text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recently, a procedure was devised to rewrite the density matrix of a quantum field in thermal equilibrium at finite temperature $`T`$ as the exponential of an effective action in one less dimension . This procedure has been termed alternative dimensional reduction, to distinguish it from the conventional dimensional reduction that occurs at infinite $`T`$ , the latter being a special case of the former. The construction of such a dimensionally reduced effective action (DREA) is in fact equivalent to the construction of a Landau-Ginzburg “coarse-grained free energy” from a microscopic Hamiltonian, which can be further analyzed using the powerful methods of renormalization group theory.

The construction of the DREA cannot, in general, be performed exactly. It requires the use of perturbation theory or a dressed-loop expansion. The purpose of this work is to perform such a construction in the simpler context of quantum mechanics, in order to test the accuracy of the truncated perturbation series for the classical effective potential $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, the quantum mechanical version of the DREA.333Because we have such an objective in mind, we shall not discuss the semiclassical  or variational  expansion of $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, which, although generally yielding better results than perturbation theory, are much harder to implement in quantum field theory. The examples considered here are the harmonic oscillator and the quartic potential.

## 2 Density matrix and effective classical potential

The diagonal elements of the thermal density matrix for a particle of mass $`m`$ in the presence of the potential $`V(x)`$ can be written as a path integral  ($`\mathrm{}=m=1`$):

$$\rho (x,x;\beta )=_{y(0)=x}^{y(\beta )=x}𝒟y\mathrm{exp}\left\{_0^\beta 𝑑\tau \left[\frac{1}{2}\dot{y}^2+V(y)\right]\right\}.$$
(1)
In the classical limit, the temperature is high and $`\beta `$ $`(=1/kT)`$ is small. In this case, it is reasonable to assume that the most important paths are those for which $`y(\tau )x`$. Then Eq. (1) can be approximated by

$$\rho (x,x;\beta )e^{\beta V(x)}\rho _0(x,x;\beta ),$$
(2)
where

$$\rho _0(x,x;\beta )=_{y(0)=x}^{y(\beta )=x}𝒟\eta \mathrm{exp}\left\{_0^\beta \frac{1}{2}\dot{\eta }^2𝑑\tau \right\}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi \beta }}$$
(3)
is the diagonal element of the density matrix for the free particle. Inserting Eq. (3) into Eq. (2) and integrating over $`x`$ one obtains the classical partition function,

$$Z_{\mathrm{cl}}=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dx}{\sqrt{2\pi \beta }}e^{\beta V(x)}.$$
(4)
In order to improve the approximation (2) in a systematic way, we shall put $`y(\tau )=x+\eta (\tau )`$, with $`\eta (0)=\eta (\beta )=0`$, into Eq. (1) and compute the path integral perturbatively. Thus,

$$\rho (x,x;\beta )=e^{\beta V(x)}_{\eta (0)=0}^{\eta (\beta )=0}𝒟\eta \mathrm{exp}\left\{_0^\beta 𝑑\tau \left[\frac{1}{2}\dot{\eta }^2+\stackrel{~}{V}_x(\eta )\right]\right\},$$
(5)
where $`\stackrel{~}{V}_x(\eta )V(x+\eta )V(x)`$. Expanding the exponential in powers of $`\stackrel{~}{V}_x(\eta )`$, we obtain

$`\rho (x,x;\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\beta V(x)}\rho _0(0,0;\beta )\{1{\displaystyle _0^\beta }d\tau \stackrel{~}{V}_x[\eta (\tau )]_0`$ (6)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2!}}{\displaystyle _0^\beta }d\tau _1{\displaystyle _0^\beta }d\tau _2\stackrel{~}{V}_x[\eta (\tau _1)]\stackrel{~}{V}_x[\eta (\tau _2)]_0+\mathrm{}\},`$
where

$$𝒪_0\rho _0(0,0;\beta )^1_{\eta (0)=0}^{\eta (\beta )=0}𝒟\eta 𝒪\mathrm{exp}\left\{_0^\beta \frac{1}{2}\dot{\eta }^2𝑑\tau \right\}.$$
(7)
If $`\stackrel{~}{V}_x(\eta )`$ is a polynomial in $`\eta `$, one can compute the expectation values in Eq. (6) with the help of Wick’s theorem:

$$\eta (\tau _1)\mathrm{}\eta (\tau _n)_0=\underset{P}{}G_0(\tau _{P(1)},\tau _{P(2)})\mathrm{}G_0(\tau _{P(n1)},\tau _{P(n)})$$
(8)
if $`n`$ is even, and zero otherwise. The sum $`_P`$ runs over all permutations that lead to different expressions,444Two permutations $`P`$ and $`P^{}`$ lead to the same expression if the sets $`\{\{P(1),P(2)\},\mathrm{},\{P(n1),P(n)\}\}`$ and $`\{\{P^{}(1),P^{}(2)\},\mathrm{},\{P^{}(n1),P^{}(n)\}\}`$ are equal. and $`G_0(\tau ,\tau ^{})=\eta (\tau )\eta (\tau ^{})_0`$. It satisfies

$$\frac{^2}{\tau ^2}G_0(\tau ,\tau ^{})=\delta (\tau \tau ^{}),G_0(0,\tau ^{})=G_0(\beta ,\tau ^{})=0.$$
(9)
Eq. (9) can be easily solved, yielding

$$G_0(\tau ,\tau ^{})=\frac{(\beta \tau ^{})\tau }{\beta }\theta (\tau ^{}\tau )+\frac{(\beta \tau )\tau ^{}}{\beta }\theta (\tau \tau ^{}),$$
(10)
where $`\theta (\tau )`$ is the Heaviside step function.

As a final step, we shall resum the terms in brackets in Eq. (6) into an exponential. The result can be cast as

$$\rho (x,x;\beta )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi \beta }}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)\right\},$$
(11)
where

$$\beta V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)=\beta V(x)+_0^\beta 𝑑\tau \stackrel{~}{V}_x[\eta (\tau )]_{0,c}\frac{1}{2!}_0^\beta 𝑑\tau _1_0^\beta 𝑑\tau _2\stackrel{~}{V}_x[\eta (\tau _1)]\stackrel{~}{V}_x[\eta (\tau _2)]_{0,c}+\mathrm{}$$
(12)
The index $`c`$ in the expectation values means that only connected diagrams, or cumulants, should be taken into account when applying Wick’s theorem.555For instance, $`\eta ^2(\tau _1)\eta ^2(\tau _2)_0=2G_0^2(\tau _1,\tau _2)+G_0(\tau _1,\tau _1)G_0(\tau _2,\tau _2)`$, whereas $`\eta ^2(\tau _1)\eta ^2(\tau _2)_{0,c}=2G_0^2(\tau _1,\tau _2)`$.

Equation (12) formally defines the effective classical potential $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ as a power series in $`x`$, with coefficients that are functions of the temperature. It is the quantum mechanical analogue of the Landau-Ginzburg functional in statistical mechanics. In the next section we shall compute the first few terms of the cumulant expansion of $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ for the harmonic oscillator and the quartic potential.

## 3 Examples

### 3.1 Harmonic oscillator

As our first example, let us consider the harmonic oscillator:

$$V(x)=\frac{1}{2}\omega ^2x^2,\stackrel{~}{V}_x(\eta )=\frac{1}{2}\omega ^2(\eta ^2+2x\eta ).$$
(13)
The first two cumulants give us

$`\stackrel{~}{V}_x[\eta (\tau )]_{0,c}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\omega ^2G_0(\tau ,\tau ),`$ (14)
$`\stackrel{~}{V}_x[\eta (\tau _1)]\stackrel{~}{V}_x[\eta (\tau _2)]_{0,c}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\omega ^2\left[\eta ^2(\tau _1)\eta ^2(\tau _2)_{0,c}+4x^2\eta (\tau _1)\eta (\tau _2)_{0,c}\right]`$ (15)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\omega ^2\left[2G_0^2(\tau _1,\tau _2)+4x^2G_0(\tau _1,\tau _2)\right].`$
Inserting these results into Eq. (12) and computing the integrals we obtain

$$\beta V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)=\left(\frac{1}{12}\beta ^2\omega ^2\frac{1}{360}\beta ^4\omega ^4+\mathrm{}\right)+\omega x^2\left(\frac{1}{2}\beta \omega \frac{1}{24}\beta ^3\omega ^3+\mathrm{}\right).$$
(16)
This result should be compared with the exact result for the harmonic oscillator,666Eq. (17) is obtained by expressing $`\rho (x,x;\beta )`$ for the harmonic oscillator (see Refs. ) in the form of Eq. (11).

$$\beta V_{\mathrm{eff},\mathrm{ex}}(x)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\beta \omega }{\beta \omega }\right)+\omega x^2\mathrm{tanh}\frac{\beta \omega }{2}.$$
(17)
One can easily check that Eq. (16) correctly reproduces the first few terms of the expansion of $`\beta V_{\mathrm{eff},\mathrm{ex}}(x)`$ in powers of $`\beta `$.

### 3.2 Quartic potential

Let us now consider the quartic potential:

$$V(x)=\frac{\lambda }{4}x^4,\stackrel{~}{V}_x(\eta )=\frac{\lambda }{4}(\eta ^4+4x\eta ^3+6x^2\eta ^2+4x^3\eta ).$$
(18)
In this case, the expansion of the effective classical potential in cumulants, Eq. (12), is also an expansion in powers of $`\lambda `$. Thus, to second order in $`\lambda `$, we have

$`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`V(x)+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4\beta }}{\displaystyle _0^\beta }𝑑\tau \left[\eta ^4(\tau )_{0,c}+6x^2\eta ^2(\tau )_{0,c}\right]+O(\lambda ^2)`$ (19)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4}}x^4+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4\beta }}{\displaystyle _0^\beta }𝑑\tau \left[3G_0^2(\tau ,\tau )+6x^2G_0(\tau ,\tau )\right]+O(\lambda ^2)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4}}x^4+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4}}\beta x^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{40}}\beta ^2+O(\lambda ^2).`$
The second term on the r.h.s. of Eq. (19) is analogous to the radiatively induced thermal mass in the massless $`\lambda \phi ^4`$ model in field theory at finite temperature .

There occurs a problem when one computes the $`O(\lambda ^2)`$ correction to $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$. It is a sixth degree polynomial in $`x`$, with the coefficient of $`x^6`$ given by

$$\frac{\lambda ^2}{2!\beta }_0^\beta 𝑑\tau _1_0^\beta 𝑑\tau _2\eta (\tau _1)\eta (\tau _2)_{0,c}=\frac{\lambda ^2}{24}\beta ^2<0.$$
(20)
It follows that if one discards cubic and higher order terms in $`\lambda `$ in the expansion (12), one ends up with a classical effective potential which is unbounded from below, with the disastrous consequence that $`\rho (x,x;\beta )`$ diverges as $`|x|\mathrm{}`$. One can remedy this problem by going to the next order in the expansion (12). At this level of approximation, $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ is an eighth degree polynomial in $`x`$, the coefficient of the highest power of $`x`$ now being a positive number, given by

$$\frac{\lambda ^3}{3!\beta }\frac{96}{64}_0^\beta 𝑑\tau _1\mathrm{}_0^\beta 𝑑\tau _3\left[\eta ^2(\tau _1)\eta (\tau _2)\eta (\tau _3)_{0,c}+\text{cyclic perm.}\right]=\frac{\lambda ^3}{80}\beta ^4.$$
(21)
Instead of expanding $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ in powers of $`\lambda `$, one may expand it in powers of $`\beta `$ — a high temperature expansion. Using Wick’s theorem and the explicit form of $`G_0(\tau ,\tau ^{})`$, and making the change of variables $`\tau _j=\beta \tau _j^{}`$ in the integral below, one can easily show that

$$\frac{1}{\beta }_0^\beta 𝑑\tau _1\mathrm{}_0^\beta 𝑑\tau _n\eta ^{k_1}(\tau _1)\mathrm{}\eta ^{k_n}(\tau _n)_{0,c}\beta ^{n1+(k_1+\mathrm{}+k_n)/2}.$$
(22)
In terms of Feynman diagrams, this means that a (connected) graph with $`V`$ vertices and $`L`$ lines gives a contribution to $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ proportional to $`\beta ^{V+L1}`$. Thus, we have

$`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4}}x^4+\beta {\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4}}x^2+\beta ^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{40}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^2}{24}}x^6\right)\beta ^3{\displaystyle \frac{3\lambda ^2}{40}}x^4`$ (23)
$`+\beta ^4\left({\displaystyle \frac{71\lambda ^2}{3360}}x^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^3}{80}}x^8\right)+O(\beta ^5).`$
Notice that the second and third order approximations to $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ are unbounded from below, hence physically nonsensical. Therefore, like the expansion in powers of $`\lambda `$, the expansion in powers of $`\beta `$ cannot be truncated at an arbitrary order, but only at those orders for which the resulting approximation to $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ is bounded from below.

## 4 Conclusions

The perturbative construction of the DREA in quantum mechanics is, therefore, equivalent to a perturbative expansion of the classical effective potential in powers of $`x`$. The construction yields a high-temperature series in $`\beta `$, or a series in the coupling constant $`\lambda `$, as shown in the quartic case.

The generalization to field theories  will also yield perturbative expansions in powers of the “boundary” fields, i.e., the field configurations on the euclidean time boundaries at $`\tau =0`$ and $`\tau =\beta `$, a role played by $`x`$ in quantum mechanics. The coefficients will, in general, depend on temperature, couplings, and on an ultraviolet cutoff. The boundary fields are independent of the euclidean time $`\tau `$ (they only depend on spatial coordinates). Thus, their effective action accomplishes the dimensional reduction advertised. For practical applications, a truncation of the series will be required, just as in quantum mechanics.

There is, however, an additional complication in field theory: the terms in the effective action are, in general, nonlocal in the boundary fields. The coefficient of the term involving $`n`$ boundary fields is given by an $`n`$-point connected Green function of the fluctuations around a “background” field. The latter is defined as the solution to the free field equation of motion that interpolates between the boundary field at $`\tau =0`$ and $`\tau =\beta `$ (in our quantum mechanical examples, the background field coincides with the boundary field, both being given by $`x`$; in general, the background is $`\tau `$-dependent).

Hopefully, both difficulties — the need to truncate and the nonlocality — can be circumvented in certain cases. Renormalization theory will dictate the dependence of the coefficients on the ultraviolet cutoff, so that nonrenormalizable terms will probably not contribute in the continuum limit, leading to a natural truncation. If, in addition, we investigate the infrared limit, as in the study of critical behavior near phase transitions, we might restrict our attention to the zero momentum limit of the coefficients, and recover a local structure. In summary, we hope that the combination of ultraviolet and infrared limits will restrict the form of the effective action, and give us a Landau-Ginzburg free energy of the expected form, whose parameters we will be able to compute from the underlying microscopic theory.

## Acknowledgments

R.M.C. acknowledges the financial support from CNPq. C.A.A.C. acknowledges support from CNPq and FUJB/UFRJ.


format: text

text:
# Low energy effective theory for two branes system – Covariant curvature formulation –

## I Introduction

The recent progress in superstring theory provides us the new picture of the universe, so called brane world, where our universe is like domain wall in higher dimensional spacetimes. The matter is confined on the 3-brane. The simplest model was proposed by Randall and Sundrum. In their model the bulk spacetimes is 5-dimensional anti-deSitter spacetimes and the brane is four dimensional Minkowski spacetimes. Their first model(RS1) gives us the geometrical solution to the gauge hierarchy problem. The RS1 model consists of two brane, the positive and negative tension branes. For the gauge hierarchy problem, it is supposed that the visible brane where we are is the negative tension one. The linealised theory has been carefully investigated in (See Ref.  for the cosmological cases. See Ref  for another issues.). As a result, it is turned out that the gravity on the brane looks like the scalar-tensor gravity. However, we have no successful analysis on the non-linear aspect of the gravity except for the second order perturbation. Recently there are impressive progress on this issue. In Ref. , the effective equation is derived at the low energy scale.

In this paper we re-derive the effective theory for two brane systems which was obtained by Kanno and Soda(See also ) in the metric based approach. On the other hand, our approach is based on the covariant curvature formalism. As seen later, our derivation is much simpler than the metric based approach and straightforward. The covariant curvature formalism gives us a gravitational equation on the branes. For RS2 models which consists of the single brane, this is powerful approach to look at the full view of the brane world. Indeed, it was easy to see that the Newton gravity is recovered at the low energy. The approach, however, is not regarded as so useful for RS1 models. We shall show this is not true. This is the main purpose in this paper. For simplicity, we will not address the stabilisation issue of two branes(radion stabilisation problems) .

The rest of this paper is organised as follows. In the section 2, we summarise the covariant curvature formalism. In the section 3, we formally solve the bulk perturbatively up to the 1st order. The infinitesimal and dimensionless parameter is the ratio of the bulk to brane curvature radii. After then we derive the effective theory at the 1st order. The equation includes the non-linear part of the induced gravity on the branes. In the section 4, we summarise the present work.

## II Covariant curvature formalism

We employ the following metric form***In Ref  it is assumed that $`\varphi (y,x)`$ does not depend on $`y`$. However, as seen later, the assumption can be removed.

$`ds^2=e^{2\varphi (y,x)}dy^2+q_{\mu \nu }(y,x)dx^\mu dx^\nu .`$ (1)
In the above it is supposed that the positive and negative tension branes are located at $`y=0`$ and $`y=y_0`$, respectively. The proper distance between two branes is given by $`d_0(x)=_0^{y_0}𝑑ye^{\varphi (y,x)}`$. $`q_{\mu \nu }(y,x)`$ is the induced metric of $`y=`$constant hypersurfaces.

We follow the geometrical procedure(covariant curvature formalism) developed in Ref. . For simplicity, we do not include the bulk fields except for the bulk consmological constant. From the Gauss-Codacci equations, first of all, we have two key equations

$`{}_{}{}^{(4)}G_{\nu }^{\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\mathrm{}^2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu +KK_\nu ^\mu K_\alpha ^\mu K_\nu ^\alpha `$ (3)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu (K^2K_\beta ^\alpha K_\alpha ^\beta )E_\nu ^\mu `$
and

$`D_\mu K_\nu ^\mu D_\mu K=0,`$ (4)
where $`D_\mu `$ is the covariant derivative with respect to $`q_{\mu \nu }`$. $`\mathrm{}`$ is the bulk curvature radius. $`{}_{}{}^{(4)}G_{\mu \nu }^{}`$ is the 4-dimensional Einstein tensor with respect to $`q_{\mu \nu }`$, $`K_{\mu \nu }`$ is the extrinsic curvature of $`y=`$constant hypersurfaces defined by

$`K_{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{£}_nq_{\mu \nu }=_\mu n_\nu +n_\mu D_\nu \varphi ,`$ (5)
where $`n=e^\varphi _y`$. Here note that $`a^\mu =n^\nu _\nu n^\mu =D^\mu \varphi (y,x)`$. $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ is a part of the projected Weyl tensor defined by

$`E_\nu ^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{}_{}{}^{(5)}C_{\mu \alpha \nu \beta }^{}n^\alpha n^\beta `$ (6)
$`=`$ $`D^\mu D_\nu \varphi D^\mu \varphi D_\nu \varphi \text{£}_nK_\nu ^\mu K_\alpha ^\mu K_\nu ^\alpha `$ (8)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu ,`$
where $`{}_{}{}^{(5)}C_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }^{}`$ is the 5-dimensional Weyl tensor.

The junction conditions on the branes are

$`[K_\nu ^\mu \delta _\nu ^\mu K]_{y=0}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}\left(\sigma _1\delta _\nu ^\mu +T_{1\nu }^\mu \right)`$ (9)
and

$`[K_\nu ^\mu \delta _\nu ^\mu K]_{y=y_0}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}\left(\sigma _2\delta _\nu ^\mu +T_{2\nu }^\mu \right).`$ (10)
$`T_{1\nu }^\mu `$ and $`T_{2\nu }^\mu `$ are the energy-momentum tensor localised on the positive and negative branes. $`\sigma _1`$ and $`\sigma _2`$ are the brane tensions. If one substitutes the above conditions to Eq (3), we might be able to derive the Einstein equation on the brane. Indeed, this was successful procedure for the single brane. This is because $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ comes from just Kaluza-Klein modes and vanishes at the low energy. For the two brane systems, on the other hand, we have to carefully evaluate $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ due to the existence of the radion fields. Otherwise, we have a wrong prediction on the gravity on the branes. So we need the evolutional equation for $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ in the bulk. Even for the low energy scale, we learned from the linealised theory that $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ is not negligible.

To evaluate $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ in the bulk, we derive its evolutional equation. The result is

$`\text{£}_nE_{\alpha \beta }`$ $`=`$ $`D^\mu B_{\mu (\alpha \beta )}+K^{\mu \nu }{}_{}{}^{(4)}C_{\mu \alpha \nu \beta }^{}+4K_{(\alpha }^\mu E_{\beta )\mu }`$ (14)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}KE_{\alpha \beta }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}q_{\alpha \beta }K^{\mu \nu }E_{\mu \nu }+2D^\mu \varphi B_{\mu (\alpha \beta )}`$
$`+2\stackrel{~}{K}_\alpha ^\mu \stackrel{~}{K}_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{K}_\beta ^\nu {\displaystyle \frac{7}{6}}\stackrel{~}{K}_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{K}^{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{K}_{\alpha \beta }`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}q_{\alpha \beta }\stackrel{~}{K}_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{K}_\rho ^\mu \stackrel{~}{K}^{\rho \nu },`$
where $`B_{\mu \nu \alpha }=q_\mu ^\rho q_\nu ^\sigma {}_{}{}^{(5)}C_{\rho \sigma \alpha \beta }^{}n^\beta `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{K}_{\mu \nu }=K_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{4}q_{\mu \nu }K`$. Since the right-hand side contains $`B_{\mu \nu \alpha }`$, $`K_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{(4)}C_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }^{}`$, we also need their evolutional equations. After long calculation we are resulted in

$`\text{£}_n{}_{}{}^{(4)}R_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }^{}+2{}_{}{}^{(4)}R_{\mu \nu \rho [\alpha }^{}K_{\beta ]}^\rho +2D_{[\mu }B_{|\alpha \beta |\nu ]}`$ (15)
$`+2(D_\mu D_{[\alpha }\varphi +D_\mu \varphi D_{[\alpha }\varphi )K_{\beta ]\nu }`$ (16)
$`2(D_\nu D_{[\alpha }\varphi D_\nu \varphi D_{[\alpha }\varphi )K_{\beta ]\mu }`$ (17)
$`2B_{\alpha \beta [\mu }D_{\nu ]}\varphi 2B_{\mu \nu [\alpha }D_{\beta ]}\varphi =0`$ (18)
$`\text{£}_nB_{\mu \nu \alpha }+2D_{[\mu }E_{\nu ]\alpha }+2D_{[\mu }\varphi E_{\nu ]\alpha }`$ (19)
$`B_{\mu \nu \beta }K_\alpha ^\beta +2B_{\alpha \beta [\mu }K_{\nu ]}^\beta `$ (20)
$`+({}_{}{}^{(4)}R_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }^{}K_{\mu \alpha }K_{\nu \beta }+K_{\mu \beta }K_{\nu \alpha })D^\beta \varphi =0`$ (21)
and

$`e^\varphi _yK_\nu ^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`D^\mu D_\nu \varphi D^\mu \varphi D_\nu \varphi `$ (23)
$`K_\alpha ^\mu K_\nu ^\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu E_\nu ^\mu .`$
Eq (23) is just the rearrangement of Eq (8). The derivation is basically same with that in Ref .

The junction condition directly implies the boundary condition on the branes for $`K_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`B_{\mu \nu \alpha }`$ because of

$`B_{\mu \nu \alpha }=2D_{[\mu }K_{\nu ]\alpha }.`$ (24)
## III Derivation of low energy effective theory

It is now ready to derive the low energy theory for two brane systems. To do so, as stressed in the previous section, we must know $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ and solve the equation for $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ in the bulk. By low energy we mean that the typical scale of the curvature scale($`L`$) on the brane is much larger than the bulk curvature scale($`\mathrm{}`$), that is, $`L\mathrm{}`$. The dimensionless parameter is $`ϵ=(\mathrm{}/L)^2`$ which is tacitly entered into the equations below. We expand $`K_\nu ^\mu `$ and $`E_\nu ^\mu `$ as

$`K_\nu ^\mu ={}_{}{}^{(0)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }+{}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }+\mathrm{}`$ (25)
and

$`E_\nu ^\mu ={}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\nu }^{\mu }+\mathrm{}.`$ (26)
### A 0-th order

At the 0-th order, the evolutional equation which we have to solve is only one for $`K_{\mu \nu }`$;

$`e^\varphi _y{}_{}{}^{(0)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu {}_{}{}^{(0)}K_{\alpha }^{\mu }{}_{}{}^{(0)}K_{\nu }^{\alpha }.`$ (27)
And $`K_{\mu \nu }`$ satisfies the constraint

$`D_\mu {}_{}{}^{(0)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }D_\nu {}_{}{}^{(0)}K=0.`$ (28)
It is easy to see that the solution is

$`{}_{}{}^{(0)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}\delta _\nu ^\mu .`$ (29)
From the definition

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}e^\varphi _y{}_{}{}^{(0)}q_{\mu \nu }^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}{}_{}{}^{(0)}q_{\mu \nu }^{},`$ (30)
the metric at the 0th order becomes

$`{}_{}{}^{(0)}q_{\mu \nu }^{}(y,x)=e^{2d(y,x)/\mathrm{}}h_{\mu \nu }(x),`$ (31)
where $`h_{\mu \nu }(x)`$ is a tensor field depending on only the coordinate $`x`$ on the brane and $`d(y,x)=_0^ye^{\varphi (y^{},x)}𝑑y^{}`$.

At this order the junction condition is

$`[{}_{}{}^{(0)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }\delta _\nu ^\mu {}_{}{}^{(0)}K]_{y=0}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}\sigma _1\delta _\nu ^\mu `$ (32)
and

$`[{}_{}{}^{(0)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }\delta _\nu ^\mu {}_{}{}^{(0)}K]_{y=y_0}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}\sigma _2\delta _\nu ^\mu .`$ (33)
Thus the junction condition implies the relation between the bulk curvature radius $`\mathrm{}`$ and the brane tension $`\sigma _{1,2}`$ as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\kappa ^2\sigma _1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\kappa ^2\sigma _2.`$ (34)
This is just the fine-tuning of Randall-Sundrum models.

### B 1st order

At the first order, the Riemann tensor does appear in the basic equations. So we can expect that the Einstein field equation will be able to described at this order. Indeed, the Gauss equation of Eq (3) becomes

$`{}_{}{}^{(4)}G_{\nu }^{\mu }={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{}}}({}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }\delta _\nu ^\mu {}_{}{}^{(1)}K){}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\nu }^{\mu }.`$ (35)
The first term in the right-hand side will be easily written in terms of the energy-momentum tensor on the branes using the junction condition at this order. So the unknown tensor is $`{}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\nu }^{\mu }`$.

The evolutional equation which we must solve are

$`e^\varphi _y{}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\mu \nu }^{}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{}}}{}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\mu \nu }^{}.`$ (36)
and

$`e^\varphi _y{}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`(D^\mu D_\nu \varphi +D^\mu \varphi D_\nu \varphi )`$ (38)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{}}}{}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }{}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\nu }^{\mu }.`$
Eq (36) is easily solved as

$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\mu \nu }^{}=e^{2d(y,x)/\mathrm{}}e_{\mu \nu }(x),`$ (39)
or

$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\nu }^{\mu }=e^{4d(y,x)/\mathrm{}}\widehat{e}_\nu ^\mu (x),`$ (40)
where $`\widehat{e}_\nu ^\mu (x)=h^{\mu \alpha }e_{\alpha \nu }(x)`$.

Substituting the expression Eq (40) into Eq (38), we can obtain the solution for $`{}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }`$ easily;

$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }(y,x)`$ (41)
$`=e^{2d/\mathrm{}}{}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }(0,x){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2}}(1e^{2d/\mathrm{}}){}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\nu }^{\mu }(y,x)`$ (42)
$`\left[D^\mu D_\nu d{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}\left(D^\mu dD_\nu d{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu (Dd)^2\right)\right]`$ (43)
For the comparison, note that $`e_{\mu \nu }`$ cannot be determined by the junction condition in the RS2 model. To do so we need the boundary condition near the Cauchy horizon.

### C Low energy effective theory for two brane systems

At the 1st order the junction condition on the positive and negative tension branes becomes

$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }(0,x)\delta _\nu ^\mu {}_{}{}^{(1)}K(0,x)={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}T_{1\nu }^\mu `$ (44)
and

$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }(y_0,x)\delta _\nu ^\mu {}_{}{}^{(1)}K(y_0,x)={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}T_{2\nu }^\mu .`$ (45)
Using the above Eq (45), the Gauss equation on the negative tension brane becomes

$`{}_{}{}^{(4)}G_{\nu }^{\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{}}}\left({}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }(y_0,x)\delta _\nu ^\mu {}_{}{}^{(1)}K(y_0,x)\right)`$ (47)
$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\nu }^{\mu }(y_0,x)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{\mathrm{}}}T_{2\nu }^\mu {}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\nu }^{\mu }(y_0,x).`$ (48)
Using the expression of Eq (43), the junction condition on the negative tension brane is written as

$`{}_{}{}^{(1)}K_{\nu }^{\mu }(y_0,x)\delta _\nu ^\mu {}_{}{}^{(1)}K(y_0,x)`$ (49)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}e^{2d_0/\mathrm{}}T_{1\nu }^\mu `$ (50)
$`\left(D^\mu D_\nu d_0D^\mu D_\nu d_0\right)`$ (51)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}\left(D^\mu d_0D_\nu d_0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu (Dd_0)^2\right)`$ (52)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2}}(1e^{2d_0/\mathrm{}}){}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\nu }^{\mu }(d_0,x)`$ (53)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}T_{2\nu }^\mu .`$ (54)
In the right-hand side of the first line, we used the solution of Eq (43). The second line is just junction condition. From Eq (54), then, the tensor $`e_{\mu \nu }`$(and then $`{}_{}{}^{(1)}E_{\mu \nu }^{}`$) is completely fixed as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2}}(1e^{2d_0/\mathrm{}})e^{4d_0/\mathrm{}}\widehat{e}_\nu ^\mu (x)`$ (55)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}(e^{2d_0/\mathrm{}}T_{1\nu }^\mu +T_{2\nu }^\mu )`$ (56)
$`\left(D^\mu D_\nu d_0\delta _\nu ^\mu D^2d_0\right)`$ (57)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}\left(D^\mu d_0D_\nu d_0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu (Dd_0)^2\right).`$ (58)
The trace of Eq (58) gives the equation for $`d_0`$ because $`e_\nu ^\mu `$ is traceless. In general the radion field is massive. Substituting Eq (58) into the Gauss equation at the first order, we can obtain the effective equation on the branes. On the negative tension brane, we have

$`{}_{}{}^{(4)}G_{\nu }^{\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}T_{2\nu }^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1+\mathrm{\Phi })^2}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}T_{1\nu }^\mu `$ (61)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}(D^\mu D_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }\delta _\nu ^\mu D^2\mathrm{\Phi })`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega (\mathrm{\Phi })}{\mathrm{\Phi }^2}}\left(D^\mu \mathrm{\Phi }D_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu (D\mathrm{\Phi })^2\right),`$
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }=e^{2d_0/\mathrm{}}1`$ and $`\omega (\mathrm{\Phi })=\frac{3}{2}\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{1+\mathrm{\Phi }}`$. As should be so, this is exactly same result obtained by Kanno and Soda. We also derive the effective equation on the positive tension brane easily;

$`{}_{}{}^{(4)}G_{\nu }^{\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Psi }}}T_{1\nu }^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1\mathrm{\Psi })^2}{\mathrm{\Psi }}}T_{2\nu }^\mu `$ (64)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Psi }}}(\widehat{D}^\mu \widehat{D}_\nu \mathrm{\Psi }\delta _\nu ^\mu \widehat{D}^2\mathrm{\Psi })`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega (\mathrm{\Psi })}{\mathrm{\Psi }^2}}\left(\widehat{D}^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }\widehat{D}_\nu \mathrm{\Psi }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _\nu ^\mu (\widehat{D}\mathrm{\Psi })^2\right),`$
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }=1e^{2d_0/\mathrm{}}`$, $`\omega (\mathrm{\Psi })=\frac{3}{2}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{1\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ and $`\widehat{D}`$ is the covariant derivative with respect to the induced metric $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ on the positive tension brane.

## IV Summary

In this paper we derived the gravitational equation on the branes for the two brane systems at the low energy using the covariant curvature formalism and low energy expansion scheme. The theory obtained here is presumably applicable to the cosmology and non-linear gravity at low energy scales. What we have done here is the evaluation of $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ at the low energy. In Ref , we thought that the anti-gravity appears on the negative tension brane supposing $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ is negligible. However, this is not correct and $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ is not negligible even at the low energy.

Here we should comment on the difference between the study in Ref  and the present one. In Ref  $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ appears as the “constant of integration”. Thus it is difficult to proceed the discussion while keeping the physical meaning. This is just because of the metric based approach. On the other hand, $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ explicitly enters into the basic equations in the covariant curvature formalism and its physican meaning is manifest. Yet, the evolutional equation for $`E_{\mu \nu }`$ is simple at the low energy limit.

For simplicity, we focused on the two brane systems without the radion stabilisation. If one is serious about the gauge hierarchy problem, we must assume that we are living on the negative tension brane. In this case, the gravity on the negative tension brane is scalar-tensor type and the scalar coupling is not permitted from the experimental point of view. So we should reconstruct our formalism in two brane systems with the radion stabilisation mechanism. This issue is left for future study.

We are also interested in the higher order effects. We can expect that the effective theory with higher order corrections is higher-derivative type due to the non-local feature of the brane world.

## Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Jiro Soda, Sugumi Kanno, Daisuke Ida and Roy Maartens for fruitful discussions. TS’s work is supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan(No. 13135208, No.14740155 and No.14102004).


text:
# Ground State Phase Diagram of 2D Electrons in High Magnetic Field

## 1 Introduction

Electrons in high magnetic field in two dimensional systems exhibit various interesting phenomena as a typical many body interacting system. In two dimensional systems, kinetic energy of electrons is completely quenched by perpendicular magnetic field and remaining macroscopic degeneracy is lifted by Coulomb interaction. This is the origin of many exotic behaviors of quantum Hall systems and the reason why much effort has been needed to understand these systems.

As typical ground states in strong magnetic field, Laughlin state and Wigner crystal have attracted much attention. Laughlin state is a quantum liquid with an excitation gap, which is an exact ground state for strong short range repulsive interaction at $`\nu =1/(2m+1)`$.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ On the other hand, Wigner crystal is the ground state of classical point particles realized in the limit of strong magnetic field. Their relative stability depends on the ratio between the magnetic length $`\mathrm{}=(\mathrm{}c/eB)^{1/2}`$, which is the length scale of one particle wave function, and the mean distance between the electrons $`n^{1/2}`$ given by the density $`n`$ of two-dimensional electrons. Thus the determination of the ground state phase diagram with respect to the filling factor $`\nu =2\pi \mathrm{}^2n`$ is an interesting issue for understanding the competition between completely different electronic states.

Experimentally, clear fractional quantum Hall effect has been observed at $`\nu =1/3`$,$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ which is naturally explained by Laughlin state,$`^{\text{?)}}`$ and exact numerical diagonalizations confirmed its existence in the lowest Landau level.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ The formation of Wigner crystal has been supported by experiments on transport properties at low fillings $`\nu \stackrel{<}{_{}}1/5`$, where observed insulating behavior is explained by the pinning of Wigner crystal by residual potential fluctuations.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$

With decreasing magnetic field, part of electrons occupy higher Landau levels. In higher Landau levels, one particle wave function extends over space with oscillations, and this change modifies effective interaction between the electrons in each Landau level. Since extended one particle wave function generates long range exchange interaction, Laughlin state stabilized by strong short range interaction will be unstable. Instead, long range interaction favors charge density waves (CDW’s). Within a Hartree-Fock approximation, Koulakov et al. showed that CDW’s called ’stripe’ and ’bubble’ are stable against Laughlin state in higher Landau levels with index $`N2`$ .$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ After their calculations, anisotropic resistivity consistent with uniaxial electronic state of stripe order has been experimentally observed.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$

In the second lowest Landau level, more interesting ground states are expected. At $`\nu _N=1/2`$, where $`\nu _N`$ is the filling factor of partially filled Landau level, BCS type pairing state has been proposed$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ to explain even denominator fractional quantum Hall effect.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ Around $`\nu _N=0.4`$ and $`\nu _N=0.24`$, reentrant integer quantum Hall effects have been observed.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ At $`\nu _N=1/3`$ and $`1/5`$, fractional quantum Hall effects have been observed.$`^{\text{?, ?)}}`$ The origin of these phenomena is still unclear and systematic study is needed.

In order to identify diverse ground states and determine the ground state phase diagram, we have to solve quantum many body problem of Coulomb interaction. In the present study we use the density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) algorithm$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ to deal with large size systems extending limitation of exact diagonalizations, and systematically calculate the ground state wave function and excitation energies for the lowest and the second lowest Landau levels. Based on the pair correlation functions and the excitation energies, we determine the ground state phase diagram, which consists of incompressible liquid state, compressible liquid state, stripe state, paring state, and Wigner crystal.

## 2 Model and Method

The Hamiltonian for electrons in Landau levels contains only Coulomb interaction. After the projection onto the Landau level with index $`N`$, the Coulomb interaction is written as

$$H=\underset{i<j}{}\underset{𝐪}{}e^{q^2/2}\left[L_N(q^2/2)\right]^2V(q)e^{i𝐪(𝐑_i𝐑_j)},$$
(2.1)
where $`𝐑_i`$ is the guiding center coordinate of the $`i`$th electron, which satisfies the commutation relation, $`[R_j^x,R_k^y]=i\mathrm{}^2\delta _{jk}`$, $`L_N(x)`$ are the Laguerre polynomials, and $`V(q)=2\pi e^2/\epsilon q`$ is the Fourier transform of the Coulomb interaction. The magnetic length $`\mathrm{}`$ is set to be 1, and we take $`e^2/\epsilon \mathrm{}`$ as units of energy scale. We omit the component at $`q=0`$, which is canceled by uniform positive background charge. We assume completely spin polarized ground state and neglect the electrons in fully occupied Landau levels. We also assume that the width of the wave function perpendicular to the two dimensional plane is sufficiently small compared with $`\mathrm{}`$.

In order to obtain the ground state of the Hamiltonian, we employ the DMRG method.$`^{\text{?, ?)}}`$ This method enables us to calculate ground state wave function of large systems with controlled accuracy. The algorithm of this method is summarized as follows: We start from a small system, i.e. a system consisting of only four local orbitals. We divide the system into two blocks, and add new orbitals at the end of two blocks to expand the blocks. We then calculate the ground state wave function of the total system and obtain the density matrix of each expanded blocks. We then restrict the basis states in the expanded blocks by keeping only eigenstates of large eigenvalues of the density matrix. We add new orbitals again and repeat the above procedure until we get desired size of system. We then use the finite system algorithm of the DMRG to improve the ground state wave function. After several sweeps, we obtain the most optimal ground state within the restricted number of basis states. The error due to the truncation of basis states is estimated from the eigenvalues of the density matrix, and the accuracy of the wave function is systematically improved by increasing the number of basis states kept in the blocks.

## 3 Results

In the following, we calculate ground state wave function of the Hamiltonian for Landau levels of $`N=0`$ and $`1`$. We study various size of systems with up to 25 electrons in the unit cell of $`L_x\times L_y`$ with periodic boundary conditions in both $`x`$ and $`y`$ directions. We choose the aspect ratio $`L_x/L_y`$ by the position of the energy minimum with respect to $`L_x/L_y`$ in order to avoid artificial determination of the periodicity of CDW’s. The truncation error in the DMRG calculation is typically $`10^4`$ for 25 electrons with 180 states in each blocks. The existing results of exact diagonalizations are completely reproduced within the truncation error. Since the present Hamiltonian has the particle-hole symmetry, we only consider the case of $`\nu _N1/2`$.

### 3.1 Compressible liquid at $`\nu =1/2`$

We first investigate the ground state at $`\nu =1/2`$ in the lowest Landau level. Since the denominator of $`\nu `$ is even and the filling factor is large, the ground state is neither Laughlin state nor Wigner crystal. Based on the composite fermion theory, the flux attached to the electrons completely cancels external magnetic field within the mean field level and Fermi liquid ground state is expected.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ Indeed, experiments show saturation in longitudinal resistivity at low temperatures,$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ which is consistent with Fermi liquid like compressible ground state.

In order to confirm the compressible ground state, we first analyze size dependence of the excitation gap. The obtained results for systems with up to 25 electrons are shown in Fig. 1. Although the excitation gap does not follow single scaling function, all the results are smaller than the upper bound shown by the dashed line, which is proportional to $`N_s^{1/2}`$, where $`N_s`$ is the number of one-particle states in the unit cell. We thus expect vanishing of the excitation gap in the thermodynamic limit. We find small excitation gap at small number of electrons. Such vanishing excitation gap appears for free electrons in the square unit cell at $`N_e=2`$,3,4,6,7,8,10,11,12,14,15,$`\mathrm{}`$, with periodic boundary conditions. This means large excitation gap appears only at $`N_e=1`$,5,9,13,21,25,$`\mathrm{}`$, where electrons occupy all the degenerate states forming closed shell. The present result of interacting system also shows a shell structure but it is not the same to that of free electrons in contrast to the results in the spherical geometry, where the same shell structure is obtained.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ Nevertheless, the estimated effective mass $`1/m^{}`$ of the composite fermion determined from the value of the gap at $`N_e=9`$ and $`25`$ is 0.12 and 0.27, respectively, in units of $`e^2/\epsilon \mathrm{}`$, which are roughly consistent with the result 0.20 obtained from the exact diagonalizations in the system of spherical geometry.$`^{\text{?)}}`$

In Fig. 2 (a) we show the ground state pair correlation function defined in the following equation:

$$g(𝐫)\frac{L_xL_y}{N_e(N_e1)}\mathrm{\Psi }|\underset{ij}{}\delta (𝐫+𝐑_i𝐑_j)|\mathrm{\Psi },$$
(3.1)
where $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is the ground state. The correlation function is circularly symmetric and short range power low exponent is two as shown in Fig. 3. These results are also consistent with gapless liquid ground state.

### 3.2 Incompressible liquids at $`\nu =n/(1+2n)`$

When we decrease filling factor from 1/2, fractional quantum Hall effects are experimentally observed at various fractional fillings.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ In particular, the primary series of $`\nu =n/(1+2n)`$ with $`n=1,2,3,4,5`$ is well known for its large excitation gap. Here, we confirm the existence of excitation gap at $`\nu =n/(1+2n)`$ by systematically calculating the lowest excitation gap for filling factors between $`\nu =0.3`$ and 0.5. The obtained result for systems with 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 24, and 25 electrons are shown in Fig. 4. As is clearly seen, large excitation gap is obtained for $`\nu =n/(1+2n)`$. The size of the gap decreases with increasing $`n`$, and its dependence is consistent with experiments. Based on the composite fermion theory, the effective mass is estimated from the excitation gap. The estimated value of $`1/m^{}`$ in units of $`e^2/\epsilon \mathrm{}`$ is around 0.23, which is almost the same to the value $`0.2`$ determined at $`\nu =1/2`$. We mention that the composite fermion picture also predicts small excitation gap in finite system at $`\nu =4/11`$,$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ which is consistent with the present result shown in Fig. 4.

In order to confirm liquid ground state at $`\nu =n/(1+2n)`$, we next see the ground state pair correlation functions. The results for $`\nu =5/11,2/5`$, and $`1/3`$ are shown in Figs. 2 (b), (c) and (f), respectively. As is seen, the correlation functions are circularly symmetric, which confirms liquid ground state.

### 3.3 Weak stripes below $`\nu 0.42`$

We next consider almost gapless ground state between the incompressible liquid states. In Figs. 2 (d), (e), (g), and (h), the pair correlation functions at $`\nu =10/27`$, $`5/14`$, $`4/13`$ and $`1/4`$ are shown. We find weak stripe correlations. Similar stripes are observed for $`\nu \stackrel{<}{_{}}10/24`$ except around the incompressible states at $`\nu =2/5`$ and $`1/3`$. The stripe correlations are gradually enhanced with decreasing $`\nu `$ as shown in Fig. 5. We think the gradual enhancement in the stripe correlations are due to the instability to Wigner crystal, and quantum fluctuations partially melt Wigner crystal to form stripe ground state. In fact, short range correlations below $`r5\mathrm{}`$ are almost the same to that of Wigner crystal. This is clearly different from the stripe state observed in higher Landau levels, where anisotropic resistivity is experimentally observed. The difference from the stripe state in higher Landau levels is clearly shown in §3.4. We note that the present results are different from those obtained in recent studies around $`\nu =3/8`$, where stripe state with much longer period of $`10\mathrm{}`$$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ and bubble state around $`\nu =3/8`$$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ are predicted based on the composite fermion theory. The present DMRG results show that the period of the stripes at $`\nu =3/8`$ is about $`4\mathrm{}`$ as shown in Fig. 3 and the stripe state is stable in wide range below $`\nu 0.42`$ except around incompressible state at $`\nu =2/5`$ and $`1/3`$. Detailed study at $`\nu =3/8`$ with small size dependence of the stripes will be published elsewhere.

### 3.4 Laughlin state and stripe order at $`\nu =1/5`$

The stripe correlation in the ground state is enhanced with decreasing $`\nu `$. The correlation function is anisotropic even at $`\nu =1/5`$ as shown in Fig. 6 (b), and it is not clear whether there exist transition to incompressible state around $`\nu 1/5`$. In order to identify the ground state at $`\nu =1/5`$, we introduce Haldane’s pseudo potentials $`V_m`$ between the electrons.$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ It is shown that the Laughlin state at $`\nu =1/5`$ is an exact ground state for strong short range repulsive interaction consisting of only $`V_1`$ and $`V_3`$, which act only between electron pairs whose relative angular momentum $`m`$ is 1 and 3, respectively. Thus we can see how the ground state connects to Laughlin state with increasing $`V_1`$ and $`V_3`$ from its values of the pure Coulomb interaction. If there exist no phase transition, the ground state is in the same phase characterized by Laughlin state.

In order to clarify whether there is a phase transition, we calculate the low energy excitations as a function of $`V_3`$. Since $`V_1`$ of pure Coulomb interaction is already large in the lowest Landau level with a small probability of finding electron pairs whose relative angular momentum is 1 for $`\nu <1/3`$, we change only $`V_3`$.

Figure 7 shows the $`V_3`$-dependence of the ground state energy and the first excited state energy at $`\nu =1/5`$ with 12 electrons. With increasing $`V_3`$ from $`\delta V_3=0`$, the ground state energy monotonically changes and the excitation gap continuously increases. The ground state correlation function at $`\delta V_3=0.24`$ shown in Fig. 6 (a) is circularly symmetric and it is well characterized by Laughlin state. Since no phase transition is detected, the ground state of pure Coulomb interaction belongs to the same phase of Laughlin state.

When we decrease $`V_3`$ from $`\delta V_3=0`$, however, significant change occurs in the ground state. As shown in Fig. 7, the slope of the ground state energy clearly changes at $`\delta V_3=0.04`$. This change in the ground state energy reflects the qualitative change in short range correlation functions. As is shown in Fig. 8, the shoulder structure at $`x3\mathrm{}`$ develops below $`\delta V_30.04`$ and it makes clear anisotropy around $`r4\mathrm{}`$. The shape of the correlation function for $`\delta V_3<0.04`$ is almost the same to that realized in higher Landau levels and clearly different from the stripe structure of pure Coulomb interaction in the lowest Landau level around $`\nu =1/5`$.

### 3.5 Transition to Wigner crystal

In the limit of low filling, the magnetic length $`\mathrm{}`$ becomes negligible compared with the mean distance between the electrons. Since $`\mathrm{}`$ is the length scale of one particle wave function, the electrons can be treated as classical point charges, and the ground state is expected to be Wigner crystal. In order to confirm the existence of Wigner crystal at finite $`\nu `$, we next see pair correlation functions in the ground state at low fillings. The ground state pair correlation functions below $`\nu =3/8`$ in Figs. 5 and 9 (a) show that the stripe structure remains stable down to $`\nu 1/6`$, although it seems to approach hexagonal structure of Wigner crystal.

At $`\nu =1/6`$ the Wigner crystal is realized in an excited state close to the ground state. The correlation function of the Wigner crystal and the energy difference from the ground state are shown in Fig. 9 (b) and (c). The energy difference almost linearly decreases with decreasing $`\nu `$ except at $`\nu =1/5`$, where the ground state is characterized by Laughlin state. Linear extrapolation on $`\nu `$ shows the crossing of the two energy levels at around $`\nu =1/7`$. Since the momentum of the two states are different, we expect first order transition to the Wigner crystal at $`\nu _c1/7`$. The value of the critical filling $`\nu _c`$ is consistent with previous studies,$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ although exact diagonalizations of 6-electrons predict second order or weak first order transition.$`^{\text{?)}}`$

### 3.6 Phase diagram of $`N=0`$ Landau level

The present DMRG calculation shows the existence of four different ground states: the compressible liquid around $`\nu =1/2`$, the incompressible liquid at $`\nu =n/(2n+1)`$ and $`1/5`$, the weak stripe state below $`\nu 0.42`$, and Wigner crystal below $`\nu _c1/7`$. From the above results, the ground state phase diagram is determined as shown in Fig. 10. Precise critical fillings and the nature of the transitions are not clear for the boundary between the liquid states and the weak stripe state, but the transition to Wigner crystal is expected to be first order. The weak stripe structure found below $`\nu 0.42`$ has clear oscillations along the stripes and this is clearly different from the stripe state realized in higher Landau levels. The ground state at $`\nu =1/5`$ continuously connects to the Laughlin state realized in the limit of large $`V_1`$ and $`V_3`$, while the size of the excitation gap is vary small compared with the gap at $`\nu =1/3`$. The pair correlation function at $`\nu =1/5`$ is strongly modified from circularly symmetric one, because $`V_3`$ of the Coulomb interaction is located close to the boundary between Laughlin state and stripe state.

### 3.7 Pairing state at half filling in $`N=1`$ Landau level

We next investigate the ground state in the second lowest Landau level. At $`\nu _N=1/2`$, fractional quantum Hall effect has been experimentally observed.$`^{\text{?)}}`$ To explain the fractional quantization, $`p`$-wave pairing formation of electrons has been proposed.$`^{\text{?, ?, ?)}}`$ In particular, recent studies based on exact diagonalizations suggest Paffiann state of triplet spin pair.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$

In the present study we introduce Haldane’s pseudo-potential $`V_1`$ in the second lowest Landau level. We calculate the excitation energies and the pair correlation functions at various $`V_1`$. In Fig. 11 we show the total energy of the ground state and several low energy excited states as a function of $`\delta V_1`$. We find two characteristic $`\delta V_1`$ where structure of the low energy spectrum changes. One is located slightly below $`\delta V_1=0`$ and the other is around $`\delta V_1=0.03`$ as shown in the figure by arrows. Below $`\delta V_1=0`$ the ground state is almost degenerate and the pair correlation function is characterized by clear stripes as shown in Fig. 12 (c). For $`V_1>0.03`$, the ground state and low energy excited states is almost independent of $`V_1`$. The correlation function is circularly symmetric with weak oscillations as shown in Fig. 12 (a), and it is similar to that observed at $`\nu =1/2`$ in the lowest Landau level, where excitation gap vanishes in the thermodynamic limit. Since sufficiently large $`\delta V_1`$ effectively maps the system onto the lowest Landau level, we expect that the ground state is compressible liquid for $`\delta V_1>0.03`$.

Between $`\delta V_1=0.0`$ and $`0.03`$, the ground state is clearly different from the stripe state. The correlation function clearly decays at long distance as shown in Fig. 12 (b) and the degeneracy in the ground state is lifted with a finite excitation gap of order 0.01. Compared with the compressible liquid state at $`\delta V_1>0.03`$, the correlation function is different at short distance as shown in Fig. 12 (d), which shows the difference in the correlation function between $`\delta V_1=0.01`$ and $`0.06`$: $`g(r)_{\delta V_1=0.01}g(r)_{\delta V_1=0.06}`$. In this figure, we can see that electrons are attracted around the origin $`r1.5`$ consistent with the pair formation.

### 3.8 Stripes away from half filling in $`N=1`$ Landau level

We next investigate the ground state away from half filling. The pair correlation functions for $`\nu =`$ 4/9, 2/5, 4/11, and 1/3 with 16 electrons in the unit cell are presented in Fig. 13. These results clearly show the existence of the stripe correlations even in the second lowest Landau level near half filling. In order to see detailed structure of the stripes we show the correlation functions on the $`x`$ and $`y`$ axes in Fig. 14. As is shown, the correlation function on the $`y`$-axis at $`\nu =`$ 4/9 and 2/5 shows monotonic increase from the origin and it becomes almost constant at a long distance. This is the same structure of the stripes observed in higher Landau levels near half filling as shown in Fig. 15. Compared with the stripes in $`N=2`$ Landau level, the amplitude of the oscillations on the $`x`$-axis is about 50% smaller and their period is 30% shorter. This means the strips in $`N=1`$ Landau level is likely to be disturbed by residual potential fluctuations and temperatures. We think this may be a reason why anisotropic resistivity is not clearly observed in the second lowest Landau level.

With further decreasing $`\nu `$, character of the stripes changes at $`\nu 4/11`$. This is clearly shown in the correlation functions along the stripes in Fig. 14. The correlation function for $`\nu <4/11`$ shows weak oscillations along the stripes, which is similar to the stripe structure in the lowest Landau level. The oscillations on the stripes are enhanced with decreasing $`\nu `$ and the ground state becomes almost the same to that in the lowest Landau level except at $`\nu =1/3`$. At low fillings $`\nu <1/4`$, the correlation functions in $`N`$=0 and 1 Landau levels are almost identical with each other. The similarity of the ground state between the two Landau levels at $`\nu =1/4`$ has been shown by previous calculations.$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$

At $`\nu =1/3`$, the ground state correlation function is clearly different from that of the lowest Landau level. Compared with Laughlin state in the lowest Landau level, short range correlation below $`r2\mathrm{}`$ is enhanced and clear oscillations exist at long distance as shown in Fig. 16. This is due to the large reduction of short range interaction $`V_1`$, which stabilizes Laughlin state.

In order to see the effect of $`V_1`$ on the ground state, we show in Fig. 17 the energies of the ground state and excited state as a function of $`V_1`$. The excitation gap monotonically increases with increasing $`V_1`$ from $`\delta V_1=0`$ and no phase transition is detected. Since the ground state at large $`V_1`$ is Laughlin state as shown in Fig. 18 (c), where the correlation functions at $`\delta V_1=0.08`$ is almost identical to that in the lowest Landau level, the present result shows the ground state at $`\delta V_1=0`$ continuously connects to Laughlin state. However, the excitation gap is very small at $`\delta V_1=0`$ compared with the gap in the lowest Landau level and slight decrease in $`V_1`$ leads to the transition to stripe state as shown in Fig. 17. The correlation function of the stripe state at $`\delta V_1=0.02`$ is shown in Fig. 18 (b), which is similar to the stripe state near half filling. With further decreasing $`V_1`$, first order transition to two-electron bubble phase occurs at $`\delta V_10.04`$. This is consistent with the results in higher Landau levels, where bubble state is realized at $`\nu _N=1/3`$ in $`N=2`$ Landau level.$`^{\text{?, }\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$

In contrast to the ground state at $`\nu _N=1/3`$, the correlation function at $`\nu _N=1/5`$ is almost the same to that in the lowest Landau level as shown in Fig. 16. This is not surprising because $`V_3`$ of the second lowest Landau level is larger than that of the lowest Landau level. Since Laughlin state at $`\nu _N=1/5`$ is stabilized by $`V_1`$ and $`V_3`$, large $`V_3`$ compared with other $`V_m`$ stabilizes Laughlin state similarly to the lowest Landau level, although circularly symmetric correlation function is strongly modified by the presence of other pseudo-potentials $`V_m`$ of Coulomb interaction.

### 3.9 Transition to Wigner crystal

At sufficiently small $`\nu _N`$, the Wigner crystal is realized in the ground state even in high Landau levels, because electrons can be treated as point particles when mean distance between the electrons becomes much longer than typical length scale of the one-particle wave function. In order to study the transition to Wigner crystal in the second lowest Landau level, we calculate the energy of Wigner crystal and compare with the ground state energy. The energy difference between the two states and the correlation functions of the guiding center are shown in Figs. 19 and 20, respectively. The energy difference between the two states monotonically decreases except at $`\nu _N=1/5`$, where the ground state continuously connects to Laughlin state. The singular behavior at $`\nu _N=1/5`$ is due to the decrease in the ground state energy. The linear extrapolation of the energy difference with respect to $`\nu _N`$ shows first order transition to Wigner crystal at $`\nu _N1/7`$.

### 3.10 Phase diagram of $`N=1`$ Landau level

The ground state phase diagram of the second lowest Landau level is shown in Fig. 21. At half filling, the ground state pair correlation function suggests pairing state. This ground state is different from both the stripe state in higher Landau levels and the compressible liquid state in the lowest Landau level. With decreasing $`\nu _N`$, however, stripe state similar to that in higher Landau levels is realized with small amplitude of the stripes (stripe I), which is 50% smaller than that in $`N=2`$ Landau level. With further decreasing $`\nu _N`$, clear oscillations along the stripes appear below $`\nu 4/11`$ (stripe II). This structure is similar to the stripes in the lowest Landau level. At $`\nu _N=1/3`$, the ground state belongs to the same phase of Laughlin state in the lowest Landau level, but correlation function shows clear oscillations at long distance. This is due to the proximity to the boundary between Laughlin state and stripe state. Below $`\nu _N1/4`$, the correlation functions are almost identical to that in the lowest Landau level, and thus the ground state is almost the same between the two Landau levels. The ground state at $`\nu _N=1/5`$ is expected to be in the same phase of Laughlin state. The first order transition to Wigner crystal is expected to occur at $`\nu _N1/7`$.

## 4 Summary and Discussion

In the present paper we have studied ground state pair correlation functions and low energy excitations of 2D electrons in the lowest and the second lowest Landau levels by using DMRG method. We have assumed completely spin polarized state and neglected Landau level mixing. The obtained results in the lowest Landau level confirmed the existence of compressible liquid at $`\nu =1/2`$, incompressible liquid at $`\nu =n/(1+2n)`$ and $`1/5`$, and Wigner crystal below $`\nu 1/7`$. We have found new stripe state between $`\nu 0.42`$ and $`1/7`$, whose correlation function shows oscillations along the stripes, which is different from the stripes in higher Landau levels. In the second lowest Landau level, pairing state at $`\nu _N=1/2`$ has been confirmed. The ground state is close to the phase boundary between the pairing state and stripe state, and decrease in $`V_1`$ of about 2% is enough for the transition to the stripe state. Between $`\nu _N0.47`$ and $`0.38`$ we have found stripe state similar to that in higher Landau levels with small amplitude of stripes. We have also found stripe state similar to that in the lowest Landau level between $`\nu _N0.38`$ and $`1/7`$. At low fillings $`\nu _N<1/3`$, the ground state is almost the same to that in the lowest Landau level. This is due to the fact that $`V_3`$ of the second lowest Landau level, which is the dominant interaction for $`\nu _N<1/3`$, is slightly increased from that in the lowest Landau level, and this increase stabilizes the ground state realized in the lowest Landau level.

We have also shown the existence of incompressible liquids at $`\nu _N=1/3`$ and $`1/5`$ in the second lowest Landau level. The size of the gap at $`\nu _N=1/3`$ is very small compared with that in the lowest Landau level and slight decrease in $`V_1`$ of about 0.01 leads to the transition to stripe state. In actual systems, the wave function has finite width in the direction perpendicular to the two-dimensional plane. Since finite width reduces $`V_1`$ from the value of ideal two dimensional system, incompressible liquid at $`\nu _N=1/3`$ will not be realized in systems of wide quantum well. Our estimate shows the critical width is about $`4\mathrm{}`$ for rigid density distribution in the direction perpendicular to the two-dimensional plane in square potential well.

Recent experiment on the second lowest Landau level shows that there exist reentrant integer quantum Hall states around $`\nu _N=0.42`$ and $`\nu _N=0.25`$.$`^{\text{?)}}`$ Our results suggest reentrant phase around $`\nu _N=0.42`$ corresponds to the stripe phase near half filling, although the mechanism of the integer quantum Hall effect is still not clear. Since the amplitude of the stripes is small compared with that of higher Landau levels, it is expected that weak random potentials disturb stripe correlations and insulating state pined by residual potential fluctuations is realized before forming stripe state.

Concerning to the reentrant phase around $`\nu _N=0.25`$, similar behavior is expected in the lowest Landau level, since the ground state obtained in the present calculation is almost the same between the two Landau levels. This means the origin of insulating behavior above $`\nu =1/5`$ in the lowest Landau level is the same to that of the reentrant phase around $`\nu _N=0.25`$ in the second lowest Landau level. Since the energy of Wigner crystal is close to the ground state energy, it may be possible that random potentials stabilize pined Wigner crystal, which is the same mechanism of integer quantum Hall effect at small $`\nu _N<1/7`$.

## Acknowledgement

The present work is supported by Grant-in-Aid No. 14540294 and No. 11740184 from JSPS.


text:
# A warped accretion disc in PX And ?

## 1. Introduction

PX And is probably one of the most complicated SW Sex stars. Thorstensen et al. (1991) reported shallow eclipses with highly variable eclipse depth and repeating with a period of $``$0$`.^\mathrm{d}`$1463533. Assuming a steady-state accretion disc and $`q0.46`$, and fitting a mean eclipse, they obtained $`i73.8^{}`$ and $`r_\mathrm{d}0.6R_{L_1}`$. Apart from the distinctive characteristics of SW Sex stars (Hellier 2000), PX And shows some other interesting peculiarities. Patterson (1999) reported PX And to show simultaneously “negative” and “positive” superhumps, and signals with typical periods of 4–5 days. With $`q0.46`$, i.e. above the canonical 0.33 value where the 3:1 resonance still lies inside the Roche lobe, it is not clear however how PX And could show positive superhumps.

We have undertaken a photometric study of PX And. In total 8 runs were obtained in 2000 and 2001, with the 2.0-m telescope of Rozhen Observatory, in the Johnson $`V`$ filter. The exposure time used was between 20 and 40 s. In addition, two unfiltered runs were obtained with the 1-m telescope at Hoher List Observatory. A detailed description of these observations, in which we clearly identify a negative superhump signal and its associated precession period, are presented in Stanishev et al. (2002). Here, we will briefly summarize our results and then discuss them in light of the warped precessing disc model.

## 2. Results

From our five photometric runs in October 2000, the following periods were determined: $`P_{\mathrm{SH}}^{}`$=0$`.^\mathrm{d}`$142 $`\pm `$0.002, $`P_1`$=0$`.^\mathrm{d}`$207 $`\pm `$0.004 and $`P_{\mathrm{prec}}`$=4$`.^\mathrm{d}`$8 with semi-amplitudes of 0.086, 0.076 and 0.256 mag, respectively. The light curves as well as our fit to the data is shown in Fig. 1a. Our observations also show that the star presents eclipses whose depth is modulated with the 5-days period (Fig. 1b). The best fit to the depths of the eclipse is shown with a dotted line in Fig. 1b. The mean eclipse depth is $``$0.56 ($``$0.89 mag) and the amplitude of the variation is $``$0.22.

For the three runs obtained in 2001, we obtain a strong peak, corresponding to a “negative superhump” with $`P_{\mathrm{SH}}^{}`$0$`.^\mathrm{d}`$141. This value of $`P_{\mathrm{SH}}^{}`$ gives $`P_{\mathrm{prec}}`$3$`.^\mathrm{d}`$8. The corresponding semi-amplitudes are 0.069 and 0.21 mag. The 0$`.^\mathrm{d}`$207 period is not detected in 2001.

## 3. Negative superhumps

The origin of the “negative superhumps” is still an open question. The most plausible model is based on the assumption of a retrograde precession of a tilted accretion disc. However, all attempts to simulate “negative superhumps” failed in the sense that they were not able to produce a significant tilt starting from a disc lying in the orbital plane (Murray & Armitage 1998; Wood, Montgomery, & Simpson 2000). The only exception we are aware of, is the recent work of Murray et al. (2002). Once tilted, however, the accretion disc starts precessing in retrograde direction (Larwood et al. 1996; Wood et al. 2000). Taking into account foreshortening and limb-darkening, one can estimate the disc tilt needed to produce the observed amplitude of the 4$`.^\mathrm{d}`$8 modulation in PX And. With a limb-darkening coefficient $`u=0.6`$ the tilt angle is between 2.5 and 3, depending on the assumed system inclination.

The mechanism generating the “negative superhump” light itself is however rather uncertain. According to the simulations of Wood et al. (2000) the two opposite parts of the disc which are most displaced from the orbital plane are tidally heated by the secondary. The heating is maximal when these parts point to the secondary and this happens twice per superhump cycle. Figure 2 shows a sketch of the system configuration in eclipse at $`\varphi _{\mathrm{prec}}=0.13`$, that is, when the maxima of the superhumps coincide with the eclipses. The expected position of the superhump light source (SLS) according to Wood et al. (2000) and the line of nodes are also shown. The dashed line marks the part of the disc which lays below the orbital plane.

There is another mechanism which could generate “negative superhumps”. Patterson (1999) noticed that most of the SW Sex novalikes show “negative superhumps” and this could naturally be explained by the accretion stream overflow thought to be responsible for the SW Sex phenomenon (Hellier & Robinson 1994). In a system with a precessing tilted accretion disc, the amount of gas in the overflowing stream will vary with the “negative superhumps” period. Correspondingly, the intensity of the spot (shown in Fig. 2) formed where the overflowing stream re-impacts the disc should be modulated and might be the “negative” SLS.

In fact, stream overflow might even not be necessary. Indeed, if the disc is precessing out of the orbital plane, the ”hot spot” (i.e. the place where the L1 stream hits the accretion disc) will be at a different location during the precession cycle. When the disc is out of the plane, the hot spot will be closer to the white dwarf than when the disc is in the plane. Thus the amount of gravitational energy which will be converted partly in radiation at the hot spot will vary with the precession phase, and this could create a modulation. Such a model was already proposed for the intermediate polar TV Col by Barrett, O’Donoghue, & Warner (1988).

## 4. Eclipse depth variations

The most puzzling observation of PX And is its highly variable eclipse depth. Our observations suggest that the eclipse depth is modulated with the precession period (Fig. 1), indicating that this phenomenon could be related to the disc precession. We will discuss two ways to modulate the fraction of the eclipsed light with the precession period and hence the eclipse depth.

### 4.1. Veiling by superhumps light source

If the SLS is never eclipsed, the eclipse depth will be affected in a way analogous to the veiling of the absorption lines in T Tau stars, where the additional emission in the continuum reduces the observed depth of the absorption lines. The eclipse depth will depend on the fraction of superhump light at the moment of eclipses, being least when superhump maxima coincide with the eclipses. At the moments of eclipses, the superhump flux varies with the precession period and therefore an eclipse depth modulation with the 5-days period will be observed. If $`F_{\mathrm{mod}}`$ is the superhump flux and $`F_{\mathrm{const}}`$ is the accretion disc flux, then the equation

$$d_\mathrm{e}=\frac{d_{\mathrm{e},0}}{1+F_{\mathrm{mod}}/F_{\mathrm{const}}}$$
(1)
gives the eclipse depth as a function of the additional modulated light in the case when this light is not eclipsed. Here, $`d_{\mathrm{e},0}`$ is the eclipse depth if $`F_{\mathrm{mod}}=0`$. At maximum the SLS in PX And contributes $`17\%`$ to the total system light, which means it could decrease the eclipse by only $`0.1`$. This is only a half of the observed modulation.

If we assume that the modulation is simply due to the fact that the position of the hot spot will change as a function of the precession phase, as described at the end of Sect. 3., things become a little bit more complicated than this simple model. Indeed, when the disc is most inclined, then the hot spot might not be eclipsed, while it could be eclipsed when the disc is in the orbital plane. Moreover, the intensity of the spot will vary depending on its location. This might well increase the amplitude of the modulation to the observed value.

### 4.2. Warped accretion disc in PX And?

Let us assume that only part of the total light emitted by the disc is modulated with the precession period. Then, if the unmodulated light is totally eclipsed while the modulated light is only partially, the eclipse depth will vary because a different fraction of the total light emitted by the system will be eclipsed at different precession phases. The deepest eclipses are expected at the precession cycle minima, as observed. The relatively shallow eclipses show that the accretion disc in PX And is not totally eclipsed. Then, since the constant light source must be eclipsed, its most likely location is close to the white dwarf with the most obvious candidate being the inner hot part of the disc. However, since the brightness modulation with the precession cycle comes from more or less pure geometrical considerations (precession of a tiled disc) it is not clear why the emission of the inner parts of the disc could be constant. One possible explanation might be that only the outer disc part is tilted, while the inner part of the disc is not tilted. This means that the disc is warped rather than simply tilted. In this case the emission from the inner disc will be constant and only the rest will be involved in the 5-days modulation. Generally, disc warping is not considered with respect to CVs. Very recently, however, Murray et al. (2002) recognized the potential role of the magnetic field of the secondary as a source of warping in CVs accretion discs. Murray et al. have shown that the magnetic field of the secondary can drive the disc out of the orbital plane and warp it. As a consequence the disc starts precessing in retrograde direction, exactly as is needed to generate ”negative superhumps”.

Let us consider the following simple model, which should approximately represent the eclipse of a warped disc. The emission from the inner part of the disc which contributes a fraction $`\alpha `$ ($`0<\alpha <1`$) of the total light is held constant, while the rest $`1\alpha `$ is modulated so as to produce the observed amplitude of the 5-days wave. The constant light is considered to be totally eclipsed and only a fraction $`\gamma `$ ($`0<\gamma <1`$) of the modulated part is eclipsed. The dashed line in Fig. 1$`b`$ is calculated with $`\alpha =0.35`$ and $`\gamma =0.25`$; this should, however, not be regarded as a fit, but only as a demonstration of the capability of the model to produce eclipse depth variations. A value of $`\gamma =0.25`$ corresponds approximately to what is observed in a system with $`q0.30.4`$ and an inclination such as the whole inner part of the disc is totally eclipsed. This simple model gives an eclipse depth modulation of $`0.16`$, which is closer to what is observed in PX And. To produce the observed amplitude of the 5-days wave the flux from the outer disc part should be reduced by $`58\%`$. With a system inclination $`74^{}`$, this is achieved by wobbling the disc by $`\pm 4^{}`$, if only the foreshortening is taken into account.

### 4.3. Concluding remarks

It seems that the two models have difficulties to explain the observed amplitude of the eclipse depth modulation. In spite of these difficulties we consider our results as a step ahead. Thorstensen et al. (1991) could produce eclipse depth variations only by changing the secondary radius by $``$5%, but as they noted this is clearly physically unreasonable.

If the first model discussed is responsible for the eclipse depth modulation then the stream overflow is more likely to be the mechanism generating the “negative superhumps” in PX And. This is because in a system with grazing eclipses the re-impact zone is not eclipsed, while the SLS in the model of Wood et al. (2000) should be at least partially eclipsed.

## 5. Acknowledgements

V.S. thanks the Federal Office for Scientific, Technical and Cultural Affairs for a research fellowship in the framework of the bilateral S&T collaboration with Central and Eastern Europe. This work was partially supported by NFSR under project No. 715/97.

## References

Barrett, P., O’Donoghue, D. & Warner, B. 1988, MNRAS 233, 759

Hellier, C., & Robinson, E.L. 1994, ApJ Lett. 431, 107

Hellier, C. 2000, NewAR 44, 131

Larwood, J.D., Nelson, R.P., Papaloizou, J.C.B., & Terquem, C. 1996, MNRAS 282, 597

Murray, J.R., Chakrabarty, D., Wynn, G.A., & Kramer, L. 2002, MNRAS, 335, 247

Murray, J.R., & Armigate, P.J. 1998, MNRAS 300, 561

Patterson, J. 1999, in: Disk Instabilities in Close Binary Systems. 25 Years of the Disk-Instability Model, Edited by S. Mineshige & J. C. Wheeler. Frontiers Science Series No. 26. Universal Academy Press, Inc., p.61

Stanishev, V., Kraicheva, Z., Boffin, H.M.J. & Genkov, V. 2002, A&A, in press

Thorstensen, J.R., Ringwald, F.A., Wade, R.A., Schmidt, G.D., & Norsworthy, J.E. 1991, AJ 102, 272

Wood, M.A., Montgomery, M.M., & Simpson, J.C. 2000, ApJ Lett. 535, 39


text:
# 1 Motivations

## 1 Motivations

There are many motivations for searching lepton flavour violating (LFV) decays - like $`\tau \mu \gamma `$, $`\mu e\gamma `$ -, fermion electric dipole moments (EDM) and additional contributions to fermion magnetic dipole moments:
1. lepton family number ($`L_i`$) violation is already a well established fact;
2. such observables, if measured - and there will be significant improvements in the experimental sensitivity in future - represent clean smoking guns for new physics;
3. they already are a severe test for theories beyond the Standard Model (SM), in particular for low energy supersymmetry.

Actually, to explain why such processes have not already been observed is one of the major problems of low energy supersymmetry: the flavour problem. In the following, I shall firstly briefly review the present constraints on the leptonic soft supersymmetry breaking terms and discuss the impact of the planned experimental improvements. It is convenient to encode such constraints on $`_{soft}`$ in the form of upper bounds on mass-insertion $`\delta `$’s.

In this way it is possible to test many extensions of the SM supplemented with low energy supersymmetry. The constraints from both the quark and leptonic sector of $`_{soft}`$ are so severe that the easiest way out is to consider the possibility of family blind soft terms. For the SM, then, all the above processes and their analog in the quark sector would be extremely suppressed. Nevertheless, even with universal soft terms, some extensions of the SM could give observable effects. This is the case for supersymmetric grandunified theories in the quark sector, as addressed by A. Masiero in his talk. In the leptonic sector, however, it is not even necessary to invoke a stage of grandunification to dispose of efficient beyond the SM interactions: it is quite likely that the desert below $`M_{GUT}`$ suggested by gauge coupling unification is actually populated by three generations of right-handed neutrinos and their interactions: the see-saw mechanism. To estimate the prediction for LFV decays and EDM in the case that the SM is extended with the see-saw is an intersting task: it represents the minimal amount of contribution that could be present. If, in addition, there is a stage of grandunification, since there is no reason for a conspiracy between contributions of different nature, such processes should eventually be enhanced. In the following, I will develop this issue in some detail.

### 1.1 Basic Motivation n.1: $`L_i`$ Violation

That $`L_i`$ is violated at low energy we are pretty sure: it is even more violated than $`B_i`$. Indeed, neutrino oscillation experiments have shown that it is maximally violated because in the flavour basis where charged leptons are diagonal 111Here and in the following, diagonal matrices will be denoted with a hat. the MNS matrix which diagonalises light neutrinos, thus expressing how much $`L_i`$ is violated in the effective theory,

$$m_\nu ^{eff}=U_{MNS}^{}\widehat{m}_\nu U_{MNS}^{}$$
(1)
has turn out to possess two large angles, $`\theta _{23},\theta _{12}\pi /4`$. Curiously enough, now the puzzle is to explain why the third angle is smaller than $`\theta _C.22`$, which measures the amount of $`B_i`$ violation at low energy.

The most elegant explanation of the smallness of neutrino masses is the see-saw mechanism :

$`_{h.e.}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\nu _{}^{c}{}_{}{}^{T}\widehat{M}\nu ^c+\nu _{}^{c}{}_{}{}^{T}\underset{=y_\nu }{\underset{}{V_R\widehat{y}_\nu V_L}}\nu H_u^0`$ (2)
$`l.e.`$ $``$ (3)
$`y_\nu ^T{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\widehat{M}}}y_\nu v_u^2=m_\nu ^{eff}`$
In the fundamental theory at high energy, the amount of $`L_i`$ violation corresponds to the largeness of the mixing angles of $`V_R,V_L`$, the unitary matrices which diagonalise $`y_\nu `$ in the basis where $`M`$ and charged leptons are diagonal. Notice that $`V_L`$ (and not $`U_{MNS}`$) is the true analog of $`V_{CKM}`$ in the leptonic sector. Clearly, $`L_i`$ violation at low energy, i.e. $`U_{MNS}𝕀`$, implies that $`V_R`$ and $`V_L`$ cannot both be $`𝕀`$, but we cannot guess the magnitude of their angles. So, the question ”is $`V_L`$ small like $`V_{CKM}`$ or large like $`U_{MNS}`$?” is not academic.

It is not possible to find an answer by just looking at neutrino phenomenology, namely at $`m_\nu ^{eff}`$. As can be realised by simple parameter counting, one cannot extract $`V_R`$, $`V_L`$. It is better to separate our ignorance from our knowledge by recognizing that the extraction of the combination

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{\widehat{M}}}V_R\widehat{y}V_Lv_u$$
(4)
from

$$m_\nu ^{eff}=(U_{MNS}^{}\sqrt{\widehat{m}}_\nu R)(R^T\sqrt{\widehat{m}}_\nu U_{MNS}^{})=(\frac{1}{\sqrt{\widehat{M}}}V_R\widehat{y}V_Lv_u)^T(\frac{1}{\sqrt{\widehat{M}}}V_R\widehat{y}V_Lv_u)$$
(5)
is ambiguous up to $`R`$, an orthogonal complex matrix  . Thus, $`R`$ parametrizes our ignorance in the sense that it encodes six physical informations that are present at high energy and that are subsequently lost when integrating out right-handed neutrinos . To further disentangle the matrices in eq. (4), one should for example know $`\widehat{M}`$. As also appears from the parameter counting, the two sets below are absolutely equivalent in describing the see-saw mechanism. However, as will be clarified in the following, the physical meaning of a certain quantity can be better interpreted using one set than the other.

$`\{\underset{\mathrm{known}}{\underset{}{\widehat{m},U_{MNS}}},\underset{\mathrm{unknown}}{\underset{}{R,\widehat{M}}}\}÷\{\underset{\mathrm{fundamental}}{\underset{}{\widehat{y},V_L,V_R,\widehat{M}}}\}`$ (6)
$`\mathrm{real}33333333`$
$`\mathrm{phases}3315`$
It is interesting to wonder what is the physical meaning of the informations contained in $`R`$, which acts on $`\nu `$ and $`\nu ^c`$ mass eigenstates at left and right respectively. It turns out that it is a dominance 222The idea of dominance has been firstly suggested and developed from the point of view of model building . matrix : its pattern reflects the way in which each heavy right-handed neutrino contributes in determining each light neutrino mass scale. Consider for instance the heaviest light neutrino mass scale, $`m_3`$. Due to the orthogonality of $`R`$,

$$m_3=\underset{i}{}R_{3i}^2m_3,$$
(7)
so that $`m_3`$ is determined by a sum of three contributions $`𝒞_{3i}R_{3i}^2m_3`$. It turns out that, once $`U_{MNS}`$ is fixed, each $`𝒞_{3i}=𝒞_{3i}(y_{ki}^2/M_i)`$, i.e. is a function of $`M_i`$ and its couplings to the light neutrinos $`y_{ki}`$ only. $`R_{3i}^2`$ thus represent the weights of the $`\nu ^c`$ in determining $`m_3`$. Analogous considerations hold for the various $`m_j`$. So, if a certain $`\nu ^c`$ gives the dominant contribution in determining a certain eigenvalue $`m_j`$, correspondingly this information is encoded in the structure of the jth row of $`R`$. For instance, if $`\nu _k^c`$ mostly determines the scale of $`m_j`$, we will have $`R_{jk}>>R_{jh}`$, where $`hk`$. The interpretation in terms of weights is straightforward for the rotational part of $`R`$. One has however to be careful because of the possible presence of the three boosts (controlled by the three phases). In the latter case the weights $`R_{3i}^2`$ are not necessarily positive nor smaller than 1. So, the situation is more subtle but, even including the phases of $`R`$, the interpretation in terms of dominance still holds. The presence of a structure in $`R`$ is important. For hierarchical neutrinos for instance, if the third row of $`R`$, which determines $`m_{atm}`$, is structureless, one cannot account at same time for the large atmospheric mixing and the experimental value of $`r(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{sol}^2/\mathrm{\Delta }m_{atm}^2)^{1/2}`$ without the introduction of a tuning between the Yukawas at the level of $`r`$. With a proper structure in the third row of $`R`$, the latter requirements are instead naturally fulfilled.

To proceede one needs other observables. Recently, a lot of attention has been given to the possibility of having baryogenesis through leptogenesis . Here I will just make some comments. It is interesting to notice that, in the case of hierarchical right-handed neutrinos, say $`M_1<M_2<M_3`$, defining $`R_{ij}=|R_{ij}|e^{i\varphi _{ij}/2}`$, the $`ϵ`$ asymmetry can be written by using the first set of parameters in eq. (6) and it is simply given by

$$ϵ=\frac{3}{16\pi }\frac{|R_{11}|^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{sol}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _{11}+|R_{31}|^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{atm}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _{31}}{|R_{11}|^2m_1+|R_{21}|^2m_2+|R_{31}|^2m_3}\frac{M_1}{v^2}.$$
(8)
With this parametrization, we can see mathematically what one would have expected by intuition, namely that the physical quantities involved in determining $`ϵ`$ are just $`M_1`$, the spectrum of light-neutrinos, $`\widehat{m}`$, and the first column of $`R`$, which expresses the composition of $`\nu _1^c`$ in terms of the light neutrino masses $`\widehat{m}_i`$. Since there is not at all trace of $`U_{MNS}`$, from this formula one can immediately realise that $`ϵ`$ (=leptogenesis) and $`m_\nu ^{eff}`$ (=neutrino phenomenology) depend on two independent sets of $`CP`$ violating phases 333See for instance  and references therein for different approaches to this subject., respectively those of $`R`$ and those of $`U_{MNS}`$. Notice also that if $`V_LU_{MNS}`$, i.e. we postulate that low energy left mixings arise mostly from those at high energy, then $`R𝕀`$ and $`ϵ`$ vanishes. Leptogenesis can however provide just one number. To proceede further one need other informations.

### 1.2 Basic Motivation n.2: New Physiscs ”Smoking Guns”

Let’s have a look at the SM as an effective theory: the operators of dimension $`d>4`$ represent new physics and could be computed if we knew the fundamental theory beyond the SM. The only one which has been observed is the $`d=5`$ operator responsible for neutrino masses, eq. (3); however, the $`d=6`$ operator

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\overline{\psi }\sigma ^{\mu \nu }(\gamma _5)\psi F_{\mu \nu }\varphi $$
(9)
potentially induces LFV, EDM and additional contributions to MDM. Some upper limits on these observables and their probable future improvements are displayed in table 1. In the SM they are predicted to be much smaller than the present and future bounds. Observation of some of them would thus represent a very clean smoking gun for the presence of new physics beyond the SM.

### 1.3 Basic Motivation n.3: Test for Theories beyond the SM

The upper limits provide the third motivation, namely to test theories beyond the SM. Let me focus on the see-saw: in the non supersymmetric case, these operators are suppressed by powers of the scale of $`L`$ violation and the effects are completely out of the future sensitivity; with low energy supersymmetry, on the contrary, these operators are suppressed by powers of $`m_{susy}`$, due to graphs with loops of virtual supersymmetric particles. The effects should be so large that the supersymmetric flavour problem arises: the only explanation of why such processes have not yet been found is to assume very specific patterns of soft supersymmetry breaking terms at high energy, namely that fermions and sfermions have to be nearly diagonal in the same basis.

## 2 Constraints on $`_\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}^2`$

In the basis where charged fermions are diagonalised, non observation of LFV, EDM and additional contributions to MDM in the leptonic sector, constrains the $`6\times 6`$ hermitian matrix of soft sfermion masses, whose mixings represent the amount of fermion-sfermion misalignement. For practical purposes it is convenient to work in the mass insertion approximation (see for instance  and references therein): one assumes nearly degenerate sfermions so that the experimental upper bound on a certain observable can be directly translated into upper bounds on some of the $`\delta `$’s defined in this way

$$_\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}^2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}m_{LL}^2& m_{LR}^2\\ m_{RL}^2& m_{RR}^2\end{array}\right)=\overline{m}_{\stackrel{~}{f}}^2\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝕀+\delta _{LL}^2& \delta _{LR}^2\\ \delta _{RL}^2& 𝕀+\delta _{RR}^2\end{array}\right).$$
(10)
The constraints on the $`\delta `$’s are so many that, if one is patient enough to tackle them in a systematic way, one ends up with a sleptonarium , a catalogue of upper bounds on $`\delta `$’s. These bounds can be for instance represented in the $`(M_1,m_{\stackrel{~}{e}_R})`$ plane for fixed $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ values assuming for definiteness gaugino universality and $`\mu `$ from radiative electroweak symmetry breaking (deviations from these assumptions are easily estimated). Besides the encyclopedical motivation, such a collection is interesting because the combined analysis of all the limits allows to extract additional informations. In the following I will briefly sketch this issue (see  for more details).

Non observation of the decay $`\mathrm{}_i\mathrm{}_j\gamma `$ puts upper bounds on the absolute value of four $`\delta _{ij}`$: $`|\delta _{ij}^{LL}|`$, $`|\delta _{ij}^{RR}|`$, $`|\delta _{ij}^{LR}|`$, $`|\delta _{ij}^{RL}|`$. There are two possible contributions to EDM: flavour conserving (FC) and flavour violating (FV). If no conspiracy between them is at work, the experimental bound can be put on each: $`d_i^{exp}>d_i^{FC},d_i^{FV}`$. The FC contribution bounds $`m(\delta _{ii}^{LR})`$. The FV contribution, which could be even bigger than the FC one if there is a fermion $`j`$ heavier than the $`i`$, bounds the following four combinations of $`\delta `$’s:

$$m(\delta _{ij}^{LL}\delta _{ji}^{LR}),m(\delta _{ij}^{LR}\delta _{ji}^{RR}),m(\delta _{ij}^{LL}\delta _{jj}^{LR}\delta _{ji}^{RR}),m(\delta _{ij}^{LR}\delta _{jj}^{RL}\delta _{ji}^{LR}).$$
(11)
Consider $`d_\mu `$ and let’s have a look at the informations that can be obtained by combining the various bounds. Since the $`|\delta _{23}|`$ are independently constrained from $`\tau \mu \gamma `$, $`d_\mu ^{FV}`$ cannot exceed a certain value. For instance, a bound at the level of $`10^8`$ on the $`BR(\tau \mu \gamma )`$ would imply that the FV contribution to $`d_\mu `$ is not bigger then $`10^{23}`$ e cm, well below the present experimental bound on $`d_\mu `$ but in the range of the planned sensitivity. So, if $`d_\mu `$ where observed above $`10^{23}`$ e cm, we could conclude that we are measuring the FC contribution; if it where observed below, its origin - if FV or FC - would remain unknown. Similar remarks can be done for $`d_e`$.

## 3 $`\delta `$’s as Tests for Theories Beyond the SM

The interest of collecting the bounds on the $`\delta `$’s is that they can be easily compared with the prediction of theories. In general we can distinguish two contributions to the $`\delta `$’s: one already present at the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ where boundary conditions are imposed and one which can be potentially developed when running from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to $`m_{susy}`$:

$$\delta _{ij}=\delta _{ij}^{(0)}+\delta _{ij}^{(rad)}.$$
(12)
Since there is no reason for contributions of such different origin to conspire, the above limits on the $`\delta `$’s can be applied to both.

It is well known that, even if $`\delta ^{(0)}`$ vanishes, which is case for universal and real boundary conditions at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\delta ^{(rad)}`$ can be generated from RGE if below $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ there are new interactions beyond those of the SM 444In GUTs, for instance, $`y_t=O(1)`$ induces fermion-sfermion misalignement : for $`SU(5)`$ it is however too small to lead to observable consequences, while for $`SO(10)`$ it could be sufficient .. It has been shown  that the see-saw (even without a stage of grandunification) could lead to observational consequences, due to a large Yukawa coupling in the Dirac term $`y_3=O(1)`$. Fermion-sfermion misalignement reads

$$\overline{m}_{\stackrel{~}{f}}^2\delta _{ij}^{LL}=m_{}^{2}{}_{ij}{}^{LL}=\frac{1}{8\pi ^2}(3m_0^2+2A_0^2)\underset{C_{ij}}{\underset{}{(y_\nu ^{}\mathrm{ln}(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\widehat{M}})y_\nu )_{ij}}},$$
(13)
where universality has been assumed and $`m_0`$, $`A_0`$ are respectively the soft scalar masses and the trilinear coupling. The bound on $`\delta _{ij}^{LL}`$ of the previous section is then translated into a bound on $`C_{ij}`$ as displayed in fig. 1.

It has been shown  that some simple realisations of the see-saw mechanism (for instance some models with $`U(1)`$ flavour symmetry, or with $`R=𝕀`$) lead to $`\mu e\gamma `$, $`\tau \mu \gamma `$ at hand, some models having been already ruled out by $`\mu e\gamma `$. It has been claimed that there exist a certain correlation between the solar solution and the rate of $`\mu e\gamma `$, which would be enhanced in the case of large solar mixing angle.

We addressed the question  whether the prediction of high rates is or not a general feature of the see-saw. It turns out that this is not the case and that in general there is no connection between having a large solar angle and an enhancement of the $`\mu e\gamma `$ rate. Anyway, it is possible to link the $`\tau \mu \gamma `$ rate to physical characteristics of the see-saw: namely it is possible to have some indirect indications on the possible magnitude of the largeness of the 23 mixing angle of $`V_L`$, $`\theta _{23}^L`$, which, as previously explained, is totally unaccessible from $`m_\nu ^{eff}`$. That $`C`$ provide some access to $`V_L`$ can be easily seen by noticing that, due to the mild effect of the logarithm, $`C`$ is in first approximation diagonalised by $`V_L`$ itself. The more the mixings in $`V_L`$ are large, the more the rates will be enhanced. So, if $`y_3=O(1)`$, which we assumed in all the following discussion, non observation of $`\mathrm{}_i\mathrm{}_j\gamma `$ can be translated into an upper bound on the combination $`V_{L}^{}{}_{i3}{}^{}V_{L}^{}{}_{3j}{}^{}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }/M_3)`$.

Despite $`m_\nu ^{eff}`$ provides no direct access to $`V_L`$, it is possibile to establish an indirect correspondence by considering the following useful classification criterion for see-saw mechanisms . Consider the hierarchical case for $`\nu `$ spectrum (for a discussion on the inverted hierarchical see ). One can classify every possible see-saw in three cathegories according to which right-handed neutrino dominates - in the sense explained previously - the scale $`m_{atm}`$. There are obviously three possibilities.

None: all the elements of the third row of $`R`$ are of comparable magnitude. This class has the following features: $`\theta _{atm}\theta _{23}^L`$; the scale of $`M_3`$, the heaviest $`\nu ^c`$ has to be below $`510^{14}`$ GeV; $`y_\nu `$ is ”lopsided”; a tuning of the order of $`r`$ is necessary in order to have at the same time large atmospheric mixing and hierarchical masses. All the see-saw models which follow from a $`U(1)`$ flavour symmetry with charges of the same sign belong to this class. Indeed, it is well known that in this case the actual values of the $`\nu ^c`$ charges are not important because $`m_\nu ^{eff}`$ depends only on those of $`\nu `$. This physical information is well encoded in $`R`$: its elements are all of the same order but the absence of structure in $`R`$ has to be payed by doing the tuning.

The heaviest, $`M_3`$: $`rR_{33}R_{31},R_{32}`$. In this case $`\theta _{23}^L\theta _{atm}`$ with corrections at the level of $`r`$; again $`M_3<510^{14}`$ GeV and $`y_\nu `$ is ”lopsided”, but now we have naturally large atmospheric mixing and large mass splittings, so that no tuning has to be introduced. These models necessitate of a richer flavour symmetry than those above, for instance a $`U(1)_F`$ flavour symmetry with positive and negative charges, which allow for holomorphic zeros in the textures.

One among the lightest, $`M_1`$ or $`M_2`$: $`rR_{31(32)}R_{33},R_{32(31)}`$. The relevant feature of this class is that $`\theta _{23}^L`$ is no more linked to $`\theta _{atm}`$. On the contrary, $`y_\nu `$ can possess small mixings so that $`\theta _{23}^L`$ could even vanish. For this class $`M_3r^1510^{14}`$ GeV - which is quite good for $`SO(10)`$ \- large atmospheric mixing and large splitting is naturally realised. These interesting models necessitate of an even richer flavour symmetry than those above: models have been studied with several $`U(1)_F`$’s with positive and negative charges and with non-abelian flavour symmetries.

The remarkable fact that emerges from this classification is that the first two classes require $`\theta _{23}^L\pi /4`$, so that $`C_{32}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }/M_3)7`$, while for the third class $`C_{32}`$ can be much smaller. It is thus sufficient to give a look to fig. 1 to understand that future searches for $`\tau \mu \gamma `$ have the potentiality of discriminating between these cathegories. The present limit on $`BR(\tau \mu \gamma )`$ implies a limit on $`C_{32}`$ weaker by a factor of $`30`$ with respect to fig. 1, so that no conclusion can be drawn by now.

For $`\mu e\gamma `$ the situation is not so sharp: for the last two cathegories of models, dominance of the heaviest and of one among the lightest, the predictions are very model dependent. Instead, the models with only positive $`U(1)_F`$ charges of the first class predict $`C_{21}7r`$: if supersymmetry is somewhere at left of the green curve, such models are already excluded for $`r`$ in the range of LMA. It is worth to stress that, if $`\mu e\gamma `$ were not found, this would be perfectly compatible with the two last cathegories, maybe slighly favouring the third one. Turning the argument around we can notice that $`\mu e\gamma `$ could test the product $`V_{13}^LV_{23}^L`$ up to the level of $`.005`$, which corresponds the measured value of the analogous mixings in $`V_{CKM}`$. Notice also that anarchical models, for which $`C_{21}7y^2`$ ($`y`$ being the common Yukawa), are already in crisis in all the supersymmetric plane.

It is also interesting to ask if the planned experimental improvement in the sensitivity to $`d_\mu `$ will imply significant progresses also from the model building point of view. This is the case because, even starting with universal and real boundary condition at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\delta ^{(rad)}`$ could induce an EDM. In the case of the see-saw, however, if $`\widehat{M}𝕀`$, the naive scaling $`d_e/d_\mu m_e/m_\mu `$ \- which, given the present bound on $`d_e`$, would imply $`d_\mu <10^{25}`$ e cm - cannot be avoided. On the contrary, in case of hierarchical $`\nu ^c`$, the naive scaling can be avoided due to the FC contribution . In any case, the FV part is such that the phases in the four products of $`\delta `$’s in eq. (11) are very small : this means that if the SM is extended to just the see-saw, then $`d_\mu ^{FV}`$ is always smaller than the maximum value allowed from non observation of $`\tau \mu \gamma `$.

Acknowledgements I would like to thank Carlos Savoy for pleasant discussions and collaboration.