text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The Operator Product Expansion (OPE) represents a foundation for extracting the $`|V_{ub}|`$ and $`|V_{cb}|`$ elements of the CKM mixing matrix from inclusive semileptonic (s.l.) $`B`$ decays. In this framework, the decay width is expressed in terms of quark masses, and non-perturbative effects are described by expectation values of heavy quark operators, some of which are presently poorly known. The experimental accuracy already achieved, and that expected from the large data sets recorded by the $`B`$-factories, makes the ensuing theory uncertainty a serious limitation. Extracting the heavy quark masses and the non-perturbative parameters, arising from the $`1/m_b^2`$ and $`1/m_b^3`$ corrections, directly from the data has therefore become a key issue. There have already been $`|V_{cb}|`$ determinations from the first moment of distributions in s.l. and $`bX_s\gamma `$ decays, and the $`1/m_b^3`$ corrections, estimated from parameter ranges, have been found to represent an important source of uncertainty . These ranges, based on dimensional arguments, are affected by a considerable degree of arbitrariness.

In order to circumvent these problems, we introduce in this Letter a multi-parameter fit to determine the relevant $`1/m_b^2`$ and $`1/m_b^3`$ parameters, together with the heavy quark masses, from the first three moments of the leptonic energy and hadronic mass spectra in s.l. $`B`$ decays. Results are based on preliminary data obtained by the Delphi Collaboration. Moments are measured without cuts on the lepton energy in the $`B`$ rest frame. We consider two formalisms, one of which is new and relies on fewer theoretical assumptions. The use of higher moments guarantees a sensitivity to these parameters and the simultaneous use of the hadronic and leptonic spectra ensures that a larger number of parameters can be kept free in the fit. We discuss the results both in terms of the extraction of the parameters and the implications for $`|V_{cb}|`$, and as a consistency check of the underlying theoretical assumptions.

## 2 Extracting Non-Perturbative Parameters

The moments of the hadronic and leptonic spectra in s.l. $`B`$ decays have recently been measured by several experiments . We consider here moments of the charged lepton energy distribution defined as

$$M_1(E_{\mathrm{}})=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}𝑑E_{\mathrm{}}E_{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\mathrm{\Gamma }}{dE_{\mathrm{}}};M_n(E_{\mathrm{}})=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}𝑑E_{\mathrm{}}\left(E_{\mathrm{}}M_1(E_{\mathrm{}})\right)^n\frac{d\mathrm{\Gamma }}{dE_{\mathrm{}}}(n>1),$$
(1)
and moments of the distribution of $`M_X`$, the invariant hadronic mass,

$$M_1(M_X)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}𝑑M_X^2(M_X^2\overline{M}_D^2)\frac{d\mathrm{\Gamma }}{dM_X^2};M_n(M_X)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}𝑑M_X^2(M_X^2M_X^2)^n\frac{d\mathrm{\Gamma }}{dM_X^2}(n>1),$$
(2)
where $`\overline{M}_D=1.973`$ GeV is the spin averaged $`D`$ meson mass and no cut on the charged lepton energy is assumed.

The theoretical framework to interpret these data has long been known and it is based on the OPE. Different implementations exist, depending on the way the quark masses are treated. For instance, the $`m_b`$ and $`m_c`$ masses can be taken as independent parameters or subject to a constraint on $`m_bm_c`$, imposed from the measured $`B^{()}`$ and $`D^{()}`$ meson masses. The second choice introduces a $`1/m_c`$ expansion. Another option concerns the normalization scheme used for quark masses and nonperturbative parameters. One approach is to use short-distance masses, such as the low-scale running masses. Alternatively, the pole mass scheme can be used.

The OPE expresses lepton moments through quark masses as a double expansion in $`\alpha _s`$ and $`1/m_b`$:

$`M_n(E_{\mathrm{}})=\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_b}{2}}\right)^n\left[\phi _n(r)+\overline{a}_n(r){\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}+\overline{b}_n(r){\displaystyle \frac{\mu _\pi ^2}{m_b^2}}+\overline{c}_n(r){\displaystyle \frac{\mu _G^2}{m_b^2}}+\overline{d}_n(r){\displaystyle \frac{\rho _D^3}{m_b^3}}+\overline{s}_n(r){\displaystyle \frac{\rho _{LS}^3}{m_b^3}}+\mathrm{}\right],`$ (3)
where $`r=(m_c/m_b)^2`$. The higher coefficient functions $`\overline{b}(r)`$, $`\overline{c}(r)`$, … are also perturbative series in $`\alpha _s`$. The expectation values of only two operators contribute to the $`1/m_b^3`$ corrections: the Darwin term $`\rho _D^3`$ and the spin-orbital term $`\rho _{LS}^3`$. Due to the kinematic definition of the hadronic invariant mass $`M_X^2`$, the general expression for the hadronic moments includes $`M_B`$ explicitly:

$`M_n(M_X)`$ $`=`$ $`m_b^{2n}{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{M_Bm_b}{m_b}}\right]^l\{E_{nl}(r)+a_{nl}(r){\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}+b_{nl}(r){\displaystyle \frac{\mu _\pi ^2}{m_b^2}}+c_{nl}(r){\displaystyle \frac{\mu _G^2}{m_b^2}}`$ (4)
$`+d_{nl}(r){\displaystyle \frac{\rho _D^3}{m_b^3}}+s_{nl}(r){\displaystyle \frac{\rho _{LS}^3}{m_b^3}}+\mathrm{}\}.`$
It is possible to re-express the heavy quark masses, $`m_Q`$, in the above equations, in terms of the meson masses, $`M_{H_Q}`$, through the relation :

$$M_{H_Q}=m_Q+\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}+\frac{\mu _\pi ^2\mu _G^2}{2m_Q}+\frac{\rho _D^3+\rho _{LS}^3\rho _{nl}^3}{4m_Q^2}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{m_Q^3}\right).$$
(5)
The use of these expressions introduces an explicit dependence of the non-local correlators contributing to $`\rho _{nl}^3`$. In the notation of , $`\rho _{nl}^3`$ corresponds to linear combinations of $`𝒯_{14}`$.

Here, we employ the following two formalisms. The first one is based on the kinetic running masses, $`m_Q(\mu )`$, and non-perturbative parameters, introduced in . No charm mass expansion is assumed. The second formalism employs quark pole masses and the $`B^{()}`$ and $`D^{()}`$ meson mass relations. It represents a useful reference, as it has been already adopted in several studies.

Contributions through $`O(\alpha _s^2\beta _0)`$  and $`O(1/m_b^3)`$  to the moments are available. Depending on the formulation adopted, the number of parameters involved at this order ranges from six to nine. Some of these parameters, like $`m_b`$ and $`\lambda _2\mu _G^2/3`$, are relatively well known. Others, notably those which appear at $`O(1/m_b^3)`$, are virtually unknown.

### 2.1 The $`m_b(\mu )`$, $`m_c(\mu )`$ and $`\mu _\pi ^2(\mu )`$ Formalism

The running kinetic quark masses $`m_b(\mu )`$ and $`m_c(\mu )`$ are considered here as two independent parameters. Apart from $`\mu _\pi ^2(\mu )`$ and $`\mu _G^2(\mu )`$, defined as expectation values in the actual $`B`$ meson, there are two $`1/m_b^3`$ parameters, $`\rho _D^3`$ and $`\rho _{LS}^3`$. The effect of $`\rho _{LS}^3`$ turns out to be numerically small. In Eqs. (3) and (4) the mass ratio $`r`$ is given by $`(m_c(\mu )/m_b(\mu ))^2`$, and the $`b`$ quark mass is understood as $`m_b(\mu )`$. The perturbative coefficients additionally depend on $`\mu /m_b`$ and the mass normalization scale $`\mu `$ is set at $`\mu =1\text{GeV}`$. The functions $`\phi _n`$ in Eq. (3) are well-known parton expressions. The relevant coefficients are given in Table 1, for the central values of $`m_b(1\mathrm{GeV})`$ = 4.6 GeV and $`r0.06`$ obtained in our fit. Although we quote only the leading-order perturbative coefficients, we also include second-order BLM corrections in the analysis. Detailed expressions for the coefficients will be presented elsewhere.

In the case of hadronic moments, we discard in Eq. (4) coefficients $`b_{nl}`$, $`c_{nl}`$ with $`l>1`$, and $`d_{nl}`$, $`s_{nl}`$ with $`l>0`$. The only non-vanishing $`E_{i0}`$ coefficient is $`E_{10}=r\overline{M}_D^2/m_b^2`$. The value of the other coefficients, at $`r=0.06`$, are listed in Table 2. Here we consider only $`𝒪(\alpha _s)`$ corrections and evaluate them using $`\alpha _s=0.3`$.

### 2.2 The $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and $`\lambda _1`$ Formalism

This widely used scheme results from the combination of the OPE with the HQET. Following the notation of Ref. , the moments are expressed in the following general form:

$`M_n`$ $`=`$ $`M_B^k[a_0+a_1{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s(\overline{M}_B)}{\pi }}+a_2\beta _0{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s^2}{\pi ^2}}+b_1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{\overline{M}_B}}+b_2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{\overline{M}_B}}+{\displaystyle \frac{c_1\lambda _1+c_2\lambda _2+c_3\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^2}{\overline{M}_{B}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}`$ (6)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{M}_B^3}}(d_1\lambda _1\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}+d_2\lambda _2\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}+d_3\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^3+d_4\rho _1+d_5\rho _2+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,4}{}}d_{5+i}𝒯_i)+O\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}^4}{m_Q^4}}\right)],`$
where $`k=n`$ and $`k=2n`$ for leptonic and hadronic moments, respectively, while $`a_0=0`$ for hadronic moments. $`\overline{M}_B=5.3135`$ GeV is the spin-averaged $`B`$ meson mass. The second order BLM corrections111The terms $`O(\alpha _s^2\beta _0)`$ and $`O(\alpha _s\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ are not available for the third hadronic moment. In our analysis we employ an estimate and the related uncertainty is included in the fit. are expressed in terms of $`\beta _0=112/3n_f`$, where we take $`n_f=3`$. The coefficients $`a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i`$ are given in Table 3 for the first three leptonic, $`M_{1,2,3}(E_{\mathrm{}})`$, and hadronic moments, $`M_{1,2,3}(M_X)`$. In the leptonic case the $`a_1`$ coefficients agree with ref. , while the coefficients of the first two hadronic moments agree with . Details of the derivation will be presented elsewhere.

The non-perturbative parameters in Eq.(6) are related to those in Section 2.1 by the following relations, valid up to $`𝒪(\alpha _s)`$:

$$\mu _\pi ^2=\lambda _1\frac{𝒯_1+3𝒯_2}{m_b};\mu _G^2=3\lambda _2+\frac{𝒯_3+3𝒯_4}{m_b};\rho _D^3=\rho _1;\rho _{LS}^3=3\rho _2.$$
(7)
Perturbative corrections introduce a significant numerical difference between the parameters in the two schemes. At $`\mu =1\text{GeV}`$:

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}M_Bm_b(1\mathrm{GeV})\frac{\mu _\pi ^2\mu _G^2}{2m_b}0.26\mathrm{GeV};\lambda _1\mu _\pi ^2(1\mathrm{GeV})0.17\mathrm{GeV}^2.$$
(8)
A well known problem of this formalism is the instability of the perturbative series, due to the use of the pole quark masses. Large higher order corrections are however expected to cancel in the relation between physical observables, as long as all observables involved in the analysis are computed at the same order in $`\alpha _s`$ . We also note that, as a consequence of the HQET mass relations for the mesons, the intrinsic expansion parameter in Eq.(6) is $`1/M_D`$, rather than $`1/M_B`$. The convergence of this expansion has been questioned, in view of indications  that the matrix elements $`𝒯_i`$ of some non-local operators could be larger than that expected from dimensional estimates.

## 3 Fits and Results

This analysis is based on the preliminary Delphi measurements  of the first three moments of the hadronic mass and charged lepton energy, summarised in Table 4. Owing to the large boost of $`B`$ hadrons in $`Z^0b\overline{b}`$ events, the acceptance of the analyses can be extended down to the start of the lepton energy spectrum, making their theoretical interpretation more direct. The results correspond to $`B_d^0`$ and $`B_u^{}`$ mesons decays only.

We perform a $`\chi ^2`$ fit to these six moments, using the two theoretical frameworks discussed above. In the fit we also impose some additional constraints derived from independent determinations.

In the kinetic mass scheme, we fit the full set of parameters: $`m_b(1\mathrm{GeV})`$, $`m_c(1\mathrm{GeV})`$, $`\mu _\pi ^2`$, $`\rho _D^3`$ and $`\rho _{LS}^3`$. We impose $`\mu _G^2`$=(0.35$`\pm `$0.05) GeV2  and $`\rho _{LS}^3`$=(-0.15$`\pm `$0.15) GeV3. Two mass constraints have also been applied: $`m_b(1\mathrm{GeV})`$=(4.57$`\pm `$0.10) GeV , and, to be conservative, $`m_c(1\mathrm{GeV})`$=(1.05$`\pm `$0.30) GeV. The most stringent is that on $`m_b(1\mathrm{GeV})`$. It must be noted that this constraint is largely equivalent to that derived from the first moment of the photon energy spectrum in $`bs\gamma `$ in other studies . Results are obtained for $`\alpha _s(m_b)=0.22\pm 0.01`$ and are shown in Table 5. In order to study the effect of the bounds on $`m_{b,c}`$ introduced, the fit has been repeated unconstrained. Results are consistent, although the accuracy on the masses degrades. In particular we find $`m_b(1\mathrm{GeV})`$=(4.61$`\pm `$0.15) GeV. It is interesting to observe that the mass constraints applied are of the scale of the fit sensitivity. Also, the central values of the heavy quark masses are in good agreement with independent determinations .

In the alternative approach based on pole masses, the fit extracts $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, $`\lambda _1`$, $`\lambda _2`$, $`\rho _1`$ and $`\rho _2`$. We fix $`𝒯_i=0`$ and impose two constraints from $`M_B^{}M_B`$ and $`M_D^{}M_D`$ which effectively reduce by two the number of free parameters. The results are given in Table 6.

Projections of the constraints from the six moments in the $`m_b`$-$`\mu _\pi ^2`$ and $`m_b`$-$`\rho _D^3`$ planes are shown in Fig. 1 and those in the $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$-$`\lambda _1`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$-$`\rho _1`$ planes in Fig. 2. The $`\chi ^2/\mathrm{n}.\mathrm{d}.\mathrm{f}.`$ of the fits is 0.96 and 0.35 in the two formulations. Since the contributions proportional to $`\rho _{LS}^3`$ in the moment expressions are numerically suppressed, the fit is only marginally sensitive to its size and the result is determined by the constraint applied. By removing this, the fit would give $`\rho _{LS}^3`$=(-1.0$`\pm `$0.7) GeV3.

In contrast, the value of the leading $`1/m_b^3`$ correction (parameterised by $`\rho _D^3`$ or $`\rho _1`$) can be determined with satisfactory accuracy and its range agrees with theoretical expectations .

Systematic uncertainties due to ranges of residual parameters which have been fixed and missing terms in the expansions have been estimated. For the running mass formalism we propagate the uncertainty on $`\alpha _s`$ and evaluate the effect of removing the BLM corrections from the lepton moments. In this scheme that is a small effect and higher order perturbative corrections are expected to be under control. Dimensional estimates suggest that $`1/m_b^4`$ effects do not exceed the present experimental resolution. Other systematic uncertainties will be addressed in a dedicated publication.

For the $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$-$`\lambda _1`$ formalism we take the effect of $`𝒯_i=(0.0\pm 0.50)^3`$ GeV3, $`\alpha _s`$ = 0.22$`\pm `$0.01 and we also estimate the effect of the missing corrections to third moments as $`M_B^6(0.001\pm 0.0005)\beta _0(\alpha _s/\pi )^2`$ and $`M_B^6(0.003\pm 0.003)\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}/\overline{M}_B\alpha _s/\pi `$.

The fit was also repeated using only the first two moments, leaving free $`m_b(1\mathrm{GeV})`$, $`\mu _\pi ^2(1\mathrm{GeV})`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, $`\lambda _1`$, respectively. The other parameters were fixed to the central values obtained in the full fit. Results agreed with those from the full fit. In particular, the values of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=0.42\pm 0.07`$(stat.) GeV and $`\lambda _1=(0.17\pm 0.05`$(stat.)) GeV2 agree with the recent result reported by the Cleo Collaboration , which uses the first moments of the charged lepton energy to obtain $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=0.39\pm 0.07`$ GeV and $`\lambda _1=(0.25\pm 0.05`$) GeV2.

There are several facets of these results to be looked at. One interesting piece of information comes from the correlation between $`m_c`$ and $`m_b`$ extracted from the fit. It corresponds to $`m_c(1\mathrm{GeV})=1.63\times (m_b(1\mathrm{GeV})3.91)`$. Therefore a competitive value of the charm mass can be extracted from a precise determination of $`m_b`$. Using, for instance, $`m_b(1\mathrm{GeV})=(4.60\pm 0.05)`$ GeV would give $`m_c(1\mathrm{GeV})=(1.13\pm 0.09)`$ GeV. This can be compared to the present typical lattice uncertainties which range between 50 and 120 MeV .

In the running mass scheme, the expansions of Eq.(5), for the $`B`$ and $`D`$ mesons are not used in the fit. It is therefore possible to test a posteriori the consistency of the meson mass expansion by comparing the $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ values obtained in the two cases. We find $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(B)\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(D)=0.086\pm `$0.092. This is also a test of the size of the non-local terms.

In both approaches, the OPE predictions for the six moments, computed with the available precision, have a common intersection in the multi-parameter space and the quality of the fit is good. Within the present experimental accuracy, we therefore do not see the need to introduce higher order terms to establish agreement with the data. In particular, the first leptonic and hadronic moments are highly correlated and depend on nearly the same combination of heavy quark masses. Fixing this from $`M_1(M_X)`$, one finds $`M_1(E_{\mathrm{}})=1.377`$ GeV which agrees well with the measured value of (1.383$`\pm `$0.015) GeV. This provides a non-trivial consistency check of the OPE. The overall agreement represents both a test of the theory and suggests constraints on the size of the $`1/m_b^4`$ terms and of other missing corrections. Similarly, the observed agreement strongly supports the validity of quark-hadron duality in the $`B`$ decay shape variables.

At present the achieved experimental resolution matches the available theoretical accuracy. With more precise data soon becoming available, it is important to improve the latter, particularly for higher hadronic moments. One way to improve the convergence of the heavy quark expansion could be to employ different kinematic variables. We propose to consider $`𝒩_X^2=M_X^22\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}E_X`$, where $`M_X`$ and $`E_X`$ are the hadronic mass and energy and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ a fixed mass parameter. Choosing $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ near $`M_Bm_b(1\mathrm{GeV})0.65`$ GeV, suppresses terms with $`l1`$ in Eq. (4) and results in a better convergence of higher moments . The use of this variable should be feasible at $`B`$ factories, where the kinematics allows an accurate reconstruction of both the mass and energy of the hadronic system in s.l. $`B`$ decays.

### 3.1 Implications for $`|V_{cb}|`$

The value of $`\left|\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{cb}}\right|`$ obtained from the total s.l. decay width depends on the OPE parameters extracted above. We discuss now the implications of our results for $`\left|\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{cb}}\right|`$, using the input parameters given in Table 7. The uncertainties on the $`\mathrm{BR}(bX\mathrm{}^{}\nu )`$ have been increased compared to ref.  for not using the heavy quark forward-backward asymmetries in the LEP global electroweak fit and to account for the $`\pm 15\%`$ uncertainty on the equality of s.l. partial width of $`b`$ baryons and mesons.

The inclusive s.l. decay width has been calculated through second order in perturbative QCD. Second order BLM corrections were obtained in , all-order BLM terms are available from , whereas second-order non-BLM corrections have been estimated in . Non-perturbative corrections start at order $`𝒪(1/m_b^2)`$  and $`𝒪(1/m_b^3)`$ corrections have also been calculated . Electroweak corrections have also been taken into account .

The determination of $`\left|\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{cb}}\right|`$ and the contributions of the various parameters in the kinetic mass scheme is described in . An approximate formula which displays the dependence on the different parameters is:

$`\left|\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{cb}}\right|=\left|\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{cb}}\right|_0`$ $`[10.65(m_b\left(1\right)4.6\mathrm{GeV}/\mathrm{c}^2)+0.40(m_c\left(1\right)1.15\mathrm{GeV}/\mathrm{c}^2)`$ (9)
$`+0.01\left(\mu _\pi ^20.4\mathrm{GeV}^2\right)+0.10\left(\rho _D^30.12\mathrm{GeV}^3\right)`$
$`+0.06(\mu _G^20.35\mathrm{GeV}^2)0.01(\rho _{LS}^3+0.17\mathrm{GeV}^3)].`$
A detailed discussion of the theoretical uncertainties on $`|V_{cb}|`$ goes beyond the scope of this paper. Here we focus on the uncertainty arising from the heavy quark masses and non-perturbative parameters determined in the fit. It is evaluated using the full fit error matrix which leads to $`\pm 1.5\%`$. There is an additional uncertainty coming from the limited accuracy of the theoretical expressions which have been used. We take the range $`m_b/2<\mu ^{}<m_b`$ for the scale $`\mu ^{}`$ at which $`\alpha _s`$ is evaluated and find a $`\pm 1\%`$ effect222Incorporating the third-order BLM correction suppresses this scale dependence. Combining Refs.  and , we find the third-order BLM correction to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{sl}}(bc)`$ to be $`50(\alpha _s/\pi )^3`$ in this scheme. This increases $`|V_{cb}|`$ by 1% for $`\mu ^{}=m_b`$, and leaves it nearly unchanged, compared to two loops, for $`\mu ^{}=m_b/2`$.. In summary, we obtain:

$$\left|\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{cb}}\right|=0.0419\times \left(1\pm 0.016|_{meas}\pm 0.015|_{fit}\pm 0.010|_{pert}\right),$$
(10)
where the first uncertainty reflects the accuracy on the s.l. width determination.

The expression for the inclusive $`b`$ s.l. width in the pole mass scheme is known to the same order. The fit results have been used to obtain:

$$\left|\mathrm{V}_{\mathrm{cb}}\right|=0.0413\times \left(1\pm 0.016|_{meas}\pm 0.017|_{fit}\pm 0.006|_{nl}\pm 0.021|_{pert}\right).$$
(11)
Again, the first two uncertainties correspond to the decay width measurement and to the fitted parameters, respectively. The third uncertainty refers to the $`𝒯_{i=1,4}`$ parameters which have been varied within the range $`(0\pm (0.5)^3)\mathrm{GeV}^3`$. The uncertainty from the truncation of the perturbative QCD series is again estimated by varying the scale at which $`\alpha _s`$ is evaluated between $`m_b/2`$ and $`2m_b`$. Here the perturbative uncertainty is larger and reflects the slower convergence of the perturbative series when the pole mass scheme is employed.

## 4 Conclusions

The values of the heavy quark masses have been determined, together with the leading $`1/m_b^2`$ and $`1/m_b^3`$ parameters, from a fit to the first three moments of the charged lepton energy and hadronic mass spectra in s.l. decays, measured in a preliminary analysis of the Delphi data. The absence of a charged lepton energy cut in the analysis makes the heavy quark expansion more reliable and allows us to include higher moments. We have adopted two different formalisms: one based on low-energy running quark masses, which does not rely on a $`1/m_c`$ expansion, and the other on pole quark masses. The constraints from the six moments agree well and the size of the dominant $`1/m_b^3`$ term has been found to be compatible with theoretical estimates. The fit is largely insensitive to non-local correlators and to the spin-orbital operator.

Propagating the ranges of the OPE parameters to the determination of $`|V_{cb}|`$ reduces the theoretical uncertainty due to the $`1/m_b^3`$ corrections below 2%. Furthermore, the use of a fit changes the nature of these uncertainties and partly removes the arbitrariness arising from estimates based on parameters ranges.

#### Acknowledgements

We thank D. Benson, I. Bigi and Z. Ligeti for interesting discussions. The work of P.G. was supported by a EU Marie Curie Fellowship. The work of N.U. was supported in part by the NSF under grant number PHY-0087419.

#### Note

During the final stage of this work, a new analysis of s.l. moments has appeared . There are several differences with our approach, but the results are qualitatively consistent with our findings.


format: text

text:
# Lattice Models with 𝒩=2 Supersymmetry

(October 16, 2002)

## Abstract

We introduce lattice models with explicit $`𝒩`$=2 supersymmetry. In these interacting models, the supersymmetry generators $`Q^\pm `$ yield the Hamiltonian $`H=\{Q^+,Q^{}\}`$ on any graph. The degrees of freedom can be described as either fermions with hard cores, or as quantum dimers. The Hamiltonian of our simplest model contains a hopping term and a repulsive potential, as well as the hard-core repulsion. We discuss these models from a variety of perspectives: using a fundamental relation with conformal field theory, via the Bethe ansatz, and using cohomology methods. The simplest model provides a manifestly-supersymmetric lattice regulator for the supersymmetric point of the massless 1+1-dimensional Thirring (Luttinger) model. We discuss the ground-state structure of this same model on more complicated graphs, including a 2-leg ladder, and discuss some generalizations.

Supersymmetry is an exceptionally powerful theoretical tool. It often allows exact computations in field theory and string theory, even when interactions are strong. In this paper we introduce $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric lattice models describing interacting fermions and monomer-dimer systems. We show that the continuum limit of the simplest of these models, defined on a one-dimensional lattice, is a well-known $`1+1`$-dimensional quantum field theory with $`𝒩=2`$ superconformal symmetry.

Our definition of $`𝒩`$=2 supersymmetry is that the Hamiltonian $`H`$ is built from two nilpotent fermionic generators denoted $`Q^+`$ and $`Q^{}=(Q^+)^{}`$ Witten . It is

$$H=\{Q^+,Q^{}\}.$$
(1)
The fact that $`Q^+`$ and $`Q^{}`$ commute with $`H`$ follows from the nilpotency $`(Q^+)^2=(Q^{})^2=0`$. Our models also have a fermion-number symmetry generated by $`F`$ with $`[F,Q^\pm ]=\pm Q^\pm `$. We shall show how, in at least some cases, this lattice supersymmetry extends to a space-time super(conformal) symmetry in the field theory describing the continuum limit. Lattice models with a symmetry involving fermionic generators, such as the $`t`$-$`J`$ model at $`J`$=$`\pm 2t`$, are often called “supersymmetric” in the condensed-matter literature, but do not have a Hamiltonian of the form eq. (1).

All eigenvalues $`E`$ of the Hamiltonian eq. (1) satisfy $`E0`$. All eigenstates form either singlet or doublet representations of the supersymmetry algebra. All states $`|g`$ with $`E=0`$ must be singlets: $`Q^+|g=Q^{}|g=0`$ Witten . Conversely, all singlets must have $`E=0`$. All the other eigenstates of $`H`$ can be decomposed into doublets under the supersymmetry, and conversely any doublet representation is an eigenstate. This is simple to prove: a doublet consists of two states $`|s,Q^+|s`$, where $`Q^{}|s=0`$. It follows from the definition of $`H`$ and the nilpotency of $`Q^\pm `$ that both of these states are eigenstates of $`H`$ with the same eigenvalue. All eigenstates can be decomposed into doublets: the four-dimensional representation $`(|s^{},Q^{}|s^{},Q^+|s^{},Q^+Q^{}|s^{})`$ is reducible. Let

$$|s|s^{}\frac{1}{E_s}Q^+Q^{}|s^{}$$

where $`E_s>0`$ is defined by $`H|s^{}=E_s|s^{}`$. Then $`Q^{}|s=0`$, and $`(|s,Q^+|s)`$ and $`(Q^{}|s^{},Q^+Q^{}|s^{})`$ form two irreducible doublets.

The models we introduce can be defined on any lattice (or actually, any graph) in any dimension. The simplest model involves a single species of fermion $`c_i`$, placed at any site $`i`$ of the lattice. The fermion obeys the usual anticommutator $`\{c_i,c_j^{}\}=\delta _{ij}`$, and the operator $`F=_ic_i^{}c_i`$ counts the number of fermions. We impose the restriction that the fermions have hard cores, meaning that fermions are not allowed on neighboring sites. A hard-core fermion is created by $`c_i^{}𝒫_{<i>}`$, where the projection operator $`𝒫_{<i>}`$ requires all sites neighboring $`i`$ to be empty:

$$𝒫_{<i>}=\underset{j\text{ next to }i}{}(1c_j^{}c_j).$$
(2)
On this space of states, the supersymmetry operators are defined by

$$Q^+=\underset{i}{}c_i^{}𝒫_{<i>}Q^{}=\underset{i}{}c_i𝒫_{<i>}.$$
(3)
It is easy to verify that $`(Q^+)^2=(Q^{})^2=0`$. The Hamiltonian is therefore

$$H=\underset{i}{}\underset{j\text{ next to }i}{}𝒫_{<i>}c_i^{}c_j𝒫_{<j>}+\underset{i}{}𝒫_{<i>}.$$
(4)
The first term in the Hamiltonian allows fermions to hop to neighboring sites, with the projectors maintaining the hard-core repulsion. The second term favors having more fermions, as long as they are more than two sites from each other. Thus one can view it as a repulsive potential for fermions, in addition to the hard core.

There are two key questions to try to answer. The first is: what properties can be computed exactly using the supersymmetry? We have already noted the positive energy and the pairing in the excited-state spectrum, but these are just the simplest consequences of the supersymmetry. The second question is: what (if any) field theory describes the model in the continuum limit?

To illustrate the power of supersymmetry, we find the ground states for a chain of six sites and periodic boundary conditions. First, we count all the states. There is one state $`|0`$ with $`f`$=0, and six states $`c_i^{}|0`$ with $`f`$=1, while because of the hard cores, there are nine states with $`f`$=2, and two with $`f`$=3. The vacuum obeys $`Q^{}|0=0`$ and $`Q^+|0=_{i=1}^6c_i^{}|0`$, so $`(|0,Q^+|0)`$ make up a doublet. The remaining five states with $`f`$=1 are all annihilated by $`Q^{}`$, and $`Q^+`$ acts non-trivially on them. There are thus five doublets with $`(f,f+1)=(1,2)`$. The states with $`f`$=3 are both annihilated by $`Q^+`$, and $`Q^{}`$ acts non-trivially on both, giving two doublets with $`(f,f+1)=(2,3)`$. This accounts for all the states in the theory, except for two states with $`f`$=2. These two cannot form a doublet, because they have same fermion number. They therefore must be singlets, so there are two $`E`$=0 ground states in this theory, both with $`f`$=2. With a little more work, one finds that they have eigenvalues $`\mathrm{exp}(\pm i\pi /3)`$ under translation by one site.

A basic quantity in a supersymmetric theory is the Witten index Witten

$$W=\text{tr}\left[(1)^Fe^{\beta H}\right].$$
(5)
Because the two states in a doublet have the same energy, their contribution to $`W`$ cancels, leaving the trace only over ground states and $`W`$ independent of $`\beta `$. $`W`$ can thus be found by evaluating (5) in the $`\beta 0`$ limit, where all states contribute with weight $`(1)^F`$. For example, for the six-site chain discussed above, we confirm that $`W=16+92=2`$. For our model on the cube, one finds $`W=18+168+2=3`$.

Computing $`W`$ for the model eq. (4) on a general graph poses a fascinating combinatorial problem. Cohomology theory is a powerful tool to compute the number of ground states at any fermion number, and therefore also $`W`$. The supersymmetry generator $`Q^+`$ satisfies $`(Q^+)^2=0`$, and the $`E=0`$ ground states are precisely the states $`|s`$ that satisfy $`Q^+|s=0`$ and that cannot be written in the form $`|s=Q^+|s^{}`$. Those states form what is called the cohomology of the operator $`Q^+`$ and for its computation a variety of techniques are available. These include the ‘spectral sequence’ technique, which can be applied in this context as follows: one splits the lattice in two sublattices, with corresponding fermion number operators $`F_1`$ and $`F_2`$, so that $`F=F_1+F_2`$. $`Q^+`$ can also be split as $`Q_1^++Q_2^+`$, so that $`Q_i^+`$ increases $`F_i`$ by one. The two operators $`Q_1^+`$ and $`Q_2^+`$ are nilpotent and anti-commute. The first step in the spectral sequence is to compute the cohomology of $`Q_1^+`$. $`Q_2^+`$ becomes an operator acting on this cohomology, and the second step is to compute the cohomology of $`Q_2^+`$ on this subspace. Often the process terminates here, and the result is the cohomology of $`Q^+`$. In general the procedure continues for a finite number of additional steps, see e.g. botttu  for details. A similar procedure exists for a decomposition of a lattice into $`n`$ sublattices, and in particular when every sublattice consists of a single site. Applying this to the $`N`$-site periodic chain, with $`F_1`$ consisting of every third site, we find ground states solely at fermion number $`f=\text{int}((N+1)/3)`$. For a chain with $`N=3p`$ with $`p`$ integer, we find two ground states (so $`W=2(1)^p`$), while for $`N=3p\pm 1`$, there is a single ground state (so $`W=(1)^p`$).

We now address our questions in the one-dimensional case, where the Hamiltonian eq. (4) is on an $`N`$-site chain:

$$H=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\left[P_{i1}\left(c_i^{}c_{i+1}+c_{i+1}^{}c_i\right)P_{i+2}+P_{i1}P_{i+1}\right]$$
(6)
where $`P_i1c_i^{}c_i`$ is the projector on a single site. We take periodic boundary conditions, so indices are defined mod $`N`$. The translation operator $`T`$ commutes with both $`H`$ and $`F`$, and its eigenvalues $`t`$ satisfying $`t^N=1`$ characterize the eigenstates of $`H`$. The Hamiltonian eq. (6) resembles a lattice version of the Thirring model, a 1$`+`$1-dimensional field theory with a four-fermion interaction term. Below we will make the connection precise.

Before we apply the Bethe ansatz, we indicate how the space of states $`_N`$ of the model can be obtained by applying a systematic ‘finitization’ procedure kjs-bs  to the chiral spectrum of a specific $`𝒩=2`$ superconformal field theory (SCFT) with central charge $`c=1`$. This construction follows two steps. In the first step, the full chiral Hilbert space of the SCFT is written in a ‘quasi-particle’ basis, with the fundamental quasi-particles forming a supersymmetry doublet with charges $`(1/3,2/3)`$. In the second step, the momenta of the individual quasi-particles are constrained to a maximum value in the order of $`N`$, corresponding to a discretization of the space direction of the SCFT with spacing of the order $`1/N`$. This then leads to a truncated or ‘finitized’ partition sum $`Q_N(q,w)`$, which is closely related to the partition sum $`Z_N(q,w)=\mathrm{Tr}(q^{\frac{N}{2\pi i}\mathrm{log}T}w^{(N3F)})`$, which keeps track of the eigenvalues of the translation operator $`T`$ and the fermion number $`F`$ of the lattice model eq. (6). This entire construction, to be detailed elsewhere, respects the supersymmetry. This gives a rationale for the existence of supersymmetry generators on the space $`_N`$, and it provides an independent way of determining the quantum numbers $`t`$ and $`f`$ of the supersymmetric ground states. We remark that an analogous construction based on the spinon basis of the simplest $`SU(2)`$-invariant CFT naturally leads to the space of states of the Heisenberg and Haldane-Shastry models for $`N`$ spin-1/2 degrees of freedom. Clearly, many generalizations are possible.

Having discussed the model eq. (6) from different points of view, we now give some of the results of a Bethe ansatz computation FSii . This computation lets us identify the continuum limit of the theory. An eigenstate of $`H`$ with $`f`$ fermions is of the form

$$\varphi ^{(f)}=\underset{\{i_k\}}{}\phi (i_1,i_2,\mathrm{}i_f)c_{i_1}^{}c_{i_2}^{}\mathrm{}c_{i_f}^{}|0$$
(7)
where we order $`1i_1<i_21<i_32\mathrm{}`$. Bethe’s ansatz for the eigenstates of $`H`$ is Bethe

$$\phi (i_1,i_2,\mathrm{}i_f)=\underset{P}{}A_P\mu _{P1}^{i_11}\mu _{P2}^{i_21}\mathrm{}\mu _{Pf}^{i_f1}.$$
(8)
for some numbers $`\{\mu _1,\mathrm{},\mu _f\}`$ and $`A_P`$; the sum is over permutations $`P`$ of the set $`(1,2,\mathrm{},f)`$. By construction, the translation operator $`T`$ has eigenvalue $`t=_{k=1}^f\mu _k^1`$.

The next step is to find highest-weight states under the symmetries of the model. In Bethe’s case, the symmetry is the $`O(3)`$ of the Heisenberg spin chain; here it is the supersymmetry. Here, $`Q^{}\varphi ^{(f)}=0`$ requires

$$t^1(\mu _k)^{Nf}=\underset{j=1}{\overset{f}{}}\frac{\mu _k\mu _j+1\mu _k}{\mu _k\mu _j+1\mu _j}$$
(9)
for all $`k=1\mathrm{}f`$. These are very similar to the Bethe equations for the antiferromagnetic XXZ spin chain at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\pm 1/2`$ Baxter . The only difference in (9) is in the left-hand-side, which in the XXZ case reads $`(\mu _k)^N\tau `$, where $`\tau 1`$ corresponds to twisted boundary conditions.

Demanding that a state be an eigenstate of a continuous symmetry fixes all the free parameters in the Bethe ansatz. The miracle of the ansatz is that in the Heisenberg and other integrable models, this state is also an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian. In our case, supersymmetry provides the miracle. Any Bethe ansatz state obeying $`Q^{}|s=0`$ is either a singlet or part of a doublet, and so it must be an eigenstate of $`H`$. Its energy is

$$E=N2f+\underset{k=1}{\overset{f}{}}\left[\mu _i+\frac{1}{\mu _i}\right].$$
(10)
The supersymmetry doublets appear naturally within the Bethe ansatz. If ($`\mu _1,\mathrm{}\mu _f`$) satisfies the Bethe equations, then the set ($`1,\mu _1,\mathrm{}\mu _f`$) also must satisfy the Bethe equations, and moreover, both sets have the same energy $`E`$. It is straightforward to check that the states associated with these two sets are related by $`\varphi ^{(f+1)}=Q^+\varphi ^{(f)}`$.

The Bethe equations are $`f`$ coupled polynomial equations of order $`N`$. They cannot be solved in closed form, and to make further progress, one usually needs to take $`N`$ large. In our case, however, the supersymmetry allows us to derive more results from the Bethe ansatz for finite $`N`$. Precisely, we define $`w_k`$ in terms of $`\mu _k`$ as $`w_k=(\mu _kq)/(q\mu _k1),`$ where $`q\mathrm{exp}(i\pi /3)`$. Then Baxter’s Q-function Baxter  $`𝒬(w)_{i=1}^f(ww_k)`$ has zeroes at $`w=w_k`$. Defining $`(w)𝒬(w)(1+w)^{Nf}`$, we find that for the $`w_k`$ giving the ground state,

$$(q^2w)=tq^N(w)+t^1q^N(q^2w).$$
(11)
We derive an explicit expression for $`(w)`$ in the sequel FSii , but from (11) directly we can rederive $`f`$ and $`t`$ for the ground state(s). When $`N=3p`$ with $`p`$ an integer, there are non-trivial solutions to (11) only when $`f=N/3`$ and $`t=(1)^N\mathrm{exp}(\pm i\pi /3)`$. For $`N3p`$, one has only a single solution with $`f=\text{int}((N+1)/3)`$, and $`t=(1)^{N1}`$.

We can see heuristically why the ground state has $`f=\text{int}((N+1)/3)`$. The potential term in (6) alone is minimized by the state with a fermion on every third site; adding any more fermions forces fermions to be two sites away and raises the energy. The hopping term alone also discourages fermions from being only two sites away, because it has negative eigenvalues when fermions can hop to an adjacent site and back again, and the hard cores prevent this if there is another fermion two sites away. The state with a fermion on every third site,

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{}$$

resembles a Néel state for a Heisenberg anti-ferromagnet. It is not an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian: the full ground state is disordered. However, like the Néel state, we expect this state to be a part of the ground state. Our derivations of $`f_{GS}=\text{int}((N+1)/3)`$ confirm this intuition. This heuristic picture also gives the fermion numbers of the low-lying excited states. The excitations include defects (domain walls) in the Néel-like state, such as

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{}$$

The fermion number of this configuration is just one higher than that of the Néel-like state, and it has three identical defects. Since defects can be moved arbitrarily far apart with no change in the potential, it is natural to treat each defect as a quasiparticle with charge $`1/3`$. The existence of fractional charge in $`1+1`$ dimensions is an old story; this was first discovered in field theory JRGW .

Finally, we give the field theory describing the continuum limit of (6). When taking $`N`$ large, one can rewrite the Bethe equations in terms of densities of roots Bethe , and then derive integral equations (known as thermodynamic Bethe ansatz equations) yielding the free energy. Our model has the same thermodynamic equations as the XXZ chain at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1/2`$, so the two models coincide in the continuum limit. The continuum limit of the XXZ chain is described by the massless Thirring model hank , or equivalently a free massless boson $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ with action Friedan

$$S=\frac{2g}{\pi }𝑑x𝑑t\left[(_t\mathrm{\Phi })^2(_x\mathrm{\Phi })^2\right].$$

The continuum limit of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1/2`$ model has $`g=2/3`$; this is the simplest field theory with $`𝒩=(2,2)`$ superconformal symmetry Friedan . The $`(2,2)`$ means that there are two left and two right-moving supersymmetries: in the continuum limit the fermion decomposes into left- and right-moving components over the Fermi sea. The boson also can be decoupled into left and right pieces, so that $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_L+\mathrm{\Phi }_R`$, while its dual $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}=g(\mathrm{\Phi }_L\mathrm{\Phi }_R)`$. The states of the field theory are given by the vertex operators $`V_{m,n}=\mathrm{exp}(im\mathrm{\Phi }+in\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }})`$, of conformal dimensions $`h_{L,R}=(m\pm gn)^2/(4g)`$. The four components of the Dirac fermion in the Thirring model are $`V_{\pm 1,\pm 1/2}`$, while the supersymmetry generators are $`Q_L^\pm =V_{\pm 1,\pm 3/2}`$ and $`Q_R^\pm =V_{\pm 1,3/2}`$. In a finite size $``$, the lowest-energy state is in the Neveu-Schwarz sector, where the Thirring fermion has anti-periodic boundary conditions. This state has $`E_{NS}=\pi /(6)`$. The lowest-energy states in the Ramond (periodic boundary conditions) sector are given by $`|\pm _R=V_{0,\pm 1/2}|0_{NS}`$; both have energy zero. States in this conformal field theory can be built up by operating with the “spinons” $`V_{\pm 1/3,\pm 1/2}`$.

Comparing this superconformal field theory with the lattice model on $`N=3p`$ sites, we identify our two $`E=0`$ ground states with the two Ramond vacua; all other states of the lattice model are in the Ramond sector as well. The $`U(1)`$ quantum number $`m`$ corresponds to $`fN/3`$ (the fermion number relative to the ground state). The spinons here have charge $`\pm 1/3`$, so it is natural to identify these with the fractionally-charged excitations in the lattice model.

One can define a quantum dimer model by placing the variables $`c_i^{}`$ on the links instead of the sites of a lattice. The product in $`𝒫_{<i>}`$ is then over links which meet the link $`i`$, and the projections are precisely such that overlapping dimers are avoided. On the $`N=3p`$-site chain, the ground states have dimer number $`N_d=N/3`$, which is 2/3 of the value for close-packed dimers. A more involved example is that of the supersymmetric dimer model on a 2-leg ladder with $`N+1`$ rungs. Using cohomology techniques, we found that the number $`N_{GS}`$ of ground states grows quickly with $`N`$, and that not all ground states have the same dimer number $`N_d`$, leading to (partial) cancellations in the Witten index $`W`$. For example, for $`N=7`$ one finds five $`E=0`$ ground states with $`N_d=5,5,5,5,6`$, so $`W=3`$. Our results, asymptotically precise for $`N`$ large, are $`N_{GS}(1.395)^N`$ and $`W(1.356)^N`$. These huge degeneracies suggest additional symmetries in the model. It will be interesting to see if supersymmetry can be of use in other quantum dimer models MSF .

Following the ideas above, one can obtain other supersymmetric models by including more projectors in (3), or by including several species of fermions. Consider a two-species model, with fermions labeled by $`+`$ and $``$, and with the conditions that (i) a single site may not be occupied by two particles and (ii) same-type particles may not occupy nearest neighbor sites. On a periodic chain with $`4n`$ sites, the Witten index of this model turns out to be $`W=3`$, and we have strong indications that the continuum limit of this theory is the second model (at $`c=3/2`$) of the series of $`𝒩`$=2 minimal superconformal field theories. A typical ground state pattern is

$$\mathrm{}+++\mathrm{}$$

and one recognizes the possibility of domain walls of charge $`\pm 1/2`$ ($`+`$) and neutral defects ($`++`$). The $`+/`$ pattern indicates an Ising substructure in the model, in accord with the fact that the $`c=3/2`$ $`𝒩=2`$ minimal model can be written in terms of a Majorana fermion and a free boson.

We finally remark that in our models, the space of states is made up solely of fermions on which the supersymmetry acts non-linearly. (This does not preclude a linear realization on bosons and fermions in the continuum theory.) Such realizations of $`𝒩=2`$ lattice supersymmetry seem very different from other known realizations, for example in lattice gauge theory feo .

Acknowledgements: It is a pleasure to thank Bernard Nienhuis, Erik Verlinde and Alexander Schrijver for discussions. This work was supported in part by the foundations FOM and NWO of the Netherlands, by NSF grant DMR-0104799, and by a DOE OJI award.


text:
# Lattice study of “f0(600) or 𝜎”

## 1 Introduction

In many text books, we can find the intuitive explanation of the spontaneous breaking of the the chiral symmetry based on the titled “Mexican Hat” potential, of which the angular and radial modes correspond to the $`\pi `$ and $`\sigma `$ mesons, respectively. Also in the the Nambu Jona-Lasinio model, the $`\sigma `$-degree of freedom plays an important role for the chiral symmetry breaking of QCD in the low-energy region. Despite its importance, the experimental identification of the light scalar meson is a long standing puzzle and the $`\sigma `$ had disappeared from the list of Particle Data Group (PDG) for over 20 years. But, the scenes around the $`\sigma `$ are changing recently; re-analyses of $`\pi `$-$`\pi `$ scattering phase shift strongly suggest the existence of the $`I=0`$ and $`J^{PC}=0^{++}`$ meson and significant contributions of the $`\sigma `$ in the decay channels of heavy particles such as D$`\pi \pi \pi `$ are reported . The $`\sigma `$ may reveal itself also in $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(3S)\mathrm{{\rm Y}}\pi \pi `$ channel. In 1996 PDG, “$`f_0`$(400-1200) or $`\sigma `$” appeared bellow $`1`$ GeV mass region. In the 2002 edition, it appears as “$`f_0`$(600) or $`\sigma `$” and as the 105th branch of the D<sup>+</sup> decay, “D $`\sigma +\pi `$ ” is cited . Now it is an important task of the lattice calculation to confirm the properties of the $`\sigma `$ meson based on QCD.

In quenched QCD, DeTar and Kogut first measured the $`\sigma `$ meson screening mass in a lattice simulation , Alford and Jaffe discussed the possible light scalar mesons as $`\overline{q}^2q^2`$ states , and masses and mixing of $`q\overline{q}`$ states and a glueball have been investigated by Lee and Weingarten . However, as we have already reported in the previous proceedings , the connected and disconnected diagrams give almost the same amount of the contributions, indicating that the dynamical quark effect seems to be essential in the calculation.

McNeile and Michael computed the mixed iso-singlet scalar masses of $`q\overline{q}`$ and glueball states in two kinds of situation, i.e, with and without the dynamical quark effects . We focus our attention to explore whether the $`\sigma `$ meson exists below $`1`$ GeV in this work. Based on the quite similar motivation, Prelovsek presented in the present conference the calculation of the quenched scalar meson correlator with the domain wall fermions, where the disconnected diagram is taken into account effectively through an approximate formula based on the chiral perturbation theory .

## 2 Formulation of the $`\sigma `$ propagator

As for the $`\sigma `$ meson, we adopt the operator as

$$\sigma (x)\underset{c=1}{\overset{3}{}}\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{4}{}}\frac{\overline{u}_\alpha ^c(x)u_\alpha ^c(x)+\overline{d}_\alpha ^c(x)d_\alpha ^c(x)}{\sqrt{2}},$$
(1)
where $`u`$ and $`d`$ are the $`u`$-quark and $`d`$-quark Dirac spinors, respectively. The indices $`c`$ and $`\alpha `$ denote color and Dirac spinor indices, respectively. Quantum numbers of the operator are $`I=0`$ and $`J^P=0^+`$. Because our simulation is full QCD, any kind of the state which has the same quantum number can contribute to the correlation as a virtual state. The $`\sigma `$ meson propagator is given by

$`G(y,x)=\sigma (y)\sigma (x)^{}(y_0>x_0)`$ (3)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z}}{\displaystyle DUD\overline{u}DuD\overline{d}Dd}`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{a,b=1}{\overset{3}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha ,\beta =1}{\overset{4}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{u}_\beta ^b(y)u_\beta ^b(y)+\overline{d}_\beta ^b(y)d_\beta ^b(y)}{\sqrt{2}}}`$
$`\times `$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{u}_\alpha ^a(x)u_\alpha ^a(x)+\overline{d}_\alpha ^a(x)d_\alpha ^a(x)}{\sqrt{2}}}\right)^{}e^{S_g\overline{u}Wu\overline{d}Wd}`$
$`=`$ $`\text{T}rW^1(x,y)W^1(y,x)`$
$`+2\text{T}rW^1(y,y)\text{T}rW^1(x,x).`$
In Eq.(3), ”Tr” represents summation over color and Dirac spinor indices. $`W^1`$’s are $`u`$ and $`d`$ quark propagators, $`U`$ is the link variable of gluon, and $`S_g`$ is the pure gauge action of gluons. We assume that the $`u`$ and $`d`$ quark propagators are equivalent because $`u`$ and $`d`$ quark masses are almost the same. From Eq.(3), we can see that $`\sigma `$ propagator is composed of the connected diagram (the first term of Eq.(3)) and the disconnected one (the second term of Eq.(3)). The quantum number of the $`\sigma `$ meson ($`I=0`$ and $`J^P=0^+`$) is the same as that of the vacuum, and the vacuum expectation value of the $`\sigma `$ operator, $`\sigma (x)`$, does not vanish. Therefore, the contribution of $`\sigma (x)`$ should be subtracted from the $`\sigma `$ operator. Thus,

$`G(y,x)`$ $`=`$ $`\text{T}rW^1(x,y)W^1(y,x)`$ (4)
$`+2\text{T}rW^1(y,y)\text{T}rW^1(x,x)`$
$`2\text{T}rW^1(y,y)\text{T}rW^1(x,x)`$
is adopted for the $`\sigma `$ propagator. The third term in Eq.(4) corresponds to the subtraction of the vacuum contribution. Our results show that the values of the second and the third terms in Eq.(4) are in the same order. Therefore, in order to obtain the signal correctly as the difference between these terms, the high precision numerical simulations and careful analyses are required.

## 3 Results of numerical simulations

We calculate the $`\sigma `$ propagator in the full QCD by using the Hybrid Monte Carlo (HMC) algorithm, in order to take the dynamical quarks which are important to estimate the disconnected diagrams of the $`\sigma `$ propagator. We use the $`Z_2`$ noise method to calculate the disconnected diagrams (the second and third terms in Eq.(4)). The 500 or 1000 random $`Z_2`$ numbers are generated. The two-flavor Wilson fermion system is simulated on the $`8^3\times 16`$ lattice.

After 500 trajectories are updated in the quenched QCD, we start to update the configuration in the full QCD by using HMC algorithm. More than 500 trajectories by HMC are spent for thermalization. The $`\sigma `$ propagators are calculated on a configuration in every 10 trajectories.

Based on ref., we set $`\beta =4.8`$ ($`a=0.197(2)`$ fm, $`\kappa _c=0.19286(14)`$). Figures 1, 2 and 3 correspond to the three values of the hopping parameter, $`\kappa =0.1846`$(fig. 1), 0.1874 (fig. 2) and 0.1891(fig. 3), respectively. The numerical results are summarized in Table 1.

## 4 Concluding Remarks

We have reported our preliminary results on the $`\sigma `$ meson propagator based on a full QCD lattice calculation with dynamical fermions. The simulations with larger hopping parameters give us clearer signals. Though our simulation is still far from the chiral limit and no decay channel is yet open, our preliminary results obtained with still a relatively low statics indicate the existence of the light $`\sigma `$ meson with the mass in almost the same order as that of the $`\rho `$ meson. See Table 1.

Acknowledgment This work is supported by Grant-in-Aide for Scientific Research by Monbu-Kagaku-sho (No. 11440080, No. 12554008, No. 12640263 and No. 14540263) and ERI of Tokuyama Univ. Simulations were performed on SR8000 at IMC, Hiroshima Univ., SX5 at RCNP, Osaka Univ., SR8000 at KEK.


text:
# Discovery of a Population of H I Clouds in the Galactic Halo (Accepted for Publication in the Astrophysical Journal Letters) (Preprint – October 14, 2002)

## 1 Introduction

The Galactic H $`\mathrm{I}`$ halo — the neutral gas layer which extends many scale heights above the disk — has been detected in 21cm emission, Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption, and in other species (see the review by Savage (1995)). In the inner Galaxy, where tangent-point observations can locate the gas accurately, 21cm H $`\mathrm{I}`$ emission has been found to $`|z|5001000`$ pc from the Galactic plane (Lockman (1984); hereafter L84), and combined 21cm-Ly$`\alpha `$ studies give similar results for gas near the Sun (Lockman, Hobbs, & Shull, 1986). The spatial structure of halo H $`\mathrm{I}`$ has always been uncertain. A list of “halo clouds” was given in L84, but these clouds are quite large, possibly atypical, and not obviously related to the more pervasive halo medium which appears smooth, though lumpy, in the major 21cm surveys (Weaver & Williams, 1973; Hartmann & Burton,, 1997). A “patchiness factor” for halo gas was introduced by Savage and collaborators (Savage, Edgar & Diplas, 1990; Diplas & Savage, 1994) to account for the relatively large scatter in the absorption column densities from one direction to another, but targets for absorption studies are sparsely distributed across the sky, and give little information on the angular structure of the gas. When 21cm survey spectra are averaged over large areas to achieve the highest sensitivity, they show what appears to be very high velocity-dispersion wings, suggesting that the Galaxy has an H $`\mathrm{I}`$ component with a scale-height of 4 kpc (Kalberla et al., 1998; Kalberla, Kerp, & Haud, 2002). However, the large areal averaging necessary to detect this emission removes most information on its angular structure.

This Letter reports results from the first observations with the Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Telescope (the GBT) of 21cm emission from the Galactic H $`\mathrm{I}`$ halo at the tangent points in the inner Galaxy. The GBT has good angular resolution, excellent sensitivity, and high dynamic range for this work, and has revealed unexpected structure in the H $`\mathrm{I}`$ far from the Galactic plane.

## 2 Observations

Observation were made in several sessions from April to July 2002 using the GBT at the NRAO in Green Bank, WV. The telescope’s 100 meter diameter, unblocked aperture gives it an exceptionally clean main beam with a half-power width at 21 cm of $`9\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}2`$, and a first sidelobe 30 dB below the main beam (Lockman, 1998; Jewell, 2000; Prestage & Maddalena, 2003). The receiver system temperature on cold sky was about 20 K. The detector was the NRAO spectral processor, a Fourier Transform instrument with an efficiency near unity. The spectra have a velocity coverage of $`\pm 250`$ km s-1 around $`+50`$ km s-1 LSR in 512 channels, each with a velocity width of 1.25 km s-1 and a spacing of 1.03 km s-1. Residual instrumental baselines are modeled adequately with a first or second order polynomial.

## 3 HI Clouds far from the Galactic Plane

At the tangent points in the inner Galaxy, Galactic rotation is projected entirely along the line of sight, so gas at the “terminal” velocity, $`V_t`$, has a distance from the Sun, r, a distance from the Galactic center, $`R`$, and a distance from the Galactic plane, z, which is known with uncommon accuracy, at least for $`R>2`$ kpc (L84, List, Burton, & Xiang (1984); Burton (1992); in this Letter the Sun-center distance $`R_08.5`$ kpc). In the halo, gas at the tangent point which corotates with gas in the disk will appear at $`V_tcos(b)V_t`$ for the latitudes studied here. The intrinsic velocity dispersion of the ISM will produce some emission at velocities beyond $`V_t`$, but any material which lags significantly behind Galactic rotation will have $`|V_{LSR}|<|V_t|`$. A lagging halo will be displaced away from the terminal velocity and will not be seen in this analysis.

Figure 1 shows H $`\mathrm{I}`$ emission observed with the GBT in a slice through the Galactic plane at longitude $`16\mathrm{°}`$. The terminal velocity is marked with a vertical line at $`+135`$ km s-1 (here $`V_t`$ is derived from the low-latitude $`{}_{}{}^{12}CO`$ studies of Burton & Gordon (1976), Clemens (1985), and Dame, Hartmann, & Thaddeus (2001)). Most of the H $`\mathrm{I}`$ at the highest velocities is concentrated to $`|b|1\mathrm{°}`$, but near latitude $`+3\mathrm{°}`$, just beyond the terminal velocity, there is a narrow line component at $`V_{LSR}=145`$ km s-1 which lies quite a bit above the disk emission. Subsequent maps made around this feature show that it is a discrete H $`\mathrm{I}`$ cloud which has an angular size $`15\mathrm{}`$ and a peak $`N_{HI}=1.2\times 10^{19}`$ cm-2. Its velocity places it at or near the tangent point, implying that it has $`z=430`$ pc, a linear extent of 36 pc, and an H $`\mathrm{I}`$ mass $`70M_{\mathrm{}}`$. The 21cm line is narrow, with a $`\mathrm{\Delta }v=6.7`$ km s-1 (FWHM). Another small cloud at $`b=2\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}2`$ and $`V_{LSR}=+133`$ km s-1 has similar properties and is +310 pc above the plane.

$`\mathrm{I}`$ clouds like these have been detected with the GBT at longitudes $`341\mathrm{°},`$ $`19\mathrm{°},`$ $`25\mathrm{°},`$ $`29\mathrm{°},`$ $`35\mathrm{°},`$ $`40\mathrm{°},`$ and $`45\mathrm{°}`$. Some of the brighter halo clouds can be recognized in low-resolution survey data (e.g., Hartmann & Burton, (1997)), but they usually appear there in only one or two pixels. These clouds constitute a previously undiscovered population. They are found many degrees and many hundreds of pc from the Galactic plane. They appear to share the same general rotation as gas in the disk — a Galactic rotation curve derived from the halo clouds alone would be quite similar to a rotation curve derived from the disk. Although the halo clouds contain only a minuscule fraction of the total $`N_{HI}`$ in their direction (the total $`N_{HI}`$ is dominated by the disk), they may contain a significant fraction of the mass of the neutral halo.

## 4 The H $`\mathrm{I}`$ Halo at Longitude $`29\mathrm{°}`$

An area of the sky near $`\mathrm{}=29\mathrm{°}`$ was mapped with the GBT to provide information on a set of these objects at one location in the Galaxy ($`R=3.7`$ kpc; $`r=7.6`$ kpc). This region was known from preliminary observations to have a number of tangent-point clouds, and it does not appear to have high optical extinction, so there is some hope that objects found in this field may be studied at other wavelengths. Figure 2 shows H $`\mathrm{I}`$ maps averaged over several velocity intervals. The left panel covers emission $`515`$ km s-1 greater than $`V_t`$, which is about 105 km s-1 at this longitude (Clemens, 1985). The map is dotted with clouds, so common near the plane that they blend into structures which are difficult to untangle. The central panel of Figure 2 shows the same area at higher velocities. There are additional clouds, though fewer than at the lower velocities. The right panel, covering very high velocities, shows mainly noise and the wings of lower-velocity clouds, but also a weak emission feature near $`\mathrm{},b=29\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}658\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}9`$, which arises in a small cloud at $`V_{LSR}=160`$ km s-1 that has a peak $`N_{HI}=5\times 10^{18}`$ cm-2 at $`z=1160`$ pc.

### 4.1 Observations of Individual Clouds

More sensitive spectra of several minutes duration were obtained toward the centers of 38 bright, unconfused clouds chosen from preliminary observations of the $`\mathrm{}=29\mathrm{°}`$ field. Gaussian components were fit to the spectra to determine the peak line intensity, $`T_L`$, the line width (FWHM) $`\mathrm{\Delta }v`$, and the velocity of each cloud. The clouds all have $`V_{LSR}V_t`$ and $`b4\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}3,`$ and are thus at least 500 pc from the plane. Their emission is typically five to ten times the background. Properties of the 38 clouds are summarized in Table 1 and representative spectra are shown in Figure 3.

In Table 1 the quantity $`N_{HI}`$ is the column density at the cloud center, where $`N_{HI}=1.94\times 10^{18}T_L\mathrm{\Delta }v`$ cm-2. The diameter listed is the square root of the product of the diameters in longitude and latitude. About 25% of the clouds are unresolved to the $`9\mathrm{}`$ beam of the GBT and most of the others are not greatly elongated. The average volume density, $`n`$, is $`N_{HI}`$ divided by the diameter, and thus a lower limit for unresolved clouds. Most of the clouds have $`n<0.4`$ cm-3, but some have up to three times this value. The total mass is for H $`\mathrm{I}`$ only. The mass distribution is strongly skewed toward lower mass clouds: one-third have $`M_{HI}30M_{\mathrm{}}`$.

#### 4.1.1 Velocity

The 38 clouds have velocities in the range $`103148`$ km s-1, but the number per unit velocity decreases approximately linearly with $`V_{LSR}`$: half of the clouds lie within 15 km s-1 of $`V_t`$. The total $`N_{HI}`$ in clouds also decreases with increasing velocity. The clouds are thus related to the disk dynamically. A simulation using a flat Galactic rotation curve suggests that a cloud population with a line-of-sight velocity dispersion $`\sigma _v1520`$ km s-1 would be consistent with the distribution of cloud velocities at $`V_{LSR}V_t`$. There is no strong correlation of $`V_{LSR}`$ with $`z`$: the highest velocity clouds are found near $`z1`$ kpc.

#### 4.1.2 Kinetic Temperature and Line Shape

Line widths are approximately uniformly distributed between 4.2 and 20 km s-1 with only a few higher values. About one-quarter of the lines are so narrow that the clouds must be rather cool, with $`T<2000`$ K, and there are 4 clouds with $`T<1000`$ K. Some halo clouds listed in L84 are also this cool. It may be significant that the narrowest lines, those with $`\mathrm{\Delta }v<9.0`$ km s-1, are all found in the half of the sample closest to the Galactic plane. Virtually all of the lines from the clouds are superimposed on weak emission which often extends to higher velocity $`(\mathrm{\S }\mathrm{4.1.5})`$. Some clouds appear to have a core-halo structure with two spectral components, one broad and one narrow, at the same position and velocity. An example is 29.12-5.65 in Figure 3. The broad component is typically one-third as bright as the narrow component, and has at least three times the line width, but the Gaussian decomposition is often ambiguous and properties of the spectral “halos” are quite uncertain. In particular, the observations are not yet sensitive enough to determine if the apparent halos are conterminous with the cores.

#### 4.1.3 Thermal Pressure

An estimate of a cloud’s thermal pressure is $`P_tnT22n\mathrm{\Delta }v^2`$. In terms of observables, $`P_tT_L\mathrm{\Delta }v^3Diam^1`$. Values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }v`$ are almost certainly dominated by turbulence and thus give only an upper limit on $`P_t`$. Also, most of the clouds are no more than a few beamwidths across, so there is significant uncertainty in their diameter. Estimates of $`P_t`$ from these data are thus highly uncertain, but for what it is worth, clouds closer to the Galactic plane have $`P_t`$ typically half that of those farther from the plane, and there are six clouds which appear to be resolved in angle and have $`P_t<1000`$ K-cm-3. Two-thirds of the clouds with the lowest $`P_t`$ seem to have core-halo spectral structure, where $`P_t`$ refers to the line from the core. Given the size and H $`\mathrm{I}`$ mass of the clouds, their pressures, whether thermal or turbulent, are orders of magnitude higher than the limit for gravitational binding, suggesting that the clouds, if they are stable, are confined by an external medium.

#### 4.1.4 Correlations with Position and Velocity

Linewidth is the only property of the halo clouds seemingly correlated with distance from the Galactic plane: the narrower lines tend to lie closer to the plane than the broader ones. Cloud size, mass, and $`N_{HI}`$ are all independent of $`z`$.

There is a relationship between $`T_L`$ and $`V_{LSR}`$ in that the brightest lines come from clouds whose velocities are closest to $`V_t`$. The median value of $`T_L`$ for clouds at $`V_{LSR}`$ $`<110`$ km s-1 is more than twice that for clouds at $`V_{LSR}>130`$ km s-1. Line widths and cloud size have no strong relationship with $`V_{LSR}`$, but the decline in mean $`T_L`$ with increasing $`V_{LSR}`$ produces a nearly linear decline in the average $`log(N_{HI})`$ with $`V_{LSR}`$ from a value near 19.5 for clouds at $`V_{LSR}=110`$ km s-1 to 19.0 at $`V_{LSR}=145`$ km s-1. Cloud diameters are not dependent on $`V_{LSR}`$, but from the $`N_{HI}(V_{LSR})`$ trend, it follows that the most massive clouds (and those with the largest $`n`$) are found preferentially at the lowest velocities.

#### 4.1.5 The Fraction of the H $`\mathrm{I}`$ Halo Contained in Discrete Clouds

In addition to the clouds, there is a broader component of H $`\mathrm{I}`$ emission on which the clouds are superimposed both in velocity (Fig. 3) and position (Fig. 2). This emission may be from faint, unresolved clouds, or a genuinely diffuse medium. The 38 clouds contain about 20% of the total $`N_{HI}`$ at $`V_{LSR}>V_t`$ within $`9\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}0b4\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}2`$, though the amount varies from zero at some latitudes to $`>80\%`$ at others. Considering that the 38 clouds studied in detail are only a subset of all the clouds visible in this field, it is plausible that half of the H $`\mathrm{I}`$ emission in the $`\mathrm{}=29\mathrm{°}`$ field might come from clouds. Because of velocity crowding, emission at a common $`V_{LSR}`$ may arise from unrelated material separated by as much as a few kpc along the line of sight around the tangent point. From the current data it is not possible to determine if the halo clouds are related to the diffuse emission, or even if they are located in the same region of space.

## 5 Summary Comments

Observations with the GBT show that the halo of the inner Galaxy contains a population of H $`\mathrm{I}`$ clouds related dynamically to the disk. This gas was already known to be in the halo from low-resolution studies (L84, Dickey & Lockman (1990)); what was not known is that a significant fraction of it is organized into clouds. It is not yet possible to derive a scale height for the clouds, but by traditional standards some of them are extremely far from the Galactic plane. It is tempting to speculate that they are a distant analog to the intermediate velocity clouds seen in the vicinity of the Sun. Halo clouds are found in GBT data throughout the inner Galaxy except at a few directions at $`\mathrm{}10\mathrm{°}`$, but it is too early to draw conclusions about their overall distribution. These clouds are so ubiquitous that some are likely to occult extragalactic objects, allowing their abundances to be determined through optical or UV spectroscopy.

Several theoretical studies have addressed the issue of cloud formation in the Galactic halo, usually in the context of high-velocity clouds, not gas in normal Galactic rotation (Shapiro & Field, 1976; Bregman, 1980; Ferrara & Field, 1994; Wolfire et al., 1995). An exception is Houck and Bregman (1990), who explicitly studied the formation of corotating neutral clouds cooling from a low-temperature Galactic fountain. Some of their models produce clouds with a density and distance from the plane in the range of those found here, but with much smaller mass. If the clouds have formed in a fountain and are falling to the plane, some deviation from circular rotation might be observed, along with a projected component of the vertical velocity (Benjamin & Danly, 1997). There is no evidence of a decrease in the average LSR velocity of the clouds with $`|z|`$ to at least 1 kpc, but any clouds which lag behind Galactic rotation, and whose line-of-sight velocity is thus below $`V_tcos(b)`$, would not have been examined in this study. Global models of the disk and halo (e.g., Rosen & Bregman (1995); de Avillez (2000); de Avillez & Mac Low (2001)) may soon be refined enough to allow a detailed comparison with the data. Further observations, now in progress, should clarify the properties of the halo clouds, establish their distribution throughout the Galaxy and relationship to other species, and reveal their internal structure.

I began this line of research some years ago in response to a provocative question posed by Renzo Sancisi. Thanks. I also thank Jim Braatz and Ron Maddalena for help with observations and data reduction, and Bob Benjamin, John Dickey, and Harvey Liszt for discussion and comments on the manuscript.