text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

A better theoretical understanding of finite size (FS) effects is one of the most important problems in Quantum Field Theory (QFT). The study of FS effects is a useful method of analysing the structure of QFT models and it is an indispensable tool in the numerical simulation of lattice field theories.

Lüscher  derived a general formula for the FS corrections to particle masses in the large volume limit. This formula, which is generally applicable for any QFT model in any dimension, expresses the FS mass corrections in terms of an integral containing the forward scattering amplitude analytically continued to unphysical (complex) energy. It is most useful in $`1+1`$ dimensional integrable models , where the scattering data are available explicitly.

The usefulness of the study of the mass gap in finite volume is demonstrated  by the introduction of the Lüscher-Weisz-Wolff running coupling that enables the interpolation between the large volume (non-perturbative) and the small volume (perturbative) regions in both two-dimensional sigma models and QCD.

An important tool in the study of two-dimensional integrable field theories is the Thermodynamic Bethe Ansatz (TBA). This thermodynamical method was initiated by Yang and Yang  and allows the calculation of the free energy of the particle system. The calculation was applied to the XXZ model by Takahashi and Suzuki  who derived the TBA integral equations for the free energy starting from the Bethe Ansatz solution of the system and using the “string hypothesis” describing the distribution of Bethe roots. The form of the resulting TBA equations strongly depends on whether the anisotropy parameter $`p_0`$ (see Section 2) is an integer, rational or irrational number.

The TBA equations also determine FS effects in relativistic (Euclidean) invariant two-dimensional field theory models where the free energy is related to the ground state energy in finite volume by a modular transformation interchanging spatial extension and (inverse) temperature. Zamolodchikov  initiated the study of TBA equations for two-dimensional integrable models by pointing out that TBA equations can also be derived starting from the (dressed) Bethe Ansatz equations formulated directly in terms of the (infinite volume) scattering phase shifts of the particles. In this approach the FS dependence of the ground state energy has been studied  in many integrable models, mainly those formulated as perturbations of minimal conformal models.

TBA methods have been developed also in lattice statistical physics . Actually the basic functional relations, Y-system equations, TBA integral equations and also other techniques playing important role in the TBA analysis of continuum models have been originally introduced here. TBA equations describing the FS energy of excited states were proposed for some models. Also non-linear integral equations, similar to the Destri-deVega equations, appeared here first. An important model, the tricritical Ising model perturbed by its $`\varphi _{1,3}`$ operator, has been studied in detail . The TBA equations describing all excited states are worked out in this example, both for the massive and the massless perturbed models.

The TBA description of excited states is less systematic in continuum models. The excited state TBA systems first studied  are not describing particle states, they correspond to ground states in charged sectors of the model. An interesting suggestion is to obtain excited state TBA systems by analytically continuing  those corresponding to the ground state energy. TBA equations for scattering states were suggested for some perturbed field theory models by the analytic continuation method . Excited state TBA equations were also suggested for scattering multi-particle states for the Sine-Gordon model at its $`N=2`$ supersymmetric point .

The BLZ program  has been initiated to derive functional relations, Y-systems, and TBA integral equations, both for the ground state and for excited states, directly in the continuum. The construction is complete for the conformal field theory limit of the models only although some examples in massive perturbed models are also worked out. The original construction is based on the $`R`$-matrix corresponding to the quantum deformed loop algebra $`U_q(A_1^{(1)})`$ and can be applied to minimal models perturbed by their $`\varphi _{1,3}`$ field but it works also in the $`U_q(A_2^{(2)})`$ case , which is relevant to the $`\varphi _{1,2}`$ and $`\varphi _{2,1}`$ perturbations. In this family the TBA equations for the first two excited states in the non-unitary perturbed $`_{3,5}`$ model are worked out explicitly.

An alternative to the TBA equations is provided by the Destri-deVega (DdV) non-linear integral equations. They were originally suggested  for the ground state of the Sine-Gordon (SG) or the closely related massive Thirring (MT) model, but can be systematically generalized to describe excited states as well; the (common) even charge sector of the SG/MT model , the odd charge sector in both SG and MT  and even the states of perturbed minimal models, which can be represented as restrictions of the SG model . The advantage of this non-linear integral equation approach is that when available (SG/MT model and restrictions), it gives a systematic description of all excited states. The method has been generalized to higher rank imaginary coupling affine Toda models .

Meanwhile an alternative derivation of the TBA equations, which is independent of the validity of the string hypothesis has been found in the lattice approach for the generalized Hubbard model  and also for the XXZ model . Both models are solvable on the lattice by the Bethe Ansatz method and the new derivation of the TBA equations proceeds via the introduction of T-system and Y-system functions satisfying functional relations which can be transformed into TBA-type integral equations. Instead of the string hypothesis used in the original derivation , here the basic assumption is about the analytic structure of the Y-system functions (distribution of their zeroes) and the validity of these assumptions can be convincingly demonstrated numerically, at least for small lattices, by starting from the numerical solution of the Bethe Ansatz equations. The Takahashi-Suzuki results for the ground state energy are reproduced and new TBA equations for the excited states are found in this way. Actually for the excited state problem the TBA equations are supplemented by quantization conditions restricting the allowed values of particle momenta, which is natural for particles confined in a box.

In this paper we borrow the ideas of the lattice approach and apply them to the continuum QFT case. Following the steps of the lattice construction, we systematically build the T-system and Y-system functions for all multi-soliton (multi-fermion) states of the SG (MT) model. We find the appropriate continuum TBA equations and quantization conditions and a link between the TBA and the DdV equations.

Our starting point is the light-cone lattice regularization  of the SG/MT model and the Bethe Ansatz solution. We use twisted boundary conditions on the lattice and show that by changing the value of the parameter characterizing the boundary conditions we can describe both the even and the odd sectors of the model on an equal footing. Previously only the even sector was treated in the light-cone lattice formulation and the properties of the states belonging to the odd sector were conjectured by postulating the corresponding DdV equation in the continuum limit . Our result for the odd sector shows that the conjectured DdV equations are indeed correct in this sector.

Next we introduce the T-system and Y-system functions and write down the Y-system functional relations. In the even sector we recover the usual Y-system equations but we find that in the odd sector the Y-system equations are somewhat modified. Although the small modifications (with respect to the even sector) only occur at the end of the corresponding diagrams, this result shows that a naive analytic continuation of the even sector TBA equations would lead to incorrect results for the odd sector.

There is a link between the TBA Y-system functions and the “counting function” of the DdV approach. This link is explicitly given by the simple formula (18) and is used to write down explicitly the solution of the TBA Y-system for asymptotically large volume.

To transform the Y-system equations into TBA integral equations (and quantization conditions) we need to know the analytic properties of the Y-system functions, in particular the distribution of their zeroes. From the explicit solution we know this distribution in the infinite volume limit. Our main assumption in this paper is that the qualitative properties of this distribution remain the same for finite volume. In the TBA language the states are characterized by specifying the source terms in the integral equations and since the functional form of the source terms is volume independent, this can be read off from the known solution in the large volume limit.

Using the above method we write down the complete set of equations determining multi-particle momenta and energies in the TBA approach. We have verified the validity of our main assumption by numerically comparing the results of the TBA approach with those obtained using the DdV equations. In a particular case ($`p_0=4`$), where we found exact results for one-particle momenta and energies on the TBA side, we were able to verify the agreement by numerically solving the corresponding DdV equations to 20 digits.

For simplicity, in this paper we restrict attention to the repulsive case $`p_0>2`$ of the SG coupling and consider integer $`p_0`$ only. Moreover, we consider multi-soliton states only and no states containing both solitons and anti-solitons at the same time. We believe that appropriate TBA systems can be found also for more general couplings and more general states but the special cases we are considering in this paper are sufficient to present the main ideas and assumptions. Finally we note that although in the SG/MT case the excited state TBA description is “superfluous” since we already have the DdV equations to study FS physics, one can hope that the simple pattern of the excited state TBA systems we find here means that similar systems can be found also for other models, where no DdV type alternative is available.

The paper is organized as follows. The light-cone lattice regularization of the SG/MT model and the Bethe Ansatz solution is briefly recalled in Section 2. In Section 3 we introduce the T-system and Y-system functions and establish the link between the TBA Y-system and the “counting function” of the DdV approach. In Section 4 simple properties of the counting function are recalled. In Section 5 we write down the light-cone lattice TBA equations together with the quantization conditions. In section 6 we take the (finite volume) continuum limit of the equations. Multi-particle energy and momentum expressions are given in Section 7. In Section 8 we discuss a special case ($`p_0=4`$) where we can find exact expressions for the one-particle energies and momenta. In section 9 we discuss the DdV equation and its analytic continuation to the entire complex rapidity plane. In Section 10, using the link between the DdV equation and the TBA Y-system, we find the explicit solution of the infinite volume limit of the TBA problem. The ground state (no particles), one-particle, and two-particle problems are discussed in detail in Sections 11, 12, and 13, respectively. The numerical comparison of the results of the TBA approach with those obtained using the DdV equations is briefly described in Section 14 and finally our conclusions are summarized in Section 15. The technical details of the transformation of Y-system type functional relations into TBA type integral equations is discussed in the Appendix.

## 2 Light-cone approach to twisted SG model

Our starting point is the Bethe Ansatz solution of the integrable lattice regularization of the Sine-Gordon field theory . Here we briefly summarize the results of this approach  to the Sine-Gordon (and massive Thirring) model. The fields of the regularized theory are defined at sites (“events”) of a light-cone lattice and the dynamics of the system is defined by translations in the left and right lightcone directions. These are given by transfer matrices of the six-vertex model with anisotropy $`\gamma `$ and alternating inhomogeneities. This approach is particularly useful for calculating the finite size dependence of physical quantities. We take $`N`$ points ($`N`$ even) in the spatial direction and use twisted periodic boundary conditions. The lattice spacing is related to $`L`$, the (dimensionful) size of the system:

$$a=\frac{L}{N}.$$
(1)
The physical states of the system are characterized by the set of Bethe roots$`\{w_j,j=1,\mathrm{},m\frac{N}{2}\}`$, which satisfy the Bethe Ansatz equations (BAE)

$$\frac{Q(w_j+2i)}{Q(w_j2i)}=\frac{T_0(w_j+i)}{T_0(w_ji)}j=1,\mathrm{},m.$$
(2)
Here

$$T_0(\xi )=\left[k\left(\xi \frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right)k\left(\xi +\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right)\right]^{N/2},$$
(3)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the inhomogeneity parameter,

$$k(\xi )=\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\gamma }{2}\xi }{\mathrm{sin}\gamma }$$
(4)
and

$$Q(\xi )=e^{\frac{\omega \xi }{2}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\gamma }{2}(\xi w_j),$$
(5)
where the parameter $`\omega `$ is characterizing the twist of the boundary condition. We shall also use the parametrization

$$\gamma =\frac{\pi }{p_0}=\frac{\pi }{p+1}.$$
(6)
Finally the energy ($`E`$) and momentum ($`P`$) of the physical state can be obtained from the eigenvalues of the lightcone transfer matrices:

$$e^{ia(E\pm P)}=(1)^me^{\pm 2i\omega }\frac{Q\left[\pm \left(i+\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right)\right]}{Q\left[\pm \left(i+\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right)\right]}.$$
(7)
Besides the usual procedure, taking the thermodynamic limit ($`N\mathrm{}`$) first, followed by the continuum limit ($`a0`$) one can also study continuum limit in finite volume by taking $`N\mathrm{}`$ and tuning the inhomogeneity parameter $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ simultaneously as

$$\mathrm{\Theta }=\mathrm{ln}\frac{2}{a}=\mathrm{ln}\frac{2N}{l},$$
(8)
where the mass parameter $``$ is the infinite volume physical mass of the Sine-Gordon solitons and we have introduced $`l=L`$, the dimensionless size of the system.

## 3 T-system and Y-system

Besides $`Q(\xi )`$ and $`T_0(\xi )`$ it is useful to introduce  the (half-)infinite sequence of functions $`T_s(\xi )`$ for $`s=1,0,1,\mathrm{}`$ In the six-vertex model these are eigenvalues of the transfer matrices corresponding to higher spin representations (in the auxiliary space) and are obtained by the fusion procedure. Equivalently we can simply define them as $`T_1(\xi )=0`$ and

$$T_s(\xi )=Q(\xi +i+is)Q(\xi iis)\underset{j=0}{\overset{s}{}}q\left[\xi +i(2js)\right]$$
(9)
for $`s=0,1,\mathrm{}`$, where

$$q(\xi )=\frac{T_0(\xi )}{Q(\xi i)Q(\xi +i)}.$$
(10)
It is obvious from the definition that the $`T_s`$ are periodic functions,

$$T_s(\xi +2ip_0)=T_s(\xi ).$$
(11)
It can also be verified that they satisfy the T-system equations

$$T_s(\xi +i)T_s(\xi i)=T_{s+1}(\xi )T_{s1}(\xi )+T_0(\xi +i+is)T_0(\xi iis),s=0,1,\mathrm{}$$
(12)
which can then be used to recursively calculate them starting from $`T_1(\xi )`$.

The next step is to introduce the functions

$$Y_s(\xi )=\frac{T_{s+1}(\xi )T_{s1}(\xi )}{T_0(\xi +i+is)T_0(\xi iis)},$$
(13)
or equivalently

$$1+Y_s(\xi )=\frac{T_s(\xi +i)T_s(\xi i)}{T_0(\xi +i+is)T_0(\xi iis)}.$$
(14)
As consequence of the T-system equations (12) they satisfy the Y-system equations

$$Y_s(\xi +i)Y_s(\xi i)=[1+Y_{s+1}(\xi )][1+Y_{s1}(\xi )],s=1,2,\mathrm{}$$
(15)
Finally we introduce the exponential counting function

$$(\xi )=\frac{Q(\xi +2i)}{Q(\xi 2i)}\frac{T_0(\xi i)}{T_0(\xi +i)},$$
(16)
which can be used to rewrite the Bethe Ansatz equations as

$$(w_j)=1j=1,\mathrm{},m.$$
(17)
Combining the above definitions it is easy to see that the Y-functions can simply be expressed in terms of the exponential counting function starting with

$$1+Y_1(\xi )=\left[1+(\xi +i)\right]\left[1+\frac{1}{(\xi i)}\right]$$
(18)
and then using the Y-system equations (15) recursively.

The above algebraic considerations are supplemented by the observation that although the $`T_s(\xi )`$ as defined by (9) and (10) appear to be trigonometric rational functions but in fact they are trigonometric polynomials. This is a consequence of the Bethe Ansatz equations (2). It is also easy to see that

$$T_s(\xi )e^{\frac{\gamma }{2}N|\xi |}$$
(19)
asymptotically for $`\xi \pm \mathrm{}`$. The Y-functions are trigonometric rational functions, bounded for large $`|\xi |`$.

In the rest of this paper we restrict our attention to the following special case of the problem.

* $`p_0=p+1`$ integer ($`p2`$)
* $`w_j`$ all real and different
* $`\omega =0`$ or $`\omega =\frac{\pi }{2}`$

We have chosen these restrictions because while they make the discussion technically much easier than for the general case they still contain many physically interesting cases. We will discuss in detail

* case $`𝒜`$: $`\omega =0`$,
* case $`_1`$: $`\omega =\frac{\pi }{2}`$, $`p_0`$ odd,
* case $`_2`$: $`\omega =\frac{\pi }{2}`$, $`p_0`$ even.

For the special case $`p_0`$ integer the T-functions satisfy

$$T_{p_0}(\xi )T_{p_02}(\xi )=2(1)^m\mathrm{cos}(\omega p_0)T_0(\xi +ip_0)$$
(20)
and for cases $`𝒜`$ and $`_2`$ this allows us to define

$$K(\xi )=(1)^m\mathrm{cos}(\omega p_0)\frac{T_{p_02}(\xi )}{T_0(\xi +ip_0)},$$
(21)
which, together with $`\{Y_s(\xi ),s=1,2,\mathrm{},p_02\}`$ form a finite Y-system of type $`D_{p_0}`$, because

$`K(\xi +i)K(\xi i)`$ $`=`$ $`1+Y_{p_02}(\xi ),`$ (22)
$`\left[1+K(\xi )\right]^2`$ $`=`$ $`1+Y_{p_01}(\xi ).`$ (23)
For case $`_1`$ (20) implies the reflection symmetry

$`T_{p_01k}(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`T_{p_01+k}(\xi )k=0,1,\mathrm{},p_0`$ (24)
$`Y_{p_01k}(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`Y_{p_01+k}(\xi )k=0,1,\mathrm{},p_01`$ (25)
and this symmetry allows us to truncate the Y-system after $`Y_{p_01}`$. We call the corresponding finite Y-system of type $`A_{2p_03}^s`$.

To analyse the Y-system equations further we need some definitions. Let us write

$$N=2(m+d),$$
(26)
where $`0d\frac{N}{2}`$. A special case of $`𝒜`$, for which also $`d<p_0`$ will play an important role in the following. We call this sub-case $`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}`$. Similarly we denote by $`\stackrel{~}{}_2`$ the sub-case of $`_2`$ with $`d<\frac{p_0}{2}`$. We next define $`\zeta (\xi )`$ by

$$\zeta (\xi )=\underset{j=0}{\overset{p_01}{}}q\left[\xi +i(2j+1p_0)\right].$$
(27)
It is easy to see that for cases $`𝒜`$ and $`_2`$

$$\zeta (\xi +2i)=\zeta (\xi )$$
(28)
and

$$T_{p_01}(\xi )=\zeta (\xi )Q(\xi +ip_0)Q(\xi ip_0).$$
(29)
Further

$`T_{p_0}(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`(1)^m\kappa T_0(\xi +ip_0)+\zeta (\xi i)Q(\xi +i+ip_0)Q(\xi iip_0),`$ (30)
$`T_{p_02}(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`(1)^{m+1}\kappa T_0(\xi +ip_0)+\zeta (\xi i)Q(\xi +i+ip_0)Q(\xi iip_0),`$ (31)
where $`\kappa =\mathrm{cos}(\omega p_0)`$.

Because $`\zeta (\xi )`$ is periodic with period $`2i`$ and is free of singularities in the strip $`|\mathrm{Im}\xi |1`$ as can be seen from (29), it is actually an entire function and thus a Laurent polynomial in the variable $`e^{\pi \xi }`$. If $`d<p_0`$, as is the case for $`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}`$, then the only such polynomial consistent with the asymptotic equation (19) is $`\zeta (\xi )=c_0=\mathrm{const}.`$ Similarly for $`\stackrel{~}{}_2`$ (19) forces $`\zeta (\xi )`$ to vanish. In this latter case the $`D_{p_0}`$ type Y-system is further reduced since from (29) we have in this case

$$T_{p_01}(\xi )=0\mathrm{and}Y_{p_02}(\xi )=0.$$
(32)
The remaining Y-system for $`\{Y_s(\xi ),s=1,2,\mathrm{},p_03\}`$ is of type $`A_{p_03}`$.

For later use we note that in case $`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}`$

$$T_{p_01}(\xi )=c_0Q(\xi +ip_0)Q(\xi ip_0)$$
(33)
and this implies that $`T_{p_01}(\xi )`$ has no zeroes in the strip $`|\mathrm{Im}\xi |1`$. Similarly in case $`\stackrel{~}{}_2`$

$$T_{p_02}(\xi )=(1)^{m+1}(1)^{\frac{p_0}{2}}T_0(\xi +ip_0)$$
(34)
implies that $`T_{p_02}(\xi )`$ has no zeroes in the strip $`|\mathrm{Im}\xi |1`$.

To summarize, for integer $`p_0=p+1`$ we found three different types of finite Y-systems. The Y-functions can be associated with the nodes of the Dynkin-diagrams shown in Figures 1 and 2. Cases $`𝒜`$ and $`_2`$ correspond to the $`D_{p+1}`$-type diagram of Figure 1$`a`$ and case $`_1`$ corresponds to the $`A_{2p1}^s`$-type diagram of Figure 1$`b`$. The $`A_{p2}`$-type diagram of Figure 2 corresponds to the sub-case $`\stackrel{~}{}_2`$. The Y-system equations are of the form

$$W_a(\xi +i)W_a(\xi i)=\underset{b}{}\left[1+W_b(\xi )\right]^{I_{ab}}.$$
(35)
Here $`W_a(\xi )=Y_a(\xi )`$ for almost all cases with the exception of the last two nodes of the $`D_{p+1}`$ diagram (Figure 1$`a`$). In this case

$$W_{p+1}(\xi )=W_p(\xi )=K(\xi ).$$
(36)
The matrix elements $`I_{ab}`$ are defined as follows. $`I_{ab}`$ is zero if nodes $`a`$ and $`b`$ are not connected by links and it is unity if the nodes are connected by a single line. Finally the oriented double line at the end of the $`A_{2p1}^s`$ type diagram means

$$I_{p1p}=1I_{pp1}=2.$$
(37)
Our $`D_{p+1}`$ and $`A_{p2}`$-type Y-system equations coincide with the usual Y-system equations  associated with the Dynkin-diagrams of these simply laced Lie algebras. Our equations corresponding to the diagram of Figure 1$`b`$ correspond to those solutions of the standard Y-system equations for the Lie algebra $`A_{2p1}`$ that are symmetric under reflection of the Dynkin diagram.

## 4 The counting function

The next step in the Bethe Ansatz solution of the model is the definition of the “counting” function $`Z_N`$ , which will play an important role in our considerations. In (16) we have already defined the exponential counting function which can be used to find the positions of Bethe Ansatz “holes”, real solutions of (17), different from the Bethe roots:

$$(h_\alpha )=1\alpha =1,\mathrm{},H.$$
(38)
To define $`Z_N`$ properly, we need some more definitions. If the function $`f(z)`$ is analytic and non-vanishing (ANZ) in some simply connected domain $`𝒰`$ then we can define its “logarithm” $`\mathrm{log}f(z)`$ as the primitive function of $`f^{}(z)/f(z)`$, up to a constant, which can be fixed by giving the value of $`\mathrm{log}f(z_0)`$ for some $`z_0𝒰`$.

Using the above definition we now introduce the functions

$$\varphi _r(\xi )=i\mathrm{log}\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\gamma }{2}(ir\xi )}{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\gamma }{2}(ir+\xi )},\varphi _r(0)=0$$
(39)
in the strip $`|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<r`$ (for $`0<r<p_0`$). For later use we note that

$$\varphi _r(\pm \mathrm{})=\pm \pi \frac{p_0r}{p_0}.$$
(40)
The counting function $`Z_N`$ is now defined as<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1 The $`\frac{\pi }{2}`$ factor is present in the argument of $`Z_N`$ because our variable $`\xi `$ differs by this factor from the usual rapidity variable.

$$Z_N\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)=\frac{N}{2}\left\{\varphi _1\left(\xi \frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right)+\varphi _1\left(\xi +\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right)\right\}\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}\varphi _2(\xi w_j).$$
(41)
The precise relation between $`Z_N`$ and the exponential counting function is

$$(\xi )=(1)^\delta e^{iZ_N\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)},$$
(42)
where

$$\delta m+\frac{2\omega }{\pi }(\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}).$$
(43)
Using (40) we can calculate

$$Z_N(\pm \mathrm{})=\pm \pi \left(m+2d\frac{2d}{p_0}\right).$$
(44)
In the following we will assume that the Bethe Ansatz solution we are considering is such that the counting function is essentially monotonically increasing. We require that

$`Z_N^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}w_j\right)`$ $`>`$ $`0j=1,\mathrm{},m,`$ (45)
$`Z_N^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}h_\alpha \right)`$ $`>`$ $`0\alpha =1,\mathrm{},H,`$ (46)
$`Z_N^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\xi \right)`$ $`>`$ $`0\text{for large }|\xi |`$ (47)
and call such solutions non-degenerate. We will see that all solutions are non-degenerate for large enough $`l`$ but we assume that this property of the solutions is sustained also for smaller values of $`l`$.

For non-degenerate solutions (44) can be used to obtain a simple formula that gives the number of holes in terms of Bethe Ansatz data:

$`\omega =0:H`$ $`=`$ $`2d2\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{p_0}}\right]\delta m(\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}),`$ (48)
$`\omega ={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}:H`$ $`=`$ $`2d12\left[{\displaystyle \frac{d}{p_0}}\right]\delta m+1(\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}).`$ (49)
(In the above formulae the square brackets stand for integer part.)

(48) and (49) show that the $`\omega =0`$ sector originally studied  corresponds to states containing an even number of holes, whereas states with odd number of holes are in the $`\omega =\frac{\pi }{2}`$ sector. The twist parameter $`\omega `$ has been used in the description of restricted Sine-Gordon models  but here we see that it can also be used to study the odd particle sector in the original (unrestricted) Sine-Gordon and Massive Thirring models. The description of this important sector of the theory (containing the physically most interesting one-particle states) has been based on conjectures  but as we see here it can be studied on an equal footing with the even sector.

## 5 Lattice TBA equations

We now translate the the Y-system functional relations (35) into TBA integral equations . As explained in the Appendix, we need to know the zeroes and poles of $`W_a(\xi )`$ in the strip $`|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<1`$ together with their asymptotic behaviour. We will call this strip the main strip. From the definitions (13) and (21) it is clear that all $`W_a(\xi )`$ are bounded at infinity and that in the main strip they can have zeroes only, there are no poles. It is also clear from these definitions that the zeroes of $`W_a(\xi )`$ are inherited from the neighbouring $`T_s(\xi )`$ functions.

Let the set of zeroes of $`T_k(\xi )`$ in the main strip be

$$\widehat{r}_k=\left\{\widehat{y}_k^{(n)}\right\}_{n=1}^{\widehat{R}_k}.$$
(50)
The zeroes are not necessarily different from each other, for example

$$\widehat{r}_0=\frac{N}{2}\{\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi },\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\},\widehat{R}_0=N.$$
(51)
The zeroes of $`T_1(\xi )`$ are solutions of the equation

$$(\widehat{y}_1^{(n)})=1,$$
(52)
different from the Bethe roots $`w_j`$. This set includes the holes defined in (38) and may contain $`C`$ additional complex “holes”, complex solutions of (52) in the main strip. Thus, $`\widehat{R}_1=H+C`$.

The set of zeroes of $`W_a(\xi )`$ will be denoted by

$$\widehat{q}_a=\left\{\widehat{z}_a^{(\alpha )}\right\}_{\alpha =1}^{\widehat{Q}_a}$$
(53)
and is given by

$`D_{p+1}:\widehat{q}_a`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{r}_{a1}\widehat{r}_{a+1}a=1,\mathrm{},p1`$ (54)
$`\widehat{q}_p`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{q}_{p+1}=\widehat{r}_{p1}`$ (55)
$`\text{}A_{2p1}^s:\widehat{q}_a`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{r}_{a1}\widehat{r}_{a+1}a=1,\mathrm{},p1`$ (56)
$`\widehat{q}_p`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{r}_{p1}\widehat{r}_{p+1}=2\widehat{r}_{p1}`$ (57)
$`\text{}A_{p2}:\widehat{q}_a`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{r}_{a1}\widehat{r}_{a+1}a=1,\mathrm{},p3`$ (58)
$`\widehat{q}_{p2}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{r}_{p3}`$ (59)
We note that in (59) we have used the fact that $`\widehat{R}_{p1}=0`$ as established after (34) and that in the special case $`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}`$ $`\widehat{R}_p=0`$ as follows from (33).

To be able to use the results of the Appendix we make the following definitions.

$$l_a(u)=\underset{b}{}I_{ab}\mathrm{ln}[1+W_b(u)],$$
(60)
$$\beta _a(\xi )=\frac{1}{4}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\frac{l_a(u)}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}(\xi u)},$$
(61)
$$\alpha _a(u)=\frac{1}{4}𝒫_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑v\frac{l_a(v)}{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2}(vu)}.$$
(62)
(In the last formula $`𝒫`$ stands for principal value integration.)

Using the main result (170) of the Appendix we now transform the Y-system equations (35) into TBA integral equations:

$$W_a(\xi )=\widehat{\sigma }_a\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{\widehat{Q}_a}{}}\tau \left(\xi \widehat{z}_a^{(\alpha )}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _a(\xi )\right\},$$
(63)
where $`\widehat{\sigma }_a`$ is the sign of $`W_a(\mathrm{})`$ and $`\tau (\xi )`$ is defined in (171).

The integral equations (63) are not sufficient to reconstruct the functions $`W_a(\xi )`$ completely. They have to be supplemented by the “quantization conditions”

$$1+W_a\left(\widehat{y}_a^{(n)}\pm i\right)=0n=1,\mathrm{},\widehat{R}_aa=1,\mathrm{},p.$$
(64)
($`a=1,\mathrm{},p2`$ for the $`A_{p2}`$ system.)

It is easy to see that (64) follows from the Y-system equations but it is also true that (63) and (64) together are completely equivalent to the Y-system equations (35).

## 6 Continuum limit

We are interested in the finite volume continuum limit, which is obtained by taking $`N\mathrm{}`$ and tuning the inhomogeneity parameter simultaneously according to (8). In the Bethe Ansatz language in this limit we have to take $`m\mathrm{}`$ while keeping $`d,H`$ fixed.

We assume that the Y-system functions $`W_a(\xi )`$ have well-defined continuum limits. The corresponding limit of the set of zeroes $`\widehat{r}_k`$ will be denoted by $`r_k`$:

$$\widehat{r}_k=\left\{\widehat{y}_k^{(n)}\right\}_{n=1}^{\widehat{R}_k}r_k=\left\{y_k^{(n)}\right\}_{n=1}^{R_k},$$
(65)
where $`R_k\widehat{R}_k`$, since some of the zeroes can disappear in the process by going to infinity.

Actually, all the zeroes of $`T_0(\xi )`$ go away in the limit and the corresponding factor

$$C_N(\xi )=\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}\tau \left(\xi \widehat{y}_0^{(n)}\right)=(1)^{\frac{N}{2}}\left\{\frac{1\frac{l}{2N}e^{\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }}{1+\frac{l}{2N}e^{\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }}\frac{1\frac{l}{2N}e^{\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }}{1+\frac{l}{2N}e^{\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }}\right\}^{\frac{N}{2}}$$
(66)
becomes

$$(1)^{\frac{N}{2}}e^{l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }$$
(67)
in the continuum limit.

We denote by $`\sigma _a`$ the sign of $`W_a(\mathrm{})`$ in the continuum limit, which can also differ from $`\widehat{\sigma }_a`$.

In the continuum limit

$$\widehat{q}_aq_a=\left\{z_a^{(\alpha )}\right\}_{\alpha =1}^{Q_a},$$
(68)
where

$$q_1=r_2,q_a=r_{a1}r_{a+1}a=2,\mathrm{},p1$$
(69)
($`a=2,\mathrm{},p3`$ for the $`A_{p2}`$ case) and

$`q_p=q_{p+1}`$ $`=`$ $`r_{p1}(D_{p+1}),`$
$`q_p`$ $`=`$ $`2r_{p1}(A_{2p1}^s),`$ (70)
$`q_{p2}`$ $`=`$ $`r_{p3}(A_{p2}p5).`$
With these definitions the TBA integral equations in the continuum limit become

$$W_a(\xi )=\sigma _ae^{\delta _{a1}l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{Q_a}{}}\tau \left(\xi z_a^{(\alpha )}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _a(\xi )\right\},$$
(71)
which have to be supplemented by the quantization conditions

$$1+W_a\left(y_a^{(n)}\pm i\right)=0n=1,\mathrm{},R_aa=1,\mathrm{},p.$$
(72)
($`a=1,\mathrm{},p2`$ for the $`A_{p2}`$ system.) The exponential factor $`e^{l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }`$ is present in the TBA equation for $`a=1`$ only. This is indicated in Figures 1 and 2 by colouring the corresponding nodes black.

An important special case is when all zeroes are real. In this case the modulus of $`W_a\left(y_a^{(n)}\pm i\right)`$ is automatically equal to unity and (72) can be rewritten as

$$(i)^{Q_a}\mathrm{exp}i\left\{\delta _{a1}l\mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{\pi }{2}y_a^{(n)}\right)\alpha _a\left(y_a^{(n)}\right)+\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{Q_a}{}}\gamma \left(y_a^{(n)}z_a^{(\alpha )}\right)\right\}=\sigma _a,$$
(73)
for $`n=1,\mathrm{},R_a`$ and $`a=1,\mathrm{},p`$ ($`a=1,\mathrm{},p2`$ for $`A_{p2}`$). In (73) the notation

$$\gamma (u)=2\mathrm{arctan}\left(\tau (u)\right)$$
(74)
is used. Note that $`|\gamma (u)|\frac{\pi }{2}`$ for real $`u`$.

## 7 Energy and momentum

The formulae (7) determinig the energy and momentum of the Bethe Ansatz state can be rewritten in terms of $`T_0(\xi )`$ and $`T_1(\xi )`$ as

$$e^{2iaE}=\frac{T_1\left(\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }i\right)T_1\left(i\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right)}{T_0^2\left(\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }2i\right)},e^{2iaP}=e^{4i\omega }\frac{T_1\left(\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }i\right)}{T_1\left(i\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right)}.$$
(75)
From (14) we see that $`T_1(\xi )`$ satisfies

$$T_1(\xi +i)T_1(\xi i)=\left[1+Y_1(\xi )\right]T_0(\xi +2i)T_0(\xi 2i),$$
(76)
which is of the form (165) and can be solved by the techniques explained in the Appendix. For this purpose we first define

$$T_1(\xi )=\widehat{\sigma }\stackrel{~}{T}_1(\xi )\mathrm{\Phi }^{N/2}(\xi ),$$
(77)
where $`\widehat{\sigma }`$ is a sign, $`\stackrel{~}{T}_1(\xi )`$ has the same zeroes as $`T_1(\xi )`$, has no poles, it is positive for $`\xi \mathrm{}`$, and satisfies

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_1(\xi +i)\stackrel{~}{T}_1(\xi i)=1+Y_1(\xi ).$$
(78)
In (77) the factor $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi )^{N/2}`$ solves the $`T_0`$-dependent part of (76):

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi )=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\mathrm{\Delta }(\xi )\right\},\mathrm{\Delta }(\xi )=\frac{1}{4}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\frac{\mathrm{ln}B(u,\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi })}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}(\xi u)},$$
(79)
where

$$B(u,\lambda )=k(u+\lambda +2i)k(u+\lambda 2i)k(u\lambda +2i)k(u\lambda 2i).$$
(80)
Now we take the logarithm of (75) and get

$`E`$ $`=`$ $`E_0+\overline{E}\overline{E}=S_++S_{},`$ (81)
$`P`$ $`=`$ $`P_0+\overline{P}\overline{P}=S_+S_{},`$ (82)
where

$$S_+=\frac{i}{2a}\mathrm{ln}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\left(\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }i\right)S_{}=\frac{i}{2a}\mathrm{ln}\left[(1)^H\stackrel{~}{T}_1\left(i\frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right)\right]$$
(83)
and the energy and momentum constants are

$`E_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{a}}N_0{\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{a}}+{\displaystyle \frac{iN}{2a}}\left\{\mathrm{\Delta }\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }}i\right){\displaystyle \frac{i\pi }{2}}+\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{sin}\gamma \mathrm{ln}\mathrm{sinh}\gamma \left({\displaystyle \frac{2\theta }{\pi }}i\right)\right\},`$ (84)
$`P_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{a}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{a}}N_1.`$ (85)
Here the choice of the integers $`N_0`$ and $`N_1`$ (which are in principle arbitrary) is part of the regularization scheme. If we choose $`N_0=N_1=0`$ we get

$$P_0=\frac{\omega }{a}\mathrm{and}E_0=\frac{\omega }{a}+\frac{N}{2a}\chi _0\left(\frac{4\mathrm{\Theta }}{\pi }\right).$$
(86)
The precise definition of the function $`\chi _0(\xi )`$ will be given later. What is important here is that $`E_0`$ and $`P_0`$ are universal in the sense that they are the same for all states in a given sector characterized by $`\omega =0`$ or $`\omega =\frac{\pi }{2}`$. Omitting these unphysical constants leaves us with the physical energy and momentum eigenvalues $`\overline{E}`$ and $`\overline{P}`$.

Using the method outlined in the Appendix we can solve (78):

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_1(\xi )=\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}\tau (\xi h_\alpha )\underset{\beta =1}{\overset{C}{}}\tau (\xi \mathrm{\Omega }_\beta )\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{4}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\frac{\mathrm{ln}[1+Y_1(u)]}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}(\xi u)}\right\}.$$
(87)
Here $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\beta `$ are complex solutions of (52). Using the definitions (83) finally we get in the continuum limit

$`\overline{E}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}}\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi h_\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \underset{\beta =1}{\overset{C}{}}}\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{\Omega }_\beta }{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑u\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi u}{2}}\mathrm{ln}[1+Y_1(u)]\right],`$ (88)
$`\overline{P}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi h_\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \underset{\beta =1}{\overset{C}{}}}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{\Omega }_\beta }{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑u\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi u}{2}}\mathrm{ln}[1+Y_1(u)]\right].`$ (89)
## 8 The $`A_1`$ case

One of the simplest cases is $`p=3`$, $`d=H=1`$. In this case we can determine the energy and momentum eigenvalues exactly.

In this case $`\delta \frac{N}{2}`$ and from (13) it follows that $`Y_1(\mathrm{})>0`$. Further $`\beta _1(\xi )=0`$ and $`\widehat{R}_2=0`$ here and (63) reduces to

$$Y_1(\xi )=W_1(\xi )=C_N(\xi ).$$
(90)
It is easy to see that there cannot be any complex holes in this case. Thus $`\widehat{R}_1=1`$ and we introduce $`\widehat{y}_1^{(1)}=\widehat{h}`$ for the position of the single (real) hole. The solution of (64) gives

$$\widehat{h}=h+\frac{h_2}{N^2}+𝒪\left(N^3\right),$$
(91)
where $`h`$ is the solution of

$$l\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2}h=2\pi M_1,M_1\frac{1+\delta }{2}(\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1})$$
(92)
and

$$h_2=\frac{l^2}{6\pi }\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{3}{2}\pi h\right)}{\mathrm{cosh}\left(\frac{1}{2}\pi h\right)}.$$
(93)
In the continuum limit we get

$$Y_1(\xi )=(1)^\delta e^{l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }$$
(94)
and the energy and momentum eigenvalues are

$`\overline{E}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi h}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{4}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑u\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi u}{2}}\mathrm{ln}[1+(1)^\delta e^{l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}u}],`$ (95)
$`\overline{P}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi h}{2}}={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi M_1}{L}}.`$ (96)
It is interesting to note that the momentum eigenvalues (96) are exactly the same as they would be in a free theory. The $`p=3`$ model is not free however since the SG S-matrix is non-trivial at $`\beta ^2=6\pi `$. (The free fermion point is $`\beta ^2=4\pi `$ or $`p=1`$.) The energy eigenvalues differ from those of the free theory by the second term in (95). On the other hand, this shift is independent of the momentum quantum number $`M_1`$. We note that it is only the one-particle states that can be exactly solved for $`p=3`$. We also note that it is not obvious in the DdV language that $`p=3,H=1`$ is a special case and we were able to solve the corresponding DdV equations only numerically.

## 9 Destri-deVega equation

In the Sine-Gordon (MT) model a non-linear integral equation (Destri-deVega equation) is used to describe the Bethe Ansatz states and calculate their energy and momentum . This is formulated in terms of the counting function $`Z_N`$ and its exponential, $`(\xi )`$.

Let us chose the parameter $`B`$ so that there are no complex holes in the strip $`0<\mathrm{Im}\xi <B`$. Then we can define

$$_+(\xi )=\mathrm{log}\left[1+(\xi )\right]0<\mathrm{Im}\xi <B.$$
(97)
We define further the function $`\chi (\xi )`$ by

$$\chi ^{}(\xi )=G(\xi ),\chi (0)=0,$$
(98)
where

$$G(\xi )=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑ke^{ik\xi }\frac{\mathrm{sinh}(p1)k}{2\mathrm{cosh}k\mathrm{sinh}pk}.$$
(99)
The function $`\chi _0(\xi )`$ occurring in (86) is defined analogously with $`p`$ replaced by$`p_0=p+1`$.

For non-degenerate states

$$_+(\xi )=\widehat{L}_+(\xi )=\mathrm{ln}\left[1+(1)^\delta e^{iZ_N\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)}\right]$$
(100)
and the DdV equation can be written as

$$Z_N\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)=\frac{N}{2}\left\{\mathrm{arctan}\left[\mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \mathrm{\Theta }\right)\right]+\mathrm{arctan}\left[\mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi +\mathrm{\Theta }\right)\right]\right\}+\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}\chi (\xi h_\alpha )$$

$$+\frac{1}{2\pi i}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\left[G(\xi ui\eta )\widehat{L}_+(u+i\eta )G(\xi u+i\eta )\widehat{L}_+^{}(u+i\eta )\right],$$
(101)
where $`0<\eta <B`$. Analogously to the quantization conditions (64) supplementing the TBA integral equations the DdV equations are supplemented by the quantization conditions

$$Z_N\left(\frac{\pi }{2}h_\alpha \right)=2\pi M_\alpha M_\alpha \frac{1+\delta }{2}(\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1})\alpha =1,\mathrm{},H.$$
(102)
The counting function $`Z_N`$ has continuum limit $`Z`$ in terms of which the continuum DdV equation reads

$$Z\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)=l\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi +\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}\chi (\xi h_\alpha )$$

$$+\frac{1}{2\pi i}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\left[G(\xi ui\eta )L_+(u+i\eta )G(\xi u+i\eta )L_+^{}(u+i\eta )\right],$$
(103)
where

$$L_+(\xi )=\mathrm{ln}\left[1+(1)^\delta e^{iZ\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)}\right].$$
(104)
The energy and momentum in the continuum can be expressed in terms of the positions of the holes $`h_\alpha `$ and $`L_+`$:

$`\overline{E}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}}\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi h_\alpha }{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{2}}\mathrm{Im}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑u\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}(u+i\eta )L_+(u+i\eta ),`$ (105)
$`\overline{P}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi h_\alpha }{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{2}}\mathrm{Im}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑u\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}(u+i\eta )L_+(u+i\eta ).`$ (106)
For large physical size $`l`$ the function $`L_+`$ is exponentially small and the integrals containing it in the DdV equation (103) and also in the energy and momentum expressions can be neglected. In this approximation the quantization conditions (102) are nothing but the (dressed) Bethe Ansatz equations for solitons/fermions in the SG/MT model. This leads to the identification

$`\mathrm{SG}:(\mathrm{soliton}\mathrm{soliton})`$ $`S(\theta )=\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\chi \left({\displaystyle \frac{2\theta }{\pi }}\right)\right\}`$
$`\delta H(\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2})`$
and

$`\mathrm{MT}:(\mathrm{fermion}\mathrm{fermion})`$ $`S(\theta )=\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\chi \left({\displaystyle \frac{2\theta }{\pi }}\right)\right\}`$
$`\delta =0,`$
where $`S(\theta )`$ is the scattering phase for soliton/fermion scattering.

The parameter $`p`$ is related to the usual SG coupling $`\beta `$ by

$$\beta ^2=\frac{8\pi p}{p+1}.$$
(109)
$`p=1`$ corresponds to the free fermion point and $`p=\mathrm{}`$ to the XY model (asymptotically free point).

For large $`l`$ the first term on the right hand side of (103) dominates and this shows that $`Z\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)`$ is monotonically increasing for real $`\xi `$. We already used the assumption that this property remains valid also for smaller $`l`$.

The DdV equation (103) is suitable for numerical calculations. To study the analytic properties of the solution it is useful to rewrite it in the form

$$Z\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)=l\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi +\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}\chi (\xi h_\alpha )+_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑uG(\xi u)Q(u),$$
(110)
where

$$Q(u)=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\eta 0}{lim}\mathrm{Im}L_+(u+i\eta ).$$
(111)
The representation (110) is valid in the strip $`|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<2`$. Note that we are considering only the repulsive case $`p>1`$ in this paper. In the attractive regime $`p<1`$ some of our expressions have to be modified.

We now analytically continue the counting function to the whole complex $`\xi `$ plane. For this purpose we define

$`\gamma _1(\xi )=i\mathrm{log}w(\xi )\gamma _1(ip)`$ $`=`$ $`\pi 1<\mathrm{Im}\xi <2p1,`$ (112)
$`\gamma _2(\xi )=i\mathrm{log}w(\xi )\gamma _2(ip)`$ $`=`$ $`\pi 2p+1<\mathrm{Im}\xi <1,`$ (113)
where

$$w(\xi )=\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2p}(i\xi )}{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2p}(i+\xi )}.$$
(114)
The analytical continuation of the counting function in the strip $`2<\mathrm{Im}\xi <2p`$ is

$$Z_1\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)=\delta \pi +\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}\gamma _1(\xi ih_\alpha )+_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑uK_1(\xi u)Q(u),$$
(115)
where

$$K_1(\xi )=G(\xi )+G(\xi 2i),$$
(116)
which is analytic in this strip.

Similarly in the strip $`2p<\mathrm{Im}\xi <2`$ the analytical continuation is

$$Z_2\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)=\delta \pi +\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}\gamma _2(\xi +ih_\alpha )+_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑uK_2(\xi u)Q(u),$$
(117)
where

$$K_2(\xi )=G(\xi )+G(\xi +2i),$$
(118)
which is analytic in this strip.

The exponential counting function is thus defined as

$$(\xi )=\{\begin{array}{cc}(1)^\delta e^{iZ_1\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)}\hfill & 2<\mathrm{Im}\xi <2p\\ (1)^\delta e^{iZ\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)}\hfill & |\mathrm{Im}\xi |<2\\ (1)^\delta e^{iZ_2\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\xi \right)}\hfill & 2p<\mathrm{Im}\xi <2\end{array}$$
(119)
and it is easy to see that this defines a meromorphic function with properties

$$(\xi +2ip_0)=(\xi ),^{}(\xi )=\frac{1}{(\xi ^{})}.$$
(120)
It has poles ($`\mathrm{}`$ many) at $`\xi =w_j+2i`$ and zeroes ($`\mathrm{}`$ many) at $`\xi =w_j2i`$.

## 10 Infinite volume solution

We have seen that for large $`l`$ the integrals give exponentially small contribution to the counting function $`Z`$. This is also true for $`Z_1`$ and $`Z_2`$ although this cannot be seen immediately from (115) and (117). However, it is possible to write $`Z_1`$ and $`Z_2`$ in a form analogous to (103) and show that the corresponding integrals are indeed exponentially small. Neglecting the integrals we have

$$(\xi )=\left[1+𝒪\left(e^{𝒦l}\right)\right]\{\begin{array}{cc}u(\xi )u(\xi 2i)\hfill & 2<\mathrm{Im}\xi <2p\\ e^{il\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }u(\xi )\hfill & |\mathrm{Im}\xi |<2\\ u(\xi )u(\xi +2i)\hfill & 2p<\mathrm{Im}\xi <2\end{array}$$
(121)
where $`𝒦`$ is $`\mathrm{Im}\xi `$-dependent and positive. The function $`u(\xi )`$ is defined by

$$u(\xi )=(1)^\delta \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}\sigma (\xi h_\alpha ),$$
(122)
where

$$\sigma (\xi )=e^{i\chi (\xi )}$$
(123)
is meromorphic with poles and zeroes on the imaginary axis and satisfies

$$\sigma (\xi +i)\sigma (\xi i)=w(\xi ).$$
(124)
Since we can express the Y-system functions in terms of the counting function starting with (18) we are able to calculate also the Y-functions with exponential precision for large $`l`$. For $`Y_1(\xi )`$ we find

$$Y_1(\xi )=\left[1+𝒪\left(e^{𝒦l}\right)\right]\{\begin{array}{cc}\eta _2(\xi i)\hfill & 3<\mathrm{Im}\xi <2p1\\ \lambda (\xi )e^{l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }\hfill & |\mathrm{Im}\xi |<3\\ \eta _2(\xi +i)\hfill & 2p+1<\mathrm{Im}\xi <3\end{array}$$
(125)
and using the Y-system equations (15) recursively we get for $`k=2,\mathrm{},p`$

$$Y_k(\xi )=\left[1+𝒪\left(e^{𝒦l}\right)\right]\eta _k(\xi )|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<k.$$
(126)
In (125)

$$\lambda (\xi )=u(\xi +i)+\frac{1}{u(\xi i)}$$
(127)
and

$$\eta _2(\xi )=\lambda (\xi +i)\lambda (\xi i)1.$$
(128)
The functions $`\eta _k(\xi )`$ satisfy the Y-system equations

$$\eta _k(\xi +i)\eta _k(\xi i)=\left[1+\eta _{k+1}(\xi )\right]\left[1+\eta _{k1}(\xi )\right]$$
(129)
for $`k=2,3,\mathrm{}`$ and this determines<sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2$`\eta _1(\xi )=0`$ by definition. $`\eta _k(\xi )`$ for $`k>2`$.

It is possible to find the solution of (129) explicitly. We note first that there is a class of solutions depending on a parameter $`q`$ and a function $`B(\xi )`$. Using these input data we first define

$$t_0(\xi )=0,t_k(\xi )=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}q^jB\left[\xi +i(k12j)\right]k=1,2\mathrm{}$$
(130)
and then it is easy to show that

$$\eta _k(\xi )=q^{1k}\frac{t_{k+1}(\xi )t_{k1}(\xi )}{B(\xi +ik)B(\xi ik)}k=1,2,\mathrm{}$$
(131)
solve (129). (131) is quite analogous to (13) and it is also true that

$$1+\eta _k(\xi )=q^{1k}\frac{t_k(\xi +i)t_k(\xi i)}{B(\xi +ik)B(\xi ik)}k=1,2,\mathrm{}$$
(132)
The actual solution entering (125) and (126) corresponds to the choice

$$q=(1)^HB(\xi )=\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{H}{}}\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2p}(\xi h_\alpha ).$$
(133)
This can be verified by computing $`\eta _2(\xi )`$ from (128) and from (131) with the above choice and showing that they coincide.

Similarly to the general Y-system equations, the set of $`\eta `$-functions can also be truncated. In cases $`𝒜`$ and $`_2`$ we can define

$$\kappa (\xi )=\frac{t_{p1}(\xi )}{B(\xi ip)}$$
(134)
and then the relations

$$\kappa (\xi +i)\kappa (\xi i)=1+\eta _{p1}(\xi )1+\eta _p(\xi )=\left[1+\kappa (\xi )\right]^2$$
(135)
can be used to show that the truncated system is of type $`D_{p+1}`$. If $`H<p`$ is also satisfied ($`\stackrel{~}{}_2`$ case) then $`t_p(\xi )=0`$ implies $`\eta _{p1}(\xi )=0`$ and this corresponds to the further truncation to $`A_{p2}`$. Finally in the $`_1`$ case reflection relations analogous to (24,25) are satisfied by $`t_k(\xi )`$ and $`\eta _k(\xi )`$ and the truncation is of type $`A_{2p1}^s`$ accordingly.

Similarly to the full Y-system where the zeroes are determined by those of the T-system, the zeroes of $`t_k(\xi )`$ determine the zeroes of $`\eta _k(\xi )`$. More concretely,

$`\lambda (\xi ):`$ $`\mathrm{ANZ}|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<3\text{except for zeroes of }t_2(\xi ),`$
$`\eta _k(\xi ):`$ $`\mathrm{ANZ}|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<k\text{except for zeroes of }t_{k+1}(\xi )t_{k1}(\xi ),`$ (136)
$`\kappa (\xi ):`$ $`\mathrm{ANZ}|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<p\text{except for zeroes of }t_{p1}(\xi ).`$
For later use we note that

$$\lambda (\pm \mathrm{})=2(1)^\delta \mathrm{cos}\left[\frac{\pi H}{2}\left(1\frac{1}{p}\right)\right].$$
(137)
We now consider some simple examples.

$`H=0`$ In this case we have a $`D_{p+1}`$ system for $`p2`$. From (122) and (127) we get

$$\lambda (\xi )=2(1)^\delta ,$$
(138)
where, according to (9) and (9) only the choice $`\delta =0`$ is physical. Further

$$B(\xi )=1,t_k(\xi )=k,\eta _k(\xi )=k^21,\kappa (\xi )=p1.$$
(139)
$`H=1`$ Here, according to (9,9) we have two choices:

$$\delta =1\text{for SG},\delta =0\text{for MT}$$
(140)
and we have an $`A_{2p1}^s`$ system for $`p2`$ even and an $`A_{p2}`$ system for $`p3`$ odd. The position of the hole is denoted by $`h_1=h`$. From (122) and (127) we find in this case

$$\lambda (\xi )=(1)^\delta \left\{e^{i\chi (\xi h+i)}+e^{i\chi (\xi hi)}\right\}$$
(141)
and from

$$B(\xi )=\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2p}(\xi h)$$
(142)
we have

$$t_k(\xi )=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{k\pi }{2p}\right)}{\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\pi }{2p}\right)}\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi (\xi h)}{2p}\hfill & k\text{ odd}\hfill \\ i\frac{\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{k\pi }{2p}\right)}{\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\pi }{2p}\right)}\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi (\xi h)}{2p}\hfill & k\text{ even}\hfill \end{array}$$
(143)
$`H=2`$ Here we have a $`D_{p+1}`$ system for $`p2`$ again and only the choice $`\delta =0`$ is physical. For simplicity we restrict our attention to the symmetric case

$$h_1=hh_2=h,$$
(144)
which corresponds to

$$B(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi \xi }{p}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi h}{p}.$$
(145)
Now we find

$$\lambda (\xi )=\left\{e^{i\chi (\xi h+i)+i\chi (\xi +h+i)}+e^{i\chi (\xi hi)i\chi (\xi +hi)}\right\}$$
(146)
and

$$t_k(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{k\pi }{p}\right)}{\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi }{p}\right)}\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi \xi }{p}\frac{k}{2}\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi h}{p}.$$
(147)
## 11 Ground state

The ground state of the system ($`H=0`$) belongs to the $`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}`$ case and corresponds to a $`D_{p+1}`$ type Y-system for $`p2`$. The only physical choice is $`\delta =0`$. From (139) we see that for $`l\mathrm{}`$ there are no zeroes and all $`W_a(\xi )`$ functions are positive. Our assumption is that these qualitative properties of the solution remain valid also for finite $`l`$ values. If this is true then (71) becomes

$$W_a(\xi )=e^{\delta _{a1}l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _a(\xi )\right\}a=1,\mathrm{},p+1$$
(148)
and there are no quantization conditions in this case. By taking the logarithm on both sides of (148) we reproduce the customary TBA system describing the ground state of the SG/MT model. Noting that both $`W_a(\xi )`$ and $`\beta _a(\xi )`$ are now even functions we find from (88) and (89)

$$P^{(0)}=0,E^{(0)}=\frac{}{4}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi u}{2}\mathrm{ln}\left[1+W_1(u)\right].$$
(149)
## 12 One-particle states

For one-particle states both $`\delta =1`$ (SG model) and $`\delta =0`$ (MT model) are possible. Moreover, depending on the parity of $`p`$, we have an $`A_{2p1}^s`$ Y-system ($`p2`$ even) or $`A_{p2}`$ Y-system ($`p5`$ odd<sup>3</sup><sup>3</sup>3We have already discussed the $`A_1`$ case.). Here we only consider the SG model with $`h_1=0`$ in detail, because in this case the quantization conditions are satisfied automatically, which simplifies the problem enormously.

Our main assumption will be again that the qualitative features of the $`l\mathrm{}`$ solution are also valid for finite $`l`$. From (141) and (143) we see that

* $`W_a(\xi ):`$ no zeroes for $`a`$ odd
* double zero at $`\xi =0`$ for $`a`$ even
* all $`W_a(\xi )`$ are negative, except $`W_p(\xi )`$ in the $`A_{2p1}^s`$ case

and this leads to the TBA equations

$$W_a(\xi )=(1)^{1+\delta _{pa}}e^{\delta _{a1}l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }\left[\tau (\xi )\right]^{1+(1)^a}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _a(\xi )\right\}a=1,\mathrm{},p.$$
(150)
($`a=1,\mathrm{},p2`$ for $`A_{p2}`$.) $`W_a(\xi )`$ and $`\beta _a(\xi )`$ are even functions and $`\alpha _a(\xi )`$ are odd. It follows that the quantization conditions (73) are automatically satisfied.

Finally from (88) and (89) we get

$$P^{(1)}=0,E^{(1)}=\frac{}{4}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi u}{2}\mathrm{ln}\left[1+W_1(u)\right].$$
(151)
## 13 Two-particle states

The two-particle states are the only ones among our examples where the quantization conditions (73) give nontrivial constraints. The $`H=2`$ states belong to the $`\stackrel{~}{𝒜}`$ case and correspond to a $`D_{p+1}`$ type Y-system ($`p2`$) and $`\delta =0`$.

Our conjecture is based again on the large $`l`$ solution. For simplicity we consider only the following symmetric distribution of zeroes:

$$r_k=\{H_k,H_k\}k=1,\mathrm{},p1,$$
(152)
where by convention $`H_k>0`$, the positions of the holes are $`h_1=H_1`$ and $`h_2=H_1`$ and the signs at infinity are

$$\sigma _1=1,\sigma _a=1a=2,\mathrm{},p2,\sigma _{p1}=\sigma _p=\sigma _{p+1}=1.$$
(153)
It is important to note that (153) and all subsequent formulae are valid for $`p3`$ only. The important special case $`p=2`$ will be discussed at the end of this section separately.

The TBA integral equations are

$`W_1(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`e^{l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }\tau (\xi H_2)\tau (\xi +H_2)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _1(\xi )\right\},`$ (154)
$`W_a(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`\tau (\xi H_{a1})\tau (\xi +H_{a1})\tau (\xi H_{a+1})\tau (\xi +H_{a+1})\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _a(\xi )\right\},`$ (155)
$`W_{p1}(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`\tau (\xi H_{p2})\tau (\xi +H_{p2})\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _{p1}(\xi )\right\},`$ (156)
$`W_p(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`W_{p+1}(\xi )=\tau (\xi H_{p1})\tau (\xi +H_{p1})\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _p(\xi )\right\}.`$ (157)
In (155) $`a=2,\mathrm{},p2`$ and because of the symmetric distribution of zeroes the functions $`W_a(\xi )`$ and $`\beta _a(\xi )`$ are even and $`\alpha _a(\xi )`$ are odd. For the same reason it is sufficient to require that (73) are satisfied for the positive zeroes:

$`l\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}H_1+\gamma (H_1H_2)+\gamma (H_1+H_2)\alpha _1(H_1)`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi M_1,`$ (158)
$`\gamma (H_aH_{a1})+\gamma (H_a+H_{a1})`$
$`+\gamma (H_aH_{a+1})+\gamma (H_a+H_{a+1})\alpha _a(H_a)`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi M_a,`$ (159)
$`\gamma (H_{p1}H_{p2})+\gamma (H_{p1}+H_{p2})\alpha _{p1}(H_{p1})`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi M_{p1}.`$ (160)
In (159) $`a=2,\mathrm{},p2`$ and all the quantum numbers $`M_a`$ are half-integers. The value of $`M_1`$ is part of the input data, whereas all others ($`M_a`$ for $`a=2,\mathrm{},p1`$) are determined from consistency. Numerically we found in all cases we considered that $`M_a=1/2`$ for $`a=2,\mathrm{},p1`$. Finally the two-particle momentum and energy are

$$P^{(2)}=0,E^{(2)}=2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}H_1\frac{}{4}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi u}{2}\mathrm{ln}\left[1+W_1(u)\right].$$
(161)
We end this section by the discussion of the special case $`p=2`$ corresponding to the supersymmetric point of the SG model. Here the TBA equations are

$`W_1(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`e^{l\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _1(\xi )\right\},`$ (162)
$`W_2(\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`W_3(\xi )=\tau (\xi H_1)\tau (\xi +H_1)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _2(\xi )\right\}`$ (163)
and there is just one quantization condition:

$$l\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2}H_1\alpha _1(H_1)=2\pi M_1.$$
(164)
## 14 Numerical iteration of the TBA equations

We have calculated the energy and momentum eigenvalues of the ground state and also of one- and two-particle states from the TBA equations numerically and compared the results with those obtained using the DdV equations. We have found agreement to many digits in all cases we considered and concluded that our TBA equations are completely equivalent to the DdV equations.

Our numerical checks covered a rather wide range of the physical size $`l`$ (from $`𝒪(1)`$ down to $`l10^2`$) and we considered a number of different choices for the parameter $`p`$, including the limit $`p=\mathrm{}`$. The agreement between TBA and DdV is especially spectacular for the $`A_1`$ case where we have exact results on the TBA side.

The infinite volume solution we found in Section 10, which we have used to help postulating qualitative properties of the Y-system elements, serve also as starting point of the numerical iteration procedure. We found that the convergence of the numerical iteration is rather fast and already the starting point is a surprisingly good approximation not only for large volumes but also for smaller $`l`$ values. In the $`H=2`$ case this is true in particular for the positions of zeroes, which change very little during the iteration.

## 15 Summary

In this paper we proposed TBA systems describing multi-soliton states of the Sine-Gordon (massive Thirring) model. We derived the TBA equations starting from the Bethe Ansatz solution of the light-cone lattice formulation of the model, which allows a uniform treatment of states with even an odd soliton number. The derivation also provides a simple link between the counting function of the Destri-deVega equation and the Y-system component functions of the TBA approach.

After considering the continuum limit of the lattice model, the only input we need is the distribution of zeroes of the TBA Y-functions (and their sign at infinity). This information can be read off from the infinite volume solution of the problem, which we found explicitly. Our main assumption in this paper is that what we find for the infinite volume solution remains qualitatively valid for all physical volumes. We verified this assumption numerically by comparing the TBA results with those obtained by the alternative Destri-deVega nonlinear integral equation.

The simple pattern of the excited state TBA systems found here gives us some hope that it will be possible to find TBA equations for excited states also in other models, even if no DdV type alternative is available there.

Acknowledgements

This investigation was supported in part by the Hungarian National Science Fund OTKA (under T030099, T034299 and T043159).

## Appendix A Appendix

In this appendix we recall the solution  of the basic functional equation

$$f(\xi +i)f(\xi i)=B(\xi ).$$
(165)
Here $`f(\xi )`$ is assumed to be meromorphic in the strip $`|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<1+ϵ`$, satisfying the reality condition

$$f^{}(\xi )=f(\xi ^{}).$$
(166)
Let $`\{r_\alpha \}_{\alpha =1}^R`$ be the set of zeroes of $`f(\xi )`$ with $`|\mathrm{Im}r_\alpha |<1`$ (not necessarily different from each other) and similarly $`\{p_\beta \}_{\beta =1}^P`$ the set of (not necessarily different) poles with $`|\mathrm{Im}p_\beta |<1`$. Moreover, for large (real, positive) $`\xi `$

$$f(\xi )\widehat{\sigma }f_0\xi ^{c_1}e^{c_0\xi }e^{\lambda \mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }$$
(167)
asymptotically. Here $`\widehat{\sigma }=\pm 1`$ is a sign, $`f_0>0`$, $`c_0,c_1`$ and $`\lambda `$ are real.

The function $`B(\xi )`$ is real analytic in the strip $`|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<ϵ`$ and non-negative for real $`\xi `$. Its asymptotics is given by

$$B(\xi )B_0\xi ^{b_1}e^{b_0\xi },$$
(168)
where $`B_0>0`$ and $`b_0,b_1`$ are real. Comparing (167) with (168) gives

$$f_0=\sqrt{B_0},c_1=\frac{b_1}{2},c_0=\frac{b_0}{2}.$$
(169)
The key observation that allows the transformation of the Y-system functional relations, which are of the form (165), to TBA integral equations is the fact that the solution of (165), satisfying all the above requirements is uniquely given by

$$f(\xi )=\widehat{\sigma }e^{\lambda \mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}\xi }\frac{_{\alpha =1}^R\tau (\xi r_\alpha )}{_{\beta =1}^P\tau (\xi p_\beta )}\mathrm{exp}\{\beta (\xi )\},$$
(170)
where

$$\tau (\xi )=\mathrm{tanh}\left(\frac{\pi }{4}\xi \right)$$
(171)
and

$$\beta (\xi )=\frac{1}{4}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\frac{\mathrm{ln}B(u)}{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi }{2}(\xi u)}.$$
(172)
$`\beta (\xi )`$ is clearly analytic in the strip $`|\mathrm{Im}\xi |<1`$ and for real $`u`$ (when $`B(u)>0`$)

$$\beta (u\pm i)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}B(u)\pm \frac{i}{4}𝒫_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑v\frac{\mathrm{ln}B(v)}{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi }{2}(vu)}.$$
(173)
Here $`𝒫`$ indicates principal value integration.


format: text

text:
# Effective Actions, Boundaries and Precision Calculations of Casimir Energies

## I Introduction

More than 50 years ago Casimir  forced physicists to recognize the reality of quantum vacuum fluctuations by showing that those of the electromagnetic field can mediate physical effects, such as causing a force between two parallel plates. For instance, for plane parallel metallic plates separated by a distance $`a`$ the energy per unit area associated with this force is***We use units for which $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$.

$$\epsilon _0=\frac{E_0}{A}=\frac{\pi ^2}{720a^3}.$$
(1)
The study of this effect has experienced a recent revival, largely due to prospects for its improved measurement. (For a modern review see, for example, ref. .) With this recent attention has come more detailed calculations, including the one-loop corrections within Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) due to virtual photons and electrons . For $`ma1`$ the leading correction found in this way is

$$\epsilon _1=\frac{\pi ^2\alpha }{2560ma^4},$$
(2)
where $`m`$ is the electron mass and $`\alpha =e^2/4\pi `$ is the usual fine-structure constant.

Surprisingly, a whiff of controversy has lingered over the physical interpretation of eq. (2), a controversy which can be traced to its dependence on the electron mass. The controversial issue has been cast most sharply when the calculation is formulated within an effective-lagrangian framework, as might be expected to be appropriate given that the electron mass is much higher than the energies, $`E1/a`$, of the photon modes whose contributions dominate in the Casimir effect. Early workers  found a much smaller contribution than eq. (2), with the leading effect instead found to arise from the Euler-Heisenberg effective interaction obtained by integrating out the electron, giving:

$$\epsilon _1^{}=\frac{11\pi ^4\alpha ^2}{3,888,000m^4a^7}.$$
(3)
Subsequent workers have verified the calculation leading to the result (2), and have attributed the discrepancy either to a failure of effective field theory itself  or to a misidentification of the most important effective interaction which is relevant . There remains a disagreement about which effective interaction is most relevant, with ref.  arguing that eq. (2) can be reproduced by an interaction localized on the plates (the ‘boundary’), with an effective coupling which is of order $`\alpha /m`$. By contrast ref.  argues that the required effective interaction arises in the space between the plates (the ‘bulk’), with a coupling which is of order $`\alpha /(ma)`$. Unfortunately, neither reference resolved the discrepancy by performing the matching calculation which is required in order to properly identify which effective interactions actually arise in the low-energy theory. (See refs.  for other discussions of effective lagrangians in the Casimir energy problem.)

It is our purpose with this paper to settle the issue of which electron-mass corrections are dominant, and how they arise within an explicitly-constructed effective field theory. In order to do so, we set up the relevant effective lagrangian, and perform the requisite matching calculation which determines the size of the effective couplings. We draw the following conclusions:

* We conclude that the correct effective operator is the local boundary operator of ref. , which describes how the vacuum polarization alters the interaction between a test charge and the surface charges which it induces on the conductor.
* As the matching calculation shows explicitly, this effect relies on polarizations of the vacuum charge over distances of order $`1/m`$, and so presupposes that the conductor’s boundaries are sharp on these scales. As such they are likely to be dominated by surface effects for real conductors, for which the scale of penetration depths for electromagnetic fields are set by much larger interatomic separations, of order $`1/(\alpha m)`$.

We present our results in more detail in the next sections, starting with a brief summary of some general features which all effective field theories must share. We then identify the dominant effective operator for the Casimir effect which arises when the electron is integrated out. Finally we perform the matching calculations which are required to identify the dominant electron contributions to the Casimir energy in both of these cases. Our conclusions are briefly summarized at the end.

## II The Effective Field Theory

Although their use has been largely systematized only during the past 20 years, the main ideas of effective field theories go back to the much earlier Born-Oppenheimer approximation used in atomic physics decades earlier. The idea is to exploit the way physical systems simplify when they are probed only at very low energies, $`E`$, compared with some intrinsic energy scale, $`M`$. Expressions for general low-energy observables usually greatly simplify once they are expanded in powers of $`E/M`$, and so it pays to take advantage of this expansion as early as possible in a calculation.

The contribution of field theory to this process comes with the recognition that all of the low-energy effects of virtual high-energy states, $`h`$, on low-energy degrees of freedom, $`\mathrm{}`$, can always be expressed in terms of local operators involving only the light states $`\mathrm{}`$. That is, the physics of the full hamiltonian

$$H_{\mathrm{full}}(\mathrm{},h)=H_{\mathrm{l}.\mathrm{e}.}(\mathrm{})+H_{\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{e}.}(h)+H_{\mathrm{int}}(\mathrm{},h),$$
(4)
is indistinguishable from the physics of the effective hamiltonian

$$H_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathrm{})=H_{\mathrm{l}.\mathrm{e}.}(\mathrm{})+\underset{kk_0}{}\frac{1}{M^k}\underset{l}{}c_{kl}𝒪_{kl}(\mathrm{}),$$
(5)
to any fixed order in powers of $`1/M`$, for some choice for the effective interactions, $`𝒪_{kl}`$, and effective couplings, $`c_{kl}`$. Furthermore, since the uncertainty principle only permits energy and momentum conservation to fail over very short times and short distances, the effective interactions, $`𝒪_{kl}`$, which are required are all local in space and time — i.e. involve products of fields and their derivatives at fixed positions in space and instants of time.

The utility of this observation is that the required effective interactions and couplings can be computed once and for all by comparing to simple observables, and once obtained may be used for any calculations in the low-energy theory. Such a determination of the effective interactions and couplings is called a ‘matching’ calculation, because the effective interactions of $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ are matched onto what is required by the full microscopic theory, $`H_{\mathrm{full}}`$. (See refs.  for reviews on effective field theories.)

### A Effective Field Theories and QED

Quantum electrodynamics in particular lends itself to this kind of effective analysis, because of the huge hierarchy in scales between the electron mass, $`m`$, and the other scales of usual interest such as those appropriate to the propagation of light or to atomic energy levels. Two kinds of effective field theories have been explicitly treated in this way. One corresponds to integrating out electrons and positrons and high-energy photons to describe the interactions of low-energy photons , and the other involves integrating out positrons and high-energy electrons and photons to describe the low-energy interactions of nonrelativistic electrons and low-energy photons .

For electromagnetism it is more convenient to work with an effective action or lagrangian than with an effective hamiltonian. In the absence of all boundaries and charge distributions, integrating out the electron leads to the following Maxwell plus Euler-Heisenberg  effective interactions for low-energy photons

$`_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(𝐄^2𝐁^2\right)`$ (7)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha ^2}{45m^4}}\left[\left(𝐄^2𝐁^2\right)^2+7\left(𝐄𝐁\right)^2\right]+\mathrm{}`$
In this expression, corrections to the first (Maxwell) term in this lagrangian have been removed using an appropriate rescaling of the electromagnetic field. Similarly, a possible $`O(\alpha /m^2)`$ (Uehling) term, of the form $`F^{\mu \nu }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }F_{\mu \nu }`$ arising from the vacuum polarization, is not written here because it can be removed to this order by performing a field redefinition of the form $`A_\mu A_\mu +\frac{c_1\alpha }{m^2}\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }A_\mu +\frac{c_2\alpha ^2}{m^4}\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }^2A_\mu `$, for an appropriate choice of coefficients, $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$. Any effective interaction which can be removed in this way is called ‘redundant’, since it cannot contribute to physical quantities.

The numerical coefficient of the quartic (Euler-Heisenberg) term may be found by comparing the amplitude for light-by-light scattering as computed to order $`\alpha ^2/m^4`$ using eq. (7) and with the full QED lagrangian, including electrons. Once this is done, the result captures the influence, to order $`\alpha ^2/m^4`$, of electrons on any low-energy observable (in the absence of boundaries) because eq. (7) completely exhausts the possible local, Lorentz-invariant and gauge invariant effective interactions which may be constructed to this order.

### B Boundary Charges and Screening

For applications to the Casimir effect we must ask how the presence of the conducting boundaries can affect the matching process just described. For simplicity we examine the case considered by refs.  and restrict our discussion to the case where the electrons do not ‘see’ the boundaries, and only the boundary conditions of the electromagnetic field are changed. For conducting plates we take the electromagnetic boundary conditions to be

$$ϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }n_\nu F_{\lambda \rho }|_{}=0,$$
(8)
where $`n_\nu =\{0,𝐧\}`$ is a normal vector on the surface which points into the bulk. This captures the usual conducting boundary conditions, that $`B_n=𝐧𝐁`$ and $`𝐧\times 𝐄`$ both vanish. $``$ here denotes the surfaces of the plates, considered as the boundaries of the intervening bulk, $``$.

Our starting point is then the QED action, with boundary terms

$`S_{\mathrm{full}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{}}d^4x\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}F^{\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }+\overline{\psi }(\text{/}\text{D}+m)\psi \right)`$ (10)
$`{\displaystyle _{}}d^4xJ^\mu A_\mu {\displaystyle _{}}d^3xj^\mu A_\mu ,`$
where $`D_\mu =_\mu +ieA_\mu `$ is the usual covariant derivative for the electron field. Here $`J^\mu =\{\rho ,𝐉\}`$ denotes any classical test charges and currents with which we choose to probe the system, and $`j^\mu =\{\sigma ,𝐣\}`$ denotes the surface charge and current densities whose presence enforces the boundary condition, eq. (8). The classical Maxwell equations obtained by varying eq. (10) with respect to $`A_\mu `$ in the bulk and on the boundaries is:

$`_\mu F^{\mu \nu }J^\nu =0`$ in $``$; (11)
$`n_\mu F^{\mu \nu }j^\nu =0`$ on $``$. (12)
The boundary part of these equations relate the surface charges and currents to the boundary electric and magnetic fields and are more familiar once written explicitly in terms of $`𝐄`$ and $`𝐁`$. For the surface charge distribution they imply, for instance,

$$𝐧𝐄|_{}=E_n|_{}=\sigma .$$
(13)
The presence of these boundary charges plays a crucial role in constructing the effective theory, because of its interplay with the photon’s vacuum polarization. To see this imagine we now compute the electron’s contribution to the vacuum polarization

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mu \nu }(q^2)=\left(q^2\eta _{\mu \nu }q_\mu q_\nu \right)\mathrm{\Pi }(q^2)`$ (14)
$`=ie^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\frac{i\text{/}p+m}{p^2+m_ϵ^2}\gamma _\mu \frac{i(\text{/}p\text{/}q)+m}{(pq)^2+m_ϵ^2}\gamma _\nu \right]}`$ (15)
with $`m_ϵ^2=m^2iϵ`$. After renormalization, $`\mathrm{\Pi }(q^2)`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Pi }(q^2)=\frac{2\alpha }{\pi }_0^1𝑑\zeta \zeta (1\zeta )\mathrm{log}\left[1+\zeta (1\zeta )\frac{q^2}{m^2}\right].$$
(16)
$`\mathrm{\Pi }(q^2)`$ describes the polarization of the vacuum about any given charge distribution, effectively smearing it over a distance of order $`1/m`$. Given a point charge source, $`Q\delta ^3(𝐫)`$, the position-space charge density which the electron vacuum polarization produces is (to leading order) $`\rho _{\mathrm{eff}}=Q\left[\delta ^3(𝐫)+\eta (𝐫)\right]`$, where

$`\eta (𝐫)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}e^{i𝐪𝐫}\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐪^2)}`$ (17)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑\zeta \zeta (1\zeta )`$ (18)
$`\times {\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}}e^{i𝐪𝐫}\mathrm{log}[1+{\displaystyle \frac{𝐪^2}{m^2}}\zeta (1\zeta )]`$ (19)
$`=N\delta ^3(𝐫){\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2\pi ^2r^3}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑\zeta \left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{mr}{\sqrt{\zeta (1\zeta )}}}\right)`$ (20)
$`\times \zeta (1\zeta )\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{mr}{\sqrt{\zeta (1\zeta )}}}\right].`$ (21)
Here $`r=|𝐫|`$ and $`N`$ is a constant which renormalizes the bare charge $`Q`$, determined by the condition

$$d^3r\eta (𝐫)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Pi }(𝐪^2=0)=0.$$
(22)
For our purposes what is important is that virtual electrons also act to screen the surface charges which are required at the boundary $``$ to enforce conducting boundary conditions there. The resulting charge distribution may be obtained by integrating eq. (17) over a planar sheet of charge, $`\sigma \delta _+(z)`$, where $`\delta _+(z)`$ is normalized so it integrates to unity on one side of the boundary: $`_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z\delta _+(z)=1`$. (For instance, this can be represented by $`\delta _+(z)=lim_\lambda \mathrm{}\left(\lambda e^{\lambda |z|}\right)=2\delta (z)`$.) We write, then

$$\sigma \delta _+(z)=2\sigma \delta (z)=2\sigma d^2a\delta ^3(𝐫𝐚),$$
(23)
where we take $`𝐚`$ to be a vector lying on the conducting surface and $`z`$ to be the coordinate in the direction perpendicular to this surface. Using this with eq. (17) gives the result for the resulting polarized charge distribution around a surface-charge sheet positioned at $`z=0`$

$`\rho (z)`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma \{(1+N)\delta _+(z)+{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha }{\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^1}d\zeta \zeta (1\zeta )`$ (25)
$`\times {\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{dq_z}{2\pi }}e^{iq_zz}\mathrm{log}[1+\zeta (1\zeta ){\displaystyle \frac{q_z^2}{m^2}}]\}`$
$`=`$ $`\sigma \{(1+N)\delta _+(z)`$ (27)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha }{\pi |z|}}{\displaystyle _0^1}d\zeta \zeta (1\zeta )\mathrm{exp}[{\displaystyle \frac{m|z|}{\sqrt{\zeta (1\zeta )}}}]\}.`$
The first term in eq. (25), involving the delta function, expresses how virtual electrons renormalize the bare surface charge distribution. Of more interest for the present purposes is the second, position-dependent component. This polarization charge distribution has the physical effect of generating multipole moments around the uniform surface charge at $`z=0`$, which are detectable (in principle) through their interactions with probe charges in the bulk. In the effective theory obtained when the electron is integrated out, the effect of these multipole moments must be replaced by effective interactions which are localized on the surface of the conducting plates.

The particular moment of interest in what follows is the electric dipole moment density, $`𝐩`$, which this charge density defines

$`𝐩(z)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho (z)z𝐞_z`$ (28)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha \sigma 𝐞_z}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑\zeta \zeta (1\zeta )\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{m|z|}{\sqrt{\zeta (1\zeta )}}}\right],`$ (29)
and which for large $`m`$ becomes

$`𝐩(z)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha \sigma 𝐞_z}{\pi m}}\delta _+(z){\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑\zeta \left[\zeta (1\zeta )\right]^{3/2}`$ (30)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\alpha \sigma 𝐞_z}{64m}}\delta _+(z).`$ (31)
This polarization distribution introduces a surface contribution to the field energy, $`U`$, when a test charge, $`Q`$, is placed in the vicinity of a conducting plate. In the absence of vacuum polarization we have seen that any test charge induces a nonzero charge density, $`\sigma `$, on the conductor’s surface, as given by eq. (13). Virtual electrons then polarize the vacuum within a distance $`1/m`$ of both the test charge and this surface charge, leading to a change in the field energy. To leading order this change is the sum of the interaction of the induced charge density $`\sigma `$ with the polarization around the test charge, plus the interaction of the test charge $`Q`$ with the induced polarization near the surface charge. Each of these effects has precisely the same size,The equality of the two contributions is most easily seen if the surface charge is instead represented as an equivalent image charge, on the opposite side of the boundary. leading to a correction of the interaction energy given by

$`\mathrm{\Delta }U`$ $`=`$ $`2\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right){\displaystyle d^3r𝐄𝐩}`$ (32)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\alpha }{64m}}{\displaystyle d^2r\sigma E_n}`$ (33)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\alpha }{64m}}{\displaystyle d^2rE_n^2},`$ (34)
where we use the lowest-order result, eq. (13), to write $`\sigma =E_n`$. Here $`𝐄`$ is the lowest-order electric field (or electric displacement) not including the vacuum-polarization corrections.

### C Matching Conditions

We now consider integrating out the electron, and ask what effective interaction in a low-energy theory without electrons describes their effects to leading order in $`1/m`$. As we have seen above, in the absence of the charge densities on the surfaces of the conducting plates, in the bulk the vacuum polarization provides only interactions of the form $`F^{\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }`$ or $`F^{\mu \nu }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }F_{\mu \nu }`$, which are redundant interactions with no physical consequences. The vacuum polarization does give nontrivial contributions once the surface charges are considered, however. As discussed above, it generates multipole moments along all of the conducting surfaces due to the induced bulk charge redistribution it implies.

For plane parallel conducting plates the symmetries of the problem require that the operator obtained must be translation- and Lorentz-invariant within the dimensions parallel to the plates, as well as being parity and time-reversal invariant. Keeping in mind that $`𝐄_{}`$ and $`B_n`$ both vanish on the conductors, the lowest-dimension operator which is possible involving the electromagnetic field is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }S=\frac{1}{2}_{}d^3x\left[c_1E_n^2+c_2𝐁_{}^2\right],$$
(35)
where $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ are constants to be determined. Since the electrons do not themselves see the boundary, their lowest-order contribution is actually Lorentz-invariant in all 4 dimensions, allowing the simplification $`c_2=c_1`$.

The coefficient $`c_1`$ may be determined by computing the contribution this operator makes to the field energy density, $`u(𝐫)`$, of a classical static test charge, giving

$$\mathrm{\Delta }u=\frac{c_1}{2}E_n^2$$
(36)
which when compared with eq. (32) (using $`U=d^2ru`$) gives the result

$$c_1=\frac{3\alpha }{32m}.$$
(37)
We see that the coefficient of this operator may be obtained for any conductor independent of the presence of any other conductors, because it describes a local condition — the vacuum polarization — near the conductor’s surface. Once it is determined, its physical origin may be forgotten and its influence in any other low-energy process may be obtained perturbatively in the coefficient $`c_1`$. In particular, the effective operator with the coefficient $`c_1`$ given in (37) may be used to calculate the leading correction to the Casimir energy. This has been performed in ref.  and agrees with the calculation in the full theory , as it must.

## III Conclusions

The general utility of effective field theories lies in their efficient identification of the scales which are relevant to any particular physical system, and we see that this is also true for the Casimir energy. The novel feature which conducting boundaries introduce into the low-energy QED effective theory is the presence of surface charges and currents, whose presence provides a way for the vacuum polarization to have physical implications which it would not otherwise have. Its effects are described by local boundary interactions because the vacuum polarization only extends over distances of order $`1/m`$, it so cannot reach very far into the bulk. Of course, it should be emphasized that for real systems the effective interactions computed in this article are not the most important, since other microscopic physical length scales arise which are much larger than the electron’s Compton wavelength.

Because effective field theories are so easy to use, they normally really come into their own once one proceeds beyond leading order in small quantities like $`\alpha `$ or $`1/m`$, since they make possible calculations which would otherwise be impractical. This is likely also to be true for precision calculations of Casimir energies, for which there is now considerable practical interest in understanding the dependence of the effect on the geometry and physical make-up of the conductors and dielectrics involved.

For real systems there are a number of effects whose contributions to the Casimir energy must be disentangled, and since each comes with an associated length scale which is short compared with the inter-plate separation it is likely most efficient to do so within an effective-field-theory analysis. These effects include thermal fluctuations; shape effects due to the curvature or roughness of the conducting surface; and effects due to imperfections in the ideal-conductor boundary conditions. Conductivity effects can be associated with the fact that static external electric fields have a finite penetration length into the conductor, and that conduction electrons cannot adjust quickly enough to respond perfectly to fields which oscillate sufficiently rapidly.For recent calculations discussing loop contributions including boundary effects, see  and references therein.. Each of these should correct the Casimir energy by amounts proportional to powers of small ratios of the form $`\lambda /a`$, where $`\lambda `$ is the length scale relevant to the microscopic physics of interest, and their dominant effects can be parameterized in terms of local $`\lambda `$-dependent effective interactions.

In general the dominant corrections must correspond to the lowest-dimension effective interactions, some of which we now display. Effective interactions which describe some conductivity effects take a form similar to those considered here, eq (35),

$$\mathrm{\Delta }S=\frac{1}{2}_Md^2r\left[c_1E_n^2+c_2𝐁_{}^2+c_3𝐄_{}^2+c_4B_n^2\right].$$
(38)
On dimensional grounds one expects the coefficients of these operators to receive effects of order $`c_i\lambda `$. Notice that the fields $`𝐄_{}`$ and $`B_n`$ can now appear here because in real systems the conducting boundary conditions are only imperfectly imposed.

Geometrical effects associated with the curvature of the conducting surface may be similarly parameterized in terms of a general effective lagrangian built from the surface’s intrinsic and extrinsic curvature tensors, $`R_{}^{a}{}_{bcd}{}^{}`$ and $`K_{ab}`$. Sample low-dimension terms include

$$\mathrm{\Delta }S=_Md^2r\sqrt{g}\left[s_0+s_1K+s_2R+\mathrm{}\right],$$
(39)
where $`R=g^{bd}R_{}^{a}{}_{bad}{}^{}`$, $`K=g^{bd}K_{bd}`$ and $`g=\text{det}(g_{bd})`$, for $`g_{bd}`$ the induced metric on the surface. On dimensional grounds one also expects the effective couplings, $`s_k`$, to be proportional to powers of the relevant microscopic length scale, $`\lambda `$.

Besides its practical applications, the Casimir energy system also provides a useful theoretical framework in which to test some of the more speculative theoretical ideas which have gained currency of late. Similar issues to those considered here arise in brane-world scenarios, wherein ordinary particles are confined to surfaces (branes), with various interactions probing the bulk. Renormalization issues can also have practical implications in this case , and QED provides a useful benchmark against which these more speculative calculations can be tested.

## IV Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Finn Ravndal and Ira Rothstein for very helpful conversations about how to apply effective field theories to the Casimir energy. Our research is partially funded by NSERC (Canada), FCAR (Québec) and by McGill University.