text:
# Quantum probability measures and tomographic probability densities

## 1. Introduction

Recently  the tomographic probability distributions were found to be related to Wigner functions . The tomoraphic probability distribution of  was used in optical tomography scheme  to reconstruct the Wigner function of photon states by measuring the homodyne quadrature distributions and applying the Radon transform  to find the Wigner function. In  an extension of optical tomography to symplectic tomography  was suggested. In framework of the symplectic tomography scheme the Wigner function and density operator can be reconstructed using Fourier - like integral (instead of Radon integral) of the symplectic tomogram. In  the tomographic approach was shown to be connected with well-known star-product quantization procedure ().

In quantum information theory and positive operator valued measures approach (in the context of quantum measurements)  the notion of quantum probability measure for a generic variable is a basic concept. Namely, to each pair $`(\widehat{\rho },\widehat{M})`$ consisting of the quantum state (the density operator) $`\widehat{\rho }`$ and the positive operator valued measure $`\widehat{M}`$, which can be identifyied with the quantum observable, it is associated axiomatically (in the way of ) the probability measure $`\mu _{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{M}}`$ which determines the readings of a classical measuring instrument. Taking into account the enssemble $`\{\mu _{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{M}}\}`$ for the fixed measure $`\widehat{M}`$ and all states $`\widehat{\rho }`$, it is possible to reconstruct $`\widehat{M}`$. In quantum information theory  the states $`\widehat{\rho }`$ play a role of quantum probability measures used to encode the information. After the states $`\widehat{\rho }`$ are transmitted through the quantum channel, one uses $`\widehat{M}`$ as desicion rules allowing to decode the data from the channel output. It is worthy to point out that one can connect a state with a probability distribution density for arbitrary observable $`\widehat{a}`$ using the characteristic function techniques (see ). This construction is related to the construction given by von Neumann in , which is used in quantum information theory .

The aim of our work is to establish a new connection of tomographic probability with such well studied mathematical object as quantum probability theory in addition to known connection with the star-product. Namely, we show that the symplectic tomogram can be obtained as a partial derivative of the distribution function of quantum probability measure. Till now the explicit relations between the tomographic probability distribution (tomogram) of quantum states and quantum probability measure concept (for the specific observable) used in quantum information theory were not known.

The paper is organized as follows: In Section 2 we review the quantum probability theory. In Section 3 and 4 symplectic tomography and spin tomography respectively will be discussed. In Section 5 connection of tomogram with quantum probability measure will be obtained. In Section 6 new concept of star-product for symplectic quantum measures will be introduced. In Section 7 evolution equation for symplectic quantum measures will be obtained. Srction 8 is devoted to conclusions and perspectives.

## 2. Basic concepts of quantum probability

Let $`H`$ be a separable Hilbert space. A positive linear operator $`\widehat{\rho }`$ in $`H`$ is said to be a state (density operator) if $`Tr\widehat{\rho }=1`$. We denote $`(H)`$, $`_+(H)(H)`$, $`\sigma (H)`$ and $`\widehat{I}`$ the sets of hermitian opeartors (quantum observables), positive operators, states and the identity operator in $`H`$ correspondingly. A map $`M`$ transmitting each Borel subset $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to a positive operator $`\widehat{M}(\mathrm{\Omega })_+(H)`$ is said to be a positive operator valued measure (POVM) if $`\underset{i}{}\widehat{M}(\mathrm{\Omega }_i)=\widehat{I}`$ for any finite or countable fragmentation $`=\mathrm{\Omega }_i`$ in the sense of the strong operator convergence of the series. The POVM $`\widehat{M}`$ is said to be orthogonal if $`\widehat{M}(\mathrm{\Omega })^2=\widehat{M}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. By means of the spectral theorem, given $`\widehat{a}(H)`$ there exists an orthogonal POVM $`\widehat{M}`$ such that

(1)
$$\widehat{a}=\underset{}{}X𝑑\widehat{M}((\mathrm{},X])=\underset{}{}X\delta (\widehat{a}X)𝑑X,$$

where $`\delta (\widehat{a}X)`$ is a density of the measure $`\widehat{M}`$. It means that the measure $`\widehat{M}`$ is expressed in terms of the Heaviside function

$$\widehat{M}((\mathrm{},X])=\theta (\widehat{a}X)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\underset{}{}\frac{1}{k}e^{ik(\widehat{a}X)}𝑑k.$$

The presentation of the spectral theorem by means of the operator - valued delta function can be understood as one can check that matrix elements of last two parts of (1) in eigenvector basis of the operator $`\widehat{a}`$ coincide if we use standard Dirac delta function properties. In this way, it is possible to identify observables $`\widehat{a}(H)`$ with orthogonal POVM. We shall say that $`\widehat{a}(H)`$ is associated with the POVM $`\widehat{M}`$ appearing in its spectral representation. Taking $`\widehat{\rho }\sigma (H)`$ and the POVM $`\widehat{M}`$ one can put

(2)
$$_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{M}}(\mathrm{\Omega })=Tr(\widehat{\rho }\widehat{M}(\mathrm{\Omega }))$$

for any Borel set $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Then $`_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{M}}`$ is a classical probability measure on $``$. Calculating the matrix $`\rho (x,x^{})`$ of the density operator $`\widehat{\rho }`$ in the basis in which $`\widehat{a}`$ is diagonal, we can represent (2) in the form

(3)
$$_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{M}}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }}{}\rho (x,x)𝑑x.$$

If the POVM $`\widehat{M}`$ is associated with some observable $`\widehat{a}(H)`$, we shall write $`_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{a}}`$ as well as $`_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{M}}`$. In quantum probability theory , it is postulated that $`_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{M}}=_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{a}}`$ defined by the formula (2) gives us a distribution of the readings of a classical instrument measuring the quantum observable $`\widehat{a}`$ associated with POVM $`\widehat{M}`$ in the state $`\widehat{\rho }`$. Notice that for the orthogonal POVM the approach introduced above appeared firstly in . The same probability distribution can be obtained by means of the characteristic functions techniques . Alternatively, in quantum information theory  $`\widehat{M}`$ determines certain decision rule allowing to decode the information containing in the state $`\widehat{\rho }`$.

For example, consider the position operator $`\widehat{x}(H)`$ acting in the Hilbert space $`H=L^2()`$ by the fromula $`(\widehat{x}f)(x)=xf(x),fH`$. Denote $`\chi _\mathrm{\Omega }`$ the characteristic (indicator) function of the Borel set $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ such that

$$\chi _\mathrm{\Omega }(x)=\{\begin{array}{c}1,x\mathrm{\Omega }\\ 0,x\mathrm{\Omega }\end{array}$$

Involve the operator $`\widehat{\chi }_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ acting by the formula $`(\widehat{\chi }_\mathrm{\Omega }f)(x)=\chi _\mathrm{\Omega }(x)f(x),fH`$. Then the map $`\widehat{M}`$ defined for a Borel set $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ by the condition $`\widehat{M}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\widehat{\chi }_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is an orthogonal POVM on $``$. One can see that $`\widehat{M}`$ gives us the spectral decomposition of the operator $`\widehat{x}`$ such that

(4)
$$\widehat{x}=\underset{}{}X𝑑\widehat{\chi }_{(\mathrm{},X]}.$$

Denote $`|X><X|`$ the density of the orthogonal POVM $`\widehat{\chi }`$, then (4) transforms to the following,

$$\widehat{x}=\underset{}{}X|X><X|𝑑X,$$

$$\underset{}{}|X><X|𝑑X=\widehat{I}.$$

In this way, the probability measure determined by the state $`\widehat{\rho }`$ can be written as

(5)
$$_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{x}}(\mathrm{\Omega })=Tr(\widehat{\rho }\widehat{\chi }_\mathrm{\Omega })=\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }}{}\rho (X,X)𝑑X,$$

where $`\rho (X,X^{})`$ is a matrix of the density operator $`\widehat{\rho }`$ in the basis consisting of generalized eienvectors $`|X><X|`$. For a pure vacuum state $`\widehat{\rho }_0=|\psi _0><\psi _0|`$ in the Schrodinger representation

$$<x|\psi _0>=\frac{1}{(\pi )^{1/4}}exp(\frac{x^2}{2})$$

the formula (5) yields

(6)
$$_{\widehat{\rho }_0}^{\widehat{x}}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }}{}exp(x^2)𝑑x,$$

which is a Gaussian measure with the zero mean and the variance equal to $`1/2`$.

Let $`\widehat{J}_z=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{2}& 0\\ 0& \frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right)`$ be an operator of spin projection on the $`z`$-axis for the particle with the total spin $`J=\frac{1}{2}`$. Picking up the Euler angles $`\varphi ,\psi ,\theta `$ one can define the rotation matrix by the formula

(7)
$$R(\varphi ,\psi ,\theta )=\left(\begin{array}{cc}cos\frac{\theta }{2}e^{\frac{i(\varphi +\psi )}{2}}& isin\frac{\theta }{2}e^{\frac{i(\varphi \psi )}{2}}\\ isin\frac{\theta }{2}e^{\frac{i(\varphi \psi )}{2}}& cos\frac{\theta }{2}e^{\frac{i(\varphi +\psi )}{2}}\end{array}\right).$$

Notice that (7) determines irreducible representation of the group $`SU(2)`$. It is straihtforward to check that a spectral decomposition of the operator $`\widehat{a}=R(\varphi ,\psi ,\theta )\widehat{J}_zR(\varphi ,\psi ,\theta )^1`$ is given by the formula

$$\widehat{a}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{2}cos\theta & \frac{i}{2}sin\theta e^{i\psi }\\ \frac{i}{2}sin\theta e^{i\psi }& \frac{1}{2}cos\theta \end{array}\right)=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}cos^2\frac{\theta }{2}& \frac{i}{2}sin\theta e^{i\psi }\\ \frac{i}{2}sin\theta e^{i\psi }& sin^2\frac{\theta }{2}\end{array}\right)$$

(8)
$$\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}sin^2\frac{\theta }{2}& \frac{i}{2}sin\theta e^{i\psi }\\ \frac{i}{2}sin\theta e^{i\psi }& cos^2\frac{\theta }{2}\end{array}\right).$$

Using (8) we obtain for the probability measure (2) which is discrete in the state $`\widehat{\rho }=|\psi ><\psi |`$ with $`|\psi >=\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right)`$ the distribution function as

(9)
$$F(x)=_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{a}}((\mathrm{},x])=\{\begin{array}{c}0,x<\frac{1}{2}\\ cos^2\frac{\theta }{2},\frac{1}{2}x<\frac{1}{2}\\ 1,x\frac{1}{2}\end{array}$$

The function (9) gives us the Bernoulli distribution concentrated in two points $`x_1=\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`x_2=\frac{1}{2}`$ with the probabilities $`p=cos^2\frac{\theta }{2}`$ and $`1p=sin^2\frac{\theta }{2}`$ correspondingly.

## 3. Tomographic representations for continuous variables

Tomographic probability (tomogram) determining a quantum state is introduced by relation

(10)
$$w(X,\mu ,\nu )=<\delta (X\mu \widehat{x}\nu \widehat{p})>_{\widehat{\rho }},$$

where $`\widehat{x}`$ and $`\widehat{p}`$ are position and momentum operators and the density operator $`\widehat{\rho }`$ defines the averaging for arbitrary observable $`\widehat{a}`$ by

(11)
$$<\widehat{a}>_{\widehat{\rho }}=Tr(\widehat{\rho }\widehat{a}).$$

The Dirac $`\delta `$-function in (10) is defined by its Fourier decomposition as

(12)
$$\delta (\widehat{a})=\frac{1}{2\pi }e^{ik\widehat{a}}𝑑k.$$

According to  the tomogram (10) is related to the density matrix in position representation $`\rho (y,y^{})`$ by

(13)
$$w(X,\mu ,\nu )=\frac{1}{2\pi |\nu |}\rho (y,y^{})e^{\frac{i(y^2y^2)\mu }{2\nu }\frac{iX(yy^{})}{\nu }}𝑑y𝑑y^{}$$

and with the Wigner function defined in  as

(14)
$$W(q,p)=\rho (q+\frac{u}{2},q\frac{u}{2})e^{ipu}𝑑u$$

via the relation

(15)
$$w(X,\mu ,\nu )=W(q,p)\delta (X\mu q\nu p)\frac{dqdp}{2\pi }.$$

The tomogram determines the Wigner function as

(16)
$$W(q,p)=\frac{1}{2\pi }w(X,\mu ,\nu )e^{i(X\mu q\nu p)}𝑑X𝑑\mu 𝑑\nu .$$

It means that the tomogram can be used to describe the quantum states completely. In terms of a wave function $`\psi (x)`$ the tomogram reads for the pure state $`\rho =|\psi ><\psi |`$

(17)
$$w(X,\mu ,\nu )=\frac{1}{2\pi |\nu |}|\psi (y)e^{\frac{i\mu y^2}{2\nu }\frac{iXy}{\nu }}𝑑y|^2.$$

Put

$$\widehat{\rho }_n=|\psi _n><\psi _n|,n=0,1,2,\mathrm{},$$

(18)
$$<X|\psi _n>=\frac{1}{(\pi )^{1/4}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2^nn!}}H_n(X)exp(\frac{X^2}{2})$$

are wave functions of the excited state of an oscillator. Here $`H_n,n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ are the Hermite polynomials. Then (17) gives us the tomogram for the state $`\widehat{\rho }_n`$ as

(19)
$$w_n(X,\mu ,\nu )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi }}\frac{1}{2^nn!}\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mu ^2+\nu ^2}}H_n^2(\frac{X}{\sqrt{\mu ^2+\nu ^2}})exp(\frac{X^2}{\mu ^2+\nu ^2}).$$

Let us involve the wave function of a coherent state $`|\psi _\alpha ><\psi _\alpha |,\alpha `$,

$$<X|\psi _\alpha >=\frac{1}{(\pi )^{1/4}}exp(\frac{X^2}{2}+\sqrt{2}\alpha X\frac{\alpha ^2}{2}\frac{|\alpha |^2}{2}).$$

Then the tomogram of the state $`|\psi _\alpha ><\psi _\alpha |`$ is given by

(20)
$$w_\alpha (X)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi (\mu ^2+\nu ^2)}}exp(\frac{(X\sqrt{2}Re\alpha \mu \sqrt{2}Im\alpha \nu )^2}{\mu ^2+\nu ^2}).$$

The most important property of the tomogram is that it is a standard density of the probability distribution function on $``$, i.e.

(21)
$$w(X,\mu ,\nu )0$$

and

(22)
$$w(X,\mu ,\nu )𝑑X=1.$$

The physical meaning of the real variable $`X`$ is that this variable is equal to position of a particle measured in rotated and scaled reference frame of the particle phase space, in which we get

(23)
$$X=\mu q+\nu p,\mu =e^\lambda cos\varphi ,\nu =e^\lambda sin\varphi ,$$

where $`\varphi `$ and $`\lambda `$ are an angle of the rotation and a real sqeezing parameter correspondingly.

## 4. Tomography of spin

Here we review the tomogram of discrete variables (spin). The tomogram of a spin state is defined by the relation

(24)
$$w^{(j)}(m,\theta ,\varphi )=<\delta (mR^{(j)}(\varphi ,\psi ,\theta )\widehat{J}_zR^{(j)}(\varphi ,\psi ,\theta )^1)>_{\widehat{\rho }},$$

where $`\delta `$ is the Kronecker operator delta function which for arbitrary hermitian operator $`\widehat{u}`$ with integer eigenvalues is given by the Fourier integral

$$\delta (\widehat{u})=\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}e^{i\varphi \widehat{u}}𝑑\varphi ,$$

a nonnegative half-integer $`j`$ is the total spin, $`m=j,j+1,\mathrm{},j`$ is the spin projection on $`z`$-axis, $`\widehat{J}_z`$ is a operator of spin projection on the $`z`$-axis and $`R^{(j)}(\varphi ,\psi ,\theta )`$ is the matrix of irreducible representation of the group $`SU(2)`$ in standard basis, elements of the group are parametrized by the Euler angles $`\varphi ,\psi ,\theta `$. The state of spin is determined by the hermitian nonnegative $`2j+1\times 2j+1`$ \- density matrix with unit trace. One can show  that the density operator can be found from (24). In fact, the formula (24) can be considered as a linear system of equations determining the density matrix if the tomogram is a known function.

## 5. Quantum probability and tomograms

By the definition of the orthogonal POVM $`\widehat{M}`$ given by the spectral decomposition of the operator $`\widehat{a}`$, we get $`\frac{d}{dx}\widehat{M}((\mathrm{},X])=\delta (X\widehat{a})`$. Suppose that $`\widehat{M}`$ is determined by the spectral decomposition of $`\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}`$. Comparing (10 \- 11) and (2) we get

(25)
$$w(X,\mu ,\nu )=\frac{d}{dx}_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}}((\mathrm{},X]).$$

Using the relation (25) one can calculate the distribution function of the measure $`_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}}`$ for the states $`\widehat{\rho }_n`$ (18) in which the tomograms $`w_n`$ are given by the formula (19) such that

$$_{\widehat{\rho }_n}^{\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}}((\mathrm{},X])=$$

(26)
$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi (\mu ^2+\nu ^2)}}\frac{1}{2^nn!}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{X}{}}H_n^2(\frac{y}{\sqrt{\mu ^2+\nu ^2}})exp(\frac{y^2}{\mu ^2+\nu ^2})𝑑y.$$

Take the function

$$\varphi _\alpha (x)=\frac{1}{(\pi )^{1/4}}exp(\frac{x^2}{2}+\sqrt{2}\alpha x\frac{\alpha ^2}{2})$$

and decompose it into the series over the excited wave functions of an oscillator $`\psi _n(x)`$ (18), then

$$\varphi _\alpha (x)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\alpha ^n}{\sqrt{n!}}\psi _n(x).$$

It follows that

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{m=0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\alpha ^n}{\sqrt{n!}}\frac{\beta ^m}{\sqrt{m!}}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{X}{}}\psi _n(y)\psi _m(y)𝑑y=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{X}{}}\varphi _\alpha (y)\varphi _\beta (y)𝑑y=$$

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{X}{}}exp(y^2+\sqrt{2}(\alpha +\beta )y\frac{\alpha ^2+\beta ^2}{2})𝑑y=$$

(27)
$$\frac{1}{2}e^{\alpha \beta }(1+erf(X\frac{\alpha +\beta }{\sqrt{2}})).$$

Using (27) we obtain for the probability measure (26)

$$_{\rho _n}^{\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}}((\mathrm{},X])=$$

$$\frac{1}{n!}\frac{d^n}{\alpha ^n}\frac{d^n}{\beta ^n}\{\frac{1}{2}e^{\alpha \beta }(1+erf(\frac{X}{\sqrt{\mu ^2+\nu ^2}}\frac{\alpha +\beta }{\sqrt{2}}))\}|_{\alpha =0,\beta =0}.$$

In particular, for the vacuum state $`\widehat{\rho }_0`$ we have

$$_{\widehat{\rho }_0}^{\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}}((\mathrm{},X])=\frac{1}{2}(1+erf(\frac{X}{\sqrt{\mu ^2+\nu ^2}})),$$

which is in accordance with (6) if one put $`\mu =1,\nu =0`$.

In this way, using the tomogram it is possible to obtain the probability measure $`_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}}`$ without a calculation of the spectral decomposition for the operator $`\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}`$. We shall call $`_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}}`$ by a sympectic quantum probability measure.

Analogously, suppose that the spectral decomposition of the operator $`\widehat{a}=R^{(j)}(\varphi ,\psi ,\theta )\widehat{J}_zR^{(j)}(\varphi ,\psi ,\theta )^1`$ has the following form

$$\widehat{a}=\underset{k=j}{\overset{j}{}}k\widehat{M}_k,$$

where $`\widehat{M}_k,jkj,`$ form the orthogonal POVM. It follows from (24) that

$$w^{(j)}(m,\theta ,\varphi )=\underset{k=j}{\overset{j}{}}\delta _{km}Tr(\widehat{\rho }\widehat{M}_k)=$$

$$\underset{k=j}{\overset{j}{}}\delta _{km}_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{a}}((k1,k])=_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\widehat{a}}((m1,m]),$$

where $`\delta _{km}`$ is the Kronecker symbol, $`m=j,j+1,\mathrm{},j`$.

## 6. Star-product for symplectic quantum measures

To formulate quantum mechanics using a map $`\widehat{a}f_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x})`$ between the set of hermitian operators and the set of functions on appropriate space, one needs to involve a new multiplication rule for the functions which should be associative. This multiplication is said to be a star-product (see ) and, in particular, it can be involved for the functions defined by the map $`(\stackrel{}{x}=(X,\mu ,\nu ))`$

(28)
$$f_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x})=Tr(\widehat{a}\delta (X\mu \widehat{x}\nu \widehat{p}))$$

in the way of  such that

(29)
$$f_{\widehat{a}}f_{\widehat{b}}(\stackrel{}{x})=K(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\stackrel{}{x})f_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x}_1)f_{\widehat{b}}(\stackrel{}{x}_2)𝑑\stackrel{}{x}_1𝑑\stackrel{}{x}_2,$$

where the kernel $`K(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\stackrel{}{x})`$ is written as

$$K(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\stackrel{}{x})=Tr(\widehat{𝒟}(\stackrel{}{x}_1)\widehat{𝒟}(\stackrel{}{x}_2)\delta (X\mu \widehat{x}\nu \widehat{p}))$$

and $`d\stackrel{}{x}=dXd\mu d\nu `$. Here the operator $`\widehat{𝒟}(\stackrel{}{x})`$ is defined by the formula

$$\widehat{𝒟}(\stackrel{}{x})=\frac{1}{2\pi }e^{iX}e^{i\mu \widehat{x}i\nu \widehat{p}}.$$

The operator $`\widehat{a}`$ can be reconstructed from the function $`f_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x})`$ by the formula

(30)
$$\widehat{a}=f_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x})\widehat{𝒟}(\stackrel{}{x})𝑑X𝑑\mu 𝑑\nu .$$

In particular, if $`\widehat{a}=\widehat{\rho }\sigma (H)`$ is a state, then (28) yields a number of the probability distribution densities associated with $`\widehat{\rho }`$.

Now consider the map

(31)
$$\widehat{\rho }_{\widehat{\rho }}(\stackrel{}{x})=_{\widehat{\rho }}^{\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}}((\mathrm{},X])$$

from the set of states $`\sigma (H)`$ to the set of probability measures on the real line. The spectral theorem determines a representation of arbitrary observable $`\widehat{a}`$ as an integral over pure states. Hence it is possible to extend the map (31) from the states $`\widehat{\rho }`$ to all observables $`\widehat{a}`$ by means of a linearity. Taking the spectral decomposition $`\mu \widehat{x}+\nu \widehat{p}=X𝑑\widehat{M}((\mathrm{},X])`$ we get

(32)
$$_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x})=Tr(\widehat{a}\widehat{M}((\mathrm{},X]))).$$

Here for an arbitrary observable $`\widehat{a}`$ we obtain the family $`_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x})`$ determining a non-positive Borel measure on the real line for any fixed $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$. We shall call them by symplectic quantum measures. Comparing (30),(25) and (32) we obtain

(33)
$$\frac{d}{dX}_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x})=f_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x})$$

and the operator $`\widehat{a}`$ can be reconstructed from the family of symplectic quantum measures $`_{\widehat{a}}`$ such that

(34)
$$\widehat{a}=\widehat{𝒟}(\stackrel{}{x})𝑑_{\widehat{a}}(X)𝑑\mu 𝑑\nu .$$

Here $`d_{\widehat{a}}(X)`$ denotes the measure on the real line determined by $`_{\widehat{a}}(\stackrel{}{x})`$ for the fixed $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$. In the formula (34) and below we claim that, at first, the integration is done over $`d_{\widehat{a}}(X)`$ for the fixed $`\mu ,\nu `$ and then we integrate over $`d\mu `$ and $`d\nu `$. The formula (34) allows to define an associative multiplication for the symplectic quantum measures $`_{\widehat{a}}`$ which can be derived from (29),

(35)
$$_{\widehat{a}}_{\widehat{b}}(\stackrel{}{x})=\stackrel{~}{K}(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\stackrel{}{x})𝑑_{\widehat{a}}(X_1)𝑑\mu _1𝑑\nu _1𝑑_{\widehat{b}}(X_2)𝑑\mu _2𝑑\nu _2,$$

where the kernel $`\stackrel{~}{K}(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\stackrel{}{x})`$ defined by the formula

$$\stackrel{~}{K}(\stackrel{}{x}_1,\stackrel{}{x}_2,\stackrel{}{x})=Tr(\widehat{𝒟}(\stackrel{}{x}_1)\widehat{𝒟}(\stackrel{}{x}_2)\widehat{M}((\mathrm{},X])),$$

$`\stackrel{}{x}_1=(X_1,\mu _1,\nu _1),\stackrel{}{x}_2=(X_2,\mu _2,\nu _2)`$. By a construction the multiplication (35) is in accordance with the obvious multiplication on the set of observables, such that

(36)
$$_{\widehat{a}\widehat{b}}(\stackrel{}{x})=_{\widehat{a}}_{\widehat{b}}(\stackrel{}{x}).$$

It follows from (36) that the symplectic probability measures $`_{\widehat{\rho }}`$ associated with the pure states $`\widehat{\rho }=|\psi ><\psi |`$ are idempotents with respect to the multiplication $``$, i.e.

$$_{|\psi ><\psi |}_{|\psi ><\psi |}=_{|\psi ><\psi |}.$$

## 7. Evolution for symplectic quantum measures

It was shown in  that if the quantum state satisfies the time-evolution equation

(37)
$$_t\widehat{\rho }=i[\widehat{H},\widehat{\rho }],$$

then for systems with Hamiltonian of the form $`\widehat{H}=\frac{\widehat{p}^2}{2}+V(\widehat{q})`$ the evolution of the quantum tomogram (10) by virtue of (37) is given as

$$\frac{w}{t}\mu \frac{w}{\nu }$$

(38)
$$i(V((\frac{}{X})^1\frac{}{\mu }\frac{i\nu }{2}\frac{}{X})V((\frac{}{X})^1\frac{}{\mu }+\frac{i\nu }{2}\frac{}{X}))w=0.$$

It is straightforward to check that the equation (38) determines the evolution of the functions (28) and, therefore, by means of the connection (33), of the distribution functions $`_{\widehat{a}}(X)`$ of symplectic quantum measures (32). Integrating (38) over $`X`$ we obtain the following form of evolution,

$$\frac{_{\widehat{a}}(X)}{t}\mu \frac{_{\widehat{a}}(X)}{\nu }$$

(39)
$$i(V((\frac{}{X})^1\frac{}{\mu }\frac{i\nu }{2}\frac{}{X})V((\frac{}{X})^1\frac{}{\mu }+\frac{i\nu }{2}\frac{}{X}))_{\widehat{a}}(X)=0.$$

Note that we have derived the linear evolution equation valid only for symplectic quantum measures. The general equation for continuous nondemolition measurement introduced in  is nonlinear.

## 8. Conclusion

To conclude we summarise the main results of the paper. We established relation (see Equ. (25)) of symplectic tomograms to distribution functions of symplectic quantum probability measures, which gives a possibility to use results of the quantum probability theory to study properties of quantum tomograms. On the base of the established relation the evolution equation for the symplectic (non-positive in general) quantum measures is obtained (see Equ. (39)). The star product of symplectic quantum measures is introduced (see Equ. (35)). The approach is illustrated by example of several different states of harmonic oscillator. In addition, the quantum probability measures and its connection with tomogram are constructed for such discrete observable as spin.


format: text

text:
# Electromagnetic nucleon-delta transition in the perturbative chiral quark model

## I Introduction

Electromagnetic transitions of the nucleon to baryon excitations give important insight into the degrees of freedom which are relevant in hadron physics and hence for the structure of the nucleon. From this point of view the study of the particular transition $`\gamma N\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$ is sensitive to the spatial and spin structure of the involved baryons.

A comparison between theory and experiment is conveniently performed on the level of electromagnetic transition matrix elements, which are expressed in terms of photon helicity amplitudes . For transverse photons the electromagnetic $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition is described by the helicity amplitudes $`A_\lambda `$, where $`\lambda =3/2(1/2)`$ refers to the case where the photon spin is parallel (antiparallel) to the spin of the nucleon target. In turn, the decay rate for $`\mathrm{\Delta }^+p\gamma `$ can be expressed in terms of these transverse helicity amplitudes

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Delta }^+p\gamma )={\displaystyle \frac{(P^{})^2}{2\pi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_p}{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}}\right)\{|A_{1/2}|^2+|A_{3/2}|^2\},`$ (1)
where $`M_p`$ and $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are the baryon masses and

$`P^{}={\displaystyle \frac{M_\mathrm{\Delta }^2M_p^2}{2M_\mathrm{\Delta }}}=258.4\mathrm{MeV}`$ (2)
is the 3-momentum of either of the final state particles (proton or real photon) in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-rest frame. Experimental values for the helicity amplitudes $`A_{1/2}`$ and $`A_{3/2}`$ at the real-photon point and for the branching ratio $`\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{\Delta }^+p\gamma )=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Delta }^+p\gamma )/\mathrm{\Gamma }_{total}(\mathrm{\Delta }^+)`$ are reported as

$`A_{1/2}=(135\pm 6)\times 10^3\mathrm{GeV}^{1/2},A_{3/2}=(255\pm 8)\times 10^3\mathrm{GeV}^{1/2},`$ (3)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{A_{3/2}}{A_{1/2}}}=1.89\pm 0.10,\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{\Delta }^+p\gamma )=(0.520.60)\%.`$ (4)
Alternatively, the transverse helicity amplitudes can be expressed in terms of electromagnetic production multipoles, that is the magnetic dipole $`M1`$ and the electric quadrupole $`E2`$ moments. The two sets of amplitudes are related by

$`A_{1/2}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(M1+3E2),A_{3/2}={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}}(M1E2).`$ (5)
Thereby, a non-vanishing $`E2/M1`$ ratio indicates the possibility of an intrinsic deformation of the nucleon  or a contribution from meson exchange currents  with the latest experimental value of

$`{\displaystyle \frac{E2}{M1}}=0.025\pm 0.005.`$ (6)
Various model calculations have been applied to the transverse helicity amplitudes of the electromagnetic $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition. In the original constituent quark model  the results for the helicity amplitudes at the real-photon point are somewhat smaller than the experimental data. Further extensions of the constituent quark model by considering two-body currents based on gluon and exchange were performed in . However, in these calculations lower values for the $`M1`$ contribution as compared to the experimental ones are still obtained even when also including relativistic effects. In the cloudy bag model  this situation was improved where pion cloud corrections are shown to contribute up to two thirds of the total amplitude. Similar models, e.g., the relativistic potential quark model , confirmed the importance of meson cloud corrections. In these model calculations one is also able to generate a non-vanishing value for the $`E2/M1`$ ratio, which is extremely sensitive to non-valence quark degrees of freedom, referred to as the pion cloud of the nucleon or as exchange currents. With the exception of Ref. , predictions for this ratio are usually considerably smaller than the experimental value of Eq. (6). A significant contribution from the meson cloud is also emphasized in Ref.  where the dynamical pion cloud effects originate from the non-resonant $`\pi `$ production mechanism. These effects are crucial in getting agreement with the data. The improvement of the theoretical calculations arising from the meson cloud effects is not only restricted to the $`\gamma N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition but also applies to other transitions as well, e.g., weak pion production reactions , vector, axial-vector and strong $`NN`$ and $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ couplings  and light meson photoproduction .

As a further development of chiral quark models with a perturbative treatment of the Goldstone boson cloud - we recently developed the perturbative chiral quark model (PCQM) for the description of low-energy properties of baryons -. The PCQM is based on the nonlinear $`\sigma `$-model quark Lagrangian and includes a phenomenological confinement potential. Baryons are considered as bound states of valence quarks surrounded by a cloud of pseudoscalar mesons as imposed by chiral symmetry requirements. The model was successfully applied to the electromagnetic properties of the nucleon , $`\sigma `$-term physics , the $`\pi N`$ scattering including radiative corrections  and the strange nucleon form factors .

In the current work we consider, as a further extension, the determination of the momentum dependence of the helicity amplitudes $`A_{1/2}`$ and $`A_{3/2}`$ of the $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition at one-loop or equivalently to the order of accuracy $`o(1/F^2,\widehat{m},m_s)`$. Here, F is the pion decay constant in the chiral limit and $`\widehat{m},m_s`$ are the respective current masses of up/down and strange quarks. In the context of the current approach we furthermore investigate the role of excited quark states in meson loop diagrams. Whereas in our previous considerations the expansion of the quark propagator was restricted to include only ground state contributions, that is N and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ intermediate states in loop diagrams, we now also consider excited quark states. The main conclusion drawn from this calculation will be that inclusion of excited quark states are relevant at the $`20\%`$ level in order to obtain a reasonable description of the transverse helicity amplitudes at the real-photon point. For the $`E2/M1`$ ratio we trivially obtain a vanishing value, since at the order of accuracy we are working in a non-vanishing result cannot be expected due to large-$`N_c`$ QCD arguments .

In the present article we proceed as follows. In the following section we review the basic notions of the perturbative chiral quark model and the modifications of the perturbative technique when including the full quark propagator. In Sec. III we present the calculation of the transverse $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ helicity amplitudes and give a comparison with current experimental data. Finally, Sec.IV contains a summary of our major conclusions.

## II The Perturbative Chiral Quark Model (PCQM)

The starting point of the perturbative chiral quark model - is an effective chiral Lagrangian describing the valence quarks of baryons as relativistic fermions moving in an external field (static potential) $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(r)=S(r)+\gamma ^0V(r)`$ with $`r=|\stackrel{}{x}|`$ , which in the SU(3)-flavor version are supplemented by a cloud of Goldstone bosons $`(\pi ,K,\eta )`$. Treating Goldstone fields as small fluctuations around the three-quark (3q) core we have the linearized effective Lagrangian :

$`_{\mathrm{eff}}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }(x)[i\overline{)}S(r)\gamma ^0V(r)]\psi (x)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[_\mu \widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x)]^2`$ (7)
$``$ $`\overline{\psi }(x)S(r)i\gamma ^5{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x)}{F}}\psi (x)+_{\chi SB}(x).`$ (8)
The additional term $`_{\chi SB}`$ contains the mass contributions both for quarks and mesons, which explicitly break chiral symmetry:

$$_{\chi SB}(x)=\overline{\psi }(x)\psi (x)\frac{B}{2}Tr[\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2(x)].$$
(9)
Here, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is the octet matrix of pseudoscalar mesons

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}}{\sqrt{2}}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\pi ^0/\sqrt{2}+\eta /\sqrt{6}& \pi ^+& K^+\\ \pi ^{}& \pi ^0/\sqrt{2}+\eta /\sqrt{6}& K^0\\ K^{}& \overline{K}^0& 2\eta /\sqrt{6}\end{array}\right),`$ (13)
$`F=88`$ MeV is the pion decay constant in the chiral limit , $`=\mathrm{diag}\{\widehat{m},\widehat{m},m_s\}`$ is the mass matrix of current quarks (we restrict to the isospin symmetry limit $`m_u=m_d=\widehat{m}`$) and $`B=<0|\overline{u}u|0>/F^2`$ is the quark condensate constant. We rely on the standard picture of chiral symmetry breaking  and for the masses of pseudoscalar mesons we use the leading term in their chiral expansion (i.e. linear in the current quark mass):

$`M_\pi ^2=2\widehat{m}B,M_K^2=(\widehat{m}+m_s)B,M_\eta ^2={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}(\widehat{m}+2m_s)B.`$ (14)
The following set of parameters  is chosen in our evaluation

$$\widehat{m}=7\mathrm{MeV},\frac{m_s}{\widehat{m}}=25,B=\frac{M_{\pi ^+}^2}{2\widehat{m}}=1.4\mathrm{GeV}.$$
(15)
Meson masses obtained in Eq. (14) satisfy the Gell-Mann-Oakes-Renner and the Gell-Mann-Okubo relation. In addition, the linearized effective Lagrangian in Eq. (7) fulfils the PCAC requirement.

We expand the quark field $`\psi `$ in the basis of potential eigenstates as

$`\psi (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}b_\alpha u_\alpha (\stackrel{}{x})\mathrm{exp}(i_\alpha t)+{\displaystyle \underset{\beta }{}}d_\beta ^{}v_\beta (\stackrel{}{x})\mathrm{exp}(i_\beta t),`$ (16)
where the sets of quark $`\{u_\alpha \}`$ and antiquark $`\{v_\beta \}`$ wave functions in orbits $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are solutions of the Dirac equation with the static potential $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(r)`$. The expansion coefficients $`b_\alpha `$ and $`d_\beta ^{}`$ are the corresponding single quark annihilation and antiquark creation operators.

We formulate perturbation theory in the expansion parameter $`1/F`$ ($`F\sqrt{N_c})`$ and treat finite current quark masses perturbatively . All calculations are performed at one loop or at order of accuracy $`o(1/F^2,\widehat{m},m_s)`$. In the calculation of matrix elements we project quark diagrams on the respective baryon states. The baryon states are conventionally set up by the product of the $`\mathrm{SU}(6)`$ spin-flavor and $`\mathrm{SU}(3)_\mathrm{c}`$ color wave functions, where the nonrelativistic single quark spin wave function is replaced by the relativistic solution $`u_\alpha (\stackrel{}{x})`$ of the Dirac equation

$$\left[i\gamma ^0\stackrel{}{\gamma }\stackrel{}{}+\gamma ^0S(r)+V(r)_\alpha \right]u_\alpha (\stackrel{}{x})=0,$$
(17)
where $`_\alpha `$ is the single-quark energy.

For the description of baryon properties we use the effective potential $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(r)`$ with a quadratic radial dependence :

$`S(r)=M_1+c_1r^2,V(r)=M_2+c_2r^2`$ (18)
with the particular choice

$`M_1={\displaystyle \frac{1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}\rho ^2}{2\rho R}},M_2=_0{\displaystyle \frac{1+\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}\rho ^2}{2\rho R}},c_1c_2={\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2R^3}}.`$ (19)
Here, $`_0`$ is the single-quark ground-state energy; $`R`$ are $`\rho `$ are parameters related to the ground-state quark wave function $`u_0`$:

$`u_0(\stackrel{}{x})=N\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{x}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}{2R^2}}\right]\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ i\rho \stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{x}/R\end{array}\right)\chi _s\chi _f\chi _c,`$ (22)
where $`N=[\pi ^{3/2}R^3(1+3\rho ^2/2)]^{1/2}`$ is a normalization constant; $`\chi _s`$, $`\chi _f`$, $`\chi _c`$ are the spin, flavor and color quark wave function, respectively. Note, that the constant part of the scalar potential $`M_1`$ can be interpreted as the constituent mass of the quark, which is simply the displacement of the current quark mass due to the potential $`S(r)`$. The parameter $`\rho `$ is related to the axial charge $`g_A`$ of the nucleon calculated in zeroth-order (or 3q-core) approximation:

$`g_A={\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2\rho ^2}{1+\frac{3}{2}\rho ^2}}\right).`$ (23)
Therefore, $`\rho `$ can be replaced by $`g_A`$ using the matching condition (23). The parameter $`R`$ is related to the charge radius of the proton in the zeroth-order approximation as

$`<r_E^2>_{LO}^P={\displaystyle d^3xu_0^{}(\stackrel{}{x})\stackrel{}{x}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}u_0(\stackrel{}{x})}={\displaystyle \frac{3R^2}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1+\frac{5}{2}\rho ^2}{1+\frac{3}{2}\rho ^2}}.`$ (24)
In our calculations we use the value $`g_A`$=1.25 . Therefore, we have only one free parameter, that is $`R`$. In the numerical studies  R is varied in the region from 0.55 fm to 0.65 fm, which corresponds to a change of $`<r_E^2>_{LO}^P`$ from 0.5 to 0.7 fm2.

The expectation value of an operator $`\widehat{A}`$ is set up as:

$$<\widehat{A}>={}_{}{}^{B}<\varphi _0|\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{i^n}{n!}d^4x_1\mathrm{}d^4x_nT[_I(x_1)\mathrm{}_I(x_n)\widehat{A}]|\varphi _0>_c^B,$$
(25)
where the state vector $`|\varphi _0>`$ corresponds to the unperturbed three-quark state ($`3q`$-core). Superscript $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}B\mathrm{"}`$ in (25) indicates that the matrix elements have to be projected onto the respective baryon states, whereas subscript $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}c\mathrm{"}`$ refers to contributions from connected graph only. $`_I(x)`$ of Eq. (25) refers to the linearized quark-meson interaction Lagrangian:

$$_I(x)=\overline{\psi }(x)i\gamma ^5\frac{\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x)}{F}S(r)\psi (x).$$
(26)
For the evaluation of Eq.(25) we apply Wick’s theorem with the appropriate propagators for quarks and mesons.

For the quark field we use a Feynman propagator for a fermion in a binding potential with

$`iG_\psi (x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`<\varphi _0|T\{\psi (x)\overline{\psi }(y)\}|\varphi _0>`$ (27)
$`=`$ $`\theta (x_0y_0){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}u_\alpha (\stackrel{}{x})\overline{u}_\alpha (\stackrel{}{y})e^{i_\alpha (x_0y_0)}\theta (y_0x_0){\displaystyle \underset{\beta }{}}v_\beta (\stackrel{}{x})\overline{v}_\beta (\stackrel{}{y})e^{i_\beta (x_0y_0)}.`$ (28)
In previous applications - we restricted the expansion of the quark propagator to its ground state with:

$`iG_\psi (x,y)iG_0(x,y)u_0(\stackrel{}{x})\overline{u}_0(\stackrel{}{y})e^{i_0(x_0y_0)}\theta (x_0y_0).`$ (29)
Such a truncation can be considered as an additional regularization of the quark propagator, where in the case of SU(2)-flavor intermediate baryon states in loop-diagrams are restricted to $`N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In the current approach we also include, for the first time, excited quark states in the propagator of Eq. (27) and analyse their influence on the matrix elements for the $`N`$-$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transitions considered. We include the following set of excited quark states: the first $`p`$-states ($`1p_{1/2}`$ and $`1p_{3/2}`$ in the non-relativistic notation) and the second excited states ($`1d_{3/2},1d_{5/2}`$ and $`2s_{1/2}`$). For the given form of the effective potential (18) the Dirac equation can be solved analytically. The corresponding expressions for the wave functions of the excited quark states are given in the Appendix. For the meson fields we adopt the free Feynman propagator with

$`i\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}(xy)=<0|T\{\mathrm{\Phi }_i(x)\mathrm{\Phi }_j(y)\}|0>=\delta _{ij}{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4i}\frac{\mathrm{exp}[ik(xy)]}{M_\mathrm{\Phi }^2k^2iϵ}}.`$ (30)
Introduction of the electromagnetic field $`A_\mu `$ to the effective Lagrangian (7) is accomplished by minimal substitution:

$`_\mu \psi D_\mu \psi =_\mu \psi +ieQA_\mu \psi ,_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_iD_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_i=_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_i+e\left[f_{3ij}+{\displaystyle \frac{f_{8ij}}{\sqrt{3}}}\right]A_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_j`$ (31)
where $`Q=\mathrm{diag}\{2/3,1/3,1/3\}`$ is the quark charge matrix and $`f_{ijk}`$ are the totally antisymmetric structure constants of $`SU(3)`$. For the photon field $`A_\mu `$ we also include the usual kinetic term

$`_{ph}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}F_{\mu \nu }(x)F^{\mu \nu }(x)\text{with}F_{\mu \nu }(x)=_\nu A_\mu (x)_\mu A_\nu (x).`$ (32)
In the evaluation of Eq. (25) we redefine the perturbation series in terms of renormalized quantities, where a set of counterterms $`\delta `$ has to be introduced in the Lagrangian (7). The counterterms play a dual role: i) they maintain the proper definition of physical parameters, such as nucleon mass and, in particular, the nucleon charge and ii) they effectively reduce the number of Feynman diagrams to be evaluated. For a detailed derivation and discussion of this renormalization technique see the original reference . Here we just indicate the relevant results following the technique of Ref. , where now intermediate excited quark states are included in the loop diagrams. In the following we attach the index $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}0\mathrm{"}`$ to quantities when we truncate the quark propagator to the ground state contribution, index $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}F\mathrm{"}`$ refers to the case where excited states are also included.

First we introduce the renormalized quark field $`\psi ^r(x)`$, which is a solution to the Dirac equation (17) with the full, renormalized non-strange quark mass

$$\widehat{m}_F^r=\widehat{m}\underset{\alpha }{}\frac{1}{3\gamma }\left(\frac{1}{\pi F}\right)^2\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑pp^2F_\alpha (p^2)F_\alpha ^{}(p^2)\left\{\frac{9}{4}𝒞_\alpha ^\pi (p^2)+\frac{3}{2}𝒞_\alpha ^K(p^2)+\frac{1}{4}𝒞_\alpha ^\eta (p^2)\right\},$$
(33)
including self-energy corrections of the meson cloud. In Eq. (33) we introduce the relativistic reduction factor $`\gamma =(1\frac{3}{2}\rho ^2)/(1+\frac{3}{2}\rho ^2)`$ and

$$𝒞_\alpha ^\varphi (p^2)=\frac{1}{w_\varphi (p^2)(w_\varphi (p^2)+\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha )}$$
(34)
with meson energy $`w_\mathrm{\Phi }(p^2)=\sqrt{M_\mathrm{\Phi }^2+p^2}`$ and momentum $`p=|\stackrel{}{p}|`$. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha =_\alpha _0`$ is the excess of the energy of the quark in state $`\alpha `$ with respect to the ground state. At the quark-meson vertex we obtain the form factor for the transition from a quark in the ground state to an excited one ($`\alpha =(nljm)`$) with

$`F_\alpha (p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`NN_\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{}{p}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑rrS(r)(g_0(r)f_\alpha (r)+g_\alpha (r)f_0(r))`$ (35)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{\Omega }}{}}d\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi e^{iprcos\theta }C_\alpha Y_{l\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}(\theta ,\varphi )`$ (36)
with $`C_\alpha (l\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}|j\frac{1}{2})`$. Explicit forms of the radial wave functions ($`g_\alpha `$ and $`f_\alpha `$), normalizations ($`N_\alpha `$) and energy difference ($`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha `$) are given in the Appendix. When the quark propagator is restricted to the ground state only, the renormalized quark mass reduces to

$$\widehat{m}_0^r=\widehat{m}\frac{1}{3\gamma }\frac{9}{400}\left(\frac{g_A}{\pi F}\right)^2\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑pp^4F_{\pi NN}^2(p^2)\left\{\frac{9}{w_\pi ^2(p^2)}+\frac{6}{w_K^2(p^2)}+\frac{1}{w_\eta ^2(p^2)}\right\},$$
(37)
where $`F_{\pi NN}(p^2)`$ is the $`\pi NN`$ form factor normalized to unity at zero recoil $`(p^2=0)`$:

$`F_{\pi NN}(p^2)=\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p^2R^2}{4}}\right)\left\{1+{\displaystyle \frac{p^2R^2}{8}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3g_A}}\right)\right\}.`$ (38)
For the effective potential considered the relationship between renormalized and bare potential eigenstates can be deduced analytically.

When the original Lagrangian (7) is rewritten in terms of renormalized quark fields and masses, a set of counterterms, denoted by $`\delta ^{str}`$, has to be included:

$`\delta ^{str}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _1^{str}+\delta _2^{str}+\delta _3^{str},`$ (39)
with (40)
$`\delta _1^{str}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }^r(x)(Z1)[i\overline{)}^rS(r)\gamma ^0V(r)]\psi ^r(x),`$ (41)
$`\delta _2^{str}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }^r(x)\delta \psi ^r(x),`$ (43)
$`\delta _3^{str}`$ $`=`$ $`c_\pi {\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}[\overline{\psi }^r(x)i\gamma ^5\lambda _i\psi ^r(x)]^2c_K{\displaystyle \underset{i=4}{\overset{7}{}}}[\overline{\psi }^r(x)i\gamma ^5\lambda _i\psi ^r(x)]^2c_\eta [\overline{\psi }^r(x)i\gamma ^5\lambda _8\psi ^r(x)]^2.`$ (44)
In the counterterms $`^r`$ is the mass matrix of renormalized quark masses and $`^r=\delta `$. The terms in $`\delta _3^{str}`$ are introduced for the purpose of nucleon mass renormalization due to meson exchange between different quarks and contain the factors

$`c_\mathrm{\Phi }={\displaystyle \frac{9}{200}}{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi R^2)^{3/2}}{(1\gamma ^2)}}\mathrm{\Pi }(M_\mathrm{\Phi }^2)\text{with}\mathrm{\Pi }(M_\mathrm{\Phi }^2)=\left({\displaystyle \frac{g_A}{\pi F}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dpp^4}{w_\mathrm{\Phi }^2(p^2)}}F_{\pi NN}^2(p^2).`$ (45)
The renormalization constants $`\widehat{Z}`$ for $`u,d`$-quarks and $`Z_s`$ for the $`s`$-quark are given in the diagonal matrix $`Z=\mathrm{diag}\{\widehat{Z},\widehat{Z},Z_s\}`$. The values of $`\widehat{Z}`$ and $`Z_s`$ are determined by the charge conservation condition at one loop . Due to the consistency of our approach the values of $`\widehat{Z}`$ and $`Z_s`$ guarantee charge conservation both on the quark and the baryon level. In the context of the present calculation we only have to consider the renormalization constant $`\widehat{Z}`$ for the non-strange quarks. When excited quark states are included we obtain the following analytical expression for the renormalization constant

$$\widehat{Z}^F=1\underset{\alpha }{}\left(\frac{1}{\pi F}\right)^2\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑pp^2F_\alpha (p^2)F_\alpha ^{}(p^2)\left\{\frac{3}{4}𝒲_\alpha ^\pi (p^2)+\frac{1}{2}𝒲_\alpha ^K(p^2)+\frac{1}{12}𝒲_\alpha ^\eta (p^2)\right\}$$
(46)
with

$$𝒲_\alpha ^\varphi (p^2)=\frac{1}{w_\varphi (p^2)(w_\varphi (p^2)+\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha )^2}.$$
(47)
When we restrict intermediate quark states to the ground state, the expression of Eq.(46) reduces to

$`\widehat{Z}^0=1{\displaystyle \frac{27}{400}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{g_A}{\pi F}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑pp^4F_{\pi NN}^2(p^2)\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{w_\pi ^3(p^2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3w_K^3(p^2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{9w_\eta ^3(p^2)}}\right\}.`$ (48)
which has already been derived in . In the two-flavor picture, that is when we restrict to the pion cloud contribution only, we obtain a value of $`\widehat{Z}^0=0.9\pm 0.02`$ for our set of parameters. The contribution of kaon and $`\eta `$-meson loops to the constant $`\widehat{Z}^0`$ is strongly suppressed due to the energy denominators in Eq. (48). In the three-flavor picture we get $`\widehat{Z}^0=0.88\pm 0.03`$, which deviates only slightly from the two-flavor result. With the value for $`\widehat{Z}^0`$ being close to unity, for our set of parameters the perturbative treatment of the meson cloud is also justified. Inclusion of the excited states changes the value of the renormalization constant to $`\widehat{Z}^F=0.81\pm 0.04`$.

For the $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition we use the renormalized electromagnetic current operator $`j_r^\mu `$ as derived by Noether’s theorem :

$`j_r^\mu =j_{\psi ^r}^\mu +j_\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu +\delta j_{\psi ^r}^\mu .`$ (49)
It contains the quark component $`j_{\psi ^r}^\mu `$, the charged meson component $`j_\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu `$ and the contribution of the counterterm $`\delta j_{\psi ^r}^\mu `$:

$`j_{\psi ^r}^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }^r\gamma ^\mu Q\psi ^r{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}[2\overline{u}^r\gamma ^\mu u^r\overline{d}^r\gamma ^\mu d^r\overline{s}^r\gamma ^\mu s^r],`$ (50)
$`j_\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\left[f_{3ij}+{\displaystyle \frac{f_{8ij}}{\sqrt{3}}}\right]\mathrm{\Phi }_i^\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_j[\pi ^{}i^\mu \pi ^+\pi ^+i^\mu \pi ^{}+K^{}i^\mu K^+K^+i^\mu K^{}],`$ (51)
and (52)
$`\delta j_{\psi ^r}^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }^r(Z1)\gamma ^\mu Q\psi ^r{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}[2(\widehat{Z}1)\overline{u}^r\gamma ^\mu u^r(\widehat{Z}1)\overline{d}^r\gamma ^\mu d^r(Z_s1)\overline{s}^r\gamma ^\mu s^r].`$ (53)
Again, further technical details of the presented formalism are contained in the original reference , but here it is extended to the case where excited states are included in the quark propagator.

## III $`\gamma N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ helicity amplitudes in the PCQM

Now we consider the determination of the helicity amplitudes for the transition $`\gamma N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in the PCQM. The transverse helicity amplitudes are defined as

$$A_M=\frac{e}{\sqrt{2\omega _\gamma }}<\mathrm{\Delta },s_z^{^{}}=M|\stackrel{}{j}\stackrel{}{ϵ}|N,s_z=M1>$$
(54)
where $`M=\frac{1}{2},\frac{3}{2}`$ and $`\omega _\gamma P^{}=(M_\mathrm{\Delta }^2M_N^2)/2M_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the energy of the photon in the rest frame of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with the polarization vector $`\stackrel{}{ϵ}`$; $`M_N`$ and $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are the physical masses of the nucleon and the $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$-resonance, respectively.

In the PCQM the helicity amplitudes $`A_{1/2}(q^2)`$ and $`A_{3/2}(q^2)`$, where $`q`$ is the photon four-momentum with $`Q^2=q^2`$, are then identified with the perturbative expressions:

$`A_{1/2}(Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{\sqrt{2\omega _\gamma }}}<\mathrm{\Delta }^+,1/2|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \delta (t)d^4xd^4x_1d^4x_2e^{iqx}}`$ (55)
$`\times `$ $`T[_{str}^r(x_1)_{str}^r(x_2)\stackrel{}{j}_r(x)\stackrel{}{ϵ}]|p,1/2>_c,`$ (56)
$`A_{3/2}(Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{\sqrt{2\omega _\gamma }}}<\mathrm{\Delta }^+,3/2|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \delta (t)d^4xd^4x_1d^4x_2e^{iqx}}`$ (57)
$`\times `$ $`T[_{str}^r(x_1)_{str}^r(x_2)\stackrel{}{j}_r(x)\stackrel{}{ϵ}]|p,1/2>_c,`$ (58)
where $`|B,M>|\varphi _0>^{B_M}`$ refers to the unperturbed three-quark state of baryon B with spin projection M. Here, $`\stackrel{}{j}_r`$ is the spatial part of the renormalized electromagnetic current operator already introduced in Eq. (49). $`_{str}^r=_I^{str}+\delta ^{str}`$ is the renormalized strong interaction Lagrangian  containing the quark-meson interaction term

$`_I^{str}=\overline{\psi }^r(x)i\gamma ^5{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x)}{F}}S(r)\psi ^r(x)`$ (59)
and the set of counterterms $`\delta ^{str}`$ of Eq. (39).

The helicity amplitudes $`A_{1/2}`$ and $`A_{3/2}`$ are evaluated at one-loop or to the order of accuracy $`o(1/F^2,\widehat{m},m_s)`$. At this level, which is also equivalent to $`O(1/N_c)`$ as will be discussed later, we obtain the naive relation $`A_{3/2}=\sqrt{3}A_{1/2}`$, which can also be checked explicitly. Therefore, in the following we only present explicit analytical results for the helicity amplitude $`A_{1/2}`$.

We start with the simplest case, where the quark propagator is restricted to the ground state contribution. The total helicity amplitude is a sum of terms arising from different diagrams: the three-quark diagram (Fig.1a), the counterterm (Fig.1b), the meson-cloud diagram (Fig.1c), the vertex-correction diagram (Fig.1d) and the meson-in-flight diagram (Fig.1e).

(a) The helicity amplitude due to the three-quark diagram \[Fig.1(a)\] is given by a leading order (LO) and a next-to-leading (NLO) term, where the latter one arises after renormalization :

$`A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}`$ $`=`$ $`A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}^{LO}+A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}^{NLO}`$ (60)
$`A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}^{LO}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{eP^{}(Q^2)}{\sqrt{2\omega _\gamma }}}\rho R{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{Q^2R^2}{4}\right)}{1+\frac{3\rho ^2}{2}}}`$ (61)
$$A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}^{NLO}=A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}^{LO}\widehat{m}_0^r\left(\frac{\rho R}{1+\frac{3\rho ^2}{2}}\right)\left(\frac{Q^2R^2}{4}\frac{2\frac{3\rho ^2}{2}}{1+\frac{3\rho ^2}{2}}\right).$$
(62)
The absolute value of the 3-momentum

$$P^{}(Q^2)=\frac{\sqrt{(M_\mathrm{\Delta }^2M_N^2Q^2)^2+\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}M_\mathrm{\Delta }^2Q^2}}{2M_\mathrm{\Delta }}$$
(63)
of either the nucleon or the virtual photon is evaluated in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-rest frame.

(b) The three-quark counterterm (CT) \[Fig.1(b)\] results in the expression:

$`A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{CT}=(\widehat{Z}^01)A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}^{LO}.`$ (64)
(c) The meson-cloud diagram (MC) \[Fig.1(c)\] yields:

$`A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{MC}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{200}}{\displaystyle \frac{eP^{}(Q^2)}{\sqrt{2\omega _\gamma }}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{g_A}{\pi F}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑pp^4{\displaystyle \underset{1}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑x(1x^2)`$ (65)
$`\times `$ $`_{\pi NN}(p^2,Q^2,x)t_N(p^2,Q^2,x)|_{MC},`$ (66)
where

$`_{\pi NN}(p^2,Q^2,x)=F_{\pi NN}(p^2)F_{\pi NN}(p_+^2),`$ (67)
$`t_N(p^2,Q^2,x)|_{MC}=2D_\pi (p^2,Q^2,x)+D_K(p^2,Q^2,x),`$ (68)
$`D_\mathrm{\Phi }(p^2,Q^2,x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{w_\mathrm{\Phi }^2(p^2)w_\mathrm{\Phi }^2(p_+^2)}},`$ (69)
$`p_\pm ^2=p^2+Q^2\pm 2p\sqrt{Q^2}x.`$ (70)
(d) For the vertex-correction diagram (VC) \[Fig.1(d)\] we obtain:

$`A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{VC}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{200}}{\displaystyle \frac{eP^{}(Q^2)}{\sqrt{2\omega _\gamma }}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{g_A}{\pi F}}\right)^2\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{Q^2R^2}{4}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\rho R}{1+\frac{3\rho ^2}{2}}}`$ (71)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑pp^4F_{\pi NN}^2(p^2)t_N(p^2)|_{VC}`$ (72)
where

$`t_N(p^2)|_{VC}=W_\pi (p^2){\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}W_\eta (p^2),`$ (73)
$`W_\mathrm{\Phi }(p^2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{w_\mathrm{\Phi }^3(p^2)}}.`$ (74)
(e) And for the meson-in-flight diagram (MF) \[Fig.1(e)\] we get:

$`A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{MF}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{9}{200}}{\displaystyle \frac{eP^{}(Q^2)}{\sqrt{2\omega _\gamma }}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{g_A}{\pi F}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑pp^4{\displaystyle _1^1}𝑑x(1x^2)`$ (75)
$`\times `$ $`_{\pi NN}(p^2,Q^2,x)D_\pi (p^2,Q^2,x).`$ (76)
When including excited states in the quark propagator, the analytical results for the LO three-quark diagram and the meson-in-flight contribution obviously still remain the same. In turn the following contributions must be extended.

(a) In the three-quark NLO expression the renormalized quark mass has to be replaced accordingly

$$A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}^{NLO}=A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}^{LO}\widehat{m}_F^r\left(\frac{\rho R}{1+\frac{3\rho ^2}{2}}\right)\left(\frac{Q^2R^2}{4}\frac{2\frac{3\rho ^2}{2}}{1+\frac{3\rho ^2}{2}}\right).$$
(77)
(b) For the three-quark counterterm (CT) the appropriate renormalization constant has to be inserted

$`A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{CT}=(\widehat{Z}^F1)A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{3q}^{LO}.`$ (78)
(c) For the meson-cloud diagram (MC) we obtain the full expression

$`A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{MC}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}{\displaystyle \frac{eP^{}(Q^2)}{\sqrt{2\omega _\gamma }}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi F}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑pp^3{\displaystyle \underset{1}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{1x^2}{\sqrt{p_+^2}}}`$ (79)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}_{\alpha ;MC}(p^2,Q^2,x)t(p^2,Q^2,x)|_{\alpha ;MC}`$ (80)
where the sum runs over the index $`\alpha `$, labelling the quantum numbers of the intermediate quark states (ground and excited states). We use the definitions

$$t(p^2,Q^2,x)|_{\alpha ;MC}=2𝒟_\alpha ^\pi (p^2,Q^2,x)+𝒟_\alpha ^K(p^2,Q^2,x)$$
(81)
and

$$𝒟_\alpha ^\varphi =\frac{1+[\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha /(w_\varphi (p_+^2)+w_\varphi (p^2))]}{w_\varphi (p^2)w_\varphi (p_+^2)(w_\varphi (p^2)+\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha )(w_\varphi (p_+^2)+\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha )},$$
(82)
where in addition we introduce the function $`_{\alpha ;MC}(p^2,Q^2,x)=F_\alpha (p_+^2)F_\alpha ^{}(p^2)`$ with the vertex form factor $`F_\alpha (p^2)`$ of Eq. (35).

(d) For the vertex-correction diagram (VC) inclusion of excited states results in

$$A_{1/2}(Q^2)|_{VC}=\underset{\beta ,\alpha }{}\frac{I_{\beta \alpha }(Q^2)}{18}\frac{eP^{}(Q^2)}{\sqrt{2\omega _\gamma }}\left(\frac{1}{\pi F}\right)^2\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑pp^2_{\beta \alpha ;VC}(p^2)t(p^2)|_{\beta \alpha ;VC},$$
(83)
where

$$t(p^2)|_{\beta \alpha ;VC}=𝒲_{\beta \alpha }^\pi (p^2)\frac{1}{3}𝒲_{\beta \alpha }^\eta (p^2),$$
(84)
$$𝒲_{\beta \alpha }^\varphi (p^2)=\frac{1}{w_\varphi (p^2)(w_\varphi (p^2)+\mathrm{\Delta }_\beta )(w_\varphi (p^2)+\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha )}$$
(85)
and $`_{\beta \alpha ;VC}=F_\beta (p^2)F_\alpha ^{}(p^2)`$. We also define

$`I_{\beta \alpha }(Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`2N_\beta N_\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{}{Q^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑rr(g_\beta (r)f_\alpha (r)+g_\alpha (r)f_\beta (r))`$ (86)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{\Omega }}{}}d\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi e^{i\sqrt{Q^2}r\mathrm{cos}\theta }C_\beta Y_{l_\beta \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}(\theta ,\varphi )C_\alpha Y_{l_\alpha \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}(\theta ,\varphi ),`$ (87)
where $`l_\beta `$ and $`l_\alpha `$ are the orbital quantum numbers of the intermediate states $`\beta `$ and $`\alpha `$, respectively.

The result for the $`Q^2`$-dependence of the helicity amplitude $`A_{1/2}(Q^2)`$, when truncating the quark propagator to the ground state, is indicated in Fig. 2. Thereby, we also list the individual contributions of the different diagrams of Fig. 1, which add up coherently. The leading order three quark diagram dominates the prediction for $`A_{1/2}`$, whereas meson cloud corrections add about $`30\%`$ to the total result. Here, both the meson-in-flight and the meson-cloud diagrams give the largest contribution. In a next step we include the intermediate excited quark states with quantum numbers $`1p_{1/2}`$, $`1p_{3/2}`$, $`1d_{3/2}`$, $`1d_{5/2}`$, and $`2s_{1/2}`$, that is excitations up to 2 $`\mathrm{}\omega `$, in the propagator. The resulting effect on $`A_{1/2}`$ is given in Fig. 3. We explicitly indicate the additional terms, which are solely due to the excited states, whereas the ground state propagator result is contained in the curve denoted by TOTAL(GS). Although higher lying state contributions are suppressed relative to the ground state one, they still have a noticeable effect on $`A_{1/2}`$ for $`Q^2<0.5`$ $`\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ at the order of $`15\%`$. For completeness we give the full result for both transverse helicity amplitudes $`A_{1/2}(Q^2)`$ and $`A_{3/2}(Q^2)`$ in Fig. 4. The amplitudes fulfil the relation $`A_{3/2}(Q^2)=\sqrt{3}A_{1/2}(Q^2)`$ for all $`Q^2`$ values.

Recently, in the framework of large-$`N_c`$ QCD  it was shown that the ratio $`A_{3/2}/A_{1/2}`$ is mostly saturated by the naive $`SU_6`$ quark model result $`A_{3/2}/A_{1/2}=\sqrt{3}`$ . Deviations from this standard result are due to higher order corrections with $`A_{3/2}/A_{1/2}=\sqrt{3}+O(1/N_c^2)`$ . We evaluate the helicity amplitudes at one-loop or equivalently to the order of accuracy $`o(1/F^2,\widehat{m},m_s)`$, where $`F\sqrt{N_c}`$. Therefore, to get a nontrivial deviation from the $`SU_6`$ result the formalism has to be extended up to two loops or up to order $`O(1/F^4)O(1/N_c^2)`$. The standard relation between the helicity amplitudes obtained here, which is consistent with large-$`N_c`$ considerations, is for example not present in the cloudy bag model . Latter model, which is conceptually close to our approach, uses in the calculation of one-loop diagrams non-degenerate nucleon and delta masses. This would correspond in our counting scheme to the order of accuracy $`O(1/F^4)`$, although the complete diagrams to this order are not evaluated. Based on the arguments of the large-$`N_c`$ analysis it is not surprising that the cloudy bag is able to generate a deviation from the $`\sqrt{3}`$ result and hence produces a non-vanishing $`E2/M1`$ ratio.

For comparison with data we turn to the results for the helicity amplitudes at the real-photon point with $`Q^2=0`$. In Table I we list the numerical values for the complete set of Feynman diagrams, again indicating separately the contributions of ground and excited states in the quark propagator. Comparison of our results to other model calculations are presented in Table III. Our final results for $`A_{1/2}(Q^2=0)`$ and $`A_{3/2}(Q^2=0)`$ are in rather decent agreement with the data. As evident from Table I, meson cloud corrections play a decisive role in explaining the large deviation from the result of the impulse, that is three-quark core, approximation. Pion contributions play the dominant role in the meson corrections as evident from Table III, where we list the individual contributions of the octet mesons to the sizable terms generated by the meson-cloud and vertex-correction diagrams. The suppression of $`K`$ and $`\eta `$ loops is due to the large corresponding meson masses occurring in the denominators. The relative contribution of $`K`$ and $`\eta `$ mesons with respect to $`\pi `$ is between $`810\%`$ in the amplitude, as can be naively expected from the ratio of meson masses $`(m_\pi /m_{K,\eta })^2`$ which also is roughly $`8\%`$. Also, the improved treatment of the quark propagator by including higher excitations tends at least phenomenologically to be required by the data. Again, to obtain a non-vanishing value for the $`E2/M1`$ ratio, higher order or two-loop corrections have to be considered.

To complete our set of predictions we also indicate the results for the radiative transition $`\mathrm{\Delta }^+p\gamma `$. For the decay width as based on Eq. (1) we obtain $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Delta }^+p\gamma )=0.55\pm 0.03`$ MeV. Using the experimental value $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{total}(\mathrm{\Delta }^+)=111.2`$ MeV for the total decay width, we deduce the branching ratio

$`BR(\mathrm{\Delta }^+p\gamma )=(0.470.52)\%`$ (88)
and in similar fashion for the partial decay branching ratios for helicity 1/2 and 3/2

$`BR_{1/2}=(0.120.13)\%\mathrm{and}BR_{3/2}=(0.350.39)\%.`$ (89)
These results are again in good agreement with the experimental data of : $`\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{\Delta }^+p\gamma )=(0.520.60)\%`$, $`\mathrm{BR}_{1/2}=(0.110.13)\%`$ and $`\mathrm{BR}_{3/2}=(0.410.47)\%`$.

## IV Summary

In summary, we have calculated the transverse helicity amplitudes for the transition $`\gamma N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in the perturbative chiral quark model. Meson cloud corrections are crucial to explain the magnitude of the helicity amplitudes at the real-photon point. These meson cloud effects were found to be important not only in $`\gamma N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition but also in weak pion production reactions , in vector, axial-vector and strong $`NN`$ and $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ couplings  and in data on light meson photoproduction .

We demonstrated furthermore that in the context of the PCQM excited quark states in loop diagrams play an important role at the level of $`15\%`$ to fully account for the measurements. Because at one-loop we work at the order of accuracy $`o(1/F^2,\widehat{m},m_s)`$ or equivalently at $`o(1/N_c)`$, a deviation from the standard ratio of $`A_{3/2}/A_{1/2}=\sqrt{3}`$, consistent with large-$`N_c`$ arguments  cannot be obtained. Hence, we also predict a vanishing value for the $`E2/M1`$ ratio.

A next step will be to explore the effect of two-loop diagrams on the helicity amplitudes, which could possibly explain the non-vanishing $`E2/M1`$ ratio. In view of the important role of intermediate excited quark states in loop diagrams, it would be also interesting to check their influence on other baryon observables.

Acknowledgements

K.P. thanks the Development and Promotion of Science and Technology Talent Project (DPST), Thailand for financial support. S.C. acknowledge the support of Thailand Research Fund (TRF,Grant No. RGJ PHD/00165/2541). This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) under contracts FA67/25-1 and GRK683.

## A Solutions of the Dirac equation for the effective potential

In this section we indicate the solutions to the Dirac equation with the effective potential $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(r)=S(r)+\gamma ^0V(r)`$. The scalar $`S(r)`$ and time-like vector $`V(r)`$ parts are given by

$`S(r)`$ $`=`$ $`M_1+c_1r^2,`$ (A1)
$`V(r)`$ $`=`$ $`M_2+c_2r^2,`$ (A2)
with the particular choice

$$M_1=\frac{1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}\rho ^2}{2\rho R},M_2=_0\frac{1+\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}\rho ^2}{2\rho R},c_1c_2=\frac{\rho }{2R^3}.$$
(A3)
The quark wave function $`u_\alpha (\stackrel{}{r})`$ in state $`\alpha `$ with eigenenergy $`_\alpha `$ satisfies the Dirac equation

$$[i\stackrel{}{\alpha }\stackrel{}{}+\beta S(r)+V(r)_\alpha ]u_\alpha (\stackrel{}{r})=0.$$
(A4)
Solutions of the Dirac spinor $`u_\alpha (\stackrel{}{r})`$ to Eq. (A4) can be written in the form

$$u_\alpha (\stackrel{}{r})=N_\alpha \left(\begin{array}{c}g_\alpha (r)\\ i\stackrel{}{\sigma }\widehat{r}f_\alpha (r)\end{array}\right)𝒴_\alpha (\widehat{r})\chi _f\chi _c.$$
(A5)
For the particular choice of potential the radial functions g and f satisfy the form

$$g_\alpha (r)=\left(\frac{r}{R_\alpha }\right)^lL_{n1}^{l+1/2}\left(\frac{r^2}{R_\alpha ^2}\right)e^{\frac{r^2}{2R_\alpha ^2}},$$
(A6)
where for $`j=l+\frac{1}{2}`$

$$f_\alpha (r)=\rho _\alpha \left(\frac{r}{R_\alpha }\right)^{l+1}\left[L_{n1}^{l+3/2}(\frac{r^2}{R_\alpha ^2})+L_{n2}^{l+3/2}(\frac{r^2}{R_\alpha ^2})\right]e^{\frac{r^2}{2R_\alpha ^2}},$$
(A7)
and for $`j=l\frac{1}{2}`$

$$f_\alpha (r)=\rho _\alpha \left(\frac{r}{R_\alpha }\right)^{l1}\left[(n+l\frac{1}{2})L_{n1}^{l1/2}(\frac{r^2}{R_\alpha ^2})+nL_n^{l1/2}(\frac{r^2}{R_\alpha ^2})\right]e^{\frac{r^2}{2R_\alpha ^2}}.$$
(A8)
The label $`\alpha =(nljm)`$ characterizes the state with principle quantum number $`n=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$, orbital angular momentum $`l`$, total angular momentum $`j=l\pm \frac{1}{2}`$ and projection $`m`$. Due to the quadratic nature of the potential the radial wave functions contain the associated Laguerre polynomials $`L_n^k(x)`$ with

$$L_n^k(x)=\underset{m=0}{\overset{n}{}}(1)^m\frac{(n+k)!}{(nm)!(k+m)!m!}x^m.$$
(A9)
The angular dependence ($`𝒴_\alpha (\widehat{r})𝒴_{lmj}(\widehat{r})`$) is defined by

$$𝒴_{lmj}(\widehat{r})=\underset{m_l,m_s}{}(lm_l\frac{1}{2}m_s|jm)Y_{lm_l}(\widehat{r})\chi _{\frac{1}{2}m_s}$$
(A10)
where $`Y_{lm_l}(\widehat{r})`$ is the usual spherical harmonic. Flavor and color part of the Dirac spinor are represented by $`\chi _f`$ and $`\chi _c`$, respectively.

The normalization constant is obtained from the condition

$$\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d^3\stackrel{}{r}u_\alpha ^{}(\stackrel{}{r})u_\alpha (\stackrel{}{r})=1$$
(A11)
which results in

$$N_\alpha =\left[2^{2(n+l+1/2)}\pi ^{1/2}R_\alpha ^3\frac{(2n+2l)!}{(n+l)!(n1)!}\{1+\rho _\alpha ^2(2n+l\frac{1}{2})\}\right]^{1/2},$$
(A12)
The two coefficients $`R_\alpha `$ and $`\rho _\alpha `$ are of the form

$`R_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`R(1+\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha \rho R)^{1/4},`$ (A13)
$`\rho _\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\rho \left({\displaystyle \frac{R_\alpha }{R}}\right)^3`$ (A14)
and are related to the Gaussian parameters $`\rho `$, $`R`$ of Eq. (22). The quantity $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha =_\alpha _0`$ is the difference between the energy of state $`\alpha `$ and the ground state. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha `$ depends on the quantum numbers $`n`$ and $`l`$ and is related to the parameters $`\rho `$ and $`R`$ by

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha +\frac{3\rho }{R})^2(\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha +\frac{1}{\rho R})=\frac{\rho }{R^3}(4n+2l1)^2.$$
(A15)
TABLES

Table I. Contributions of the individual diagrams to the transverse helicity amplitudes for $`Q^2=0`$ (in units of $`10^3\mathrm{GeV}^{1/2}`$). Results for inclusion of ground (GS) and excited states (ES) in the quark propagator are indicated separately.

|  | $`A_{1/2}(Q^2=0)`$ | $`A_{3/2}(Q^2=0)`$ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| GS quark propagator |  |  |
| 3q-core |  |  |
| -LO | -69.7 $`\pm `$ 5.9 | -120.7 $`\pm `$ 10.2 |
| -NLO | -8.6 $`\pm `$ 1.2 | -14.9 $`\pm `$ 2.1 |
| Counter-term | 8.2 $`\pm `$ 1.1 | 14.2 $`\pm `$ 1.9 |
| Meson-cloud | -16.7 $`\pm `$ 2.6 | -28.9 $`\pm `$ 4.5 |
| Vertex-correction | -0.7 $`\pm `$ 0.1 | -1.2 $`\pm `$ 0.1 |
| Meson-in-flight | -23.0 $`\pm `$ 3.4 | -39.8 $`\pm `$ 5.9 |
| Total(GS) | -110.5 $`\pm `$ 0.3 | -191.3 $`\pm `$ 0.5 |
| ES quark propagator |  |  |
| NLO | -10.3 $`\pm `$ 1.1 | -17.8 $`\pm `$ 1.9 |
| Counter-term | 4.9 $`\pm `$ 0.6 | 8.5 $`\pm `$ 1.0 |
| Meson-cloud | -13.5 $`\pm `$ 2.5 | -23.4 $`\pm `$ 4.3 |
| Vertex-correction | -0.7 $`\pm `$ 0.1 | -1.2 $`\pm `$ 0.1 |
| Total(ES) | -19.6 $`\pm `$ 3.1 | -33.9 $`\pm `$ 5.3 |
| Total=Total(GS)+Total(ES) | -130.1 $`\pm `$ 3.4 | -225.2 $`\pm `$ 5.8 |
| Experiment  | -135 $`\pm `$ 6 | -255 $`\pm `$ 8 |

Table II. Total result for the helicity amplitudes $`A_{1/2}(Q^2=0)`$ and $`A_{3/2}(Q^2=0)`$ in comparison to other theoretical models (in units of $`10^3\mathrm{GeV}^{1/2}`$). The cloudy bag model results are taken from the values at a typical bag radius $`R=0.8`$ fm.

|  | $`A_{1/2}(Q^2=0)`$ | $`A_{3/2}(Q^2=0)`$ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| NRQM  | -90.9 | -181.9 |
| Cloudy bag model  | -128 | -222 |
| Relativistic quark potential model  | -147 | -277 |
| PCQM | -130.1 $`\pm `$ 3.4 | -225.2 $`\pm `$ 5.8 |
| Experiment  | -135 $`\pm `$ 6 | -255 $`\pm `$ 8 |

Table III. Absolute contributions of $`\pi `$, $`K`$, and $`\eta `$ to $`A_{1/2}(Q^2=0)`$ for the meson-cloud (MC) and vertex-correction (VC) diagrams in units of $`10^3\mathrm{GeV}^{1/2}`$.

|  | $`A_{1/2}(\pi )`$ | $`A_{1/2}(K)`$ | $`A_{1/2}(\eta )`$ | Total |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| GS quark propagators |  |  |  |  |
| MC | -15.3 | -1.4 | - | -16.7 |
| VC | -0.73 | - | 0.06 | -0.67 |
| ES quark propagators |  |  |  |  |
| MC | -12.4 | -1.1 | - | -13.5 |
| VC | -0.80 | - | 0.08 | -0.72 |

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4


text:
# Topological properties of active orders for matroid bases

## 1 The external and internal orders

In September of 2001, there was a conference on Tutte Polynomials and Related Topics at the Centre de Recerca Matematica in Barcelona, Spain. At the meeting, Michel Las Vergnas gave a talk about three lattice structures which he had imposed on the bases of an ordered matroid using external and internal activity . During the question and answer period that followed, one of us (Sagan), asked if Las Vergnas knew anything about the Möbius function of these lattices. Las Vergnas replied that he had computed some examples and noted that the value was often zero, but did not have an explanation for that fact.

In this paper, we will give a topological reason for Las Vergnas’ observation. The rest of this section will be devoted to developing the definition and some basic properties of the external lattice, $`L`$. In the next section, we derive some results about the structure of $`L`$ which will be useful in working with its order complex $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In particular, we give a simpler formula for the join operator than was given by Las Vergnas. The third section contains our main theorem, showing that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is homotopic to the independence complex $`IN`$ of the restriction $`M^{}|T`$ where $`M^{}`$ is the dual of $`M`$ and $`T`$ is the top element of $`L`$. In section 4, we compute some examples showing that $`IN`$ is often contractible which forces all its homology groups, and thus its Möbius function, to be zero. A characterization of the homology of $`IN`$ due to Björner  is recalled in the next section and used for the calculation of yet more examples. The final section contains a couple of open problems.

Let $`M`$ be a matroid on a finite set $`E`$. We denote the bases and independent sets of $`M`$ by $`=(M)`$ and $`=(M)`$, respectively. We say that $`M`$ is ordered if $`E`$ is linearly ordered. From now on all matroids will be ordered.

Given a set $`FE`$ we say that $`eE`$ is active with respect to $`F`$ if there is a circuit $`C(F;e)F\{e\}`$ in which $`e`$ is minimal with respect to the ordering on $`E`$. Let

$$Act_M(F)=\{e:\text{ }e\text{ is active with respect to }F\}.$$

Note that we include the possibility that $`eF`$. Note also that we will often write one-element sets without the set braces and drop $`M`$ as a subscript if the matroid is clear from context.

For $`FE`$ we define

$$Ext_M(F)=Act_M(F)F.$$

The elements of $`Ext_M(F)`$ are called externally active with respect to $`F`$. This coincides with the usual notion of externally active elements with respect to an element of $``$.

Las Vergnas defined the external lattice of $`M`$ in a manner equivalent to the following. For $`A,B`$, define

$`A_M^{\mathrm{ext}}B`$ if and only if $`ABExt_M(B)`$.
It was proven in  that, when augmented with a minimum element $`\widehat{0}`$, the resulting order is in fact a graded lattice with rank function

$$\rho _M(B)=|Ext_M(B)|+1.$$
(1)
We will denote this lattice by $`L(M)`$ or simply $`L`$. It is important to remember that, even though our notation does not show it, this lattice structure depends not the ordering of the base set of $`M`$.

Let us give two simple examples of these lattices by using the cycle matroid of a multigraph $`G=(V,E)`$. Because of symmetry, these particular lattices do not depend on the ordering of the edge set. If $`G`$ is the circuit on $`n`$ vertices, then $`L`$ consists of an antichain of $`n1`$ elements with a minimum and maximum adjoined. At the other extreme, if $`G`$ consists of two vertices with $`n`$ edges between them then $`L`$ is a chain of $`n+1`$ elements.

Returning to our general exposition, let $`M^{}`$ be the dual matroid of $`M`$. We turn $`M^{}`$ into an ordered matroid using the order already given on $`E`$. Las Vergnas  also defined another ordering $`_M^{\mathrm{int}}`$ on $`(M)`$ by

$$A_M^{\mathrm{int}}B(EB)_M^{}^{\mathrm{ext}}(EA).$$
(2)
We should note that one can also define $`_M^{\mathrm{int}}`$ using the internal activity of bases of $`M`$ (which also eliminates the need to pass to $`M^{}`$), but (2) will be more convenient for our purpose. When augmented with a maximum element $`\widehat{1}`$, the resulting order is called the internal order. Directly from the definitions, we see that this structure is just the order-theoretic dual of $`L(M^{})`$. Since the dual of a lattice has the same homology as the original lattice, we will restrict ourselves to external orders. For that reason, we will also drop the $`\mathrm{ext}`$ superscript.

It will be useful in the sequel to have the following characterization, due to Las Vergnas \[7, Proposition 3.1\]. of the external order.

###### Proposition 1.1 (Las Vergnas)

Let $`A`$, $`B`$ be two bases of an ordered matroid $`M`$. Then $`AB`$ if and only if $`B`$ is the lexicographically maximum base of $`M`$ contained in $`AB`$ (where elements of a base are listed in increasing order).

In the aforementioned paper it was shown that the number of elements at a given rank in $`L(M)`$ does not depend on the particular order on $`E`$, but that the lattice itself does. We wish to give some measure of how $`L(M)`$ depends on the order on $`E`$.

###### Proposition 1.2

Let $``$ and $`^{}`$ be linear orders on $`E`$. Given a matroid on $`E`$, let $`M`$ and $`M^{}`$ be the corresponding ordered matroids. Suppose that $`Act(M)=Act(M^{})`$ and that $``$, $`^{}`$ when restricted to this set are same. Then

$$L(M)L(M^{}).$$

Proof We prove that the identity map from $`(M)`$ to $`(M^{})`$ induces a lattice isomorphism of $`L(M)`$ with $`L(M^{})`$. So we need to show that for $`A,B(M)=(M^{})`$ we have $`ABExt_M(B)`$ if and only if $`ABExt_M^{}(B)`$. Clearly it suffices to have $`Ext_M(B)=Ext_M^{}(B)`$. We will show $`Ext_M(B)Ext_M^{}(B)`$ and then the reverse inclusion follows by symmetry. Now take $`aExt_M(B)`$ and let $`C`$ be the unique cycle in $`Ba`$. So $`a`$ is the $``$-minimum in $`C`$ and it suffices to show that it is also the $`^{}`$-minimum. Let $`a^{}`$ be this $`^{}`$-minimum. Then $`a,a^{}Act(M)=Act(M^{})`$ with $`aa^{}`$ and $`a^{}^{}a`$. Since the two orderings agree on this set, $`a=a^{}`$ and we are done.

## 2 Sublattices and the join operator

Fix a subset $`FE`$ and let $`K=M|F`$ be the restriction of $`M`$ to $`F`$. Note that it is an ordered matroid with respect to the ordering induced on $`F`$ by $`E`$. We will say that $`K`$ is spanning if $`F`$ is a spanning set of $`M`$, that is, $`F`$ contains a base of $`M`$. We will show that the lattice for a spanning matroid is closely related to that of the parent matroid. But first we need a lemma.

###### Lemma 2.1

Suppose that $`FE`$ and $`K=M|F`$. Then for any $`JF`$ we have

* $`Act_K(J)=Act_M(J)F`$, and as a consequence
* $`Ext_K(J)=Ext_M(J)F`$.

Proof (a) The fact that $`Act_K(J)Act_M(J)F`$ is clear from the definitions. For the opposite inclusion, suppose $`eAct_M(J)F`$. Then there is a circuit $`CJe`$ in which $`e`$ is minimal. But then $`CF`$ and $`e`$ is minimal with respect to the ordering induced on $`F`$ so that $`eAct_K(J)`$.

Part (b) follows immediately from part (a).

###### Corollary 2.2

Suppose that $`K=M|F`$ is spanning. Then the inclusion $`(K)(M)`$ induces an inclusion

$$L(K)L(M).$$

Proof Suppose $`A,B(K)`$. We prove that $`A_MB`$ if and only if $`A_KB`$. By definition, $`A_MB`$ if and only if $`ABExt_M(B)`$. Since $`A,BF`$ this happens if and only if $`AB(Ext_M(B)F)`$. By the previous lemma, $`B(Ext_M(B)F)=BExt_K(B)`$. So we are done.

Following Las Vergnas , for a spanning subset $`AE`$ we define

$$MaxBasA=AAct(A).$$

Alternatively, one can define this as the lexicographically maximum base of $`M`$ contained in $`A`$, using the convention of Proposition 1.1. We obtain the maximum element of $`L=L(M)`$ as

$$T=MaxBasE$$

and reserve the notation $`T`$ for this top element. Las Vergnas gave a formula for the join operator $``$ for two elements of $`L`$ using the $`MaxBas`$ operator. Using Corollary 2.2 we give a slight but useful simplification of his result, at the same time extending it to the join of an arbitrary number of elements in $`L`$.

###### Corollary 2.3

The join of elements $`B_i(M)`$ ($`i=1,2,\mathrm{},m`$) in $`L(M)`$ is given by

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}B_i=MaxBas\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}B_i\right)$$

Proof Let $`K=M|F`$ where $`F=_{i=1}^mB_i`$ and let $`S=MaxBas(F)`$. We must prove that $`S=_{i=1}^mB_i`$. First of all, for all $`i`$ we have $`B_i_KS`$ because $`S`$ is the maximal element of $`L(K)`$. By Corollary 2.2 this means $`B_i_MS`$ for all $`i`$.

Now suppose $`T(M)`$ satisfies $`B_i_MT`$ for all $`i`$. Then $`B_iTExt_M(T)`$ so that $`F=_{i=1}^mB_iTExt_M(T)`$. But $`SFTExt_M(T)`$ and so by we have $`S_MT`$. Thus $`S=_{i=1}^mB_i`$.

We denote the set of atoms of $`L(M)`$ by $`𝒜=𝒜(M)`$. By (1), these are precisely the bases $`B`$ for $`M`$ with $`Ext(B)=\mathrm{}`$.

###### Corollary 2.4

Let $`𝒜^{}𝒜`$. Then $`_{B𝒜^{}}B=T`$ if and only if every element of $`T`$ is contained in some element $`B𝒜^{}`$.

Proof This follows from Corollary 2.3 and the following observation which is needed for the “if” direction. Suppose $`TF`$ for some $`FE`$. Then since $`TAct(F)TAct(E)=\mathrm{}`$ we have $`TMaxBas(F)`$. Also, if $`F`$ is spanning, then $`MaxBas(F)`$ is a base for $`M`$. Since $`T`$ is also a base for the matroid $`M`$, we find $`T=MaxBas(F)`$.

The inclusion in Corollary 2.2 does not preserve the rank function in general. But it does under certain circumstances.

###### Lemma 2.5

If $`K=M|F`$ is spanning and $`B(K)(M)`$, then the following hold.

* We have $`\rho _K(B)=\rho _M(B)`$ if and only if $`Ext_M(B)F`$.
* If $`FET`$, then the inclusion $`L(K)L(M)`$ preserves rank.
* If $`f<e`$ for all $`fF`$ and $`eEF`$, then the inclusion $`L(K)L(M)`$ preserves rank.

Proof (a) We have $`\rho _K(B)=|Ext_K(B)|+1`$ and $`\rho _M(B)=|Ext_M(B)|+1`$. Now Lemma 2.1 completes the proof.

(b) This follows from part (a) since for any $`AE`$ we have $`Ext_M(A)Act_M(E)=ET`$.

(c) This also follows from part (a) since the assumption implies that no element of $`EF`$ can be externally active with respect to any subset of $`F`$.

Given a subset $`FE`$ and an ordering on $`F`$ we can always define an ordering on $`E`$ such that the condition in (c) of Lemma 2.5 holds. Thus we have proved the following observation.

###### Corollary 2.6

Let $`K`$ be an ordered matroid on a set $`F`$. If $`M`$ is an unordered matroid on a set $`EF`$ such that $`K=M|F`$ and $`K`$ is spanning, then we can find an ordering on $`E`$ inducing a rank-preserving inclusion $`L(K)L(M)`$.

In particular if $`K`$ is the cycle matroid of a connected graph $`H`$ with edge set $`F`$, then for $`M`$ we can take the cycle matroid of the complete graph on the vertex set of $`H`$.

## 3 The homotopy equivalence

In this section we study the reduced homology of the order complex of the lattice $`L(M)`$. We will show that there is a homotopy equivalence between the order complex of $`L(M)`$ and the independence complex of $`M^{}`$ restricted to $`T`$. This will we used in the next section to explain Las Vergnas’ observation about the Möbius function of $`L(M)`$.

Let $`L`$ be a finite lattice with minimum and maximum elements $`\widehat{0}`$ and $`\widehat{1}`$, respectively. We denote by $`\mathrm{\Delta }(L)`$, or simply $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the order complex of $`L`$, that is, the abstract simplicial complex on the set $`L\{\widehat{0},\widehat{1}\}`$ whose faces are the nonempty chains in $`L\{\widehat{0},\widehat{1}\}`$ ordered by inclusion. If $`L=L(M)`$ for some matroid, then we will also use the notation $`\mathrm{\Delta }(M)=\mathrm{\Delta }(L(M))`$.

There is another abstract simplicial complex associated with a matroid. The independence complex of $`M`$, denoted $`IN(M)`$, is the simplicial complex of nonempty independent subsets of $`M`$. Let $`T^{}`$ be the elements of $`T`$ that are independent as singleton sets in $`M^{}`$. Then $`IN(M^{}|T)=IN(M^{}|T^{})`$. Note that the elements $`eE`$ which are not independent in $`M^{}`$ are precisely those which are contained in every base for $`M`$. Our main theorem relates the two complexes we have defined. In it, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{H}}_i(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ will denote the reduced $`i`$-dimensional homology group of a complex $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with coefficients in $``$ (see e.g. Stanley \[11, Ch.3\]).

###### Theorem 3.1

We have a homotopy equivalence

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(M)IN(M^{}|T).$$

So, for all $`i1`$, we have an isomorphism in homology

$$\underset{i}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{H}}}(\mathrm{\Delta }(M))\underset{i}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{H}}}(IN(M^{}|T)).$$

Note that this result implies that the homotopy type of the order complex depends only on the maximum base $`T`$. We will prove Theorem 3.1 using the next two propositions.

Let $`L`$ be an arbitrary lattice with atom set $`𝒜`$. Let $`𝒥=𝒥(L)`$ be the abstract simplicial complex of all subsets of $`𝒜`$ whose join is not $`\widehat{1}`$. The following is a theorem of Lakser  later generalized by Björner  and Segev .

###### Proposition 3.2

For any lattice $`L`$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(L)𝒥(L).\text{ }$$

Let $``$ be an abstract simplicial complex on a finite set $`F`$. A facet covering of $``$ is a multiset of facets $`𝒞=\{F_0,F_1,\mathrm{},F_n\}`$ such that every face of $``$ is contained in some $`F_i`$. The nerve $`\mathrm{Nerv}(𝒞)`$ of the covering is the simplicial complex on the vertex set $`I=\{0,1,2,\mathrm{},n\}`$ where a subset $`JI`$ is a face if and only if $`_{jJ}F_j`$ is a face of $``$. As will be seen, the nerve of a certain covering of $`𝒥(L)`$ is isomorphic to $`IN(M^{}|T)`$.

But first we must show that $``$ and $`\mathrm{Nerv}(𝒞)`$ are the same up to homotopy. Note that every nonempty intersection of facets of $``$ is again a face of $``$. Thus the intersections $`_{jJ}F_j`$ are contractible as subspaces of $``$ and hence are acyclic. Thus the hypotheses of the Nerve Theorem of Borsuk and Folkman are satisfied (see (10.6) in Björner ) and we obtain our second proposition.

###### Proposition 3.3

Let $``$ be a simplicial complex on a set $`F`$ and let $`𝒞`$ be a facet covering. Then

$$\mathrm{Nerv}(𝒞).\text{ }$$

Proof (of Theorem 3.1) Combining Propositions 3.2 and 3.3 for any facet covering $`𝒞`$ of $`𝒥`$ we have

$$\mathrm{\Delta }𝒥\mathrm{Nerv}(𝒞).$$

So it suffices to show that we can find a facet covering $`𝒞`$ such that $`\mathrm{Nerv}(𝒞)`$ and $`IN(M^{}|T)`$ are isomorphic as simplicial complexes.

Suppose $`T^{}=\{t_0,t_1,\mathrm{},t_n\}`$ and recall that $`IN(M^{}|T)=IN(M^{}|T^{})`$. For $`0in`$, define $`F_i=\{A𝒜:AE\{t_i\}\}`$. Then it follows from Corollary 2.4 that these are the facets of $`𝒥`$, possibly with repetitions. Let $`𝒞`$ be the corresponding facet covering of $`𝒥`$. We can now define a bijection $`\varphi :IN(M^{}|T^{})\mathrm{Nerv}(𝒞)`$ as follows. If $`ST^{}`$ then let

$$\varphi (S)=J=\{j:t_jS\}.$$

Clearly $`\varphi `$ is a bijection between subsets of $`T^{}`$ and subsets of $`I`$. We claim that $`\varphi `$ restricts to a well-defined isomorphism between the respective complexes, that is, $`_{j\varphi (S)}F_j\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`S`$ is independent in $`M^{}|T^{}`$. This is because $`S`$ is independent in $`M^{}|T^{}`$ if and only if $`ES`$ contains a base for $`M`$ which, by Lemma 2.5(b), is equivalent to $`ES`$ containing an atom for $`L`$. This completes the proof of the isomorphism and of Theorem 3.1.

## 4 Applications

We are now ready to explain the empirical observation of Las Vergnas that the Möbius function $`\mu `$ of the external lattice $`L(M)`$ often satisfies $`\mu (L(M))=0`$. It is known that, given any finite lattice $`L`$ with minimum element $`\widehat{0}`$, maximum element $`\widehat{1}`$, and Möbius function $`\mu `$, one has

$$\mu (L):=\mu _L(\widehat{0},\widehat{1})=\stackrel{~}{\chi }(\mathrm{\Delta })=\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^idim\underset{i}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{H}}}(\mathrm{\Delta })$$
(3)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the order complex of $`L`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }`$ is the reduced Euler characteristic. This equation together with Theorem 3.1 can be used to show that a number of external activity lattices have Möbius function zero. We will use the notation $`\stackrel{~}{H}_i(M)`$ and $`\mu (M)`$ for $`\stackrel{~}{H}_i(\mathrm{\Delta }(M))`$ and $`\mu (L(M))`$, respectively. We will also use $`rk(M)`$ for the rank of the matroid $`M`$. This should not be confused with the rank function $`\rho `$ for the lattice $`L(M)`$.

###### Proposition 4.1

Let $`M`$ be an ordered matroid with maximum base $`T`$ and rank $`r=rk(M)1`$.

1. Suppose that $`M|(ET)`$ is spanning. Then

$$\stackrel{~}{H}_i(M)=\{0\}\text{ for all }i1\text{and}\mu (M)=0.$$
2. Suppose that $`M|(ES)`$ is spanning for all proper subsets $`ST`$ but is not spanning for $`S=T`$. Then

$$\stackrel{~}{H}_i(M)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill & \text{if }i=r2\text{,}\hfill \\ \{0\}\hfill & \text{else,}\hfill \end{array}\text{and}\mu (M)=(1)^{r2}.$$

Proof Under the first (respectively, second) hypothesis, $`IN(M^{}|T)`$ is homologically an $`(r1)`$-ball (respectively, $`(r2)`$-sphere). The conclusions now follow from Theorem 3.1 and equation (3).

As an example, consider the cycle matroid of a graph $`G`$ where, as usual, the edge set $`E=E(G)`$ has been linearly ordered. In this case we will use $`G`$ in our notation everywhere we used $`M`$ before. If $`H`$ is a subgraph of $`G`$, then we will call a vertex $`v`$ of $`H`$ internal if every edge of $`G`$ containing $`v`$ is present in $`H`$.

###### Corollary 4.2

Let $`K_n`$ be an ordered complete graph on $`n`$ vertices, $`n2`$, and let $`T`$ be its lexicographically maximal spanning tree.

1. If $`T`$ has no internal vertex then

$$\stackrel{~}{H}_i(K_n)=\{0\}\text{ for all }i1\text{and}\mu (K_n)=0.$$
2. If $`T`$ has an internal vertex then

$$\stackrel{~}{H}_i(K_n)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill & \text{if }i=n3\text{,}\hfill \\ \{0\}\hfill & \text{else,}\hfill \end{array}\text{and}\mu (K_n)=(1)^{n3}.$$

Proof If $`T`$ has no internal vertex, then $`K_nE(T)`$ is connected and the hypotheses of Proposition 4.1 (a) are satisfied. If $`T`$ has an internal vertex, then $`K_nE(S)`$ is connected for all $`ST`$, except for $`S=T`$. Thus the hypotheses of Proposition 4.1 (b) are fulfilled.

As a result of this corollary, we can see that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(M)`$ is not, in general, shellable (even though $`IN(M^{}|T)`$ always is, see Björner \[2, Theorem 7.3.3\]). If $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a shellable simplicial complex pure of dimension $`d`$, then $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is topologically a wedge of $`d`$-spheres and so only has homology in dimension $`d`$. So if a finite lattice $`L`$ graded of rank $`\rho `$ is shellable, then it only has homology in dimension $`\rho 2`$ (since we remove $`\widehat{0}`$ and $`\widehat{1}`$). But in $`L(M)`$ we have

$$\rho (L(M))=\rho (T)=|Ext(T)|+1=|ET|+1.$$

In particular

$$\rho (L(K_n))=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}\right)(n1)+1=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n1}{2}\right)+1.$$

But from the previous corollary, if $`T`$ has an internal vertex then $`L(K_n)`$ has homology in dimension $`n3<\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n1}{2}\right)1`$ for $`n4`$.

Here is another family of matroids that have zero Möbius function.

###### Proposition 4.3

Let $`M`$ be an ordered matroid with maximum base $`T`$ and suppose there is $`tT`$ such that $`rk(ET)=rk((ET)t)`$. Then

$$\stackrel{~}{H}_i(M)=\{0\}\text{ for all }i1\text{and}\mu (M)=0.$$

Proof Suppose that $`tT`$ satisfies $`rk(ET)=rk((ET)t)`$. This means that if a base $`B(M)`$ intersects $`T`$ minimally, then $`tB`$. That is, $`t`$ is not contained in any base of the contraction $`M.T`$ and hence is contained in every base of $`M^{}|T`$. Thus $`IN(M^{}|T)`$ is a cone with vertex $`t`$. The result follows.

For application in our examples, note that for the cycle matroid of a graph $`G`$, the hypothesis of Corollary 4.3 just says that the edge $`tT`$ connects two vertices in the same component of $`GE(T)`$. We first consider the $`n`$-fan, $`F_n`$, which is obtained from a path with $`n`$ vertices by adding an additional vertex adjacent to every vertex of the path. More explicitly, $`F_n=(V,E)`$ where $`V=\{0,1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ and

$$E=\{01,02,\mathrm{},0n\}\{12,23,\mathrm{},(n1)n\}.$$

We always write our edges with the smaller vertex first and order them lexicographically. Then

$$E(T)=\{0n,12,23,\mathrm{},(n1)n\}.$$

It is easy to see that if $`n3`$ then the edge $`t=12`$ satisfies the component criterion of the first sentence in this paragraph.

Next consider the $`n`$-triangle graph, $`T_n`$, gotten by gluing together $`n`$ copies of $`K_3`$ along a common edge. To set notation, let

$$E=\{e_0,e_1,\mathrm{},e_{2n}\}$$

where the $`i`$th triangle has edges $`\{e_0,e_i,e_{n+i}\}`$ and edges are ordered by their subscripts. Now

$$T=\{e_n,e_{n+1},\mathrm{},e_{2n}\}$$

So if $`n3`$ then the edge $`t=e_{n+1}`$ will satisfy the component criterion. By Proposition 4.3, we have proved the following.

###### Proposition 4.4

For the given orderings and $`n3`$ we have

$$\stackrel{~}{H}_i(F_n)=\stackrel{~}{H}_i(T_n)=\{0\}\text{ for all }i1\text{and}\mu (F_n)=\mu (T_n)=0.\text{ }$$

## 5 A theorem of Björner

A theorem of Björner \[2, Theorem 7.8.1\] characterizes the reduced homology of $`IN(M)`$ for any matroid $`M`$ and can be used in conjunction with Theorem 3.1 for computations. To state it, we will need the lattice of flats of $`M`$ which will be denoted $`L_F=L_F(M)`$ to distinguish it from the external activity lattice. Also, define the reduced Möbius function of $`M`$ to be

$$\stackrel{~}{\mu }(M)=\{\begin{array}{cc}|\mu (L_F(M))|\hfill & \text{if }M\text{ is loopless,}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{else.}\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Theorem 5.1 (Björner)

If $`r=rk(M)`$ then

$$\stackrel{~}{H}_i(IN(M))\{\begin{array}{cc}^{\stackrel{~}{\mu }(M^{})}\hfill & \text{if }i=r1\text{,}\hfill \\ \{0\}\hfill & \text{else.}\hfill \end{array}\text{ }$$

Now if $`FE`$, consider $`M.F`$, the contraction of $`M`$ to $`F`$. Our interest stems from the fact that $`(M^{}|F)^{}=M.F`$. An immediate corollary of the previous theorem and Theorem 3.1 is as follows.

###### Theorem 5.2

If $`r^{}=rk(M^{}|T)`$ then

$$\stackrel{~}{H}_i(\mathrm{\Delta }(M))\{\begin{array}{cc}^{\stackrel{~}{\mu }(M.T)}\hfill & \text{if }i=r^{}1\text{,}\hfill \\ \{0\}\hfill & \text{else. }\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Corollary 5.3

If $`r=rk(M)`$ and $`r^{}=rk(M^{}|T)`$ then

$$\mu (M)=\{\begin{array}{cc}(1)^{r1}\mu (L_F(M.T))\hfill & \text{if }M.T\text{ is loopless,}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{else.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Proof Viewing $`\mu (M)`$ as the reduced Euler characteristic of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(M)`$ and using Theorem 5.2 we find $`\mu (M)=(1)^{r^{}1}\stackrel{~}{\mu }(M.T)`$. So if $`M.T`$ has loops then $`\mu (M)=0`$ by definition of $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }`$. Otherwise, since $`M.T=(M^{}|T)^{}`$ and $`|T|=r`$, the rank of $`M.T`$ and hence of $`L_F(M.T)`$ is $`rr^{}`$. As $`L_F(M.T)`$ is a geometric lattice, the sign of $`\mu (L_F(M.T))`$ is $`(1)^{rr^{}}`$ and canceling appropriate powers of $`1`$ gives the desired conclusion.

Let us apply these results to some examples.

### The uniform matroid

Consider the uniform matroid $`U_{n,k}`$ on the $`n`$-set $`E`$ whose collection of bases is

$$(U_{n,k})=\{IE:|I|=k\}.$$

The lattice of flats $`L_F(U_{n,k})`$ consists of the subsets of $`E`$ of cardinality strictly less than $`k`$ together with $`E`$ itself, ordered by inclusion. Thus $`L_F(U_{n,k})`$ is obtained from the Boolean lattice $`B_n`$ on $`E`$ by deleting all elements of rank $`lk`$, except the top element. We will call this poset the truncated Boolean algebra (see Zhang ) Using the fact that, for any two subsets $`ABE`$, the Möbius function of $`B_n`$ satisfies

$$\mu (A,B)=(1)^{|BA|},$$

we find that

$$\mu (L_F(U_{n,k}))=\underset{i=0}{\overset{k1}{}}(1)^i\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}\right)=(1)^k\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n1}{k1}\right).$$

Now let $`M=U_{n,k}`$ for some $`n>0`$, and order $`E`$ linearly. The top element $`T`$ of $`L`$ is some $`k`$-subset of $`E`$. One verifies that $`M^{}|T`$ is the uniform matroid $`U_{k,r^{}}`$, where $`r^{}=\mathrm{min}\{k,nk\}`$, and that $`M.T`$ is the uniform matroid $`U_{k,kr^{}}`$.

Suppose $`kn/2`$. Then $`r^{}=k`$ and only the empty set is independent in $`M.T`$. Hence $`M.T`$ has loops, $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }(M.T)=0`$, and we have $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{H}}_i(\mathrm{\Delta })=\{0\}`$ for all $`i`$, and $`\mu (L)=0`$.

Suppose instead that $`k>n/2`$ so that $`r^{}=nk`$. Then $`M.T`$ has no loops and combining our computation of $`\mu (L_F(U_{n,k}))`$ with Theorem 5.2 and Corollary 5.3 we have the following result. In it, we assume that $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j}{i}\right)=0`$ if $`i<0`$.

###### Proposition 5.4

For any ordering of the uniform matroid $`U_{n,k}`$ we have

$`dim\stackrel{~}{H}_i(U_{n,k})=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k1}{2kn1}\right)`$ if $`i=nk1`$ and $`\mu (U_{n,k})=(1)^{nk1}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k1}{2kn1}\right)`$.
Note that since $`L(U_{n,k})`$ has rank $`nk+1`$, the complex $`\mathrm{\Delta }(U_{n,k})`$ is pure of dimension $`nk1`$. Apparently $`\mathrm{\Delta }(U_{n,k})`$ only has homology in the top dimension.

### The wheel graph $`W_n`$

Consider the $`n`$-wheel graph, $`W_n`$, obtained from an $`n`$-circuit $`C`$ by adding a vertex $`v_0`$ adjacent to all vertices of the circuit. Let the edge set be ordered linearly and let $`T`$ be the top element of $`L(W_n)`$.

Suppose first that some edge $`tT`$ satisfies Proposition 4.3 , i.e., $`t`$ connects two vertices in the same component of $`W_nE(T)`$. Then $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{H}}_i(W_n)=\{0\}`$ for all $`i1`$, and $`\mu (W_n)=0`$.

If there is no such edge, then $`W_nT`$ is partitioned into connected components $`C_0,C_1,\mathrm{},C_k`$ as follows:

* $`k=1`$, $`C_0=\{v_0\}`$ and $`C_1=C`$, or
* $`C_0`$ is the union of triangles intersecting only in $`v_0`$, the components $`C_1`$, $`C_2`$,…, $`C_l`$ are paths, possibly of length $`0`$, and every edge of $`T`$ meets $`C_0`$ and $`C_i`$ for some $`i1`$.

Let $`T_i`$ be the set of edges from $`T`$ joining $`C_0`$ to $`C_i`$. Then by the above we have $`T=_{i=1}^kT_i`$.

Now $`M.T`$ is the cycle matroid of the graph with vertex set $`\{C_0,C_1,\mathrm{},C_k\}`$, where $`T_i`$ represents a set of parallel edges joining the central vertex $`C_0`$ to $`C_i`$. Thus $`M.T`$ is the matroid of partial transversals of $`T`$ with respect to the family $`\{T_i\}_{i=1}^k`$.

We now determine $`L_F(M.T)`$. The closed sets of $`M.T`$ are the unions of the sets $`T_i`$. Thus $`L_F(M.T)`$ is the Boolean algebra $`B_k`$ on the set $`\{T_i\}_{i=1}^k`$. Hence $`\mu (L(M.T))=(1)^k`$. Clearly $`M^{}|T=(M.T)^{}`$ has rank $`nk`$ and so, using Theorem 5.2 and its corollary, we obtain the following result

###### Proposition 5.5

Let $`T`$ be the top element of $`L(W_n)`$ for some ordering of the edges of $`W_n`$.

1. If there is an edge $`tT`$ satisfying Proposition 4.3 then

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{H}}_i(W_n)=\{0\}`$ for all $`i1`$ and $`\mu (W_n)=0`$.
2. If there is no such edge, then

$$dim\stackrel{~}{H}_i(W_n)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{if }i=nk1\text{,}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{else,}\hfill \end{array}\text{and}\mu (W_n)=(1)^{nk1}.\text{ }$$

Note that since $`L`$ has rank $`n+1`$, the complex $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is pure of dimension $`n1`$. We have just shown that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ has homology in dimension $`nk1`$ and since $`k`$ cannot be zero, this complex is not shellable.

## 6 Open problems

We observed that the order complex for the uniform matroid has homology in the correct dimension for it to be shellable. It would be nice to find an explicit shelling if one exists. This would give a way of re deriving Theorem 5.4.

Forman  has introduced a discrete analogue of Morse theory as a way of studying CW complexes by collapsing them onto smaller, more tractable, complexes of critical cells. These techniques can be used to compute the homology of a complex even when it is not shellable. Are the non-shellable complexes which we have considered amenable to Forman’s technique?

Las Vergnas  defined a third ordering on the bases of an ordered matroid. To state it, we first need one of his results.

###### Proposition 6.1 (Las Vergnas)

If $`A,B(M)`$ are distinct bases which are comparable in both the external and internal orders, then either $`A`$ is smaller than $`B`$ in both or $`A`$ is larger than $`B`$ in both.

Because of this proposition, we have a well-defined external-internal order $`^{\mathrm{exin}}`$ on $`(M)`$ given by

$`A_M^{\mathrm{exin}}B`$ if and only if $`A_M^{\mathrm{ext}}B`$ or $`A_M^{\mathrm{int}}B`$
with corresponding lattice $`L_{\mathrm{inex}}(M)`$. We have been unable to find an analogue of Theorem 3.1 for this lattice. It would be very interesting to do so.

Acknowledgment. We would like to thank Anders Björner for helpful discussions and references.