }`$ $`_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }i\mu \delta _{\nu 0}\left(𝐁\mathrm{\Phi }+\mathrm{\Phi }𝐁\right),`$ (17)
$`_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }^{}`$ $`_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }^{}+i\mu \delta _{\nu 0}\left(𝐁\mathrm{\Phi }^{}+\mathrm{\Phi }^{}𝐁\right).`$ (18)
The Lagrangian in Eq. (15) then becomes

$`L_0L=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[(_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^{})(^\mu \mathrm{\Phi })\right]+i{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}\mathrm{Tr}[(_0\mathrm{\Phi })(\mathrm{\Phi }^{}𝐁+𝐁\mathrm{\Phi }^{})h.c.]+{\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^2}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[(𝐁\mathrm{\Phi }+\mathrm{\Phi }𝐁)(𝐁\mathrm{\Phi }^{}+\mathrm{\Phi }^{}𝐁)\right]`$ (20)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right]\lambda _1\left(\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right]\right)^2\lambda _2\mathrm{Tr}\left[\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right)^2\right]c\left[\mathrm{Pf}(\mathrm{\Phi })+\mathrm{Pf}(\mathrm{\Phi }^{})\right].`$
Given that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ transforms as $`\mathrm{\Phi }M\mathrm{\Phi }M^T`$, the Lagrangian in Eq. (20) is only invariant under transformations that satisfy $`𝐁M=M𝐁`$, which reduces the global symmetry to SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{L}{}^{}\times `$SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{R}{}^{}\times `$U(1)B for $`\mu 0`$. Moreover, from Eq. (20) it is straightforward to verify that the minimum of the classical potential is obtained when $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=\varphi _0𝚺`$, where $`\varphi _0^2=(m^24\mu ^2)/(8N_f\lambda _1+4\lambda _2)`$ for $`c=0`$ and $`m^2<4\mu ^2`$. This expectation value breaks the symmetry down to Sp($`N_f`$)$`\times `$Sp($`N_f`$), as required. It should also be noted that the choice $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=\varphi _0𝐄`$ now corresponds to a local maximum, so that the effective model does distinguish between the two vacua.

## III Melting the Diquark Condensate

As the temperature is increased, at a given $`\mu >0`$, we expect the diquark condensate to eventually melt and the symmetry to be restored. The object is to determine the order of this phase transition by studying the fixed points of the $`\beta `$-functions in the $`ϵ`$ expansion. The effect of the chemical potential in the Landau theory is threefold: 1) it allows for terms linear in the time derivative, 2) it explicitly breaks the U($`2N_f`$) symmetry, and 3) it induces a Bose diquark condensate.

We will assume that $`T_c`$ at $`\mu =0`$ is large, $`T_c^2|m^2|`$. Then as discussed in detail in  we can dimensionally reduce the Landau theory to an effective theory of the massless zeroth Matsubara modes. It is in this dimensionally reduced theory we will study the stability of the $`\beta `$-functions. Because of the breaking of the U($`2N_f`$) symmetry not all zeroth Matsubara modes become massless at $`T_c`$ when $`\mu >0`$. At nonzero $`\mu `$ the effective three dimensional theory describes the static zeroth Matsubara modes from the block diagonal modes in $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. These are the massless modes at the phase transition. Explicitly, in the three dimensional theory the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is

$`\mathrm{\Phi }\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝐀_1& \mathrm{𝟎}\\ \mathrm{𝟎}& 𝐀_2\end{array}\right),`$ (21)
with $`𝐀_1`$ and $`𝐀_2`$ $`N_f\times N_f`$ matrices given by,

$`𝐀_1=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& \varphi _{12}& \mathrm{}& \varphi _{1N_f}\\ \varphi _{12}& 0& \mathrm{}& \varphi _{2N_f}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}\\ \varphi _{1N_f}& \varphi _{2N_f}& \mathrm{}& 0\end{array}\right)\mathrm{and}𝐀_2=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& \varphi _{(N_f+1)(N_f+2)}& \mathrm{}& \varphi _{(N_f+1)(2N_f)}\\ \varphi _{(N_f+1)(N_f+2)}& 0& \mathrm{}& \varphi _{(N_f+2)(2N_f)}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}\\ \varphi _{(N_f+1)(2N_f)}& \varphi _{(N_f+2)(2N_f)}& \mathrm{}& 0\end{array}\right).`$ (22)
When the chemical potential is infinitesimally small, the masses of the zeroth Matsubara components of the off-diagonal blocks in $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ are not large. In this particular situation, the phase transition is almost identical to the phase transition in the theory for $`\mu =0`$, at least if it is first order . We therefore restrict $`\mu `$ to be sufficiently large for this separation of mass scales to hold, although it should be emphasized that the matching to the nonzero $`T`$, $`\mu =0`$, line in the phase diagram may be somewhat ambiguous.

Our approach is to use renormalization group arguments in $`(4ϵ)`$ dimensions and study the existence of infra-red fixed points in the space of coupling constants for $`ϵ1`$. Whether or not this extrapolation is valid is of course a difficult question to answer fully. However, this approach has been successful under many different circumstances, both in the condensed matter context (see e.g.  and references therein) and in the context of relativistic field theories .

### A Renormalization group flow in the anomaly-free case

Having defined the model, we now analyze the renormalization group flow in the space of parameters $`\lambda _1`$, $`\lambda _2`$, and $`c`$. As long as the quartic coupling constants are within their stability region, two situations can occur. Either the $`\beta `$-functions have infrared stable fixed points, in which case there is a second order phase transition, or they do not, and the phase transition is then first order, induced by fluctuations. The obvious caveat here is that the coupling constants can be adjusted to lie outside the stability region, with the result that higher dimensional terms must be added to stabilize the theory, making the phase transition first order already at the mean field level. In addition, there could also be fixed points at the nonperturbative level.

From the above discussion, the $`c=0`$ effective Lagrangian around criticality is

$`L={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[(_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }^{})(^\nu \mathrm{\Phi })\right]\lambda _1\left(\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right]\right)^2\lambda _2\mathrm{Tr}\left[\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right)^2\right],`$ (23)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is defined as in Eq. (21). To study the existence of fixed points, we expand the Lagrangian in Eq. (23) to one-loop order around the expectation value $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=\varphi _0𝚺`$ and calculate the $`\beta `$-functions using the background field method. To more easily separate the one-loop corrections to $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$, we will also label the constant $`\varphi _0`$ differently for different matrix elements:

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_0i\left(\begin{array}{cc}\varphi _a𝐈& \mathrm{𝟎}\\ \mathrm{𝟎}& \varphi _b𝐈\end{array}\right).`$ (24)
We then replace $`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }_0+\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in Eq. (23) and split the fields into their real and imaginary parts, $`\varphi _{mn}=(\varphi _{mn}^{(r)}+i\varphi _{mn}^{(i)})/\sqrt{2}`$. Up to terms quadratic in the fluctuations, we find that

$`L=V_0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k,l=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}}.\left[(_\nu \varphi _{kl}^{(r)})^2+(_\nu \varphi _{kl}^{(i)})^2+(_\nu \varphi _{(k+N_f)(l+N_f)}^{(r)})^2+(_\nu \varphi _{(k+N_f)(l+N_f)}^{(i)})^2\right]|_{k<l}`$ (25)
$`\lambda _1[8\varphi _a^2\left({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N_f/2}{}}}\varphi _{k(N_f/2+k)}^{(i)}\right)^2+8\varphi _b^2\left({\displaystyle \underset{k=N_f+1}{\overset{3N_f/2}{}}}\varphi _{k(N_f/2+k)}^{(i)}\right)^2+16\varphi _a\varphi _b({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N_f/2}{}}}\varphi _{k(N_f/2+k)}^{(i)})\left({\displaystyle \underset{k=N_f+1}{\overset{3N_f/2}{}}}\varphi _{k(N_f/2+k)}^{(i)}\right).`$ (26)
$`+.2N_f(\varphi _a^2+\varphi _b^2)({\displaystyle \underset{k,l=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}}.\{(\varphi _{kl}^{(r)})^2+(\varphi _{kl}^{(i)})^2+(\varphi _{(N_f+k)(N_f+l)}^{(r)})^2+(\varphi _{(N_f+k)(N_f+l)}^{(i)})^2\}|_{k<l})]`$ (27)
$`\lambda _2[4\varphi _a^2{\displaystyle \underset{k,l=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}}.\{(\varphi _{kl}^{(r)})^2+(\varphi _{kl}^{(i)})^2\}|_{k<l}+4\varphi _b^2{\displaystyle \underset{k,l=N_f+1}{\overset{2N_f}{}}}.\{(\varphi _{kl}^{(r)})^2+(\varphi _{kl}^{(i)})^2\}|_{k<l}2\varphi _a^2\{{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N_f/2}{}}}\{(\varphi _{k(N_f/2+k)}^{(r)})^2(\varphi _{k(N_f/2+k)}^{(i)})^2\}..`$ (28)
$`+.2{\displaystyle \underset{k,l=1}{\overset{N_f/2}{}}}.(\varphi _{k(N_f/2+l)}^{(r)}\varphi _{l(N_f/2+k)}^{(r)}\varphi _{k(N_f/2+l)}^{(i)}\varphi _{l(N_f/2+k)}^{(i)}+\varphi _{kl}^{(r)}\varphi _{(N_f/2+k)(N_f/2+l)}^{(r)}\varphi _{kl}^{(i)}\varphi _{(N_f/2+k)(N_f/2+l)}^{(i)})|_{k<l}\}`$ (29)
$`2\varphi _b^2\{2{\displaystyle \underset{k,l=N_f+1}{\overset{3N_f/2}{}}}.(\varphi _{k(N_f/2+l)}^{(r)}\varphi _{l(N_f/2+k)}^{(r)}\varphi _{k(N_f/2+l)}^{(i)}\varphi _{l(N_f/2+k)}^{(i)}+\varphi _{kl}^{(r)}\varphi _{(N_f/2+k)(N_f/2+l)}^{(r)}\varphi _{kl}^{(i)}\varphi _{(N_f/2+k)(N_f/2+l)}^{(i)})|_{k<l}.`$ (30)
$`+..{\displaystyle \underset{k=N_f+1}{\overset{3N_f/2}{}}}\{(\varphi _{k(N_f/2+k)}^{(r)})^2(\varphi _{k(N_f/2+k)}^{(i)})^2\}\}],`$ (31)
where the classical potential $`V_0`$ is given by,

$`V_0=\lambda _1N_f^2(\varphi _a^2+\varphi _b^2)^2+\lambda _2N_f(\varphi _a^4+\varphi _b^4).`$ (32)
All the terms quadratic in $`\varphi _a^2`$ and $`\varphi _b^2`$ can be collected into a symmetric matrix $`M`$ that can be diagonalized by an orthonormal transformation, $`MPMP^T=M_D`$. By integrating out the quadratic fluctuations and using dimensional regularization in $`d=4ϵ`$ dimensions, we find the effective action,

$`V_{\mathrm{eff}.}(\varphi _a,\varphi _b)=V_0{\displaystyle \frac{1}{32\pi ^2ϵ}}\left(\mathrm{Tr}M_D^2\right)+\delta \lambda _1N_f^2(\varphi _a^2+\varphi _b^2)^2+\delta \lambda _2N_f(\varphi _a^4+\varphi _b^4),`$ (33)
where we have only kept the ultra-violet divergent terms and $`\delta \lambda _1`$ and $`\delta \lambda _2`$ denote the counterterms. Using the relation $`\mathrm{Tr}M_D^2=\mathrm{Tr}M^2`$, it is straightforward to find the counterterms and hence the $`\beta `$-functions. Using $`\kappa `$ as the arbitrary mass scale, we find

$`\beta _1=`$ $`\kappa {\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _1}{\kappa }}=ϵ\lambda _1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi ^2}}\left[\lambda _1^2(N_f^2N_f+4)+2\lambda _1\lambda _2(N_f1)\right],`$ (34)
$`\beta _2=`$ $`\kappa {\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _2}{\kappa }}=ϵ\lambda _2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi ^2}}\left[5\lambda _2^2(N_f1)+12\lambda _1\lambda _2\right].`$ (35)
Consider now the different fixed points that can be inferred from Eqs. (34)–(35), i.e. the solutions to $`\beta _1=\beta _2=0`$. Since we are examining the long-range fluctuations, the fixed points $`\lambda _1^{}`$ and $`\lambda _2^{}`$ must be infra-red stable, implying that the eigenvalues of the stability matrix,

$`S=.\left(\begin{array}{cc}\beta _1/\lambda _1& \beta _1/\lambda _2\\ \beta _2/\lambda _1& \beta _2/\lambda _2\end{array}\right)|_{\stackrel{\lambda _1=\lambda _1^{}}{\lambda _2=\lambda _2^{}}},`$ (36)
have to be positive. From Eqs. (34)–(35), we find the fixed points

$`\mathrm{i}:\lambda _1^{}=0,\lambda _2^{}=0,\mathrm{ii}:\lambda _1^{}=0,\lambda _2^{}={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2ϵ}{5(N_f1)}},`$ (37)
$`\mathrm{iii}:\lambda _1^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2ϵ}{N_f^2N_f+4}},\lambda _2^{}=0,\mathrm{iv}:\lambda _1^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2ϵ}{5N_f(N_f1)4}},\lambda _2^{}={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2ϵ(N_f^2N_f2)}{(N_f1)[5N_f(N_f1)4]}},`$ (38)
where the last one (iv) only exists for $`N_f4`$. In fact, when $`N_f=2`$ it reduces to the third solution. From the eigenvalues of $`S`$, we find that the first and second cases are unstable for any number of flavors. The third case is unstable for $`N_f4`$ but marginal when $`N_f=2`$, i.e. one of the eigenvalues vanishes. The fourth solution, however, has a fixed point that is infra-red stable for $`N_f4`$. From this we conclude

* For $`N_f=2`$, the order of the phase transition is not determined by the renormalization group flow, and a higher order calculation is necessary to make a definite prediction. However, at $`\mu =0`$, the temperature induced phase transition is first order for $`N_f=2`$ and $`c=0`$ , so it is likely that this first order transition extends to small but nonzero values of $`\mu `$. If the phase transition becomes second order as $`\mu `$ increases further, it should correspond to the O(4) critical point (i.e. case iii above).
* For $`N_f4`$, there is a stable fixed point. Thus, if this theory evolves from a point within the stability region $`\lambda _20`$ and $`\lambda _1+\lambda _2/(2N_f)0`$, the phase transition in two–color QCD with more than four flavors, and without any influence from the axial anomaly, is likely to be second order.

The renormalization group flow in the $`(\lambda _1,\lambda _2)`$-plane for $`N_f=4`$ is illustrated in figure 1.

### B Adding the chiral anomaly

The above conclusions must be reconsidered if the chiral anomaly is present around $`T_c`$. Lattice results for $`N_c=3`$ QCD indicate that although the effects of the chiral anomaly decrease, they do not vanish in the vicinity of the chiral symmetry restoring phase transition . Since there is no reason to believe that the situation is drastically different in $`N_c=2`$ QCD, the anomaly can be expected to be present near $`T_c`$ and $`\mu =0`$. At a nonzero chemical potential, there is an additional suppression of the anomaly  apart from the nonzero $`T`$ effects. However, since our model is limited to the region $`\mu \stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$, it is still likely that the effects of the chiral anomaly are not negligible at the phase transition.

For two flavors, the anomaly term is a mass-like operator and has the effect that only half of the number of the original real-valued fields in $`𝐀_1`$ and $`𝐀_2`$ become critical. At $`T=0`$, there is an SU(2)$`\times `$SU(2)$`\times `$U(1) symmetry that is spontaneously broken to Sp(2)$`\times `$Sp(2), but since Sp(2)$``$SU(2), only the U(1)$``$O(2) symmetry is actually broken. Keeping only those fields in Eq. (20) which become critical at $`T_c`$, the theory becomes O(2)-symmetric and the diquark condensate breaks this symmetry completely. Thus, if the phase transition indeed is second order, it is characterized by O(2) critical exponents. Since the phase transition at $`\mu =0`$ can be second order as well , but with O(6) critical exponents, there could thus be a change of the critical exponents as $`\mu `$ increases from zero.

For $`N_f=4`$, the anomaly term represents another quartic coupling. Repeating the calculation from the previous section with $`c0`$, we find the $`\beta `$-functions,

$`\beta _1=`$ $`\kappa {\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _1}{\kappa }}=ϵ\lambda _1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi ^2}}\left[16\lambda _1^2+6\lambda _1\lambda _2+{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{64}}\right],`$ (39)
$`\beta _2=`$ $`\kappa {\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _2}{\kappa }}=ϵ\lambda _2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi ^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{15\lambda _2^2}{2}}+6\lambda _1\lambda _2+{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{32}}\right],`$ (40)
$`\beta _3=`$ $`\kappa {\displaystyle \frac{c}{\kappa }}=ϵc+{\displaystyle \frac{2c}{\pi ^2}}\left[3\lambda _1\lambda _2\right].`$ (41)
When the fixed point $`c^{}`$ vanishes, the solutions of course reduce to the results of the previous section. Surprisingly, there are no real-valued solutions to the three equations that satisfy $`c^{}0`$. Since there is then no fixed point, we conclude that the phase transition is first order, induced by fluctuations . The presence of a first order phase transition for $`N_f=4`$ is also in agreement with the existing lattice results . Note, however, (see Ref. ) that the roles of the fundamental and the adjoint representations are reversed for the staggered fermions as used in Ref. . Hence, this comparison is not fully justified.

For $`N_f6`$, the critical behavior in the presence of the chiral anomaly is identical to the $`c=0`$ case. In renormalization group terms, the operator $`c`$ is irrelevant, since its mass dimension in four Minkowski space-time dimensions is $`[c]=4N_f`$, and the critical behavior is determined by $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ only.

Finally, we stress again that in this approach we can not exclude first order phase transitions induced dynamically by higher order operators. Hence, even if there is a stable fixed point within the $`ϵ`$-expansion, the transition may still be first order.

## IV Conclusions

In this work, we have studied the diquark phase transition in two-color QCD at zero quark mass and nonzero $`T`$ and $`\mu `$ using an effective Landau theory. To improve upon mean-field theory, we studied the renormalization group flow in $`4ϵ`$ dimensions, and then extrapolated our results to $`ϵ=1`$. The conclusions to be drawn are the following. In the absence of the anomaly term and for $`N_f4`$, the phase transition could be second order, whereas the case of $`N_f=2`$ is inconclusive at the one-loop level studied here. The effect of the anomaly on the phase transition has been shown to be substantial. In the presence of the anomaly, the $`N_f=2`$ case exhibits a second order transition characterized by O(2) critical exponents, which may change to O(6) as $`\mu 0`$. For $`N_f=4`$, there is no infrared stable fixed points and hence the phase transition is first order. For $`N_f6`$, the phase transition may be of second order, since this situation is identical to the $`c=0`$ case. Of course, the statement for $`N_f6`$ is only true as long as $`N_c=2`$ QCD is asymptotically free. From the one-loop running coupling constant, this limits the number of flavors to $`N_fN_{f(\mathrm{max})}=11`$.

Our analysis has focused solely on the case of massless quarks, and it is interesting to speculate on the consequences of adding nonzero masses. Defining $`x=2\mu /m_\pi \mu /\sqrt{m_q}`$, the phase transition discussed in this manuscript corresponds to the limit $`x\mathrm{}`$. For a common, nonzero quark mass $`m_q`$, the diquark condensate competes with the chiral condensate. Such a term alters the symmetry breaking pattern from SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{L}{}^{}\times `$SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{R}{}^{}\times `$U(1)$`{}_{B}{}^{}`$Sp($`N_f`$)$`\times `$Sp($`N_f`$) in the massless case to SU($`N_f`$)$`{}_{V}{}^{}\times `$U(1)$`{}_{B}{}^{}`$Sp($`N_f`$) when $`m_q0`$. For $`\mu m_\pi `$, the first order phase transition for $`N_f=4`$ and $`c0`$ should only weaken, whereas the second order phase transitions for $`N_f6`$ presumably stay second order. When $`N_f=2`$ the number of broken symmetries is independent of the introduction of a quark mass, since only the baryon number symmetry is broken. It is therefore possible that the phase transition is second order for all $`x`$. For $`N_f4`$, however, it is unlikely that the massless results should be representative at such a small ratio of $`\mu `$ and $`m_\pi `$. Instead, the mass term should be incorporated explicitly into the effective Lagrangian, and the effects could very well change the order of the phase transition as $`x`$ approaches $`1`$.

The presence of a tricritical point in the phase diagram of two color QCD has so far only been observed on the lattice for $`N_f=4`$ flavors. Chiral perturbation theory  predicts that the tricritical point is present for any even number of flavors ($`N_fN_{f(\mathrm{max})}=11`$). In contrast, the possibility of a fluctuation induced first order phase transition depends very sensitively on the number of flavors as well as the strength of the anomaly. By combining the results of future lattice simulations for different numbers of flavors with these complementary but quite different analytical approaches, the nature of the superfluid phase transition will certainly become more clear.

In recent lattice investigations , it was found that the phase diagram of $`N_c=3`$ QCD at nonzero temperature and isospin chemical potential is very similar to that of $`N_c=2`$ at nonzero temperature and baryonic chemical potential. In particular, the existence of a tricritical point was also demonstrated. Chiral perturbation theory also predicts the existence of a tricritical point for $`N_c=3`$ QCD at nonzero isospin chemical potential . The approach followed in this work has been applied to this physically relevant case  and for $`N_f=2`$ one marginal fixed point was found for the anomaly free case.

By carefully combining the analytical and numerical results for a variety of parameters (including not the least of which is the case where $`N_f`$ is odd), we should ultimately be able to grasp the complex phase diagram of $`N_c=2`$ QCD. Hopefully, this experience will also further enhance our knowledge of dense $`N_c=3`$ QCD.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank R. D. Pisarski for valuable and encouraging discussions and for reading the manuscript. F. Sannino is thanked for collaboration during the early stages of this work. We would also like to thank A. Krasnitz and M. Oswald for useful discussions and the Institut d’Études Scientifiques de Cargèse where this work was initiated. J. W. would like to thank Brookhaven National Laboratory, where part of this work was done with support from The Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education (STINT) under contract 99/665, and the DOE grant DE-AC02-98CH10886. J.T.L. is supported by the U.S. DOE grant DE-FG02-97ER41027. K.S. was supported by the Leon Rosenfeld Foundation and by the U.S. DOE grant DE-FG02-88ER40388.