text:
# The Sasa-Satsuma higher order nonlinear Schrödinger equation and its bilinearization and multi-soliton solutions

## I Introduction

One of the most interesting applications of solitons is in the propagation of short pulses in optical fibers (for an overview, see KA ). The basic phenomena are described by the nonlinear Schrödinger equation, but as the pulses get shorter various additional effects become important. In KH  Kodama and Hasegawa derived the relevant equation with higher order correction terms, the generic form of such an equation is (in the optical fiber setting the roles of time and space are usually reversed)

$$iq_\xi +\alpha _1q_{\tau \tau }+\alpha _2|q|^2q+i[\beta _1q_{\tau \tau \tau }+\beta _2|q|^2q_\tau +\beta _3q(|q|^2)_\tau ]=0,$$
(1)
where the $`\alpha _i,\beta _i`$ are real constants and $`q`$ a complex function. The first three terms form the standard nonlinear Schrödinger equation (nls) and the $`\beta _i`$ terms are the perturbative corrections. Usually one chooses the scaling so that $`\alpha _2=2\alpha _1`$. In this paper we assume $`\beta _10`$.

Our main concern here is the bilinearization and multi-soliton solutions of the Sasa-Satsuma equation (SSnls) SS , which is a particularly interesting integrable example in the above class. In this introductory section we discuss some basic properties of (1), its integrable special cases and their multicomponent generalizations. In particular we show that many previous attempts to solve these equations have produced only rather trivial solutions, in which the complex and multicomponent freedom has been “frozen”. The reason for this turns out to be in the incorrect bilinearization that was used in those papers. The correct bilinearization (presented in Sec. II with detailed derivation in Sec. III) follows once we identify SSnls as a reduction of the three-component Kadomtsev-Petviashvili (KP) hierarchy, and then we also obtain general multi-soliton solutions.

### I.1 Gauge transformation

In order to understand the complex structure of (1) it is important to isolate the gauge (phase) invariance and fix the gauge. First let us recall that the nls part of (1) (i.e., if $`\beta _i=0`$) is invariant under the combined gauge/Galilei transformation

$$q(\xi ,\tau )=e^{iv(\tau v\xi )/\alpha _1}y(x,t),x=\tau 2v\xi ,t=\xi .$$
(2)
The full equation (1) is not invariant under (2), but if we try the transformation

$$q(\xi ,\tau )=e^{i(c_1\tau +c_2\xi )}y(x,t),x=\tau +c_3\xi ,t=\xi ,c_i\text{ real constants,}$$
(3)
we find that if

$$c_3=c_1(2\alpha _1+3\beta _1c_1),c_2=c_1^2(\alpha _1+c_1\beta _1),$$
(4)
then (1) is form invariant: the equation for $`y(x,t)`$ is as in (1) with $`\beta _i`$ unchanged, but the $`\alpha _i`$ change according to

$$\alpha _1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1=\alpha _13\beta _1c_1,\alpha _2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_2=\alpha _2\beta _2c_1.$$
(5)
We can therefore use this transformation to put $`\alpha _1=\alpha _2=0`$, provided that

$$3\beta _1\alpha _2=\beta _2\alpha _1.$$
(6)
\[In the usual normalization $`\alpha _1=\frac{1}{2},\alpha _2=1`$ (6) means $`\beta _2=6\beta _1`$.\] In all integrable cases (along with some non-integrable cases appearing in the literature) (6) is satisfied, and we assume it from now on.

On the basis of the above we fix the gauge (3) by requiring that $`\alpha _i=0`$ in the equation, and compare results only in that uniquely defined gauge.

### I.2 Integrable cases

The integrability of the class of equations (1) has been studied by a number of authors using Painlevé analysis GSB97 ; MTC ; Sa97  and other methods NR , with the consistent result that if $`\beta _1,\beta _20`$ there are precisely two integrable cases with bright solitons:

1. Hirota’s equation (Hnls) H73 : $`\beta _1:\beta _2:\beta _3=1:6:0`$,

$$q_t+q_{xxx}+6|q|^2q_x=0,$$
(7)
2. Sasa-Satsuma equation (SSnls) SS : $`\beta _1:\beta _2:\beta _3=1:6:3`$,

$$q_t+q_{xxx}+6|q|^2q_x+3q|q^2|_x=0.$$
(8)

Here the scaling convention mentioned above has been assumed and the $`\alpha _i`$ terms eliminated.

Some non-integrable special cases of (1) have also been studied in the literature, including LW ; RL96 : $`\beta _1:\beta _2:\beta _3=1:6:6`$,

$$q_t+q_{xxx}+6(q|q^2|)_x=0.$$
(9)
### I.3 Multicomponent generalizations

Both Hnls and SSnls allow various kinds of multicomponent generalizations, some of them integrable. The results of a Painlevé analysis ST  can be summarized as follows:

$$\text{Case }1:\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill q_{1t}+q_{1xxx}+3(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{1x}& =& 0,\hfill \\ \hfill q_{2t}+q_{2xxx}+3(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{2x}& =& 0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(10)
which can be interpreted as a real 4-component modified Korteweg–de Vries (mKdV) equuation, reducing to Hnls for $`q_1=q_2`$ etc.,

$$\text{Case 2 }\text{ST}:\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill q_{1t}+q_{1xxx}+3(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{1x}+3q_1(|q_2|^2)_x& =& 0,\hfill \\ \hfill q_{2t}+q_{2xxx}+3(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{2x}+3q_2(|q_1|^2)_x& =& 0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(11)
and

$$\text{Case 3 }\text{PSM94}:\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill q_{1t}+q_{1xxx}+3(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{1x}+\frac{3}{2}q_1(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)_x& =& 0,\hfill \\ \hfill q_{2t}+q_{2xxx}+3(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{2x}+\frac{3}{2}q_2(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)_x& =& 0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(12)
which reduce to SSnls under the above reduction, and a mixed case

$$\text{Case 4 }\text{YO ; TP}:\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill q_{1t}+q_{1xxx}+\frac{a}{2}(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{1x}+\frac{a}{2}q_1(q_1^{}q_{1x}+q_2^{}q_{2x})& =& 0,\hfill \\ \hfill q_{2t}+q_{2xxx}+\frac{a}{2}(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{2x}+\frac{a}{2}q_2(q_1^{}q_{1x}+q_2^{}q_{2x})& =& 0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(13)
which reduces to Hnls under $`q=q_1=q_2,a=3`$ and to SSnls under $`q=q_1=q_2^{},a=6`$. In each case we must of course adjoin the complex conjugated equations. Cases 1–3 are invariant under $`q_2q_2^{}`$, while case 4 changes to the alternative form

$$\text{Case }4^{}:\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill q_{1t}+q_{1xxx}+\frac{a}{2}(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{1x}+\frac{a}{2}q_1(q_1^{}q_{1x}+q_2q_{2x}^{})& =& 0,\hfill \\ \hfill q_{2t}+q_{2xxx}+\frac{a}{2}(|q_1|^2+|q_2|^2)q_{2x}+\frac{a}{2}q_2(q_1q_{1x}^{}+q_2^{}q_{2x})& =& 0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
Under the reduction $`q_2=0`$ cases 1,2,4 reduce to Hnls, and 3 to SSnls.

### I.4 The mKdV limit

With complex and multicomponent equations it is important to make the following observation: we can always make the real, one-component reduction

$$q_i(x,t)=c_iu(x,t),i,$$
(15)
where $`u`$ is a real function and $`c_i`$ are arbitrary complex constants. As a result of this all the equations mentioned before (and many others, including non-integrable ones) reduce to the real mKdV equation

$$u_t=u_{xxx}+\kappa u^2u_x.$$
(16)
(Note that for case 2 we need $`|c_1|=|c_2|`$.) This was observed already in GSB97 , see eqs (21-25). A consequence of this rather simple observation is the following:

All these complex and/or multicomponent systems always have multi-soliton solutions of the real mKdV type, with frozen complex and/or multicomponent freedom.

In the usual real one-component case the existence of multi-soliton solutions is a signal of integrability, but from the above we can see that this is not necessarily true in the complex/multicomponent case. In general it is essential that the individual solitons, from which the multi-soliton solution is built, are each allowed to have their own freedom of initial position and overall phase. That is, even if a one-soliton solution is of the type (15), in the multi-soliton case each component soliton must be allowed to have its own parameters, including the complex coefficient(s) $`c_i`$. Furthermore, under during scattering some of these parameters can change RLH .

Thus in practice the reduction (15) trivializes the equation and the resulting solutions are hardly of interest. Nevertheless it seems that several recent studies have fallen into this trap and produced no solutions with genuine multicomponent or complex structure. This is quite evident from the proposed final results: for example the multicomponent structure is trivialized into a constant factor in RLD95  (see (3.15-16) or (3.20) or (3.25-26,32-33)), RL96  (see (17) or (24) or (27)) and N02  (see (10) or (13)), whereas the solutions are obviously real (after the gauge has been fixed) in LW  (see Sec. III), GKN99  (see (2,3,15,16)) and VK00  (in Sec IV $`k_i,\eta _i`$ are real and $`H/G`$ a constant). Below we will show that the reason for this often lies in the incorrect bilinearization that was used.

### I.5 Traveling-wave solutions

Let us now return to the one-component equations (7,8) and consider their one-soliton solutions. For the purpose of orientation, let us first consider Hnls (7). The usual traveling-wave ansatz

$$q(x,t)=e^{i(ax+bt+\omega )}f(x+dt+\delta ),$$
(17)
where $`f`$ is a real function (soliton envelope), leads to a pair of real equations, which are compatible, if

$$b=a(3d8a^2),$$
(18)
and in that case the solution can be parameterized as follows

$$q(x,t)=e^{ia(x+(a^23c^2)t+\omega )}\frac{c}{\mathrm{cosh}[c(x+(3a^2c^2)t+\delta )]}.$$
(19)
We observe that there are four free real parameters: $`a`$ and $`c`$, which relate to the size and velocity of the soliton, and $`\omega ,\delta `$ which give the constant complex phase and soliton position, respectively.

If we use the same ansatz (17) in (8) we find that it works only under the additional condition $`a=0`$, leading to

$$q(x,t)=\frac{ce^{i\omega }}{\sqrt{2}\mathrm{cosh}[c(xc^2t+\delta )]}.$$
(20)
Since one parameter was lost the solution (20) is not general enough. Indeed, Sasa and Satsuma have derived a complex traveling-wave solution to (8), which does not fit to the usual ansatz (17), but has the form SS

$$q(x,t)=e^{ia(x+(a^23c^2)t+\omega )}\frac{2e^\eta c(e^{2\eta }+\kappa )}{e^{4\eta }+2e^{2\eta }+|\kappa |^2},\kappa =\frac{a}{a+ic},\eta =c(x+(3a^2c^2)t+\delta ).$$
(21)
We note that this has similar $`x,t`$-dependence as (19) but the functional form is different, also in the limit $`a0`$, i.e., $`\kappa 0`$ we obtain the real limit (20).

It turns out that (21) is still not the most general one-soliton solution for this system, it is given by $`q=G/F`$, where

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma e^\eta +\rho ^{}e^\eta ^{}+m\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{2p^2}}e^{2\eta +\eta ^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^{}}{2p^2}}e^{\eta +2\eta ^{}}\right),`$ (22)
$`F`$ $`=`$ $`1+2{\displaystyle \frac{|\rho |^2+|\gamma |^2}{(p+p^{})^2}}e^{\eta +\eta ^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho \gamma }{2p^2}}e^{2\eta }+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^{}\gamma ^{}}{2p^2}}e^{2\eta ^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{|m|^2}{4|p|^4}}e^{2(\eta +\eta ^{})}`$
$`=`$ $`1+\frac{1}{2}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma e^\eta }{p}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^{}e^\eta ^{}}{p^{}}}\right|^2+\frac{1}{2}(|\gamma |^2+|\rho |^2)\left|{\displaystyle \frac{(pp^{})e^\eta }{(p+p^{})p}}\right|^2+\left|{\displaystyle \frac{me^{2\eta }}{2p^2}}\right|^2,`$
$`m`$ $`=`$ $`(|\gamma |^2p|\rho |^2p^{}){\displaystyle \frac{pp^{}}{(p+p^{})^2}},`$ (24)
$`\eta `$ $`=`$ $`pxp^3t+\eta ^{(0)},p,\rho ,\gamma \text{ and }\eta ^{(0)}\text{ complex}.`$ (25)
Comparing with the original 1-soliton solution (21), we have two extra parameters $`\gamma `$ and $`\rho `$. By $`\eta `$ translation one finds that only $`\rho /\gamma `$ matters, and if it vanishes we have the usual SS-solution, so this is a genuine new parameter. This parameter controls the oscillation, which appears not only in the carrier but also in the envelope (but in any case $`F1`$ so the solution is not singular). This solution was already obtained by Mihalache et. al. MTMPT  using inverse scattering transform, below we will derive it using the bilinear method. It is not easy to derive such a solution from a (complex) traveling wave ansatz, and Hirota’s bilinear method is easier to use in this case.

### I.6 Outline

In this paper we first present in Sec. II the bilinearizations that work and the one-soliton solution that is obtained by the expansion method. The detailed derivations and multi-solution solutions are made in Sec. III.

It is well known that soliton equations can be organized into infinite hierarchies as described by the Sato theory JM  and that particular equations can be obtained from these hierarchies by various reductions. Indeed, one cannot have a full understanding of an integrable equation before its relation to integrable hierarchies is described. In Section III we will give the full picture by showing that the Sasa-Satsuma equation can be obtained from the general Sato theory as a reduction of the three-component KP hierarchy. The reduction can be made in two different ways producing two different bilinearizations. As intermediate steps of the reduction process we get either a $`(2+1)`$-dimensional generalization or a complex 2-component generalization of the Sasa-Satsuma equation.

## II Direct bilinearization and one-soliton solutions

One can attempt to bilinearize the generic equation

$$q_t+q_{xxx}+6|q|^2q_x+\beta q(|q|^2)_x=0,$$
(26)
with the standard substitution

$$q=\frac{G}{F},$$
(27)
where $`F`$ is taken to be real and $`G`$ complex. This leads to the equation

$$F^2[(D_x^3+D_t)GF]\beta GF(D_xGG^{})3(D_xGF)[D_x^2FF\frac{2}{3}(\beta +3)|G|^2]=0,$$
(28)
which is quartic in $`F,G`$. We can see that if $`\beta =0`$ (which is the Hnls case) the equation splits naturally into two bilinear ones, $`(D_x^3+D_t)GF=0`$, and $`D_x^2FF=2|G|^2`$. In the general case (that includes the SSnls equation at $`\beta =3`$) we could take

$$D_x^2FF=\frac{2}{3}(\beta +3)|G|^2,$$
(29)
as one of the equations, which leaves a trilinear equation

$$F[(D_x^3+D_t)GF]\beta G[D_xGG^{}]=0.$$
(30)
One might be tempted to require that in (30) the terms in square brackets vanish separately, but this is not correct (as was already noted in GSB97 ), because it would result in more independent equations than there are unknowns and in effect force reduction to the real mKdV. \[Clearly $`D_xGG^{}=0_x(G/G^{})=0`$ and therefore the phase of $`G`$ has no $`x`$-dependence, and when $`G=R(x,t)e^{i\theta (t)}`$ is substituted into the remaining equation one finds that $`\theta (t)`$ must be constant, i.e., (15).\] As a matter of fact, this sort of brute force bilinearization turns out to be precisely the reason for the trivialization of the complex/multicomponent freedom mentioned before. Unfortunately this incorrect approach has been used quite frequently, see, e.g., RLD95  (3.6), RL96  (9,29,44,47), PN96  (12), P98  (26), PSM99  (21-24), GKN99  (7c), VK00  (20), MP01  (43), MP01b  (18), N02  (9,16), N01  (38).

The trilinear equation (30) can only be split into two bilinear ones by introducing a new dependent variable. There are two acceptable ways to do this, resulting in

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill D_x^2FF& =& \frac{2}{3}(\beta +3)|G|^2,\hfill \\ \hfill ((6\beta )D_x^3+2(\beta +3)D_t)GF& =& 3\beta D_xHF,\hfill \\ \hfill ((6\beta )D_x^3+2(\beta +3)D_t)G^{}F& =& 3\beta D_xH^{}F,\hfill \\ \hfill D_x^2GF& =& HF,\hfill \\ \hfill D_x^2G^{}F& =& H^{}F.\hfill \end{array}$$
(31)
or

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill D_x^2FF& =& \frac{2}{3}(\beta +3)|G|^2,\hfill \\ \hfill (D_x^3+D_t)GF& =& \beta SG,\hfill \\ \hfill (D_x^3+D_t)G^{}F& =& \beta SG^{},\hfill \\ \hfill D_xGG^{}& =& SF,\hfill \end{array}$$
(32)
where the new dependent variable has been called $`H`$ and $`S`$, respectively. Note that $`S`$ is pure imaginary, $`H`$ complex, and that $`HG^{}H^{}G=D_xFS`$. These splittings are acceptable, because they introduce equal number of new functions and new equations, and furthermore for integrable equations and soliton solutions the new functions turn out to be expressible in terms of polynomials of exponentials. Thus for any $`\beta `$ we can give for (26) a bilinear form in terms of three bilinear equations for three functions, but it should be emphasized that the fact that an equation can be written in a bilinear form does not by itself imply that the equation is integrable, or that the new functions $`S,H`$ are $`\tau `$-functions, although it is the case when $`\beta =3`$.

The one-soliton solution can be obtained as usual by substituting the expansions

$$F=1+ϵ^2F_2+ϵ^4F_4+\mathrm{},G=ϵG_1+ϵ^3G_3+\mathrm{}$$
(33)
accompanied with suitable ansatze $`H`$ or $`S`$, into (31) or (32), and truncating at some power of the formal expansion parameter $`ϵ`$. For Hnls ($`\beta =0`$) the expansion can be truncated by keeping terms up to $`ϵ^2`$, but for SSnls ($`\beta =3`$) we must go up to $`ϵ^4`$ obtaining $`F,G`$ as given in (22-25), with the auxiliary functions

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`(pp^{})(|\gamma |^2|\rho |^2)e^{\eta +\eta ^{}},`$ (34)
$`H`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma p^2e^\eta \rho ^{}p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}e^\eta ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{m}{2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{p^2}}e^{2\eta +\eta ^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^{}p^2}{p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}e^{\eta +2\eta ^{}}\right],`$ (35)
which also are polynomials of exponentials. It is not known whether the expansion can be truncated for any other value of $`\beta `$.

## III The Sasa-Satsuma equation as a reduction of the 3-component KP hierarchy

We will next explain how the Sasa-Satsuma equation and its multi-soliton solutions can be obtained from the 3-component KP hierarchy by suitable reductions. It turns out that there are two different reduction routes leading to the Sasa-Satsuma equation; both are two-step reductions but the intermediate equations are different. We will first describe the starting point (3-component KP hierarchy) and then the two kinds of reductions.

### III.1 3-component KP hierarchy and its $`\tau `$-functions

In general, the 3-component KP hierarchy has $`\tau `$-functions depending on three infinite sets of variables $`𝐱=x,x_2,x_3,\mathrm{}`$, $`𝐲=y,y_2,y_3,\mathrm{}`$ and $`𝐳=z,z_2,z_3,\mathrm{}`$, and is defined in terms of vector “eigenfunctions” $`\mathit{\varphi }(𝐱)`$, $`𝝍(𝐲)`$ and $`𝝌(𝐳)`$ and “adjoint eigenfunctions” $`\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}(𝐱)`$, $`\overline{𝝍}(𝐲)`$ and $`\overline{𝝌}(𝐳)`$. We should emphasize that, at this point, these six eigenfunctions are independent of one another. In general, they are only assumed to satisfy the linear equations (for $`n=2,3,\mathrm{}`$)

$$_{x_n}\mathit{\varphi }=_x^n\mathit{\varphi },_{x_n}\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}=(_x)^n\overline{\mathit{\varphi }},$$
(36)
$$_{y_n}𝝍=_y^n𝝍,_{y_n}\overline{𝝍}=(_y)^n\overline{𝝍},$$
(37)
$$_{z_n}𝝌=_z^n𝝌,_{z_n}\overline{𝝌}=(_z)^n\overline{𝝌}.$$
(38)
Here we consider the special case in which only dependence on $`x,x_2,x_3`$, $`y`$ and $`z`$ is active and so the vectors $`\mathit{\varphi }(x,x_2,x_3)`$ and $`\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}(x,x_2,x_3)`$ satisfy

$$_{x_2}\mathit{\varphi }=_x^2\mathit{\varphi },_{x_3}\mathit{\varphi }=_x^3\mathit{\varphi },_{x_2}\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}=_x^2\overline{\mathit{\varphi }},_{x_3}\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}=_x^3\overline{\mathit{\varphi }},$$
(39)
and $`𝝍(y)`$, $`𝝌(z)`$, $`\overline{𝝍}(y)`$ and $`\overline{𝝌}(z)`$ are arbitrary vector functions of a single variable.

A potential matrix $`m`$ is defined by

$$_xm=\mathit{\varphi }\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}^t,_ym=𝝍\overline{𝝍}^t,_zm=𝝌\overline{𝝌}^t,$$
(40)
which can be integrated to

$$m=c+\mathit{\varphi }\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}^t𝑑x+𝝍\overline{𝝍}^t𝑑y+𝝌\overline{𝝌}^t𝑑z,$$
(41)
where $`c`$ is a constant matrix. As a consequence of (36), we also have

$$_{x_2}m=\mathit{\varphi }_x\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}^t\mathit{\varphi }\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}_x^t,_{x_3}m=\mathit{\varphi }_{xx}\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}^t\mathit{\varphi }_x\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}_x^t+\mathit{\varphi }\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}_{xx}^t,$$
(42)
Now define the $`\tau `$-functions

$$f=\left|\begin{array}{c}m\end{array}\right|,$$
(43)
$$g=\left|\begin{array}{cc}m& \mathit{\varphi }\\ \overline{𝝍}^t& 0\end{array}\right|,\overline{g}=\left|\begin{array}{cc}m& 𝝍\\ \overline{\mathit{\varphi }}^t& 0\end{array}\right|,$$
(44)
and

$$h=\left|\begin{array}{cc}m& \mathit{\varphi }\\ \overline{𝝌}^t& 0\end{array}\right|,\overline{h}=\left|\begin{array}{cc}m& 𝝌\\ \overline{\mathit{\varphi }}^t& 0\end{array}\right|.$$
(45)
By considering Jacobi determinantal identities involving $`f`$, $`g`$, $`\overline{g}`$, $`h`$ and $`\overline{h}`$ and their derivatives with respect to $`x`$, $`x_2`$, $`x_3`$, $`y`$ and $`z`$, one may compile a complete list of bilinear equations that are satisfied by these functions. The bilinear equations given below are the only ones from this list that will actually be used in the rest of this paper:

$`(D_x^2D_{x_2})gf=0,`$ $`(D_x^2+D_{x_2})\overline{g}f=0,`$ (46)
$`(D_x^2D_{x_2})hf=0,`$ $`(D_x^2+D_{x_2})\overline{h}f=0,`$ (47)
$`(D_x^3+3D_xD_{x_2}4D_{x_3})gf=0,`$ $`(D_x^33D_xD_{x_2}4D_{x_3})\overline{g}f=0,`$ (48)
$`(D_x^3+3D_xD_{x_2}4D_{x_3})hf=0,`$ $`(D_x^33D_xD_{x_2}4D_{x_3})\overline{h}f=0,`$ (49)
$`D_yD_xff=2g\overline{g},`$ $`D_zD_xff=2h\overline{h},`$ (50)
$`D_y(D_x^2D_{x_2})gf=0,`$ $`D_y(D_x^2+D_{x_2})\overline{g}f=0,`$ (51)
$`D_z(D_x^2D_{x_2})hf=0,`$ $`D_z(D_x^2+D_{x_2})\overline{h}f=0.`$ (52)
As is typical for the multicomponent KP hierarchy, this set of equations appears to be over-determined as it stands, having many more equations than dependent variables. But we already know that it has a rather general set of solutions given above (even containing several arbitrary functions of one variable). It turns out that there exist exactly the right number of differential relations amongst these equations to guarantee their compatibility. There is some freedom in choosing the primary or independent equations, one choice is (46,47,48a,50) \[7 equations for 5 functions and two dummy independent variables\]. The remaining equations are consequences from these or possibly just restrict some constants of integration. As an example consider (48b). From (46a) we can determine $`g_{x_2}`$, from (48a) $`g_{x_3}`$ and from their cross derivatives we get an equation for $`f`$. But now doing the same computation for $`\overline{g}`$ from (46b) and (48b) we get the same equation for $`f`$ and thus (48b) does not add essential information.

In order to write (46-52) in nonlinear form let us first introduce the dependent variables

$$q=\frac{g}{f},\overline{q}=\frac{\overline{g}}{f},r=\frac{h}{f},\overline{r}=\frac{\overline{h}}{f}\text{and}\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{log}f)_x,\mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{log}f)_{x_2}.$$
(53)
Converting the bilinear equations into nonlinear form and eliminating dependence on the auxiliary variable $`x_2`$ one obtains

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}q_{xxx}+6q_x\mathrm{\Phi }_x+3q(\mathrm{\Phi }_{xx}+\mathrm{\Psi }_x)q_{x_3}\hfill & =0,\\ \overline{q}_{xxx}+6\overline{q}_x\mathrm{\Phi }_x+3\overline{q}(\mathrm{\Phi }_{xx}\mathrm{\Psi }_x)\overline{q}_{x_3}\hfill & =0,\\ r_{xxx}+6r_x\mathrm{\Phi }_x+3r(\mathrm{\Phi }_{xx}+\mathrm{\Psi }_x)r_{x_3}\hfill & =0,\\ \overline{r}_{xxx}+6\overline{r}_x\mathrm{\Phi }_x+3\overline{r}(\mathrm{\Phi }_{xx}\mathrm{\Psi }_x)\overline{r}_{x_3}\hfill & =0,\end{array}$$
(54)
together with

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{\Phi }_y=\frac{1}{2}q\overline{q},& & \mathrm{\Phi }_z=\frac{1}{2}r\overline{r},\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Psi }_y=\frac{1}{2}(q_x\overline{q}q\overline{q}_x),& & \mathrm{\Psi }_z=\frac{1}{2}(r_x\overline{r}r\overline{r}_x).\hfill \end{array}$$
(55)
Although this looks superficially like a (3+1)-dimensional system, it in fact describes a family of (2+1)-dimensional systems. The $`y`$\- and $`z`$-dependence arises in such a way that it could be replaced by single variable corresponding to any linear combination of $`y`$ and $`z`$.

In the next sections we will describe a two stage reduction of this system in which a calculation similar to that used above will give the Sasa-Satsuma equation.

### III.2 First reduction, step 1

The previous set of equations contains two dummy variables, $`x_2`$ and one of $`y,z`$. In this reduction we will eliminate the dummy variables by keeping just the leading terms in $`x_2`$ and $`yz`$.

We start by considering eigenfunctions and adjoint eigenfunctions possessing the symmetry

$$\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}(x,x_2,x_3)=\mathit{\varphi }(x,x_2,x_3),$$
(56)
and the other eigenfunctions having pairwise identical forms:

$$\overline{𝝍}(a)=𝝌(a),\overline{𝝌}(a)=𝝍(a).$$
(57)
This reduction may be shown to be a natural generalization of the 3-component version of the $`C`$-reduction described in JM .

Now we explore the consequences of this symmetry on the $`\tau `$-functions. Using the independent variables $`y=\xi +\eta `$ and $`z=\xi \eta `$, the symmetry (57) gives

$$\overline{𝝍}(y)=𝝌(\xi +\eta )=𝝌(z)|_{\eta \eta },\overline{𝝌}(z)=𝝍(\xi \eta )=𝝍(y)|_{\eta \eta }.$$

For the potential $`m`$ it is then easy to see that

$$m(x,x_2,x_3,\xi ,\eta )=m^t(x,x_2,x_3,\xi ,\eta ),$$
(58)
as long as the constant matrix $`c`$ in (41) is taken to be symmetric. Hence

$$f(x,x_2,x_3,\xi ,\eta )=f(x,x_2,x_3,\xi ,\eta ).$$
(59)
In a similar way,

$$\overline{g}(x,x_2,x_3,\xi ,\eta )=h(x,x_2,x_3,\xi ,\eta ),\overline{h}(x,x_2,x_3,\xi ,\eta )=g(x,x_2,x_3,\xi ,\eta ).$$
(60)
Next we consider the Taylor expansions of the eigenfunctions with respect to $`x_2`$ and $`\eta `$ and obtain

$$\mathit{\varphi }(x,x_2,x_3)=\mathit{\varphi }(x,0,x_3)+x_2\mathit{\varphi }_{xx}(x,0,x_3)+O(x_2^2),$$
(61)
while the symmetry (56) gives

$$\overline{\mathit{\varphi }}(x,x_2,x_3)=\mathit{\varphi }(x,0,x_3)x_2\mathit{\varphi }_{xx}(x,0,x_3)+O(x_2^2).$$
(62)
By a similar argument

$$𝝍(y)=𝝍(\xi )+O(\eta ),𝝌(z)=𝝌(\xi )+O(\eta ),\overline{𝝍}(y)=𝝌(\xi )+O(\eta ),\overline{𝝌}(z)=𝝍(\xi )+O(\eta ).$$
(63)
For the potential $`m`$ the expansion is

$$m(x,x_2,x_3,\xi ,\eta )=m(x,0,x_3,\xi ,0)+x_2\left(\mathit{\varphi }_x\mathit{\varphi }^t\mathit{\varphi }\mathit{\varphi }_x^t\right)(x,0,x_3)+O(x_2^2,\eta ).$$
(64)
For the $`\tau `$-functions we then get

$$f=f_0(x,x_3,\xi )+O(x_2^2,\eta x_2,\eta ^2),$$
(65)
and

$$f_0=|m_0|,$$
(66)
where $`m_0=m(x,0,x_3,\xi ,0)`$ satisfies

$$m_{0,x}=\mathit{\varphi }_0\mathit{\varphi }_0^t,m_{0,x_3}=\mathit{\varphi }_{0,xx}\mathit{\varphi }_0^t\mathit{\varphi }_{0,x}\mathit{\varphi }_{0,x}^t+\mathit{\varphi }_0\mathit{\varphi }_{0,x}^t,m_{0,\xi }=𝝍𝝌^t+𝝌𝝍^t,$$
(67)
and $`\mathit{\varphi }_0=\mathit{\varphi }(x,0,x_3)`$ satisfies the single linear pde

$$_{x_3}\mathit{\varphi }_0=_x^3\mathit{\varphi }_0.$$
(68)
Also,

$$g=g_0+x_2g_2+O(x_2^2,\eta ),h=h_0+x_2h_2+O(x_2^2,\eta ),$$
(69)
where

$$g_0=\left|\begin{array}{cc}m_0& \mathit{\varphi }_0\\ 𝝌^t& 0\end{array}\right|,h_0=\left|\begin{array}{cc}m_0& \mathit{\varphi }_0\\ 𝝍^t& 0\end{array}\right|,$$
(70)
and

$$g_2=\left|\begin{array}{cc}m_0& \mathit{\varphi }_{0,xx}\\ 𝝌^t& 0\end{array}\right|\left|\begin{array}{ccc}m_0& \mathit{\varphi }_0& \mathit{\varphi }_{0,x}\\ \mathit{\varphi }_0^t& 0& 0\\ 𝝌^t& 0& 0\end{array}\right|,h_2=\left|\begin{array}{cc}m_0& \mathit{\varphi }_{0,xx}\\ 𝝍^t& 0\end{array}\right|\left|\begin{array}{ccc}m_0& \mathit{\varphi }_0& \mathit{\varphi }_{0,x}\\ \mathit{\varphi }_0^t& 0& 0\\ 𝝍^t& 0& 0\end{array}\right|.$$
(71)
Finally, because of (60)

$$\overline{g}=h_0x_2h_2+O(x_2^2,\eta ),\overline{h}=g_0x_2g_2+O(x_2^2,\eta ).$$
(72)
The above discussion shows that, up to leading orders in $`x_2`$ and $`\eta `$, the original five $`\tau `$-functions $`f,g,h,\overline{g},\overline{h}`$ can be written in terms of the five $`\tau `$-functions $`f_0,g_0,g_2,h_0,h_2`$ depending only on $`x`$, $`x_3`$ and $`\xi `$.

The final part of calculation is to identify an appropriate set of five bilinear equations involving these five $`\tau `$-functions. Applying the reduction to (46)–(50) gives

$`D_x^2g_0f_0=g_2f_0,`$ $`D_x^2h_0f_0=h_2f_0,`$ (73)
$`(D_x^34D_{x_3})g_0f_0=3D_xg_2f_0,`$ $`(D_x^34D_{x_3})h_0f_0=3D_xh_2f_0,`$ (74)
$`D_\xi D_xf_0f_0`$ $`=4g_0h_0.`$ (75)
Notice that in this reduction, (46) and (47) both give (73), (48) and (49) both give (74) and the sum of the equations in (50) gives (75).

This set of bilinear equations (73)–(75) is the Hirota form of a $`(2+1)`$-dimensional Sasa-Satsuma equation. If we define

$$q=\frac{g_0}{f_0},r=\frac{h_0}{f_0},q_2=\frac{g_2}{f_0},r_2=\frac{h_2}{f_0}\text{ and }\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{log}f_0)_x$$
(76)
then (73) give

$$q_2=q_{xx}+4q\mathrm{\Phi }_x,r_2=r_{xx}+4r\mathrm{\Phi }_x,$$
(77)
(74) give

$$q_{xxx}+12q_x\mathrm{\Phi }_x4q_{x_3}=3q_{2,x},r_{xxx}+12r_x\mathrm{\Phi }_x4r_{x_3}=3r_{2,x}.$$
(78)
and (75) gives

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\xi =qr.$$
(79)
After eliminating $`q_2`$ and $`r_2`$ one obtains

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill q_{xxx}+6q_x\mathrm{\Phi }_x+3q\mathrm{\Phi }_{xx}& =& q_{x_3},\hfill \\ \hfill r_{xxx}+6r_x\mathrm{\Phi }_x+3r\mathrm{\Phi }_{xx}& =& r_{x_3},\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Phi }_\xi & =& qr.\hfill \end{array}$$
(80)
If we now set $`r=q^{}`$, $`x_3=t`$ and use $`U=\mathrm{\Phi }_x`$ we get a $`(2+1)`$-dimensional Sasa-Satsuma equation

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill q_t+q_{xxx}+6q_xU+3qU_x& =& 0,\hfill \\ \hfill U_\xi & =& (|q|^2)_x.\hfill \end{array}$$
(81)
### III.3 First reduction, step 2

In order to make a dimensional reduction from $`(2+1)`$\- to $`(1+1)`$-dimensional, we make a further rotation of coordinates

$$x=\frac{1}{2}(X+\mathrm{\Xi }),\xi =\frac{1}{2}(X\mathrm{\Xi }),$$
(82)
and then choose eigenfunctions so that the $`\tau `$-functions will be independent of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. Then both $`X`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ derivatives in (80) become $`x`$ derivatives and we obtain the Sasa-Satsuma equation with two complex fields

$$q_{xxx}6q_xqr3q(qr)_xq_{x_3}=0,r_{xxx}6r_xqr3r(qr)_xr_{x_3}=0.$$
(83)
In order to keep the solution structure in this dimensional reduction, it is necessary to choose eigenfunctions $`\mathit{\varphi }`$, $`𝝍`$ and $`𝝌`$ so that they are separable with a common dependence on $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. A natural way to achieve this is to take

$$(\mathit{\varphi }_0)_i=\lambda _ie^{p_ix+p_i^3x_3}\lambda _ie^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_i\mathrm{\Xi }}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_iX+p_i^3x_3},$$
(84)
$$\psi _i=\widehat{\mu }_ie^{p_i\xi }\widehat{\mu }_ie^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_i\mathrm{\Xi }}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_iX},$$
(85)
$$\chi _i=\widehat{\nu }_ie^{p_i\xi }\widehat{\nu }_ie^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_i\mathrm{\Xi }}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_iX},$$
(86)
where $`\lambda _i,\widehat{\mu }_i,\widehat{\nu }_i`$ and $`p_i`$ are constants. As a result of this choice of eigenfunctions we have

$$(m_0)_{ij}=c_{ij}+e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_i\mathrm{\Xi }}\left[\frac{\lambda _i\lambda _je^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(p_i+p_j\right)X+\left(p_i^3+p_j^3\right)x_3}\left(\widehat{\mu }_i\widehat{\nu }_j+\widehat{\nu }_i\widehat{\mu }_j\right)e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(p_i+p_j\right)X}}{p_i+p_j}\right]e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_j\mathrm{\Xi }},\text{ for }p_i+p_j0,$$
(87)
where $`c_{ij}`$ are constants of integration \[if $`p_i+p_j=0`$ we must choose the coefficients properly so that from (41) we get a constant, which can then be absorbed into the $`c`$-matrix\]. As a consequence of the $`C`$-reduction, the matrix $`c_{ij}`$ has to be symmetric. In order that $`f_0=|m_0|`$ be independent of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ we must have

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{L}{}}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_i\mathrm{\Xi }}=\text{constant}$$
(88)
and, for each $`i,j\{1,\mathrm{},L\}`$,

$$c_{ij}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}(p_i+p_j)\mathrm{\Xi }}=\text{constant}.$$
(89)
These are satisfied if and only if $`_{i=1}^Lp_i=0,`$ and for each $`i,j\{1,\mathrm{},L\}`$ either $`c_{ij}=0\text{or}p_i+p_j=0`$. Consequently, we take $`L=2N`$ and then

$$p_{N+i}=p_i,i=1,\mathrm{},N,c_{ij}=\delta _{i+N,j}c_i\delta _{i,j+N}c_j,i,j\{1,\mathrm{},2N\}.$$
(90)
Finally, we show how to obtain solutions of the usual Sasa-Satsuma equation (8), in which $`r=q^{}`$, where  stands for complex conjugation. In order that this comes about, we must have $`f_0`$ real and $`h_0^{}=g_0`$, $`h_2^{}=g_2`$, and so we must impose the relations

$$\mathit{\varphi }_0^{}=P\mathit{\varphi }_0,𝝍^{}=P𝝌,𝝌^{}=P𝝍,$$
(91)
where $`P`$ is a permutation matrix. The simplest realization of these conditions is to take $`N=2M`$, choose the permutation to be

$$P=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 𝕀& 0& 0\\ 𝕀& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 𝕀\\ 0& 0& 𝕀& 0\end{array}\right),$$

with $`M\times M`$ blocks, and

$$\mathit{\varphi }_0=\left(\begin{array}{c}\lambda _1e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_1X+p_1^3x_3}\\ \mathrm{}\\ \lambda _Me^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_MX+p_M^3x_3}\\ \lambda _1^{}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_1^{}X+p_1^{}{}_{}{}^{3}x_{3}^{}}\\ \mathrm{}\\ \lambda _M^{}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_M^{}X+p_M^{}{}_{}{}^{3}x_{3}^{}}\\ 0\\ \mathrm{}\\ 0\\ 0\\ \mathrm{}\\ 0\end{array}\right),𝝍=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ \mathrm{}\\ 0\\ 0\\ \mathrm{}\\ 0\\ \mu _1e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_1X}\\ \mathrm{}\\ \mu _Me^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_MX}\\ \nu _1^{}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_1^{}X}\\ \mathrm{}\\ \nu _M^{}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_M^{}X}\end{array}\right)\text{and}𝝌=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ \mathrm{}\\ 0\\ 0\\ \mathrm{}\\ 0\\ \nu _1e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_1X}\\ \mathrm{}\\ \nu _Me^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_MX}\\ \mu _1^{}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_1^{}X}\\ \mathrm{}\\ \mu _M^{}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_M^{}X}\end{array}\right),$$
(92)
where we have changed the notation for coefficients in order to conform with (91). Since the $`e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}p_k\mathrm{\Xi }}`$-factors in (84-87) will eventually cancel out with the above choices we do not include them in these formulae, but in order to compensate this omission we must replace $`_x^n\varphi _0`$ by $`(2_X)^n\varphi _0`$, e.g., in (71).

Taking all constants of integration $`c_i=1`$ in (90) gives the $`M`$-soliton solution. In particular the one-soliton solution shown in (22-25) is obtained for $`M=1,\lambda _1=1,\mu _1=\rho ,\nu _1=\gamma `$.

If we set $`x_3=T`$ and following (82) replace $`D_x`$ and $`D_\xi `$ with $`D_X`$ in the bilinear equations (73-75) they become

$`D_X^2g_0f_0`$ $`=g_2f_0,`$ (93)
$`(D_X^3+4D_T)g_0f_0`$ $`=3D_Xg_2f_0,`$ (94)
$`D_X^2f_0f_0`$ $`=4g_0g_0^{}.`$ (95)
This is the same as (31) for $`\beta =3`$, if we identify $`f_0=F`$, $`g_0=G`$ and $`g_2=H`$. The multisoliton solutions are obtained from (87,66,70,71) with (92). \[But please remember that due to the simplified expressions we have $`_x^n\varphi _0=(2_X)^n\varphi _0`$.\]

### III.4 Second reduction, step 1

To obtain the alternative bilinear form of SSnls we carry out the reduction process in a different manner. This process will take us via a “coupled Sasa-Satsuma equation” as opposed to the $`(2+1)`$-dimensional Sasa-Satsuma equation.

Firstly we need to introduce two new $`\tau `$-functions,

$$s=\left|\begin{array}{ccc}m& \mathit{\varphi }& \mathit{\varphi }_x\\ \overline{𝝍}^t& 0& 0\\ \overline{𝝌}^t& 0& 0\end{array}\right|,\overline{s}=\left|\begin{array}{ccc}m& 𝝍& 𝝌\\ \overline{\mathit{\varphi }}^t& 0& 0\\ \overline{\mathit{\varphi }}_x^t& 0& 0\end{array}\right|.$$
(96)
In addition to (46-52) we now have some further bilinear equations satisfied by these $`\tau `$-functions together with the original five $`\tau `$-functions (43-45):

$`D_z(D_x^2D_{x_2})gf=4s\overline{h},`$ $`D_z(D_x^2+D_{x_2})\overline{g}f=4\overline{s}h,`$ (97)
$`D_y(D_x^2D_{x_2})hf=4s\overline{g},`$ $`D_y(D_x^2+D_{x_2})\overline{h}f=4\overline{s}g,`$ (98)
$`D_xhg=sf,`$ $`D_x\overline{h}\overline{g}=\overline{s}f.`$ (99)
Again these equations are not all independent. Altogether there are 7 dependent variables $`f,g,\overline{g},h,\overline{h},s,\overline{s}`$ and two dummy independent variables and therefore we need 9 independent equations. We can take, e.g., (46, 47, 48a, 50, 99), and then the other equations are consequences of these. \[In practice it is best to keep the full set at one’s disposal.\]

If we change variables to $`\xi `$ and $`\eta `$ using

$$y=\xi +\eta ,z=\xi \eta ,$$
(100)
then taking sums and differences of some of the equations, for instance (51a) and (97a) we get some equations containing only $`\xi `$-derivatives and others containg $`\eta `$-derivatives. In the following we will only use the ones containing $`\xi `$-derivatives, they are

$`D_\xi (D_x^2D_{x_2})gf=4s\overline{h},`$ $`D_\xi (D_x^2+D_{x_2})\overline{g}f=4\overline{s}h,`$ (101)
$`D_\xi (D_x^2D_{x_2})hf=4s\overline{g},`$ $`D_\xi (D_x^2+D_{x_2})\overline{h}f=4\overline{s}g,`$ (102)
$`D_\xi D_xff`$ $`=2(g\overline{g}+h\overline{h}).`$ (103)
This leaves us with equations (46-49, 99, 101-103).

At this stage we have not yet carried out a reduction. If we now do a second change of variables

$$x=\frac{1}{2}(X+\mathrm{\Xi }),\xi =\frac{1}{2}(X\mathrm{\Xi }),$$
(104)
we can achieve a dimensional reduction in a manner similar to the dimensional reduction in Section III.3, i.e., by expanding in $`\eta ,\mathrm{\Xi }`$ and keeping only the leading terms. After also eliminating the $`x_2`$ dependence, and denoting $`x_3=T`$, we finally obtain the following set of equations

$`(D_X^3+D_T)gf=3s\overline{h},`$ $`(D_X^3+D_T)\overline{g}f=3\overline{s}h,`$ (105)
$`(D_X^3+D_T)hf=3s\overline{g},`$ $`(D_X^3+D_T)\overline{h}f=3\overline{s}g,`$ (106)
$`D_Xhg=sf,`$ $`D_X\overline{h}\overline{g}=\overline{s}f,`$ (107)
$`D_X^2ff`$ $`=2(g\overline{g}+h\overline{h}).`$ (108)
This is a coupled Sasa-Satsuma equation with complex fields. The nonlinear form obtained with the substitutions

$$q=\frac{g}{f},\overline{q}=\frac{\overline{g}}{f},r=\frac{h}{f},\overline{r}=\frac{\overline{h}}{f},$$

is

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill q_T+q_{XXX}6q_Xq\overline{q}3\overline{r}(qr)_X=0& ,\hfill \\ \hfill \overline{q}_T+\overline{q}_{XXX}6\overline{q}_X\overline{q}q3r(\overline{q}\overline{r})_X=0& ,\hfill \\ \hfill r_T+r_{XXX}6r_Xr\overline{r}3\overline{q}(rq)_X=0& ,\hfill \\ \hfill \overline{r}_T+\overline{r}_{XXX}6\overline{r}_X\overline{r}r3q(\overline{r}\overline{q})_X=0& ,\hfill \end{array}$$
(109)
which was proposed already in YO . If we take $`\overline{q}=q^{},\overline{r}=r^{}`$ we obtain (13).

### III.5 Second reduction, step 2

The final reduction on this system is a reduction of $`C`$ type, this is obtained as in the other bilinearization by identifying

$$\overline{g}=h,\overline{h}=g,\overline{s}=s.$$
(110)
This gives us the alternative bilinear form of the Sasa-Satsuma equations:

$`(D_X^3+D_T)gf=3sg,`$ $`(D_X^3+D_T)\overline{g}f=3s\overline{g},`$ (111)
$`D_Xg\overline{g}`$ $`=sf,`$ (112)
$`D_X^2ff`$ $`=4g\overline{g}.`$ (113)
With $`f=F`$, $`g=G`$, $`\overline{g}=G^{}`$, $`s=S`$ these equations yield (32) for $`\beta =3`$. The solutions for this alternative form will be the same as in the first case and the nonlinear form of these equations is (83), with $`r`$ replaced by $`\overline{q}`$. This bilinear form of the system requires a single pure imaginary auxiliary variable $`s`$, whilst the other bilinearization involves a complex auxiliary field $`h`$, and consequently here we need four bilinear equations rather than five.

## IV Conclusions

In this paper we have shown how the Sasa-Satsuma equation fits into the general theory as a reduction of the three-component KP hierarchy. As a result we have obtained two possible bilinearization for SSnls, (31) and (32), and formulae for constructing multisoliton solutions, (87, 92, 66, 70, 71, 96). In the reduction process we have also obtained two intermediate equations, (81), and (109), of which the $`(2+1)`$-dimensional (81) seems to be new.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported in part by a grant from Academy of Finland. J.H. and Y.O. would like to thank Dr. Sasa, Prof. Satsuma and Dr. Tsuchida for discussions.


format: text

text:
# A Possible Form of the Orthogonal Set in Six Kinds of Boson Operators

## 1 Introduction

Time dependent variational method has played a central role for describing time-evolution of quantal many-body systems. The typical example may be the time-dependent Hartree-Fock (TDHF) method for many-fermion systems. In this case, a trial state for the variation is the Slater determinant containing complex parameters. Especially, it may be interesting to see that, under the time-dependent variation with a certain condition governing these parameters, time-evolution of many-fermion systems under investigation can be treated in the framework of classical mechanics in Hamilton form. In the case of many-boson systems, the time-evolution of the systems can be also described in the framework of the time-dependent variational method. In this case, the simplest trial state may be the boson coherent state for one kind of boson operator. However, in order to give the variety to the variation, the trial state must be modified from the boson coherent state to other states. For a possible modification, we know that with the help of a function of the boson number operator, the boson coherent state can be generalized. This generalization may be called the deformation of the boson coherent state and Penson and Solomon maintained that the choice of the function characterizing the deformation is rather arbitrary. By adopting various forms of the functions, various trial states are obtained. In response to their opinion, the present authors proposed the deformed boson scheme for a generalizing boson coherent state. In this case, also, we can formulate classical mechanics in Hamiltonian form under the same idea as that in the TDHF method.

In order to approach to various realistic problems as much as possible, it is necessary to formulate boson coherent states for many-body systems consisting of many kinds of boson operators and, further, we make the boson coherent states deform. In order to construct such boson coherent states, it is inevitable to prepare the orthogonal set based on the algebraic examination as a preliminary task. Typical examples of this task can be found in the $`su(2)`$\- and the $`su(1,1)`$-algebras. The generators are expressed in terms of bilinear forms for two kinds of bosons. This is called the Schwinger boson representation. The case of three kinds of bosons was formulated by the present authors in relation to the $`su(2,1)`$-algebra. In addition to the above cases, the present authors formulated the case of four kinds of bosons, in which the $`su(2)\times su(2)`$\- and the $`su(1,1)\times su(1,1)`$-algebras are objects of the investigation. This is a simple example of the formalism in which $`(M+1)(N+1)`$ kinds of bosons are treated. In each case, the orthogonal set was investigated. As the first step for constructing the boson coherent state after finishing the algebraic examination, we set up an exponential type superposition of various states with the minimum weight or its equivalent state. At the second step, we set up an operator, the form of which is of exponential superposition of various raising or coherent state generating operators. As the final step, by operating the exponential operator obtained at the second step on the state introduced at the first step, we are able to obtain the coherent state. Once the coherent state is given, the task for the deformation may be not so tedious as that imagined. With the aid of the deformed boson scheme, it is completed. This deformation leads us to the concept of the $`q`$-deformed algebra. Of course, in each case, each device is necessary. Following the above-mentioned viewpoint, the present authors investigated the cases of two, three and four kinds of boson operators.

Main aim of this paper is to show a possible orthogonal set for six kinds of boson operators. There exist two reasons why we investigate the above case. In Ref. ?, we proposed a method for describing statistically mixed state of many-body systems consisting of one kind of boson, which interacts with an external harmonic oscillator. The basic idea partly comes from the phase space doubling which characterized the thermo field dynamics formalism. And, in Ref. ?, this method is transparently understood in the framework of the deformation of the $`su(2,1)`$-algebra in three kinds of bosons. Therefore, as a natural extension, we have an idea how to describe statistically mixed state of many-body systems consisting of two kinds of bosons, which interact with an external harmonic oscillator. Such many-body systems are found in the single-level shell model under the pairing correlation and the two-level shell model under the particle-hole interaction, i.e., Lipkin model. Through this investigation, we are able to have an understanding of a possible mechanism of damping or amplifying of the collective motions which are observed in these models. This is the first reason. The second reason is related to the formalism given in Ref. ?. In this work, with the help of the deformed boson scheme, we proposed a method which enable us to describe thermal effects observed in the two-level shell model under the pairing correlation. Therefore, it may be interesting to check if the basic idea presented in Ref. ? is applicable or not for the three-level shell model. This is the second reason. The above-mentioned two reasons suggest us the importance of the investigation of the case of six kinds of boson operators. For this aim, first, we must present an orthogonal set which is convenient for constructing the coherent state.

Our starting point can be found in the paper by the present authors which is referred to as Ref. ?. In this paper, we can construct the $`su(M+1)\times su(N,1)`$-algebra in the framework of $`(M+1)(N+1)`$ kinds of boson operators. In the present paper, we treat the case $`M=1`$ and $`N=2`$. Then, in this case, totally six kinds of bosons are treated and the $`su(2)`$\- and the $`su(2,1)`$-algebras are obtained. Further, in this framework, we can construct the $`su(1,1)`$\- and the $`su(3)`$-algebras. Since the system under investigation consists of six kinds of bosons, the orthogonal set is specified by six quantum numbers. Therefore, in order to get the orthogonal set, it may be necessary to prepare six mutually commutable hermitian operators. In fact, as will be shown in §§4 and 5, we are able to prepare four sets of these operators and, then, four types of the orthogonal sets exist. These four sets are related to the $`su(3)`$-, the $`su(2)`$-, the $`su(2,1)`$\- and the $`su(1,1)`$-algebras, respectively. Further, the orthogonal set can be expressed in terms of monomial as a function of the state generating operators. This fact is quite important for constructing the coherent state. Therefore, we can expect that the orthogonal set obtained in this paper plays a powerful role for constructing the coherent state consisting of six kinds of bosons.

In the next section, the basic framework for investigating the orthogonal set is summarized. In §3, a possible form of the orthogonal set is presented in terms of polynomial as a function of state generating operators. Sections 4 and 5 are central parts of this paper. The orthogonal set is given in terms of monomial for four types related to the $`su(3)`$-, the $`su(2)`$-, the $`su(2,1)`$\- and the $`su(1,1)`$-algebras. Finally, in §6, two points are discussed as concluding remarks : 1) the relation of the formalism in this paper with the $`su(2,1)`$-model in three kinds of bosons and 2) a basic idea for construction of the coherent state.

## 2 The su(2)-algebra in six kinds of boson operators

In this section, we recapitulate the $`su(2)`$-algebra in six kinds of boson operators in a form slightly different from that developed by the present authors in Ref. ? including the notations. Let us denote six kinds of bosons $`(\widehat{a}_i,\widehat{a}_i^{})`$ and $`(\widehat{b}_i,\widehat{b}_i^{})`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$). With the use of these bosons, the following operators obeying the $`su(2)`$-algebra are defined :

$$\widehat{S}_{\pm ,0}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\widehat{S}_{\pm ,0}(i),$$
(2.1)
$`\widehat{S}_+(i)=\widehat{a}_i^{}\widehat{b}_i,\widehat{S}_{}(i)=\widehat{b}_i^{}\widehat{a}_i,`$
$`\widehat{S}_0(i)=(1/2)(\widehat{a}_i^{}\widehat{a}_i\widehat{b}_i^{}\widehat{b}_i).(i=1,2,3)`$ (2.2a)
The above corresponds to the case $`(M=1,N=2)`$ in Ref. ?. Associating with the operators (2.2a), we introduce the operators defined as

$$\widehat{S}(i)=(1/2)(\widehat{a}_i^{}\widehat{a}_i+\widehat{b}_i^{}\widehat{b}_i).(i=1,2,3)$$
(2.2b)
Three sets $`(\widehat{S}_{\pm ,0}(i);i=1,2,3)`$ form mutually independent $`su(2)`$-algebra in the Schwinger boson representation and the operator $`\widehat{S}(i)`$ denotes the magnitude of the $`i`$-th $`su(2)`$-spin. Therefore, $`(\widehat{S}_{\pm ,0})`$ forms the addition of these three $`su(2)`$-spins. First aim of this paper is to give the eigenstate of $`(\widehat{𝑺}^2,\widehat{S}_0)`$ without the limits of the conventional manner, i.e., successive addition of the $`su(2)`$-spins. Here, $`\widehat{𝑺}^2`$ denotes the Casimir operator of the $`su(2)`$-spin :

$$\widehat{𝑺}^2=\widehat{S}_0^2+(1/2)(\widehat{S}_+\widehat{S}_{}+\widehat{S}_{}\widehat{S}_+)=\widehat{S}_0(\widehat{S}_01)+\widehat{S}_+\widehat{S}_{}.$$
(2.3)
The eigenstate of $`(\widehat{𝑺}^2,\widehat{S}_0)`$ with the eigenvalues $`(s(s+1),s_0)`$ satisfies

$`\widehat{𝑺}^2|(\alpha );ss_0=s(s+1)|(\alpha );ss_0,`$
$`\widehat{S}_0|(\alpha );ss_0=s_0|(\alpha );ss_0.`$ (2.4)
$`s=0,1/2,1,3/2,\mathrm{},s_0=s,s+1,\mathrm{},s1,s.`$ (2.5)
Here, $`(\alpha )`$ denotes a set of four numbers additional to $`(s,s_0)`$ which specifies the eigenstate of only $`(\widehat{𝑺}^2,\widehat{S}_0)`$. It should be noted that the four numbers do not play a role of quantum numbers directly. The state $`|(\alpha );ss_0`$ can be expressed in the form

$`|(\alpha );ss_0=\left(\sqrt{(s+s_0)!}\right)^1(\widehat{S}_+)^{s+s_0}|(\alpha );s,`$ (2.6)
$`\widehat{S}_{}|(\alpha );s=0,\widehat{S}_0|(\alpha );s=s|(\alpha );s.`$ (2.7)
We call the state $`|(\alpha );s`$ the intrinsic state, because $`|(\alpha );ss_0`$ is constructed by successive operation of $`\widehat{S}_+`$ on the state $`|(\alpha );s`$. Therefore, our problem is reduced to determine the state $`|(\alpha );s`$.

In order to approach to the above-mentioned problem, we introduce the $`su(3)`$-algebra, the generators of which can be expressed in the form

$`\widehat{R}_+(2)=\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_3+\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_3,\widehat{R}_+(1)=\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_3+\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_3,`$
$`\widehat{R}_{}(2)=\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_2+\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_2,\widehat{R}_{}(1)=\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_1,`$ (2.8a)
$`\widehat{R}_2^1=\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_2+\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_2,\widehat{R}_1^2=\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_1,`$ (2.8b)
$`\widehat{R}_2^2=(1/2)(\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_2\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3)+(1/2)(\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3),`$
$`\widehat{R}_1^1=(1/2)(\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_1\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3)+(1/2)(\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3).`$ (2.8c)
Further, we introduce the following operators :

$`\widehat{T}_+(2)=\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{a}_3^{},\widehat{T}_+(1)=\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{a}_3^{},`$
$`\widehat{T}_{}(2)=\widehat{b}_3\widehat{a}_2\widehat{a}_3\widehat{b}_2,\widehat{T}_{}(1)=\widehat{b}_3\widehat{a}_1\widehat{a}_3\widehat{b}_1,`$ (2.9a)
$`\widehat{T}_2^1=\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_2+\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_2,\widehat{T}_1^2=\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_1,`$ (2.9b)
$`\widehat{T}_2^2=(1/2)(\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_2+\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3)+(1/2)(\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2+\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3)+1,`$
$`\widehat{T}_1^1=(1/2)(\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3)+(1/2)(\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1+\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3)+1.`$ (2.9c)
The set defined in the relation (2) forms the $`su(2,1)`$-algebra. The above two algebras were already presented in Ref. ?.

We can show that in the present system, there exist various relations among the generators of the $`su(2)`$-, the $`su(3)`$\- and the $`su(2,1)`$-algebras given in the above. Among them, the following relations are in particular useful for the later treatment :

$`[\text{any of the }su(3)\text{-generators , any of the }su(2)\text{-generators}]=0,`$ (2.10a)
$`[\text{any of the }su(2,1)\text{-generators , any of the }su(2)\text{-generators}]=0,`$ (2.10b)
$`[\widehat{R}_{}(2),\widehat{T}_+(2)]=[\widehat{R}_{}(2),\widehat{T}_+(1)]=0,`$
$`[\widehat{R}_{}(1),\widehat{T}_+(2)]=[\widehat{R}_{}(1),\widehat{T}_+(1)]=0,`$ (2.11a)
$`[\widehat{R}_+(2),\widehat{T}_+(2)]=[\widehat{R}_+(1),\widehat{T}_+(1)]=0,`$
$`[\widehat{R}_+(2),\widehat{T}_+(1)]=[\widehat{R}_+(1),\widehat{T}_+(2)]=\widehat{Q}_+0.`$ (2.11b)
Here, $`\widehat{Q}_+`$ is given as a component of a set of the operators $`(\widehat{Q}_{\pm ,0})`$ defined by

$`\widehat{Q}_+`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{a}_2^{},\widehat{Q}_{}=\widehat{b}_2\widehat{a}_1\widehat{a}_2\widehat{b}_1,`$
$`\widehat{Q}_0`$ $`=`$ $`(1/2)(\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_2)+(1/2)(\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1+\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2)+1`$ (2.12)
$`=`$ $`(1/2)(\widehat{R}_1^1+\widehat{R}_2^2)+(1/2)(\widehat{T}_1^1+\widehat{T}_2^2).`$
The set $`(\widehat{Q}_{\pm ,0})`$ obeys the $`su(1,1)`$-algebra :

$$[\widehat{Q}_+,\widehat{Q}_{}]=2\widehat{Q}_0,[\widehat{Q}_0,\widehat{Q}_\pm ]=\pm \widehat{Q}_\pm .$$
(2.13)
From the above argument, we know that many-body systems consisting of six kinds of bosons are characterized not only by the $`su(2)`$-, the $`su(3)`$\- and the $`su(2,1)`$-algebras but also by the $`su(1,1)`$-algebra. The operators $`\widehat{Q}_\pm `$ play a central role in §§4 and 5. The above is the basic framework of our formalism.

## 3 Determination of the intrinsic state

We are now in a stage to determine the intrinsic state $`|(\alpha );s`$ obeying the condition (2.7). As a possible candidate, we set up following form :

$`|(\alpha );s`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{p_1!p_2!}\right)^1(\widehat{R}_+(1))^{p_1}(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{p_2}|(\beta );s,`$ (3.1a)
$`(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`p_1,p_2,(\beta ),p_1,p_2=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.`$ (3.1b)
Here, $`(\beta )`$ denotes a certain set of two numbers, which plays the same role as that of $`(\alpha )`$. There exists the relation (2.10a) and $`|(\alpha );s`$ obeys the condition (2.7). Therefore, the state $`|(\beta );s`$ should satisfy

$$\widehat{S}_{}|(\beta );s=0,\widehat{S}_0|(\beta );s=s|(\beta );s.$$
(3.2)
Further, the form (3) suggests us that $`\widehat{R}_+(1)`$ and $`\widehat{R}_+(2)`$ plays a role of the raising operators from $`|(\beta );s`$ and, then, we set up the condition

$$\widehat{R}_{}(1)|(\beta );s=0,\widehat{R}_{}(2)|(\beta );s=0.$$
(3.3)
The state $`|(\beta );s`$ obeying the conditions (3.2) and (3.3) can be given as

$`|(\beta );s`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{q_1!q_2!}\right)^1(\widehat{T}_+(1))^{q_1}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{q_2}|s,`$ (3.4a)
$`(\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`q_1,q_2,q_1,q_2=0,1,2,\mathrm{},`$ (3.4b)
$`|s`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{(2s)!}\right)^1(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0.`$ (3.5)
Therefore, combining with the form (3), we have

$`|p_1p_2q_1q_2;s`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{p_1!p_2!}\right)^1(\widehat{R}_+(1))^{p_1}(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{p_2}`$ (3.6)
$`\times \left(\sqrt{q_1!q_2!}\right)^1(\widehat{T}_+(1))^{q_1}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{q_2}\left(\sqrt{(2s)!}\right)^1(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0.`$
The state (3.6) can be regarded as the intrinsic state and forms the linearly independent set, but, it is not orthogonal. The numbers $`(p_1,p_2,q_1,q_2)`$ do not play a role of the quantum numbers. Then, by making an appropriate linear combination for the states (3.6), we can construct the orthogonal set.

For the above task, we must prepare four mutually commuted hermitian operators expressed in terms of the $`su(3)`$-generators (2.8a)$``$ (2.8c). Then, including $`\widehat{𝑺}^2`$ and $`\widehat{S}_0`$, we have six mutually commuted hermitian operators. First, we define the operators

$`\widehat{M}_+`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_2+\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_2=\widehat{R}_2^1=\widehat{T}_2^1,`$
$`\widehat{M}_{}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_1=\widehat{R}_1^2=\widehat{T}_1^2,`$
$`\widehat{M}_0`$ $`=`$ $`(1/2)(\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_1\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_2)+(1/2)(\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2)`$ (3.7)
$`=`$ $`\widehat{R}_1^1\widehat{R}_2^2=\widehat{T}_1^1\widehat{T}_2^2.`$
As can be seen from the form, the set $`(\widehat{M}_{\pm ,0})`$ obeys the $`su(2)`$-algebra and, then, as mutually commuted operators, we can choose $`\widehat{M}_0`$ and the Casimir operator $`\widehat{𝑴}^2`$ expressed in the form

$$\widehat{𝑴}^2=\widehat{M}_0^2+(1/2)(\widehat{M}_+\widehat{M}_{}+\widehat{M}_{}\widehat{M}_+).$$
(3.8)
Next, we define the operator

$`\widehat{R}_0`$ $`=`$ $`(1/2)(\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_2)+(1/2)(\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1+\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2)(\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3+\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3)`$ (3.9)
$`=`$ $`\widehat{R}_1^1+\widehat{R}_2^2=\widehat{S}(1)+\widehat{S}(2)2\widehat{S}(3).`$
Finally, the Casimir operator for the $`su(3)`$-algebra, which we denote as $`\widehat{𝑹}^2`$, is introduced :

$`\widehat{𝑹}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(4/3)[(\widehat{R}_1^1)^2\widehat{R}_1^1\widehat{R}_2^2+(\widehat{R}_2^2)^2]+(1/2)(\widehat{R}_2^1\widehat{R}_1^2+\widehat{R}_1^2\widehat{R}_2^1)`$ (3.10)
$`+(1/2)[\widehat{R}_+(1)\widehat{R}_{}(1)+\widehat{R}_+(2)\widehat{R}_{}(2)+\widehat{R}_{}(1)\widehat{R}_+(1)+\widehat{R}_{}(2)\widehat{R}_+(2)]`$
$`=`$ $`(1/3)\widehat{R}_0(\widehat{R}_03)+\widehat{𝑴}^2+(\widehat{R}_+(1)\widehat{R}_{}(1)+\widehat{R}_+(2)\widehat{R}_{}(2)).`$
The above operators $`\widehat{𝑴}^2`$, $`\widehat{M}_0`$, $`\widehat{𝑹}^2`$ and $`\widehat{R}_0`$ are the mutually commuted hermitian operators and, of course, they commute with $`\widehat{𝑺}^2`$ and $`\widehat{S}_0`$.

The operators $`(\widehat{R}_+(1),\widehat{R}_+(2))`$ and $`(\widehat{T}_+(1),\widehat{T}_+(2))`$ obey the relations

$`[\widehat{M}_+,\widehat{R}_+(1)]=0,[\widehat{M}_+,\widehat{R}_+(2)]=\widehat{R}_+(1),`$
$`[\widehat{M}_{},\widehat{R}_+(1)]=\widehat{R}_+(2),[\widehat{M}_{},\widehat{R}_+(2)]=0,`$
$`[\widehat{M}_0,\widehat{R}_+(1)]=+1/2\widehat{R}_+(1),[\widehat{M}_0,\widehat{R}_+(2)]=1/2\widehat{R}_+(2),`$ (3.11a)
$`[\widehat{M}_+,\widehat{T}_+(1)]=0,[\widehat{M}_+,\widehat{T}_+(2)]=\widehat{T}_+(1),`$
$`[\widehat{M}_{},\widehat{T}_+(1)]=\widehat{T}_+(2),[\widehat{M}_{},\widehat{T}_+(2)]=0,`$
$`[\widehat{M}_0,\widehat{T}_+(1)]=+1/2\widehat{T}_+(1),[\widehat{M}_0,\widehat{T}_+(2)]=1/2\widehat{T}_+(2),`$ (3.11b)
The relations (3.11a) and (3.11b) tell us that the operators $`(\widehat{R}_+(1),\widehat{R}_+(2))`$ and $`(\widehat{T}_+(1),\widehat{T}_+(2))`$ denote the spherical tensors with rank $`j=1/2`$, i.e., $`(\widehat{R}_+(1)=\widehat{R}_{1/2,1/2}`$, $`\widehat{R}_+(2)=\widehat{R}_{1/2,1/2})`$ and $`(\widehat{T}_+(1)=\widehat{T}_{1/2,1/2}`$, $`\widehat{T}_+(2)=\widehat{T}_{1/2,1/2})`$. Therefore, we can construct the spherical tensors with rank $`k`$ and the $`k_0`$-th component and with rank $`l`$ and the $`l_0`$-th component, respectively, in the following form :

$`\widehat{R}_+(k,k_0)=\left(\sqrt{(k+k_0)!(kk_0)!}\right)^1(\widehat{R}_+(1))^{k+k_0}(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{kk_0},`$ (3.12a)
$`\widehat{T}_+(l,l_0)=\left(\sqrt{(l+l_0)!(ll_0)!}\right)^1(\widehat{T}_+(1))^{l+l_0}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{ll_0},`$ (3.12b)
$`k=0,1/2,1,3/2,\mathrm{},k_0=k,k+1,\mathrm{},k1,k,`$ (3.13a)
$`l=0,1/2,1,3/2,\mathrm{},l_0=l,l+1,\mathrm{},l1,l,`$ (3.13b)
The boson operators $`\widehat{a}_3^{}`$ and $`\widehat{b}_3^{}`$ are scalars with respect to the $`su(2)`$-algebra $`(\widehat{M}_{\pm ,0})`$. The operator $`\widehat{R}_0`$ obeys the relations

$`[\widehat{R}_0,\widehat{R}_+(1)]=+3/2\widehat{R}_+(1),[\widehat{R}_0,\widehat{R}_+(2)]=+3/2\widehat{R}_+(2),`$ (3.14a)
$`[\widehat{R}_0,\widehat{T}_+(1)]=1/2\widehat{T}_+(1),[\widehat{R}_0,\widehat{T}_+(2)]=1/2\widehat{T}_+(2).`$ (3.14b)
Therefore, we have

$`[\widehat{R}_0,\widehat{R}_+(k,k_0)]=+3k\widehat{R}_+(k,k_0),`$ (3.15a)
$`[\widehat{R}_0,\widehat{T}_+(l,l_0)]=l\widehat{T}_+(l,l_0).`$ (3.15b)
Further, there exists the relation

$$[\widehat{𝑹}^2,\widehat{R}_+(k,k_0)]=0.$$
(3.16)
Under the above preparation, let us construct the orthogonal set for the intrinsic state. For the state (3.6), we put

$$p_1=k+k_0,p_2=kk_0,q_1=l+l_0,q_2=ll_0.$$
(3.17)
By superposing the state (3.6) under the Clebsh-Gordan(CG)-coefficients, we define the state as

$$|k,l,m,m_0;s=\underset{k_0,l_0}{}kk_0ll_0|mm_0\widehat{R}_+(k,k_0)\widehat{T}_+(l,l_0)|s.$$
(3.18)
The state $`|k,l,m,m_0;s`$ satisfies the eigenvalue equations for the operators $`\widehat{𝑹}^2`$, $`\widehat{R}_0`$, $`\widehat{𝑴}^2`$ and $`\widehat{M}_0`$, the eigenvalues of which are given as

$`(1/3)(2s+l)(2s+l+3)+l(l+1)`$ for $`\widehat{𝑹}^2,`$ (3.19a)
$`3k(2s+l)`$ for $`\widehat{R}_0,`$ (3.19b)
$`m(m+1)`$ for $`\widehat{𝑴}^2,`$ (3.19c)
$`m_0`$ for $`\widehat{M}_0.`$ (3.19d)
Under a given value of $`s`$, we can determine $`(k,l,m,m_0)`$. From the relation (3.19a), $`l`$ is determined and, then, the relation (3.19b) give us $`k`$. Further, the relations (3.19c) and (3.19d) give us $`m`$ and $`m_0`$. It may be self-evident that the set of the states $`|k,l,m,m_0;s`$ forms the orthogonal set.

From the above argument, we have the state

$`|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right)^1(\widehat{S}_+)^{s+s_0}{\displaystyle \underset{k_0,l_0}{}}C(k,k_0;l,l_0|m,m_0)`$ (3.20)
$`\times \left(\sqrt{(k+k_0)!(kk_0)!}\right)^1(\widehat{R}_+(1))^{k+k_0}(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{kk_0}`$
$`\times \left(\sqrt{(l+l_0)!(ll_0)!}\right)^1(\widehat{T}_+(1))^{l+l_0}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{ll_0}`$
$`\times \left(\sqrt{(2s)!}\right)^1(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0.`$
Here, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`C(k,k_0;l,l_0|m,m_0)`$ denote the normalization constant and the Clebsch-Gordan coefficient, respectively.

## 4 Reformation of the orthogonal set

Main task in this section is to show the eigenstate $`|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0`$, the form of which is different from that given in the relation (3.20), but essentially, the same. The form presented in this section may be useful for constructing the coherent state of the present system. In the case $`(s_0=s,m_0=m,m=k+l)`$, the state $`|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0`$ can be expressed as

$$|k,l,(k+l),(k+l);s,s=(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{2k}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{2l}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0(=|2k,2l,2s).$$
(4.1)
In the above expression, including the normalization constant $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the factorial factors are omitted. It may be noted that the case $`(m_0=m,m=k+l)`$ corresponds to $`(k_0=k,l_0=l)`$ and $`C(k,k;l,l|(k+l),(k+l))=1`$. The state (4.1) obeys the conditions

$`\widehat{S}_{}|2k,2l,2s=0,`$
$`\widehat{𝑺}^2|2k,2l,2s=s(s+1)|2k,2l,2s,`$
$`\widehat{S}_0|2k,2l,2s=s|2k,2l,2s,`$ (4.2)
$`\widehat{M}_{}|2k,2l,2s=0,`$
$`\widehat{𝑴}^2|2k,2l,2s=(k+l)(k+l+1)|2k,2l,2s,`$
$`\widehat{M}_0|2k,2l,2s=(k+l)|2k,2l,2s,`$ (4.3)
$`\widehat{R}_0|2k,2l,2s=(3k(2s+l))|2k,2l,2s.`$ (4.4)
The relation (4.3) presents a key to arrive at our final goal. By shifting $`2k`$ and $`2l`$ to $`2k(k+lm)(=kl+m)`$ and $`2l(k+lm)(=lk+m)`$, respectively, we have

$$|kl+m,lk+m,2s=(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{kl+m}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{lk+m}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0.$$
(4.5)
Of course, the state (4.5) satisfies the same relation as that given in Eq. (4.2). Concerning the relations (4.3) and (4.4), we have

$`\widehat{M}_{}|kl+m,lk+m,2s=0,`$
$`\widehat{𝑴}^2|kl+m,lk+m,2s=m(m+1)|kl+m,lk+m,2s,`$
$`\widehat{M}_0|kl+m,lk+m,2s=m|kl+m,lk+m,2s,`$ (4.6)
$`\widehat{R}_0|kl+m,lk+m,2s=[3k(2s+l)(k+lm)]|kl+m,lk+m,2s.`$
(4.7)
The state $`|kl+m,lk+m,2s`$ is an eigenstate of $`\widehat{R}_0`$ with the eigenvalue shown in the relation (4.7). Then, let us show that the eigenstate of $`\widehat{R}_0`$ with the eigenvalue $`3k(2s+l)`$ is obtained by the operator $`\widehat{Q}_+`$ defined in the relation (2) :

$$\widehat{Q}_+=[\widehat{R}_+(2),\widehat{T}_+(1)]=[\widehat{R}_+(1),\widehat{T}_+(2)]=\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{a}_2^{}.$$
(4.8)
The operator $`\widehat{Q}_+`$ obeys the relations

$`[\widehat{M}_\pm ,\widehat{Q}_+]=[\widehat{M}_0,\widehat{Q}_+]=0,`$ (4.9)
$`[\widehat{R}_0,\widehat{Q}_+]=\widehat{Q}_+.`$ (4.10)
Then, we define the state

$`|k,l,m,s`$ $`=`$ $`(\widehat{Q}_+)^{k+lm}|kl+m,lk+m,2s`$ (4.11)
$`=`$ $`(\widehat{Q}_+)^{k+lm}(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{kl+m}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{lk+m}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0.`$
The state (4.11) obeys the relations

$`\widehat{M}_{}|k,l,m,s=0,`$
$`\widehat{𝑴}^2|k,l,m,s=m(m+1)|k,l,m,s,`$
$`\widehat{M}_0|k,l,m,s=m|k,l,m,s,`$ (4.12)
$`\widehat{R}_0|k,l,m,s=[3k(2s+l)]|k,l,m,s.`$ (4.13)
The operators $`\widehat{Q}_+`$, $`\widehat{R}_+(2)`$ and $`\widehat{T}_+(2)`$ are mutually commuted and, then, the ordering of these operators appearing in the state (4.11) is arbitrary. The Casimir operator $`\widehat{𝑹}^2`$ given in the relation (3.10) satisfies

$`\widehat{𝑹}^2|k,l,m,s=(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{kl+m}\widehat{𝑹}^2|k,l,m,s,`$ (4.14a)
$`|k,l,m,s=(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{lk+m}(\widehat{Q}_+)^{k+lm}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0.`$ (4.14b)
The state $`|k,l,m,s`$ satisfies

$`\widehat{R}_0|k,l,m,s=[(l+3(km))/22s]|k,l,m,s,`$ (4.15a)
$`\widehat{𝑴}^2|k,l,m,s=[(lk+m)/2][(lk+m)/2+1]|k,l,m,s,`$ (4.15b)
$`[\widehat{R}_+(1)\widehat{R}_{}(1)+\widehat{R}_+(2)\widehat{R}_{}(2)]|k,l,m,s=(k+lm)(lk+m+2s+2)|k,l,m,s.`$
(4.15c)
The relations (4.15a)$``$(4.15c) lead us to the following result :

$$\widehat{𝑹}^2|k,l,m,s=[(1/3)(2s+l)(2s+l+3)+l(l+1)]|k,l,m,s.$$
(4.16)
As can be seen in the above relation, $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ appearing in the Elliott’s $`su(3)`$-model correspond to $`\lambda =2s+l`$ and $`\mu =l`$. From the above argument, the state defined in the following can be regarded as the intrinsic state introduced in §3 :

$$|k,l,m,m_0,s=(\widehat{M}_+)^{m+m_0}|k,l,m,s.$$
(4.17)
Thus, we are able to have the state $`|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0`$ in the form

$`|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right)^1(\widehat{S}_+)^{s+s_0}(\widehat{M}_+)^{m+m_0}`$ (4.18)
$`\times (\widehat{Q}_+)^{k+lm}(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{kl+m}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{lk+m}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0.`$
In contrast to the form (3.20), the form (4.18) is a monomial. We can see that the state (4.18) is constructed in terms of the operators $`\widehat{S}_+`$, $`\widehat{M}_+`$, $`\widehat{Q}_+`$, $`\widehat{T}_+(2)`$ and $`\widehat{R}_+(2)`$. In this sense, these operators may be called the state generating operators. The quantity $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ denotes the normalization constant which may be different from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in the state (3.20). Straightforward calculation gives us $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in the following form :

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`[(2s)!(s+s_0)!/(ss_0)!][(2m)!(m+m_0)!/(mm_0)!]`$ (4.19)
$`\times [(2s)!(k+lm)!(lk+m)!/(2sk+lm)!]^2`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{k+lm}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{lk+m}{}}}[(2ki+j)!(lk+m+ij)!(2(s+lk)j)!]`$
$`\times [i!j!(k+lmi)!((lk+mj)!)^2]^1.`$
Until the present, we did not contact with the conditions which the quantum numbers $`(k,l,m,m_0,s,s_0)`$ should satisfy. These numbers cannot change in arbitrary regions. Finally, we discuss this problem. For this aim, with the use of the definition of $`\widehat{R}_+(2)`$ shown in the relation (2.8a), we rewrite the state (4.18) in the form

$`|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right)^1(2s)!/(2sk+lm)!`$ (4.20)
$`\times (\widehat{S}_+)^{s+s_0}(\widehat{M}_+)^{m+m_0}(\widehat{Q}_+)^{k+lm}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{lk+m}`$
$`\times (\widehat{b}_2^{})^{kl+m}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2sk+lm}|0.`$
We can see that the state $`|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0`$ can be defined in the regions

$`ss_0+s,mm_0+m,`$
$`k+lm0,lk+m0,kl+m0,2sk+lm0,`$
that is,

$$|s_0|s,|m_0|m,|kl|mk+l,m2s+lk.$$
(4.21b)
The relation (4) is discussed again in §5.

## 5 Discussion

It may be interesting to investigate the properties of the orthogonal set$`\{|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0\}`$ in the language of the conventional manner for three $`su(2)`$-spins, i.e., the successive addition of these spins. If we follow the conventional manner, the orthogonal set is specified in terms of the quantum numbers $`(s_1,s_2,s_{12},s_3;s,s_0)`$. Here, $`s_i`$ ($`i=1,2,3)`$ denotes the magnitude of the $`i`$-th $`su(2)`$-spin and $`s_{12}`$ the magnitude of the $`su(2)`$-spin coupled by the first and the second $`su(2)`$-spin. The operator expressing the magnitude of the $`i`$-th $`su(2)`$-spin can be found in the relation (2.2b). The operation of $`\widehat{S}(i)`$ on the state $`|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0`$ leads us to

$$\widehat{S}(i)|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0=s_i|k,l,m,m_0;s,s_0.(i=1,2,3)$$
(5.1)
Here, $`s_i`$ is obtained in the form

$`s_1=(1/2)(k+l+m_0),`$ (5.1a)
$`s_2=(1/2)(k+lm_0),`$ (5.1b)
$`s_3=lk+s.`$ (5.1c)
In the case of the quantum number $`s_{12}`$, we must treat the Casimir operator of the $`su(2)`$-spin coupled by the first and the second $`su(2)`$-spin, which we denote as $`\widehat{𝑺}_{12}^2`$ :

$`\widehat{𝑺}_{12}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(\widehat{S}_0(1)+\widehat{S}_0(2))^2+(1/2)[(\widehat{S}_+(1)+\widehat{S}_+(2))(\widehat{S}_{}(1)+\widehat{S}_{}(2))`$ (5.2)
$`+(\widehat{S}_{}(1)+\widehat{S}_{}(2))(\widehat{S}_+(1)+\widehat{S}_+(2))].`$
Substituting the definition (2.2a) into the form (5.2), we have

$$\widehat{𝑺}_{12}^2=(\widehat{S}(1)+\widehat{S}(2))(\widehat{S}(1)+\widehat{S}(2)+1)\widehat{Q}_+\widehat{Q}_{}.$$
(5.3)
On the other hand, with use of the definition (3), we obtain the relation

$$\widehat{𝑴}^2=\widehat{𝑺}_{12}^2.$$
(5.4)
Therefore, $`s_{12}`$ is equal to $`m`$ :

$$s_{12}=m.$$
(5.5)
Inversely, the relations (5.1a)$``$(5.1c) and (5.5) give us the relations

$`k=(1/2)(s_1+s_2s_3+s),`$ (5.6a)
$`l=(1/2)(s_1+s_2+s_3s),`$ (5.6b)
$`m=s_{12},`$ (5.6c)
$`m_0=s_1s_2.`$ (5.6d)
Substituting the relation (5.5) into the inequality (4), we get the following inequality :

$$|s_0|s,|s_1s_2|s_{12}s_1+s_2,|s_{12}s_3|ss_{12}+s_3.$$
(5.7)
The above is nothing but the coupling rule for three $`su(2)`$-spins. Thus, we can summarize the state $`|s_1,s_2,(s_{12}),s_3;s,s_0`$ as follows :

$`|s_1,s_2,(s_{12}),s_3;s,s_0=\left(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right)^1(\widehat{S}_+)^{s+s_0}(\widehat{M}_+)^{s_1s_2+s_{12}}(\widehat{Q}_+)^{s_1+s_2s_{12}}`$
$`\times (\widehat{T}_+(2))^{s_{12}+s_3s}(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{s_{12}s_3+s}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0.`$ (5.8)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }=[(2s)!(s+s_0)!/(ss_0)!][(2s_{12})!(s_1s_2+s_{12})!/(s_2s_1+s_{12})!]`$
$`\times [(2s)!(s_1+s_2s_{12})!(s_{12}+s_3s)!/(s_3s_{12}+s)!]^2`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{s_1+s_2s_{12}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{s_{12}+s_3s}{}}}[(s_1+s_2s_3+si+j)!(s_{12}+s_3s+ij)!(2s_3j)!]`$
$`\times [i!j!(s_1+s_2s_{12}i)!((s_{12}+s_3sj)!)^2]^1.`$ (5.9)
In this paper, we gave the orthogonal set for describing the systems consisting of six kinds of boson operators, mainly, in relation to the $`su(2)`$\- and the $`su(3)`$-algebras. We show that the orthogonal set obtained in this paper can be applied to the case of the $`su(2,1)`$-algebra. In addition to the operators $`\widehat{𝑺}^2`$ and $`\widehat{S}_0`$, four mutually commuted hermitian operators must be introduced. As was shown in the relation (3), the operators $`(\widehat{M}_{\pm ,0})`$ can be also expressed in terms of the $`su(2,1)`$-generators :

$$\widehat{M}_+=\widehat{T}_2^1,\widehat{M}_{}=\widehat{T}_1^2,\widehat{M}_0=\widehat{T}_1^1\widehat{T}_2^2.$$
(5.10)
Then, $`\widehat{𝑴}^2`$ and $`\widehat{M}_0`$ are also useful in the present case. Instead of $`\widehat{R}_0`$, we introduce the operator $`\widehat{T}_0`$ in the form

$`\widehat{T}_0=\widehat{T}_1^1+\widehat{T}_2^2`$ $`=`$ $`(1/2)(\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_2)`$ (5.11)
$`+(1/2)(\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1+\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2)+(\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3+\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3)+2`$
$`=`$ $`\widehat{S}(1)+\widehat{S}(2)+2\widehat{S}(3)+2.`$
Further, the Casimir operator of the $`su(2,1)`$-algebra, which we denote as $`\widehat{𝑻}^2`$, is useful :

$`\widehat{𝑻}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(4/3)[(\widehat{T}_1^1)^2\widehat{T}_1^1\widehat{T}_2^2+(\widehat{T}_2^2)^2]+(1/2)(\widehat{T}_2^1\widehat{T}_1^2+\widehat{T}_1^2\widehat{T}_2^1)`$ (5.12)
$`(1/2)[\widehat{T}_+(1)\widehat{T}_{}(1)+\widehat{T}_+(2)\widehat{T}_{}(2)+\widehat{T}_{}(1)\widehat{T}_+(1)+\widehat{T}_{}(2)\widehat{T}_+(2)].`$
The above operator can be rewritten as

$`\widehat{𝑻}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{𝑹}^2(1/6)(\widehat{T}_0^2\widehat{R}_0^2)`$ (5.13)
$`=`$ $`\widehat{𝑹}^2(2/3)(\widehat{S}(1)+\widehat{S}(2)+1)(2\widehat{S}(3)+1).`$
From the above argument, we can see that the state (4.18) or (5.8) is the eigenstate of $`\widehat{𝑴}^2`$, $`\widehat{M}_0`$, $`\widehat{𝑻}^2`$ and $`\widehat{T}_0`$. The eigenvalues of $`\widehat{𝑴}^2`$ and $`\widehat{M}_0`$ are naturally $`m(m+1)`$ and $`m_0`$, respectively. The cases of the eigenvalues of $`\widehat{𝑻}^2`$ and $`\widehat{T}_0`$, which we denote as $`(𝑻^2)_{\mathrm{ev}}`$ and $`(T_0)_{\mathrm{ev}}`$, are calculated in the following form :

$`(𝑻^2)_{\mathrm{ev}}`$ $`=`$ $`(1/3)(2sk+2)(2sk1)+k(k+1)`$ (5.14)
$`=`$ $`(1/3)(2(s+1)+k)(2(s+1)+k+3)+k(k+1),`$
$`(T_0)_{\mathrm{ev}}`$ $`=`$ $`3l+2sk+2`$ (5.15)
$`=`$ $`3l(2(s+1)+k).`$
It is interesting to see that if $`s`$, $`k`$ and $`l`$ in the expressions for the eigenvalues of $`\widehat{𝑹}^2`$ and $`\widehat{R}_0`$ shown in the relation (3.18) are replaced with $`(s+1)`$, $`l`$ and $`k`$, respectively, the results are reduced to the relations (5.14) and (5.15). From the above argument, we can understand that the orthogonal set obtained in this paper is also applicable to the case of the $`su(2,1)`$-algebra.

Until the present stage, we have discussed three interesting aspects of the orthogonal set (3.20) in relation to the $`su(3)`$-, the $`su(2)\times su(2)\times su(2)`$ and the $`su(2,1)`$-algebra. We, further, show fourth aspect related with the role of the operators $`(\widehat{Q}_{\pm ,0})`$. As was shown in the relation (2.13), the set $`(\widehat{Q}_{\pm ,0})`$ obeys the $`su(1,1)`$-algebra and, then, the Casimir operator $`\widehat{𝑸}^2`$ is defined in the form

$$\widehat{𝑸}^2=\widehat{Q}_0^2(1/2)(\widehat{Q}_+\widehat{Q}_{}+\widehat{Q}_{}\widehat{Q}_+)=\widehat{Q}_0(\widehat{Q}_01)\widehat{Q}_+\widehat{Q}_{}.$$
(5.16)
Since $`\widehat{Q}_0=\widehat{S}(1)+\widehat{S}(2)+1`$, the operator $`\widehat{𝑸}^2`$ is reduced to $`\widehat{𝑺}_{12}^2`$ shown in the relation (5.3). Then, the relation (5.4) gives us

$$\widehat{𝑸}^2=\widehat{𝑴}^2.$$
(5.17)
Further, we introduce the operator $`\widehat{N}_0`$ defined as

$`\widehat{N}_0`$ $`=`$ $`(1/2)(\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3+\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3)`$ (5.18)
$`=`$ $`(1/4)((\widehat{T}_1^1+\widehat{T}_2^2)(\widehat{R}_1^1+\widehat{R}_2^2))1/2.`$
In this way, we can prepare new set of six mutually commuted hermitian operators$`(\widehat{𝑺}^2,\widehat{S}_0,\widehat{𝑸}^2,\widehat{Q}_0,\widehat{M}_0,\widehat{N}_0)`$. The eigenvalue problem for these operators can be easily solved. First, we note the following relation :

$`\widehat{Q}_{}|kl+m,lk+m,2s=0,`$
$`\widehat{𝑸}^2|kl+m,lk+m,2s=(m+1)((m+1)1)|kl+m,lk+m,2s,`$
$`\widehat{Q}_0|kl+m,lk+m,2s=(m+1)|kl+m,lk+m,2s.`$ (5.19)
Here, the state $`|kl+m,lk+m,2s`$ is given in the relation (4.5). The relation (5) tells us that $`\widehat{Q}_+`$ plays a role of the raising operator on the state $`|kl+m,lk+m,2s`$. Therefore, the eigenvalue problem for $`\widehat{𝑸}^2`$ and $`\widehat{Q}_0`$ is easily solved. The case of $`\widehat{N}_0`$ is also easily treated and the case of $`\widehat{𝑺}^2`$, $`\widehat{S}_0`$ and $`\widehat{M}_0`$ is already investigated. Thus, we can show that the state (4.18) is also the eigenstate for $`(\widehat{𝑺}^2,\widehat{S}_0,\widehat{𝑸}^2,\widehat{Q}_0,\widehat{M}_0,\widehat{N}_0)`$ and the eigenvalues of $`\widehat{𝑸}^2`$, $`\widehat{Q}_0`$ and $`\widehat{N}_0`$ are shown as follows :

$`q(q1),(q=m+1=s_{12}+1)\text{for}\widehat{𝑸}^2`$ (5.20a)
$`q_0,(q_0=k+l+1=s_1+s_2+1)\text{for}\widehat{Q}_0`$ (5.20b)
$`n_0,(n_0=lk+s=s_3)\text{for}\widehat{N}_0`$ (5.20c)
Here, $`q`$, $`q_0`$ and $`n_0`$ take the values

$$q=1,3/2,2,\mathrm{},q_0=q,q+1,q+2,\mathrm{},n_0=0,1/2,1,\mathrm{}.$$
(5.21)
The relation (5) gives us

$$m=q1,k=(1/2)(q_0n_0+s1),l=(1/2)(q_0+n_0s1).$$
(5.22)
Then, the state (4.18) can be rewritten in the form

$`|q,q_0,m_0,n_0;s,s_0=\left(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right)^1(\widehat{S}_+)^{s+s_0}(\widehat{M}_+)^{q+m_01}(\widehat{Q}_+)^{q_0q}`$
$`\times (\widehat{R}_+(2))^{qn_0+s1}(\widehat{T}_+(2))^{q+n_0s1}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2s}|0.`$ (5.23)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }=[(2s)!(s+s_0)!/(ss_0)!][(2q2)!(q+m_01)!/(qm_01)!]`$
$`\times [(2s)!(q_0q)!(n_0+qs1)!/(n_0q+s+1)!]^2`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{q_0q}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{n_0s+q1}{}}}[(q_0n_0+s1i+j)!(n_0+qs1+ij)!(n_0+sj)!]`$
$`\times [i!j!(q_0qi)!((n_0+qs1j)!)^2]^1.`$ (5.24)
The above is the fourth aspect of the orthogonal set given in §3.

## 6 Concluding remarks

Finally, as the concluding remarks, we contact with the relation of the present formalism with the $`su(2,1)`$-boson model in three kinds of boson operators, which was proposed by the present authors. In the original notations, this $`su(2,1)`$-model can be expressed in terms of the bosons $`(\widehat{a},\widehat{a}^{})`$, $`(\widehat{c},\widehat{c}^{})`$ and $`(\widehat{d},\widehat{d}^{})`$. We make these bosons correspond to $`(\widehat{a}_1,\widehat{a}_1^{})`$, $`(\widehat{b}_2,\widehat{b}_2^{})`$ and $`(\widehat{b}_3,\widehat{b}_3^{})`$, respectively, in the present notations. Further, this model consists of nine (essentially eight) $`su(2,1)`$-generators, which are denoted by $`\widehat{S}_{\pm ,0}`$, $`\widehat{T}_{\pm ,0}`$ and $`\widehat{R}_{\pm ,0}`$. In order to avoid the confusion of the notations, in this paper, the above three sets are expressed as $`\widehat{\sigma }_{\pm ,0}(1)`$, $`\widehat{\tau }_{\pm ,0}(1)`$ and $`\widehat{\rho }_{\pm ,0}(1)`$, respectively. Then, these generators can be expressed as

$`\widehat{\sigma }_+(1)=\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_3,\widehat{\sigma }_{}(1)=\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_2,\widehat{\sigma }_0(1)=(1/2)(\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3),`$ (6.1a)
$`\widehat{\tau }_+(1)=\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{b}_2^{},\widehat{\tau }_{}(1)=\widehat{b}_2\widehat{a}_1,\widehat{\tau }_0(1)=(1/2)(\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2)+1/2,`$ (6.1b)
$`\widehat{\rho }_+(1)=\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{b}_3^{},\widehat{\rho }_{}(1)=\widehat{b}_3\widehat{a}_1,\widehat{\rho }_0(1)=(1/2)(\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_1+\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3)+1/2.`$ (6.1c)
Here, the relation $`\widehat{\sigma }_0(1)=\widehat{\tau }_0(1)\widehat{\rho }_0(1)`$ should be noted. Next, we replace $`(\widehat{a}_1,\widehat{a}_1^{})`$, $`(\widehat{b}_2,\widehat{b}_2^{})`$ and $`(\widehat{b}_3,\widehat{b}_3^{})`$ in the forms (6) with $`(\widehat{b}_1,\widehat{b}_1^{})`$, $`(\widehat{a}_2,\widehat{a}_2^{})`$ and $`(\widehat{a}_3,\widehat{a}_3^{})`$, respectively, and another set of the $`su(2,1)`$-generators denoted by $`\widehat{\sigma }_{\pm ,0}(2)`$, $`\widehat{\tau }_{\pm ,0}(2)`$ and $`\widehat{\rho }_{\pm ,0}(2)`$ is obtained :

$`\widehat{\sigma }_+(2)=\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_3,\widehat{\sigma }_{}(2)=\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_2,\widehat{\sigma }_0(2)=(1/2)(\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_2\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3),`$ (6.2a)
$`\widehat{\tau }_+(2)=\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{a}_2^{},\widehat{\tau }_{}(2)=\widehat{a}_2\widehat{b}_1,\widehat{\tau }_0(2)=(1/2)(\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1+\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_2)+1/2,`$ (6.2b)
$`\widehat{\rho }_+(2)=\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{a}_3^{},\widehat{\rho }_{}(2)=\widehat{a}_3\widehat{b}_1,\widehat{\rho }_0(2)=(1/2)(\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1+\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3)+1/2.`$ (6.2c)
If the above set is added to that shown in the relation (6), we obtain new set expressed as follows :

$`\widehat{\sigma }_\pm =\widehat{\sigma }_\pm (1)+\widehat{\sigma }_\pm (2)=\widehat{R}_\pm (2),\widehat{\sigma }_0=\widehat{\sigma }_0(1)+\widehat{\sigma }_0(2)=\widehat{R}_2^2,`$ (6.3a)
$`\widehat{\tau }_\pm =\widehat{\tau }_\pm (1)+\widehat{\tau }_\pm (2)=\widehat{Q}_\pm ,\widehat{\tau }_0=\widehat{\tau }_0(1)+\widehat{\tau }_0(2)=\widehat{Q}_0,`$ (6.3b)
$`\widehat{\rho }_\pm =\widehat{\rho }_\pm (1)+\widehat{\rho }_\pm (2)=\widehat{T}_\pm (1),\widehat{\rho }_0=\widehat{\rho }_0(1)+\widehat{\rho }_0(2)=\widehat{T}_1^1.`$ (6.3c)
Translation of an orthogonal set given in Ref. ? to the present system leads us to the form

$`|\kappa ,t,t_0`$ $`=`$ $`(\widehat{\tau }_+)^{t_0t}(\widehat{\sigma }_+)^{2t1}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2\kappa 2}|0`$ (6.4a)
$`=`$ $`(\widehat{Q}_+)^{t_0t}(\widehat{R}_+(2))^{2t1}(\widehat{b}_3^{})^{2\kappa 2}|0,`$
$`\kappa `$ $`=`$ $`1,1/2,2,\mathrm{},t=1/2,1,3/2,\mathrm{},t_0=t,t+1,t+2,\mathrm{}.`$ (6.4b)
Comparison of the state (6) with the form (4.18) gives us

$`s_0=s,m_0=m,m=kl,`$ (6.5)
$`\kappa =s+1,t=kl+1/2.t_0=k+l+1/2.`$ (6.6)
The above is the relation of the formalism developed in this paper to the $`su(2,1)`$-boson model presented by the present authors. Of course, it should be noted that the number of the degrees of freedom increases twofold.

As was mentioned in §1, the aim of the present paper is to give a preparation for formulating the deformed boson scheme in six kinds of boson operators. For this aim, the starting point may be seen in the following coherent state :

$`|c^0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }_c}\right)^1\mathrm{exp}\left(\gamma _S\widehat{S}_+\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\gamma _M\widehat{M}_+\right)`$ (6.7)
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\left(\gamma _Q\widehat{Q}_+\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\gamma _T\widehat{T}_+(2)\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\gamma _R\widehat{R}_+(2)\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\delta \widehat{b}_3^{}\right)|0.`$
The symbols $`\gamma _S`$, $`\gamma _M`$, $`\gamma _Q`$, $`\gamma _T`$, $`\gamma _R`$ and $`\delta `$ denote complex parameters. In Ref. ?, a special case $`\gamma _S=\gamma _M=\gamma _T=0`$ was treated. It may be interesting to investigate the deformation of the coherent state $`|c^0`$ based on the deformed boson scheme which has been developed by the present authors. In subsequent paper, we will discuss this problem.