text:
# 1 INTRODUCTION

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Super-Kamiokande collaboration has confirmed a neutrino oscillation by their atmospheric neutrino experiments . In their two-flavor mixing analyses of the sub-GeV and the multi-GeV zenith angle distribution, it has been obtained that the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation is preferred to the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation and the range of mass parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ is from $`10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ to $`10^2\mathrm{eV}^2`$. Recently, Super-Kamiokande collaboration has reported that the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation is maximally $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta =0.9\text{}1`$ and mass parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ is from $`2.5\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ to $`5\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$, using the sub-GeV, multi-GeV neutrino and upward muons zenith angle distribution experiments (830–920 live days) .

However, these results are obtained from the two-flavor neutrino analyses. In order to account for the solar neutrino anomaly data together with atmospheric neutrino experiments, three flavor neutrinos are necessary at least. In three-flavor neutrinos scenario with a mass hierarchy $`m_1m_2m_3`$, there are necessary two mass parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$, and three mixing angles $`\theta _{12}`$, $`\theta _{13}`$ and $`\theta _{23}`$. Solar neutrino anomaly gives constraint on only three parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$, $`\theta _{12}`$ and $`\theta _{13}`$. The MSW solution for solar neutrinos predicts the large mixing angle solution ($`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=4\times 10^6`$  $`7\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}=0.6\text{}0.9`$) and the small mixing angle solution ($`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=3\times 10^6`$$`1.2\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}=0.003\text{}0.01`$) for $`\theta _{13}=0^{}\text{}20^{}`$, and these large and small mixing angle solutions are merged for $`25^{}\text{}50^{}`$ . The vacuum solution is also obtained as $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^210^{10}\mathrm{eV}^2`$. However, CHOOZ experiment  which is a terrestrial experiment using reactor neutrinos gives a strong constraint $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}<0.18`$ for large $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2<0.9\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ for $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}1`$. From the recent many atmospheric neutrino analyses  using either two- or three-flavor neutrinos framework, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=10^3\text{}10^2\mathrm{eV}^2`$ is obtained. Therefore, it can be said that the mixing angle $`\theta _{13}`$ is small but not necessarily 0.

In the three-flavor neutrino framework, if the mixing parameter $`\theta _{13}`$ is not zero, it is necessary to consider the interplay between two mass parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ and three mixing angles $`\theta _{12}`$, $`\theta _{13}`$, $`\theta _{23}`$ for atmospheric neutrino experimental analyses. The oscillation term $`\mathrm{sin}^21.27{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2}{E}}L`$ cannot be neglected though $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$, because the term is not so small in the sub-GeV experiment ($`E=0.21.3\mathrm{GeV}`$) of atmospheric neutrino with zenith angle $`\theta 180^{}`$ at which $`L10000\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}`$. In the multi-GeV experiment ($`E>1.3\mathrm{GeV}`$) of atmospheric neutrino and terrestrial short- and long-baseline experiments, the neutrino oscillation term $`\mathrm{sin}^21.27{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2}{E}}L`$ can be neglected. The angle $`\theta _{13}`$ has been seen to be small, then the $`\theta _{13}`$ is approximated to be $`0`$ in usual analyses. However, in the case considering the matter effects of the Earth, above approximation is not appropriate. The matter effect is expressed by the induced mass squared $`A=2\sqrt{2}EG_FN_e=7.59\rho E\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, where $`N_e`$ is the number density of electrons, $`E`$ is the energy of neutrinos (measured in GeV) and $`\rho `$ is the matter density (measured in gm/cm3). The Earth density $`\rho `$ is $`3.513`$g/cm3 and the multi-GeV experiment energy of neutrinos ranges from 1.3GeV to 100GeV. Then the value of $`A`$ go through the value of mass parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ and the MSW effect occurs in the mixing angle $`\theta _{13}`$ (see section 3).

In this paper, we analyze the Super-Kamiokande atmospheric neutrino experimental data(850–920 live days)  of sub-GeV and multi-GeV neutrino, upward through-going and stopping muons, using the three-flavor neutrino framework with the hierarchy $`m_1m_2m_3`$. In previous paper , we analyzed the 535 live days data of Super-Kamiokande atmospheric neutrino experiment  using similar framework to the present analysis, approximating the Earth density to be constant. In this present analysis, we will pursue a full calculation adopting the varying density of the Earth. We will also discuss the long-baseline K2K experiment  in the three-flavor neutrino framework.

## 2 NEUTRINO OSCILLATION IN THREE-FLAVOR NEUTRINOS

The unitary matrix $`U`$ which transforms the mass eigenstate neutrinos $`\nu _\alpha `$ to the flavor eigenstate neutrinos $`\nu _l`$ as the formula

$$\nu _l=\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{3}{}}U_{l\alpha }\nu _\alpha ,l=e,\mu ,\tau ,$$
(1)
is parametrized as follows:

$`U`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(i\theta _{23}\lambda _7)\mathrm{exp}(i\theta _{13}\lambda _5)\mathrm{exp}(i\theta _{12}\lambda _2)`$
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c_{12}c_{13}& s_{12}c_{13}& s_{13}\\ s_{12}c_{23}c_{12}s_{23}s_{13}& c_{12}c_{23}s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}& s_{23}c_{13}\\ s_{12}s_{23}c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}& c_{12}s_{23}s_{12}c_{23}s_{13}& c_{23}c_{13}\end{array}\right),`$
$`c_{ij}=\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij},s_{ij}=\mathrm{sin}\theta _{ij}.`$
in a case disregarding the CP violation. We assume the mass hierarchy

$$m_1m_2m_3,$$
(3)
then $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$. In this mass hierarchy, the transition probabilities $`P(\nu _l\nu _l^{})`$ can be written as

$`P(\nu _l\nu _l)`$ $`=`$ $`12(12U_{l3}^2U_{l1}^4U_{l2}^4+U_{l3}^4)S_{12}4U_{l3}^2(1U_{l3}^2)S_{23},`$ (4)
$`P(\nu _l\nu _l^{})`$ $`=`$ $`P(\nu _l^{}\nu _l)=2(U_{l1}^2U_{l^{}1}^2+U_{l2}^2U_{l^{}2}^2U_{l3}^2U_{l^{}3}^2)S_{12}+4U_{l3}^2U_{l^{}3}^2S_{23},`$ (5)
where $`S_{\alpha \beta }`$ is a term representing the neutrino oscillation defined as;

$$S_{\alpha \beta }=\mathrm{sin}^21.27\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\alpha \beta }^2}{E}L.$$
(6)
Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\alpha \beta }^2=|m_\alpha ^2m_\beta ^2|`$, $`E`$ and $`L`$ are measured in units eV2, GeV and km, respectively. For the mass parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ and mixing angle $`\theta _{12}`$, we use values obtained in the solar neutrino experimental analyses: the large mixing angle solution $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=3\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}=0.7`$, and small mixing angle solution $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}=0.005`$. It should be noted that the oscillation term $`S_{12}=\mathrm{sin}^21.27{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2}{E}}L`$ cannot be neglected in the sub-GeV experiment of atmospheric neutrino though $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$, because this oscillation term is not so small in sub-GeV neutrino energy ($`E=0.2\text{}1.3\mathrm{GeV}`$) with zenith angle $`\theta 180^{}`$($`L10000\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}`$).

In the atmospheric neutrino experiments, the matters of the Earth have a important effect. Matter effect is represented by a term $`A=2\sqrt{2}EG_FN_e=7.59\rho E\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$ induced by the Earth matter, where $`\rho `$ is the matter density. In the Earth, $`\rho =3.5\text{}13\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$, and sub-GeV and multi-GeV neutrino energy ranges from 0.1GeV to 100GeV, then the value of $`A`$ goes through those of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ and the resonance happens in mixing angles $`\theta _{12}`$ and $`\theta _{13}`$ as will be seen in Eqs.(8)–(11) and Eqs.(13)–(16). In the sub-GeV neutrino energy, $`A\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{13}/2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^21`$, then we can approximate the mixing matrix $`U`$ as

$$U_{\mathrm{sub}}^M=\mathrm{exp}(i\lambda _7\theta _{23})\mathrm{exp}(i\lambda _5\theta _{13})\mathrm{exp}(i\lambda _2\theta _{12}^M),$$
(7)
where

$`\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{12}^M={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^{M2}}}\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{12},`$ (8)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^{M2}=m_2^{M2}m_1^{M2},\mathrm{\Sigma }=m_1^2+m_2^2,`$ (9)
$`m_{1,2}^{M2}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{(\mathrm{\Sigma }+A\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _{13})`$
$`\sqrt{(A\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _{13}\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12})^2+(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{12})^2}\},`$ (10)
$`m_3^{M2}=m_3^2+A\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}.`$ (11)
On the other hand, $`A\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{13}/2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ is not so small in multi-GeV neutrino and upward muon energy. In this case, the mixing matrix can be expanded by powers of a quantity $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{12}/2m_3^2`$ which is very small. In the lowest order, the mixing matrix is expressed as

$$U_{\mathrm{multi}}^M=\mathrm{exp}(i\lambda _7\theta _{23})\mathrm{exp}(i\lambda _5\theta _{13}^M),$$
(12)
where

$`\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{13}^M={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^{M2}}}\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{13},`$ (13)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^{M2}=m_3^{M2}m_1^{M2},\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12},\mathrm{\Sigma }=m_1^2+m_2^2,`$ (14)
$`m_{1,3}^{M2}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{(m_3^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{2}}+A)`$
$`\sqrt{\left(A\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{13}\right)^2+\left(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{13}\right)^2}\},`$ (15)
$`m_2^{M2}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\mathrm{\Sigma }+\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}).`$ (16)
These expressions correspond to the neutrino case, and $`A`$ for the anti-neutrino case has an opposite sign of the neutrino case. From these expressions, we can recognize that a resonance exists at $`A\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{13}`$ of $`\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{13}^M`$. When $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{13}^2=3\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{13}1`$, the resonance occurs at $`E10\mathrm{GeV}`$.

When the density of the Earth matter is constant, the transition probability $`P^M(\nu _l\nu _l^{})`$ with the matter effects can be expressed by the expression (5) with $`U`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\alpha \beta }^2`$ replaced by $`U^M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\alpha \beta }^{M2}`$. Actual density of the Earth is not constant but the density in shells which compose the Earth is almost constant. The net transition probability $`P_{\nu _l\nu _l^{}}`$ of neutrinos going through the Earth can be given by connecting the transition amplitudes of each shell. The transition amplitude in $`k`$-th shell is expressed as

$$T_{l^{}l}(M_k,x_k)=\underset{\alpha }{}(U^{M_k})_{l^{}\alpha }(U^{M_k})_{l\alpha }\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{m_\alpha ^{M_k2}}{2p}x_k\right),$$
(17)
where $`U^{M_k}`$ represents the mixing matrix containing the $`k`$-th shell matter effects, $`m_\alpha ^{M_k}`$ the mass of $`\nu _\alpha `$ in the $`k`$-th shell and $`x`$ the length traveling in the $`k`$-th shell. Using this transition amplitude, we get the transition probability as follows:

$`P_{\nu _l\nu _l^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`|{\displaystyle \underset{l_1,l_2,\mathrm{}}{}}T_{l^{}l_{n1}}(M_n,x_n)T_{l_{n1}l_{n2}}(M_{n1},x_{n1})\mathrm{}`$ (18)
$`\mathrm{}T_{l_2l_1}(M_2,x_2)T_{l_1l}(M_1,x_1)|^2.`$
Calculation using this expression is very complicated and cannot be carry out analytically, then we calculate this numerically.

## 3 NUMERICAL ANALYSES OF ATMOSPHERIC NEUTRINOS

In this work, we analyze the ratio $`N_{\mathrm{Exp}}(l)/N_{\mathrm{MC}}(l)`$ of experimentally observed events $`N_{\mathrm{Exp}}(l)`$ and expected events $`N_{\mathrm{MC}}(l)`$ without oscillation, where $`l`$ represents $`\mu `$-like and $`e`$-like events. The zenith angle $`\theta `$ dependent events $`dN_{\mathrm{Exp}}(l)/d\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ and $`dN_{\mathrm{MC}}(l)/d\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ are defined as

$$\frac{dN_{\mathrm{Exp}}(l)}{d\mathrm{cos}\theta }=\underset{\nu _l^{}}{}ϵ_l(E_l)\sigma _{\nu _l}(E_{\nu _l^{}},E_l,\psi )F_{\nu _l^{}}(E_{\nu _l^{}},\theta \psi )P^M(\nu _l^{}\nu _l)𝑑E_{\nu _l^{}}𝑑E_ld\mathrm{cos}\psi ,$$
(19)
$$\frac{dN_{\mathrm{MC}}(l)}{d\mathrm{cos}\theta }=ϵ_l(E_l)\sigma _{\nu _l}(E_{\nu _l},E_l,\psi )F_{\nu _l}(E_{\nu _l},\theta \psi )𝑑E_{\nu _l}𝑑E_ld\mathrm{cos}\psi ,$$
(20)
where the summation $`_{\nu _l^{}}`$ are taken over $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _e`$. In these expressions, processes of $`\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ and $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ are contained. $`ϵ_l(E_l)`$ is the detection efficiency of the detector for $`l`$-type charged lepton with energy $`E_l`$. $`\sigma _{\nu _l}(E_{\nu _l^{}},E_l,\psi )`$ is the differential cross section of scattering $`l`$ with energy $`E_l`$ by incident $`\nu _l`$ with energy $`E_{\nu _l^{}}=E_{\nu _l}`$, where angle $`\psi `$ is the scattering angle between the directions of incident $`\nu _l`$ and scattered $`l`$. $`F_{\nu _l^{}}(E_{\nu _l^{}},\theta )`$ is the incident $`\nu _l^{}`$ flux with energy $`E_{\nu _l^{}}`$ produced at the atmosphere coming to the detector with zenith angle $`\theta `$. $`E_{\nu _l}`$ and $`\theta `$ dependences of $`F_{\nu _l}(E_{\nu _l},\theta )`$ for multi-GeV experiment ($`E_{\nu _l}>1.33\mathrm{GeV}`$) are given in Refs. . These dependences including the geomagnetic effects for sub-GeV case ($`0.2\mathrm{GeV}<E_{\nu _l}<1.33\mathrm{GeV}`$) are taken from Ref. . Other informations of $`ϵ_l(E_l)`$ and $`\sigma _{\nu _l}(E_{\nu _l},E_l,\psi )`$ are given in Ref. . The upward through-going muons (thru-muons) and stopping muons (stop-muons) fluxes are shown in Ref. . Typical energies of $`\nu _\mu `$ that produce thru- and stop-muons are 100GeV and 10GeV, respectively. Explicit calculation of Eqs. (19) and (20) is explained precisely in Appendix A of the second paper in Ref. .

$`P^M(\nu _l^{}\nu _l)`$ is the transition probability with the matter effects expressed in Eq. (18). The Earth consists of 5 shells approximately ; the density of the most outside shell ($`\mathrm{radius}r=59916371\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}`$) is $`3.5\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the next outside shell ($`r=57195991\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}`$) $`4\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the middle shell ($`r=35195719\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}`$) $`5\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the outer core shell ($`r=12313519\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}`$) $`11\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$, the inner core ($`r=01231\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}`$) $`13\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$. A number of the shells through which neutrinos pass changes with a change of the zenith angle $`\theta `$. For example, the number of the shell is 0 for $`0<\theta <90^{}`$ and 9 for $`\theta =180^{}`$.

The zenith angle distributions of sub-GeV, multi-GeV neutrino events and upward thru- and stop-muons fluxes are given by the SuperKamiokande 850-920 live days experiments . The data are tabulated in Table I. These values are taken from the experimental event data and Monte-Carlo simulations which are given graphically in Ref. . $`\mu `$-like events include the fully contained and partially contained events. Errors represent statistical ones only.

Since $`P^M(\nu _l^{}\nu _l)`$ is a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2,\theta _{12},\theta _{13}`$ and $`\theta _{23}`$, the ratio $`(dN_{\mathrm{Exp}}(l)`$ $`/d\mathrm{cos}\theta )/(dN_{\mathrm{MC}}(l)/d\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$ of the zenith angle distributions is a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2,`$ $`\theta _{12},\theta _{13},\theta _{23}`$ and $`\theta `$. We analyze the atmospheric neutrino data fixing the values of parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}`$ determined from the solar neutrino experiments  as $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=3\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}=0.7`$, which corresponds to the large angle solution, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}=0.005`$, which corresponds to the small angle solution. We treat the ratios of the zenith angle distributions of the experimental events and the ones of Monte-Calro simulation, $`(N_{\mathrm{Exp}}(l)/N_{\mathrm{MC}}(l))_i`$, where $`i`$ represents the region number of the bins of zenith angle $`\theta `$.

We calculate numerically the $`\chi ^2`$ defined as

$$\chi ^2=\underset{i,l}{}\frac{\left\{(N_{\mathrm{Exp}}(l)/N_{\mathrm{MC}}(l))_i^{\mathrm{cal}}(N_{\mathrm{Exp}}(l)/N_{\mathrm{MC}}(l))_i^{\mathrm{data}}\right\}^2}{(\sigma _{\mathrm{st}})_i^2+(\sigma _{\mathrm{sy}})_i^2}.$$
(21)
For the sub-GeV, multi-GeV and upward thru-muon experiments, the summation on $`i`$ are from 1 to 10 of zenith angle range bins and for the upward stop-muon, from 1 to 5. The summation on $`l`$ are over $`\mu `$ and $`e`$ for the sub-GeV and multi-GeV experiments. $`\sigma _{\mathrm{st}}`$ represents the statistical error and $`\sigma _{\mathrm{sy}}`$ systematic one. We assumed that the value of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{sy}}`$ is $`5\%`$ of an amount of the $`N_{\mathrm{MC}}`$ for the sub-GeV and multi-GeV neutrino data, $`10\%`$ for the upward stop-muon data and $`20\%`$ for the upward thru-muon data. We adopted the rather large value of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{sy}}`$ for upward thru-muons, because there exists larger uncertainty of neutrino flux for high energy neutrinos. We estimated the values of $`\chi ^2`$ for the various values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2,\theta _{13}`$ and $`\theta _{23}`$.

In Fig. 1, we showed the contour plots of $`\chi ^2`$ in the $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _{13}`$$`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _{23}`$ plane for various values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$. These plots show the $`\chi ^2`$ of the sub-GeV neutrino plus multi-GeV neutrino zenith angle distributions for the large $`\theta _{12}`$ angle solution. We did not show the plots for the small angle solution, because $`\chi ^2`$ for the small angle solution is almost similar to that for large one. In these figures, broken thick, broken thin and dotted curves denote the regions allowed in 99%, 95% and 90% C.L., respectively. From these plots we can say that the values of allowed $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ is from $`2\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ to $`10^2\mathrm{eV}^2`$, $`\theta _{13}`$ is $`<17^{}`$ and $`\theta _{23}`$ is from $`35^{}`$ to $`55^{}`$.

Plots of the upward thru- plus stop-muons are shown in Fig. 2 for the large $`\theta _{12}`$ angle solution. We did not show the plots for small angle solution, because there is no difference between the large $`\theta _{12}`$ angle solution and small one. In these figures, sharp allowed regions similar to those of previous sub-GeV plus multi-GeV neutrinos data is not appeared. The reason is as follows: although stop-muons data show the sharp allowed regions similar to those of sub-GeV plus multi-GeV neutrino data, thru-muons data show the excluded regions near $`45^{}`$ of $`\theta _{23}`$. The latter situation is caused from small deficit (about 0.2) from 1 of the $`\mu `$ event ratio $`N_{\mathrm{Exp}}/N_{\mathrm{MC}}`$ as shown in Table 1.

In Fig. 3, we showed the contour plots of $`\chi ^2`$ for the combination of the sub-GeV and multi-GeV neutrinos, the upward thru- and stop-muons zenith angle distributions for large $`\theta _{12}`$ solution. In these figures, broken thick, broken thin and dotted curves denote the regions allowed in 99%, 95% and 90% C.L., respectively.

From these plots, we can get the following results for the neutrino mass and mixing parameters:
(1) As shown in Fig. 1, the allowed region for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ obtained from the sub-GeV and multi-GeV neutrino experiments is from $`2\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ to $`10^2\mathrm{eV}^2`$ at 90%C.L., and the allowed region for $`\theta _{23}`$ angle is from $`35^{}`$ to $`55^{}`$ and for $`\theta _{13}`$ angle is less than $`17^{}`$. The minimum $`\chi ^2`$ is obtained as $`29`$ for 39 degrees of freedom (DOF) at $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=5\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$, $`\theta _{13}=10^{}`$ and $`\theta _{23}=45^{}`$. The minimum $`\chi ^2`$ in the restriction $`\theta _{13}=0`$ which corresponds to the two flavor mixing $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ approximation, is $`30`$ for 39 DOF at $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=4\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$.
(2) As shown in Fig. 2, the allowed region for $`\theta _{13}`$ and $`\theta _{23}`$ is excluded at small $`\theta _{13}`$ and the maximal mixing of $`\theta _{23}`$ for large values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$. This is because of the fact that the data in upward thru-muons has not so large deficit from the no-oscillation case as seen in the Table 1.
(3) There is no significant difference between the large $`\theta _{12}`$ solution and the small solution. This fact is not seen from these figures, but we can see from our numerical calculation that the difference between the large angle solution and the small one is less than 1% for multi-GeV neutrinos and upward muons and less than 10 % for sub-GeV neutrinos.
(4) The allowed region for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ obtained from the sub- and multi-GeV neutrinos, and upward thru- and stop-muons is given as $`2\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ to $`\times 10^2\mathrm{eV}^2`$, and for $`\theta _{23}`$ as $`35^{}`$ to $`55^{}`$ and for $`\theta _{13}`$ as less than $`13^{}`$. The minimum $`\chi ^2`$ is obtained as $`55`$ for 54 DOF at $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=4\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$, $`\theta _{13}=10^{}`$ and $`\theta _{23}=45^{}`$. The minimum $`\chi ^2`$ in the restriction $`\theta _{13}=0^{}`$ which corresponds to the two flavor mixing $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ approximation, is $`61`$ for 54 DOF at $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=3\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ and $`\theta _{23}=45^{}`$. These results are the same as the result obtained by Super-Kamiokande collaboration .
(5) It is interesting that the minimum of $`\chi ^2`$ is obtained at not $`\theta _{13}=0`$ but $`\theta _{13}=10^{}`$, though the difference between $`\chi ^2`$ for $`\theta _{13}=0`$ case and that for $`\theta _{13}=10^{}`$ case is not so large. This result is consistent with the CHOOZ experiment . The CHOOZE experiment predicts the results: $`\theta _{13}<13^{}`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=3\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$.

We will now discuss about the interesting feature that the mixing angle $`\theta _{13}`$ is preferred to be about $`10^{}`$. If this feature is real, the detected $`\nu _e`$ events in the long baseline K2K experiment  will be about 10 times as large as the events expected in $`\theta _{13}=0`$ case. This is caused from the fact that the $`\nu _\mu `$ flux produced at KEK is about 100 times as large as $`\nu _e`$ flux and the transition probability is $`P(\nu _\mu \nu _e)\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}\mathrm{sin}^21.27\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2L/E`$, $`E1.4\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`L=250\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}`$.

## 4 Conclusion

We analyzed the atmospheric neutrino experimental data of Super-Kamiokande  in the three-flavor neutrino framework with the mass hierarchy $`m_1m_2m_3`$ and obtained the allowed regions of parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2,\theta _{13}`$ and $`\theta _{23}`$, including the Earth matter effects thoroughly. We studied the event ratios of the sub- and multi-GeV, and upward thru- and stop-muons zenith angle distributions. From these atmospheric experiments, we can get the allowed region of mass parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ restricted as $`0.002\mathrm{eV}^2\text{}0.01\mathrm{eV}^2`$, and mixing parameter $`\theta _{13}`$ as less than $`13^{}`$ and $`\theta _{23}`$ as $`35^{}\text{}55^{}`$. The value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ at the minimum $`\chi ^2=55`$ for 54 DOF is obtained as $`4\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ at $`\theta _{13}=10^{}`$ and $`\theta _{23}=45^{}`$. The minimum $`\chi ^2=61`$ for 54 DOF is obtained with the restriction $`\theta _{13}=0`$ at the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=3\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ and $`\theta _{23}=45^{}`$. This fact seems very interesting for us because the mixing parameter $`\theta _{13}`$ may not be 0. For mixing parameter $`\theta _{12}`$, the difference between the large angle solution and the small one is less than 1%. If $`\theta _{13}`$ is about $`10^{}`$, the detected $`\nu _e`$ events in K2K experiment is about 10 times as large as events expected in $`\theta _{13}=0`$ case.


format: text

text:
# Quantum Strata of Coadjoint Orbits

## Introduction

For locally compact groups, their C\*-algebras contain exhausted informations about the groups them-selves and their representations, see \[D1\], \[D2\]. In some sense \[R1\]-\[R2\], the group algebras can be considered as C\*-algebraic deformation quantization $`C_q^{}(G)`$ at the special value $`q=1`$.

In \[D1\] and \[D2\], the group C\*-algebras were described as repeated extensions of C\*-algebras of strata of coadjoint orbits. Quantum groups are group Hopf algebras, i.e. replace C\*-algebras by special Hopf algebras “of functions”. It is therefore interesting to ask whether we could describe quantum groups as some repeated extensions of some kind quantum strata of coadjoint orbits? We are attempting to give a positive answer to this question. It is not yet completely described but we obtained a reasonable answer. Let us describe the main ingredients of our approach.

For the good strata, namely families of with some good enough parameter space, of coadjoint orbits, there exist always continuous fields of polarizations (in the sense of the representation theory), satisfying the L. Pukanszky irreducibility condition: for each orbit $`𝒪`$ and any point $`F_𝒪`$ in it, the affine subspace, orthogonal to some polarizations with respect to the symplectic form is included in orbits themselves, i.e.

$$F_𝒪+𝔥_𝒪^{}𝒪$$

and

$$dim𝔥_𝒪=\frac{1}{2}dim𝒪.$$

We choose the the canonical Darboux coordinates with impulse $`p`$’s-coordinates, following a vector structure basis of $`𝔥^{}`$. From this we can deduce that in this kind of Darboux coordinates, the Kirillov form $`\omega _𝒪`$ locally are canonical and every element $`X𝔤=LieG`$ can be considered as a function $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ on $`𝒪`$, linear on $`p`$’s-coordinates, i.e.

$$\stackrel{~}{X}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_i(q)p_i+a_0(q).$$

This essential fact gives us a possibility to effectively write out the corresponding $``$-product of functions, define quantum strata $`C_q(V,)`$. On the strata acts our Lie group of symmetry. It induces therefore an action on equivariant differential operators. Using the indicate fields of polarizations we prove some kind of Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt theorem and then provide quantization with separation of variable in sense of Karabegov \[Ka1\]. We can then express the corresponding representations of the quantum strata $`C_q(V,)`$, where $`V_{dim𝒪=const}𝒪`$, through the Feynman path integrals etc…,see \[D3\].

Our main result is Theorem 2.6 in which we construct the $``$-product exactly, Theorem 3.4, where the representations are obtained from Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt separation of variable and $``$-products, and Theorem 5.5 where we express the product through Fourier integral operators.

Let us now describe in brief the structure of sections. In section 1, we construct a canonical local coordinate system, where the generating functions $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$, for $`X𝔤`$ are linear in the impulse coordinates $`p`$’s, Theorem 1.4. In this kind of coordinates, we can in §2 construct construct the local $``$-product, Theorem 2.1, then globalize it into a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant $``$-product on the universal coverings of coadjoint orbits and then push down to the coadjoint orbits them-selves, Theorem 2.4, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\pi _1(𝒪)`$ \- the fundamental group of the coadjoint orbit $`𝒪`$. IN section 3 we let this left $``$-multiplication of functions, acting on the quantum bundle sections. It manipulates an action of the generating functions as right $`G`$-invariant pseudo-differential operators of the first order. We then use the universal property of the universal enveloping algebra $`U(𝔤)`$ to construct a quantizing homomorphism $`U(𝔤)PDO_G(𝒪)`$, Theorem 3.1. We prove then a version of the Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt Theorem, associated with a complex polarization. Theorem 3.3. In section 4, we show that this kind representations are the same as those obtained from the procedure of multidimensional quantization, \[D2\]. In section 5, we restrict to special case of strata of coadjoint orbits appeared from some versions of solvable cases of the Gelfand-Kirillov conjecture. In those cases we can express the associated unitary representations of the groups $`G`$ as some oscilatting Fourier integrals, Theorem 5.5. In Section 6, all the main ideas are demonstrated in 3 series of examples.

## 1. Canonical coordinates on a stratum

Let us consider a connected and simply connected Lie group $`G`$ with Lie algebra $`𝔤`$. Denote the dual to $`𝔤`$ vector space by $`𝔤^{}`$. It is well-known that the action of $`G`$ on itself by conjugation

$$A(g):GG,$$

defined by $`A(g)(h):=ghg^1`$ keeps the identity element $`h=e`$ unmoved. This induces the tangent map $`Ad(g):=A(g)_{}:𝔤=T_eG𝔤,`$ defined by

$$Ad(g)X:=\frac{d}{dt}|_{t=0}A(g)\mathrm{exp}(tX)$$

and the co-adjoint action $`K(g):=Ad(g^1)^{}`$ maps the dual space $`𝔤^{}`$ into itself. The orbit space $`𝒪(G):=𝔤^{}/G`$ is in general a bad topological space, namely non-Hausdorff, in general. Consider an arbitrary orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }𝒪(G)`$ and an element $`F𝔤^{}`$ in it. The stabilizer is denote by $`G_F`$, its connected component by $`(G_F)_0`$ and its Lie algebra by $`𝔤_F:=Lie(G_F)`$. It is well-known that

$$\begin{array}{ccc}G_F& & G\\ & & \\ & & \mathrm{\Omega }_F\end{array}$$

is a principal bundle with the structural group $`G_F`$. Let us fix some connection in this principal bundle,  i.e. some trivialization  of this bundle. We want to construct representations in some cohomology spaces with coefficients in the sheaves of sections of some vector bundle associated with this principal bundles. It is well know that every vector bundle is an induced one with respect to some representation of the structural group in the typical fiber. It is natural to fix some unitary representation $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$ of $`G_F`$ such that its kernel contains $`(G_F)_0`$, the character $`\chi _F`$ of the connected component of stabilizer

$$\chi _F(\mathrm{exp}X):=\mathrm{exp}(2\pi \sqrt{1}F,X)$$

and therefore the differential $`D(\stackrel{~}{\sigma }\chi _F)=\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$ is some representation of the Lie algebra $`𝔤_F`$. We suppose that the representation $`D(\stackrel{~}{\rho }\chi _F)`$ was extended to the complexification $`(𝔤_F)_{}`$. The whole space of all sections seems to be so large for the construction of irreducible unitary representations. One considers the invariant subspaces with the help of some so called polarizations, see \[D1\], \[D2\].

###### Definition 1.1.

We say that a triple $`(𝔭_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})`$ is a $`(\stackrel{~}{\sigma },F)`$-polarization of $`𝒪`$ iff :

1. $`𝔭_𝒪`$ is some complex sub-algebra of the complexified $`𝔤_𝐂`$, containing $`𝔤_{F_𝒪}`$.
2. The sub-algebra $`𝔭_𝒪`$ is invariant under the action of all the operators of type $`Ad_{𝔤_𝐂}x,xG_{F_𝒪}.`$
3. The vector space $`𝔭_𝒪+\overline{𝔭_𝒪}`$ is the complexification of some real Lie sub-algebra $`𝔪_𝒪:=(𝔭_𝒪+\overline{𝔭}_𝒪)𝔤.`$
4. All the subgroups $`M_{0,𝒪}`$, $`H_{0,𝒪}`$, $`M_𝒪`$, $`H_𝒪`$ are closed, where by definition, $`M_{0,𝒪}`$ (resp., $`H_{0,𝒪}`$) is the connected subgroup of $`G`$ with the Lie algebra $`𝔪_𝒪`$ (resp., $`𝔥_𝒪:=𝔭_𝒪𝔤`$) and the semi-direct products $`M:=M_{0,𝒪}G_{F_𝒪}`$, $`H_𝒪:=H_{0,𝒪}G_{F_𝒪}`$.
5. $`\sigma _{0,𝒪}`$ is an irreducible representation of $`H_{0,𝒪}`$ in some Hilbert space $`V_𝒪`$ such that: (1.) the restriction $`\sigma _{0,𝒪}|_{G_{F_𝒪}H_{0,𝒪}}`$ is some multiple of the restriction $`\chi _{F_𝒪}.\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_𝒪|_{G_{F_𝒪}H_{0,𝒪}}`$, where the character $`\chi _𝒪`$ is by definition, $`\chi _𝒪(\mathrm{exp}X)=\mathrm{exp}(2\pi \sqrt{1}F_𝒪,X)`$; (2.) under the action of $`G_{F_𝒪}`$ on the dual $`\widehat{H}_{0,𝒪}`$, the point $`\sigma _{0,𝒪}`$ is fixed.
6. $`\rho _𝒪`$ is a representation of the complex Lie algebra $`𝔭_𝒪`$ in the same $`V_𝒪`$, which satisfies the Nelson conditions for $`H_{0,𝒪}`$ and $`\rho _𝒪|_{𝔥_𝒪}D\sigma _{0,𝒪}`$.

There is a natural order in the set of all $`(\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_𝒪,F_𝒪)`$-polarizations by inclusion and from now on speaking about polarizations we means always the maximal ones. It is not hard to prove that the (maximal) polarizations are also the Lagrangian distributions and in particular the co-dimension of $`𝔥_𝒪`$ in $`𝔤`$ is a half of the dimension of the coadjoint orbit $`𝒪`$,

$$codim_𝔤𝔥_𝒪=\frac{1}{2}dim𝒪,$$

see e.g. \[D2\] or \[K\].

Let us now recall the Pukanszky condition.

###### Definition 1.2.

We say that the $`(\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_𝒪,F_𝒪)`$-polarization $`(𝔭_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})`$ satisfies the Pukanszky condition, iff

$$F_𝒪+𝔥_𝒪^{}𝒪.$$

###### Remark 1.3.

* Pukanszky conditions involve an inclusion of the Lagrangian affine subspace of $`p`$’s coordinates into the local Darboux coordinates.
* The partial complex structure on orbits let us to use smaller subspaces of section in the induction construction, as subspaces of partially invariant, partially holomorphic sections of the induced bundles.

###### Theorem 1.4.

There exists on each coadjoint orbit a local canonical system of Darboux coordinates, in which the Hamiltonian function $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$, $`X𝔤`$, are linear on $`p`$’s impulsion coordinates and in theses coordinates,

$$\stackrel{~}{X}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_i(q)p_i+a_0(q).$$

###### Proof.

We supposed that our coadjoint orbit admit at least a polarization $`(𝔭,\rho ,\sigma )`$, satisfying L. Pukanszky’s condition of irreducibility

$$F_𝒪+𝔥_𝒪^{}𝒪.$$

The codimension of $`𝔥_𝒪`$ and therefore the dimension of $`𝔥_𝒪^{}`$ is $`\frac{1}{2}dim𝒪`$. Consider a canonical system of geodesics. The geodesics corresponding to the affine subspace $`𝔥_𝒪^{}`$ provide linear coordinates $`p_1,p_2,\mathrm{},p_n`$. The others are the corresponding $`q^1,\mathrm{},q^n`$. Therefore we can arrange a local system of coordinates, such that exponential map gives linear geodesics on $`p`$’s directions. ∎

## 2. Poisson structure on strata

Let us first recall the construction of strata of coadjoint orbit from \[D1\]-\[D2\]. The orbit space $`𝒪(G)`$ is a disjoint union of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{2n}`$, each of which is a union of the coadjoint orbits of dimension $`2n`$, $`02ndimG`$. Denote

$$V_{2n}=_{dim𝒪=2n}𝒪.$$

Then $`V_{2n}`$ is the set of points of fixed rank $`2n`$ of the Poisson structure bilinear function

$$\{X,Y\}(F)=F,[X,Y].$$

Suppose that it is a foliation, at least it is true for $`V_{2n}`$, where $`2n`$ is the maximal dimension possible in $`𝒪(G)`$. It can be shown that the foliation $`V_{2n}`$ can be obtained from the group action of $`𝐑^{2n}`$ on $`V_{2n}`$. For this aim, let us consider a basis $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_{2n}`$ of the tangent space $`T_{F_𝒪}𝒪𝔤/𝔤_{F_𝒪}`$ at the point $`F_𝒪𝒪V_{2n}`$. We can define an action of $`^{2n}`$ on $`V_{2n}`$ as

$$(t_1,\mathrm{},t_{2n})\mathrm{exp}(t_1X_1)\mathrm{exp}(t_2X_2)\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}(t_{2n}X_{2n})F_𝒪.$$

We have therefore the Hamiltonian vector fields

$$\xi _k:=\frac{d}{dt}|_{t=0}\mathrm{exp}(t_kX_k)F,k=1,\mathrm{},2n$$

and their span $`_{2n}=\{\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{2n}\}`$ provides a tangent distribution. It is easy to show that we have therefore a measurable (in sense of A. Connes) foliation. One can therefore define also the Connes C\*-algebra $`C^{}(V_{2n},_{2n})`$, $`02ndimG`$. By introducing some technical condition in \[D1\], it is easy to reduce these C\*-algebras to extension of other ones, those are in form of tensor product $`C(X)𝒦(H)`$ of algebras of continuous functions on compacts and the elementary algebra $`𝒦(H)`$ of compact operators in a separable Hilbert space $`H`$. The strata of these kinds we means good strata. Another kind of good strata of coadjoint orbits are obtained from relation with the cases where the Gelfand-Kirillov conjecture was solved, for examples for connected and simply connected solvable Lie groups, see §5.

It is deduced from a result of Kontsevich that this Poisson structure can be quantized. This quantization however is formal. The question of convergence of the quantizing series is not clear. We show in this section that in the case of charts with the linear p’s impulse coordinates, the corresponding $``$-product is convergent.

In this kind of special local chart systems of Darboux coordinates it is easy to deduce existence local convergent $``$-products.

###### Theorem 2.1.

Locally on each coadjoint orbit, there exist a convergent $`star`$-product.

###### Proof.

Let us denote by $`_p^1`$ the Fourier inverse transformation on variables $`p`$’s and by $`_p`$ the Fourier transformation. Let us denote by $`PDO_G(𝒪)`$ the algebra of $`G`$-invariant pseudodifferential operators on $`𝒪`$. Locally, the Fourier transformation maps symbols (as function on local coordinates of $`𝒪`$) to $`G`$-invariant pseudodifferential operators and conversely, the inverse Fourier transformation maps the pseudodifferential operators to some specific classes of symbols. For two symbols $`f,g_p^1(PDO_G(𝒪))=𝐂_q(𝒪)`$, their Fourier images $`_p(f)`$ and $`_p(g)`$ are operators and we can define their operator product and then take the Fourier inverse transforms, as $``$-product

$$fg:=_p^1(_p(f)._p(g)).$$

So this product is again a symbol n the same class $`𝐂_q(𝒪)`$.

Because of existence of special coordinate systems, linear on $`p`$’s coordinates we can treat for the good strata in the same way as in the cases of exponential groups. And the formal series of $``$-product is convergent. ∎

###### Remark 2.2.

The proof could be also done in the same scheme as in exponential or compact cases, see \[AC1\]-\[AC2\].

Let us denote by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\pi _1(𝒪)`$ the fundamental group of the orbit. Our next step is to globally extend this kind of local $``$-products. Our idea is as follows. We lift this $``$-product to the universal covering of coadjoint orbits as some $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant $``$-products, globally extend them in virtue of the monodromy theorem and then pushdown to our orbits. We start with the following lemmas

###### Lemma 2.3.

There is one-to-one correspondence between $``$-products on Poisson manifolds and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant $``$-products on their universal coverings.

###### Proof.

By the lifting properties of the universal covering, we can easily lift each $``$-product on a Poisson manifold onto its universal covering. This correspondence is one-to-one. ∎

We use this lemma to describe existence of a $``$-product on coadjoint orbits.

###### Lemma 2.4.

On a universal covering, each local $``$-product can be uniquely extended to some global $``$-product on this covering.

###### Proof.

For local charts, there exist deformation quantization, as said above, $`fOp(f)`$ by using the formulas of Fedosov quantization. Also in the intersection of two local charts of coordinates $`(q,p)`$ and $`(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$, there is a symplectomorphism, namely $`\phi `$ such that

$$(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})=\phi (q,p).$$

Using the local oscilatting integrals and by compensating the local Maslov’s index obstacles, one can exactly construct the unitary operator $`U`$ such that

$$Op(f\phi )=U.Op(f).U^1,$$

see for example Fedosov’s book \[F\]. Because the universal coverings are simply connected, the extensions can be therefore produced because of Monodromy Theorem. ∎

###### Remark 2.5.

The operators “U” of this kind, depending on two local charts as parameters, provide some cohomological 2-class and therefore are classified by some $`2^{nd}`$ cohomology class with values in unitary operators. This reduces to some classification of all the possibilities of quantizations, upto the first cohomology classes, i.e. upto conjugations.

###### Theorem 2.6.

There exists a convergent $``$-product on each orbit, which is a symplectic leaf of the Poisson structure on each stratum of coadjoint orbits.

###### Proof.

From the description of the canonical coordinates in the previous section, we see that there exists at least a convergent $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant local $``$-product. This local $``$-product then extended to a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant global one on the universal covering, which produces a convergent $``$-product on the coadjoint orbits, following Lemmas 2.3,2.4. ∎

## 3. Star-product, Quantization and PBW Theorem

We use the constructed in the previous section $``$-product to provide an action of functions on the spaces of partially invariant partially holomorphic sections of the corresponding partially invariant holomorphically induced bundles associated with polarizations. It is possibles because the quantum induced bundles are locally trivial and the spaces of partially invariant partially holomorphic sections with section in Hilbert spaces locally are finitely generated modules over the algebras of quantizing functions, see \[D2\]. We use then the construction of Karabegov and Fedosov to obtain a Hopf \*-algebra of longitudinal pseudo-differential operators elliptic along the leaves of this measurable foliations. The main ingredient is that we use here the Poincaré-Birkhopf-Witt theorem to provide this quantization.

###### Theorem 3.1.

There is a natural deformation quantization with separation of variables, corresponding to the Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt Theorem for polarizations.

We have from the multidimensional quantization, see e.g. \[D1\]-\[D2\], $`𝔤PDO^1(𝒪)`$, $`X\widehat{X}`$. More precisely, Let us denote by $`PDO(𝒪)`$ the algebra of right $`G`$-invariant pseudo-differential operators on $`𝒪`$, i.e. the continuous maps from $`C^{\mathrm{}}(𝒪)`$ into itself not extending support. We also denote $`PDO^1(𝒪)`$ the Lie algebras of right $`G`$-invariant first order pseudo-differential operators. By the procedure of multidimensional quantization, there is a homomorphism of Lie algebras

$$𝔤PDO_G^1(𝒪)PDO_G(𝒪).$$

Following the universal property of $`U(𝔤)`$, there is a unique homomorphism of associative algebras $`U(𝔤)PDO_G(𝒪)`$making the following diagram commutative

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝔤& & PDO_G(𝒪)\\ & & & & \\ U(𝔤)& =& U(𝔤)\end{array}$$

Let us first describe the machinery applied in the method of Karabegov’s separation of variable. We use the idea about polarizations in multidimensional quantization, \[D2\].

Let us recall the root decomposition

$$𝔤=𝔫_{}𝔞𝔫_+.$$

If $`𝔭`$ is a complex polarization, then from definition we have $`𝔪_𝐂=𝔭\overline{𝔭},`$ $`𝔥_𝐂=𝔭\overline{𝔭},`$ where $`𝔪=𝔤(𝔭\overline{𝔭})`$ and $`𝔥=𝔤(𝔭\overline{𝔭}).`$ The quotients subspaces $`𝔭/𝔥_𝐂`$ and $`\overline{𝔭}/𝔥_𝐂`$ are included in $`𝔪`$ as linear subspaces (not necessarily to be sub-algebras). Let us fix some (non-canonical) inclusions. Let us denote by $`U(𝔭/𝔥_𝐂)`$ (resp. $`U(\overline{𝔭}/𝔥_𝐂)`$) the sub-algebra, generated by elements from $`𝔭/𝔥_𝐂𝔪_𝐂`$ (resp. $`𝔭/𝔥_𝐂𝔪_𝐂`$) in the universal algebra $`U(𝔪)`$. We have therefore an analog of the well-known Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt theorem.

###### Theorem 3.2 (Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt Theorem).

If $`𝔭`$ is as polarization, then

$$U(𝔪_𝐂)U(𝔭/𝔥_𝐂)U(𝔥_𝐂)U(\overline{𝔭}/𝔥_𝐂)$$

###### Proof.

Let us fix in a basis each of $`𝔭/𝔥_𝐂`$, $`𝔥_𝐂`$ and $`\overline{𝔭}/𝔥_𝐂`$. We have therefore a basis of $`𝔪_𝐂=𝔭/𝔥_𝐂𝔥_𝐂\overline{𝔭}/𝔥_𝐂`$. Our theorem is therefore deduced from the original Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt Theorem \[P\]. ∎

It is easy to see that by this reason, on the variety $`M/H`$ there is a natural complex structure and therefore on coadjoint orbits exists some partial complex structure. We use this complex structure and this Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt theorem to do a separation of variables on $`M`$ and apply the machinery of Karabegov.

###### Remark 3.3.

Because of BKW, $`U(𝔤)U(𝔭_𝒪/𝔥_𝒪)U(𝔥_𝒪)U(\overline{𝔭}_𝒪/𝔥_𝒪)`$ and because of this our quantizing map is coincided with that one used by Karabegov in the quantization with separation of variables in case of coadjoint orbits with totally complex polarizations $`𝔤_𝐂=𝔪_𝐂=𝔭\overline{𝔭}`$.

###### Theorem 3.4.

In the case of totally complex polarizable coadjoint orbits, the quantization map from the theorem 3.1 is coincided with the rule of Karabegov’s quantization with separation of variables.

## 4. Representations

Let us consider now a continuous fields of $`(\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_𝒪,F_𝒪)`$-polarizations $`(𝔭_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})`$ satisfying the Pukanszky condition. On one hand side, we can use the multidimensional quantization procedure to obtain irreducible unitary representations $`\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪=Ind(G;𝔭_𝒪,H_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})`$ of $`G`$, \[D2\]. On other hand side, we can use $``$-product construction to provide the representations $`\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪:\stackrel{~}{X|_\mathrm{\Omega }}\widehat{\mathrm{}}_X`$ of the quantum strata $`𝐂_q(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. We’d like to show we have the same one.

###### Definition 4.1.

Quantum coadjoint orbit $`𝐂_q(𝒪)`$ is defined as the Hopf algebra of symbols of differential operators $`U_{q,𝒪}(𝔤)=U(𝔤)|_𝒪`$. The homomorphism $`Q:U(𝔤)PDO_G(𝒪)`$ is defined to be the second quantization homomorphism.

###### Theorem 4.2.

The representation of the Lie algebra obtained from $``$-product is equal to the representations obtained from the multidimensional quantization procedure.

###### Proof.

Let us recall \[D2\], that

$$Lie_XInd(G;𝔭_𝒪,H_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})\widehat{X}.$$

From the construction of quantization map

$$U(𝔤)PDO_G(𝒪)$$

as the map arising from the universal property the map $`𝔤PDO_G^1(𝒪),`$

$$\widehat{\mathrm{}}_X=Op(\stackrel{~}{X})=\widehat{X},X𝔤=Lie(G).$$

The associated representation of $`𝐂_q(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ is the solution of the Cauchy problem for the differential equation

$$\frac{}{t}U(t,q,p)=\mathrm{}_XU(t,q,p),$$

$$U(0,q,p)=Id.$$

The solution of this problem is uniquely defined. ∎

## 5. Oscillating Fourier integrals

Let us in this section consider the good family of coadjoint orbits arising from the solved cases of Gelfand-Kirillov Conjecture. The results in this section is revised from the \[D3\].

Consider a connected and simply connected Lie group $`G`$ with Lie algebra $`𝔤`$.

###### Theorem 5.1.

There exists a $`G`$-invariant Zariski open set $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and a covering $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, with natural action of $`G`$ such that for each continuous field of polarizations $`(𝔭_𝒪,H_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})`$, $`𝒪\mathrm{\Omega }/G`$, the Lie derivative of the direct integral of representations arized from the multidimensional quantization procedure is equivalent to the tensor product of the Schrödinger representation $`\mathrm{\Pi }=Sch`$ of the Gelfand-Kirillov basis of the enveloping field and a continuous field of trivial representations $`\{V_𝒪\}`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$.

###### Proof.

Our proof is rather long and consists of several steps:

1. We apply the construction of Nghiem \[Ng5\] to the solvable radical $`{}_{}{}^{r}𝔤`$ of $`𝔤`$ to obtain the Zariski open set $`{}_{}{}^{r}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in $`{}_{}{}^{r}𝔤_{}^{}`$ and its covering $`{}_{}{}^{r}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$.

2. The general case is reduced to the semi-simple case $`{}_{}{}^{s}𝔤`$, see (\[nghien1\], Thm. C). Denote by $`{}_{}{}^{s}G`$ the corresponding analytic subgroup of $`G`$.

3. Take the Zariski open set $`𝒜_s𝒫(^sG)`$ of admissible and well-polarizable strongly regular functionals from $`{}_{}{}^{s}𝔤_{}^{}`$ and its covering $`_s(^sG)`$ via Duflo’s construction \[Du1\].

4. The desired $`G`$-invariant Zariski open set and its covering are the corresponding Cartesian products

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=𝒜_s𝒫(^sG)\times {}_{}{}^{r}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{0}\times {}_{}{}^{r}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{1}\times \mathrm{}\times {}_{}{}^{r}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{k}$$

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}=_s(^sG)\times {}_{}{}^{r}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }^0}\times {}_{}{}^{r}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }^1}\times \mathrm{}\times {}_{}{}^{r}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{}^{k}$$

5.

###### Lemma 5.2.

There exists a continuous field of polarizations of type $`(𝔭_𝒪,H_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})`$, for each $`𝒪\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}/G`$.

6.

###### Lemma 5.3.

The Lie derivative commutes with direct integrals, i.e.

$$_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}/G}^{}Ind(G;𝔭_𝒪,H_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})𝑑𝒪=_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}/G}^{}Ind(G;𝔭_𝒪,H_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})𝑑𝒪.$$

7.

###### Lemma 5.4.

The restriction of the Schrödinger representation to coadjoint orbits provides a continuous field of polarizations. In particular,

$$D\sigma _{0,𝒪}=\rho _𝒪|_{𝔭_𝒪𝔤}multSch_𝒪.$$

###### Theorem 5.5.

1. There exists an operator-valued phase $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t,z,x)`$ and an operator-valued amplitude $`a(t,z,x,y,\xi )`$ extended from the expression

$$\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Phi }(t,z,y)+\sqrt{1}\xi (g(t)xx))$$

in such a fashion that the action of the representation

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪=Ind(G;𝔭_𝒪,H_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})$$

can be expressed as an oscilatting Fourier integral

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(g(t))f(z,x)=c._{𝐑^M}_{𝐑^M}a(t,z,x,y,\xi )\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{1}\xi (xy))f(z,y)𝑑y𝑑\xi ,$$

where $`c`$ is some constant.

2. For each function $`\phi `$ of Schwartz class $`𝒮(G)`$ satisfying the compactness criteria \[D2\] in every induction step \[Li\], \[D2\], the operator $`\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(\phi )`$ is of trace class and its action can be expressed as the oscilatting Fourier integral

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(\phi )f(z,x)=const._{𝐑^M}_{𝐑^M}(_𝐑^{\mathrm{}}a(t,z,x,y,\xi )\phi (g(t))dt)\times $$

$$\times \mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{1}\xi (xy))f(z,y)dyd\xi .$$

Hence, its trace is

$$tr\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(\phi )=const._{𝐑^M}_{𝐑^M}(_𝐑^{\mathrm{}}a(t,z,x,x,\xi )\phi (g(t))𝑑t)𝑑x𝑑\xi $$

###### Proof.

The proof also consists of several steps:

1. From \[D1\] \- \[D2\] and \[Du1\] it is easy to see obtain a slight unipotent modification( i.e. a reduction to the unipotent radical) of the multidimensional quantization procedure. We refer the reader to \[TrV\]-\[TrV2\], and \[TDV\] for a detailed exposition.

2. From the unitary representations $`\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪=Ind(G;𝔭_𝒪,H_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})`$ in the unipotent context and its differential $`\pi _𝒪=D\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(G;𝔭_𝒪,H_𝒪,\rho _𝒪,\sigma _{0,𝒪})`$, it is easy to select the constant term and the vector fields term, (see \[Ng4\] for the simplest case and notations),

$$\pi (L)=\pi _c(L)+\pi _d(L),\pi _s(L)=a_0(L,x),$$

$$\pi _d(L)=(L)=\underset{k}{}a_k(L)\frac{}{x_k}.$$

The operator-valued partial (i.e. depending on $`L`$) phase

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_L(t_L,z,x)=_0^{t_L}a_0(z,g(s)x)𝑑s.$$

The phase $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t,z,x)`$ is the sum of the partial phases, on which the one-parameter group $`g_L(s)`$ operates by translations for all the factors on the left of $`g_L(t_L)`$ in the ordered product

$$g(t)=\underset{L}{}g_L(t_L).$$

It is easy then to see that our induced representations $`\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪`$ act as follows

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(g(t))f(z,x)=\sigma _{0,𝒪}(t,z,x)f(z,g(t)x).$$

3. It suffices now to apply the Fourier transforms

$$f(z,x)=(2\pi )^M_{𝐑^M}_{𝐑^M}\mathrm{exp}\{\sqrt{1}\xi (xy)\}f(z,y)𝑑y𝑑\xi $$

to the function $`\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(g(t))f(z,x)`$ to obtain

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(g(t))f(z,x)=$$

$$(2\pi )^M_{𝐑^M}_{𝐑^M}a(t,z,x,y,\xi )\mathrm{exp}\{\sqrt{1}\xi (xy)\}f(z,y)𝑑y𝑑\xi ,$$

where the amplitude $`a(t,z,x,y,\xi )`$ is the natural extension of the expression

$$\mathrm{exp}\{\mathrm{\Phi }(t,z,y)+\sqrt{1}\xi (g(t)xx)\}$$

in the correspondence with the fields of polarizations. Hence for each $`\phi 𝒮(G)`$,

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(\phi )f(z,x)=(2\pi )^M_{𝐑^M}_{𝐑^M}(_𝐑^{\mathrm{}}a(t,z,x,y\xi )\phi (g(t))dt)\times $$

$$\times \mathrm{exp}\{\sqrt{1}\xi (xy)\}f(z,y)dyd\xi .$$

Remark that the integral $`_𝐑^{\mathrm{}}a(t,z,x,y,\xi )\phi (g(t))𝑑t`$ is just a type of Feynman path integrals.

4.

###### Lemma 5.6.

If in every repeated induction step, see \[Li\], \[D2\], $`\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(\phi )`$ satisfies the compactness criteria, then the operator $`\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(\phi )`$ is trace class and hence

$$tr\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒪(\phi )=(2\pi )^M_{𝐑^M}_{𝐑^M}tr(_𝐑^{\mathrm{}}a(t,z,x,x,\xi )\phi (g(t))dtdxd\xi .$$

The proof of the theorem is therefore achieved. ∎

## 6. Examples

In this section, we illustrate the main ideas in examples.

### 6.1. $`\overline{MD}`$-groups

We expose in this subsection our joint works with Nguyen Viet Hai \[DH1\]-\[DH2\].

#### 6.1.1. The group of affine transformations of the real straight line

We refer the reader to the work \[DH1\] for a detailed exposition with complete proof.

Canonical coordinates on the upper half-planes. Recall that the Lie algebra $`𝔤=aff(𝐑)`$ of affine transformations of the real straight line is described as follows, see for example \[D2\]: The Lie group $`Aff(𝐑)`$ of affine transformations of type

$$x𝐑ax+b,\text{ for some parameters }a,b𝐑,a0.$$

It is well-known that this group $`Aff(𝐑)`$ is a two dimensional Lie group which is isomorphic to the group of matrices

$$Aff(𝐑)\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)|a,b𝐑,a0\}.$$

We consider its connected component

$$G=Aff_0(𝐑)=\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)|a,b𝐑,a>0\}$$

of identity element. Its Lie algebra is

$$𝔤=aff(𝐑)\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \beta \\ 0& 0\end{array}\right)|\alpha ,\beta 𝐑\}$$

admits a basis of two generators $`X,Y`$ with the only nonzero Lie bracket $`[X,Y]=Y`$, i.e.

$$𝔤=aff(𝐑)\{\alpha X+\beta Y|[X,Y]=Y,\alpha ,\beta 𝐑\}.$$

The co-adjoint action of $`G`$ on $`𝔤^{}`$ is given (see e.g. \[AC2\], \[kirillov1\]) by

$$K(g)F,Z=F,Ad(g^1)Z,F𝔤^{},gG\text{ and }Z𝔤.$$

Denote the co-adjoint orbit of $`G`$ in $`𝔤`$, passing through $`F`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_F=K(G)F:=\{K(g)F|FG\}.$$

Because the group $`G=Aff_0(𝐑)`$ is exponential (see \[D2\]), for $`F𝔤^{}=aff(𝐑)^{}`$, we have

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_F=\{K(\mathrm{exp}(U)F|Uaff(𝐑)\}.$$

It is easy to see that

$$K(\mathrm{exp}U)F,Z=F,\mathrm{exp}(ad_U)Z.$$

It is easy therefore to see that

$$K(\mathrm{exp}U)F=F,\mathrm{exp}(ad_U)XX^{}+F,\mathrm{exp}(ad_U)YY^{}.$$

For a general element $`U=\alpha X+\beta Y𝔤`$, we have

$$\mathrm{exp}(ad_U)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{n!}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ \beta & \alpha \end{array}\right)^n=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ L& e^\alpha \end{array}\right),$$

where $`L=\alpha +\beta +\frac{\alpha }{\beta }(1e^\beta )`$. This means that

$$K(\mathrm{exp}U)F=(\lambda +\mu L)X^{}+(\mu e^\alpha )Y^{}.$$

From this formula one deduces \[D2\] the following description of all co-adjoint orbits of $`G`$ in $`𝔤^{}`$:

* If $`\mu =0`$, each point $`(x=\lambda ,y=0)`$ on the abscissa ordinate corresponds to a 0-dimensional co-adjoint orbit

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =\{\lambda X^{}\},\lambda 𝐑.$$
* For $`\mu 0`$, there are two 2-dimensional co-adjoint orbits: the upper half-plane $`\{(\lambda ,\mu )|\lambda ,\mu 𝐑,\mu >0\}`$ corresponds to the co-adjoint orbit

(1)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }_+:=\{F=(\lambda +\mu L)X^{}+(\mu e^\alpha )Y^{}|\mu >0\},$$

and the lower half-plane $`\{(\lambda ,\mu )|\lambda ,\mu 𝐑,\mu <0\}`$ corresponds to the co-adjoint orbit

(2)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{}:=\{F=(\lambda +\mu L)X^{}+(\mu e^\alpha )Y^{}|\mu <0\}.$$

We shall work from now on for the fixed co-adjoint orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$. The case of the co-adjoint orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$ is similarly treated. First we study the geometry of this orbit and introduce some canonical coordinates in it. It is well-known from the orbit method \[K\] that the Lie algebra $`𝔤=aff(𝐑)`$, realized by the complete right-invariant Hamiltonian vector fields on co-adjoint orbits $`\mathrm{\Omega }_FG_FG`$ with flat (co-adjoint) action of the Lie group $`G=Aff_0(𝐑)`$. On the orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$ we choose a fix point $`F=Y^{}`$. It is well-known from the orbit method that we can choose an arbitrary point $`F`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_F`$. It is easy to see that the stabilizer of this (and therefore of any) point is trivial $`G_F=\{e\}`$. We identify therefore $`G`$ with $`G_Y^{}G`$. There is a natural diffeomorphism $`Id_𝐑\times \mathrm{exp}(.)`$ from the standard symplectic space $`𝐑^2`$ with symplectic 2-form $`dpdq`$ in canonical Darboux $`(p,q)`$-coordinates, onto the upper half-plane $`𝐇_+𝐑𝐑_+`$ with coordinates $`(p,e^q)`$, which is, from the above coordinate description, also diffeomorphic to the co-adjoint orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$. We can use therefore $`(p,q)`$ as the standard canonical Darboux coordinates in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^{}`$. There are also non-canonical Darboux coordinates $`(x,y)=(p,e^q)`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^{}`$. We show now that in these coordinates $`(x,y)`$, the Kirillov form looks like $`\omega _Y^{}(x,y)=\frac{1}{y}dxdy`$, but in the canonical Darboux coordinates $`(p,q)`$, the Kirillov form is just the standard symplectic form $`dpdq`$. This means that there are symplectomorphisms between the standard symplectic space $`𝐑^2,dpdq)`$, the upper half-plane $`(𝐇_+,\frac{1}{y}dxdy)`$ and the co-adjoint orbit $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^{},\omega _Y^{})`$. Each element $`Z𝔤`$ can be considered as a linear functional $`\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ on co-adjoint orbits, as subsets of $`𝔤^{}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{Z}(F):=F,Z`$. It is well-known that this linear function is just the Hamiltonian function associated with the Hamiltonian vector field $`\xi _Z`$, which represents $`Z𝔤`$ following the formula

$$(\xi _Zf)(x):=\frac{d}{dt}f(x\mathrm{exp}(tZ))|_{t=0},fC^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega }_+).$$

The Kirillov form $`\omega _F`$ is defined by the formula

(3)
$$\omega _F(\xi _Z,\xi _T)=F,[Z,T],Z,T𝔤=aff(𝐑).$$

This form defines the symplectic structure and the Poisson brackets on the co-adjoint orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$. For the derivative along the direction $`\xi _Z`$ and the Poisson bracket we have relation $`\xi _Z(f)=\{\stackrel{~}{Z},f\},fC^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega }_+)`$. It is well-known in differential geometry that the correspondence $`Z\xi _Z,Z𝔤`$ defines a representation of our Lie algebra by vector fields on co-adjoint orbits. If the action of $`G`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$ is flat \[D2\], we have the second Lie algebra homomorphism from strictly Hamiltonian right-invariant vector fields into the Lie algebra of smooth functions on the orbit with respect to the associated Poisson brackets.

Denote by $`\psi `$ the indicated symplectomorphism from $`𝐑^2`$ onto $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$

$$(p,q)𝐑^2\psi (p,q):=(p,e^q)\mathrm{\Omega }_+$$

###### Proposition 6.1.

1. Hamiltonian function $`f_Z=\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ in canonical coordinates $`(p,q)`$ of the orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$ is of the form

$$\stackrel{~}{Z}\psi (p,q)=\alpha p+\beta e^q,\text{ if }Z=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \beta \\ 0& 0\end{array}\right).$$

2. In the canonical coordinates $`(p,q)`$ of the orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$, the Kirillov form $`\omega _Y^{}`$ is just the standard form $`\omega =dpdq`$.

Computation of generators $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}_Z`$ Let us denote by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ the 2-tensor associated with the Kirillov standard form $`\omega =dpdq`$ in canonical Darboux coordinates. We use also the multi-index notation. Let us consider the well-known Moyal $``$-product of two smooth functions $`u,vC^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^2)`$, defined by

$$uv=u.v+\underset{r1}{}\frac{1}{r!}(\frac{1}{2i})^rP^r(u,v),$$

where

$$P^r(u,v):=\mathrm{\Lambda }^{i_1j_1}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{i_2j_2}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{i_rj_r}_{i_1i_2\mathrm{}i_r}u_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_r}v,$$

with

$$_{i_1i_2\mathrm{}i_r}:=\frac{^r}{x^{i_1}\mathrm{}x^{i_r}},x:=(p,q)=(p_1,\mathrm{},p_n,q^1,\mathrm{},q^n)$$

as multi-index notation. It is well-known that this series converges in the Schwartz distribution spaces $`𝒮(𝐑^n)`$. We apply this to the special case $`n=1`$. In our case we have only $`x=(x^1,x^2)=(p,q)`$.

###### Proposition 6.2.

In the above mentioned canonical Darboux coordinates $`(p,q)`$ on the orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$, the Moyl $``$-product satisfies the relation

$$i\stackrel{~}{Z}i\stackrel{~}{T}i\stackrel{~}{T}i\stackrel{~}{Z}=i\stackrel{~}{[Z,T]},Z,Taff(𝐑).$$

Consequently, to each adapted chart $`\psi `$ in the sense of \[AC2\], we associate a $`G`$-covariant $``$-product.

###### Proposition 6.3 (see \[G\]).

Let $``$ be a formal differentiable $``$-product on $`C^{\mathrm{}}(M,𝐑)`$, which is covariant under $`G`$. Then there exists a representation $`\tau `$ of $`G`$ in $`AutN[[\nu ]]`$ such that

$$\tau (g)(uv)=\tau (g)u\tau (g)v.$$

Let us denote by $`_pu`$ the partial Fourier transform \[meisevogt\] of the function $`u`$ from the variable $`p`$ to the variable $`x`$, i.e.

$$_p(u)(x,q):=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}_𝐑e^{ipx}u(p,q)𝑑p.$$

Let us denote by $`_p^1(u)(x,q)`$ the inverse Fourier transform.

###### Lemma 6.4.

1. $`_p_p^1(p.u)=i_p^1(x.u)`$ ,

2. $`_p(v)=i_x_p(v)`$ ,

3. $`P^k(\stackrel{~}{Z},_p^1(u))=(1)^k\beta e^q\frac{^k_p^1(u)}{^kp},\text{ with }k2.`$

For each $`Zaff(𝐑)`$, the corresponding Hamiltonian function is $`\stackrel{~}{Z}=\alpha p+\beta e^q`$ and we can consider the operator $`\mathrm{}_Z`$ acting on dense subspace $`L^2(𝐑^2,\frac{dpdq}{2\pi })^{\mathrm{}}`$ of smooth functions by left $``$-multiplication by $`i\stackrel{~}{Z}`$, i.e. $`\mathrm{}_Z(u)=i\stackrel{~}{Z}u`$. It is then continuated to the whole space $`L^2(𝐑^2,\frac{dpdq}{2\pi })`$. It is easy to see that, because of the relation in Proposition (6.2), the correspondence $`Zaff(𝐑)\mathrm{}_Z=i\stackrel{~}{Z}.`$ is a representation of the Lie algebra $`aff(𝐑)`$ on the space $`N[[\frac{i}{2}]]`$ of formal power series in the parameter $`\nu =\frac{i}{2}`$ with coefficients in $`N=C^{\mathrm{}}(M,𝐑)`$, see e.g. \[G\] for more detail.

We study now the convergence of the formal power series. In order to do this, we look at the $``$-product of $`i\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ as the $``$-product of symbols and define the differential operators corresponding to $`i\stackrel{~}{Z}`$. It is easy to see that the resulting correspondence is a representation of $`𝔤`$ by pseudo-differential operators.

###### Proposition 6.5.

For each $`Zaff(𝐑)`$ and for each compactly supported $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ function $`uC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐑^2)`$, we have

$$\widehat{\mathrm{}}_Z(u):=_p\mathrm{}_Z_p^1(u)=\alpha (\frac{1}{2}_q_x)u+i\beta e^{q\frac{x}{2}}u.$$

###### Remark 6.6.

Setting new variables $`s=q\frac{x}{2}`$, $`t=q+\frac{x}{2}`$, we have

(4)
$$\widehat{\mathrm{}}_Z(u)=\alpha \frac{u}{s}+i\beta e^su,$$

e.i.

$$\widehat{\mathrm{}}_Z=\alpha \frac{}{s}+i\beta e^s,$$

which provides a representation of the Lie algebra $`aff(𝐑)`$.

The associate irreducible unitary representations

Our aim in this section is to exponentiate the obtained representation $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}_Z`$ of the Lie algebra $`aff(𝐑)`$ to the corresponding representation of the Lie group $`Aff_0(𝐑)`$. We shall prove that the result is exactly the irreducible unitary representation $`T_{\mathrm{\Omega }_+}`$ obtained from the orbit method or Mackey small subgroup method applied to this group $`Aff(𝐑)`$. Let us recall first the well-known list of all the irreducible unitary representations of the group of affine transformation of the real straight line.

###### Theorem 6.7 (\[GN\]).

Every irreducible unitary representation of the group $`Aff(𝐑)`$ of all the affine transformations of the real straight line, up to unitary equivalence, is equivalent to one of the pairwise nonequivalent representations:

* the infinite dimensional representation $`S`$, realized in the space $`L^2(𝐑^{},\frac{dy}{|y|})`$, where $`𝐑^{}=𝐑\{0\}`$ and is defined by the formula

$$(S(g)f)(y):=e^{iby}f(ay),\text{ where }g=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right),$$
* the representation $`U_\lambda ^\epsilon `$, where $`\epsilon =0,1`$, $`\lambda 𝐑`$, realized in the 1-dimensional Hilbert space $`𝐂^1`$ and is given by the formula

$$U_\lambda ^\epsilon (g)=|a|^{i\lambda }(sgna)^\epsilon .$$

Let us consider now the connected component $`G=Aff_0(𝐑)`$. The irreducible unitary representations can be obtained easily from the orbit method machinery.

###### Theorem 6.8.

The representation $`\mathrm{exp}(\widehat{\mathrm{}}_Z)`$ of the group $`G=Aff_0(𝐑)`$ is exactly the irreducible unitary representation $`T_{\mathrm{\Omega }_+}`$ of $`G=Aff_0(𝐑)`$ associated following the orbit method construction, to the orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_+`$, which is the upper half-plane $`𝐇𝐑𝐑^{}`$, i. e. +

$$(\mathrm{exp}(\widehat{\mathrm{}}_Z)f)(y)=(T_{\mathrm{\Omega }_+}(g)f)(y)=e^{iby}f(ay),fL^2(𝐑^{},\frac{dy}{|y|}),$$

where $`g=\mathrm{exp}Z=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).`$

By analogy, we have also

###### Theorem 6.9.

The representation $`\mathrm{exp}(\widehat{\mathrm{}}_Z)`$ of the group $`G=Aff_0(𝐑)`$ is exactly the irreducible unitary representation $`T_\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$ of $`G=Aff_0(𝐑)`$ associated following the orbit method construction, to the orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$, which is the lower half-plane $`𝐇𝐑𝐑^{}`$, i. e.

$$(\mathrm{exp}(\widehat{\mathrm{}}_Z)f)(y)=(T_\mathrm{\Omega }_{}(g)f)(y)=e^{iby}f(ay),fL^2(𝐑^{},\frac{dy}{|y|}),$$

where $`g=\mathrm{exp}Z=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).`$

###### Remark 6.10.

1. We have demonstrated how all the irreducible unitary representation of the connected group of affine transformations could be obtained from deformation quantization. It is reasonable to refer to the algebras of functions on co-adjoint orbits with this $``$-product as quantum ones.

2. In a forthcoming work, we shall do the same calculation for the group of affine transformations of the complex straight line $`𝐂`$. This achieves the description of quantum $`\overline{MD}`$ co-adjoint orbits, see \[dndiep\] for definition of $`\overline{MD}`$ Lie algebras.

#### 6.1.2. The group of affine transformations of the complex straight line

Recall that the Lie algebra $`𝔤=aff(𝐂)`$ of affine transformations of the complex straight line is described as follows, see \[D\].

It is well-known that the group $`Aff(𝐂)`$ is a four (real) dimensional Lie group which is isomorphism to the group of matrices:

$$Aff(𝐂)\left\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\right|a,b𝐂,a0\}$$

The most easy method is to consider $`X`$,$`Y`$ as complex generators, $`X=X_1+iX_2`$ and $`Y=Y_1+iY_2`$. Then from the relation $`[X,Y]=Y`$, we get$`[X_1,Y_1][X_2,Y_2]+i([X_1Y_2]+[X_2,Y_1])=Y_1+iY_2`$. This mean that the Lie algebra $`aff(𝐂)`$ is a real 4-dimensional Lie algebra, having 4 generators with the only nonzero Lie brackets: $`[X_1,Y_1][X_2,Y_2]=Y_1`$; $`[X_2,Y_1]+[X_1,Y_2]=Y_2`$ and we can choose another basic noted again by the same letters to have more clear Lie brackets of this Lie algebra:

$$[X_1,Y_1]=Y_1;[X_1,Y_2]=Y_2;[X_2,Y_1]=Y_2;[X_2,Y_2]=Y_1$$

###### Remark 6.11.

The exponential map

$$\mathrm{exp}:𝐂𝐂^{}:=𝐂\backslash \{0\}$$

giving by $`ze^z`$ is just the covering map and therefore the universal covering of $`C^{}`$ is $`\stackrel{~}{𝐂}^{}𝐂`$. As a consequence one deduces that

$$\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂)𝐂𝐂\{(z,w)|z,w𝐂\}$$

with the following multiplication law:

$$(z,w)(z^{^{}},w^{^{}}):=(z+z^{},w+e^zw^{})$$

###### Remark 6.12.

The co-adjoint orbit of $`\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂)`$ in $`𝔤^{}`$ passing through $`F𝔤^{}`$ is denoted by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_F:=K(\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂))F=\{K(g)F|g\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂)\}$$

Then, (see \[D\]):

1. Each point $`(\alpha ,0,0,\delta )`$ is 0-dimensional co-adjoint orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{(\alpha ,0,0,\delta )}`$
2. The open set $`\beta ^2+\gamma ^2`$ 0 is the single 4-dimensional co-adjoint orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_F=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\beta ^2+\gamma ^20}`$. We shall also use $`\mathrm{\Omega }_F`$ in form $`\mathrm{\Omega }_F𝐂\times 𝐂^{}`$.

###### Remark 6.13.

Let us denote:

$$𝐇_k=\{w=q_1+iq_2𝐂|\mathrm{}<q_1<+\mathrm{};2k\pi <q_2<2k\pi +2\pi \};k=0,\pm 1,\mathrm{}$$

$$L=\{\rho e^{i\phi }𝐂|0<\rho <+\mathrm{};\phi =0\}\text{ and }𝐂_k=𝐂\backslash L$$

is a univalent sheet of the Riemann surface of the complex variable multi-valued analytic function $`Ln(w)`$, ($`k=0,\pm 1,\mathrm{}`$) Then there is a natural diffeomorphism $`w𝐇_ke^w𝐂_k`$ with each $`k=0,\pm 1,\mathrm{}.`$ Now consider the map:

$$𝐂\times 𝐂\mathrm{\Omega }_F=𝐂\times 𝐂^{}$$

$$(z,w)(z,e^w),$$

with a fixed $`k𝐙`$. We have a local diffeomorphism

$$\phi _k:𝐂\times 𝐇_k𝐂\times 𝐂_k$$

$$(z,w)(z,e^w)$$

This diffeomorphism $`\phi _k`$ will be needed in the all sequel.

On $`𝐂\times 𝐇_k`$ we have the natural symplectic form

(5)
$$\omega =\frac{1}{2}[dzdw+d\overline{z}d\overline{w}],$$

induced from $`𝐂^2`$. Put $`z=p_1+ip_2,w=q_1+iq_2`$ and $`(x^1,x^2,x^3,x^4)=(p_1,q_1,p_2,q_2)𝐑^4`$, then

$$\omega =dp_1dq_1dp_2dq_2.$$

The corresponding symplectic matrix of $`\omega `$ is

$$=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 1& 0& 0\\ 1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\end{array}\right)\text{ and }^1=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 1& 0& 0\\ 1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\end{array}\right)$$

We have therefore the Poisson brackets of functions as follows. With each $`f,g𝐂^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$

$$\{f,g\}=^{ij}\frac{f}{x^i}\frac{g}{x^j}=^{12}\frac{f}{p_1}\frac{g}{q_1}+^{21}\frac{f}{q_1}\frac{g}{p_1}+^{34}\frac{f}{p_2}\frac{g}{q_2}+^{43}\frac{f}{q_2}\frac{g}{p_2}=$$

$$=\frac{f}{p_1}\frac{g}{q_1}\frac{f}{q_1}\frac{g}{p_1}\frac{f}{p_2}\frac{g}{q_2}+\frac{f}{q_2}\frac{g}{p_2}=$$

$$=2\left[\frac{f}{z}\frac{g}{w}\frac{f}{w}\frac{g}{z}+\frac{f}{\overline{z}}\frac{g}{\overline{w}}\frac{f}{\overline{w}}\frac{g}{\overline{z}}\right]$$

###### Proposition 6.14.

Fixing the local diffeomorphism $`\phi _k(k𝐙)`$, we have:

1. For any element $`Aaff(𝐂)`$, the corresponding Hamiltonian function $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ in local coordinates $`(z,w)`$ of the orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_F`$ is of the form

$$\stackrel{~}{A}\phi _k(z,w)=\frac{1}{2}[\alpha z+\beta e^w+\overline{\alpha }\overline{z}+\overline{\beta }e^{\overline{w}}]$$
2. In local coordinates $`(z,w)`$ of the orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_F`$, the symplectic Kirillov form $`\omega _F`$ is just the standard form (1).

Computation of Operators $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}_A^{(k)}`$.

###### Proposition 6.15.

With $`A,Baff(𝐂)`$, the Moyal $``$-product satisfies the relation:

(6)
$$i\stackrel{~}{A}i\stackrel{~}{B}i\stackrel{~}{B}i\stackrel{~}{A}=i[\stackrel{~}{A,B}]$$

For each $`A\text{aff}(𝐂`$), the corresponding Hamiltonian function is

$$\stackrel{~}{A}=\frac{1}{2}[\alpha z+\beta e^w+\overline{\alpha }\overline{z}+\overline{\beta }e^{\overline{w}}]$$

and we can consider the operator $`\mathrm{}_A^{(k)}`$ acting on dense subspace $`L^2(𝐑^2\times (𝐑^2)^{},\frac{dp_1dq_1dp_2dq_2}{(2\pi )^2})^{\mathrm{}}`$ of smooth functions by left $``$-multiplication by $`i\stackrel{~}{A}`$, i.e: $`\mathrm{}_A^{(k)}(f)=i\stackrel{~}{A}f`$. Because of the relation in Proposition 3.1, we have

###### Corollary 6.16.

(7)
$$\mathrm{}_{[A,B]}^{(k)}=\mathrm{}_A^{(k)}\mathrm{}_B^{(k)}\mathrm{}_B^{(k)}\mathrm{}_A^{(k)}:=[\mathrm{}_A^{(k)},\mathrm{}_B^{(k)}]^{}$$

From this it is easy to see that, the correspondence $`Aaff(𝐂)\mathrm{}_A^{(k)}=`$i$`\stackrel{~}{A}`$. is a representation of the Lie algebra $`aff(𝐂`$) on the space N$`\left[[\frac{i}{2}]\right]`$ of formal power series, see \[G\] for more detail.

Now, let us denote $`_z`$(f) the partial Fourier transform of the function f from the variable $`z=p_1+ip_2`$ to the variable $`\xi =\xi _1+i\xi _2`$, i.e:

$$_z(f)(\xi ,w)=\frac{1}{2\pi }_{R^2}e^{iRe(\xi \overline{z})}f(z,w)𝑑p_1𝑑p_2$$

Let us denote by

$$_z^1(f)(\xi ,w)=\frac{1}{2\pi }_{R^2}e^{iRe(\xi \overline{z})}f(\xi ,w)𝑑\xi _1𝑑\xi _2$$

the inverse Fourier transform.

###### Lemma 6.17.

Putting $`g=g(z,w)=_z^1(f)(z,w)`$ we have:

1. $$_zg=\frac{i}{2}\overline{\xi }g;_z^rg=(\frac{i}{2}\overline{\xi })^rg,r=2,3,$$
2. $$_{\overline{z}}g=\frac{i}{2}\xi g;_{\overline{z}}^rg=(\frac{i}{2}\xi )^rg,r=2,3,$$
3. $$_z(zg)=2i_{\overline{\xi }}_z(g)=2i_{\overline{\xi }}f;_z(\overline{z}g)=2i_\xi _z(g)=2i_\xi f$$
4. $$_wg=_w(_z^1(f))=_{z}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}(_wf);_{\overline{w}}g=_{\overline{w}}(_z^1(f)=_{z}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}(_{\overline{w}}f)$$

We also need another Lemma which will be used in the sequel.

###### Lemma 6.18.

With $`g=_z^1`$$`(f)(`$$`z,w)`$, we have:

1. $$_z(P^0(\stackrel{~}{A},g))=i(\alpha _{\overline{\xi }}+\overline{\alpha }_\xi )f+\frac{1}{2}\beta e^wf+\frac{1}{2}\overline{\beta }e^{\overline{w}}f.$$
2. $$_z(P^1(\stackrel{~}{A},g))=\overline{\alpha }_{\overline{w}}f+\alpha _wf\overline{\beta }e^{\overline{w}}(\frac{i}{2}\xi )f\beta e^w(\frac{i}{2}\overline{\xi })f.$$
3. $$_z(P^r(\stackrel{~}{A},g))=(1)^r.2^{r1}[\overline{\beta }e^{\overline{w}}(\frac{i}{2}\xi )^r+\beta e^w(\frac{i}{2}\overline{\xi })^r]fr2.$$

###### Proposition 6.19.

For each $`A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \beta \\ 0& 0\end{array}\right)aff(𝐂)`$ and for each compactly supported $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-function $`fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(𝐂\times 𝐇_k)`$, we have:

(8)
$$\mathrm{}_A^{(k)}f:=_z\mathrm{}_A^{(k)}_z^1(f)=[\alpha (\frac{1}{2}_w_{\overline{\xi }})f+\overline{\alpha }(\frac{1}{2}_{\overline{w}}_\xi )f+$$

$$+\frac{i}{2}(\beta e^{w\frac{1}{2}\overline{\xi }}+\overline{\beta }e^{\overline{w}\frac{1}{2}\xi })f]$$

###### Remark 6.20.

Setting new variables u = $`w\frac{1}{2}\overline{\xi }`$;$`v=w+\frac{1}{2}\overline{\xi }`$ we have

(9)
$$\widehat{\mathrm{}}_A^{(k)}(f)=\alpha \frac{f}{u}+\overline{\alpha }\frac{f}{\overline{u}}+\frac{i}{2}(\beta e^u+\overline{\beta }e^{\overline{u}})f|_{(u,v)}$$

i.e $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}_A^{(k)}=\alpha \frac{}{u}+\overline{\alpha }\frac{}{\overline{u}}+\frac{i}{2}(\beta e^u+\overline{\beta }e^{\overline{u}})`$,which provides a ( local) representation of the Lie algebra aff(C).

The Irreducible Representations of $`\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂)`$.  Since $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}_A^{(k)}`$ is a representation of the Lie algebra $`\stackrel{~}{\text{Aff}}(𝐂)`$, we have:

$$\mathrm{exp}(\widehat{\mathrm{}}_A^{(k)})=\mathrm{exp}\left(\alpha \frac{}{u}+\overline{\alpha }\frac{}{\overline{u}}+\frac{i}{2}(\beta e^u+\overline{\beta }e^{\overline{u}})\right)$$

is just the corresponding representation of the corresponding connected and simply connected Lie group $`\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂)`$.

Let us first recall the well-known list of all the irreducible unitary representations of the group of affine transformation of the complex straight line, see \[D\] for more details.

###### Theorem 6.21.

Up to unitary equivalence, every irreducible unitary representation of $`\stackrel{~}{\text{Aff}}(𝐂)`$ is unitarily equivalent to one the following one-to-another nonequivalent irreducible unitary representations:

1. The unitary characters of the group, i.e the one dimensional unitary representation $`U_\lambda ,\lambda 𝐂`$, acting in $`𝐂`$ following the formula $`U_\lambda (z,w)=e^{i\mathrm{}(z\overline{\lambda })},(z,w)\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂),\lambda 𝐂.`$
2. The infinite dimensional irreducible representations $`T_\theta ,\theta 𝐒^1`$, acting on the Hilbert space $`L^2(𝐑\times 𝐒^1)`$ following the formula:

(10)
$$[T_\theta (z,w)f](x)=\mathrm{exp}(i(\mathrm{}(wx)+2\pi \theta [\frac{\mathrm{}(x+z)}{2\pi }]))f(xz),$$

Where $`(z,w)\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂)`$ ; $`x𝐑\times 𝐒^1=𝐂\backslash \{0\};fL^2(𝐑\times 𝐒^1);`$

$$xz=Re(x+z)+2\pi i\{\frac{\mathrm{}(x+z)}{2\pi }\}$$

In this section we will prove the following important Theorem which is very interesting for us both in theory and practice.

###### Theorem 6.22.

The representation $`\mathrm{exp}(\widehat{\mathrm{}}_A^{(k)})`$ of the group $`\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂)`$ is the irreducible unitary representation $`T_\theta `$ of $`\stackrel{~}{Aff}(𝐂)`$ associated, following the orbit method construction, to the orbit $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, i.e:

$$\mathrm{exp}(\widehat{\mathrm{}}_A^{(k)})f(x)=[T_\theta (\mathrm{exp}A)f](x),$$

where $`fL^2(𝐑\times 𝐒^1);A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \beta \\ 0& 0\end{array}\right)aff(𝐂);\theta 𝐒^1;k=0,\pm 1,`$

###### Remark 6.23.

We say that a real Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ is in the class $`\overline{MD}`$ if every K-orbit is of dimension, equal 0 or dim $`𝔤`$. Further more, one proved that (\[D, Theorem 4.4\]) Up to isomorphism, every Lie algebra of class $`\overline{MD}`$ is one of the following:

1. Commutative Lie algebras.
2. Lie algebra $`aff(𝐑)`$ of affine transformations of the real straight line
3. Lie algebra $`aff(𝐂)`$ of affine transformations of the complex straight line.

Thus, by calculation for the group of affine transformations of the real straight line $`Aff(𝐑)`$ in \[DH\] and here for the group affine transformations of the complex straight line $`Aff(𝐂)`$ we obtained a description of the quantum $`\overline{MD}`$ co-adjoint orbits.

### 6.2. $`MD_4`$-groups

We refer the reader to the results of Nguyen Viet Hai \[H3\]-\[H4\] for the class of $`MD_4`$-groups (i.e. 4-dimensional solvable Lie groups, all the coadjoint of which are of dimension 0 or maximal). It is interesting that here he obtained the same exact computation for $``$-products and all representations.

### 6.3. $`SO(3)`$

As an typical example of compact Lie group, the author proosed Job A. Nable to consider the case of $`SO(3)`$. We refer the reader to the results of Job Nable \[Na1\]-\[Na3\]. In these examples, it is interesting that the $``$-products, in some how as explained in these papers, involved the Maslov indices and Monodromy Theorem.

## Acknowledgments

This work was completed during the stay of the first author as a visiting mathematician at the Department of mathematics, The University of Iowa. The author would like to express the deep and sincere thanks to Professor Tuong Ton-That and his spouse, Dr. Thai-Binh Ton-That for their effective helps and kind attention they provided during the stay in Iowa, and also for a discussion about the PBW Theorem. The deep thanks are also addressed to the organizers of the Seminar on Mathematical Physics, Seminar on Operator Theory in Iowa and the Iowa-Nebraska Functional Analysis Seminar (INFAS), in particular the professors Raul Curto, Palle Jorgensen, Paul Muhly and Tuong Ton-That for the stimulating scientific atmosphere.

The author would like to thank the University of Iowa for the hospitality and the scientific support, the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Germany, for an effective support.