text:
# Noncommutative ampleness for multiple divisors

## 1. Introduction

Let $`R`$ be an $``$-graded algebra over an algebraically closed field $`k`$ such that $`dimR_i<\mathrm{}`$ for all $`i`$. One of the main techniques of noncommutative projective geometry is to study a graded ring $`R`$ via a category $`𝒞`$ of graded $`R`$-modules. More specifically, one usually examines $`\mathrm{QGr}R`$, the quotient category of graded right $`R`$-modules modulo the full subcategory of torsion modules; one hopes that $`\mathrm{QGr}R`$ will have geometric properties, since the Serre Correspondence Theorem says that if $`R`$ is commutative and generated in degree one, then there is a category equivalence $`\mathrm{QGr}R\mathrm{Qch}X`$, where $`\mathrm{Qch}X`$ is the category of quasi-coherent sheaves on $`X=\mathrm{Proj}R`$ \[H, Exercise II.5.9\].

The twisted homogeneous coordinate rings are the most basic class of rings in noncommutative geometry. Such a ring $`R`$ is constructed from a commutative projective scheme $`X`$, an automorphism $`\sigma `$ of $`X`$, and an invertible sheaf $``$. When the pair $`(,\sigma )`$ satisfies “right $`\sigma `$-ampleness,” then $`R`$ is right noetherian and has $`\mathrm{QGr}R\mathrm{Qch}X`$ \[AV, Theorems 1.3, 1.4\]. These rings were first used to show that Artin-Schelter regular algebras of dimension $`3`$ are noetherian domains \[ATV, St1, St2\] and their basic properties were studied in \[AV\]. Further, any domain of GK-dimension $`2`$, generated in degree one, is a twisted homogeneous coordinate ring for some curve $`X`$ \[AS\].

A simple criterion for right $`\sigma `$-ampleness was found in \[Ke2\]. From this criterion one sees that right and left $`\sigma `$-ampleness are equivalent. Hence the associated ring $`R`$ is noetherian. One also sees that the GK-dimension of $`R`$ is an integer. (While this paper and \[Ke2\] work over an algebraically closed field, we note that \[Ke1\] generalized these results to the case of a commutative noetherian base ring.)

Chan introduced twisted multi-homogeneous coordinate rings in \[C\], which are constructed from a finite collection $`\{(_i,\sigma _i)\}`$ of invertible sheaves and automorphisms on a projective scheme $`X`$. When the set $`\{(_i,\sigma _i)\}`$ is “right ample,” then the category $`\mathrm{QGr}R`$ of multi-graded right $`R`$-modules modulo torsion modules again has $`\mathrm{QGr}R\mathrm{Qch}X`$. With some natural extra hypotheses, $`R`$ will be right noetherian. Via these methods, Chan shows that some rings associated to twisted homogeneous coordinate rings, like tensor products of two such coordinate rings, are right noetherian.

In this paper, we will generalize the results of \[Ke2\] to the multi-homogeneous case and thereby strengthen \[C\]. More specifically, we show

###### Theorem 1.1 (see Theorem 2.7, Corollary 2.8).

Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme and let $`\{(_i,\sigma _i)\}`$ be a finite set of pairs of invertible sheaves and automorphisms. Then there is a simple criterion for $`\{(_i,\sigma _i)\}`$ to be right ample. This criterion shows that right and left ampleness are equivalent.

We then immediately have, in Corollary 3.5, that the tensor product $`B_kB^{}`$ is noetherian, where $`B,B^{}`$ are twisted homogeneous coordinate rings associated to ample pairs $`(,\sigma ),(^{},\sigma ^{})`$. If $`B`$ is generated in degree one and $`I`$ is the irrelevant ideal of $`B`$, then the Rees algebra $`B[It]`$ is noetherian; see Corollary 3.4.

We also show

###### Theorem 1.2 (see Theorem 4.6).

Let $`B`$ be a twisted multi-homogenous coordinate ring under suitable hypotheses (4.1). Then $`\mathrm{GKdim}B`$ is an integer with geometrically defined bounds.

Most of this paper appeared in the author’s Ph.D. thesis, under the direction of J.T. Stafford.

## 2. Right ampleness is left ampleness

Because of the notational difficulties associated with handling the ampleness of arbitrarily many pairs $`(_i,\sigma _i)`$, we will use the concept of an invertible bimodule $`_\sigma `$. In this paper it will only be important to know how invertible bimodules act on a coherent sheaf $``$, so we will treat $`_\sigma `$ as a notational convenience where

$$_\sigma =\sigma _{}(),_\sigma =\sigma ^{}$$

and the right hand side of the above equations are just $`𝒪_X`$-modules. For a formal definition of invertible bimodule see \[AV, $`\mathrm{\S }`$2\]. Given two invertible bimodules $`_\sigma `$ and $`_\tau `$, one finds the tensor product to be

(2.1)
$$_\sigma _\tau =(\sigma ^{})_{\tau \sigma },$$

where the second tensor product is the usual product on quasi-coherent sheaves \[AV, Lemma 2.14\]. We will sometimes denote the product of invertible bimodules by juxtaposition if the meaning is clear. The $`𝒪_X`$-module underlying a product of bimodules $`_\sigma _\tau `$ will be denoted $`|_\sigma _\tau |`$; in this particular case $`|_\sigma _\tau |=\sigma ^{}`$.

We will also use the notation $`^\sigma =\sigma ^{}`$. The automorphism $`\sigma `$ induces a natural isomorphism

(2.2)
$$_\sigma =\sigma _{}()^{\sigma ^1}^{\sigma ^1}=_{\sigma ^1}^{\sigma ^1},$$

for any coherent sheaf $``$.

We now sketch the construction of a twisted multi-homogeneous coordinate ring; for details see \[C, $`\mathrm{\S }`$2\]. Let $`\{(_i)_{\sigma _i}\}`$ be a collection of $`s`$ invertible bimodules, possibly with repetitions. For notational convenience, we will write $`_{(i,\sigma _i)}=(_i)_{\sigma _i}`$. Given these $`s`$ invertible bimodules, one wishes to form an associated twisted multi-homogeneous coordinate ring $`B=B(X;\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\})`$. For an $`s`$-tuple $`\overline{n}=(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)`$ we define the multi-graded piece $`B_{\overline{n}}`$ as

(2.3)
$$B_{\overline{n}}=H^0(X,_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{n_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{n_s})$$

where the cohomology of an invertible bimodule is just cohomology of the underlying sheaf. Multiplication should be given by

(2.4)
$$ab=a\sigma ^{\overline{m}}(b)$$

when $`aB_{\overline{m}}`$ and $`bB_{\overline{n}}`$. Here $`\sigma ^{\overline{m}}(b)=\sigma _1^{m_1}\sigma _2^{m_2}\mathrm{}\sigma _s^{m_s}(b)`$, where the action of an automorphism on a global section is induced by pullback.

However, to make the ring construction work, \[C\] shows that we need the invertible bimodules to commute with each other. Examining (2.1), we see that two bimodules $`_\sigma ,_\tau `$ commute when

(2.5)
$$\sigma ^{}\tau ^{}\text{and}\sigma \tau =\tau \sigma .$$

Thus we need sheaf isomorphisms $`\phi _{ij}:_{(j,\sigma _j)}_{(i,\sigma _i)}_{(i,\sigma _i)}_{(j,\sigma _j)}`$ for each $`1i<js`$. It is further noted in \[C\] that when there are three or more bimodules, these isomorphisms must be compatible on “overlaps” in the sense of Bergman’s Diamond Lemma. In terms of the isomorphism $`\phi _{ij}`$ this means \[C, p. 444\]

(2.6)
$$\begin{array}{c}(\phi _{ij}1_{_{(k,\sigma _k)}})(1_{_{(j,\sigma _j)}}\phi _{ik})(\phi _{jk}1_{_{(i,\sigma _i)}})\hfill \\ \hfill =(1_{_{(i,\sigma _i)}}\phi _{jk})(\phi _{ik}1_{_{(j,\sigma _j)}})(1_{_{(k,\sigma _k)}}\phi _{ij})\end{array}$$

in $`\mathrm{Hom}(_{(k,\sigma _k)}_{(j,\sigma _j)}_{(i,\sigma _i)},_{(i,\sigma _i)}_{(j,\sigma _j)}_{(k,\sigma _k)})`$. We will always assume that we have this compatibility when forming the ring $`B`$. Summarizing, we have

###### Proposition 2.1.

Let $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ be a finite collection of commuting invertible bimodules. Assume that these bimodules have compatible pairwise commutation relations in the sense of (2.6). Then there is a multi-graded ring $`B`$ with multi-graded pieces given by (2.3) and multiplication given by (2.4).∎

To study these rings, a multi-graded version of $`\sigma `$-ampleness is introduced. Since we will be interested in both this version of ampleness and the usual commutative one, we will call this (right) *NC-ampleness*, whereas \[C\] uses the terminology (right) ampleness. We define the ordering on $`s`$-tuples to be the standard one, i.e., $`(n_1^{},\mathrm{},n_s^{})(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)`$ if $`n_i^{}n_i`$ for all $`i`$. For simplicity we write $`_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}}=_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{m_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{m_s}`$.

###### Definition 2.2.

Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with $`s`$ commuting invertible bimodules $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$.

1. If for any coherent sheaf $``$, there exists an $`\overline{m}_0`$ such that

$$H^q(X,_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}})=0$$

for $`q>0`$ and $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$, then the set $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ is called *right NC-ample*.
2. If for any coherent sheaf $``$, there exists an $`\overline{m}_0`$ such that

$$H^q(X,_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}})=0$$

for $`q>0`$ and $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$, then the set $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ is called *left NC-ample*.

As in the case of one invertible bimodule, right and left NC-ampleness are related.

###### Lemma 2.3.

(cf. \[Ke2, Lemma 2.3\]) Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with $`s`$ commuting invertible bimodules $`\{(_i)_{\sigma _i}\}`$. Then the set $`\{(_i^{\sigma _i^1})_{\sigma _i^1}\}`$ commutes pairwise. Also, the set $`\{(_i)_{\sigma _i}\}`$ is right NC-ample if and only if the set $`\{(_i^{\sigma _i^1})_{\sigma _i^1}\}`$ is left NC-ample.

###### Proof.

Let $`_\sigma ,_\tau `$ be two commuting invertible bimodules. Then (2.5) holds. Obviously $`\sigma ^1\tau ^1=\tau ^1\sigma ^1`$. Now since $`\sigma ^{}\tau ^{}`$, pulling back by $`(\sigma ^1\tau ^1)`$ we have

$$(\tau ^1)^{}(\sigma ^1)^{}(\tau ^1)^{}(\sigma ^1)^{}(\tau ^1)^{}(\sigma ^1)^{}.$$

So $`_{\sigma ^1}^{\sigma ^1}=((\sigma ^1)^{})_{\sigma ^1}`$ and $`_{\tau ^1}^{\tau ^1}=((\tau ^1)^{})_{\tau ^1}`$ commute.

Now using (2.2) and the fact that the bimodules commute, we see that

$$H^q(X,(_1)_{\sigma _1}^{m_1}\mathrm{}(_s)_{\sigma _s}^{m_s})=H^q(X,(_1^{\sigma _1^1})_{\sigma _1^1}^{m_1}\mathrm{}(_s^{\sigma _s^1})_{\sigma _s^1}^{m_s})$$

for all $`q,m_i`$. Thus right NC-ampleness of $`\{(_i)_{\sigma _i}\}`$ is equivalent to left NC-ampleness of $`\{(_i^{\sigma _i^1})_{\sigma _i^1}\}`$. ∎

###### Lemma 2.4.

Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme over $`k`$ with $`s`$ commuting invertible bimodules $`\{(_i)_{\sigma _i}\}`$. Assume that the commutation relations of $`\{(_i)_{\sigma _i}\}`$ and of $`\{(_i^{\sigma _i^1})_{\sigma _i^1}\}`$ are compatible in the sense of (2.6). If $`B^{}=B(X;\{(_i)_{\sigma _i}\})`$ and $`B=B(X;\{(_i^{\sigma _i^1})_{\sigma _i^1}\})`$, then $`B(B^{})^{\text{op}}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\tau :B(B^{})^{\text{op}}`$ given by $`\tau (a)=\sigma _1^{n_1}\mathrm{}\sigma _s^{n_s}(a)`$ for $`aB_{(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)}`$. Extend $`\tau `$ linearly so it is a vector space map. It is obviously a vector space isomorphism.

Let $``$ be multiplication in $`B`$ and $``$ be multiplication in $`(B^{})^{\text{op}}`$. For $`aB_{\overline{n}},bB_{\overline{m}}`$,

$`\tau (ab)`$ $`=\tau (a\sigma ^{\overline{n}}(b))=\sigma ^{\overline{n}+\overline{m}}(a)\sigma ^{\overline{m}}(b),`$
$`\tau (a)\tau (b)`$ $`=\sigma ^{\overline{n}}(a)\sigma ^{\overline{m}}(b)=\sigma ^{\overline{m}}(b)\sigma ^{\overline{n}+\overline{m}}(a).`$
Thus $`\tau (ab)=\tau (a)\tau (b)`$, as required. ∎

As in \[Ke2, Proposition 2.3\], we have simpler equivalent conditions for a set of bimodules to be right NC-ample.

###### Proposition 2.5.

Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with $`s`$ commuting invertible bimodules $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$. Then the following are equivalent:

1. The set $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ is right NC-ample.
2. For any coherent sheaf $``$, there exists an $`\overline{m}_0`$ such that $`_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}}`$ is generated by global sections for $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$.
3. For any invertible sheaf $``$, there exists an $`\overline{m}_0`$ such that $`|^1_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}}|`$ is very ample for $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$.
4. For any invertible sheaf $``$, there exists an $`\overline{m}_0`$ such that $`|^1_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}}|`$ is ample for $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$.

A similar statement holds for left NC-ample.

###### Proof.

This is a special case of \[Ke1, Theorem 1.3, Proposition 6.9\]. ∎

We can now give a connection between right NC-ampleness and the concept of $`\sigma `$-ampleness for one invertible sheaf $``$.

###### Lemma 2.6.

Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with $`s`$ commuting invertible bimodules $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$. Suppose that $`\overline{n}=(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)(^+)^s`$ and set $`\tau =\sigma _1^{n_1}\mathrm{}\sigma _s^{n_s}`$. If the set of bimodules is right NC-ample, then $`|_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{n_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{n_s}|`$ is $`\tau `$-ample.

###### Proof.

Let $``$ be an invertible sheaf and let $`\overline{m}_0`$ be such that for all $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$, the sheaf $`|^1_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}}|`$ is ample by Proposition 2.5(4).

Now there exists an integer $`l_0`$ such that for all $`ll_0`$, we have $`l\overline{n}\overline{m}_0`$. So $`|^1(_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}})^l|`$ is ample. Thus by \[Ke2, Proposition 2.3(4)\], $`|_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}}|`$ is $`\tau `$-ample. ∎

Recall that the Picard group of $`X`$ modulo numerical equivalence, $`A_{\text{Num}}^1(X)=\mathrm{Pic}X/`$, is a finitely generated free abelian group \[Kle, p. 305, Remark 3\]. Thus the action of $`\sigma `$ on $`A_{\text{Num}}^1(X)`$ is given by some $`P\mathrm{GL}_\rho ()`$ for some $`\rho >0`$. We say that $`\sigma `$ is *unipotent* if all the eigenvalues of $`P`$ equal $`1`$ and that $`\sigma `$ is *quasi-unipotent* if all the eigenvalues of $`P`$ are roots of unity. This is a well-defined notion \[Ke1, Proposition 7.12\]. We then have a new version of \[Ke2, Theorem 1.3\].

###### Theorem 2.7.

Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with $`s`$ commuting invertible bimodules $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$. The set $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ is (right) NC-ample if and only if every $`\sigma _i`$ is quasi-unipotent and there exists $`\overline{m}_0^s`$ such that $`|_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}}|`$ is ample for all $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose that $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ is right NC-ample. Then by Proposition 2.5(4), there exists $`\overline{m}_0^s`$ such that $`|_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}}|`$ is ample for all $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$. Further, by the previous lemma, $`_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{n_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{n_s}`$ is $`\tau `$-ample when $`\tau =\sigma _1^{n_1}\mathrm{}\sigma _s^{n_s}`$ and each $`n_i>0`$. Now recall that all the automorphisms commute and hence their actions on $`A_{\text{Num}}^1(X)`$ are commuting matrices. Thus the eigenvalues of the product $`\sigma _1^{n_1}\mathrm{}\sigma _s^{n_s}`$ are products of eigenvalues from each $`\sigma _i`$. So if $`\sigma _1`$ were not quasi-unipotent, then either $`\tau _1=\sigma _1\sigma _2\mathrm{}\sigma _s`$ or $`\tau _2=\sigma _1^2\sigma _2\mathrm{}\sigma _s`$ would not be quasi-unipotent. But $`\tau _1`$ and $`\tau _2`$ must be quasi-unipotent by \[Ke2, Theorem 1.3\] since the corresponding sheaves $`_{(1,\sigma _1)}^1\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^1`$ and $`_{(1,\sigma _1)}^2\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^1`$ are $`\tau _1`$-ample and $`\tau _2`$-ample respectively. Thus each $`\sigma _i`$ must be quasi-unipotent.

Now suppose that every $`\sigma _i`$ is quasi-unipotent and there exists $`\overline{m}_0^s`$ such that $`|_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}}|`$ is ample for all $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$. As the $`\sigma _i`$ commute, $`\tau =\sigma _1\mathrm{}\sigma _s`$ is quasi-unipotent. Then by \[Ke2, Theorem 1.3\], the invertible bimodule $`_{(1,\sigma _1)}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}`$ is $`\tau `$-ample. So given any invertible sheaf $``$, there exists $`n_0`$ such that

$$|^1(_{(1,\sigma _1)}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)})^n|=|^1_{(1,\sigma _1)}^n\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^n|$$

is ample for $`nn_0`$ by \[Ke2, Proposition 2.3(4)\]. Then for all $`\overline{m}(n_0,n_0,\mathrm{},n_0)+\overline{m}_0`$ the invertible sheaf

$$|^1_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{m}}|=|^1_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{n_0}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{n_0}||_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{m_1n_0}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{m_sn_0}|^{\sigma _1^{n_0}\mathrm{}\sigma _s^{n_0}}$$

is the tensor product of two ample invertible sheaves. Hence it is ample and so the set of invertible bimodules is right NC-ample by Proposition 2.5(4). ∎

###### Corollary 2.8.

Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with $`s`$ commuting invertible bimodules $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$. Then $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ is right NC-ample if and only if it is left NC-ample.

###### Proof.

Suppose that $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ is right NC-ample. Then each $`\sigma _i`$ is quasi-unipotent and there exists $`\overline{m}_0`$ such that $`|_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{m_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{m_s}|`$ is ample for $`(m_1,\mathrm{},m_s)\overline{m}_0`$. Pulling back by $`\sigma _1^{m_1}\mathrm{}\sigma _s^{m_s}`$, we have that $`|(_1^{\sigma _1^1})_{\sigma _1^1}^{m_1}\mathrm{}(_s^{\sigma _s^1})_{\sigma _s^1}^{m_s}|`$ is ample. Thus by Theorem 2.7, the set $`\{(_i^{\sigma _i^1})_{\sigma _i^1}\}`$ is right NC-ample. So the original set $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ is left NC-ample by Lemma 2.3. The argument is clearly reversible. ∎

Thus we may now refer to a set of bimodules as being simply NC-ample.

Note the difference between \[Ke2, Theorem 1.3\] and Theorem 2.7. The former requires only that $`|_\sigma ^m|`$ is ample for one value of $`m`$, while the latter requires the product of bimodules to be ample for all $`\overline{m}\overline{m}_0`$. To see this stronger requirement is necessary, let $`X`$ be any projective scheme with $``$ any ample invertible sheaf. We need to rule out the pair $`,^1`$ where the bimodule action is the usual commutative one. In this particular case, of course $`^1(^1)^0`$ is ample. But $`^{m_1}(^1)^{m_2}`$ is not ample for all $`(m_1,m_2)`$ sufficiently large; just fix $`m_1`$ and let $`m_2`$ go to infinity.

It is not necessary for one of the $`_{(i,\sigma _i)}^m`$ to be ample for $`m0`$, since on $`^1\times ^1`$, the pair $`𝒪(1,0),𝒪(0,1)`$ is NC-ample, where again these bimodules act only as commutative invertible sheaves.

## 3. Ring theoretic consequences

Unlike the case of only one bimodule, the multi-graded ring $`B`$ may not be noetherian when $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$ is NC-ample. In fact, \[C, Example 5.1\] gives a simple commutative (and hence not finitely generated) counterexample. However, Chan introduces an additional property for an invertible bimodule $`_\sigma `$ on $`X`$ to guarantee the noetherian condition.

###### Hypothesis 3.1.

There exists a projective scheme $`Y`$ with automorphism $`\sigma `$ and a $`\sigma `$-equivariant morphism $`f:XY`$. That is $`\sigma _Yf=f\sigma _X`$. There also exists an invertible sheaf $`^{}`$ on $`Y`$ such that $`=f^{}^{}`$ and such that $`_\sigma ^{}`$ is $`\sigma `$-ample. (\[C\] labels this property $`()`$.)

This property (3.1) is saying that for $`m0`$, $`|_\sigma ^m|`$ is generated by global sections, since it is a pullback of $`|(^{})_\sigma ^m|`$, which is eventually very ample by \[Ke2, Proposition 2.3(3)\]. Note in particular that if $``$ is already $`\sigma `$-ample, then $`_\sigma `$ satisfies (3.1) trivially. Using this property, one determines

###### Theorem 3.2.

(\[C, Theorem 5.2\]) Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with commuting invertible bimodules $`_\sigma ,_\tau `$. Suppose that the pair is (right) NC-ample and each bimodule satisfies (3.1), possibly for different $`Y`$. Then $`B(X;_\sigma ,_\tau )`$ is right noetherian.∎

Then combining Corollary 2.8, Lemma 2.4, and the theorem above, we have

###### Theorem 3.3.

Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with commuting invertible bimodules $`_\sigma ,_\tau `$. Suppose that the pair is NC-ample and each bimodule satisfies (3.1), possibly for different $`Y`$. Then $`B(X;_\sigma ,_\tau )`$ is noetherian.∎

Now we can prove that two particularly interesting twisted multi-homogeneous coordinate rings, a Rees ring and a tensor product, are noetherian, strengthening the results of \[C, Corollaries 5.7, 5.8\]. In the latter case, we may replace his proof, based on spectral sequences, by an easier one since the criterion of Theorem 2.7 simplifies testing the NC-ampleness of the relevant pair of bimodules.

###### Corollary 3.4.

Let $`_\sigma `$ be a $`\sigma `$-ample invertible bimodule on a projective scheme $`X`$. Let $`B=B(X;_\sigma )`$ be generated in degree one. Then the Rees algebra $`B[It]=_{r=0}^{\mathrm{}}I^rt^r`$ of $`B`$ is noetherian, where $`I=B_{>0}`$ is the irrelevant ideal.

###### Proof.

The ring $`B[It]`$ has bigraded pieces

$$B_{(i,j)}=H^0(X,_\sigma ^i_\sigma ^j)t^j$$

since $`I^j=_{l=j}^{\mathrm{}}B_l`$ when $`B`$ is generated in degree one. The pair $`_\sigma ,_\sigma `$ is obviously NC-ample and satisfies (3.1). Thus Theorem 3.3 applies. ∎

###### Corollary 3.5.

Let $`_\sigma `$ be $`\sigma `$-ample on a projective scheme $`X`$ and let $`_\tau `$ be $`\tau `$-ample on a projective scheme $`Y`$. Then $`B(X;_\sigma )B(Y;_\tau )`$ is noetherian.

###### Proof.

It is argued in \[C, Example 4.3\] that

$$B(X;_\sigma )B(Y;_\tau )B(X\times Y;(\pi _1^{})_{\sigma \times 1},(\pi _2^{})_{1\times \tau }),$$

where the $`\pi _i`$ are the natural projections. These two invertible bimodules on $`X\times Y`$ obviously satisfy (3.1).

Since $`_\sigma `$ is $`\sigma `$-ample and $`_\tau `$ is $`\tau `$-ample, there is an $`m_0`$ such that $`|_\sigma ^m|`$ and $`|_\tau ^m|`$ is ample for all $`mm_0`$. Note that $`(\sigma \times 1)^{}\pi _1^{}=\pi _1^{}\sigma ^{}`$ and a similar formula holds for $`_\tau `$. Then

$$|(\pi _1^{})_{\sigma \times 1}^{m_1}(\pi _2^{})_{1\times \tau }^{m_2}|$$

is ample for all $`(m_1,m_2)(m_0,m_0)`$ by \[H, p. 125, Exercise 5.11\].

Now $`\sigma `$ is quasi-unipotent and we wish to show $`\sigma \times 1`$ is as well. It is tempting to think that as a matrix acting on $`A_{\text{Num}}^1(X\times Y)`$ one has $`\sigma \times 1=\sigma 1`$. However, this may not be the case, since in general $`A_{\text{Num}}^1(X\times Y)`$ has larger rank than $`A_{\text{Num}}^1(X)A_{\text{Num}}^1(Y)`$ \[H, p. 367, Exercise 1.6\]. But let $`_X`$ and $`_Y`$ be ample invertible sheaves on $`X`$ and $`Y`$ respectively. If $`\sigma \times 1`$ is not quasi-unipotent, then by \[Ke2, Lemma 3.2\], there exists $`r>1`$, $`c>0`$, and an integral curve $`C`$ on $`X\times Y`$ such that

(3.1)
$$(((\sigma \times 1)^{})^m(\pi _1^{}_X\pi _2^{}_Y).C)cr^m\text{for all }m0.$$

But

$$((\sigma \times 1)^{})^m(\pi _1^{}_X\pi _2^{}_Y)=\pi _1^{}(\sigma ^{})^m_X\pi _2^{}_Y.$$

Since $`\sigma `$ is quasi-unipotent, the intersection numbers of the right hand side with any curve $`C`$ must be bounded by a polynomial. This contradicts (3.1). So $`\sigma \times 1`$ must be quasi-unipotent. Similarly, $`1\times \tau `$ is quasi-unipotent. Thus by Theorem 2.7, the pair $`(\pi _1^{})_{\sigma \times 1},(\pi _2^{})_{1\times \tau }`$ is NC-ample and thus the ring of interest is noetherian. ∎

## 4. Gel’fand-Kirillov dimension

In this section we generalize the results of \[Ke2, $`\mathrm{\S }`$6\], showing that a noetherian twisted multi-homogeneous coordinate ring has integer GK-dimension. We first fix hypotheses on the ring $`B`$.

###### Hypothesis 4.1.

Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with $`s`$ commuting NC-ample bimodules $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$. Assume that the commutation relations of $`\{(_i)_{\sigma _i}\}`$ are compatible in the sense of (2.6). Let $`B=B(X;\{(_i)_{\sigma _i}\})`$ and suppose that $`B`$ is right noetherian.

If $`B`$ is the twisted multi-homogenous coordinate ring associated to an NC-ample set of invertible bimodules, then the vanishing of cohomology in Definition 2.2 allows one to control the dimension of $`B_{\overline{ı}}`$ for $`\overline{ı}\overline{ı}_0`$ for some $`\overline{ı}_0^s`$. We are not guaranteed such control on the “edges” $`_jB_{(0,\mathrm{},j,\mathrm{},0)}`$. Thus, it will be easier to study the GK-dimension of the ideal $`B_{\overline{ı}_0}`$ rather then the GK-dimension of $`B`$.

###### Lemma 4.2.

Let $`B`$ satisfy (4.1), and let $`\overline{ı}^s`$. Then $`\mathrm{GKdim}B=\mathrm{GKdim}(B_{\overline{ı}})_B`$.

###### Proof.

If $`\overline{ȷ}\overline{ı}`$, then $`B_{\overline{ȷ}}B_{\overline{ı}}`$ and $`\mathrm{GKdim}B_{\overline{ȷ}}\mathrm{GKdim}B_{\overline{ı}}`$. So we may assume that $`\overline{ı}`$ is sufficiently large so that $`_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{j_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{j_s}`$ is generated by global sections for $`(j_1,\mathrm{},j_s)\overline{ı}`$ by Proposition 2.5(2). So $`B_{\overline{ȷ}}B_{\overline{ȷ}+\overline{ı}}`$ for all $`\overline{ȷ}^s`$.

We may grade $`B`$ by $`\{B_{(n,n,\mathrm{},n)}/B_{(n1,n1,\mathrm{},n1)}:n\}`$ and grade $`B_{\overline{ı}}`$ by $`\{B_{(n,n,\mathrm{},n)+\overline{ı}}/B_{(n1,n1,\mathrm{},n1)+\overline{ı}}:n\}`$. Then

$$\mathrm{GKdim}B=\overline{\mathrm{lim}}_n\mathrm{log}_ndimB_{(n,n,\mathrm{},n)}\overline{\mathrm{lim}}_n\mathrm{log}_ndimB_{(n,n,\mathrm{},n)+\overline{ı}}=\mathrm{GKdim}B_{\overline{ı}}$$

since $`B_{\overline{ı}}`$ is finitely generated \[KL, Lemma 6.1\]. The other inequality $`\mathrm{GKdim}B_{\overline{ı}}\mathrm{GKdim}B`$ is trivial. ∎

We will need to use multi-Veronese subrings and also generalize a standard lemma for graded rings to the multi-graded case.

###### Definition 4.3.

Let $`B`$ be a $`k`$-algebra, finitely multi-graded by $`^s`$ (that is, each multi-graded piece is finite dimensional). Then the subring

$$B^{(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)}=\underset{(i_1,\mathrm{},i_s)^s}{}B_{(n_1i_1,\mathrm{},n_si_s)}$$

is a *multi-Veronese subring* of $`B`$.

###### Lemma 4.4.

Let $`B`$ be a $`k`$-algebra, finitely multi-graded by $`^s`$.

1. If $`B`$ has ACC on multi-graded right ideals, then $`B`$ is right noetherian.
2. If $`B`$ is right noetherian, then the multi-Veronese subring $`A=B^{(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)}`$ is right noetherian for any $`(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)^s`$.

###### Proof.

Both claims are simple generalizations of the graded case. For (1), one may see that the conclusion is implicit in the proof that a right multi-filtered ring is right noetherian if its associated multi-graded ring is right noetherian \[G, Theorem 1.5\]. The proof of (2) is as in \[AZ, Proposition 5.10(1)\], noting that if $`I`$ is a multi-graded ideal of $`A`$, then $`I=IBA`$. ∎

Now we may replace $`B`$ with a multi-Veronese.

###### Lemma 4.5.

Let $`B`$ satisfy (4.1), and let $`\overline{n}`$. Then $`B^{(\overline{n})}`$ satisfies Hypothesis 4.1 and $`\mathrm{GKdim}B=\mathrm{GKdim}B^{(\overline{n})}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\overline{n}=(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)`$ and $`A=B^{(\overline{n})}`$. We may assume that all $`n_i>0`$. For the first claim, we have already seen in Lemma 4.4 that $`A`$ is right noetherian. The bimodules $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}^{n_i}\}`$ commute compatibly because their commutation relations are compositions of the commutation relations for $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}\}`$. The bimodules $`\{_{(i,\sigma _i)}^{n_i}\}`$ are also NC-ample by Theorem 2.7.

Now choose $`\overline{m}=(m_1,\mathrm{},m_s)^s`$ such that $`_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{j_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{j_s}`$ is generated by global sections for $`(j_1,\mathrm{},j_s)\overline{m}`$ by Proposition 2.5(2). Then for $`m_ij_i<n_i+m_i`$ there are short exact sequences

$$0𝒦_{(j_1,\mathrm{},j_s)}B_{(j_1,\mathrm{},j_s)}𝒪_X_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{j_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{j_s}0.$$

Then tensoring with $`_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{n_1a_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{n_sa_s}`$ and taking cohomology, we have

$$\begin{array}{c}B_{(j_1,\mathrm{},j_s)}H^0(_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{n_1a_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{n_sa_s})B_{(j_1+n_1a_1,\mathrm{},j_s+n_sa_s)}\hfill \\ \hfill H^1(𝒦_{(j_1,\mathrm{},j_s)}_{(1,\sigma _1)}^{n_1a_1}\mathrm{}_{(s,\sigma _s)}^{n_sa_s}).\end{array}$$

For $`(a_1,\mathrm{},a_s)`$ sufficiently large, the rightmost cohomology group vanishes. So there exists $`\overline{b}`$ such that

$$B_{\overline{b}}\underset{1is}{}\underset{0j_i<n_i+m_i}{}B_{(j_1,\mathrm{},j_s)}A.$$

Hence $`B_{\overline{b}}`$ is a finite $`A`$-module, so

$$\mathrm{GKdim}B=\mathrm{GKdim}(B_{\overline{b}})_B=\mathrm{GKdim}(B_{\overline{b}})_A\mathrm{GKdim}A$$

by Lemma 4.2 and \[KL, Corollary 5.4\]. ∎

We may now generalize \[Ke2, Theorem 6.1\] to the multi-homogeneous case.

###### Theorem 4.6.

Let $`B`$ satisfy Hypothesis 4.1. Then $`\mathrm{GKdim}B`$ is an integer and

$$dimX+1\mathrm{GKdim}Bs\left((\mathrm{}+1)dimX+1\right),$$

where $`s`$ is the number of commuting bimodules, $`\rho =\rho (X)`$ is the Picard number of $`X`$, and $`\mathrm{}=2\frac{\rho 1}{2}`$.

###### Proof.

By Lemma 4.5, we may replace $`B`$ with a multi-Veronese; hence, replacing each $`\sigma _i`$ with $`\sigma _i^{m_i}`$ for some $`m_i`$, we may assume each $`\sigma _i`$ is unipotent. That is, up to numerical equivalence, $`\sigma _i^1I+N_i\mathrm{GL}_\rho ()`$. We know $`N_i^{\mathrm{}+1}=0`$ for all $`i`$ \[Ke2, Lemma 6.12\]. (We choose to use $`\sigma _i^1`$ since we will use Cartier divisors and if $`𝒪_X(D)`$, then $`^\sigma 𝒪_X(\sigma ^1D)`$.)

Since the set of bimodules is NC-ample, we may again replace $`B`$ with a multi-Veronese and assume that $`H^q(X,_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}})=0`$ for all $`q>0,n_i>0`$ where $`\overline{n}=(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)`$. Thus $`dimH^0(X,_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}})=\chi (_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}})`$ for $`n_i>0`$. So by the Riemann-Roch Theorem \[F, p. 361, Example 18.3.6\],

(4.1)
$$dimH^0(X,_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}})=\underset{j=0}{\overset{dimX}{}}\frac{1}{j!}_X((_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}})^j)\tau _{X,j}(𝒪_X).$$

where $`j`$ denotes $`j`$th self-intersection and the $`\tau _{X,j}(𝒪_X)`$ are constant $`j`$-cycles. By Lemma 4.2, we may ignore $`dimH^0(X,_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}})`$ when some $`n_i=0`$.

Let $`D_i`$ be a Cartier divisor such that $`_i𝒪_X(D_i)`$. The action of $`\sigma ^{n_i}`$ on Cartier divisors modulo numerical equivalence is given by \[Ke2, (4.2), (4.3)\]

$`\sigma _i^{n_i}`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{c=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_i}{c}}\right)N_i^c`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{n_i1}{}}}\sigma _i^m`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{d=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_i}{d+1}}\right)N_i^d.`$
So up to numerical equivalence,

$$_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}}\underset{a=1}{\overset{s}{}}\left[\left(\underset{b=1}{\overset{a1}{}}\left(\underset{c=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_b}{c}\right)N_b^c\right)\right)\left(\underset{d=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_a}{d+1}\right)N_a^dD_a\right)\right].$$

Thus $`dimH^0(X,_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}})`$ is a polynomial in $`n_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$, with the degree of $`n_i`$ at most $`(\mathrm{}+1)dimX`$, since one has at most a $`(dimX)`$th self-intersection.

Now let $`B_{(1,1,\mathrm{},1)}`$ have the filtration given by assuming each $`n_in`$. Then $`f(n)=dimB_{(1,1,\mathrm{},1)(n_1,\mathrm{},n_s)(n,\mathrm{},n)}`$ is a polynomial in $`n`$ of degree at most $`s((\mathrm{}+1)dimX+1)`$. This is because summing over each $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$ adds $`1`$ to the degree of $`n_i`$. Then the degree $`f(n)`$ is maximized if $`dimH^0(X,_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{n}})`$ has a term of the form $`n_1^{(\mathrm{}+1)dimX}\mathrm{}n_s^{(\mathrm{}+1)dimX}`$, since in this case, $`(\mathrm{}+1)dimX+1`$ is added to itself $`s`$ times.

Thus $`\mathrm{GKdim}B`$ is an integer with the desired upper bound by Lemma 4.2. Now by Lemma 2.6, $`B`$ has a twisted homogeneous coordinate ring $`C`$ as a subring. Now $`dimX+1\mathrm{GKdim}C`$ \[Ke1, Theorem 7.17\], so the lower bound on $`\mathrm{GKdim}B`$ holds. ∎

Examining \[Ke2, Theorem 6.1\], \[Ke1, Theorem 7.17\] we see that these bounds on $`\mathrm{GKdim}B`$ are not optimal for the case $`s=1`$. However, the notational difficulties of repeating the arguments of \[Ke2, $`\mathrm{\S }`$6\] for $`s`$ bimodules seem to outweigh the benefits, given that exact results can be given in the following specific cases.

###### Proposition 4.7.

Let $`_\sigma `$ be a $`\sigma `$-ample invertible bimodule on a projective scheme $`X`$. Let $`B=B(X;_\sigma )`$ be generated in degree one. Then

$$\mathrm{GKdim}B[It]=\mathrm{GKdim}B+1$$

where $`I=B_{>0}`$ is the irrelevant ideal.

###### Proof.

By Lemma 4.5, we may replace $`\sigma `$ with some $`\sigma ^m`$ and assume that $`\sigma `$ is unipotent, $`dimB_m=\chi (_\sigma ^m)`$ for $`m1`$, and $`dimB_mdimB_{m+1}`$ for $`m0`$. Let $`f(m)=dimB_m`$. Then $`\mathrm{GKdim}B=\mathrm{deg}f+1`$ \[Ke2, (6.4)\]. Filter $`B[It]`$ by $`(B[It])_{(i,j)(n,n)},n`$. Now $`dim(B[It])_{(i,j)}=dimB_{i+j}`$, so

$$g(n)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}\underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}f(i+j)=dim(B[It])_{(i,j)(n,n)}.$$

Since $`f(m)`$ is a numerical polynomial, $`\mathrm{deg}g=\mathrm{deg}f+2`$. So $`\mathrm{GKdim}B[It]=\mathrm{deg}f+2=\mathrm{GKdim}B+1`$. ∎

For general $`k`$-algebras $`R,S`$, we have $`\mathrm{GKdim}(R_kS)\mathrm{GKdim}R+\mathrm{GKdim}S`$ \[KL, Lemma 3.10\]. However, for the tensor product of a twisted homogeneous coordinate ring and a general $`k`$-algebra, we have equality, as in the commutative case.

###### Proposition 4.8.

Let $`_\sigma `$ be $`\sigma `$-ample on a projective scheme $`X`$, and let $`B=B(X;_\sigma )`$. Let $`S`$ be any $`k`$-algebra. Then

$$\mathrm{GKdim}(BS)=\mathrm{GKdim}B+\mathrm{GKdim}S.$$

###### Proof.

There exists a Veronese subalgebra $`B^{(n)}`$ of $`B`$ such that $`f(m)=dimB_m^{(n)}`$ is a polynomial for $`m>0`$ and $`\mathrm{GKdim}B=\mathrm{GKdim}B^{(n)}`$ \[Ke2, (6.3)–(6.4)\]. We may also assume that $`B^{(n)}`$ is generated in degree one \[Ke1, Theorem 7.17\]. Let $`V=B_0B_1^{(n)}`$. Then $`dimV^m`$ is a polynomial in $`m`$, so $`\mathrm{GKdim}(BS)=\mathrm{GKdim}B+\mathrm{GKdim}S`$ \[KL, Proposition 3.11\]. ∎

## Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Daniel Chan for suggesting this topic and his continued interest in it. We also thank J.T. Stafford and Michel Van den Bergh for their comments.


format: text

text:
# References

RUB-TP2-14/02

Generalized parton distributions and strong forces inside nucleons and nuclei
M.V. Polyakova,b

aPetersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina, St. Petersburg 188350, Russia

and

bInstitut für Theoretische Physik II, Ruhr–Universität Bochum, D–44780 Bochum, Germany

## Abstract

We argue that generalized parton distributions (GPDs), accessible in hard exclusive processes, carry information about the spatial distribution of forces experienced by quarks and gluons inside hadrons. This way the measurements of hard exclusive processes open a possibility for direct “measurements” of strong forces in different parts of nucleons and nuclei. Also such studies open a venue for addressing questions of the properties of the quark (gluon) matter inside hadrons and nuclei. We give a simple example of relations between GPDs and properties of “nuclear matter” in finite nuclei.

1. The generalized parton distributions (GPDs), accessible in hard exclusive reactions (see the original works  and reviews ), describe the response of the target hadron to the well-defined QCD operators on the light-cone. Generically the GPDs contain information about the matrix elements of the following type:

$`B|\overline{\psi }_\alpha (0)\mathrm{P}e^{ig_0^z𝑑x_\mu A^\mu }\psi _\beta (z)|A,B|G_{\alpha \beta }^a(0)\left[\mathrm{P}e^{ig_0^z𝑑x_\mu A^\mu }\right]^{ab}G_{\mu \nu }^b(z)|A,`$ (1)
where the operators are on the light-cone, i.e. $`z^2=0`$, and $`A,B`$ are various hadronic states. In this way the hard exclusive processes provide us with a set of new fundamental probes of the hadronic structure. An important question is a physical interpretation of these probes. Many ideas have already been put forward, for example, viewed in the infinite momentum frame GPDs allow us to probe the distribution of partons in the transverse plane this way we can obtain detailed spatial partonic images of hadrons, see e.g. . In this note we shall discuss why the lowest Mellin moments of GPDs provide us with information about the spatial distribution of energy, momentum and forces experienced by quarks and gluons inside hadrons.

To be specific we consider a spin-$`1/2`$ hadronic target, e.g. a nucleon. For the GPDs we shall use the notation of X. Ji, see Ref. . We note that all spin independent equations in this paper apply to the spin-$`0`$ targets as well.

2. The $`x`$-moments of the GPDs play a special role as they are related to the form factors of the symmetric energy momentum tensor. The nucleon matrix element of the symmetric energy momentum tensor is characterized by three scalar form factors . The nucleon matrix elements of the quark and gluon parts of the QCD energy-momentum tensor (EMT) can be parametrized the following way :

$`p^{}|\widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }^{Q,G}(0)|p`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{N}(p^{})[M_2^{Q,G}(t){\displaystyle \frac{\overline{P}_\mu \overline{P}_\nu }{m_N}}+J^{Q,G}(t){\displaystyle \frac{i\overline{P}_{\{\mu }\sigma _{\nu \}\rho }\mathrm{\Delta }^\rho }{m_N}}`$ (2)
$`+`$ $`d^{Q,G}(t){\displaystyle \frac{1}{5m_N}}(\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu \mathrm{\Delta }_\nu g_{\mu \nu }\mathrm{\Delta }^2)\pm \overline{c}(t)g_{\mu \nu }]N(p).`$
Here $`\widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }^Q=\frac{i}{2}\overline{\psi }\gamma _{\{\mu }\underset{\nu \}}{\overset{}{}}\psi `$ is the quark part of the QCD energy-momentum tensor (massless case) and $`\widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }^G=G_{\mu \alpha }^aG_{\alpha \nu }^a+\frac{1}{4}g_{\mu \nu }G^2`$ is the gluon part of the QCD EMT. Dirac spinors $`\overline{N}`$ and $`N`$ are normalized by $`\overline{N}N=2m_N`$ and the kinematical variables are defined as $`\overline{P}=(p+p^{})/2`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=(p^{}p)`$, $`t=\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$. The form factor $`\overline{c}(t)`$ accounts for nonconservation of the separate quark and gluon parts of the EMT. This form factor enters the quark and gluon parts with opposite signs in order to account for conservation of the total (quark+gluon) EMT. The form factors in eq. (2) are related to the Mellin moments of GPDs through***We write explicitly results only for quarks, corresponding expressions for the gluon GPDs are similar  :

$`{\displaystyle _1^1}𝑑xx\left(H(x,\xi ,t)+E(x,\xi ,t)\right)=2J^Q(t),`$ (3)
$`{\displaystyle _1^1}𝑑xxH(x,\xi ,t)=M_2^Q(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{5}}d^Q(t)\xi ^2.`$
Such relations between GPDs and the form factors of EMT open a possibility to study these form factors in hard exclusive processes. For example, the form factor $`d^Q(t)`$ contributes to the $`x_{Bj}`$ independent part of the real part of the DVCS amplitude, which is accessible through the beam charge asymmetry . Simultaneously this form factor corresponds to the first coefficient in the Gegenbauer expansion of the so-called D-term  in the parametrizations of the GPDs, see for details . The real part of the DVCS amplitude (spin-0 target for simplicity) at small $`x_{Bj}`$ and $`t`$ to the leading order in $`\alpha _s(Q)`$ can be written, under certain simplifying assumptions, as:

$`\mathrm{Re}A\pi H(\xi ,\xi ,t)\mathrm{tan}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi \omega }{2}}\right)+2d^Q(t)+\mathrm{},`$ (4)
where $`\omega `$ corresponds to the exponent in the small $`x_{Bj}`$ behaviour of the singlet quark distribution $`q(x)+\overline{q}(x)1/x^{1+\omega }`$. The “slice” $`H(\xi ,\xi ,t)`$ of quark GPD is directly measurable in the DVCS beam spin asymmetry. Ellipsis in eq. (4) stands for the higher Gegenbauer coefficients of the D-term expansion, which die out logarithmically with increasing of the photon virtuality and seems to be small even at a low normalization point, see estimates in ref. . Note that the constant contribution $`d^Q(t)+\mathrm{}`$ is similar to the contribution of fixed poles in the angular momentum plane to the virtual Compton scattering discussed, e.g. in .

Let us now analyze the physics content of the form factors $`M_2^Q(t)`$, $`J^Q(t)`$ and $`d^Q(t)`$. To reveal the physics content of these form factors, in the same way as for electromagnetic form factors , it useful to consider the nucleon matrix elements of the energy momentum tensor in Breit frame. In this frame the energy transfer $`\mathrm{\Delta }^0=0`$, therefore one can introduce the static energy momentum tensor defined as:

$`T_{\mu \nu }^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2E}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3\mathrm{\Delta }}{(2\pi )^3}e^{i\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}p^{},S^{}|\widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }^Q(0)|p,S},`$ (5)
where $`\widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }^Q(0)`$ is the QCD operator of the symmetric energy momentum tensor of quarks. In Breit frame $`E=E^{}=\sqrt{m_N^2+\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2/4}`$. The polarization vectors of the initial and final nucleons, $`S^\mu `$ and $`S^\mu `$ we choose in such a way that both of them correspond to the same polarization vector $`(0,\stackrel{}{s})`$ in the rest frame of the corresponding nucleon. We also note that in the Breit frame the four-momentum transfer squared $`t=\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2`$.

Various components of the static energy momentum tensor $`T_{\mu \nu }^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})`$ can be interpreted as spatial distributions (averaged over time) of the quark contribution to various mechanical characteristics of the nucleon. However, doing this we have to be careful because of nonconservation of the separate quark and gluon parts of the EMT encoded in the form factor $`\overline{c}(t)`$ in eq. (2). The point is that the “charges” obtained from the tensor densities through the relation like

$`Q_\mu \left(x^0\right)={\displaystyle d^3rD_{0\mu }(x^0,\stackrel{}{r})}.`$ (6)
are time dependent for the non-conserved tensor density $`D_{\nu \mu }`$ and therefore the Lorentz covariance generically is broken. Nevertheless for the case of the quark or gluon part of the EMT one is free from such a problem for the $`T_{0k}^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})`$ and $`\left(T_{ik}^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})\frac{1}{3}\delta _{ik}T_{ll}^Q\right)`$ components of the static tensor densities, because the “problematic” term $`\overline{c}(t)`$ drops out in these combinations.

The components $`T_{0k}^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})`$ correspond to the distribution of the quark momentum in the nucleon. The components $`\left(T_{ik}^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})\frac{1}{3}\delta _{ik}T_{ll}^Q\right)`$ characterize the spatial distribution (averaged over time) of “shear forces” experienced by quarks inside the nucleon. For a spin-1/2 hadron, only the component $`T_{0k}^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})`$ is sensitive to the polarization state. For the higher spin hadrons (e.g. higher spin nuclei) all components of $`T_{\mu \nu }^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s},\mathrm{})`$ are polarization dependent.

Now we can easily relate the form factors $`J^Q(t)`$ and $`d^Q(t)`$ to the spatial distribution of the energy-momentum and forces encoded in $`T_{\mu \nu }^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})`$. The relation for the form factor $`J^Q(t)`$ is the following:

$`J^Q(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}t{\displaystyle \frac{dJ^Q(t)}{dt}}={\displaystyle d^3re^{i\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}\epsilon ^{ijk}s_ir_jT_{0k}^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})}.`$ (7)
We see that the form factor $`J^Q(t)`$ gives us information about the spatial distribution of the quark angular momentumNote that $`\epsilon ^{ijk}r_jT_{0k}^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})`$ corresponds to angular momentum density. inside the nucleon. Now if we take the limit $`t0`$ in eq. (7) we obtain:

$`J^Q(0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3r\epsilon ^{ijk}s_ir_jT_{0k}^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})}.`$ (8)
This relation illustrates the interpretation of $`J^Q(0)`$ as a fraction of the angular momentum of the nucleon carried by quarks and antiquarks .

Concerning the form factor $`M_2^Q(t)`$, one can easily see, going to the infinite momentum frame in eq. (2), that at $`t=0`$ it is related to the momentum fraction carried by quarks which is measured in inclusive deep inelastic scattering. The constant $`M_2^Q(0)`$ is related to the parton distributions via $`M_2^Q(0)=_q_0^1𝑑xx\left(q(x)+\overline{q}(x)\right).`$

Obviously the form factors $`M_2^Q(t)`$, $`J^Q(t)`$ and $`d^Q(t)`$ are renormalization scale dependent. This corresponds to the fact that the individual distributions of quarks (gluons) depend on the resolution scale. The scale independent quantities are obtained adding the contributions of quarks and gluons. These are $`M_2(t)=M_2^Q(t)+M_2^G(t)`$, $`J(t)=J^Q(t)+J^G(t)`$ and $`d(t)=d^Q(t)+d^G(t)`$. The scale independent form factors $`M_2(t)`$ and $`J(t)`$ are expressible in terms of the total static energy momentum tensor $`T_{\mu \nu }(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})=T_{\mu \nu }^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})+T_{\mu \nu }^G(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})`$Note that for the total conserved EMT all components of this tensor have a meaning of “good” tensor densities. The corresponding expressions have the form

$`M_2(t){\displaystyle \frac{t}{4m_N^2}}\left[M_2(t)2J(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{5}}d(t)\right]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_N}}{\displaystyle d^3re^{i\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}T_{00}(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})},`$
$`J(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}t{\displaystyle \frac{dJ(t)}{dt}}={\displaystyle d^3re^{i\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}\epsilon ^{ijk}s_ir_jT_{0k}(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})},`$ (9)
which at $`t=0`$ read

$`M_2(0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_N}}{\displaystyle d^3rT_{00}(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})}=1`$
$`J(0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3r\epsilon ^{ijk}s_ir_jT_{0k}(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}.`$
Written in this form the above equations have obvious interpretation. The first one tells us that the total energy of the nucleon in the rest frame is equal to its mass. The second equation states that the total spin of the nucleon is 1/2. Also it shows that the anomalous gravimagnetic moment of the nucleon is zero .

3. Now let us turn to the physics content of the form factor $`d^Q(t)`$. It is easy to see that this form factor is related to the traceless part of the static stress tensor $`T_{ik}^Q(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{s})`$ which characterizes the spatial distribution (averaged over time) of shear forces experienced by quarks in the nucleon . In detail this relation is the following:

$`d^Q(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}t{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}d^Q(t)+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{15}}t^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dt^2}}d^Q(t)={\displaystyle \frac{m_N}{2}}{\displaystyle d^3re^{i\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}T_{ij}^Q(\stackrel{}{r})\left(r^ir^j\frac{1}{3}\delta ^{ij}r^2\right)}.`$ (10)
If one considered the nucleon as a continuous medium then $`T_{ij}^Q(\stackrel{}{r})`$ would characterize the force experienced by quarks in an infinitesimal volume at distance $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ from the centre of the nucleon. At $`t=0`$ eq. (10) gives:

$`d^Q(0)={\displaystyle \frac{m_N}{2}}{\displaystyle d^3rT_{ij}^Q(\stackrel{}{r})\left(r^ir^j\frac{1}{3}\delta ^{ij}r^2\right)}.`$ (11)
The expressions for the gluon and total energy momentum tensors are analogous .

As our understanding of the forces inside hadrons in QCD is still rather limited we can not make first principles prediction for the value of $`d(t)`$. The estimate which is based on the calculation of GPDs in the chiral quark soliton model  at a low normalization point $`\mu 0.6`$ GeV, gives  a rather large and negative value of $`d^Q(0)4.0`$. The negative value of this constant has a deep relation to the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry in QCD, see .

4. To illustrate physics behind the form factor $`d(t)=d^Q(t)+d^G(t)`$ let us consider an idealized model of a very large nucleus. Generically the static stress tensor for spin-0 and spin-1/2 targets can be decomposed as:

$`T_{ij}(\stackrel{}{r})=s(r)\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_ir_j}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\delta _{ij}\right)+p(r)\delta _{ij}.`$ (12)
The functions $`s(r)`$ and $`p(r)`$ are related to each other by conservation of the total energy-momentum tensor. The function $`p(r)`$ can be interpreted as the radial distribution of the “pressure” inside the hadron§§§Note that for non-homogeneous media the pressure, defined as the force per unit area and directed orthogonally to the surface element, gets a contribution from shear forces as well. . The function $`s(r)`$ is related to the distribution of the shear forces and, in the simple model of a large nucleus considered below, is related to the surface tension.

For a very large nucleus we can assume that the pressure $`p(r)`$ is constant, $`p_0`$, in the bulk of the nucleus, and it changes only in the thin “skin” around radius $`R`$ of the nucleus. It is known from the famous electron scattering experiments  that the distribution of electric charge has such a shape in large nuclei. Surely this does not imply that, say, the distribution of pressure follows the shape of the electric charge distribution, although such an assumption is rather sensible. The measurements of coherent hard exclusive processes (like DVCS) on nuclei will provide us with detailed information about deviations of the energy, pressure, and shear forces distributions from that of electric charge, see eqs. (9,10). Since here our aim is merely illustrative, we consider an (over)idealized case of a nucleus with sharp edges, like a liquid drop. In this case, the pressure can be written asOne can easily include higher terms which take into account the width of the “skin” and other characteristics of the spatial distribution of forces, see below.:

$`p(r)=p_0\theta (Rr){\displaystyle \frac{p_0R}{3}}\delta (Rr).`$ (13)
From the condition $`_kT_{kl}(\stackrel{}{r})=0`$ we obtain that

$`s(r)={\displaystyle \frac{p_0R}{2}}\delta (Rr)=\gamma \delta (Rr).`$ (14)
This equation immediately shows that the function $`s(r)`$ in eq. (12) has a meaning of the surface tension $`\gamma `$ of the nucleusRecall the well known Kelvin relation between the pressure in a liquid spherical drop, its surface tension and the radius of the drop $`P=2\gamma /R`$ .. Substituting the solution (14) into eq. (11) we obtain for the constant $`d(0)`$ the following value:

$`d(0)={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{3}}m_A\gamma R^4.`$ (15)
First we see that the $`d`$-constant is negative. The effect of the finite width of the nuclear “skin” also has a negative sign. The corresponding formula can be easily derived:

$`d(0)={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{3}}m_A\gamma R^4\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{5\pi ^2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{a^2}{R^2}}\right),`$ (16)
where $`a`$ is a “skin” width introduced by replacing the step function by Fermi-like function $`\theta (Rr)1/(1+\mathrm{exp}((rR)/a))`$. If we assume that the surface tension depends slowly on the atomic number (as it is suggested by the Weizsäcker formula), we come to the conclusion that $`d(0)A^{7/3}`$, i.e. it rapidly grows with the atomic number. This fact implies that the contribution of the D-term to the real part of the DVCS amplitude grows with an increase of the atomic number as $`A^{4/3}`$. This should be compared to the behaviour of the amplitude $`A`$ in the impulse approximation. If true, rather interesting phenomenon! In principle, it can be checked by measuring the charge beam asymmetry in coherent DVCS on nuclear targets. Taking the value of the nuclear surface tension of $`\gamma 1MeV/fm^2`$ (as it follows from the Weizsäcker formula) and Hofstadter’s $`R=1.12A^{1/3}fm`$, $`a0.54fm`$ , we get an estimate $`d(0)0.2A^{7/3}\left(1+3.8/A^{2/3}\right)`$. Although being very rough and naive, estimate (16) shows a big potential of hard exclusive processes for studies of properties of quark and gluon “matter” inside nuclei.

Another possible application of our eqs. (7,9,10) is the estimations of the EMT form factors in various effective models of the nucleon structure, like chiral soliton models. In the latter case the static EMT can be obtained from the expression for EMT of the effective chiral Lagrangian (EChL) computed on the static soliton field.

5. Hard exclusive processes allow us to extend a set of fundamental probes of hadronic structure. As an example we considered physics encoded in the lowest Mellin moments of generalized parton distributions. In particular, we showed that one has an access to the spatial distributions of energy, angular momentum and forces inside hadrons, see eqs. (7,9,10). These equations give us a tool for systematic studies of the properties (distributions of energy, angular momentum, pressure, shear forces, etc.) of the quark-gluon “matter” inside hadrons.

As an illustration, we considered a rough idealized picture of a large nucleus. We showed that even in this picture the parameters of GPDs carry detailed information about nuclear matter in the nucleus– knowledge which is still incomplete. We note that the picture used here can be considerably refined, for instance one can, instead of macroscopic approach used here, apply microscopic description.

Hopefully experimental studies of the hard exclusive processes will fill the gap in our understanding of the strong forces creating our world as we see it. See the first experimental data on deeply virtual Compton scattering (DVCS) . We hope that this studies will be extended for the nuclear targets.

I am grateful to M. Amarian, L. Frankfurt, K. Goeke, V. Guzey, P.V. Pobylitsa and M. Strikman for valuable discussions. The work is supported by the Sofja Kovalevskaja Programme of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research and the Programme for Investment in the Future of German Government.


text:
# Novel Technique for Ultra-sensitive Determination of Trace Elements in Organic Scintillators

## 1 Introduction

A next generation of nuclear and particle physics experiments will require increasingly pure materials for success. The signatures of extremely rare processes such as neutrino interaction and oscillation, double beta decay, and dark matter interaction, are often masked by common terrestrial backgrounds. New underground facilities may shield experiments from the background derived from cosmic radiation. However, isolating the physics processes from radiation in the experimental apparatus itself remains critical. Radionuclides such as uranium, thorium and potassium-40 have long half lives and remain abundant in the earth’s crust. The decay products of these nuclei and their daughters can often have the same low energy signatures of the rare processes studied. To enable experiments probing rare phenomena, new research into the selection of materials with very high purity in radionuclides is key.

## 2 KamLAND physics and requirements

A prime example is the KamLAND experiment , which motivated this work. KamLAND, installed in the cavity of the concluded Kamiokande experiment in the Japanese Kamioka underground laboratory, is detecting neutrino oscillations in disappearance mode using Japanese nuclear power reactors as anti-neutrino sources . Its long baseline gives KamLAND sensitivity to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$-values in the range of the so-called large mixing angle solution of the solar neutrino problem. The flux weighted mean distance to 22 nuclear power stations in Japan and Korea is about 200 km. This large distance to the neutrino sources, which is essential for the physics, results in an extremely small anti-neutrino interaction rate of only about 2 per day in KamLAND’s 1000 tons fiducial volume, consisting of organic liquid scintillator.
Owing to the low anti-neutrino energies, physics events can be masked by natural, anthropogenic and cosmogenic radioactivity. It has been estimated, that the concentrations of 40K, 232Th and 238U should not exceed $`10^{14}`$ g/g in order to not compromise the physics measurement . As an example of the requirements in another organic material, concentrations of Th and U in the acrylic vessel of the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) were measured to be less than the specified limits of 10-13 g/g . The goal of this work was therefore to test samples of the scintillation fluid for the presence of above elements at these very small concentrations.

## 3 NAA motivation

While direct radiation counting is the ideal analysis technique for radiation sensitive experiments, such analysis suffers from a lack of decay rate. As an example, at a concentration of $`10^{14}`$ g/g U the expected decay rate is about 1 per day per 100 kg of sample. The large sample size needed therefore becomes impractical. At the same concentration a 1 kg sample contains about $`2.5\times 10^{10}`$ uranium atoms. Direct detection of this large population of parent nuclei can be achieved with inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy (ICPMS) and neutron activation analysis (NAA). The secular equilibrium assumption in the uranium and thorium decay chains relate the parent population measurements to the expected radiation.

Using efficient ion sources, sensitivities to 238U of the required magnitude or even better have been reported in the literature . However, these methods require the nuclides of interest to be in aqueous solution. In order to apply mass spectroscopy to organic liquids requires the blank free, efficient transfer of the elements of interest into aqueous solution. This in turn requires chemical manipulations before the analysis. The purity of the used chemicals is hence crucial for achieving a low blank reading. The basic principles governing trace element analysis by means of NAA have been worked out in great detail in the past. They shall hence not be discussed in this article. Textbooks such as reference  give a comprehensive overview. A further important criterion which led us to choose NAA as analysis tool was the fact that sensitivities even exceeding those required for our work have been reported in the literature , proving feasibility. Organic substances are, at least in principle, well suited for NAA. Hydro-carbons, consisting of C, H, N, O have no long lived activation products. The nuclides of interest, 41K, 232Th and 238U on the other hand, offer sizable capture cross sections and their activation products, 42K, 233Pa and 239Np, have half lives greater than 12 hours, stable enough to allow decay radiation counting even after substantial shipping and processing delays.
A problem, however, arises from the fact that hydrocarbons tend to dissociate in a high neutron and gamma flux environment. This so called radiolysis leads to hydrogen outgassing inside the nuclear reactor used for the activation. In the previous work by the Munich group  pressure build-up in the sample containment vessel (and its potential rupture associated with sample loss) was prevented by venting the excess gas into the pool water of the reactor . This approach has been used for liquid scintillator samples with up to 500 ml volume at the research reactor, FRM I, in Munich . Detection limits of $`3\times 10^{12}`$ g/g for K, $`2\times 10^{15}`$ g/g for Th and $`2\times 10^{16}`$ g/g for U have been reported in the literature . More recently, the Munich group obtained further improved sensitivities of 1.8$`\times `$10-16 g/g for Th and 1.0$`\times `$10-17 g/g for U . The direct irradiation of liquid samples does not require extensive sample preparation or treatment prior to the analysis, enhancing the robustness against the introduction of unwanted contaminations. Although this procedure offers a number of positive features its use seems to be limited to the research reactor facility in Munich. No research reactor could be found in the US which has an existing facility that would allow the irradiation of large liquid samples and the venting of potentially flammable gases into the coolant.

We therefore decided to develop a novel technique, not requiring the venting of excess gases. In the approach described here, the organic materials are gently heated in a clean vacuum chamber, in order to evaporate most of the organic until less than one percent by mass remains. Sample outgassing is substantially reduced, while most of the impurities survive evaporation and are analyzed in the residual organic. The sensitivities achieved with this new technique are not quite as stringent as those reported by the Munich group but, to the best of our knowledge, they are only exceeded by this group. The main advantage of the approach described in this article lies in the fact that it can be used at almost any research reactor, it does not require expensive, unique irradiation facilities, and it is therefore generally applicable. Irradiation facilities with very high neutron flux may also be used. At FRM I the thermal neutron flux was limited to $`2\times 10^{12}1.3\times 10^{13}`$ cm-2s-1. By comparison the thermal neutron flux available at the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) of Oak Ridge National Lab. and at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Research Reactor (MITR) of MIT Nuclear Reactor Laboratory is with $`4\times 10^{14}`$ cm-2s-1 and $`5\times 10^{13}`$ cm-2s-1, respectively, substantially higher. Both facilities were utilized in this work.

## 4 Procedure

Our work focused on the analysis of radio impurities in KamLAND liquid scintillator and its components. The scintillator is composed of 80% dodecane (C12H26) and 20% 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (pseudocumene, C9H12). 1.5 g/l solid 2,5-diphenyloxazole (PPO, C15H11NO), acting as the primary fluor, is dissolved in it.

### 4.1 Sample Preparation

The analyzed samples of liquid scintillator were obtained directly from the KamLAND experimental site in Japan. For sample collection and storage, one liter PFA Teflon containers were etched in sub-boiling 25% ultra-pure nitric acid and 25% ultra-pure hydrochloric acid over a period of one week. The containers were then rinsed with ultra-pure water (MilliQ) and dried. Liquid scintillator was accessed in a clean room surrounding the liquid plumbing of the detector. An access tap was cleaned with alcohol and water, and then 5 liters of scintillator was drained through it. Scintillator was then emptied into the collection containers, shaken and discarded. A second filling with scintillator was kept for analysis. The Teflon containers were closed, heat sealed in class 100 grade nylon bags, and shipped to the analysis laboratories at Caltech and the University of Alabama in the United States.

Samples required further preparation at the United States laboratories prior to neutron activation. Evaporation of the liquid at low temperature and under vacuum leaves behind most of the solid PPO powder, the least volatile component. The PPO can therefore be used as a convenient collection medium for the elements of interest. Since for K, Th and U only very few volatile chemical compounds exist, we would expect that recovery for the elements of interest after evaporating the liquid should be almost quantitative.

After evaporation the PPO was heated and transferred to a small container for irradiation. A plastic nalgene bottle of 1 cm diameter and 2 cm length was used initially for this purpose; the lid was melted and fused to the bottle with a clean soldering iron. To reach lower blank levels and allow for longer irradiations, high purity, Suprasil T21 quartz vessels from Heraeus Amersil were alternatively used in later irradiations. The quartz bottle derived from 8$`\times `$10 mm quartz tube stock. A 10 cm length was cut from the tube and blown shut in one end. The center of the tube was then pinched inwards until a 3 mm opening remained. The bottle was etched with a regimen of concentrated acids, followed by a rinse of ultrapure water. For PPO transfer, the quartz was heated to near 80 oC to ensure efficient movement of the organic into the bottom of the bottle. On several runs, the evaporation beaker was rinsed by an additional one milliliter of liquid scintillator which was then also poured into the quartz vessel, which was then dried in the same apparatus. After loading the sample, the quartz vessels were sealed by melting the pinched area closed. Liquid nitrogen was applied continuously to the bottom of the bottle in order to freeze the sample, and prevent mass loss through PPO melting and boiling111It is advisable to perform this operation under vacuum to prevent potentially hazardous condensation of O2.

The sample preparation and analysis strategy depends critically on the retention of the elements of interest in the PPO. Our measurements of the retention efficiency are discussed in section 5.

### 4.2 Irradiation and Analysis

Evaporated PPO samples were then irradiated. A test run at HFIR in October 2000 verified the feasibility of the techniques described above. The data reported here derive from irradiations at MITR between January, 2001 and July, 2002. When encased in plastic bottles, the PPO samples were shown to survive 15 minutes in HFIR or two hours in MITR before sample boiling caused plastic bottle breaches and losses. When sealed in quartz, the sample containment survived at least 28 hours of irradiation in the MITR 2PH1 pneumatic facility, without evidence of loss. The neutron flux was calibrated at MITR by irradiating trace amounts of salts of sodium, potassium, chromium, zinc, bromine, strontium, tin, antimony, lanthanum, gold, thorium and uranium, all in identical quartz and plastic bottles. The calibrated neutron flux varied from 3.0 to 4.3$`\times 10^{13}`$ thermal n/(cm2 s) and from 4.1 to 8.9$`\times 10^{11}`$ epithermal n/(cm2 s) (neutron energies larger than 0.5 eV), with a 8% precision in the determinations.

The pneumatic tube 2PH1 is one of the highest neutron flux irradiation facilities at the MITR. This facility allows a sample to be inserted pneumatically into a heavy water reflector tank reentrant thimble for irradiation. Once the irradiation is terminated, the sample is ejected to a hot cell that is used for temporary storage. A CO2 purge is maintained in the thimble which helps to reduce the amount of 41Ar produced. The sample holder (rabbit) is a polyethylene cylinder that has a 1-3/8” ID and is 6-1/4” long. Multiple PPO samples can be accommodated in one rabbit. After irradiation samples were allowed to cool at a hot cell for at least 12 hours, in order to minimize the radiation hazard of short-lived activities, such as 31Si. The samples were then packed for overnight FedEX shipment to Caltech and UA. The delay between sample ejection from the reactor and receipt at the laboratories was reduced to 35 hours, improving sensitivity to short-lived activities such as 42K(T1/2=12.36 hours).

Upon receipt at the analysis laboratories, each sample was processed for radiation analysis in a fume hood. The processing involved several steps. In the first step, the exterior of each sample container, whether quartz or plastic, was cleaned, in order to remove external contamination unconnected with the sample. An initial acetone rinse removed residual organics and connected activities. Then each sample container was immersed in a small bottle containing 60 ml of concentrated nitric acid or aqua regia. After one hour, each sample was moved to a fresh acid vessel and the process was repeated. The acetone and two acid washes were directly assayed to confirm that extractable contamination sharply dropped from one wash to the next. Studies with additional exterior washes yielded external activities significantly lower than the activity extracted from the interior of all samples, indicating the procedure was effective. Typical external activity reductions of 24Na greater than 1000 were achieved. No evidence of external uranium or thorium contamination was seen in the washes, and only trace potassium levels were seen.

After exterior washes, the sample container was rinsed by pure water, and then broken to expose its interior. The open containers were placed in beakers to which strong nitric acid was added, in order to extract the radioactivity from the sample itself. The acid was heated to 80 o C on a hot plate for over a half hour. At this temperature, the sample of irradiated PPO was fully digested by the acid, forming a transparent yellow solution. The sample container was extracted from the hot acid, and rinsed with a few drops of acid back into the beaker. The acid was allowed to cool, which typically precipitated the PPO. By decanting or centrifugation, the acid was extracted into a separate PE bottle. The process was then repeated in which a fresh batch redissolved the residual PPO sample and etched the sample container in a new beaker, to further extract adsorbed activity. All of these acid solutions were then collected and assayed.

High purity germanium detector spectrometers at Caltech and UA were used to assay the radionuclides in the acid. Two such detectors exist at each institution for this work. Each detector is surrounded by approximately 10 cm of lead and 5 cm of copper to reduce external backgrounds. It is important to note that a low background counting facility is essential for this study because radiochemistry separation methods are employed to remove competing activities. The detector performances vary in relative NaI efficiency from 30 to 85% at 1332 keV, resolution from 2 to 5 keV, and ambient background from $`4\times 10^5`$ to $`2\times 10^3`$ $`\mathrm{counts}/(\mathrm{s}\mathrm{keV})`$ at 300 keV.

During the acid counting, one is limited to 10 ppt sensitivity in a gram of irradiated material for activities tagging uranium and thorium. The overall spectrometer counting rate is dominated by the decay radiation of 82Br and 24Na, originating from sodium and bromine naturally abundant in the scintillator. Partial energy depositions from the Compton scattering of high energy gamma radiation typically produce backgrounds of 1.5 $`\mathrm{counts}/(\mathrm{s}\mathrm{keV})`$ near 300 keV. A further radiochemical step isolates actinides from these sources of backgrounds. The acid is poured through a plastic column containing actinide absorbing resin; the TRU or Actinide resin of Eichrom Technologies, Inc. were used. To reduce the remaining PPO precipitant in the acid which may clog the column, the acid was prefiltered with either a column of inactive resin or a disposable plastic filter. Ideally, the column selectively absorbs actinide activities while allowing sodium, bromine, and other light elements to pass through harmlessly. In practice, we noted a reduction of greater than 100 for the sodium activity, and greater than 5 for bromine, for a typical background in the 233Pa and 239Np region of interest of $`480\times 10^3\mathrm{counts}/(\mathrm{s}\mathrm{keV})`$.

The 100 ml polyethylene bottle containing the extracted nitric acid was counted in a high resolution germanium detector for 12 hours or more, in order to detect the presence of short-lived nuclei. The acid counting focused on 42K detection. The column was sealed in a bag and taped to the top of a Germanium detector for radiation assay; the column’s small size ( 1 cm diameter by 5 cm long) provided for a high efficiency in gamma ray detection. The column data provided a sensitive measure of uranium and thorium related activity.

The detection efficiency of the germanium counters was determined using nine-activity solutions from Isotope Products Laboratories and Northern Analytics with gamma activities spanning 88 to 1836 keV calibrated to 3%. The calibration solution was diluted with acid and then filled into containers with identical counting geometry and liquid volume as those used in the neutron activation analysis. The detector efficiency in each geometry was determined for each calibrated activity, and a six parameter calibration function was fitted to the data. The absolute uncertainty on the germanium detectors’ efficiencies from this determination is 6%. In practice, repeated measurements of the same sample showed an activity variance of 10%, where the spread results from imprecision in geometric sample placement around the detector.
As an example for the counting procedure Fig. 2 depicts the analysis of 82Br in activated scintillator residue. The left panel of Fig. 2 shows part of a typical gamma spectrum obtained after counting the ion exchange column. The six peaks are due to the decay of 82Br, one of the main interferences. The good energy resolution and large peak to Compton ratio of the Germanium counter is used to isolate the gamma lines. Partial activities displayed for every peak show that the counting efficiency correction is consistent. The right panel shows the temporal development of the weighted average of all partial Br activities. A least squares fit to an exponential decay is used to determine the activity at time zero. This double differential analysis allows for an unambiguous identification of the various radio-nuclides contained in the sample and offers a compact way to summarize the numerous peak integrals. For the quantitative analysis the half life was fixed to the known value. The masses of the elements of interest were then inferred from the measured activities using the known neutron flux and energy distribution. The equations governing this calculation are well known  and shall not be repeated here.

A full suite of samples for neutron activation analysis included one or more copies of a KamLAND scintillator fluid for analysis, in addition to a neutron fluence standard, one or more spiked scintillator calibration standards, an analysis reproducibility standard, and a complementary pure water blank for each of the preceding materials. Not all of these samples were available during all irradiations. Procedures describing contamination controls are included in the Appendix.

## 5 Determination of the Efficiency

Samples of liquid scintillator quantitatively prepared with large trace element impurities monitored the overall efficiency of the analysis. Metallo-organic element standards dissolved in mineral oil were purchased from Alfa Aesar for potassium, tin, and lanthanum. For uranium and thorium, no commercial organic standard was available, so acid sources were extracted into a form soluble in organic liquids by tri-n-butyl phosphate(TBP) extraction . For uranium, uranyl nitrate dissolved in 5ml 1M HCl was washed with three lots of 5 ml TBP. For thorium, thorium nitrate crystals were dissolved in a 15 ml solution of 7M $`\mathrm{Ca}(\mathrm{CO}_3)_2/2\mathrm{M}\mathrm{HNO}_3`$. This was washed with three 15 ml lots of TBP. In each case, the TBP or commercial standard was dissolved in liquid scintillator and diluted to near 10 ppb element impurity. ICPMS, NAA, and low background gamma ray assay were all used to calibrate the final element impurities with a 10% uncertainty.

For spiked sample preparation and radiochemical analysis, completely separate but identical laboratories and equipment were used in order to avoid cross-contamination. Only the germanium detectors used for the counting were common between the calibration and clean samples. In an identical evaporator as described for the clean analysis, an approximately one gram aliquot of standard impure scintillator was mixed with a 50 ml KamLAND scintillator and evaporated. This calibration sample was collected, bottled, irradiated, radiochemically extracted and finally counted for trace activities.

Irradiation of scintillator with known element concentrations yielded information about the element transfer in the analysis process. Element concentrations in the standard spiked scintillator were inferred from the activities measured in the extraction acid and actinide column. The values were compared to the known impurity of the scintillator to derive an analysis efficiency for the entire process. The results are summarized in Table 1.

Efficiency is clearly demonstrated for all the analyzed elements, though the efficiencies do not approach 100%.

The overall efficiency encompasses a variety of retention and loss mechanisms including element loss in evaporation and inefficient activity extraction into acid and into actinide columns. These were measured separately in order to better understand the sources of inefficiencies. The retention efficiencies are shown in Tables 2 and 3.

The chemical efficiency of the ion exchange process was calibrated separately. This determination does not need to rely on knowledge of the element concentration in the spike solution, it can be done by comparing measured activities before and after ion exchange. To do that the analyzed activities were separated between the ion exchange column, residual acid and solid residue of irradiated sample. The sum of these three partial activities constitute 100 % of induced activity. Repeated studies of the radiochemical extraction showed little change in the activity recovery with variations in certain aspects of the above procedure, including mineral acid composition, acid strength, filtration techniques, vial breaking technique, and acid digestion temperature.

As an additional constraint a straightforward separation of 237Np was carried out on Eichrom TRU-Spec columns. A solution of 237Np in 8M nitric acid was employed as a tracer. 15 ml of tracer solution was allowed to drain through the column and was followed by consecutive washes of 8M HNO3. The first acid wash of 4 ml was analyzed for 237Np by liquid scintillation and was found to contain only 2.8 percent of the total 237Np added to the column. Analysis of the elutant during loading of the 237Np tracer sample showed no detectable breakthrough of the tracer. The tracer was eluted from the column with 93 percent recovery using a single 4 ml water wash as determined by liquid scintillation. A second column was treated in like manner to establish blank values for the liquid scintillation detection. The reproducibility of the 237Np recovery was approximately 5 percent for three determinations.

Activation analyses of clean scintillators are corrected for these measured efficiencies. Note that the purpose of this work is to demonstrate trace element purity of materials, rather than precisely calibrate the impurities. The precision in the determination of the analysis efficiency in the tables is sufficient for this purpose. It is noted that the full analysis efficiency for 232Th and 238U, as reported in Table 1 is consistent with the product of the partial efficiencies measured for the sample evaporation and column retention, given in Tables 2 and 3. The control over the element concentrations in the low level organic spike solutions used to derive these efficiencies contributes to the relatively large fluctuations observed. From the above data we conclude that trace impurity concentration can be determined quantitatively within a factor of two accuracy when applying the methods and procedures discussed in this paper.

## 6 Results

During the application of the activation analysis for KamLAND, three representative organic materials were analyzed. The impurity concentrations derived from activation analysis are shown in Table 4. Different lots of PPO from Packard BioScience were screened for purity before they were mixed with the other scintillator components. PPO 21-634 is one such lot. Since the PPO contributes only 0.2% of the final scintillator mass, it was required to be less than $`5\times 10^{12}`$ g/g in radionuclides to reach the reactor anti-neutrino goals defined in the introduction. The PPO was directly irradiated in plastic containers, without any evaporation. During final scintillator production for KamLAND, all of the PPO lots were predissolved in pseudocumene. The concentrated PPO in PC at 200 g/liter was screened prior to final scintillator mixing. The mixture was evaporated and irradiated in plastic vials.

Liquid scintillator sampled from the KamLAND detector was finally analyzed using these techniques. The 1000 tons were filled into KamLAND over a six months period. Samples of the scintillator fluid were taken as it entered the detector, during the second and fourth month. These samples were evaporated and irradiated in quartz. Their analysis is labeled “LS Sample #1 and #2” in the table. At the end of the filling period a sample of final detector fluid was taken and analyzed. Each of the liquid scintillator samples was evaporated and irradiated in pure quartz vials. In the filling samples, a potassium impurity was detected, but it’s strength varied between the two samples studied. The final detector LS had no detectable radioimpurity.

The sensitivity to these trace radionuclides reached below $`8\times 10^{15}`$ g/g, and the final scintillator material was proven pure at this level. These sensitivities were sufficient to certify the organic materials as suitable for the KamLAND reactor anti-neutrino experiment.

Analysis consistency was monitored by repeatedly analyzing the same material during 5 irradiations. The reproducibility and laboratory to laboratory consistency was verified by repeated analysis of PPO samples of production batch 21-634. To quantify variations in our sample treatment the effective concentrations of Na in the acid, discharged from the ion exchange column, and of Br in the columns was determined. The concentrations are labeled “effective” because 100% retention efficiency in the respective medium has been assumed. The retention efficiency for Na in acid has been determined to be (85$`\pm `$7)%. The retention of Br in the column is estimated to be about (18$`\pm `$1)%. Na and Br have been chosen because they exhibit the lowest preparation blank and therefore most robust signature. Figure 3 depicts the results of this repeated analysis. The concentrations derived for Br vary by about $`\pm `$5% when averaged over all activation runs. The average Br concentration derived at Caltech \[$`(2.56\pm 0.15)\times 10^9`$\] and UA \[$`(2.31\pm 0.11)\times 10^9`$\] agree within $`1.4\sigma `$.

## 7 Conclusion

The primordial activities potassium-40, thorium and uranium constitute important sources of background for low energy low rate experiments. Access to sensitive detection techniques is crucial in the development of next generation neutrino oscillation, double beta decay and dark matter experiments. The analysis technique described in this article might also be important for the development of a next generation ultra low background counting facility in the planned US National Underground Science Laboratory.

In this paper we discuss a novel ultra-sensitive neutron activation analysis, optimized towards the detection of primordial activities in liquid scintillator. The achieved sensitivity is below $`8\times 10^{15}`$ g/g. The described procedure is applicable at almost any research reactor facility.

Acknowledgment

This work was supported in part by the US Department of Energy and the US-Japan Committee for Cooperation in High Energy Physics. The authors would like to thank S.J. Freedman, K.T. Lesko Y. Kamyshkov, A. Suzuki and J. Webb for help during the critical early phase of this project. The authors appreciate the advice and assistance of K. Farley, J. Goreva, L. Hedges, and G. Wasserburg during the ICPMS studies. We would also like to thank the KamLAND collaboration for their support.

Appendix

A key concern in high sensitivity analysis is the control of contamination during the analysis. A number of details regarding the measures taken in this work to control contaminations are included here. In order to address the level of potential contaminations in sample extraction, similar containers, both empty and half full with ultrapure water, were exposed to the air at the liquid access point for one week. The containers were filled with hot, concentrated nitric acid for one day, and the acid was then analyzed by ICPMS. No uranium or thorium contamination was detected. A limit of $`<9\times 10^{16}`$ g per liter of fluid maximum contamination from the above collection process was inferred, when properly extrapolated to the collection conditions.

Contamination control during evaporation is another challenge of the technique. After evaporation of 600 ml of liquid scintillator the typical sample size of about 800 mg results in a much higher vulnerability towards the introduction of contaminations. The cleanliness requirements during sample evaporation and handling are thus very stringent.

Scintillator evaporation at low temperatures takes very long thus resulting in a prolonged exposure to contamination. It was observed that significant loss of PPO occurs if the scintillator is evaporated at higher temperatures. Vacuum evaporation offered the best compromise between evaporation speed and PPO retention. Evaporation of scintillator samples at various temperatures showed that at temperatures between 63oC and 75oC 70% of the PPO is recovered while the evaporation rate is with about 2 g/h still reasonable. The evaporation rate scales approximately linearly with the temperature and reaches 20 g/h at 95oC. All sample evaporations were performed in the above temperature range and at a pressure of about 40 torr.

1. All work was done in class 100 or 500 clean rooms, to avoid sample contamination.
2. The evaporations were performed using Sheldon Model 1415 vacuum ovens.
3. During evaporation vacuum was maintained using an oil free Teflon diaphragm pump.

In order to provide an overall monitor of contamination during the sample preparation, empty quartz or plastic vessels were irradiated in parallel with samples. The procedure for evaporating the scintillator involves transferring the liquid between several PFA vessels until the PPO residue reaches the irradiation bottle, so that one is particularly sensitive to contamination during this sample handling. This contamination was monitored in practice by duplicating the procedures with ultrapure water. Water certified to purity of $`<`$5$`\times `$10-12 g/g potassium and $`<`$5$`\times `$ 10-15g/g uranium and thorium was purchased from Tama Chemicals, and was evaporated in parallel to scintillator samples, using the same equipment. At the temperature and pressure used for scintillator evaporation, the water completely evaporates in a few hours. After opening the oven to recover the PPO beaker, one milliliter of fresh water was added to the blank evaporation beakers and was poured into quartz irradiation containers. These were evaporated to dryness in the same oven and sealed. The resulting containers were then irradiated and analyzed in parallel with the samples, using all the same steps and techniques described in the text.