format: text

text:
# Supersymmetric Flavor Models and the 𝐵→ϕ𝐾_𝑆 Anomaly

## I Introduction

In the standard model (SM), the direct decay amplitudes for $`BJ/\psi K_S`$ and $`B\varphi K_S`$ have approximately no weak phases in the Wolfenstein parametrization. Thus, the CP asymmetry in both decays is due to the weak phase in $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing and hence is determined by $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$, where $`\beta `$ is an angle of the unitarity triangle111In the SM, the deviation of the CP asymmetry from $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ in $`B\varphi K_S`$ (due to a $`u`$-quark penguin) is $`O(\lambda ^2)5\%`$, where $`\lambda 0.22`$ is the Cabibbo angle (see, for example, reference grossman  and, for a recent study, reference ligeti ); the deviation in the case of $`BJ/\psi K_S`$ is smaller, $`O(\lambda ^2)\times `$ ratio of penguin to tree amplitudes.. Recently, the asymmetric $`B`$-factories, BABAR and BELLE, announced that $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ extracted from CP asymmetry in $`B\varphi K_S`$ decays (assuming the CKM paradigm for CP violation) is smaller by $`2.7\sigma `$ than the measurement using $`BJ/\psi K_S`$ decays – the world averages are $`0.39\pm 0.41`$ and $`0.734\pm 0.054`$, respectively babarbelle . The latter measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ is consistent with the result of a global fit to other data.

If this discrepancy persists, then it could be a signal of new physics. While the decay $`BJ/\psi K_S`$ occurs at tree level in the SM, the amplitude for $`B\varphi K_S`$ arises at one-loop (since it involves a $`bss\overline{s}`$ transition). One therefore expects that new physics is more likely to affect the latter decay mode. Also, a new physics amplitude in $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing cannot account for the anomaly since it will not change the difference of the two CP asymmetries. Hence, we require a new physics contribution to the direct $`B\varphi K_S`$ decay amplitude. This new physics amplitude (a) must be comparable to the SM amplitude and (b) have a new $`𝒪(1)`$ CP violating phase, since the experimental CP asymmetry is $`0`$, while the SM prediction is $`O(1)`$222For recent model-independent studies of new physics effects in this decay, see references ciuchini ; rosner ..

Supersymmetric extensions of the SM have new sources of flavor and CP violation and hence are good candidates for an explanation of this anomaly. Consider the soft supersymmetry (SUSY) breaking masses for the down-type squarks,

$$_{soft}\stackrel{~}{d}_R^{}\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{RR}^{gauge}\stackrel{~}{d}_R+\stackrel{~}{d}_L^{}\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{LL}^{gauge}\stackrel{~}{d}_L+[\stackrel{~}{d}_L^{}\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{LR}^{gauge}\stackrel{~}{d}_R+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.]$$
(1)
One may find the unitary transformations $`U_{D_R}`$ and $`U_{D_L}`$ that diagonalize the fermion Yukawa matrices,

$$d_i^{gauge}=\left(U_D\right)_{ij}d_j^{mass},$$
(2)
and apply these transformations to the squarks so that the quark-squark-gluino couplings are flavor-diagonal. This defines the super-CKM basis – a mass eigenstate basis for quarks in which the gluino couplings are also diagonal. The down squark mass matrices in the super-CKM basis are given by

$$\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{AB}^{superCKM}=U_{D_A}^{}\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{AB}^{gauge}U_{D_B}$$
(3)
where the subscripts $`AB`$ represent either $`LL`$, $`LR`$ or $`RR`$. In general, the squark mass matrices in the super-CKM basis are not diagonal, and provide an origin for flavor changing effects in the low-energy theory.

Flavor violation can be attributed to the “insertion” of an off-diagonal element of one of these matrices (which converts a squark of one flavor to that of another) in a squark propagator. If all the squark masses are of the same order and the off-diagonal elements in these squark mass matrices are small compared to the diagonal elements, then this “mass insertion” approximation is accurate for computing SUSY contributions to flavor changing neutral currents (FCNC’s). In this case, convenient measures of flavor violation are given by the parameters gabbiani

$$\delta _{ij}\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{ij}^{superCKM}/\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{iiaverage}^{superCKM}.$$
(4)
Possible Feynman diagrams contributing directly to $`bs\overline{s}s`$ transitions are shown in Fig. 1. It has been shown that flavor violation (in gluino-mediated Feynman diagrams) can explain the anomaly while satisfying the constraints from $`bs\gamma `$; correlation with $`B_s\overline{B_s}`$ mixing has also been discussed khalil ; kane ; murayama ; masiero 333For an earlier study of these effects, see reference wyler . For other SUSY and non-SUSY explanations, see references others .. Since the new physics amplitude has to be comparable to the SM amplitude to account for $`B\varphi K_S`$ anomaly, it is clear that we need large flavor violation444The SM amplitude has a CKM suppression ($`V_{ts}`$) which roughly matches the suppression of the SUSY amplitude due to the fact that the superpartner masses are larger than the $`W`$, top quark masses., e.g., $`\delta _{23}^d1`$ with $`𝒪(1)`$ phase555Strictly speaking, the mass insertion approximation is no longer valid in the presence of such large flavor violation. Instead, we should use the mass eigenstate basis for both quarks and squarks. This point has been emphasized in the present context in reference murayama . Since we are not concerned with a detailed numerical analysis in this paper, it will suffice to use the mass insertion approximation..

In this paper, we explore correlations between a large SUSY contribution to $`B\varphi K_S`$ and the SUSY contributions to other FCNC’s. In a model independent analysis, the various $`\delta ^{}s`$ can be treated as independent parameters and the stringent bounds from, for example, $`K\overline{K}`$ and $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing, may be satisfied by assumption. While this approach is important as a first step, it is somewhat ad hoc; the nontrivial flavor structure required of the theory strongly hints at some underlying organizing principle. The use of flavor symmetries and effective field theory presents a well-motivated and consistent framework in which the question of FCNC correlations may be addressed. Flavor symmetries explain/post-dict the hierarchy of fermion masses and mixings while simultaneously constraining the flavor structure of soft SUSY breaking masses. This in turn yields information on the pattern of SUSY contributions to FCNC’s.

While it is impossible to explore the space of possible models in its entirety, we can focus on the typical properties of successful models and let minimality guide us in finding specific examples. In a wide range of flavor models, one does not expect large contributions to $`B\varphi K_S`$ from $`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{LL}`$ and $`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{LR}`$. One might anticipate $`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{LL}\lambda ^2`$, where $`\lambda 0.22`$ is the Cabibbo angle, since the left-handed quark mixings are of that order. Moreover, the $`\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{LR}^{gauge}`$ terms and the Yukawa couplings transform identically under flavor symmetries and are often “aligned”, i.e., are diagonalized by the same unitary transformations, so that the $`\delta _{LR}`$’s are suppressed. We therefore focus on the possibility that the $`B\varphi K_S`$ anomaly is explained by a large imaginary part of $`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{RR}`$, the most likely solution if $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, the ratio of Higgs vacuum expectation values (vevs), is order one. (We do not consider the case of large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ in this paper.) It is worth noting that the preferred regions of supersymmetry parameter space that follow from the analyses in Refs. khalil ; kane ; murayama ; masiero  depend crucially on the renormalization of the Wilson coefficients in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }B=1`$ effective Hamiltonian. The results are obtained numerically, cover only parts of the multidimensional supersymmetry parameter space, and cannot be summarized usefully in any simple analytic approximation. We therefore use the numerical results in Figs. 3 through 7 of Ref. murayama  as a basis for our investigation of more explicit supersymmetric models. In Section II, we study the properties of minimal mass matrix textures that lead to $`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{RR}1`$, and determine the correlation with other $`\delta `$ parameters. In Section III, we present explicit flavor models that approximate these textures.

It is worth pointing out that our analysis is of interest even if the current anomaly in $`B\varphi K_S`$ turns out to be a statistical fluctuation. One possibility is that the SUSY contribution in all $`bs`$ transitions is large, but CP-conserving so that the CP asymmetry in $`B\varphi K_S`$ is not affected. In this case, anticipated improvements in the measurement of $`B_s\overline{B}_s`$ mixing have the potential of revealing the SUSY contribution. Another possibility is that the SUSY contribution is CP-violating, but is small in the amplitude for the decay $`B\varphi K_S`$ and large in the amplitude for $`bs\gamma `$ or in $`B_s\overline{B}_s`$ mixing. This will result in a direct CP asymmetry in $`BX_s\gamma `$ or a mixing-induced, time-dependent CP asymmetry in $`B_sJ/\psi \varphi `$, which potentially can be detected in ongoing or future experiments. Whether such effects are consistent with the tight bounds on $`sd`$ and $`bd`$ transitions in realistic models is also addressed in our approach.

## II Texture Analysis

In order to obtain a large value for $`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{RR}`$, one must either have (a) squark nondegeneracy and a large 2-3 rotation on right-handed (RH) fields from down-quark Yukawa diagonalization, or (b) large off-diagonal terms in the squark mass matrix in the gauge basis. We consider these possibilities in turn. Of course, combinations of (a) and (b) are also possible, as we will see in Section III.

### II.1 Large RH $`23`$ rotation in down quark Yukawa matrix

For simplicity, we assume that in the gauge basis the off-diagonal terms in the RH down squark mass matrix are small,

$$\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{RR}^{gauge}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}m_{\stackrel{~}{d}_R}^2& 0& 0\\ 0& m_{\stackrel{~}{s}_R}^2& 0\\ 0& 0& m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_R}^2\end{array}\right),$$
(5)
so that $`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{RR}1`$ is obtained only from large rotation between strange and bottom quarks. Such a large mixing might be motivated in grand unified theories as follows neutrino : it is possible that the large $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing required to explain the atmospheric neutrino anomaly originates in the left-handed (LH) charged lepton mass matrix. Since right-handed down-type quarks and left-handed leptons are part of the same multiplet, large $`b_Rs_R`$ mixing is an immediate consequence.

The “minimal” quark texture which gives the desired phenomenology can be obtained as follows. We require $`𝒪(1)`$ rotation in the 2-3 sector for RH down-type quarks (with CP violation) to explain the $`B\varphi K_S`$ anomaly. Also, the size of bottom and strange quark Yukawa couplings renormalized at a high scale are $`𝒪(\lambda ^2)`$ and $`𝒪(\lambda ^4)`$, respectively. Thus, the “minimal” quark texture required in $`23`$ block of the down quark Yukawa matrix is:

$$\left(Y_d\right)_{23block}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\lambda ^4& \lambda ^4\\ \lambda ^2\mathrm{exp}(i\varphi )& \lambda ^2\end{array}\right).$$
(6)
Here, we use the notation $`Y_{dij}\overline{d}_{Li}d_{Rj}`$, where $`d_L`$ and $`d_R`$ denote the left-handed and right-handed down-type quarks ($`i,j`$ are generation indices). Also, unless stated otherwise, there are unknown, $`𝒪(1)`$ fluctuations in the coefficients of all elements of Yukawa/mass matrices. Neglecting the first generation entries, which are typically small, the phase in $`(3,2)`$ element can be “transferred” to the $`(2,3)`$ element by field redefinitions so that the $`(2,3)`$ element has to be $`O(\lambda ^4)`$ to get the maximum CP violation. The $`(2,3)`$ element cannot be larger, or it would give $`V_{cb}>\lambda ^2`$.

In order to study the implications of the large $`23`$ RH rotation in $`Y_d`$ for other FCNC’s, we need the texture in the $`12`$ block of $`Y_d`$, which depends on whether the Cabibbo angle originates in $`Y_d`$ or in $`Y_u`$. We analyze these cases in turn.

Cabibbo angle from $`Y_d`$

In this case, we have $`\left(U_{D_L}\right)_{12,21}\lambda `$ from the $`12`$ rotation among the LH down-type quarks. If $`m_{\stackrel{~}{d}_L}^2\overline{)}m_{\stackrel{~}{s}_L}^2`$, then it follows from Eqs. (3) and (4) that $`\left(\delta _{12}^d\right)_{LL}\lambda `$. This is ruled out by the $`K\overline{K}`$ mixing bound $`\left(\delta _{12}^d\right)_{LL}\stackrel{<}{}0.10.04`$, for squark masses $`1`$ TeV gabbiani . Hence, to evade this bound, we need approximate degeneracy between first and second generation squarks. Models based on non-Abelian flavor symmetries with a $`\mathrm{𝟐}+\mathrm{𝟏}`$ representation structure for fields of the three generations have this feature. The simplest models of this type (for example, based on U(2) symmetry u2\_1 ; u2o  or one of its discrete subgroups u2\_2 ) also lead to the decomposition $`\mathrm{𝟐}\mathrm{𝟐}=\mathrm{𝟑}\mathrm{𝟏}`$, where the $`\mathrm{𝟑}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ correspond to two-by-two symmetric and antisymmetric matrices. As a result, the symmetry breaking entries in the 1-2 block of $`Y_d`$ tend to appear in a symmetric or antisymmetric pattern. Motivated by the minimality of these models and their success in maintaining the squark degeneracy that we require given our present assumptions, we combine a U(2)-like texture in 1-2 sector with Eq. (6):

$$Y_d\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \lambda ^5& 0\\ \lambda ^5& \lambda ^4& \lambda ^4\\ 0& \lambda ^2\mathrm{exp}(i\varphi )& \lambda ^2\end{array}\right)$$
(7)
Generally, the $`(1,2)`$ and $`(2,1)`$ entries have contributions from symmetry breaking fields, flavons, that transform as symmetric or antisymmetric tensors under the flavor group. Thus, unless symmetric and antisymmetric flavon vevs are fine tuned, the $`(1,2)`$ and $`(2,1)`$ entries will be of the same size, namely $`O(\lambda ^5)`$. These entries provide an origin for the Cabibbo angle, and also yield a down quark Yukawa coupling of the right order, namely $`\lambda ^6`$.

To proceed further in correlating the large $`23`$ rotation with other FCNC’s, we obtain the form of $`U_{D_R}`$. In general, it is difficult to analytically diagonalize $`3\times 3`$ matrices. However, if the entries in the Yukawa matrices have a hierarchical structure, then the matrices can be diagonalized perturbatively by three successive rotations in the 2-3, 1-3 and 1-2 subspaces (see, for example, reference rasin ). Denoting the sines of the rotation angles by $`s_{23}^{R(L)}`$, $`s_{13}^{R(L)}`$ and $`s_{12}^{R(L)}`$ for the RH (LH) quarks, we have

$$Y_d^{diagonal}=\left(U_{D_L}\right)^{}Y_DU_{D_R},$$
(8)
where

$$U_{D_R}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& s_{23}^R\\ 0& s_{23}^R& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& s_{13}^R\\ 0& 1& 0\\ s_{13}^R& 0& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& s_{12}^R& 0\\ s_{12}^R& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$
(9)
A similar decomposition is valid for $`U_{D_L}`$. Given the texture in Eq. (7), it is not hard to see that $`s_{12}^R𝒪(\lambda )`$, $`s_{23}^R𝒪(1)`$ and that $`s_{13}^R`$ is very small666Strictly speaking, although perturbative diagonalization cannot be used in this case since $`23`$ mixing is $`𝒪(1)`$, it suffices for our semi-quantitative analysis.. Expanding the RHS of Eq. (9), we get $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{12}s_{12}^R`$, $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{21}s_{12}^R+s_{13}^Rs_{23}^R`$, $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{23}s_{23}^R`$ and $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{32}s_{23}^R+s_{13}^Rs_{12}^R`$ so that $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{12,21}\lambda `$ and $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{23,32}O(1)`$, as one might expect. What is more interesting is the observation that

$$\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{31}=s_{13}^R+s_{23}^Rs_{12}^R,$$
(10)
which is enhanced by the large 2-3 mixing. Using the above values of the $`3`$ rotations, we see that perturbative diagonalization gives $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{31}\lambda `$. We have confirmed this expectation by a numerical analysis, which also shows that $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{31}`$ has a phase777We work in the basis where the quark masses are real and the CKM matrix, i.e., $`U_{U_L}^{}U_{D_L}`$ has the standard form given in the Review of Particle Physics rpp .. Thus, we obtain the following significant result: $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{31}𝒪(\lambda )`$ is a generic consequence of the minimal texture in Eq. (7), even though the 1-3 rotation defined by Eq. (9) is small.

Let us now estimate the relevant $`\delta `$ parameters. In non-Abelian models with a $`\mathrm{𝟐}\mathrm{𝟏}`$ representation structure, one expects that $`m_{\stackrel{~}{d}_R}m_{\stackrel{~}{s}_R}`$ while $`m_{\stackrel{~}{d}_R}`$ and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_R}`$ are of the same order but not degenerate. Then, using $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{32,33}1`$ and $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{31}\lambda `$ in Eq. (3), we find $`\left(\delta _{12}^d\right)_{RR}\lambda `$ (with no phase) and $`\left(\delta _{13}^d\right)_{RR}\lambda \mathrm{exp}(i\varphi )`$. On the other hand, the limits from $`K\overline{K}`$ and $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing require $`\text{Re}\left(\delta _{12}^d\right)_{RR}0.04`$ and $`\text{Re}\left(\delta _{13}^d\right)_{RR}0.1`$, respectively, for squark and gluino masses $`500`$ GeV gabbiani . Thus, the SUSY contribution to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_K`$ is too large with this texture, but there is no SUSY contribution to $`ϵ_K`$. The SUSY contribution to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_B`$ is borderline (i.e., comparable to the experimental value) and has an $`𝒪(1)`$ phase. Thus, the time-dependent CP asymmetry in $`BJ/\psi K_S`$ measures a combination of angle $`\beta `$ and the new phase $`\varphi `$.

Clearly, our theory must be modified if the contribution to $`K\overline{K}`$ mixing is to be sufficiently suppressed. One could entertain the possibility that the squarks of the first two generations are much heavier than the third; a squark mass spectrum of the form $`m_{\stackrel{~}{d},\stackrel{~}{s}_R}1`$ TeV and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_R}`$ a few $`100`$ GeV can still explain the $`B\varphi K_S`$ anomaly murayama . To study this case, one must work in the mass eigenstate basis for both the quarks and squarks. Given the assumed form of Eq. (5), the gauge and mass bases for the squarks are the same; the quark-squark-gluino coupling in the mass basis is then given by

$$\stackrel{~}{g}\left(\stackrel{~}{d}_i^{mass}\right)^{}\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{ij}d_j^{mass}.$$
(11)
Dominant contributions to FCNC’s come from Feynman diagrams involving the exchange of the light $`\stackrel{~}{b}_R`$. From Eq. (11), we see that its couplings to $`d`$ and $`s`$ quarks are given by $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{31}\lambda `$ (with a phase) and $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{32}1`$ (with a phase), respectively. Box diagrams involving the exchange of $`\stackrel{~}{b}_R`$ and a gluino generate a CP-conserving, $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=2`$ $`4`$-fermion operator with coefficient $`\lambda ^2/m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_R}^2`$, and a $`\mathrm{\Delta }B=2`$ $`4`$-fermion operator with a coefficient of the same order, but with a phase. It is easy to see that this is equivalent to having $`\left(\delta _{12,13}^d\right)_{RR}\lambda `$ and thus gives too large a contribution to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_K`$ and a large CP-violating contribution to $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing, just as before.

If one, on the other hand, tries to make all the quarks heavier than a TeV, than one must take the gluino mass to be relatively light, (a few $`100`$ GeV) to affect $`B\varphi K_S`$ (see Ref. murayama ). Thus, $`xm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2/m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}^21`$. Heavy squarks relax the bounds on $`\delta `$’s, whereas small $`x`$ tightens the bounds. As a result, the limits on $`\delta `$’s stay about the same gabbiani . Thus, the large contributions to $`K\overline{K}`$ and $`B\overline{B}`$ are not alleviated if we are also to explain the anomaly of interest.

These considerations lead us to the conclusion that we must suppress the $`(2,1)`$ entry of Eq. (7). For U(2)-like textures, with symmetric and antisymmetric contributions to the upper two-by-two block of $`Y_d`$, this suggests a mild fine tuning is required. We will construct an explicit model based on this solution in Section III.

Cabibbo angle from $`Y_u`$

For models in which the Cabibbo angle originates in $`Y_u`$, we can we can choose a minimal block diagonal form for $`Y_d`$:

$$Y_d\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^6& 0& 0\\ 0& \lambda ^4& \lambda ^4\\ 0& \lambda ^2\mathrm{exp}(i\varphi )& \lambda ^2\end{array}\right).$$
(12)
To generate the Cabibbo angle, we must introduce a $`(1,2)`$ entry of the appropriate size in $`Y_u`$:

$$Y_u\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^8& \lambda ^5& 0\\ 0& \lambda ^4& \lambda ^2\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$
(13)
Note that the eigenvalues of $`Y_u`$ are in the correct ratio for the up-type quarks, namely $`1`$::$`\lambda ^4`$::$`\lambda ^8`$. If we were to follow the same non-Abelian ansatz described earlier, we would also expect an $`𝒪(\lambda ^5)`$ $`(2,1)`$ entry in $`Y_u`$. However, this would lead to an up quark Yukawa coupling of order $`\lambda ^6`$, about a factor of $`25`$ too large. The fine tuning required to fix this problem is much greater than what we needed to adequately suppress the flavor changing problems in our previous example. So it is more natural in this case to assume that the $`(2,1)`$ entry in $`Y_u`$ is absent, and to discard our assumption that the underlying theory is non-Abelian888Of course, the underlying symmetry could still be non-Abelian but of a more complicated form than we have assumed, e.g., products of simple non-Abelian factors. We do not consider this possibility here.; unwanted SUSY FCNC’s must then be suppressed by a suitable quark-squark alignment. We will show in Section III that this can be achieved in Abelian models with multiple U(1) factors (a la Nir-Seiberg NS ), or in a new class of models involving fewer U(1)’s and a nontrivial extra-dimensional topography.

From the texture of $`Y_d`$ and the form of the squark mass matrix in Eq. (5), we see that the first generation is decoupled from the second and third in the down sector. Thus, there are no SUSY contributions to $`K\overline{K}`$ and $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing, even if the three down-type squarks are not degenerate. However, since $`\left(U_{U_L}\right)_{12}\lambda `$, some mild degeneracy between $`m_{\stackrel{~}{u}_L}`$ and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{c}_L}`$ may be required to satisfy the bounds on $`D\overline{D}`$ mixing.

### II.2 Large 2-3 mixing in RH down squark mass matrix

In this case, the “minimal” texture for down-type squark mass matrix in the gauge basis is

$$\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{RR}^{gauge}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& \mathrm{exp}(i\varphi )\\ 0& \mathrm{exp}(i\varphi )& 1\end{array}\right),$$
(14)
where, for simplicity, we have assumed that the off-diagonal elements involving down squarks are small. In the discussion that follows immediately below, we assume that large 2-3 mixing is present only in the supersymmetry breaking sector of the theory. However, it should be pointed out that in most realistic models, the form of Eq. (14) suggests that the entire 2-3 block is flavor group invariant, and that $`s_R`$ and $`b_R`$ have the same flavor charges. In this case, one expects large 2-3 mixing from both the Yukawa and soft mass matrices, as illustrated in the first model of Section III.

If the Cabibbo angle comes from the down sector, then as before we need degeneracy of $`m_{\stackrel{~}{d}_L}`$ and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{s}_L}`$ and hence a non-Abelian flavor symmetry. Given our previous assumptions on the symmetry or antisymmetry of the upper two-by-two block of $`Y_d`$, we expect generically that $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{12,21}\lambda `$. However, unlike our earlier example, $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{31}`$ can be very small (see Eq. (10)) since we no longer need an $`𝒪(1)`$ 2-3 RH rotation in the quark sector. Using Eq. (3) and $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{12,21}\lambda `$, we get

$$\left[\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{RR}^{superCKM}\right]_{13}\lambda \times \left[\left(\stackrel{~}{M}_d^2\right)_{RR}^{gauge}\right]_{23}$$
(15)
resulting in $`\left(\delta _{13}^d\right)_{RR}\lambda `$ (with a phase), and large $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing as before. Since $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{31}`$ and $`\left(U_{D_R}\right)_{32}`$ can be small and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{d}_R}m_{\stackrel{~}{s}_R}`$ is implied by the non-Abelian flavor symmetry, we can check (using Eq. (3)) that $`\left(\delta _{12}^d\right)_{RR}`$ and hence $`K\overline{K}`$ mixing can be small, unlike our earlier example.

If the Cabibbo angle originates in the up-quark sector, then the off-diagonal entries of $`Y_d`$ involving the down quark can be small or zero. Assuming further that the down squark mass matrix is as in Eq. (14), we see that the down quark is decoupled from the bottom and strange quarks so that there are no SUSY contributions to $`K\overline{K}`$ and $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing.

## III Models

In this section, we will consider simple Abelian and non-Abelian models that can account for the discrepancy in the measured value of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$. Our Abelian model will realize the Yukawa textures in Eqs. (12) and (13) by construction, just as the well-known alignment models of Ref. NS . However, unlike these models, we rely on localization in extra dimensions rather that holomorphy to achieve an appropriate quark-squark alignment for the lighter generations. This allows us to achieve a viable phenomenology using only one flavor U(1) factor. An interesting feature of our model is that texture zeros can occur in non-holomorphic terms, such as the soft scalar masses, as a consequence of extra-dimensional locality. This leads to somewhat different scalar mass matrix textures – exact zero entries for the off-diagonal elements involving the down-squark, where they otherwise would be finite but small. In our model and those of Ref. NS , $`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{RR}`$ is due to a large RH 2-3 rotation in the down quark Yukawa matrix and large 2-3 mixing in the down squark mass matrix. In the non-Abelian example, we will show how a U(2) flavor model may be modified to provide for the desired $`b`$-$`s`$ mixing; large $`K`$-$`\overline{K}`$ mixing can be avoided provided that a mild fine-tuning is allowed.

### III.1 An Extra-dimensional Abelian Model

In this model, we assume the horizontal flavor symmetry $`G_f=`$ U(1); the particle content is that of the minimal supersymmetric standard model with one additional field $`\varphi `$ that has U(1) charge $`+1`$. We assume that the ratio of the vev of $`\varphi `$ to the ultraviolet cutoff of the effective theory, $`M_f`$, is approximately given by the Cabibbo angle,

$$\frac{\varphi }{M_f}=\lambda 0.22.$$
(16)
We assume that $`M_f`$ is generically well below the fundamental gravitational scale $`M_{}`$ and that $`M_f`$ sets the mass scale for all the operators contributing to the flavor structure of the theory. The U(1) charge assignments of the matter fields are given as follows:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}EQ(3,2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}),\hfill & & LD(322),\hfill \\ U(5,2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}),\hfill & & H_U,H_D0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(17)
Yukawa textures originate as higher-dimensional operators involving the MSSM matter fields and powers of $`\varphi /M_f`$. The model described thus far is not viable since the Cabbibo angle receives an unsuppressed contribution from the diagonalization of the down quark Yukawa matrix (as one can verify from the explicit form for $`Y_d`$), leading to $`(\delta _{12}^d)_{LL}\lambda `$; this exceeds the bounds from $`K^0`$-$`\overline{K}^0`$ mixing and $`ϵ_K`$ if superparticle masses are a few hundred GeV.

We now consider a possible non-trivial, extra-dimensional topography for the model. We assume that there are two extra spatial dimensions, compactified on the orbifold $`(S^1/Z_2)^2`$. We take the compactification radii to be the same, namely $`R`$, so that fixed points exist at $`(0,0)`$, $`(0,\pi R)`$, $`(\pi R,0)`$ and $`(\pi R,\pi R)`$. The space can be described as a rectangle, with fields confined either to corners (fixed points of both $`S^1/Z_2`$ factors), sides (fixed point of one $`S^1/Z_2`$ factor), or defined everywhere (the six-dimensional bulk). We choose to localize our fields as shown in Fig. 2. In addition, we assume that the unknown, high-energy dynamics that is responsible for generating $`M_f`$-suppressed operators is localized at fixed points of both $`S^1/Z_2`$ factors.

Given this construction, the separation of fields at isolated fixed points prevents Yukawa couplings involving these fields in the four-dimensional theory, after dimensional reduction. For the couplings that do remain, one must generally take into account volume suppression factors (i.e., powers of the ratio $`R^1/M_f`$) that, to varying degrees, suppress the effective four-dimensional interactions. In our model we will assume that $`R^1M_f`$ so that these factors are $`𝒪(1)`$ and do not alter the analysis. Moreover, we will take $`R^1`$ to be sufficiently large so that only the physics of the zero-modes of the MSSM matter fields will be relevant to the low-energy phenomenology. Finally, a minor technical point: for MSSM matter fields that are confined to 5D subspaces of the 6D bulk, we allow for the introduction of chiral-conjugate mirror fields with opposite parity under the appropriate $`Z_2`$ factor so that chiral zero modes can be obtained.

Given the constraints of symmetry and geometry, we find the following textures for the Yukawa matrices:

$$Y_u\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^8& \lambda ^5& 0\\ 0& \lambda ^4& \lambda ^2\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right),Y_d\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^6& 0& 0\\ 0& \lambda ^4& \lambda ^4\\ 0& \lambda ^2& \lambda ^2\end{array}\right).$$
(18)
While these are the same as in Ref. NS  (by construction), the soft mass squared matrices are somewhat different:

$$m_Q^2m^2\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& \lambda ^2\\ 0& \lambda ^2& 1\end{array}\right),m_D^2m^2\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 1\\ 0& 1& 1\end{array}\right),m_U^2m^2\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& \lambda ^3& 0\\ \lambda ^3& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$
(19)
As far as strangeness changing processes are concerned, this model yields a remarkable level of quark-squark alignment; notice that there are no 1-2 down quark rotations (on either left- or right-handed fields), and no 1-2 entries in either $`m_Q^2`$ or $`m_D^2`$! The model provides the desired $`𝒪(1)`$ 2-3 right-handed down-quark mixing with an irremovable phase (as well as large 2-3 mixing in $`m_D^2`$), and like other models of this type predicts $`D^0`$-$`\overline{D}^0`$ mixing near the experimental limit. It is worth noting that a choice of $`M_f`$ closer to $`M_{}`$ may lead to exponentially suppressed, though non-negligible, interactions between fields at isolated fixed points, due to the exchange of string states. Such effects are not relevant here given our choice of scales, but could be of interest in similar flavor models.

### III.2 A Non-Abelian Example

Non-Abelian flavor symmetries resolve the supersymmetric flavor problem by maintaining a sufficient degree of degeneracy among squarks of the first two generations. Theories of flavor based on U(2) symmetry assume a $`\mathrm{𝟐}+\mathrm{𝟏}`$ representation structure for the three generations, and a two-stage symmetry breaking

$$U(2)\stackrel{ϵ}{}U(1)\stackrel{ϵ^{}}{}\text{ nothing},$$
(20)
where the U(1) factor represents phase rotations on fields of the first generation, and where $`ϵ`$ and $`ϵ^{}`$ are small parameters defined in analogy to Eq. (16). For a detailed discussion of models based on U(2) symmetry and its discrete subgroups we refer the reader to Ref. u2\_1 ; u2\_2 ; u2o . While conventional U(2) models provide an elegant theory of fermion masses, they do not generally lead to the large 2-3 down quark mixing of interest to us here. In this section we present a minimal modification that yields the desired result while preserving most of the desirable feature of the original U(2) models.

We assume the flavor group $`G_f=`$ U(2)$`\times `$ U(1)F, with the three generations of matter fields again embedded in $`\mathrm{𝟐}+\mathrm{𝟏}`$ representations of the U(2) factor, and the symmetry breaking pattern given in Eq. (20). The additional U(1)F factor is assumed to break at the first of the two symmetry-breaking scales in Eq. (20), and is therefore associated with a small parameter of size $`ϵ`$. Conventional U(2) models involve singlet, doublet and triplet flavon fields $`A^{ab}`$, $`\varphi ^a`$ and $`S^{ab}`$, that obtain a pattern of vevs that are consistent with Eq. (20). In our model, we make the unconventional choices $`ϵ\lambda ^2`$, $`ϵ^{}\lambda ^6`$, and

$$\frac{A}{M_f}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \lambda ^6\\ \lambda ^6& 0\end{array}\right),\frac{\varphi }{M_f}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ \lambda ^2\end{array}\right),\frac{S}{M_f}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\lambda ^6& \lambda ^6\\ \lambda ^6& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(21)
Unlike the usual U(2) model, the first generation fermions get their Yukawa eigenvalues primarily from the $`(1,1)`$ entry of the symmetric flavon, rather than the off diagonals. Note that the $`\lambda ^6`$ entries in the symmetric flavon are completely consistent with Eq. (20); in the effective theory below the first symmetry breaking scale, these entries correspond to fields with differing charges under the intermediate U(1) symmetry acquiring order $`ϵ^{}`$ vevs. All the entries are consistent with the dynamical assumption that a given flavon will either get a vev of the same size as a symmetry-breaking scale, or no vev at all. In addition, we introduce the following additional flavons with nontrivial U(1)F charge, indicated by a subscript:

$$\frac{\varphi _+}{M_f}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ \lambda ^2\end{array}\right),\frac{\sigma _{}}{M_f}\lambda ^2\frac{\sigma _+}{M_f}\lambda ^2.$$
(22)
Complete U(2) representation of the matter fields can be assigned different U(1)F charges. We assign a U(1)F charge of $`1`$ to the right-handed up-quark superfields of the first two generations and $`+1`$ to the right-handed down quark superfield of the third generation999We follow the usual convention that all matter fields are embedded into left-handed chiral superfields. Our charge assignments apply to these fields.. We then obtain the Yukawa textures

$$Y_u\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^8& \lambda ^8& 0\\ \lambda ^8& \lambda ^4& \lambda ^2\\ 0& \lambda ^2& 1\end{array}\right),Y_d\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^6& 2.5\lambda ^6& 0\\ 0.5\lambda ^6& 0.5\lambda ^4& \lambda ^4\\ 0& \lambda ^2& \lambda ^2\end{array}\right),$$
(23)
and the soft scalar masses

$$m_Q^2m^2\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c_0+\lambda ^{12}& \lambda ^{10}& \lambda ^8\\ \lambda ^{10}& c_0+\lambda ^4& \lambda ^2\\ \lambda ^8& \lambda ^2& c_3\end{array}\right),m_U^2m_D^2\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c_0+\lambda ^{12}& \lambda ^{10}& \lambda ^{10}\\ \lambda ^{10}& c_0+\lambda ^4& \lambda ^2\\ \lambda ^{10}& \lambda ^2& c_3\end{array}\right).$$
(24)
Here, since the first two generation squarks are degenerate, we have explicitly shown the $`𝒪(1)`$ coefficients in the diagonal entries (the $`c_0,c_3`$’s are different for $`Q,U,D`$). Also, while we generally show only the order in $`\lambda `$ of a given Yukawa entry, we have displayed some of the order one coefficients in $`Y_d`$. This is to illustrate that with a mild, $`𝒪(\lambda )`$ fine tuning between $`A`$ and $`S`$ we can obtain the Cabibbo angle from the down quark Yukawa matrix while sufficiently suppressing its 21 entry, thus avoiding the flavor changing problems discussed in Section II.

Finally it is worth pointing out that the similarity between the down quark and charged lepton mass hierarchies suggests that under the flavor group $`LD`$ and $`EQ`$ or $`LQ`$ and $`ED`$, where $``$ indicates identical flavor charge assignments. Detailed differences in the mass spectrum can be accommodated using the freedom to adjust order one coefficients. The first (second) choice implies large LH (RH) 2-3 mixing in the charged lepton sector, independent of whether the theory has any grand unified embedding. The bi-large neutrino mixing that is favored by the current data must therefore partly originate from the neutral lepton sector. While we do not explicitly investigate this issue here, it is worth pointing out that Aranda, Carone and Meade u2\_2  have shown that bi-large neutrino mixing can arise entirely from the neutral lepton sector in non-Abelian models with $`2`$+$`1`$ representation structure, as a consequence of the structure of the right-handed neutrino mass matrix and the nonlinearity of the seesaw mechanism. Non-Abelian models of the type we discuss here can in principle be generalized along these lines. We refer the interested reader to Ref. u2\_2 .

To conclude this section, we point out that the models we have constructed can be tested in future collider experiments assuming that these models are relevant for explaining the $`B\varphi K_s`$ anomaly. Both models involve significant right-handed down squark mixing, which implies that the gluino mass must be relatively light, in the $`150200`$ GeV mass range, based on the numerical results in Figure 3 of Ref. murayama . Using the off-diagonal squark masses predicted in each of our models, we may obtain lower bound estimates on the mass of first two generation squarks, from $`D`$-$`\overline{D}`$ and $`K`$-$`\overline{K}`$ mixing constraints. These are shown in the Figure below, assuming a common mass for all squarks of the first two generations. While there is uncertainty in the order one coefficients in such predictions, we can conclude qualitatively that the discovery of very light squarks of the first two generation would disfavor the models discussed in this section.

## IV Conclusions

We have considered the detailed flavor structure of supersymmetric theories that can give large contributions to $`bs`$ transitions. We have focused on the possibility that such theories may explain the discrepancy between the value of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ measured in $`B\varphi K_S`$ and $`BJ/\psi K_S`$ decays. With relatively few assumptions, we have isolated minimal, preferred textures for the Yukawa couplings and the soft supersymmetry-breaking masses. In the case where the Cabibbo angle originates in the down quark Yukawa matrix, we argued that the need for squark degeneracy among the first two generations suggests an underlying non-Abelian flavor symmetry with a $`\mathrm{𝟐}\mathrm{𝟏}`$ representation structure. However, in a wide class of these models with symmetric $`\mathrm{𝟑}`$ and antisymmetric $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ dimensional representations, the required, large 2-3 mixing is correlated with Cabibbo-like 1-2 and 1-3 right-handed mixing angles. This leads generically to unwanted flavor changing effects, given the requirement that some elements of the superparticle spectrum must be light to contribute non-negligibly to the processes of interest. We argue that non-Abelian models of this type may provide a viable solution to the $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ anomaly providing that a mild fine tuning of parameters is allowed. On the other hand, if the Cabibbo angle originates in the up quark Yukawa matrix, the same non-Abelian ansatz leads to a value for the up quark mass that is too large. Barring more complicated non-Abelian constructions, the desired phenomenology seems in this case to be realized more naturally in Abelian models that rely on alignment rather than degeneracy to suppress strangeness-changing neutral currents.

We have presented explicit models that reproduce many of the features of the idealized textures that we have discussed. We showed how the minimal U(2) model, which normally does not have any large mixing angles, may be modified with the help of an additional U(1) factor to yield textures of the desired form. In addition, we presented a new type of alignment model with the desired properties that is based on a single U(1) factor and a nontrivial extra-dimensional topography for the matter content. If the $`B\varphi K_S`$ anomaly turns out to be real, or if large deviations from SM predictions are seen in other $`bs`$ transitions, these models represent relatively minimal realizations of the desired flavor structure of the MSSM and provide a framework for investigating the correlation between a variety of flavor changing process in both quark and lepton sectors.

###### Acknowledgements.

K. A. is supported by the Leon Madansky Fellowship and by NSF Grant P420-D36-2041-0540. C.D.C. thanks the NSF for support under Grant Nos. PHY-9900657, PHY-0140012 and PHY-0243768. K. A. thanks P. Ko and M. Piai for discussions.


text:
# Von Neumann Measurement is Optimal for Detecting Linearly Independent Mixed Quantum States

## I Introduction

One of the important features of quantum mechanics is that non orthogonal quantum states cannot be perfectly distinguished Peres (1995). Therefore, a fundamental problem in quantum mechanics is to design measurements optimized to distinguish between a collection of nonorthogonal quantum states.

We consider a quantum state ensemble consisting of $`m`$ density operators $`\{\rho _i,1im\}`$ on an $`n`$-dimensional complex Hilbert space $``$, with prior probabilities $`\{p_i>0,1im\}`$. A density operator $`\rho `$ is a positive semidefinite (PSD) Hermitian operator with $`\text{Tr}(\rho )=1`$; we write $`\rho 0`$ to indicate $`\rho `$ is PSD. A mixed state ensemble is one in which at least one of the density operators $`\rho _i`$ has rank larger than one. A pure-state ensemble is one in which each density operator $`\rho _i`$ is a rank-one projector $`|\varphi _i\varphi _i|`$, where the vectors $`|\varphi _i`$, though evidently normalized to unit length, are not necessarily orthogonal.

In a quantum detection problem a transmitter conveys classical information to a receiver using a quantum-mechanical channel. Each message is represented by preparing the quantum channel in one of the ensemble states $`\rho _i`$. At the receiver, the information is detected by subjecting the channel to a quantum measurement in order to determine the state prepared. If the quantum states are mutually orthogonal, then the state can be determined correctly with probability one by performing an optimal Von Neumann measurement Peres (1995) consisting of $`m`$ mutually orthogonal projection operators $`\{\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{\Pi }_j=\delta _{ij}\mathrm{\Pi }_i,1i,jm\}`$ that form a resolution of the identity on $``$ so that $`_{i=1}^m\mathrm{\Pi }_i=I`$.

If the given states are not orthogonal, then no measurement will distinguish perfectly between them. Our problem is therefore to construct a measurement that minimizes the probability of a detection error. It is well known that the most efficient way of obtaining information about the state of a quantum system is not always by performing orthogonal projections Peres (1990); Peres and Wootters (1991), but rather by performing more general positive operator-valued measures (POVMs). A POVM consists of $`m`$ PSD Hermitian operators $`\{\mathrm{\Pi }_i,1im\}`$ that form a resolution of the identity on $``$ but are not constrained to be projection operators.

Necessary and sufficient conditions for an optimum measurement maximizing the probability of correct detection have been developed Holevo (1973); Yuen et al. (1975); Eldar et al. (2003). However, in general obtaining a closed form expression for the optimal measurement directly from these conditions is a difficult and unsolved problem. Closed-form analytical expressions for the optimal measurement have been derived for several special cases Helstrom (1976); Charbit et al. (1989); Osaki et al. (1996); Ban et al. (1997); Eldar and Forney (2001); Eldar et al. (2002).

Kennedy Kennedy (1973) showed that for a pure state ensemble with linearly independent vectors $`|\varphi _i`$ the optimal measurement is a Von Neumann measurement consisting of mutually orthogonal rank-one projection operators. However, this o,plication has not been proven for the more general case of mixed state ensembles.

In Section III we show that the optimal measurement for distinguishing between a set of linearly independent mixed quantum states is a Von Neumann measurement and not a general POVM. Therefore, when seeking the optimal measurement, we may restrict our attention to the class of Von Neumann measurements. We also show that the rank of each projection operator is equal to the rank of the corresponding density operator.

In Section IV we consider the least-squares measurement (LSM) Eldar and Forney (2001), also known as the square-root measurement Hausladen and Wootters (1994); Hausladen et al. (1996), which is a detection measurement that has many desirable properties and has been employed in many settings. We show that for linearly independent mixed state ensembles the LSM reduces to a Von Neumann measurement.

In the next section we present our detection problem and summarize results from Eldar et al. (2003) pertaining to the conditions on the optimal measurement operators.

## II Optimal Detection of Quantum States

Assume that a quantum channel is prepared in a quantum state drawn from a collection of given states represented by density operators $`\{\rho _i,1im\}`$ in an $`n`$-dimensional complex Hilbert space $``$. We assume without loss of generality that the eigenvectors of $`\rho _i,1im`$, collectively span111Otherwise we can transform the problem to a problem equivalent to the one considered here by reformulating the problem on the subspace spanned by the eigenvectors of $`\{\rho _i,1im\}`$.  $``$.

Since each density operator $`\rho _i`$ is Hermitian and PSD, it can be expressed via the eigendecomposition as $`\rho _i=\varphi _i\varphi _i^{}`$ where $`\varphi _i`$ is an $`n\times r_i`$ matrix of orthogonal eigenvectors $`\{|\varphi _{ik},1kr_i\}`$ and $`r_i=\text{rank}(\rho _i)`$. The density operators $`\rho _i,1im`$ are linearly independent if the eigenvectors $`\{|\varphi _{ik},1kr_i,1im\}`$ form a linearly independent set of vectors. Since the eigenvectors of $`\rho _i,1im`$ collectively span the $`n`$-dimensional space $``$, it follows that for linearly independent state sets

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}r_i=n.$$
(1)
At the receiver, the constructed measurement comprises $`m`$ measurement operators $`\{\mathrm{\Pi }_i,1im\}`$ on $``$ that satisfy

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$ $``$ $`0,1im;`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$ $`=`$ $`I_n,`$ (2)
where $`I_n`$ is the identity operator on $``$. We seek the measurement operators $`\{\mathrm{\Pi }_i,1im\}`$ satisfying (II) that maximize the probability of correct detection which is given by

$$P_d=\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}p_i\text{Tr}(\rho _i\mathrm{\Pi }_i),$$
(3)
where $`p_i>0`$ is the prior probability of $`\rho _i`$, with $`_ip_i=1`$.

It was shown in Yuen et al. (1975); Eldar et al. (2003) that a set of measurement operators $`\{\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i,1im\}`$ maximizes the probability of correct detection for a state set $`\{\rho _i,1im\}`$ with prior probabilities $`\{p_i,1im\}`$ if and only if there exists an Hermitian $`\widehat{X}`$ satisfying

$$\widehat{X}p_i\rho _i,1im,$$
(4)
such that

$$(\widehat{X}p_i\rho _i)\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i=0,1im.$$
(5)
The matrix $`\widehat{X}`$ can be determined as the solution to the problem

$$\underset{X}{\mathrm{min}}\text{Tr}(X)$$
(6)
where $``$ is the set of Hermitian operators on $``$, subject to

$$Xp_i\rho _i,1im.$$
(7)
As shown in Eldar et al. (2003), the conditions (4) and (5) together imply that

$$t_ir_i,$$
(8)
where $`t_i=\text{rank}(\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i)`$.

Kennedy Kennedy (1973) showed that for pure state ensembles $`\rho _i=|\varphi _i\varphi _i|`$ with linearly independent vectors $`|\varphi _i`$ the optimal measurement is a rank-one measurement $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i=|\mu _i\mu _i|`$ with orthonormal vectors $`|\mu _i`$, i.e., a Von Neumann measurement. However, this implication has not been proven for mixed states. In the following section we use the conditions for optimality to prove that the optimal measurement for linearly independent mixed states is a Von Neumann measurement and not a more general POVM.

## III Linearly Independent State Ensembles

Suppose now that the density operators $`\rho _i`$ are linearly independent and let $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i`$ be the optimal measurement operators that maximize (3) subject to (II). Denoting $`\mathrm{\Pi }=_{i=1}^m\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i`$ we have that

$$\text{rank}(\mathrm{\Pi })\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}\text{rank}(\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}t_i.$$
(9)
Since $`\mathrm{\Pi }=I_n`$ we also have

$$\text{rank}(\mathrm{\Pi })=n,$$
(10)
from which we conclude that

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}t_in.$$
(11)
Combining (11) with (8) and (1) we conclude that

$$t_i=r_i.$$
(12)
Therefore, via the eigendecomposition we can express each measurement operator $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i`$ as $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i=\mu _i\mu _i^{}`$ where $`\mu _i`$ is an $`n\times r_i`$ matrix of orthogonal eigenvectors $`\{|\mu _{ik},1kr_i\}`$. Since $`_{i=1}^mr_i=n`$ we have $`n`$ vectors $`|\mu _{ik}`$. In addition, from (II),

$$\underset{ik}{}|\mu _{ik}\mu _{ik}|=I_n$$
(13)
from which we conclude that the vectors $`\{|\mu _{ik},1kr_i,1im\}`$ are linearly independent.

We now show that the vectors $`\{|\mu _{ik},1kr_i,1im\}`$ are mutually orthonormal. From (II) we have that for any $`1lr_i,1jm`$,

$$|\mu _{jl}=\underset{ik}{}\mu _{ik}|\mu _{jl}|\mu _{ik}.$$
(14)
Since the vectors $`|\mu _{ik}`$ are linearly independent, we must have that $`\mu _{ik}|\mu _{jl}=\delta _{ij,kl}`$.

We conclude that

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i=\underset{k=1}{\overset{r_i}{}}|\mu _{ik}\mu _{ik}|=P_{𝒮_i}$$
(15)
where $`P_{𝒮_i}`$ is an orthogonal projection onto a subspace $`𝒮_i`$ of $``$ with dimension $`r_i`$ and

$$P_{𝒮_i}P_{𝒮_j}=\delta _{ij}P_{𝒮_i},$$
(16)
so that $`=𝒮_1\mathrm{}𝒮_m`$ is the direct sum of the subspaces $`𝒮_i`$.

We summarize our results in the following theorem:

###### Theorem 1.

Let $`\{\rho _i,1im\}`$ be a quantum state ensemble consisting of linearly independent density operators $`\rho _i`$ with prior probabilities $`p_i>0`$. Then the optimal measurement is a Von Neumann measurement with measurement operators $`\{\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_i=P_{𝒮_i},1im\}`$ where $`P_{𝒮_i}`$ is an orthogonal projection onto an $`r_i`$-dimensional subspace $`𝒮_i`$ of $``$ with $`r_i=\text{rank}(\rho _i)`$ and $`P_{𝒮_i}P_{𝒮_j}=\delta _{ij}P_{𝒮_i}`$.

## IV Least-Squares Measurement

A suboptimal measurement that has been employed as a detection measurement in many applications is the least-squares measurement (LSM) Eldar and Forney (2001); Holevo (1998), also known as the square-root measurement Ban et al. (1997); Hausladen and Wootters (1994); Hausladen et al. (1996); Sasaki et al. (1998a, b); Kato et al. (1999). The LSM has many desirable properties. Its construction is relatively simple; it can be determined directly from the given collection of states; it minimizes the probability of a detection error for pure and mixed state ensembles that exhibit certain symmetries Eldar and Forney (2001); Eldar et al. (2003); it is “pretty good” when the states to be distinguished are equally likely and almost orthogonal Hausladen and Wootters (1994); and it is asymptotically optimal Hausladen et al. (1996); Holevo (1998).

The LSM corresponding to a set of density operators $`\{\rho _i=\varphi _i\varphi _i^{},1im\}`$ with eigenvectors that collectively span $``$ and prior probabilities $`\{p_i,1im\}`$ consists of the measurement operators $`\{\mathrm{\Sigma }_i=\mu _i\mu _i^{},1im\}`$ where Holevo (1998); Eldar and Forney (2001)

$$\mu _i=(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^{1/2}\psi _i.$$
(17)
Here $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is the matrix of (block) columns $`\psi _i=\sqrt{p_i}\varphi _i`$ and $`()^{1/2}`$ is the unique Hermitian square root of the corresponding matrix. Note that since the eigenvectors of the $`\{\rho _i\}`$ collectively span $``$, the columns of the $`\{\psi _i\}`$ also together span $``$, so $`\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ is invertible.

We now show that the LSM satisfies the conditions of Theorem 1 so that if the columns of $`\{\varphi _i\}`$ are linearly independent, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_j=\mathrm{\Sigma }_i\delta _{ij}`$ and the LSM is a Von Neumann measurement.

From (17) we have that

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_j=(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^{1/2}\psi _i\psi _i^{}(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^1\psi _j\psi _j^{}(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^{1/2}.$$
(18)
To simplify (18) we express $`\psi _i`$ as

$$\psi _i=\mathrm{\Psi }E_i.$$
(19)
Here $`E_i`$ is an $`n\times r_i`$ matrix where the $`q`$th column of $`E_i`$ has one nonzero element equal to $`1`$ in the $`p`$th position with $`p=_{k=1}^{i1}r_k+q`$. We then have that

$$\psi _i^{}(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^1\psi _j=E_i^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^1\mathrm{\Psi }E_j.$$
(20)
If the density operators $`\{\rho _i\}`$ are linearly independent, then $`_ir_i=n`$ and the operators $`\{\psi _i\}`$ are also linearly independent. Since each matrix $`\psi _i`$ has dimension $`n\times r_i`$ we conclude that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a $`n\times n`$ matrix with linearly independent columns and therefore invertible. Thus, $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^1\mathrm{\Psi }=I_n`$ and

$$\psi _i^{}(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^1\psi _j=E_i^{}E_j=\delta _{ij}I.$$
(21)
Substituting (21) into (18),

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_j=\delta _{ij}(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^{1/2}\psi _i\psi _i^{}(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^{1/2}=\delta _{ij}\mathrm{\Sigma }_i$$
(22)
and the LSM is a Von Neumann measurement consisting of mutual orthogonal projection operators.

We summarize our results regarding the LSM in the following theorem.

###### Theorem 2.

Let $`\{\rho _i,1im\}`$ be a quantum state ensemble consisting of linearly independent density operators $`\rho _i`$ with prior probabilities $`p_i>0`$. Then the least-squares measurement is a Von Neumann measurement with measurement operators $`\{\mathrm{\Sigma }_i=P_{𝒮_i},1im\}`$ where $`P_{𝒮_i}`$ is an orthogonal projection onto an $`r_i`$-dimensional subspace $`𝒮_i`$ of $``$ with $`r_i=\text{rank}(\rho _i)`$ and $`P_{𝒮_i}P_{𝒮_j}=\delta _{ij}P_{𝒮_i}`$.

###### Acknowledgements.

The author is a Horev Fellow supported by the Taub Foundation.


text:
# Noncommutative Projective GeometryThe author is supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant DMS-9801148.

## 1. Introduction

In recent years a surprising number of significant insights and results in noncommutative algebra have been obtained by using the global techniques of projective algebraic geometry. This article will survey some of these results.

The classical approach to projective geometry, where one relates a commutative graded domain $`C`$ to the associated variety $`X=\mathrm{Proj}C`$ of homogeneous, nonirrelevant prime ideals, does not generalize well to the noncommutative situation, simply because noncommutative algebras do not have enough ideals. However, there is a second approach, based on a classic theorem of Serre: If $`C`$ is generated in degree one, then the categories $`\mathrm{coh}(X)`$ of coherent sheaves on $`X`$ and $`\mathrm{qgr}C`$ of finitely generated graded $`C`$-modules modulo torsion are equivalent.

Surprisingly, noncommutative analogues of this idea work very well and have lead to a number of deep results. There are two strands to this approach. First, since $`X`$ can be reconstructed from $`\mathrm{coh}(X)`$  we will regard $`\mathrm{coh}(X)`$ rather than $`X`$ as the variety since this is what generalizes. Thus, given a noncommutative graded $`k`$-algebra $`R=R_i`$ generated in degree one we will consider $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ as the corresponding “noncommutative variety” (the formal definitions will be given in a moment). In particular, we will regard $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ as a noncommutative curve, respectively surface, if $`dim_kR_i`$ grows linearly, respectively quadratically. This analogy works well, since there are many situations in which one can pass back and forth between $`R`$ and $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$  and, moreover, substantial geometric techniques can be applied to study $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$. A survey of this approach may be found in .

The second strand is more concrete. In order to use algebraic geometry to study noncommutative algebras we need to be able to create honest varieties from those algebras. This is frequently possible and such an approach will form the basis of this survey. Once again, the idea is simple: when $`R`$ is commutative, the points of $`\mathrm{Proj}R`$ correspond to the graded factor modules $`M=R/I=_{i0}M_i`$ for which $`dim_kM_i=1`$ for all $`i`$. These modules are still defined when $`R`$ is noncommutative and are called point modules. In many circumstances the set of all such modules is parametrized by a commutative scheme and that scheme controls the structure of $`R`$.

This article surveys significant applications of this idea. Notably:

* If $`R=R_i`$ is a domain such that $`dim_kR_i`$ grows linearly, then $`\mathrm{qgr}R\mathrm{coh}(X)`$ for a curve $`X`$ and $`R`$ can be reconstructed from data on $`X`$. Thus, noncommutative curves are commutative (see Section 4).
* The noncommutative analogues $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ of the projective plane can be classified. In this case, the point modules are parametrized by either $`^2`$ (in which case $`\mathrm{qgr}R^2`$) or by an cubic curve $`E^2`$, in which case data on $`E`$ determines $`R`$ (see Section 2).
* For strongly noetherian rings, as defined in Section 5, the point modules are always parametrized by a projective scheme. However there exist many noetherian algebras $`R`$ for which no such parametrization exists. This has interesting consequences for the classification of noncommutative surfaces.

We now make precise the definitions that will hold throughout this article. All rings will be algebras over a fixed, algebraically closed base field $`k`$ (although most of the results actually hold for arbitrary fields). A $`k`$-algebra $`R`$ is called connected graded (cg) if $`R`$ is a finitely generated $``$-graded $`k`$-algebra $`R=_{i0}R_i`$ with $`R_0=k`$. Note that this forces $`dim_kR_i<\mathrm{}`$ for all $`i`$. Usually, we will assume that $`R`$ is generated in degree one in the sense that $`R`$ is generated by $`R_1`$ as a $`k`$-algebra. If $`R=_iR_i`$ is a right noetherian cg ring then define $`\mathrm{gr}R`$ to be the category of finitely generated, $``$-graded right $`R`$-modules, with morphisms being graded homomorphisms of degree zero. Define the torsion subcategory, $`\mathrm{tors}R`$, to be the full subcategory of $`\mathrm{gr}R`$ generated by the finite dimensional modules and write $`\mathrm{qgr}R=\mathrm{gr}R/\mathrm{tors}R`$. We write $`\pi `$ for the canonical morphism $`\mathrm{gr}R\mathrm{qgr}R`$ and set $`=\pi (R)`$.

One can—and often should—work more generally with all graded $`R`$-modules and all quasi-coherent sheaves of $`𝒪_X`$-modules, but two categories are enough.

In order to measure the growth of an algebra we use the following dimension function: For a cg ring $`R=_{i0}R_i`$, the Gelfand-Kirillov dimension of $`R`$ is defined to be $`\mathrm{GKdim}R=inf\{\alpha :dim_k(_{i=0}^nR_i)n^\alpha \text{ for all }n0\}.`$ Basic facts about this dimension can be found in . If $`R`$ is a commutative cg algebra then $`\mathrm{GKdim}R`$ equals the Krull dimension of $`R`$ and hence equals $`dim\mathrm{Proj}R+1`$. Thus a noncommutative curve, respectively surface, will more formally be defined as $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ for a cg algebra $`R`$ with $`\mathrm{GKdim}R=2`$, respectively $`3`$.

## 2. Historical background

We begin with a historical introduction to the subject. It really started with the work of Artin and Schelter  who attempted to classify the noncommutative analogues $`R`$ of a polynomial ring in three variables (and therefore of $`^2`$). The first problem is one of definition. A “noncommutative polynomial ring” should obviously be a cg ring of finite global dimension, but this is too general, since it includes the free algebra. One can circumvent this problem by requiring that $`dim_kR_i`$ grows polynomially, but this still does not exclude unpleasant rings like $`k\{x,y\}/(xy)`$ that has global dimension two but is neither noetherian nor a domain. The solution is to impose a Gorenstein condition and this leads to the following definition:

###### Definition 1

A cg algebra $`R`$ is called AS-regular of dimension $`d`$ if $`\mathrm{gl}\mathrm{dim}R=d`$, $`\mathrm{GKdim}R<\mathrm{}`$ and $`R`$ is AS-Gorenstein; that is, $`\mathrm{Ext}^i(k,R)=0`$ for $`id`$ but $`\mathrm{Ext}^d(k,R)=k`$, up to a shift of degree.

One advantage with the Gorenstein hypothesis, for AS-regular rings of dimension $`3`$, is that the projective resolution of $`k`$ is forced to be of the form

$$0RR^{(n)}R^{(n)}Rk0$$

for some $`n`$ and, as Artin and Schelter show in , this gives strong information on the Hilbert series and hence the defining relations of $`R`$. In the process they constructed one class of algebras that they were unable to analyse:

###### Example 2

The three-dimensional Sklyanin algebra is the algebra

$$\mathrm{Skl}_3=\mathrm{Skl}_3(a,b,c)=k\{x_0,x_1,x_2\}/(ax_ix_{i+1}+bx_{i+1}x_i+cx_{i+2}^2:i_3),$$

where $`(a,b,c)^2F`$, for a (known) set $`F`$.

The original Sklyanin algebra $`\mathrm{Skl}_4`$ is a $`4`$-dimensional analogue of $`\mathrm{Skl}_3`$ discovered in . Independently of , Odesskii and Feigin  constructed analogues of $`\mathrm{Skl}_4`$ in all dimensions and coined the name Sklyanin algebra. See  for applications of Sklyanin algebras to another version of noncommutative geometry.

In retrospect the reason $`\mathrm{Skl}_3`$ is hard to analyse is because it depends upon an elliptic curve and so a more geometric approach is required. This approach came in  and depended upon the following simple idea. Assume that $`R`$ is a cg algebra that is generated in degree one. Define a point module to be a cyclic graded (right) $`R`$-module $`M=_{i0}M_i`$ such that $`dim_kM_i=1`$ for all $`i0`$. The notation is justified by the fact that, if $`R`$ were commutative, then such a point module $`M`$ would be isomorphic to $`k[x]`$ and hence equal to the homogeneous coordinate ring of a point in $`\mathrm{Proj}R`$. Point modules are easy to analyse geometrically and this provides an avenue for using geometry in the study of cg rings.

We will illustrate this approach for $`S=\mathrm{Skl}_3`$. Given a point module $`M=M_i`$ write $`M_i=m_ik`$ for some $`m_iM_i`$ and suppose that the module structure is defined by $`m_ix_j=\lambda _{ij}m_{i+1}`$ for some $`\lambda _{ij}k`$. If $`f=f_{ij}x_ix_j`$ is one of the relations for $`S`$, then necessarily $`m_0f=(f_{ij}\lambda _{0i}\lambda _{1j})m_2`$, whence $`f_{ij}\lambda _{0i}\lambda _{1j}=0`$. This defines a subvariety $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(S_1^{})\times (S_1^{})=^2\times ^2`$ and clearly $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ parametrizes the truncated point modules of length three: cyclic $`R`$-modules $`M=M_0M_1M_2`$ with $`dimM_i=1`$ for $`0i2`$. A simple computation (see \[6, Section 3\] or \[25, Section 8\]) shows that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is actually the graph of an automorphism $`\sigma `$ of an elliptic curve $`E^2`$. It follows easily that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ also parametrizes the point modules. As a morphism of point modules, $`\sigma `$ is nothing more than the shift functor $`M=M_iM_1[1]=M_1M_2\mathrm{}.`$

The next question is how to use $`E`$ and $`\sigma `$ to understand $`\mathrm{Skl}_3`$. Fortunately, one can create a noncommutative algebra from this data that is closely connected to $`\mathrm{Skl}_3`$. This is the twisted homogeneous coordinate ring of $`E`$ and is defined as follows. Let $`X`$ be a $`k`$-scheme, with a line bundle $``$ and automorphism $`\sigma `$. Set $`_n=^\sigma \mathrm{}^{\sigma ^{n1}}`$, where $`^\tau =\tau ^{}`$ denotes the pull-back of $``$ along an automorphism $`\tau `$. Then the twisted homogeneous coordinate ring is defined to be the graded vector space $`B=B(X,,\sigma )=k+_{n1}B_n`$ where $`B_n=\mathrm{H}^0(X,_n)`$. The multiplication on $`B=B(Y,,\sigma )`$ is defined by the natural map

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill B_n_kB_m& \mathrm{H}^0(X,_n)_k\sigma ^n\mathrm{H}^0(X,_m)\hfill \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{}\\ & \mathrm{H}^0(X,_n)_k\mathrm{H}^0(X,_m^{\sigma ^n})\stackrel{\varphi }{}\mathrm{H}^0(X,_{n+m})=B_{n+m}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The ring $`B`$ has two significant properties. First, the way it has been constructed ensures that the natural isomorphism $`S_1\mathrm{H}^0(^2,𝒪_^2(1))B_1`$ induces a ring homomorphism $`\varphi :SB`$. With a little more work using the Riemann-Roch theorem one can even show that $`BS/gS`$ for some $`gS_3`$. Secondly—and this will be explained in more detail in the next section—$`\mathrm{qgr}B\mathrm{coh}(E)`$. The latter fact allows one to obtain a detailed understanding of the structure of $`B`$ and the former allows one to pull this information back to $`S`$.

To summarize, the point modules over the Sklyanin algebra $`\mathrm{Skl}_3`$ are determined by an automorphism of an elliptic curve $`E`$ and the geometry of $`E`$ allows one to determine the structure of $`\mathrm{Skl}_3`$. As is shown in  this technique works more generally and this leads to the following theorem.

###### Theorem 3

 The AS-regular rings $`R`$ of dimension $`3`$ are classified. They are all noetherian domains with the Hilbert series of a weighted polynomial ring $`k[x,y,z]`$; thus the $`(x,y,z)`$ can be given degrees $`(a,b,c)`$ other than $`(1,1,1)`$.

Moreover, $`R`$ always maps homomorphically onto a twisted homogeneous coordinate ring $`B=B(X,,\sigma )`$, for some scheme $`X`$. Thus $`\mathrm{coh}(X)\mathrm{qgr}B\mathrm{qgr}R`$.

In this result, Artin, Tate and Van den Bergh  classified the algebras generated in degree one, while Stephenson  did the general case.

There are strong arguments (see  or \[25, Section 11\]) for saying that the noncommutative analogues of the projective plane are precisely the categories $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$, where $`R`$ is an AS-regular ring with the Hilbert series $`1/(1t)^3`$ of the unweighted polynomial ring $`k[x,y,z]`$. So consider this class, which clearly includes the Sklyanin algebra. The second paragraph of the theorem can now be refined to say that either $`X=^2`$, in which case $`\mathrm{qgr}R\mathrm{coh}(^2)`$, or $`X=E`$ is a cubic curve in $`^2`$. Thus, the theorem can be interpreted as saying that noncommutative projective planes are either equal to $`^2`$ or contain a commutative curve $`E`$.

## 3. Twisted homogeneous coordinate rings

The ideas from  outlined in the last section have had many other applications, but before we discuss them we need to analyse twisted homogeneous coordinate rings in more detail. The following exercise may give the reader a feel for the construction.

###### Exercise 4

Perhaps the simplest algebra appearing in the theory of quantum groups is the quantum (affine) plane $`k_q[x,y]=k\{x,y\}/(xyqyx)`$, for $`qk^{}`$. Prove that $`k_q[x,y]B(^1,𝒪_^1(1),\sigma )`$ where $`\sigma `$ is defined by $`\sigma (a:b)=(a:qb)`$, for $`(a:b)^1`$.

For the rest of the section, fix a $`k`$-scheme $`X`$ with an invertible sheaf $``$ and automorphism $`\sigma `$. When $`\sigma =1`$, the homogeneous coordinate ring $`B(X,)=B(X,,1)`$ is a standard construction and one has Serre’s fundamental theorem: If $``$ is ample then $`\mathrm{coh}(X)\mathrm{qgr}(B)`$. As was hinted in the last section, this does generalize to the noncommutative case, provided one changes the definition of ampleness. Define $``$ to be $`\sigma `$-ample  if, for all $`\mathrm{coh}(X)`$, one has $`\mathrm{H}^q(X,_n)=0`$ for all $`q>0`$ and all $`n0`$. The naïve generalization of Serre’s Theorem then holds.

###### Theorem 5

(Artin-Van den Bergh ) Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme with an automorphism $`\sigma `$ and let $``$ be a $`\sigma `$-ample invertible sheaf. Then $`B=B(X,,\sigma )`$ is a right noetherian cg ring such that $`\mathrm{qgr}(B)\mathrm{coh}(X)`$.

This begs the question of precisely which line bundles are $`\sigma `$-ample. A simple application of the Riemann-Roch Theorem shows that

if $`X`$ is a curve, then any ample invertible sheaf is $`\sigma `$-ample, (3.1)
and the converse holds for irreducible curves. This explains why Theorem 5 could be applied to the factor of the Sklyanin algebra in the last section.

For higher dimensional varieties the situation is more subtle and is described by the following result, for which we need some notation. Let $`X`$ be a projective scheme and write $`A_{\mathrm{Num}}^1(X)`$ for the set of Cartier divisors of $`X`$ modulo numerical equivalence. Let $`\sigma `$ be an automorphism of $`X`$ and let $`P_\sigma `$ denote its induced action on $`A_{\mathrm{Num}}^1(X)`$. Since $`A_{\mathrm{Num}}^1(X)`$ is a finitely generated free abelian group, $`P_\sigma `$ may be represented by a matrix and $`P_\sigma `$ is called quasi-unipotent if all the eigenvalues of this matrix are roots of unity.

###### Theorem 6

(Keeler ) If $`\sigma `$ be an automorphism of a projective scheme $`X`$ then:

1. $`X`$ has a $`\sigma `$-ample line bundle if and only if $`P_\sigma `$ is quasi-unipotent. If $`P_\sigma `$ is quasi-unipotent, then all ample line bundles are $`\sigma `$-ample.
2. In Theorem 5, $`B`$ is also left noetherian.

There are two comments that should be made about Theorem 6. First, it is standard that $`\mathrm{GKdim}B(X,)=1+dimX`$, whenever $``$ is ample. However, it can happen that $`\mathrm{GKdim}B(X,,\sigma )>1+dimX`$. Secondly, one can still construct $`B(X,,\sigma )`$ when $``$ is ample but $`P_\sigma `$ is not quasi-unipotent, but the resulting algebra is rather unpleasant. Indeed, possibly after replacing $``$ by some $`^n`$, $`B(X,,\sigma )`$ will be a non-noetherian algebra of exponential growth. See  for the details.

## 4. Noncommutative curves and surfaces

As we have seen, twisted homogeneous coordinate rings are fundamental to the study of noncommutative projective planes. However, a more natural starting place would be cg algebras of Gelfand-Kirillov dimension two since, as we suggested in the introduction, these should correspond to noncommutative curves. Their structure is particularly simple.

###### Theorem 7

 Let $`R`$ be a cg domain of GK-dimension $`2`$ generated in degree one. Then there exists an irreducible curve $`Y`$ with automorphism $`\sigma `$ and ample invertible sheaf $``$ such that $`R`$ embeds into the twisted homogeneous coordinate ring $`B(Y,,\sigma )`$ with finite index. Equivalently, $`R_n\mathrm{H}^0(Y,^\sigma \mathrm{}^{\sigma ^{n1}})`$ for $`n0.`$

By (3.1) we may apply Theorem 5 to obtain part (1) of the next result.

###### Corollary 8

Let $`R`$ be as in Theorem 7. Then:

1. $`R`$ is a noetherian domain with $`\mathrm{qgr}R\mathrm{coh}(Y)`$. In particular, $`\mathrm{qgr}R\mathrm{qgr}C`$ for the commutative ring $`C=B(Y,,\mathrm{Id})`$.
2. If $`|\sigma |<\mathrm{}`$ then $`R`$ is a finite module over its centre. If $`|\sigma |=\mathrm{}`$, then $`R`$ is a primitive ring with at most two height one prime ideals.

If $`R`$ is not generated in degree one, then the analogue of Theorem 7 is more subtle, since more complicated algebras appear. See  for the details. One should really make a further generalization by allowing $`R`$ to be prime rather than a domain and to allowing $`k`$ to be arbitrary (since this allows one to consider the projective analogues of classical orders over Dedekind domains). Theorem 7 and Corollary 8 do generalize appropriately but the results are more technical. The details can be found in .

Although these results are satisfying they are really only half of the story. As in the commutative case one would also like to define noncommutative curves abstractly and then show that they can indeed be described by graded rings of the appropriate form. Such a result appears in  but to state it we need a definition.

Let $`𝒞`$ be an $`\mathrm{Ext}`$-finite abelian category of finite homological dimension with derived category of bounded complexes $`D^b(𝒞)`$. Recall that a cohomological functor $`H:D^b(𝒞)\mathrm{mod}(k)`$ is of *finite type* if, for $`AD^b(𝒞)`$, only a finite number of the $`H(A[n])`$ are non-zero. The category $`𝒞`$ is *saturated* if every cohomological functor $`H:D^b(𝒞)\mathrm{mod}(k)`$ of finite type is of the form $`\mathrm{Hom}(A,)`$ (that is, $`H`$ is representable). If $`X`$ is a smooth projective scheme, then $`\mathrm{coh}(X)`$ is saturated , so it is not unreasonable to use this as part of the definition of a “noncommutative smooth curve.”

###### Theorem 9

(Reiten-Van den Bergh \[19, Theorem V.1.2\]) Assume that $`𝒞`$ is a connected saturated hereditary noetherian category. Then $`𝒞`$ has one of the following forms:

1. $`\mathrm{mod}(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is an indecomposable finite dimensional hereditary algebra.
2. $`\mathrm{coh}(𝒪)`$ where $`𝒪`$ is a sheaf of hereditary $`𝒪_X`$-orders over a smooth connected projective curve $`X`$.

It is easy to show that the abelian categories appearing in parts (1) and (2) of this theorem are of the form $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ for a graded ring $`R`$ with $`\mathrm{GKdim}R2`$, and so this result can be regarded as a partial converse to Theorem 7. A discussion of the saturation condition for noncommutative algebras may be found in .

If one accepts that noncommutative projective curves and planes have been classified, as we have argued, then the natural next step is to attempt to classify all noncommutative surfaces and this has been a major focus of recent research. This program is discussed in detail in \[25, Sections 8–13\] and so here we will be very brief. For the sake of argument we will assume that an (irreducible) noncommutative surface is $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ for a noetherian cg domain $`R`$ with $`\mathrm{GKdim}R=3`$, although the precise definition is as yet unclear. For example, Artin  demands that $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ should also possess a dualizing complex in the sense of Yekutieli . Nevertheless in attempting to classify surfaces it is natural to mimic the commutative proof:

* Classify noncommutative surfaces up to birational equivalence; equivalently classify the associated graded division rings of fractions for graded domains $`R`$ with $`\mathrm{GKdim}R=3`$. Artin \[1, Conjecture 4.1\] conjectures that these division rings are known.
* Prove a version of Zariski’s theorem that asserts that one can pass from any smooth surface to a birationally equivalent one by successive blowing up and down. Then find minimal models within each equivalence class.

Van den Bergh has created a noncommutative theory of blowing up and down  and used this to answer part (b) in a number of special cases. A key fact in his approach is that (after minor modifications) each known example of a noncommutative surface $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ contains an embedded commutative curve $`𝒞`$, just as $`\mathrm{qgr}(\mathrm{Skl}_3)\mathrm{coh}(E)=E`$ in Section 2. This is important since he needs to blow up points on that subcategory. In general, define a point in $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ to be $`\pi (M)`$ for a point module $`M\mathrm{gr}R`$. Given such a point $`p`$, write $`p=\pi (R/I)=/`$. Mimicking the classical situation we would like to write

$$=^2\mathrm{},$$
(4.1)
and then define the blow-up of $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ to be the category $`\mathrm{qgr}`$ of finitely generated graded $``$-modules modulo those that are right bounded. However, there are two problems. A minor one is that $``$ needs to be twisted to take into account the shift functor on $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$. The major one is that $`I`$ is only a one-sided ideal of $`R`$, and so there is no natural multiplication on $``$. To circumvent these problems, Van den Bergh  has to define $``$ in a more subtle category so that it is indeed an algebra. It is then quite hard to prove that $`\mathrm{qgr}`$ has the appropriate properties.

## 5. Hilbert schemes

Since point modules and twisted homogeneous coordinate rings have proved so useful, it is natural to ask how generally these techniques can be applied. In particular, one needs to understand when point modules, or other classes of modules, can be parametrized by a scheme. Indeed, even for point modules over surfaces the answer was unknown until recently and this is obviously rather important for the program outlined in the last section.

The best positive result is due to Artin, Small and Zhang , for which we need a definition. A $`k`$-algebra $`R`$ is called strongly noetherian if $`R_kC`$ is noetherian for all noetherian commutative $`k`$-algebras $`C`$.

###### Theorem 10

(Artin-Zhang \[9, Theorems E4.3 and E4.4\]) Assume that $`R`$ is a strongly noetherian, cg algebra and fix $`h(t)=h_it^ik[[t]].`$ Let $`𝒞`$ denote the set of cyclic $`R`$-modules $`M=R/I`$ with Hilbert series $`h_M(t)=dim_k(M_i)t^i`$ equal to $`h(t)`$. Then:

1. $`𝒞`$ is naturally parametrized by a (commutative) projective scheme.
2. There exists an integer $`d`$ such that, if $`M=R/I𝒞`$, then $`I`$ is generated in degrees $`d`$ as a right ideal of $`R`$.

In particular, if $`R`$ is a strongly noetherian cg algebra generated in degree one, then the set of point modules is naturally parametrized by a projective scheme $`𝒫`$. In this case one can further show that the shift functor $`MM_1[1]`$ induces an automorphism $`\sigma `$ of $`𝒫`$. Thus one can form the corresponding twisted homogeneous coordinate rings $`B=B(𝒫,,\sigma )`$ and for an appropriate line bundle $``$ there will exist a homomorphism $`\varphi :RB`$. Determining when $`\varphi `$ is surjective is probably quite subtle. This result cannot be used to shorten the arguments about the Sklyanin algebra $`\mathrm{Skl}_3`$ given in Section 2, since one needs to use $`B(E,,\sigma )`$ to prove that $`\mathrm{Skl}_3`$ is noetherian.

Although we have concentrated on point modules, more general classes of modules are also important. An example where line modules (modules $`M`$ with the Hilbert series of $`k[x,y]`$) are needed in a classification problem appears in .

How strong is the strongly noetherian hypothesis? Certainly most of the standard examples of noetherian cg algebras (including the Sklyanin algebras) are strongly noetherian (see \[3, Section 4\]) and so one might hope that this is always the case. But in fact, as Rogalski  has shown, cg noetherian algebras that are not strongly noetherian exist in profusion.

These examples are constructed as subrings of $`B=B(^n,𝒪_^n(1),\sigma )`$ for an appropriate automorphism $`\sigma `$. Given $`\sigma \mathrm{Aut}(^n)`$, pick $`c^n`$ and set $`𝒞=\{c_i=\sigma ^i(c):i\}`$. Then $`𝒞`$ is called critically dense if, for any infinite subset $`𝒟𝒞`$, the Zariski closure of $`𝒟`$ equals $`^n`$. This is not a particularly stringent condition, since it holds for a generic set of $`(\sigma ,c)\mathrm{Aut}(^n)\times ^n.`$ Corresponding to $`c`$ one has the point module $`M=B/VB`$ for some codimension one subspace $`V=V(c)B_1`$. Rogalski’s example is then simply $`S(\sigma ,c)=kVB`$, and it has remarkable properties:

###### Theorem 11

(Rogalski ) Keep the above notation. Assume that $`\sigma \mathrm{Aut}(^n)`$ and $`c^n`$ for $`n2`$ are such that $`𝒞`$ is critically dense. Then:

1. $`S=S(\sigma ,c)`$ is always noetherian but never strongly noetherian.
2. The point modules for $`S`$ are not naturally parametrized by a projective scheme.
3. $`S`$ satisfies the condition $`\chi _1`$ but not the condition $`\chi _2`$, as defined below. Moreover, $`\mathrm{qgr}S`$ has finite cohomological dimension.
4. The category $`\mathrm{qgr}S`$ is not Ext-finite; indeed if $`𝒮=\pi (S)\mathrm{qgr}S`$, then $`\mathrm{H}^1(𝒮)=\mathrm{Ext}_{\mathrm{qgr}S}^1(𝒮,𝒮)`$ is infinite dimensional.

Some comments about the theorem are in order. First, the point modules for $`S=S(\sigma ,c)`$ are actually parametrized by an “infinite blowup of $`^n`$” in the sense that they are parametrized by $`^n`$ except that for each $`p𝒞`$ one has a whole family $`𝒫_p`$ of point modules parametrized by $`^{n1}`$. In contrast, the points in $`\mathrm{qgr}S`$ are actually parametrized by $`^n`$ since, if $`M,N𝒫_p`$, then $`\pi (N)\pi (M)`$ in $`\mathrm{qgr}S`$.

The conditions $`\chi _i`$ in part (3) are defined as follows: A cg ring $`R`$ satisfies $`\chi _n`$ if, for each $`0jn`$ and each $`M\mathrm{gr}R`$, one has $`dim_k\mathrm{Ext}_R^j(k,M)<\mathrm{}.`$ The significance of $`\chi _1`$ is that, by \[8, Theorem 4.5\], one can reconstruct $`S=S(\sigma ,c)`$ from $`\mathrm{qgr}S`$ and so the peculiar properties of $`S`$ are reflected in $`\mathrm{qgr}S`$. In particular, part (4) implies that $`S`$ does not satisfy $`\chi _2`$. The significance of part (4) is that, for all the algebras $`R`$ considered until now, Serre’s finiteness theorem holds in the sense that $`\mathrm{H}^i()`$ is finite dimensional for all $`\mathrm{qgr}R`$ and all $`i`$.

Here is the simplest example of $`S(\sigma ,c)`$. Pick algebraically independent elements $`p,qk`$ and define $`\sigma \mathrm{Aut}(^2)`$ by $`\sigma (a:b:c)=(pa:qb:c)`$. If $`c=(1:1:1)^2`$ then $`𝒞`$ is critically dense and an argument like that of Exercise 4 shows that

$$B=k\{x,y,z\}/(zxpxz,zyqyz,yxpq^1xy)\mathrm{and}S(\sigma ,c)=kyx,zx.$$

This example was first considered by Jordan  who was able to parametrize the point modules for $`S(\sigma ,c)`$ but was unable to determine if the ring was noetherian.

Rogalski’s examples show that, even for surfaces, the picture is much more complicated than the discussion of the last section would suggest. Yet even these examples appear in a geometric framework; indeed they can be constructed as blow-ups of $`^n`$ if one uses the naïve approach of (4.1).

This works as follows. As before, assume that $`(\sigma ,c)\mathrm{Aut}(^n)\times ^n`$ for $`n2`$ is such that $`𝒞`$ is critically dense. In $`\mathrm{coh}(^n)`$ let $`_c`$ denote the ideal sheaf corresponding to the point $`c`$. If $``$ is a coherent module over $`𝒪=𝒪_^n`$, we form a bimodule $`_\sigma `$ such that as a left module, $`_\sigma `$ but the right action is twisted by $`\sigma `$: if $`s_\sigma (U)`$ and $`a𝒪_^n(\sigma U)`$, then $`sa_\sigma (U)`$ is defined by the formula $`sa=a^\sigma s`$. See \[7, pp.252-3\] for a more formal discussion. Now set $`𝒥=_c_𝒪𝒪(1)_\sigma 𝒪(1)_\sigma `$ and let $`=(\sigma ,c)=𝒪𝒥𝒥^2\mathrm{}`$, where $`𝒥^n`$ is the image of $`𝒥^n`$ in $`𝒪(1)_\sigma ^n𝒪(n)_{\sigma ^n}`$. This does not define a sheaf of rings in the usual sense since we are “playing a game of musical chairs with the open sets \[7, p.252\].” Nevertheless $``$ does have an natural graded algebra structure and so we can form $`\mathrm{qgr}`$ in the usual way. If $`\sigma =1`$ then $`\mathrm{qgr}`$ is simply $`coh(X)`$, where $`X`$ is the blow-up of $`^n`$ at $`c`$. In contrast, Keeler, Rogalski and the author have recently proved:

###### Theorem 12

 Pick $`(\sigma ,c)\mathrm{Aut}(^n)\times ^n`$ for $`n2`$ such that $`𝒞`$ is critically dense. Then $`=(\sigma ,c)`$ is noetherian. Moreover $`\mathrm{qgr}()\mathrm{qgr}S(\sigma ,c).`$

Thus, $`\mathrm{qgr}S(\sigma ,c)`$ is nothing more than the (noncommutative) blow-up of $`^n`$ at a point! The differences between this blow-up and Van den Bergh’s are illustrative. Van den Bergh had to work hard to ensure that the analogue of the exceptional divisor really looks like a curve. Indeed much of his formalism is required for just this reason. In contrast, in Theorem 12 the analogue of the exceptional divisor (which in this case equals $`/(_{c_1})`$) is actually a point. This neatly explains the structure of the points in $`\mathrm{qgr}S(\sigma ,c)`$; they are indeed parametrized by $`^n`$ although the point corresponding to $`c`$ (and hence the shifts of this point, which are nothing more than the points corresponding to the $`c_i`$) are distinguished.