text:
# The bosonic Kondo effect

## Abstract

The Kondo effect is associated with the formation of a many-body ground state that contains a quantum-mechanical entanglement between a (localized) fermion and the free fermions. We show that a bosonic version of the Kondo effect can occur in degenerate atomic Fermi gases near a Feshbach resonance. We also discuss how this bosonic Kondo effect can be observed experimentally.

preprint: ITP-UU-03/22;cond-mat/0304489

Introduction. — The Kondo effect is an intricate many-body phenomenon, that was originally put forward to explain the anomalous resistance minimum of metals contaminated with magnetic impurities. Today the Kondo effect is known to be also responsible for the existence of heavy-fermion materials Hewson , and is speculated to play an important role in the physics of high-temperature superconductors Cox . Moreover, a particularly clear manifestation of this effect occurs in semiconductor quantum dots Gordon ; Cronen ; Sasa . In all these examples the Kondo effect is associated with the formation of a many-body ground state that contains a quantum-mechanical entanglement between a (localized) fermion and the free fermions. Here we show that a new version of the Kondo effect can occur in the degenerate atomic Fermi gases that have recently been created Demarco ; Trusco ; Schre ; Modu ; Dieck . In contrast to the fermionic version, the many-body ground state of the gas shows now coherence between bosons, in fact bosonic molecules, and the free fermions in the gas. We explore the conditions under which this bosonic Kondo effect occurs and also discuss how it can be observed experimentally.

To be concrete we consider a degenerate Fermi gas of 6Li or 40K atoms near a so-called Feshbach resonance Dieck ; O'Ha ; Regal ; Bourdel . A Feshbach resonance in the scattering amplitude of two alkali atoms arises when the energy of the two colliding atoms is close to the energy of a diatomic molecular state that is coupled to the incoming atoms. Since the coupling is provided by the hyperfine interaction between the electron and nuclear spins of the atoms, the magnetic moment of the molecule is not equal to twice the atomic magnetic moment. As a result, the Zeeman interaction leads to an energy difference between the incoming atoms and the molecule, and therefore to an effective interaction strength between the atoms, that is tunable by means of an external magnetic field. The usefulness of these Feshbach resonances for degenerate atomic gases was first pointed out theoretically Stwa ; Tie  and then confirmed experimentally in a Bose-Einstein condensate of 23Na atoms Ino . Feshbach resonances appear to be particularly useful for ultracold Fermi gases because of the possibility to achieve a Bose-Einstein condensation of Cooper pairs at experimentally accessible temperatures in this way Stoof ; Com ; Pet ; Oh ; Hol ; Mil . For our purposes it is most important to realize that, due to the nearby location of a molecular state, the atomic gas can develop coherence between atoms and molecules. In a degenerate Bose gas the atom-molecule coherence has last year been demonstrated experimentally by Donley et al. Cla . It is the purpose of this Letter to point out that in the case of a degenerate Fermi gas it leads to Kondo physics.

Atom-molecule model. — In a dilute gas at low temperature only $`s`$-wave scattering is important. In a gas of fermionic particles, resonant interaction effects can therefore only be observed if we consider a mixture of two hyperfine states, denoted by $`|`$ and $`|`$. Close to resonance the gas is then described by an effective atom-molecule action Du . In this action atoms in different hyperfine states are coupled to dressed molecular bosons with twice the atomic mass $`m`$. In the absence of the coupling, the energy of the molecules relative to the two-atom continuum threshold is equal to the magnetic-field dependent detuning energy $`\delta (B)`$. The coupling terms describe processes in which two fermionic atoms form one bosonic molecule or the bosonic molecule breaks up into two fermionic atoms. The effective coupling strength $`g`$ corresponds physically to the bare atom-molecule coupling dressed with ladder diagrams to take into account all two-body processes. According to this renormalization procedure, the parameters $`g`$ and $`\delta (B)`$ of the effective atom-molecule theory can be expressed solely in terms of the experimentally known location of the Feshbach resonance $`B_0`$, its width $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ and the associated magnetic moment difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu `$. In detail we have $`g=\mathrm{}\sqrt{4\pi \mathrm{\Delta }B\mathrm{\Delta }\mu /m}`$ and $`\delta (B)=\mathrm{\Delta }\mu (BB_0)`$ Du .

We consider here only the case of an equal number of atoms in every hyperfine state and hence there is only one chemical $`\mu `$. To avoid Bose-Einstein condensation of the molecules we consider a positive detuning that is larger than twice the chemical potential $`\mu `$ of the atoms. In this case the molecule has a finite lifetime because it can decay into two free atoms. This finite lifetime is incorporated by the imaginary part of the molecular self-energy.

Spectral weight function. — Because we are mostly interested in the density of states of the molecules, we focus here on the spectral properties of the molecular Green’s function and in particular how they are affected by the presence of the Fermi sea of atoms. According to quantum many-body theory the molecular density of states is related to the spectral function $`\rho _\mathrm{m}(𝐪,\omega )`$, which is found from the retarded Green’s function or propagator by means of $`\rho _\mathrm{m}(𝐪,\omega )=\mathrm{Im}[G_\mathrm{m}^{(+)}(𝐪,\omega )]/\pi \mathrm{}`$ and obeys the sum rule $`_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}d(\mathrm{}\omega )\rho _\mathrm{m}(𝐪,\omega )=1`$. The exact molecular retarded propagator is

$$G_\mathrm{m}^{(+)}(𝐪,\omega )=\frac{\mathrm{}}{\mathrm{}\omega +2\mu \delta (B)ϵ_𝐪/2\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{m}^{(+)}(𝐪,\omega )},$$
(1)
where $`ϵ_𝐪=\mathrm{}^2𝐪^2/2m`$ and $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{m}^{(+)}(𝐪,\omega )`$ is the exact retarded selfenergy. The problem thus reduces to the evaluation of the selfenergy of the molecule. In the presence of a degenerate Fermi gas at temperatures far below the Fermi temperature, a zero-temperature approximation to the Fermi gas can be adopted. For the low-energy Kondo physics of interest to us the energy dependence of the coupling constant $`g`$ can be negleted as well. Moreover, we have checked that, within the weak-coupling limit of the Kondo effect that we only consider here, it is appropriate to consider the fermionic propagators as free and neglect mean-field effects due to interactions between the fermions in different spin states. In the ladder approximation the selfenergy is determined by a Feynman diagram that physically describes the process of a dressed molecule decaying into two atoms and subsequently recombining into a molecule again. Summing over all ladder diagrams ultimately yields

$`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{m}^{(+)}(𝐪,\omega )`$ $`=\eta i\sqrt{\mathrm{}\omega +2\mu {\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}}}+2\eta {\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2\mu }}{\pi }}+\eta {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{\pi \sqrt{2ϵ_𝐪}}}\mathrm{ln}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\omega ϵ_𝐪+2\sqrt{\mu ϵ_𝐪}}{\mathrm{}\omega ϵ_𝐪2\sqrt{\mu ϵ_𝐪}}}\right]+`$ (2)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{\pi }}\sqrt{\mathrm{}\omega +2\mu {\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}}}\left[\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\mathrm{}\omega +2\mu \frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}}(\sqrt{2\mu }+\sqrt{\frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}})}{\sqrt{\mathrm{}\omega +2\mu \frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}}+(\sqrt{2\mu }+\sqrt{\frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}})}}+\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\mathrm{}\omega +2\mu \frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}}(\sqrt{2\mu }\sqrt{\frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}})}{\sqrt{\mathrm{}\omega +2\mu \frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}}+(\sqrt{2\mu }\sqrt{\frac{ϵ_𝐪}{2}})}}\right],`$
where $`\eta =g^2m^{\frac{3}{2}}/4\pi \mathrm{}^3`$.

The bosonic spectral density for two different values of the detuning $`\delta (B)`$ is shown in the insets of Fig. 1. In the upper inset $`\delta (B)/\eta \sqrt{2\mu }=12/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`\sqrt{2\mu }/\eta =\sqrt{2}`$ so that the detuning is much larger than the Fermi energy, or more precisely $`\delta \eta \sqrt{2\mu }`$. In that case there is essentially no Kondo effect and the spectral density shows just a single broad peak centered around the detuning. This is the expected situation for a single molecular state with a finite lifetime. In the lower inset, where $`\delta (B)/\eta \sqrt{2\mu }=5/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`\sqrt{2\mu }/\eta =\sqrt{2}`$ the detuning is much closer to twice the Fermi energy and, apart from the broad feature around the detuning, the spectral density now also shows slightly above and below zero frequency two sharp peaks. This is the Kondo effect. Physically these two sharp peaks are a pure many-body effect due to a logarithmic singularity in the selfenergy that is induced by the Fermi surface. They signal the formation of a molecular resonance that contains a quantum-mechanical entanglement between the bosonic molecule and the free fermions. The situation is reminiscent of the Anderson model for a quantum dot, with a localized electron level located just below the Fermi energy of the leads. In that model the onsite Coulomb repulsion on the quantum dot removes the symmetry between scattering to and from the dot and leads to a logarithmic singularity in the selfenergy. In our case no Coulomb blockade is required and the formation of the Kondo resonance is the result of the fact that the molecule consists of two atoms. If a molecule breaks apart it adds two particles to the Fermi sea. As a result our Hamiltonian is not quadratic in creation and annihilation operators and contains much more physics than the Anderson model without onsite Coulomb interaction, i.e., the so called Fano-Anderson model which has no Kondo resonance. The role of the localized fermion is now played by the bosonic molecular state above the two-particle Fermi surface and the Kondo resonance appears slightly above twice the Fermi energy because otherwise the equilibrium situation would be a Bose-Einstein condensate of molecules.

In the weak-coupling limit the molecular state with zero momentum has exactly the same form as the wave-function underlying the Kondo effect in the Anderson model. In the latter case we have Mahan

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{K},\sigma }=\sqrt{Z}f_\sigma ^{}|\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{F}+{\displaystyle \underset{|𝐤|>k_\mathrm{F}}{}}u_𝐤c_{𝐤,\sigma }^{}|\mathrm{\Phi }_F+`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{|𝐤|<k_\mathrm{F}}{}}v_𝐤f_\sigma ^{}f_\sigma ^{}c_{𝐤,\sigma }|\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{F},`$ (3)
where $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{F}`$ is the filled Fermi sphere, $`k_\mathrm{F}`$ is the Fermi momentum and, $`c_{𝐤,\sigma }^{}`$ and $`f_\sigma ^{}`$ are the creation operators for the conduction electrons and the electrons on the dot, respectively. The only difference with the Anderson model is that in our situation fermions are created above and below the Fermi sea in pairs. Hence we have

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{K}=\sqrt{Z}b_\mathrm{𝟎}^{}|\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{F}+{\displaystyle \underset{|𝐤|>k_\mathrm{F}}{}}u_𝐤c_{𝐤,}^{}c_{𝐤,}^{}|\mathrm{\Phi }_F+`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{|𝐤|<k_\mathrm{F}}{}}v_𝐤b_\mathrm{𝟎}^{}b_\mathrm{𝟎}^{}c_{𝐤,}c_{𝐤,}|\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{F},`$ (4)
where $`b_\mathrm{𝟎}^{}`$ and $`c_{𝐤,\sigma }^{}`$ are our bosonic and fermionic creation operators. In the two-atom limit, where the Fermi sea $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{F}`$ becomes the vacuum state and no Kondo effect is present, the hole amplitude $`v_𝐤`$ vanishes and the molecular wave function only has contributions from the bare molecular state, with amplitude $`\sqrt{Z}`$, and from the two-atom continuum, with particle amplitudes $`u_𝐤`$. This wave function indeed describes exactly the dressed molecule of the Feshbach resonance. When the Fermi surface is present, pairs of fermionic atoms with opposite spin tunnel back and forth from the Fermi sea into the molecular state. The coherent addition of many of such events produces the Kondo effect. It is important to realize that because the molecules are bosons, the negative peak below the Fermi energy and the positive peak above the Fermi energy are physically both associated with the same molecular state. The presence of the negative peak just indicates that molecular states are populated even at zero temperature.

Kondo temperature. — The energy of the Kondo resonance is equal to $`k_\mathrm{B}T_\mathrm{K}`$, where $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ is the so-called Kondo temperature. This temperature plays an important role because in the Kondo regime it is possible to express all the temperature effects as universal functions of $`T/T_\mathrm{K}`$. Moreover, it is the temperature to which the Fermi gas needs to be cooled experimentally to observe the Kondo effect. In the weak-coupling limit it is given by

$$T_\mathrm{K}=\frac{8\mu }{e^2k_\mathrm{B}}e^{\frac{\pi }{2}\frac{\sqrt{2\mu }}{\eta }}e^{\frac{\pi }{2}\frac{\delta (B)}{\eta \sqrt{2\mu }}}.$$
(5)
This non-perturbative result is, apart from the prefactor, identical to the Kondo temperature of the Anderson model in the weak coupling limit that is given by $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mu /k_\mathrm{B})e^{\delta /\mathrm{g}^2\mathrm{N}(0)}`$, where $`\delta `$ is the energy difference between the state on the quantum dot and the Fermi level, $`\mathrm{g}`$ is the hopping parameter between the conduction electrons and the dot, and $`N(0)`$ is the density of states at the Fermi level.

The Kondo temperature makes it possible to classify two different limits. When $`k_\mathrm{B}T_\mathrm{K}2\mu `$ the system is in the weak-coupling regime. Otherwise we are dealing with a strong-coupling situation. The dashed line in the phase diagram shown in Fig. 1 marks this separation in the parameter space. The theory presented here allows for a full description of the weak-coupling limit, while for a strong-coupling treatment an improved approximation in the calculation of the molecular selfenergy is needed. In particular, it will be necessary to consider the resonant interactions between the fermions, which lead to the creation of particle-hole pairs in the Fermi sea.

Experimental signature. — In order to observe the Kondo effect, its associated resonance must contain sufficient spectral weight. Using that the integrated weight of the Kondo peaks in the spectral function is proportional to $`k_\mathrm{B}T_\mathrm{K}/\eta \sqrt{2\mu }`$, the solid line in Fig. 1 gives a quantitative estimate of the lower limit for the visibility of the effect. Using typical parameters of 6Li and 40K, we have checked that the Kondo regime is indeed experimentally accessible. The direct experimental measurement of this Kondo effect can be accomplished by looking at the enhancement in the density of molecules even for relatively large detuning. For example, the recently developed method for sensitive detection of molecules in cold atomic gases could be used for this purpose Chi .

The influence of the Kondo effect on the total number of molecules in the gas can be easily calculated. At temperatures $`T\mu /k_\mathrm{B}`$ it is consistent to calculate the total density of the bosonic molecules in the gas by multiplying the zero-temperature molecular spectral function with the Bose distribution function $`N(x)=[e^x1]^1`$ and integrating over all momenta and frequencies, i.e.,

$$n_\mathrm{B}(T)=_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}d(\mathrm{}\omega )\frac{\mathrm{d}𝐪}{(2\pi )^3}\rho _\mathrm{m}(𝐪,\omega )N\left(\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{k_\mathrm{B}T}\right).$$
(6)
At zero temperature and without many-body effects, the number of molecules is exactly zero because the detuning is larger than the Fermi energy. When the Kondo resonance is included, even at zero temperature a nonzero number of molecules is obtained. The inset of Fig. 2 shows the molecular fraction in the gas at zero temperature for different values of the detuning. The thermal effects on the number of molecules are also shown in Fig. 2. Notice the enormous enhancement in the number of molecules due to the Kondo effect. It is also interesting to observe that without the many-body effects the maximum number of molecules goes to zero as $`T^3`$, whereas with the Kondo effect it saturates to a nonzero constant only as $`T^2`$. Since our calculations are valid within the weak-coupling limit, results are shown only for this regime.

It is important to realize that the Kondo temperature found above is always larger than the critical temperature of the Bose-Einstein condensation of Cooper pairs and, therefore, more easy to obtain experimentally. In the weak-coupling limit this critical temperature is known in terms of the s-wave scattering length $`a(\mathrm{B})`$ Stoof  as $`T_{\mathrm{BCS}}=\left(8e^{\gamma 2}\mu /\pi k_\mathrm{B}\right)e^{\frac{\pi }{2k_Fa(B)}}`$, where $`\gamma `$ is Euler’s constant. Using the fact that the resonant part of this scattering length is given by $`g^2m/4\pi \mathrm{}^2\delta (B)`$, allows us to express the Kondo temperature in terms of the BCS critical temperature as $`T_\mathrm{K}=\pi e^{\frac{\pi }{2}\frac{\sqrt{2\mu }}{\eta }\gamma }T_{\mathrm{BCS}}`$, which is indeed always larger than the BCS critical temperature. Nevertheless, it must pointed out that since only the parameters of the resonant part of the interaction play a role for the Kondo effect, $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ is physically quite distinct from $`T_{\mathrm{BCS}}`$. In particular, we can have the situation of a positive total scattering length with no Cooper pairing at any temperature, but with the Kondo effect still present.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank M. Baranov, M. Cazalilla, G. ’t Hooft, R. Hulet, B. Farid and S. Stringari for helpful remarks. This work is supported by the Stichting voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek der Materie (FOM) and the Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO).


format: text

text:
# A generalization of Levinger’s theorem to positive kernel operators

## 1. Introduction

In general there is no relation between the spectral radius of a sum of operators on a Banach space and the sum of the corresponding spectral radii. So, under appropriate assumptions, any inequality between these two numbers might be interesting. In  we proved some inequalities for the spectral radius of a sum of positive compact kernel operators on a Banach function space. We thus extended the corresponding matrix results proved in . In this article we show their further generalizations by removing several assumptions from the results in . As an application of our main result we obtain an extension of Levinger’s theorem to positive kernel operators on $`L^2`$-spaces. This beautiful result, stated without proof in , asserts that for a non-negative (square) matrix $`A`$ the function

$$\varphi (t)=r(tA+(1t)A^T)$$

is non-decreasing on $`[0,\frac{1}{2}]`$ and is non-increasing on $`[\frac{1}{2},1]`$. In particular, for all $`t[0,1]`$, the following inequality holds

$$r(tA+(1t)A^T)r(A).$$

This theorem was generalized in Bapat , where an elementary proof is given. Recently, Alpin and Kolotilina \[2, Theorem 7\] further extended Bapat’s result. Our Theorem 8 includes their extension as a special case. Finally, Theorem 10 proves an inequality that seems to be new even in the finite-dimensional case. For the theory of Banach function spaces and Banach lattices we refer the reader to the books ,  and . Here we shall recall some relevant facts.

Let $`\mu `$ be a $`\sigma `$-finite positive measure on a $`\sigma `$-algebra $``$ of subsets of a non-void set $`X`$. Let $`M(X,\mu )`$ be the vector space of all equivalence classes of (almost everywhere equal) complex measurable functions on $`X`$. A Banach space $`LM(X,\mu )`$ is called a Banach function space if $`fL`$, $`gM(X,\mu )`$, and $`|g||f|`$ imply that $`gL`$ and $`gf`$. Throughout the paper, it is assumed that the dimension of $`L`$ is greater than one and that $`X`$ is the carrier of $`L`$, that is, there is no subset $`Y`$ of $`X`$ of strictly positive measure with the property that $`f=0`$ a.e. on $`Y`$ for all $`fL`$ (see ). The cone of positive elements in $`L`$ is denoted by $`L_+`$. A non-negative function $`fL_+`$ is said to be strictly positive if $`f(x)>0`$ for almost all $`xX`$. The norm of $`L`$ is said to be a weakly Fatou norm if there exists a finite constant $`k1`$ such that $`0f_\tau f`$ in $`L`$ implies that $`fksup_\tau f_\tau `$.

By $`L^{}`$ we denote the associate space (also called the Köthe dual) of all $`gM(X,\mu )`$ such that

$$\phi _g(f)=_Xfg𝑑\mu $$

defines a bounded linear functional $`\phi _g`$ on $`L`$. The space $`L^{}`$ is also a Banach function space with respect to the associate norm $`^{}`$ defined by

$$g^{}=\phi _g=sup\left\{_X\right|fg|d\mu :fL,f1\},$$

and it may be considered as a closed subspace of the dual Banach lattice $`L^{}`$. In view of the definition of $`^{}`$ the following generalized Hölder’s inequality holds

$$_X|fg|𝑑\mu fg^{}$$

for $`fL`$ and $`gL^{}`$. Note that the set $`X`$ is also the carrier of the associate space $`L^{}`$, and $`L^{}`$ separates points of $`L`$ (see \[13, Theorem 112.1\]). For any non-negative functions $`f`$ and $`g`$ on $`X`$ we introduce the following notation

$$f,g=_Xfg𝑑\mu .$$

For brevity, the integration over the whole set $`X`$ will be denoted by $`𝑑\mu (x)`$ or even $`𝑑x`$.

By an operator on a Banach function space $`L`$ we always mean a linear operator on $`L`$. The spectrum and the spectral radius of a bounded operator $`T`$ on $`L`$ are denoted by $`\sigma (T)`$ and $`r(T)`$, respectively. An operator $`T`$ on $`L`$ is said to be positive if $`TfL_+`$ for all $`fL_+`$. Given operators $`S`$ and $`T`$ on $`L`$, we write $`ST`$ if the operator $`ST`$ is positive. It should be recalled that a positive operator $`T`$ on $`L`$ is automatically bounded and that $`r(T)`$ belongs to the spectrum of $`T`$. An operator $`K`$ on $`L`$ is called a kernel operator if there exists a $`\mu \times \mu `$-measurable function $`k(x,y)`$ on $`X\times X`$ such that, for all $`fL`$ and for almost all $`xX`$,

$$_X|k(x,y)f(y)|𝑑\mu (y)<\mathrm{}\mathrm{and}(Kf)(x)=_Xk(x,y)f(y)𝑑\mu (y).$$

One can check that a kernel operator $`K`$ is positive iff its kernel $`k`$ is non-negative almost everywhere. We say that $`K`$ is reducible if there exists a set $`A`$ such that $`\mu (A)>0`$, $`\mu (A^c)>0`$ and $`k=0`$ a.e. on $`A\times A^c`$. Otherwise, if there is no such set, $`K`$ is said to be irreducible.

Let $`K`$ be a positive kernel operator on $`L`$ with kernel $`k`$. It is easily seen that $`L^{}`$ is invariant under the adjoint operator $`K^{}`$. We denote by $`K^{}`$ the restriction of $`K^{}`$ to $`L^{}`$. One can show \[13, Section 97\] that $`K^{}`$ is also a positive kernel operator with the kernel $`k^{}(x,y)=k(y,x)`$ ($`x,yX`$). The following important observation was already stated in  for general Banach lattices.

###### Proposition 1.

Let $`L`$ be a Banach function space with a weakly Fatou norm. If $`K`$ is a kernel operator on $`L`$, then $`r(K^{})=r(K)`$.

###### Proof.

It follows from \[13, Theorem 107.7\] (see also the equality (2) on p. 393 of ) that the space $`L`$ can be (not necessarily isometrically) embedded into $`(L^{})^{}`$ as a Banach space. Then we have $`r(K)r(K^{})r((K^{})^{})r(K)`$, and so $`r(K^{})=r(K)`$. ∎

The following important result is contained in \[9, Theorems 4.13 and 3.14\].

###### Theorem 2.

Let $`K`$ be an irreducible positive kernel operator on a Banach function space $`L`$ such that $`r(K)`$ is a pole of the resolvent $`(\lambda K)^1`$. Then $`r(K)>0`$, $`r(K)`$ is an eigenvalue of $`K`$ of algebraic multiplicity one, and the corresponding eigenspace is spanned by a strictly positive function.

It is well-known that the assumption that $`r(K)`$ is a pole of the resolvent $`(\lambda K)^1`$ is satisfied if some power of $`K`$ is a compact operator. In this case Theorem 2 is known as the theorem of Jentzsch and Perron (see \[9, Theorem 5.2\]).

We will also need the following simple result.

###### Proposition 3.

Assume that a positive operator $`T`$ on a Banach function space $`L`$ is the norm limit of a sequence $`\{T_n\}_{n\text{I}\text{N}}`$ of positive operators on $`L`$ such that $`T_1T_2\mathrm{}T`$. Then

$$r(T)=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}r(T_n).$$

###### Proof.

The sequence $`\{r(T_n)\}_{n\text{I}\text{N}}`$ is non-increasing and bounded below by $`r(T)`$, so that $`r(T)lim_n\mathrm{}r(T_n)`$. Since the spectral radius is upper semicontinuous, the equality holds in this inequality. ∎

## 2. General Banach function spaces

Throughout this section, let $`L`$ be a Banach function space with a weakly Fatou norm. For brevity, we denote by $`L_{++}^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )`$ the set of all strictly positive functions $`fL^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )_+`$ satisfying $`1/fL^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )_+`$. For $`dL^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )_+`$ the multiplication operator $`D`$ is a positive operator on $`L`$ defined by $`Df=df`$. Clearly, $`D`$ is invertible iff $`dL_{++}^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )`$.

The following lemma that extends \[5, Lemma 2.2\] is needed in the proof of Theorem 8.

###### Lemma 4.

Let $`K`$ be a positive kernel operator on $`L`$ with $`r(K)=1`$. Let $`d`$ and $`e`$ be strictly positive functions in $`L_{++}^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )`$, and let $`D`$ and $`E`$ be the corresponding multiplication operators on $`L`$. Let $`fL_+`$ and $`gL_+^{}`$ be strictly positive functions such that $`Kf`$ is a strictly positive function satisfying

$$\frac{Kf}{f}=\frac{K^{}g}{g}\mathrm{𝑎𝑛𝑑}Kf,g=1.$$

Then

(1)
$$DKEu,v\mathrm{exp}\left(_XKfg\mathrm{log}(de)𝑑\mu \right)$$

for any $`uL_+`$ and for any nonnegative measurable function $`v`$ on $`X`$ satisfying $`uv=fg`$. If, in addition, $`Ku,v<\mathrm{}`$, then

(2)
$$Ku,v\mathrm{exp}\left(_XKfg\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu \right)1.$$

###### Proof.

Since $`Kf,g=1`$, the integral in (1) exists, while it will be seen below that the integral in (2) exists provided $`Ku,v<\mathrm{}`$. In fact, there is no loss of generality in assuming that $`DKEu,v<\mathrm{}`$, and consequently, $`Ku,v<\mathrm{}`$, since it holds

$$Ku,v1/d_{\mathrm{}}1/e_{\mathrm{}}DKEu,v.$$

We will first show the right-hand inequality in (2), that is

(3)
$$_XKfg\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu 0.$$

We consider the special case when $`vL_+^{}`$. For almost all $`xX`$ we define the probability measure on $``$ by

$$\nu _x(A)=\frac{1}{(Kf)(x)}_Ak(x,y)f(y)𝑑y,$$

where $`k`$ is the kernel of $`K`$. Using the estimate $`|\mathrm{log}(t)|t+\frac{1}{t}`$ ($`t>0`$) we obtain that

(4)
$$Kfg\left|\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{u}{f}\right)\right|𝑑\mu Kfg\left(\frac{u}{f}+\frac{f}{u}\right)𝑑\mu =u,K^{}g+Kf,v<\mathrm{}.$$

Now, we have

$$(Kf)(y)g(y)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{u(y)}{f(y)}\right)𝑑y=f(y)(K^{}g)(y)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{u(y)}{f(y)}\right)𝑑y=$$

$$=f(y)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{u(y)}{f(y)}\right)\left(k(x,y)g(x)𝑑x\right)𝑑y.$$

Because of (4) we can use Fubini’s theorem to get

$$(Kf)(y)g(y)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{u(y)}{f(y)}\right)𝑑y=g(x)\left(k(x,y)f(y)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{u(y)}{f(y)}\right)𝑑y\right)𝑑x=$$

$$=(Kf)(x)g(x)\left(\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{u(y)}{f(y)}\right)𝑑\nu _x(y)\right)𝑑x.$$

Then, an application of Jensen’s inequality gives the inequality

$$(Kf)(y)g(y)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{u(y)}{f(y)}\right)𝑑y(Kf)(x)g(x)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{u(y)}{f(y)}𝑑\nu _x(y)\right)𝑑x=$$

$$=(Kf)(x)g(x)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{(Ku)(x)}{(Kf)(x)}\right)𝑑x,$$

from which (3) follows. To prove the general case, define sequences $`\{u_n\}_{n\text{I}\text{N}}`$ and $`\{v_n\}_{n\text{I}\text{N}}`$ of strictly positive functions by $`u_n=u+f/n`$ and $`v_n=fg/u_n`$. Since $`v_nng`$, we have $`v_nL_+^{}`$, and so

(5)
$$_XKfg\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{Ku_n}{u_n}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu 0,$$

by the special case of (3). Since

$$\frac{Ku_n}{u_n}\frac{Kf}{f}=\frac{u}{u_n}\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{Kf}{f}\right),$$

it holds that

$$\{xX:\frac{(Ku_n)(x)}{u_n(x)}\frac{(Kf)(x)}{f(x)}\}=\{xX:\frac{(Ku)(x)}{u(x)}\frac{(Kf)(x)}{f(x)}\},$$

and the sequence $`\left\{\frac{Ku_n}{u_n}\right\}_{n\text{I}\text{N}}`$ is non-decreasing on this set. Then, by the Monotone Convergence Theorem,

(6)
$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}_XKfg\mathrm{log}^+\left(\frac{Ku_n}{u_n}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu =_XKfg\mathrm{log}^+\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu ,$$

where the limit is finite. Namely, using the inequality $`\mathrm{log}^+tt`$ ($`t>0`$) we obtain that

$$0_XKfg\mathrm{log}^+\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu _XKfg\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}𝑑\mu =Ku,v<\mathrm{}.$$

This shows that the integral in (3) is defined (and its value belongs to $`[\mathrm{},\mathrm{})`$). Similarly, we obtain that

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}_XKfg\mathrm{log}^{}\left(\frac{Ku_n}{u_n}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu =_XKfg\mathrm{log}^{}\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu ,$$

which together with (6) gives that

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}_XKfg\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{Ku_n}{u_n}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu =_XKfg\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu .$$

In view of (5) this completes the proof of (3).

We now define the probability measure $`\lambda `$ on $``$ by

$$\lambda (A)=_AKfg𝑑\mu .$$

An application of Jensen’s inequality gives that

$$\mathrm{log}\left(Ku,v\right)=\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}𝑑\lambda \right)$$

$$\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\lambda =Kfg\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{Ku}{u}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu ,$$

so that the left-hand inequality holds in (2). Similarly, we have

$$\mathrm{log}\left(DKEu,v\right)=\mathrm{log}\left(𝑑e\frac{K(Eu)}{Eu}\frac{f}{Kf}𝑑\lambda \right)$$

$$\mathrm{log}\left(de\frac{K(Eu)}{Eu}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\lambda =Kfg\mathrm{log}(de)𝑑\mu +Kfg\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{K(Eu)}{Eu}\frac{f}{Kf}\right)𝑑\mu .$$

Since the last integral is non-negative by (3), this gives (1). ∎

The following result extends Theorems 2.4 and 2.6 in . Its finite-dimensional version was shown in \[7, Theorem 2.3\].

###### Theorem 5.

Let $`K_1`$, $`K_2`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`K_n`$ be positive kernel operators on $`L`$. Assume that $`f_1`$, $`f_2`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`f_nL_+`$ and $`g_1`$, $`g_2`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`g_nL_+^{}`$ are strictly positive functions satisfying

$$K_if_i=r(K_i)f_i,K_i^{}g_i=r(K_i)g_i$$

and be normalized so that

$$f_ig_i=h(i=1,2,\mathrm{},n)\mathrm{and}_Xh𝑑\mu =1.$$

Furthermore, let $`d_1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`d_n`$ and $`e_1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`e_n`$ be in $`L^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )_+`$, and let $`D_1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`D_n`$ and $`E_1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`E_n`$ be the corresponding multiplication operators on $`L`$. Then

(7)
$$r(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}D_iK_iE_i)\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}r(K_i)\mathrm{exp}\left(_Xh\mathrm{log}(d_ie_i)𝑑\mu \right)$$

adopting the convention $`\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{})=0`$. In particular, for all positive numbers $`t_1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`t_n`$,

(8)
$$r(t_1K_1+\mathrm{}+t_nK_n)t_1r(K_1)+\mathrm{}+t_nr(K_n).$$

###### Proof.

If, for some $`i`$, $`d_ie_i=0`$ on the set of positive measure, then $`_Xh\mathrm{log}(d_ie_i)𝑑\mu =\mathrm{}`$, which together with the monotonicity of the spectral radius convinces us that there is no loss of generality in assuming that $`\{d_i\}_{i=1}^n`$ and $`\{e_i\}_{i=1}^n`$ are strictly positive functions. Also, we may assume that $`r(K_i)>0`$ for all $`i`$.

Consider first the case when $`\{d_i\}_{i=1}^n`$ and $`\{e_i\}_{i=1}^n`$ are in $`L_{++}^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )`$. Denote $`K=D_1K_1E_1+\mathrm{}+D_nK_nE_n`$, pick $`\lambda >r(K)`$, and set

$$u=(\lambda K)^1f_1=\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\lambda ^{j1}K^jf_1.$$

Then $`u`$ is a strictly positive function in $`L`$ satisfying $`Ku\lambda u`$. Denoting $`v=h/u`$ we apply (1) of Lemma 2 for the operator $`K_i/r(K_i)`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, to get

$$D_iK_iE_iu,vr(K_i)\mathrm{exp}\left(_Xh\mathrm{log}(d_ie_i)𝑑\mu \right).$$

Summing over $`i`$ gives the inequality

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}r(K_i)\mathrm{exp}\left(_Xh\mathrm{log}(d_ie_i)𝑑\mu \right)$$

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}D_iK_iE_iu,v=Ku,v\lambda u,v=\lambda .$$

Since this is true for any $`\lambda >r(K)`$, the inequality (7) follows.

To remove the assumptions on $`\{d_i\}_{i=1}^n`$ and $`\{e_i\}_{i=1}^n`$, define $`d_i^{(m)}=\mathrm{max}\{d_i,\frac{1}{m}\}`$ and $`e_i^{(m)}=\mathrm{max}\{e_i,\frac{1}{m}\}`$ ($`m\text{I}\text{N}`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$), and let $`D_i^{(m)}`$ and $`E_i^{(m)}`$ be the corresponding multiplication operators on $`L`$. Then, by the above,

$$r(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}D_i^{(m)}K_iE_i^{(m)})\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}r(K_i)\mathrm{exp}\left(_Xh\mathrm{log}(d_i^{(m)}e_i^{(m)})𝑑\mu \right).$$

When $`m`$ tends to infinity, the left-hand side approaches $`r(K)`$ by Proposition 3, while

$$\underset{m\mathrm{}}{lim}_Xh\mathrm{log}(d_i^{(m)}e_i^{(m)})𝑑\mu =_Xh\mathrm{log}(d_ie_i)𝑑\mu $$

by the Monotone Convergence Theorem (for decreasing sequences). This yields the inequality (7), and the proof is finished. ∎

A glance at the proof above shows that Theorem 8 also holds in the case when some operators of $`K_1`$, $`K_2`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`K_n`$ are positive multiples of the identity operator, or in other words, every $`K_i`$ is a sum of a positive kernel operator and a non-negative multiple of the identity.

Given a positive operator $`T`$ on $`L`$, let $`𝒫_+(T)`$ denote the set of all functions $`p(z)=_{k=0}^{\mathrm{}}a_kz^k`$ such that $`a_k0`$ for all $`k`$ and the convergence radius of $`p`$ is greater than $`r(T)`$. Using the spectral mapping theorem one can show easily that $`r(p(T))=p(r(T))`$ for all $`p𝒫_+(T)`$.

###### Theorem 6.

Under the assumptions of Theorem 8, let $`p_i𝒫_+(T_i)`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. Then

$$r(p_1(K_1)+\mathrm{}+p_n(K_n))p_1(r(K_1))+\mathrm{}+p_n(r(K_n)).$$

In particular, if $`s_i>r(K_i)`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, then

$$r((s_1K_1)^1+\mathrm{}+(s_nK_n)^1)\frac{1}{s_1r(K_1)}+\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{s_nr(K_n)}.$$

###### Proof.

We first claim that every $`p_i(K_i)`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, is the sum of a kernel operator and a non-negative multiple of the identity operator $`I`$. If $`p_i(z)=_{k=0}^{\mathrm{}}a_kz^k`$ with $`a_k0`$, then $`p_i(K_i)a_0I`$ is the limit (in norm and in order) of an increasing sequence of kernel operators. It follows that it is a kernel operator (see e.g. \[13, Theorem 94.5\]). This proves our claim. Now, according to the remark following the proof of Theorem 8 we may apply the inequality (8) of Theorem 8 for operators $`p_1(K_1)`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`p_n(K_n)`$ to get

$$r(p_1(K_1)+\mathrm{}+p_n(K_n))r(p_1(K_1))+\mathrm{}+r(p_n(K_n))=p_1(r(K_1))+\mathrm{}+p_n(r(K_n)).$$

As an extension of Theorem 4.2 in  we now show that the inequality (7) of Theorem 8 for $`n=1`$ can be improved if the operator is of the form $`(sK)^1`$, where $`s>r(K)`$.

###### Theorem 7.

Let $`K`$ be a positive operator on $`L`$ with $`r(K)>0`$ that is a sum of a positive kernel operator and a non-negative multiple of the identity. Assume that $`fL_+`$ and $`gL_+^{}`$ are strictly positive functions satisfying $`Kf=r(K)f`$, $`K^{}g=r(K)g`$ and $`f,g=1`$. Let $`d`$ be in $`L^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )_+`$, and let $`D`$ be the corresponding multiplication operator on $`L`$. Then

(9)
$$r(DK)r(K)\mathrm{exp}\left(_Xfg\mathrm{log}(d)𝑑\mu \right).$$

Furthermore, for $`s>r(K)`$ it holds

(10)
$$r(D(sK)^1)r((sK)^1)\left(_Xfg𝑑d\mu \right).$$

###### Proof.

The inequality (9) is a special case of (7). Denote $`T=(sK)^1`$ and pick $`\lambda >r(DT)`$. Then $`w=(\lambda DT)^1f`$ is a strictly positive function in $`L`$ satisfying $`DTw\lambda w`$. Set $`u=Tw`$ and $`v=fg/u`$. If we apply (2) of Lemma 2 for the operator $`K/r(K)`$, we obtain that $`Ku,vr(K)`$, and so

$$T^1u,v=(sK)u,vsr(K)=\frac{1}{r(T)}.$$

On the other hand, since $`\lambda T^1u=\lambda wDTw=du`$, we have $`\lambda T^1u,vdu,v`$. It follows that $`\lambda r(T)du,v`$ which implies (10). ∎

Observe that (10) is really a sharpening of (9) for the special class of positive operators, since

$$\mathrm{exp}\left(_Xfg\mathrm{log}(d)𝑑\mu \right)_Xfg𝑑d\mu $$

by Jensen’s inequality. Also, simple examples show that in (9) $`\mathrm{exp}\left(_Xfg\mathrm{log}(d)𝑑\mu \right)`$ can not be replaced by $`_Xfg𝑑d\mu `$. (Consider $`K=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right]`$ on $`L=\text{C}|\text{ }|\text{ }^2`$.)

## 3. $`L^2`$-spaces

In  we proved an extension of Levinger’s inequality to positive kernel operators on $`L^2`$-spaces. Unfortunately, we were able to show it only under some assumptions on the kernel of the operator. We now show that these assumptions are redundant, as we expected. In the finite-dimensional case this result was proved in \[2, Theorem 7\].

###### Theorem 8.

Let $`K`$ be a positive kernel operator on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$ such that $`r(K)`$ is an isolated point of $`\sigma (K)`$ and the corresponding Riesz idempotent has finite rank. Let $`dL_{++}^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )`$ be a strictly positive function, and let $`D`$ be the corresponding multiplication operator on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$. Then, for any $`t[0,1]`$,

(11)
$$r(tDKD^1+(1t)K^{})r(K).$$

If, in addition, the operator $`K`$ is compact and if $`\varphi :[0,1][0,\mathrm{})`$ is defined by

$$\varphi (t)=r(tDKD^1+(1t)K^{}),$$

then $`\varphi `$ is non-decreasing on $`[0,\frac{1}{2}]`$ and is non-increasing on $`[\frac{1}{2},1]`$.

###### Proof.

Consider first the case when $`D=I`$, the identity on $`L`$. If $`K`$ is irreducible, then by Theorem 2 there exist strictly positive functions $`f,gL^2(X,\mu )`$ satisfying $`Kf=r(K)f`$, $`K^{}g=r(K)g`$ and $`f,g=1`$, and the inequality (11) follows from Theorem 8 with $`K_1=K`$, $`K_2=K^{}`$, $`f_1=g_2=f`$ and $`g_1=f_2=g`$. For general $`K`$ pick any strictly positive function $`uL^2(X,\mu )`$. (Such functions exist because the measure $`\mu `$ is $`\sigma `$-finite.) Denote by $`K_0`$ an irreducible kernel operator with strictly positive kernel $`u(x)u(y)`$ ($`x,yX`$). For each $`m\text{I}\text{N}`$ define an irreducible positive kernel operator on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$ by $`K_m=K+\frac{1}{m}K_0`$. Then $`r(K_m)r(K)`$, and the left (and, similarly, the right) essential spectra of $`K_m`$ and $`K`$ coincide. Now, Proposition XI.6.9 and Theorem XI.6.8 of  imply that $`r(K_m)`$ is an isolated point of $`\sigma (K_m)`$ and the corresponding Riesz idempotent has finite rank. By the first part of the proof, we then have

$$r(tK+(1t)K^{}+\frac{1}{m}K_0)=r(t(K+\frac{1}{m}K_0)+(1t)(K+\frac{1}{m}K_0)^{})r(K+\frac{1}{m}K_0).$$

Letting $`m\mathrm{}`$ we get $`\varphi (t)r(K)`$ by Proposition 3, which proves (11) in the case $`D=I`$. Since $`\varphi (t)=\varphi (1t)`$, it remains to show in this special case that $`\varphi `$ is non-decreasing on $`[0,\frac{1}{2}]`$ provided $`K`$ is compact. Let $`0t<s\frac{1}{2}`$. Then, by (11),

$$\varphi (t)r(u(tK+(1t)K^{})+(1u)(tK+(1t)K^{})^{})=r((2utut+1)K+(t+u2ut)K^{})$$

for all $`u[0,1]`$. Put $`u=\frac{1st}{12t}`$ to obtain that $`\varphi (t)r(sK+(1s)K^{})=\varphi (s)`$.

The general case follows from the special one. To show this, let $`E`$ be the multiplication operator on $`L`$ the multiplier of which is $`\sqrt{d}`$, so that $`E^2=D`$. Introducing the notation

$$\varphi _{K,D}(t)=r(tDKD^1+(1t)K^{})$$

we have, for all $`t[0,1]`$,

$$\varphi _{K,D}(t)=r(E(tEKE^1+(1t)E^1K^{}E)E^1)=$$

$$=r(tEKE^1+(1t)(EKE^1)^{})=\varphi _{EKE^1,I}(t).$$

Since $`\varphi _{EKE^1,I}(t)r(EKE^1)=r(K)`$ by the special case, (11) follows. If, in addition, $`K`$ is compact, then $`\varphi _{EKE^1,I}`$ is non-decreasing on $`[0,\frac{1}{2}]`$ and is non-increasing on $`[\frac{1}{2},1]`$ by the special case, and so the same is also true for $`\varphi _{K,D}`$. This completes the proof. ∎

We do not know whether Theorem 8 is valid for every positive operator $`K`$ on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$. However, we shall show below that for $`t=1/2`$ the inequality (11) holds for all positive operators on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$. To do this, we recall that the numerical radius $`w(A)`$ of a bounded operator $`A`$ on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$ is defined by

$$w(A)=sup\{|Af,f|:fL^2(X,\mu ),f_2=1\}.$$

If, in addition, $`A`$ is positive, then we have

$$w(A)=sup\{Af,f:fL^2(X,\mu )_+,f_2=1\}.$$

Indeed, this follows from the estimate

$$|Af,f|_X|Af||f|𝑑\mu A|f|,|f|$$

that holds for any $`fL^2(X,\mu )`$. It is well-known  that

$$r(A)w(A)A$$

for all bounded operators $`A`$ on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$.

###### Theorem 9.

Let $`A`$ be a positive operator on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$. Then, for any $`t[0,1]`$,

(12)
$$AtA+(1t)A^{}w(tA+(1t)A^{})=w(A)r(A)$$

and

(13)
$$(tA+(1t)A^{})^2w((tA+(1t)A^{})^2)w(A^2)(r(A))^2.$$

Furthermore, if $`d`$ is in $`L_{++}^{\mathrm{}}(X,\mu )`$ and $`D`$ is the corresponding multiplication operator on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$, then

(14)
$$r(DAD^1+A^{})2r(A)$$

###### Proof.

The equality in (12) follows from

$$(tA+(1t)A^{})f,f=tAf,f+(1t)f,Af=Af,f,$$

which holds for all $`fL^2(X,\mu )_+`$. The remaining inequalities in (12) are clear. Similarly, only the second inequality in (13) needs a proof. This relation is a consequence of the following inequality

$$(tA+(1t)A^{})^2f,fA^2f,f$$

that holds for every $`fL^2(X,\mu )_+`$, since it is equivalent to $`t(1t)AfA^{}f_2^20`$. Setting $`t=1/2`$ in (12) we obtain (14) in the case $`D=I`$, since $`r(A+A^{})=w(A+A^{})=A+A^{}`$. The general case can be obtained from the special one as in the proof of Theorem 8. Namely, if $`E`$ is the multiplication operator on $`L`$ with the multiplier $`\sqrt{d}`$, then

$$r(DAD^1+A^{})=r(E(EAE^1+E^1A^{}E)E^1)=$$

$$=r(EAE^1+(EAE^1)^{})2r(EAE^1)=2r(A).$$

An application of Berberian’s trick concerning $`2\times 2`$ operator matrices gives the following result which seems to be new even in the finite-dimensional case.

###### Theorem 10.

Let $`A`$ and $`B`$ be positive operators on $`L^2(X,\mu )`$. Then

$$A+B^{}2\sqrt{r(AB)}.$$

If, in addition, $`A`$ and $`B`$ are compact kernel operators, then, for each $`t[0,1]`$,

$$\mathrm{max}\{tA+(1t)B^{},tB+(1t)A^{}\}\sqrt{r(AB)}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`T`$ be a positive operator on $`L^2(X,\mu )L^2(X,\mu )`$ defined by $`2\times 2`$ operator matrix

$$T=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& A\\ B& 0\end{array}\right].$$

Then $`r(T+T^{})=T+T^{}=A+B^{}`$ and $`(r(T))^2=r(T^2)=r(AB)`$. By (14), we obtain that

$$A+B^{}=r(T+T^{})2r(T)=2\sqrt{r(AB)}.$$

If, in addition, $`A`$ and $`B`$ are compact kernel operators, then $`T`$ is a compact kernel operator as well. Then, for each $`t[0,1]`$,

$$\sqrt{r(AB)}=r(T)r(tT+(1t)T^{})$$

$$tT+(1t)T^{}=\mathrm{max}\{tA+(1t)B^{},tB+(1t)A^{}\},$$

where we have used (11). This completes the proof. ∎

Acknowledgment. This work was supported in part by the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport of Slovenia.

Roman Drnovšek
Department of Mathematics
University of Ljubljana
Jadranska 19
SI-1000 Ljubljana
Slovenia
e-mail : roman.drnovsek@fmf.uni-lj.si


text:
# The Strong Perfect Graph ConjectureThis work was supported in part by NSF grant DMI-0098427 and ONR grant N00014-97-1-0196.

## 1. Introduction

In this paper, all graphs are simple (no loops or multiple edges) and finite. The vertex set of graph $`G`$ is denoted by $`V(G)`$ and its edge set by $`E(G)`$. A stable set is a set of vertices no two of which are adjacent. A clique is a set of vertices every pair of which are adjacent. The cardinality of a largest clique in graph $`G`$ is denoted by $`\omega (G)`$. The cardinality of a largest stable set is denoted by $`\alpha (G)`$. A $`k`$-coloring is a partition of the vertices into $`k`$ stable sets (these stable sets are called color classes). The chromatic number $`\chi (G)`$ is the smallest value of $`k`$ for which there exists a $`k`$-coloring. Obviously, $`\omega (G)\chi (G)`$ since the vertices of a clique must be in distinct color classes of the $`k`$-coloring. An induced subgraph of $`G`$ is a graph with vertex set $`SV(G)`$ and edge set comprising all the edges of $`G`$ with both ends in $`S`$. It is denoted by $`G(S)`$. The graph $`G(V(G)S)`$ is denoted by $`GS`$. A graph $`G`$ is perfect if $`\omega (H)=\chi (H)`$ for every induced subgraphs $`H`$ of $`G`$. A graph is minimally imperfect if it is not perfect but all its proper induced subgraphs are.

A hole is a graph induced by a chordless cycle of length at least $`4`$. A hole is odd if it contains an odd number of vertices. Odd holes are not perfect since their chromatic number is 3 whereas the size of their largest clique is 2. It is easy to check that odd holes are minimally imperfect. The complement of a graph $`G`$ is the graph $`\overline{G}`$ with the same vertex set as $`G`$, and $`uv`$ is an edge of $`\overline{G}`$ if and only if it is not an edge of $`G`$. The odd holes and their complements are the only known minimally imperfect graphs. In 1960 Berge  proposed the following conjecture, known as the Strong Perfect Graph Conjecture.

###### Conjecture 1.1

(Strong Perfect Graph Conjecture) (Berge ) The only minimally imperfect graphs are the odd holes and their complements.

At the same time, Berge also made a weaker conjecture, which states that a graph $`G`$ is perfect if and only if its complement $`\overline{G}`$ is perfect. This conjecture was proved by Lovász  in 1972 and is known as the Perfect Graph Theorem.

###### Theorem 1.2

(Perfect Graph Theorem) (Lovász ) Graph $`G`$ is perfect if and only if graph $`\overline{G}`$ is perfect.

Proof: Lovász  proved the following stronger result.
Claim 1: A graph $`G`$ is perfect if and only if, for every induced subgraph $`H`$, the number of vertices of $`H`$ is at most $`\alpha (H)\omega (H)`$.

Since $`\alpha (H)=\omega (\overline{H})`$ and $`\omega (H)=\alpha (\overline{H})`$, Claim 1 implies Theorem 1.2.
Proof of Claim 1: We give a proof of this result due to Gasparyan . First assume that $`G`$ is perfect. Then, for every induced subgraph $`H`$, $`\omega (H)=\chi (H)`$. Since the number of vertices of $`H`$ is at most $`\alpha (H)\chi (H)`$, the inequality follows.

Conversely, assume that $`G`$ is not perfect. Let $`H`$ be a minimally imperfect subgraph of $`G`$ and let $`n`$ be the number of vertices of $`H`$. Let $`\alpha =\alpha (H)`$ and $`\omega =\omega (H)`$. Then $`H`$ satisfies

$$\omega =\chi (H\backslash v)\text{ for every vertex }vV(H)$$

$$\text{and }\omega =\omega (H\backslash S)\text{ for every stable set }SV(H).$$

Let $`A_0`$ be an $`\alpha `$-stable set of $`H`$. Fix an $`\omega `$-coloring of each of the $`\alpha `$ graphs $`H\backslash s`$ for $`sA_0`$, let $`A_1,\mathrm{},A_{\alpha \omega }`$ be the stable sets occuring as a color class in one of these colorings and let $`𝒜:=\{A_0,A_1,\mathrm{},A_{\alpha \omega }\}`$. Let $`𝐀`$ be the corresponding stable set versus vertex incidence matrix. Define $`:=\{B_0,B_1,\mathrm{},B_{\alpha \omega }\}`$ where $`B_i`$ is an $`\omega `$-clique of $`H\backslash A_i`$. Let $`𝐁`$ be the corresponding clique versus vertex incidence matrix.

Claim 2: Every $`\omega `$-clique of $`H`$ intersects all but one of the stables sets in $`𝒜`$.

Proof of Claim 2: Let $`S_1,\mathrm{},S_\omega `$ be any $`\omega `$-coloring of $`Hv`$. Since any $`\omega `$-clique $`C`$ of $`H`$ has at most one vertex in each $`S_i`$, $`C`$ intersects all $`S_i`$’s if $`vC`$ and all but one if $`vC`$. Since $`C`$ has at most one vertex in $`A_0`$, Claim 2 follows.

In particular, it follows that $`\mathrm{𝐀𝐁}^T=JI`$. Since $`JI`$ is nonsingular, $`𝐀`$ and $`𝐁`$ have at least as many columns as rows, that is $`n\alpha \omega +1`$. This completes the proof of Claim 1.

## 2. Four Basic Classes of Perfect Graphs

Bipartite graphs are perfect since, for any induced subgraph $`H`$, the bipartition implies that $`\chi (H)2`$ and therefore $`\omega (H)=\chi (H)`$.

A graph $`L`$ is the line graph of a graph $`G`$ if $`V(L)=E(G)`$ and two vertices of $`L`$ are adjacent if and only if the corresponding edges of $`G`$ are adjacent.

###### Proposition 2.1

Line graphs of bipartite graphs are perfect.

Proof: If $`G`$ is bipartite, $`\chi ^{}(G)=\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ by a theorem of König , where $`\chi ^{}`$ denotes the edge-chromatic number and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the largest vertex degree.

If $`L`$ is the line graph of a bipartite graph $`G`$, then $`\chi (L)=\chi ^{}(G)`$ and $`\omega (L)=\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$. Therefore $`\chi (L)=\omega (L)`$. Since induced subgraphs of $`L`$ are also line graphs of bipartite graphs, the result follows.

Since bipartite graphs and line graphs of bipartite graphs are perfect, it follows from Lovász’s perfect graph theorem (Theorem 1.2) that the complements of bipartite graphs and of line graphs of bipartite graphs are perfect. This can also be verified directly, without using the perfect graph theorem. To summarize, in this section we have introduced four basic classes of perfect graphs:

* bipartite graphs and their complements, and
* line graphs of bipartite graphs and their complements.

## 3. 2-Join

A graph $`G`$ has a 2-join if its vertices can be partitioned into sets $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$, each of cardinality at least three, with nonempty disjoint subsets $`A_1,B_1V_1`$ and $`A_2,B_2V_2`$, such that all the vertices of $`A_1`$ are adjacent to all the vertices of $`A_2`$, all the vertices of $`B_1`$ are adjacent to all the vertices of $`B_2`$ and these are the only adjacencies between $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$. There is an $`O(|V(G)|^2|E(G)|^2)`$ algorithm to find whether a graph $`G`$ has a 2-join .

When $`G`$ contains a 2-join, we can decompose $`G`$ into two blocks $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ defined as follows.

###### Definition 3.1

If $`A_2`$ and $`B_2`$ are in different connected components of $`G(V_2)`$, define block $`G_1`$ to be $`G(V_1\{p_1,q_1\})`$, where $`p_1A_2`$ and $`q_1B_2`$. Otherwise, let $`P_1`$ be a shortest path from $`A_2`$ to $`B_2`$ and define block $`G_1`$ to be $`G(V_1V(P_1))`$. Block $`G_2`$ is defined similarly.

Next we show that the 2-join decomposition preserves perfection (Cornuéjols and Cunningham ; see also Kapoor  Chapter 8). Earlier, Bixby  had shown that the simpler join decomposition preserves perfection.

###### Theorem 3.2

Graph $`G`$ is perfect if and only if its blocks $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are perfect.

Proof: By definition, $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are induced subgraphs of $`G`$. It follows that, if $`G`$ is perfect, so are $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$. Now we prove the converse: If $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are perfect, then so is $`G`$. Let $`G^{}`$ be an induced subgraph of $`G`$. We must show

$$()\omega (G^{})=\chi (G^{}).$$

For $`i=1,2`$, let $`V_i^{}=V_iV(G^{})`$. The proof of $`()`$ is based on a coloring argument, combining $`\omega (G^{})`$-colorings of the perfect graphs $`G(V_1^{})`$ and $`G(V_2^{})`$ (Claim 3) into an $`\omega (G^{})`$-coloring of $`G^{}`$ (Claim 4). To prove Claim 3, we will use the following results.

Claim 1: (Lovász’s Replication Lemma ) Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a perfect graph and $`vV(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Create a new vertex $`v^{}`$ adjacent to $`v`$ and to all the neighbors of $`v`$. Then the resulting graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is perfect.
Proof of Claim 1: It suffices to show that $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=\chi (\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$ since, for induced subgraphs, the proof follows similarly. We distinguish two cases. Suppose first that $`v`$ is contained in some $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$-clique of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma })+1`$. Since at most one new color is needed in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=\chi (\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$ follows.

Now suppose that $`v`$ is not contained in any $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$-clique of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Consider any $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$-coloring of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and let $`A`$ be the color class containing $`v`$. Then, $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma }(A\{v\}))=\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma })1`$, since every $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$-clique of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ meets $`A\{v\}`$. By the perfection of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(A\{v\})`$ can be colored with $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma })1`$ colors. Using one additional color for the vertices $`(A\{v\})\{v^{}\}`$, we obtain an $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$-coloring of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$. This proves Claim 1.

We say that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is obtained from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ by replicating $`v`$. Replication can be applied recursively. We say that $`v`$ is replicated $`k`$ times if $`k`$ copies of $`v`$ are made, including $`v`$.

Claim 2: Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a graph and $`uv`$ an edge of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that the vertices $`u`$ and $`v`$ have no common neighbor. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ be the graph obtained from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ by replicating vertex $`v`$ into $`v^{}`$. Let $`H`$ be the graph obtained from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ by deleting edge $`uv^{}`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is perfect if and only if $`H`$ is perfect.

Proof of Claim 2: If $`H`$ is perfect, then so is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is an induced subgraph of $`H`$.

Conversely, suppose that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is perfect and $`H`$ is not. Let $`H^{}`$ be a minimally imperfect subgraph of $`H`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ be the subgraph of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ induced by the vertices of $`H^{}`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is perfect but $`H^{}`$ is not, $`V(H^{})`$ must contain vertices $`u`$ and $`v^{}`$. Also $`\chi (\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=\chi (H^{})`$ and $`\omega (\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=\omega (H^{})+1`$. Therefore $`uvv^{}`$ is the unique maximum clique in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ and $`\omega (H^{})=2`$. The only neighbor of $`v`$ in $`H^{}`$ is $`u`$ since otherwise $`v,v^{}`$ would be in a clique of cardinality three in $`H^{}`$. Now $`v^{}`$ is a vertex of degree 1 in $`H^{}`$, a contradiction to the assumption that $`H^{}`$ is minimally imperfect. This proves Claim 2.

For $`i=1,2`$, let $`A_i^{}=A_iV(G^{})`$, $`B_i^{}=B_iV(G^{})`$, $`a_i=\omega (A_i^{})`$ and $`b_i=\omega (B_i^{})`$. Let $`G_i^{}=G_i(V_iV_i^{})`$ and $`\omega \omega (G_i^{})`$. In an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G_i^{}`$, let $`C(A_i^{})`$ and $`C(B_i^{})`$ denote the sets of colors in $`A_i^{}`$ and $`B_i^{}`$ respectively.

Claim 3: There exists an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`V_i^{}`$ such that $`|C(A_i^{})|=a_i`$ and $`|C(B_i^{})|=b_i`$. Furthermore, if $`G_i`$ contains path $`P_i`$ and

(i) if $`P_i`$ has an odd number of edges, then $`|C(A_i^{})C(B_i^{})|=\mathrm{max}(0,a_i+b_i\omega )`$,

(ii) if $`P_i`$ has an even number of edges, then $`|C(A_i^{})C(B_i^{})|=\mathrm{min}(a_i,b_i)`$.

Proof of Claim 3: First assume that block $`G_i`$ is induced by $`V_i\{p_i,q_i\}`$. In $`G_i^{}`$, replicate $`p_i`$ $`\omega a_i`$ times and $`q_i`$ $`\omega b_i`$ times. By Claim 1, this new graph $`H`$ is perfect and $`\omega (H)=\omega `$. Therefore an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`H`$ exists. This coloring induces an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`V_i^{}`$ with $`|C(A_i^{})|=a_i`$ and $`|C(B_i^{})|=b_i`$. Now assume that $`G_i`$ contains path $`P_i`$. We consider two cases.

(i) $`P_i`$ has an odd number of edges.

Let $`P_i=x_1,\mathrm{},x_{2k}`$. In $`G_i^{}`$, replicate vertex $`x_{2k}`$ into $`x_{2k}^{}`$ and remove edge $`x_{2k1}x_{2k}^{}`$. By Claim 2, the new graph is perfect. For $`i`$ odd, $`1i<2k`$, replicate vertex $`x_i`$ $`\omega a_i`$ times. For $`i`$ even, $`1<i2k2`$, replicate vertex $`x_i`$ $`a_i`$ times.

If $`a_i+b_i<\omega `$, replicate $`x_{2k}`$ $`a_i`$ times and replicate $`x_{2k}^{}`$ $`\omega a_ib_i`$ times. By Claim 1, this new graph $`H`$ is perfect. Since $`\omega (H)=\omega `$, $`H`$ has an $`\omega `$-coloring. Note that $`|C(A_i^{})|=a_i`$ and $`|C(B_i^{})|=b_i`$ and every vertex of $`P_i`$ belongs to two cliques of size $`\omega `$. So the colors that appear in the replicates of $`x_{2k}`$ are precisely $`C(A_i)`$. Therefore $`B_i^{}`$ is colored with colors that do not appear in $`C(A_i^{})`$. Thus $`|C(A_i^{})C(B_i^{})|=0`$.

If $`a_i+b_i\omega `$, replicate $`x_{2k}`$ $`\omega b_i`$ times and remove $`x_{2k}^{}`$. The new graph $`H`$ is perfect and $`\omega (H)=\omega `$. Therefore $`H`$ has an $`\omega `$-coloring. Again $`|C(A_i^{})|=a_i`$ and $`|C(B_i^{})|=b_i`$, and the $`\omega b_i`$ colors that appear in the replicates of $`x_{2k}`$ belong to $`C(A_i^{})`$. Since these colors cannot appear in $`C(B_i^{})`$, the number of common colors in $`C(A_i^{})`$ and $`C(B_i^{})`$ is $`a_i+b_i\omega `$.

(ii) $`P_i`$ has an even number of edges.

Assume w.l.o.g. that $`a_ib_i`$. Let $`P_i=x_1,\mathrm{},x_{2k+1}`$. In $`G_i^{}`$, replicate vertex $`x_i`$ $`\omega a_i`$ times for $`i`$ odd, $`1i2k1`$, and replicate vertex $`x_i`$ $`a_i`$ times for $`i`$ even, $`1<i2k`$. Finally, replicate $`x_{2k+1}`$ $`\omega b_i`$ times. By Claim 1, the new graph $`H`$ is perfect and $`\omega (H)=\omega `$. In an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`H`$, $`|C(A_i^{})|=a_i`$ and $`|C(B_i^{})|=b_i`$ and the colors that appear in the replicates of $`x_{2k}`$ are precisely $`C(A_i^{})`$. But then these colors do not appear in the replicates of $`x_{2k+1}`$ and consequently they must appear in $`C(B_i)`$. Thus $`|C(A_i)C(B_i)|=\mathrm{min}(a_i,b_i)`$. This proves Claim 3.

Claim 4: $`G^{}`$ has an $`\omega (G^{})`$-coloring.

Proof of Claim 4: Let $`\omega =\omega (G^{})`$. Clearly, $`\omega a_1+a_2`$ and $`\omega b_1+b_2`$. To prove the claim, we will combine $`\omega `$-colorings of $`V_1^{}`$ and $`V_2^{}`$.

If at least one of the sets $`A_1^{},A_2^{},B_1^{},B_2^{}`$ is empty, one can easily construct the desired $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G^{}`$. So we assume now that these sets are nonempty. This implies that $`\omega \omega (G_1^{})`$ and $`\omega \omega (G_2^{})`$. By Claim 3, there exist $`\omega `$-colorings of $`V_i^{}`$ such that $`|C(A_i^{})|=a_i`$ and $`|C(B_i^{})|=b_i`$. Thus, if $`A_2^{}`$ and $`B_2^{}`$ are in different connected components of $`G(V_2^{})`$, an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`V_1^{}`$ can be combined with $`\omega `$-colorings of the components of $`G(V_2^{})`$ into an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G^{}`$. So we can assume that both $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ exist. Since $`G_1`$ contains no odd hole, every chordless path from $`A_1`$ to $`B_1`$ has the same parity as $`P_1`$. It follows from the definition of 2-join decomposition that $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ have the same parity.

(i) $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ both have an odd number of edges.

Then by Claim 3 (i), there exists an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`V_i^{}`$ with $`|C(A_i^{})C(B_i^{})|=\mathrm{max}(0,a_i+b_i\omega )`$. In the coloring of $`V_1^{}`$, label by 1 through $`a_1`$ the colors that occur in $`A_1^{}`$ and by $`\omega `$ through $`\omega b_1+1`$ the colors that occur in $`B_1^{}`$. In the coloring of $`V_2^{}`$, label by $`\omega `$ through $`\omega a_2+1`$ the colors that occur in $`A_2^{}`$ and by 1 through $`b_2`$ the colors that occur in $`B_2^{}`$. If this is not an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G^{}`$, there must exist a common color in $`A_1^{}`$ and $`A_2^{}`$ or in $`B_1^{}`$ and $`B_2^{}`$. But then either $`a_1\omega a_2+1`$ or $`b_2\omega b_1+1`$, a contradiction.

(ii) $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ both have an even number of edges.

Then by Claim 3 (ii), there exists an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`V_i^{}`$ with $`|C(A_i^{})C(B_i^{})|=\mathrm{min}(a_i,b_i)`$. In the coloring of $`V_1^{}`$, label by 1 through $`a_1`$ the colors that occur in $`A_1^{}`$ and by 1 through $`b_1`$ the colors that occur in $`B_1^{}`$. In the coloring of $`V_2^{}`$, label by $`\omega `$ through $`\omega a_2+1`$ the colors that occur in $`A_2^{}`$ and by $`\omega `$ through $`\omega b_2+1`$ the colors that occur in $`B_2^{}`$. If this is not an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G`$, there must exist a common color in $`A_1^{}`$ and $`A_2^{}`$ or in $`B_1^{}`$ and $`B_2^{}`$. But then either $`a_1\omega a_2+1`$ or $`b_1\omega b_2+1`$, a contradiction.

###### Corollary 3.3

If a minimally imperfect graph $`G`$ has a 2-join, then $`G`$ is an odd hole.

Proof: Since $`G`$ is not perfect, Theorem 3.2 implies that block $`G_1`$ or $`G_2`$ is not perfect, say $`G_1`$. Since $`G_1`$ is an induced subgraph of $`G`$ and $`G`$ is minimally imperfect, it follows that $`G=G_1`$. Since $`|V_2|3`$, $`V_2`$ induces a chordless path. Thus $`G`$ is a minimally imperfect graph with a vertex of degree 2. This implies that $`G`$ is an odd hole .

We end this section with another decomposition that preserves perfection. A graph $`G`$ has a 6-join if $`V(G)`$ can be partitioned into eight nonempty sets $`X_1,X_2,X_3,X_4,Y_1,Y_2,Y_3,Y_4`$ with the property that, for any $`x_iX_i`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$) and $`y_jY_j`$ ($`j=1,2,3`$), the graph induced by $`x_1,y_1,x_2,y_2,x_3,y_3`$ is a 6-hole and these kinds of edges are the only adjacencies between $`X=X_1X_2X_3X_4`$ and $`Y=Y_1Y_2Y_3Y_4`$.

###### Theorem 3.4

(Aossey and Vušković ) No minimally imperfect graph contains a 6-join.

If $`G`$ contains a 6-join, define blocks $`G_X`$ and $`G_Y`$ as follows. $`G_X`$ is the graph induced by $`X\{y_1,y_2,y_3\}`$ where $`y_jY_j`$ ($`j=1,2,3`$). Similarly $`G_Y`$ is the graph induced by $`Y\{x_1,x_2,x_3\}`$ where $`x_iX_i`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$). It can be shown  that $`G`$ is perfect if and only if its blocks $`G_X`$ and $`G_Y`$ are perfect.

## 4. Skew Partition and Homogeneous Pair

A graph has a skew partition if its vertices can be partitioned into four nonempty sets $`A,B,C,D`$ such that there are all the possible edges between $`A`$ and $`B`$ and no edges from $`C`$ to $`D`$. It is easy to verify that the odd holes and their complements do not have a skew partition. Chvátal  conjectured that no minimally imperfect graph has a skew partition.

###### Theorem 4.1

(Skew Partition Theorem) (Chudnovsky and Seymour ) No minimally imperfect graph has a skew partition.

Chudnovsky and Seymour obtained this result as a consequence of their proof of the SPGC. In order to prove the SPGC, they first proved the following weaker result.

###### Theorem 4.2

(Chudnovsky and Seymour ) A minimally imperfect Berge graph with smallest number of vertices does not have a skew partition.

We do not give the proof of this difficult theorem here. Instead, we prove results due to Hoàng  on two special skew partitions called $`T`$-cutset and $`U`$-cutset respectively.

Assume that $`G`$ is a minimally imperfect graph with skew partition $`A,B,C,D`$. Let $`a=\omega (A)`$, $`b=\omega (B)`$, $`\omega =\omega (G)`$ and $`\alpha =\alpha (G)`$. The vertex sets $`ABC`$ and $`ABD`$ induce perfect graphs $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ respectively and both of these graphs contain an $`\omega `$-clique. Indeed, each vertex of a minimally imperfect graph belongs to $`\omega `$ $`\omega `$-cliques  and, for $`uC`$, these $`\omega `$-cliques are contained in $`G_1`$. For $`uD`$, they are contained in $`G_2`$.

###### Lemma 4.3

(Hoàng ) Let $`𝒞_i`$ be an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G_i`$, for $`i=1,2`$. Then $`𝒞_1`$ and $`𝒞_2`$ cannot have the same number of colors in $`A`$.

Proof: Suppose $`𝒞_1`$ and $`𝒞_2`$ have the same number of colors in $`A`$ and assume w.l.o.g. that these colors are $`1,2,\mathrm{},k`$. Let $`K`$ be the subgraph of $`G`$ induced by the vertices with colors $`1,2,\mathrm{},k`$ and let $`H=GK`$. Since every $`\omega `$-clique of $`G`$ is in $`G_1`$ or $`G_2`$, the largest clique in $`K`$ has size $`k`$ and the largest clique in $`H`$ has size $`\omega k`$. The graphs $`H`$ and $`K`$ are perfect since they are proper subgraphs of $`G`$. Color $`K`$ with $`k`$ colors and $`H`$ with $`\omega k`$ colors. Now $`G`$ is colored with $`\omega `$ colors, a contradiction to the assumption that $`G`$ is minimally imperfect.

###### Lemma 4.4

No $`\omega `$-clique is contained in $`AB`$.

Proof: Suppose that a $`\omega `$-clique were contained in $`AB`$. Then any $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G_i`$, for $`i=1,2`$, would contain $`a`$ colors in $`A`$ and $`b=\omega a`$ colors in $`B`$, contradicting Lemma 4.3.

###### Lemma 4.5

Every $`\alpha `$-stable set intersects $`AB`$.

Proof: By Lemma 4.4 applied to the complement graph, no $`\alpha `$-stable set is contained in $`CD`$.

###### Lemma 4.6

If some $`uA`$ has no neighbor in $`C`$, then there exists an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G_1`$ with $`b`$ colors in $`B`$.

proof: Let $`𝒞_1`$ be an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G_1`$ with minimum number $`k`$ of colors in $`B`$ and suppose that this number is strictly greater than $`b`$. Consider the subgraph $`H`$ of $`G_1`$ induced by the vertices colored with the colors of $`𝒞_1`$ that appear in $`B`$. The graph $`Hu`$ can be colored with $`k`$ colors since it is perfect and has no clique of size greater than $`k`$. Keeping the other colors of $`𝒞_1`$ in $`G_1(Hu)`$, we get an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G_1`$ with fewer colors on $`B`$ than $`𝒞_1`$, a contradiction.

###### Lemma 4.7

If some $`uA`$ has no neighbor in $`C`$, then every vertex of $`A`$ has a neighbor in $`D`$ and every vertex of $`B`$ has a neighbor in $`C`$.

Proof: By Lemma 4.6, there exists an $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G_1`$ with $`b`$ colors in $`B`$. Thus, by Lemma 4.3, there exists no $`\omega `$-coloring of $`G_2`$ with $`b`$ colors in $`B`$. By Lemma 4.6, this implies that every vertex of $`A`$ has a neighbor in $`D`$.

Suppose that $`vB`$ has no neighbor in $`C`$. In the complement graph, $`u`$ and $`v`$ are adjacent to all the vertices of $`C`$. By Lemma 4.3, $`|A|2`$ and $`|B|2`$. So $`A^{}=Au`$, $`B^{}=Bv`$, $`C^{}=C`$, $`D^{}=D\{u,v\}`$ form a skew partition. But $`u`$ has no neighbor in $`B`$ and $`v`$ has no neighbor in $`A`$, contradicting the first part of the lemma. So every $`vB`$ has a neighbor in $`C`$.

A $`T`$-cutset is a skew partition with $`uC`$ and $`vD`$ such that every vertex of $`A`$ is adjacent to both $`u`$ and $`v`$.

###### Lemma 4.8

(Hoàng ) No minimally imperfect graph contains a $`T`$-cutset.

Proof: In the complement, $`u`$ and $`v`$ contradict Lemma 4.7.

A $`U`$-cutset is a skew partition with $`u,vC`$ such that every vertex of $`A`$ is adjacent to $`u`$ and every vertex of $`B`$ is adjacent to $`v`$.

###### Lemma 4.9

(Hoàng ) No minimally imperfect graph contains a $`U`$-cutset.

Proof: In the complement, $`u`$ and $`v`$ contradict Lemma 4.7.

We conclude this section with the notion of homogeneous pair introduced by Chvátal and Sbihi . A graph $`G`$ has a homogeneous pair if $`V(G)`$ can be partitioned into subsets $`A_1`$, $`A_2`$ and $`B`$, such that:

* $`|A_1|+|A_2|3`$ and $`|B|2`$.
* If a node of $`B`$ is adjacent to a node of $`A_1`$ ($`A_2`$) then it is adjacent to all the nodes of $`A_1`$ ($`A_2`$).

###### Theorem 4.10

(Chvátal and Sbihi ) No minimally imperfect graph contains a homogeneous pair.

## 5. Decomposition of Berge Graphs

A graph is a Berge graph if it does not contain an odd hole or its complement. Clearly, all perfect graphs are Berge graphs. The SPGC states that the converse is also true.

###### Conjecture 5.1

(Decomposition Conjecture) (Conforti, Cornuéjols, Robertson, Seymour, Thomas and Vušković (2001)) Every Berge graph $`G`$ is basic or has a skew partition or a homogeneous pair, or $`G`$ or $`\overline{G}`$ has a 2-join.

This conjecture implies the SPGC. Indeed, suppose that the Decomposition Conjecture holds but not the SPGC. Then there exists a minimally imperfect graph $`G`$ distinct from an odd hole or its complement. Choose $`G`$ with the smallest number of vertices. $`G`$ is a Berge graph and it cannot have a skew partition by Theorem 4.2. $`G`$ cannot have an homogeneous pair by Theorem 4.10. Neither $`G`$ nor $`\overline{G}`$ can have a 2-join by Corollary 3.3. So $`G`$ must be basic by the Decomposition Conjecture. Therefore $`G`$ is perfect, a contradiction.

Note that there are other decompositions that cannot occur in minimally imperfect Berge graphs, such as 6-joins (Theorem 3.4) or universal 2-amalgams  (universal 2-amalgams generalize both 2-joins and homogeneous pairs). These decompositions could be added to the statement of Conjecture 5.1 while still implying the SPGC. However they do not appear to be needed. Paul Seymour commented that homogeneous pairs might not be necessary either. In fact, we had initially formulated Conjecture 5.1 without homogeneous pairs. I added them to the statement to be on the safe side since they currently come up in the proof of the SPGC (see below).

Several special cases of Conjecture 5.1 are known. For example, it holds when $`G`$ is a Meyniel graph (Burlet and Fonlupt  in 1984), when $`G`$ is claw-free (Chvatal and Sbihi  in 1988 and Maffray and Reed  in 1999), diamond-free (Fonlupt and Zemirline  in 1987), bull-free (Chvátal and Sbihi  in 1987), or dart-free (Chvátal, Fonlupt, Sun and Zemirline  in 2000). All these results involve special types of skew partitions (such as star cutsets) and, in some cases, homogeneous pairs . A special case of 2-join called augmentation of a flat edge appears in . In 1999, Conforti and Cornuéjols  used more general 2-joins to prove Conjecture 5.1 for WP-free Berge graphs, a class of graphs that contains all bipartite graphs and all line graphs of bipartite graphs. This paper was the precursor of a sequence of decomposition results involving 2-joins:

###### Theorem 5.2

(Conforti, Cornuéjols and Vušković ) A square-free Berge graph is bipartite, the line graph of a bipartite graph, or has a 2-join or a star cutset.

###### Theorem 5.3

(Chudnovsky, Robertson, Seymour and Thomas ) If $`G`$ is a Berge graph that contains the line graph of a bipartite subdivision of a 3-connected graph, then $`G`$ has a skew partition, or $`G`$ or $`\overline{G}`$ has a 2-join or is the line graph of a bipartite graph.

Given two vertex disjoint triangles $`a_1,a_2,a_3`$ and $`b_1,b_2,b_3`$, a stretcher is a graph induced by three chordless paths, $`P^1=a_1,\mathrm{},b_1`$, $`P^2=a_2,\mathrm{},b_2`$ and $`P^3=a_3,\mathrm{},b_3`$, at least one of which has length greater than one, such that $`P^1,P^2,P^3`$ have no common vertices and the only adjacencies between the vertices of distinct paths are the edges of the two triangles. The next result is a real tour-de-force and a key step in the proof of the SPGC.

###### Theorem 5.4

(Chudnovsky and Seymour ) If $`G`$ is a Berge graph that contains a stretcher, then $`G`$ is the line graph of a bipartite graph or $`G`$ has a skew partition or a homogeneous pair, or $`G`$ or $`\overline{G}`$ has a 2-join.

A wheel $`(H,v)`$ consists of a hole $`H`$ together with a vertex $`v`$, called the center, with at least three neighbors in $`H`$. If $`v`$ has $`k`$ neighbors in $`H`$, the wheel is called a $`k`$-wheel. A line wheel is a 4-wheel $`(H,v)`$ that contains exactly two triangles and these two triangles have only the center $`v`$ in common. A twin wheel is a 3-wheel containing exactly two triangles. A universal wheel is a wheel $`(H,v)`$ where the center $`v`$ is adjacent to all the vertices of $`H`$. A triangle-free wheel is a wheel containing no triangle. A proper wheel is a wheel that is not any of the above four types. These concepts were first introduced in . The following theorem generalizes an earlier result by Conforti, Cornuéjols and Zambelli  and Thomas .

###### Theorem 5.5

(Conforti, Cornuéjols and Zambelli ) If $`G`$ is a Berge graph that contains no proper wheels, stretchers or their complements, then $`G`$ is basic or has a skew partition.

The last step in proving the SPGC is the following difficult theorem.

###### Theorem 5.6

(Chudnovsky and Seymour ) If $`G`$ is a Berge graph that contains a proper wheel, but no stretchers or their complements, then $`G`$ has a skew partition, or $`G`$ or $`\overline{G}`$ has a 2-join.

A monumental paper containing these results is forthcoming . Independently, Conforti, Cornuéjols, Vušković and Zambelli  proved that the Decomposition Conjecture holds for Berge graphs containing a large class of proper wheels but, as of May 2002, they could not prove it for all proper wheels. Theorems 5.4, 5.5 and 5.6 imply that Conjecture 5.1 holds, and therefore the SPGC is true.

###### Corollary 5.7

(Strong Perfect Graph Theorem) The only minimally imperfect graphs are the odd holes and their complements.

Conforti, Cornuéjols and Vušković  proved a weaker version of the Decomposition Conjecture where “skew partition” is replaced by “double star cutset”. A double star is a vertex set $`S`$ that contains two adjacent vertices $`u,v`$ and a subset of the vertices adjacent to $`u`$ or $`v`$. Clearly, if $`G`$ has a skew partition, then $`G`$ has a double star cutset: Take $`S=AB`$, $`uA`$ and $`vB`$. Although the decomposition result in  is weaker than Conjecture 5.1 for Berge graphs, it holds for a larger class of graphs than Berge graphs: By changing the decomposition from “skew partition” to “double star cutset”, the result can be obtained for all odd-hole-free graphs instead of just Berge graphs.

###### Theorem 5.8

(Conforti, Cornuéjols and Vušković ) If $`G`$ is an odd-hole-free graph, then $`G`$ is a bipartite graph or the line graph of a bipartite graph or the complement of the line graph of a bipartite graph, or $`G`$ has a double star cutset or a 2-join.

One might try to use Theorem 5.8 to construct a polynomial time recognition algorithm for odd-hole-free graphs. Conforti, Cornuéjols, Kapoor and Vušković  obtained a polynomial time recognition algorithm for the class of even-hole-free graphs. This algorithm is based on the decomposition of even-hole-free graphs by 2-joins, double star and triple star cutsets obtained in .

A useful tool for studying Berge graphs is due to Roussel and Rubio . This lemma was proved independently by Robertson, Seymour and Thomas , who popularized it and named it The Wonderful Lemma. It is used repeatedly in the proofs of Theorems 5.3-5.6.

###### Lemma 5.9

(The Wonderful Lemma) (Roussel and Rubio ) Let $`G`$ be a Berge graph and assume that $`V(G)`$ can be partitioned into a set $`S`$ and an odd chordless path $`P=u,u^{},\mathrm{},v^{},v`$ of length at least $`3`$ such that $`u`$, $`v`$ are both adjacent to all the vertices in $`S`$ and $`\overline{G}(S)`$ is connected. Then one of the following holds:

* An odd number of edges of $`P`$ have both ends adjacent to all the vertices in $`S`$.
* $`P`$ has length 3 and $`\overline{G}(S\{u^{},v^{}\})`$ contains an odd chordless path between $`u^{}`$ and $`v^{}`$.
* $`P`$ has length at least 5 and there exist two nonadjacent vertices $`x`$, $`x^{}`$ in $`S`$ such that $`(V(P)\{u,v\})\{x,x^{}\}`$ induces a path.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Closed $`N=2`$ strings  possess local $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry on the string worldsheet. Critical $`N=2`$ strings have a four-dimensional target space. The supersymmetric structure implies that the target space has a complex structure. Therefore it must be of signature $`(4,0)`$ or $`(2,2)`$. In $`(4,0)`$ signature there are no propagating degrees of freedom in the $`N=2`$ string spectrum. In $`(2,2)`$ signature there is only one massless scalar in the spectrum and the infinite tower of massive excitations of the string is absent. The effective action of this scalar has been computed in  which suggested its interpretation as a deformation of the target space Kähler potential. It was argued in  that the $`N=2`$ strings may describe a quantum theory of self-dual Einstein gravity in four dimensions.

In  the $`N=2`$ closed strings have been divided into two families denoted by $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$. Consider $`N=2`$ strings in a flat background. In order to construct the $`N=2`$ string we need to gauge the $`N=2`$ superconformal algebra (SCA) on the worldsheet. More precisely we have two copies of the $`N=2`$ algebra to consider: the left and right sectors. The free field representation of the (left) $`N=2`$ SCA takes the form

$`T={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta _{IJ}x^Ix^J{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\eta _{IJ}\left(\psi ^I\psi ^J+\psi ^J\psi ^I\right),`$
$`J={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}𝒥_{IJ}^L\psi ^I\psi ^J,`$
$`G^\pm ={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\left(\eta _{IJ}\pm i𝒥_{IJ}^L\right)\psi ^Ix^J.`$ (1.1)
Here $`I,J=1,\mathrm{},4`$ denote the indices of the target space in a real basis. The metric is given by $`\eta _{IJ}=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,+1,+1)`$. $`𝒥_{IJ}^L`$ is a Kähler form related to the complex structure $`𝒥_J^K`$ by $`𝒥_{IJ}=\eta _{IK}𝒥_J^K`$, and the index $`L`$ refers to the left sector.111For more details see next section and . Similarly, we have the SCA generators in the right sector with a complex structure $`𝒥^R`$. The (conventional) $`N=2`$ string denoted by $`\beta `$-string in  is defined by having the same complex structure in the left and right sectors $`𝒥^L=𝒥^R`$. On the other hand, $`N=2`$ string denoted by $`\alpha `$-string in  has different complex structures in the left and right sectors 222For an earlier discussion see .. In fact the $`\beta `$\- and $`\alpha `$-strings define two families of $`N=2`$ strings related by T-duality .

In $`(2,2)`$ signature both families have one scalar in the spectrum. The scalar in the $`\beta `$-string is, as noted above, a deformation of the target space Kähler potential and the dynamics is that of self-dual gravity. The aim of this paper is to compute the exact effective action of the scalar in the $`\alpha `$-string. The scalar is a deformation of a potential that determines the target space metric, torsion and dilaton . The dynamics is that of a self-dual curvature with torsion .

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we consider the worldsheet description of $`N=2`$ strings. We present the $`\sigma `$-model Lagrangian description of the $`\alpha `$-string using a chiral and a twisted chiral superfields and construct the vertex operators. In section 3, we compute the genus zero three-point and four-point scattering amplitudes of the $`N=2`$ strings scalar. In section 4 we show, based on sections 2 and 3, that the $`\alpha `$-string scalar is free and that the dynamics is that of a self-dual curvature with torsion. This has been anticipated in  based on $`\sigma `$-model and conformal anomaly analysis. In section 5 we construct an example of a gravitational $`\alpha `$-string background, based on the space transverse to NS5-branes.

## 2 Worldsheet description of $`N=2`$ strings

In this section we will discuss in some detail the worldsheet description of the $`\beta `$\- and $`\alpha `$-strings. We consider the $`\sigma `$-model Lagrangian and the vertex operators.

### 2.1 Complex Structure and $`N=2`$ SCA

In the following we will review some aspects of the complex structures on $`𝐑^{2,2}`$ that are relevant to the generators of $`N=2`$ SCA. In the real basis $`x^I=(x^1,x^2,x^3,x^4)`$, the metric is given by $`\eta _{IJ}=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,+1,+1)`$. We define a complex structure

$$𝒥_J^I=\left(\begin{array}{cc}i\sigma _2& 0\\ 0& i\sigma _2\end{array}\right).$$
(2.1)
In the complex basis

$$z^1=\frac{x^1+ix^2}{\sqrt{2}},z^2=\frac{x^3+ix^4}{\sqrt{2}},$$
(2.2)
the metric reads $`\eta _{i\overline{j}}=\mathrm{diag}(1,+1)`$, $`i,\overline{j}=1,2`$. In this basis, the complex structure $`𝒥_J^I`$ is diagonal:

$`𝒥(z^1)=iz^1,𝒥(\overline{z}^{\overline{1}})=+i\overline{z}^{\overline{1}},`$
$`𝒥(z^2)=iz^2,𝒥(\overline{z}^{\overline{2}})=+i\overline{z}^{\overline{2}}.`$ (2.3)
The Kähler form $`𝒥_{IJ}=\eta _{IK}𝒥_J^K`$ is given in the real basis by

$$𝒥_{IJ}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}i\sigma _2& 0\\ 0& i\sigma _2\end{array}\right).$$
(2.4)
For later reference, we define the quadratic form in momenta

$$k_i^I𝒥_{IJ}k_j^J=ic_{ij},$$
(2.5)
where in the complex basis

$$c_{ij}=k_i\overline{k}_j\overline{k}_ik_j,$$
(2.6)
and $`k_i\overline{k}_j\eta _{m\overline{n}}k_i^m\overline{k}_j^{\overline{n}}`$. For the on-shell momenta $`k_i,i=1,2,3,4`$ with $`k_i^2=0,k_1+k_2+k_3+k_4=0`$, $`c_{ij}`$ obey the identities

$`{\displaystyle \frac{c_{12}c_{34}}{s}}+{\displaystyle \frac{c_{23}c_{41}}{t}}=u,{\displaystyle \frac{c_{21}c_{34}}{s}}+{\displaystyle \frac{c_{13}c_{42}}{u}}=t,{\displaystyle \frac{c_{13}c_{24}}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{c_{32}c_{41}}{t}}=s,`$ (2.7)
where $`s=k_1k_2(k_1\overline{k}_2+\overline{k}_1k_2),t=k_2k_3,u=k_1k_3`$.

We will also need a second complex (and Kähler) structure, which in the real basis take the form

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_J^I=\left(\begin{array}{cc}i\sigma _2& 0\\ 0& i\sigma _2\end{array}\right),\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_{IJ}=\eta _{IK}\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_J^K=\left(\begin{array}{cc}i\sigma _2& 0\\ 0& i\sigma _2\end{array}\right).$$
(2.8)
In the complex basis, the complex structure is given by

$`\stackrel{~}{𝒥}(z^1)=iz^1,\stackrel{~}{𝒥}(\overline{z}^{\overline{1}})=+i\overline{z}^{\overline{1}},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{𝒥}(z^2)=+iz^2,\stackrel{~}{𝒥}(\overline{z}^{\overline{2}})=i\overline{z}^{\overline{2}}.`$ (2.9)
The Kähler form reads

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_{i\overline{j}}=i\mathrm{𝟏},\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_{\overline{i}j}=+i\mathrm{𝟏}.$$
(2.10)
We define also

$$\stackrel{~}{c}_{ij}=ik_i^I\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_{IJ}k_j^J=k_i^1\overline{k}_j^1k_i^2\overline{k}_j^2+\overline{k}_i^1k_j^1+\overline{k}_i^2k_j^2,$$
(2.11)
which obeys an equation similar to (2.7), for four on-shell momenta.

The $`\beta `$-string in $`𝐑^{2,2}`$ is defined by the choice 333More precisely, there is a parameter space of $`\beta `$-strings corresponding to the choice of the complex structures in the $`N=2`$ SCA, see . The results that will be presented later remain valid for any choice of the complex structure $`𝒥_L=𝒥_R`$.

$$𝒥_{IJ}^L=𝒥_{IJ}^R=𝒥_{IJ},$$
(2.12)
in (1.1), while for the $`\alpha `$-string

$$𝒥_{IJ}^L=𝒥_{IJ},𝒥_{IJ}^R=\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_{IJ}.$$
(2.13)
The two $`N=2`$ strings are related by a T-duality along a spatial direction.

### 2.2 A $`\sigma `$-Model Lagrangian Description

Here we will consider the two-dimensional $`\sigma `$-model Lagrangian description of the $`N=2`$ strings. We begin by reviewing the $`𝒩=(2,2)`$ superfield formulation in Euclidean two-dimensional space-time with the complex coordinates $`z`$ and $`\overline{z}`$ (see e.g. ). The complex supercovariant derivatives for the left and right movers $`D_\pm `$ and $`\overline{D}_\pm `$ are defined by

$$D_\pm =\frac{}{\theta ^\pm }+\theta ^{}_z,\overline{D}_\pm =\frac{}{\overline{\theta }^\pm }+\overline{\theta }^{}_{\overline{z}},$$
(2.14)
where $`\theta ^\pm `$ are the complex fermionic coordinates in the superspace. Denote $`z^\pm ,\overline{z}^\pm `$ by

$$z^\pm =z\pm \theta ^2,\overline{z}^\pm =\overline{z}\pm \overline{\theta }^2,$$
(2.15)
with $`\theta ^2=\theta ^+\theta ^{},\overline{\theta }^2=\overline{\theta }^{}\overline{\theta }^+`$. It is easy to see that

$$D_\pm z^{}=0.$$
(2.16)
A chiral superfield $`X`$ is defined by

$$D_+X=\overline{D}_+X=0,$$
(2.17)
and an anti-chiral superfield $`\overline{X}`$ by

$$D_{}\overline{X}=\overline{D}_{}\overline{X}=0.$$
(2.18)
In components we have

$`X`$ $`=`$ $`X(z^{},\overline{z}^{},\theta ^{},\overline{\theta }^{})`$ (2.19)
$`=`$ $`x(z^{},\overline{z}^{})+\sqrt{2}\theta ^{}\psi _L(z^{},\overline{z}^{})+\sqrt{2}\overline{\theta }^{}\psi _R(z^{},\overline{z}^{})+2\theta ^{}\overline{\theta }^{}F(z^{},\overline{z}^{}),`$
and

$`\overline{X}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{X}(z^+,\overline{z}^+,\theta ^+,\overline{\theta }^+)`$ (2.20)
$`=`$ $`\overline{x}(z^+,\overline{z}^+)+\sqrt{2}\theta ^+\overline{\psi }_L(z^+,\overline{z}^+)\sqrt{2}\overline{\theta }^+\overline{\psi }_R(z^+,\overline{z}^+)+2\theta ^+\overline{\theta }^+F(z^+,\overline{z}^+).`$
Since $`\{D_\pm ,\overline{D}_\pm \}=0`$, one can define in two dimensions twisted chiral superfields $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ by

$$D_+\stackrel{~}{X}=\overline{D}_{}\stackrel{~}{X}=0,$$
(2.21)
and an anti-twisted chiral $`\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$ superfield by

$$D_{}\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}=\overline{D}_+\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}=0.$$
(2.22)
In components we have

$`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{X}(z^{},\overline{z}^+,\theta ^{},\overline{\theta }^+)`$ (2.23)
$`=`$ $`x(z^{},\overline{z}^+)+\sqrt{2}\theta ^{}\psi _L(z^{},\overline{z}^+)+\sqrt{2}\overline{\theta }^+\psi _R(z^{},\overline{z}^+)+2\theta ^{}\overline{\theta }^+F(z^{},\overline{z}^+),`$
and

$`\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}(z^+,\overline{z}^{},\theta ^+,\overline{\theta }^{})`$ (2.24)
$`=`$ $`\overline{x}(z^+,\overline{z}^{})+\sqrt{2}\theta ^+\overline{\psi }_L(z^+,\overline{z}^{})\sqrt{2}\overline{\theta }^{}\overline{\psi }_R(z^+,\overline{z}^{})+2\theta ^+\overline{\theta }^{}F(z^+,\overline{z}^{}).`$
T-duality along $`X+\overline{X}`$ exchanges chiral (anti-chiral) superfields and twisted (anti-twisted) chiral superfields. In the complex structure language, the left movers complex structure does not change but the right movers complex structure does ($`𝒥\stackrel{~}{𝒥}`$).

The $`N=2`$ $`\sigma `$-model action for the $`\beta `$-string in a flat background is

$$S_\beta ^0=d^4xd^4\theta K_0(X^1,\overline{X}^1,X^2,\overline{X}^2),$$
(2.25)
where $`X^i,i=1,2`$ are chiral superfields and $`K_0`$ is the Kähler potential for flat $`(2,2)`$ space

$$K_0(X^1,\overline{X}^1,X^2,\overline{X}^2)=X^1\overline{X}^1+X^2\overline{X}^2X^1\overline{X}^1+\frac{1}{2}(X^2+\overline{X}^2)^2.$$
(2.26)
In the last equivalence we used the freedom of adding holomorphic and antiholomorphic terms to the Kähler potential without changing the metric $`g_{i\overline{j}}=_{X^i}_{\overline{X}^j}K_0`$.

The $`N=2`$ $`\sigma `$-model action for the $`\alpha `$-string in a flat background is

$$S_\alpha ^0=d^4xd^4\theta \widehat{K}_0(X^1,\overline{X}^1,\stackrel{~}{X}^2,\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}}),$$
(2.27)
where $`X^1`$ is a chiral superfield and $`\stackrel{~}{X}^2`$ is a twisted chiral superfield. $`\widehat{K}_0`$ is the Legendre transform of $`K_0`$ with respect to $`X^2+\overline{X}^2`$  (see ). Thus,

$$\stackrel{~}{X}^2+\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}}=\frac{K_0}{(X^2+\overline{X}^2)}=X^2+\overline{X}^2,$$
(2.28)
and

$$\widehat{K}_0(X^1,\overline{X}^1,\stackrel{~}{X}^2,\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}})=K_0(X^2+\overline{X}^2)(\stackrel{~}{X}^2+\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}})=X^1\overline{X}^1\frac{1}{2}(\stackrel{~}{X}^2+\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}})^2.$$
(2.29)
The target space metric, torsion and dilaton are encoded in the function $`\widehat{K}_0`$

$$\widehat{g}_{1\overline{1}}=\frac{^2\widehat{K}_0}{X^1\overline{X}^1}=1,\widehat{g}_{2\overline{2}}=\frac{^2\widehat{K}_0}{\stackrel{~}{X}^2\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}}}=+1.$$
(2.30)
In flat space the torsion and dilaton vanish and we have

$$B_{1\overline{2}}=\frac{^2\widehat{K}_0}{X^1\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}}}=0,B_{2\overline{1}}=\frac{^2\widehat{K}_0}{\stackrel{~}{X}^2\overline{X}^1}=0,$$
(2.31)
and

$$\phi =\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\widehat{g}_{2\overline{2}}=0.$$
(2.32)
Note that in order to get the dilaton equation (2.32), the dilaton term  should be added to the $`\sigma `$-model action $`S_\alpha ^0`$.

### 2.3 Vertex Operators

The vertex operators for the massless scalar in the $`\beta `$\- and $`\alpha `$-strings are given by

$$V_\beta (k)=e^{i(\overline{k}^1X^1+\overline{k}^2X^2+k^1\overline{X}^1+k^2\overline{X}^2)},$$
(2.33)
and

$$V_\alpha (k)=e^{i(\overline{k}^1X^1+\overline{k}^2\stackrel{~}{X}^2+k^1\overline{X}^1+k^2\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}})},$$
(2.34)
respectively. The ghost part will be treated separately. The vertex operator in the $`(1,1)`$-picture comes from the lowest component of the superfields and is the same for the $`\beta `$\- and $`\alpha `$-strings

$$V_L^{(1,1)}(z)=e^{ikx_L(z)},V_R^{(1,1)}(\overline{z})=e^{ikx_R(\overline{z})},$$
(2.35)
with $`k^2=0`$. Note that we use $`x`$ as the lowest component of the superfield $`X`$.

In order to obtain the vertex operators of higher superconformal ghost numbers we need to use the picture-changing operations  (see also ), that are implemented by acting on the vertex operators with the worldsheet supercharges given in (1.1). Using the OPE’s of the free fields of the form

$$x_L^I(z)x_L^J(w)\eta ^{IJ}\mathrm{log}(zw),\psi _L^I(z)\psi _L^J(w)\frac{\eta ^{IJ}}{zw},$$
(2.36)
it follows that

$$G_L^\pm (z)V_L^{(1,1)}(0)\frac{1}{z}(V_L^{(0,1)}(0),V_L^{(1,0)}(0)),$$
(2.37)
from which

$`V_L^{(0,1)}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(kJ_{}^L\psi _L(z))e^{ikx_L(z)},V_L^{(1,0)}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(kJ_+^L\psi _L(z))e^{ikx_L(z)}.`$ (2.38)
Here $`J_\pm ^L=\eta \pm i𝒥^L`$. Also

$$G_R^\pm (\overline{z})V_R^{(1,1)}(0)\frac{1}{\overline{z}}(V_R^{(0,1)}(0),V_R^{(1,0)}(0)),$$
(2.39)
from which

$`V_R^{(0,1)}(\overline{z})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(kJ_{}^R\psi _R(\overline{z}))e^{ikx_R(\overline{z})},V_R^{(1,0)}(\overline{z})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(kJ_+^R\psi _R(\overline{z}))e^{ikx_R(\overline{z})}.`$ (2.40)
Here we define $`J_\pm ^R=\eta \pm i𝒥^R`$. Finally, the vertex operator of $`(0,0)`$-picture is

$$G_L^{}(z)V_L^{(0,1)}(0)G_L^+(z)V_L^{(1,0)}(0)\frac{1}{z}V_L^{(0,0)}(0),$$
(2.41)
from which

$$V_L^{(0,0)}(z)=\left(k𝒥^Lx_L+\frac{1}{2}\left(kJ_+^L\psi _L\right)\left(kJ_{}^L\psi _L\right)\right)e^{ikx_L}.$$
(2.42)
The right sector vertex operator of the same picture takes the same form with $`LR`$.

As discussed in , the scalar $`\varphi `$ of the $`\beta `$-string is a deformation of the Kähler structure (2.26) as $`K_0K_0+\varphi `$. What is the interpretation of the scalar $`\varphi `$ of the $`\alpha `$-string? A generating function for the scattering amplitudes is

$$\mathrm{exp}\left(d^2zd^4\theta \varphi (X^1,\overline{X^1},\stackrel{~}{X}^2,\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}})\right),$$
(2.43)
where

$$\varphi (X^1,\overline{X^1},\stackrel{~}{X}^2,\overline{\stackrel{~}{X^2}})=d^4k\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(k)V_\alpha (k),$$
(2.44)
and $`V_\alpha (k)`$ is the scalar vertex operator (2.34). Thus, $`\varphi `$ is a deformation of $`\widehat{K}_0`$ in (2.30) $`\widehat{K}_0\widehat{K}_0+\varphi `$.

In the next section, we will compute the scattering amplitudes of $`\alpha `$-string and derive the effective action for $`\varphi `$.

## 3 Scattering Amplitudes

In this section, we compute the three and four point amplitudes of $`N=2`$ strings on a sphere. Let us begin with the three point amplitude. Recall that the total superconformal ghost number of the amplitude on the sphere is two. The amplitude takes the form

$$𝒜_3=𝒜_3^L𝒜_3^R,$$
(3.1)
where $`𝒜_3^L`$ ($`𝒜_3^R`$) is the left (right) sector contribution

$`𝒜_3^L`$ $`=`$ $`V_L^{(1,1)}(z_1)V_L^{(1,1)}(z_2)V_L^{(0,0)}(z_3)`$ (3.2)
$`c_L(z_1)c_L(z_2)c_L(z_3)e^{\phi _L^+(z_1)}e^{\phi _L^+(z_2)}e^{\phi _L^{}(z_1)}e^{\phi _L^{}(z_2)}.`$
Here $`c_L`$ is the spin $`1`$ conformal ghost, and $`\phi ^\pm `$ come from the bosonization of the two sets of superconformal ghosts $`\beta ^\pm ,\gamma ^\pm `$. To evaluate the ghost part in $`𝒜_3`$, we use the formulas

$`c_L(z_1)c_L(z_2)c_L(z_3)`$ $`=`$ $`(z_1z_2)(z_2z_3)(z_1z_3),`$
$`e^{\phi _L^\pm (z_1)}e^{\phi _L^\pm (z_2)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z_1z_2}}.`$ (3.3)
By setting, say, $`z_1=\mathrm{},z_2=0,z_3=1`$, we obtain

$$𝒜_3=c_{ij}^Lc_{ij}^R,$$
(3.4)
where

$$c_{ij}^{L(R)}=ik_i^I𝒥_{IJ}^{L(R)}k_j^J,$$
(3.5)
and $`ij`$. For $`\beta `$-string, $`𝒥^L=𝒥^R=𝒥`$ so that

$$𝒜_3^\beta =(c_{ij})^2,$$
(3.6)
where

$$c_{ij}=ik_i^I𝒥_{IJ}k_j^J,$$
(3.7)
as in (2.5) and (2.6). This reproduces the result of .

For $`\alpha `$-string, $`𝒥^L=𝒥,𝒥^R=\stackrel{~}{𝒥}`$ and

$$𝒜_3^\alpha =c_{ij}\stackrel{~}{c}_{ij},$$
(3.8)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{c}_{ij}=ik_i^I\stackrel{~}{𝒥}_{IJ}k_j^J,$$
(3.9)
as in (2.11).

The two amplitudes $`𝒜_3^\beta `$ and $`𝒜_3^\alpha `$ are related by T-duality along one of two spatial directions 444Under T-duality along a time-like direction the amplitudes are equal up to a sign.. Consider, for instance, a T-duality along the $`x^4`$ direction, which is implemented by $`k_R^4k_R^4`$. Here $`k_R`$ is the momentum of a string in the right sector. It is easy to see that

$$c_{ij}(k^1,k^2,k^3,k^4)=\stackrel{~}{c}_{ij}(k^1,k^2,k^3,+k^4).$$
(3.10)
The amplitude (3.6) is reproduced by an effective action for the scalar  satisfying the Plebanski equation . We turn to the amplitude (3.8) and ask what is the effective action for the scalar that reproduces it. Here we find a somewhat surprising result.

Consider three on-shell momenta $`k_i`$ obeying $`k_1+k_2+k_3=0`$. It is useful to work in the complex basis of section 2, where the on-shell momenta take the form $`k=(k^l,\overline{k}^{\overline{l}})`$ with $`k_i^1=k_ie^{i\theta _i},k_i^2=k_ie^{i\varphi _i}`$ and $`k_i,\theta _i,\varphi _i`$ are real. Momentum conservation implies the relation

$$\mathrm{cos}(\theta _i\theta _j)=\mathrm{cos}(\varphi _i\varphi _j).$$
(3.11)
We can recast the amplitude as

$$c_{ij}\stackrel{~}{c}_{ij}=4(k_ik_j)^2\left[\mathrm{cos}^2(\theta _i\theta _j)\mathrm{cos}^2(\varphi _i\varphi _j)\right],$$
(3.12)
and hence $`𝒜_3^\alpha =0`$. This means that the effective action of the scalar of the $`\alpha `$-string has no three-point interaction.

Let us turn now to the computation of the four-point amplitude. Consider

$$𝒜_4=d^2z𝒜_4^L𝒜_4^R,$$
(3.13)
where $`𝒜_4^L`$ comes from the left sector

$`𝒜_4^L`$ $`=`$ $`V_L^{(1,1)}(z_1)V_L^{(1,1)}(z_2)V_L^{(0,0)}(z_3)V_L^{(0,0)}(z)`$ (3.14)
$`c_L(z_1)c_L(z_2)c_L(z_3)e^{\phi _L^+(z_1)}e^{\phi _L^+(z_2)}e^{\phi _L^{}(z_1)}e^{\phi _L^{}(z_2)},`$
and a similar expression for the right sector. To evaluate the amplitude, we need the following formulas that involve the complex structures

$$J_\pm \eta ^1J_\pm =2J_\pm ,J_\pm \eta ^1J_{}=0,$$
(3.15)
where $`J_\pm =\eta \pm i𝒥`$, and the integral formula

$`{\displaystyle d^2zz^{\alpha +n_1}\overline{z}^{\alpha +n_2}(1z)^{\beta +m_1}(1\overline{z})^{\beta +m_2}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}(\pi \alpha )\mathrm{sin}(\pi \beta )}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi (\alpha +\beta ))}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +n_1+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +n_2+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta +m_1+1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta +m_2+1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +\beta +n_1+m_1+2)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +\beta +n_2+m_2+2)}}.`$ (3.16)
Setting, say, $`z_1=1,z_2=\mathrm{},z_3=0`$, it is straightforward to show that

$$𝒜_4=\pi F^LF^R\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1s)\mathrm{\Gamma }(1t)\mathrm{\Gamma }(1u)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)},$$
(3.17)
with

$$F^{L(R)}=1\frac{c_{12}^{L(R)}c_{34}^{L(R)}}{su}\frac{c_{23}^{L(R)}c_{41}^{L(R)}}{tu}.$$
(3.18)
Here $`s=k_1k_2,t=k_2k_3,u=k_1k_3`$. Using the (2.7) we find that

$$𝒜_4^\alpha =𝒜_4^\beta =0.$$
(3.19)
Consider now the higher-point amplitudes. As discussed in , these amplitudes, if nonzero, will have infinite number of poles corresponding to unphysical massive string states, and therefore should vanish. Alternatively, it has been argued in  that for $`N=2`$ strings in a flat background, all the scattering amplitudes vanish except the sphere three-point amplitude. This stronger claim implies that the $`\alpha `$-string scalar is free to all orders in string perturbation theory. Note that, as argued in , the inclusion of contributions from sectors of nonzero worldsheet $`U(1)`$ instanton numbers does not modify the result.

## 4 Effective Action and Geometry

In this section we discuss the effective action and geometry of the $`N=2`$ strings. As shown in , the effective action of the $`\beta `$-string scalar is given by

$$S_\beta =\left(\varphi \overline{}\varphi +\frac{1}{3}\varphi \overline{}\varphi \overline{}\varphi \right).$$
(4.1)
This effective action reproduces the correct three-point and four-point amplitudes of the string computation. It has not been verified yet that all the higher-order amplitudes arising from (4.1) vanish 555For partial results in the open and closed strings cases see ..

Recall that $`\varphi `$ is a deformation of the flat space Kähler potential. The field equation for $`\varphi `$ is the Ricci flatness condition. Thus, the background is Kähler and Ricci-flat, which in four dimensions is equivalent to the curvature being self-dual.

Consider next the $`\alpha `$-string scalar. We have seen that all the $`n(3)`$-point amplitudes vanish. This implies that $`\alpha `$-string scalar is free and the effective action is

$$S_\alpha =\varphi \overline{}\varphi .$$
(4.2)
We have seen that $`\varphi `$ is a deformation of the potential $`\widehat{K}_0`$ in (2.27), so that the $`\sigma `$-model action is

$$S=d^2\sigma d^4\theta \widehat{K}(X,\overline{X},\stackrel{~}{X},\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}),$$
(4.3)
where $`\widehat{K}=\widehat{K}_0+\varphi `$. The geometry of the theories described by (4.3) has been studied in . Define

$`g_{X\overline{X}}=_X_{\overline{X}}\widehat{K},g_{\stackrel{~}{X}\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}}=_{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}}\widehat{K},`$
$`B_{X\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}}=_X_{\overline{\stackrel{~}{X}}}\widehat{K},B_{\stackrel{~}{X}\overline{X}}=_{\stackrel{~}{X}}_{\overline{X}}\widehat{K},`$ (4.4)
then by examining the scalar component of the action one finds that $`g_{IJ}`$ is the metric of the target space and $`B_{IJ}`$ is a two-form field.

One defines a connection with torsion by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\pm K}{}_{IJ}{}^{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }^K{}_{IJ}{}^{}H_{IJ}^K,$$
(4.5)
where $`H=dB`$. Conformal invariance requires the self-duality condition of the Riemann tensor with torsion (4.5) $`R_{IJKL}^\pm `$

$$R_{IJKL}^\pm =\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{KLMN}R_{IJ}^\pm {}_{}{}^{MN},$$
(4.6)
and

$$R_{IJKL}^+=R_{KLIJ}^{}.$$
(4.7)
The derivation of the result that $`\widehat{K}`$ is a free scalar using the worldsheet computations that we performed is in agreement with  that predicted this based on the conformal invariance of the $`\sigma `$-model. We note that while in the $`\sigma `$-model the result is expected to hold to all orders in $`\alpha ^{}`$, here we expect that it holds to all orders in the string loop expansion.

## 5 An $`\alpha `$-string Background

As an example we show that the four-dimensional transverse part of an NS5-brane background  solves the field equations of the $`\alpha `$-string. This is expected since the NS5-branes have been argued to be T-dual to ALE spaces , which are solutions of the $`\beta `$-string field equations. Thus, by T-duality we expect the NS5-branes to solve the $`\alpha `$-string field equations.

We consider first the signature $`(4,0)`$. The transverse part to the NS5-branes background reads

$`ds^2=e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }}\delta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu ,`$
$`H=dB=2Qϵ_3,`$
$`e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }}=e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }_0}+{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{x^2}}.`$ (5.1)
$`\mu ,\nu =0,\mathrm{},3`$ and $`x^2=x_\mu x^\mu `$. $`ϵ_3`$ is the volume form of a unit $`𝐒^3`$.

We look for a potential $`\varphi `$ that reproduces this background with $`\mu _p=0`$. Thus, $`\varphi `$ obeys the free field equation in four dimensions. Using the metric equations (4) we obtain

$$_1_{\overline{1}}\varphi =_2_{\overline{2}}\varphi =e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }_0}1+\frac{Q}{x^2}.$$
(5.2)
To solve this, we assume that $`\varphi `$ depends on $`r_1=|z_1|`$ and $`r_2=|z_2|`$. $`\varphi `$ takes the form

$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }_0}1}{4}}(r_1^2r_2^2){\displaystyle \frac{Q}{4}}\mathrm{Li}_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_1^2}{r_2^2}}\right)+Q\mathrm{log}r_1\mathrm{log}r_2{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{2}}\left(\mathrm{log}r_2\right)^2`$ (5.3)
$`+(k_1+k_2\mathrm{log}r_1)(k_3+k_4\mathrm{log}r_2).`$
Here $`k_1,k_2,k_3,k_4`$ are constant and $`\mathrm{Li}_2(x)`$ is the polylogarithm function satisfying

$$\frac{d}{dx}\mathrm{Li}_2(x)=\frac{\mathrm{log}(1x)}{x}.$$
(5.4)
Note that the potential depends on four free parameters. These correspond to symmetry transformations that leave the background unchanged. This is similar to Kähler transformations of $`\varphi `$ in the $`\beta `$-string.

The solution with signature $`(2,2)`$ is obtained by $`r_1ir_1`$.

## Acknowledgements

Y.O. would like to thank Z. Yin for valuable discussions. This research is supported by the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation.