format: text

text:
# Color Dynamics On Phase Space

## Abstract

We describe the properties of quark matter at zero temperature and finite baryon densities within microscopic Vlasov/molecular dynamics approaches. We use an inter-quark Richardson’s potential consistent with the indications of Lattice QCD calculations. The color degrees of freedom are explicitly taken into account. We explicitly demonstrate that the Vlasov approach alone is insufficient in the hadronization region. In order to overcome this problem we prepare the initial condition for many events using molecular dynamics with frictional cooling and a Thomas-Fermi approximation to the Fermi motion. These events are averaged and propagated in time using the Vlasov approach. We find some evidence for a second order phase transition from nuclear to quark matter at high baryon densities. An order parameter suitable to describe the phase transition is discussed. At low densities the quark condensate into approximately color white clusters (nucleon).

PACS : 12.39.Pn 24.85.1p

One of the open problems in theoretical nuclear and particle physics is how to obtain the well known nuclear properties starting from the quark degrees of freedom . This also includes the possibility of understanding the basic free nucleon-nucleon interaction from quark and gluons dynamics. Some kind of solution to this problem is becoming more and more needed with the new experiments done or planned using ultra-relativistic heavy ions at CERN and soon at RHIC. The search for a quark-gluon plasma (QGP) in such collisions is in fact one of the new and most exciting directions in physics at the border between nuclear and particle physics . Quantum ChromoDynamics (QCD) because of its difficulties (numerical and conceptual), has been applied so far to some limited cases such as quark matter at zero baryon ($`\rho _B`$) density and high temperature (T) . Furthermore in relativistic heavy ion collisions (RHIC) dynamics plays surely an important role and accordingly the theory should be dynamical.

Recently , we have proposed a dynamical approach based on the Vlasov equation  to reproduce hadron masses and the properties of nuclear matter at finite $`\rho _B`$. Some works in the same spirit are discussed in . Our approach needs as inputs the interaction potential among quarks, which was borrowed from phenomenology i.e. the Richardson’s potential, and the quark masses which were fitted to reproduce known meson masses such as the $`\pi `$, the $`\varphi `$, the $`\eta _c`$ etc. When the particles are embedded in a dense medium such as in nuclear matter (NM) the potential becomes screened in a similar fashion as ions and electrons in condensed matter do, i.e. Debye screening (DS).

It is the purpose of this paper to refine that approach in one important aspect which is the treatment of the color degrees of freedom. In the previous works  color degrees of freedom were implicitly taken into account through the use of a Debye radius that effectively screens the $`qq`$ interaction potential. In the present paper we give to the quarks explicitly a color (using the Gell-Mann matrices) and follow their dynamics in phase space solving the Vlasov equation (VE). Thus screening will be dynamically obtained. In general the self screening obtained in Vlasov dynamics is inadequate, which is the reason why it was not adopted in the earlier attempts . In fact we will show explicitly that the Vlasov approach alone gives a good description of the system at large densities only,i.e. in the QGP region. In order to overcome this problem we adopted the following strategy. We first prepare the initial conditions using molecular dynamics (MD) with frictional cooling for many events. The events are averaged and care is taken of antisymmetrization. These are the initial conditions for the Vlasov evolution. Since the VE fulfills the Liouville theorem, the initial phase space density remains constant in time. Thus the initial antisymmetrization and eventual clustering obtained in the cooling process are maintained.

We outline our approach on purely classical grounds, however the same results can be obtained within the Wigner transform formalism  of the quantum BBGKY-hierarchy in the limit $`\mathrm{}0`$.

The exact (classical) one-body distribution function $`f_1(r,p,t)`$ satisfies the equation (BBGKY hierarchy):

$$_tf_1+\frac{\stackrel{}{\text{p}}}{E}_rf_1=d(2)_rV(𝐫,𝐫_\mathrm{𝟐})_pf_2(𝐫,𝐫_\mathrm{𝟐},𝐩,𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐},t)$$
(1)
$`E=\sqrt{p^2+m_i^2}`$ is the energy and $`m_i=10MeV`$ is the (u,d) quark mass. Here we assume the potential to be dependent on the relative coordinates only. A generalization to include a momentum dependent part is straightforward. $`f_2`$ is the two-body distribution function, which in the classical limit reads:

$$f_2(r,r_2,p,p_2,t)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\alpha \beta }^Q\delta (𝐫𝐫_\alpha )\delta (𝐩𝐩_\alpha )\times \delta (𝐫_\mathrm{𝟐}𝐫_\beta )\delta (𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}𝐩_\beta )$$
(2)
where $`Q=q+\overline{q}`$ is the total number of quarks and anti quarks ($`\overline{q}=0`$ in this work). Inserting this equation into Eq.(1) gives:

$$_tf_1+\frac{\stackrel{}{\text{p}}}{E}_rf_1_\text{r}U_\text{p}f_1=0$$
(3)
Where $`U=\mathrm{\Sigma }_jV(𝐫,𝐫_𝐣)`$ is the exact potential. Let us now define $`f_1`$ and $`U`$ as sums of an ensemble averaged quantity plus the deviation from this average:

$$f_1=\overline{f}_1+\delta f_1;U=\overline{U}+\delta U$$
(4)
Substituting these equations in Eq.(3) and ensemble averaging gives:

$$_t\overline{f}_1+\frac{\stackrel{}{\text{p}}}{E}_r\overline{f}_1_\text{r}\overline{U}_\text{p}\overline{f}_1=<_r\delta U_p\delta f_1>$$
(5)
where one recognizes in the lhs the Vlasov term and in the rhs the Balescu-Lennard collision term . The mean-field is given by:

$$\overline{U}(𝐫)=\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{𝐍_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐯}}}𝚺_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐯}}𝚺_𝐣𝐕(𝐫,𝐫_𝐣)$$
(6)
For the purpose of this work we neglect the collision term in Eq.(5) and note that such term will be essential when dealing with RHIC. In agreement to LQCD calculations the interacting potential $`V(r)`$ for quarks is ($`\mathrm{}=1`$):

$`V(r_{i,j})=3\mathrm{\Sigma }_{a=1}^8{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _i^a}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _j^a}{2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{332n_f}}\mathrm{\Lambda }(\mathrm{\Lambda }r_{ij}{\displaystyle \frac{f(\mathrm{\Lambda }r_{ij})}{\mathrm{\Lambda }r_{ij}}})+{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{9}}\overline{\alpha }{\displaystyle \frac{<\sigma _q\sigma _{\overline{q}}>}{m_qm_{\overline{q}}}}\delta (𝐫_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}})]`$ (7)
and

$`f(t)=14{\displaystyle \frac{dq}{q}\frac{e^{qt}}{[ln(q^21)]^2+\pi ^2}}`$ (8)
We fix the number of flavors $`n_f=2`$ and the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.25GeV`$ . In Eq.(7) we have added to the Richardson’s potential the chromomagnetic term (ct), very important to reproduce the masses of the hadrons in vacuum. Since in this work we will be dealing with finite nuclei, the ct can be neglected, we only notice that with the parameters choice discussed here, the hadron masses can be reproduced by suitably tuning the ct term .

The $`\lambda ^a`$ are the Gell-Mann matrices. From lattice calculations we expect that there is no color transport for distances of the order of $`0.20.3fm`$, which are distances much shorter than the ones we will be dealing with in this paper. Thus we will use the $`\lambda _{3,8}`$ only commuting diagonal Gell-Mann matrices (Abelian approximation).

Numerically the VE equation(5) is solved by writing the one body distribution function as:

$$\overline{f}_1(r,p,t)=\frac{1}{n_{tp}}\underset{i}{\overset{N}{}}\delta (rr_i(t))\delta (pp_i(t))$$
(9)
$`N=Qn_{tp}`$ is the number of such terms. Actually, N is much larger than the total quark number Q, so that we can say that each quark is represented by $`n_{tp}`$ terms called test particles(tp). Notice how well this fits in the previous discussion if we put $`n_{tp}=N_{ev}`$. Inserting Eq.(9) in the Vlasov equation gives the Hamilton equations of motion (eom) for the tp . The total number of tp (or corresponding $`N/Q`$ events)used in this work ranges from 5000 to 50000, and Q=150-300.

Initially, we distribute randomly the tp in a sphere of radius $`R=r_{0B}A^{1/3}`$ (the radius of the nucleus) in coordinate space and $`p_f`$ in momentum space. $`r_{0B}=(\frac{3}{4\pi \rho _B})^{1/3}`$, $`A=Q/3`$ and $`\rho _B`$ is the baryon density. $`p_f`$ is the Fermi momentum estimated in a simple Fermi gas model by imposing that a cell in phase space of size $`h=2\pi `$ can accommodate at most two identical quarks of different spins, flavors and colors. A simple estimate gives the following relation between the quark density , $`n_q`$, and the Fermi momentum:

$`n_q={\displaystyle \frac{g_q}{6\pi ^2}}p_f^3`$ (10)
The degeneracy number $`g_q=n_f\times n_c\times n_s`$, where $`n_c`$ is the number of colors and $`n_s`$ is the number of spins. For quarks and anti quarks 3 different colors are used red, yellow and blue (r,y,b) .

In figure(1), we plot the total energy per nucleon (top) and energy density (in units of the Fermi gas energy density) vs. baryon density. The full triangles give the results obtained by randomly distributing the tp as described above. We notice that a minimum at about $`\rho _c=2.08fm^3`$ is found with $`E_t/A=2GeV/A`$. Such a minimum is at much higher density and energy than expected for the ground state (gs) of a nucleus ($`\rho _0=0.16fm^3`$ and $`E_t/A=0.9380.016GeV/A`$). An important property of the system that we have described above is the following. If we rotate the quarks in color space, regardless of their position in r-space, the total energy will remain the same. This is indeed a ”pure” Vlasov solution and demonstrates explicitly the in-capability of the Vlasov approach to give clustering of quarks into nucleons. However this result is already instructive since it gives us an hint on where the quark and nuclear matter are located, i.e. above and below $`\rho _c`$ respectively. This result is qualitatively in agreement with the Hartree-Fock(HF) calculations of refs. (compare to fig.1 in ). For a discussion on why the $`E_t/A`$ increases at low densities in the HF/VE approaches we also refer to .

Of course distributing randomly the quarks in a sphere in r and p-space is not the most economical way to find the real gs of the system. In MD one searches for a minimum energy by introducing a friction term. The friction acts in such a way to lead the particles to a configuration for which the potential energy is a minimum. We cannot use this technique for our system since we are dealing with fermions and the friction term will destroy the initial antisymmetrization. In order to overcome this difficulty we adopt the following strategy. First we prepare $`N_{ev}`$ events as above, and we evolve them numerically solving the eom but with friction included. Because of the large number of particles interacting with attractive and repulsive forces, the quarks will slowly evolve to new positions where the potential is lower while keeping the initial root mean square radius approximately constant. When the averaged potential (over events) reaches a given value $`V_{min}`$, we look for the two closest particles $`(j,k)`$ to a quark $`i`$ in the same event. For these three quarks we know what the local density and the number of colors are. For instance if in a certain region we find two red and one blue quark, we use $`n_c=2`$ in Eq.(10) and calculate the local density from the knowledge of the distances of the 3 quarks. In this way the Fermi momentum is defined locally similar to the procedure used in nuclear or atomic physics (Thomas-Fermi approximation). We repeat this for all quarks $`i`$ in all events and calculate the total energy for this state . We let the system evolve again with friction included to a lower potential energy $`V_{min}=V_{min}\delta V`$, where $`\delta V`$ is a constant. We calculate the local density and local color numbers again and apply the Thomas-Fermi approximation to obtain the new total energy. We stop the procedure when the total energy is a minimum. The initial conditions so obtained are then propagated in time using the VE in order to maintain the initial antisymmetrization. We will show below, see fig.3, that the initial clustering obtained in MD is preserved as well during the Vlasov evolution.

The open triangles in fig.(1) are the result of the minimization. Notice especially at low densities the large decrease of the total energy of the system as compared to the Vlasov result. Now the calculated total energy at the nuclear gs is very close to the experimental value indicated by the full circle. However, we find slightly lower energies at lower densities, i.e. the gs of the nucleus is shifted in our calculations at about 1/10 of the experimental one. This should not be surprising in view of the simple potential that we have used. Also we have not tried to look for a best set of fitting parameters in these exploratory studies. At low $`\rho _B`$, the global invariance for rotations in color space is lost, i.e. if we exchange the colors of two $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡}`$ quarks, the total energy of the system will change. At high densities (larger than $`2fm^3`$) the Vlasov and MD solutions are the same. This can be also seen in the bottom part of the figure where energy densities are given. We would like to stress again the qualitative agreement to ref. where a stochastic method had been used to calculate the g.s. energy of the system. This is quite evident if one compares our fig.1 to fig.1 of .

The energy density displayed in fig.1 (bottom) is a smooth function apart some fluctuations around $`2fm^3`$ density. From this result we can exclude a first order phase transition but a second order phase transition might be possible.

In order to check if a second order phase transition occurs we define an order parameter. As we discussed above the color degrees of freedom play an important role for our system. When the quarks of different colors are in suitable positions in r-space the potential energy largely decreases. It is also very important that the system is locally color white because in this way $`n_c=3`$ and the kinetic part will also decrease. Thus for extremely small densities the quarks should condensate in clusters of 3 and zero net color. When the density changes this picture gradually modifies and at very high densities it does not matter where the quarks are located and which color they have. Looking at Eq.(7) we see that this fact is a consequence of the $`\frac{3}{4}_{a=3,8}\lambda _i^a\lambda _j^a`$ term (equal to $`1`$ for identical color quarks and $`1/2`$ otherwise) . Thus we define an order parameter $`M_c`$ as:

$$M_c=\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{a=3,8}{}(\lambda _j^a\lambda _k^a+\lambda _i^a\lambda _j^a+\lambda _i^a\lambda _k^a)=M_{c_r}+\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{a=3,8}{}(\lambda _j^a\lambda _k^a++\lambda _i^a\lambda _k^a)$$
(11)
Where $`j,k`$ are the two quarks closest in r-space to quark $`i`$ as before. In Eq.(11) we have also defined a ”reduced” order parameter $`M_{c_r}`$ which tells us the color of the closest particle $`j`$ to quark $`i`$. From the properties of the (3,8) Gell-Mann matrices it is easy to derive the following results for $`M_c`$. If the 3 closest quarks have the same color, $`M_c=3`$. We stress that this case is practically impossible to be obtained because the corresponding potential energy would be very large and repulsive. If the 3 closest quark states have two colors $`M_c=0`$, this case is also recovered if the colors are randomly distributed such as in the ”pure” Vlasov solution. The case of 3 different color quarks gives $`M_c=3/2`$. The last is the ideal case of well isolated white nucleons. If this last case is recovered in the calculations at small densities then the system is $`\mathrm{𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦}`$ invariant for rotation in color space. i.e. if we rotate the color states inside the nucleon, the total energy of the system will remain constant. Using similar arguments it is simple to show that if the closest particle to quark $`i`$ has always a different color $`M_{c_r}=1/2`$, if the two closest quarks have the same color $`M_{c_r}=1`$. If the closest quark color is randomly chosen $`M_{c_r}=0`$.

In figure (2) top , we plot the order parameter (opportunely normalized) vs. density (divided by a critical density-see below) for the MD case. The displayed $`M_c`$ are always positive i.e. it never happens that 3 equal quark color states are on average in the same region in r-space. In the top part of the figure we have distinguished two cases. The first one indicated by the full triangles corresponds to calculations where the average potential energy is larger than zero i.e. the linear term in Eq.(7) is dominant, small $`\rho _B`$. The full squares correspond to the case where the Coulomb term is dominant, large $`\rho _B`$ and negative mean field. The first case can be rather well fitted by the relation:

$$M_c|1\frac{\rho _B}{\rho _c}|^\beta $$
(12)
Where $`\rho _c=2.08fm^3`$ is the critical density and the two curves correspond to the critical exponent values $`\beta =1/3`$(full line) and $`1/2`$ (dashed line). The latter is the expected value of the critical exponent $`\beta `$ in a mean field approach  . We notice that in ref. a phase transition of first order was found. However the potential and the kinetic term (non-relativistic) used there are quite different from ours. In LQCD calculations for Fermions at zero temperature the order of the phase transition depends on the quark masses. For small quark masses such as ours, the transition found is second order .

In order to better understand the behavior of $`M_c`$ we have repeated the calculations by turning off the Coulomb term (open triangles) or the linear part (open squares). At low densities the linear term is larger while the Coulomb term is dominant at high densities. The two terms are equally important around the critical density. However, there is an important difference between the two cases. In fact at low densities the kinetic part is rather small compared to the potential one, while it is rather large at high densities, Eq.(10). Furthermore, at high densities the strong coupling constant entering the Coulomb potential, Eq.(8), vanishes logarithmically. Thus it is clear that the order parameter increases again at high densities because of the friction used to lower the potential energy. But as soon as we ”turn on” the kinetic term we expect the bonds to be quickly broken. This is shown in figure (3) where the time evolution of $`M_c`$ is given. At high density we have a large value of $`M_c`$ (full circles) at time t=0fm/c. But such a value quickly decreases to a minimum value of about 0.3. The $`M_c`$ obtained at low densities is rather large and constant (open circles), while the one obtained at the critical density slightly increases (open squares). This result also shows that the VE can keep the initial clustering obtained from the MD initial conditions for a time sufficient to perform calculations for heavy ion collisions at relativistic energies. It also implies that the $`M_c`$ values obtained at high $`\rho _B`$ are an artifact of the calculation and we expect $`M_c`$ to saturate at about 0.3-0.4 at high densities. This is exactly the behavior expected for a order parameter, i.e. a power law dependence for densities below the critical one and constant otherwise. It is also instructive to notice that the two closest quarks have always a different color for low densities as it is suggested by $`M_{c_r}`$ in the bottom part of figure(2). The $`M_{c_r}`$ starts to be smaller than 1/2 for densities larger than $`\rho _0`$ and approaches zero very slowly with increasing density.

From figures (2) and (3) some important consequences can be derived.

i) The order parameter is never equal to 3/2 i.e. isolated white nucleons. As it is shown in figure 2, $`M_c`$ is still increasing with decreasing densities. Thus in the limit of very small densities we should get color white objects. However such a limit is hard to reach because of numerical fluctuations due to the confining potential. The maximum calculated $`M_c`$ value is about 0.9,a value in between 2 and 3 color states. Of course it is not always the same cluster (nucleon) to have $`n_c=2`$ or 3, but rather the number of colors in a cluster changes dynamically between 2 and 3. In order to understand this behavior imagine to have two clusters with one color exchanged, $`(r_1,y_1,y_2)`$ and $`(r_2,b_1,b_2)`$, located at very large distances. The contribution to the potential of cluster 1 due to cluster 2 is zero for the red quark (-1+1/2+1/2) and 3/2 for each of the yellow quarks. Thus the two cluster will be $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑}`$ towards each other at low densities. On the other hand there is a repulsion between the two equal color quarks in the two clusters. These quarks will be pushed away from their original cluster and eventually the white color will be established. In other words the ”color migration” binds the clusters.

ii) The system is not locally ($`M_c=3/2`$) nor globally ($`M_c=0`$) color invariant. This is true at high densities as well, but there the potential energy is negligible as compared to the kinetic one and color invariance is (approximately) restored.

In conclusion in this work we have discussed microscopic Vlasov/MD approaches to finite nuclei starting from quark degrees of freedom with colors. In order to obtain the correct initial conditions we have introduced a method based on MD with frictional cooling plus a Thomas-Fermi approximation for the Fermi motion. We have shown that the method is able to describe at least qualitatively the well known features of nuclei near the ground state. At high densities a second order phase transition from nuclear to quark matter is predicted. Such a transition is due to the restoration of global color invariance at high densities and we have defined an order parameter accordingly. The approach can be refined in order to obtain a better description of the ground state of the nucleus. This can be used to simulate heavy ion collisions at ultra-relativistic energies after the introduction of a suitable collision term. Our approach can be very useful for the understanding of the quark gluon plasma formation and its signatures.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank prof. J.B. Natowitz and the colleagues at the Cyclotron Institute-Texas $`A\&M`$ University for warm hospitality and financial support.


text:
# Composite fermions close to the one-half filling of the lowest Landau level revisited

\[

## Abstract

By strictly adhering to the microscopic theory of composite fermions (CFs) for the Landau-level filling fractions $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=p/(2p+1)`$, we reproduce, with remarkable accuracy, the surface-acoustic-wave (SAW)-based experimental results by Willett and co-workers concerning two-dimensional electron systems with $`\nu _\mathrm{e}`$ close to $`1/2`$. Our results imply that the electron band mass $`m_b`$, as distinct from the CF mass $`m_{}`$, must undergo a substantial increase under the conditions corresponding to $`\nu _\mathrm{e}1/2`$. We further establish that a finite mean-free path $`\mathrm{}_0`$ is essential for the observed linearity of the longitudinal conductivity $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ as deduced from the SAW velocity shifts.

\]

The fractional quantum Hall effect (FQHE) owes its existence to the electron-electron (e-e) interaction. The fermionic Chern-Simons field theory in $`2+1`$ dimensions unifies the FQHE with the integer QHE (IQHE) whose existence does not depend on e-e interaction . This is effected through the binding, brought about by the mediation of the Chern-Simons action, of $`2n`$, $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$, magnetic flux quanta to electrons, whereby the composite particles, that is CFs , are exposed to an effective magnetic flux density $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ whose corresponding IQH state determines the FQH state for the electrons; the FQH state associated with $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=p/(2np+1)`$ is the IQH state of CFs in which $`p`$ lowest Landau levels (LLs) are fully occupied. The sequence $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=p/(2np+1)`$ and its particle-hole conjugate $`\nu _\mathrm{e}^{}:=1p/(2np+1)`$ approach $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=1/(2n)`$ for $`p\mathrm{}`$. In this work we deal with the case where $`n=1`$ and states whose $`\nu _\mathrm{e}`$ are close to $`1/2`$. With $`\mathrm{\Delta }Bhn_e/(ep)`$, where $`e<0`$ stands for the charge of an electron and $`n_e`$ the planar number density of electrons, these states thus correspond to small $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$. The state corresponding to $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=1/2`$ was proposed by Halperin, Lee and Read  to be a compressible state of degenerate fermions which, in the case of full polarisation of the electron spins, is characterised by a cylindrical Fermi surface of radius $`k_F^{\mathrm{cf}}=\sqrt{4\pi n_e}`$. This has been borne out by several experiments .

In this work we particularly concentrate on a series of experimental results by Willett and co-workers , concerning 2DESs with $`\nu _\mathrm{e}`$ at and close to $`1/2`$ and establish that these can be remarkably accurately reproduced within the framework of the microscopic Chern-Simons field theory. To achieve this, it turns out to be essential that the band-electron mass $`m_b`$ be by one order of magnitude larger than the customarily-assumed value: for GaAs heterostructures, in which the 2DESs under consideration were realised, $`m_b`$ is customarily taken to be $`0.067\times m_e`$, where $`m_e`$ is the electron mass in vacuum. In what follows, we use the notation $`m_b^0=0.067\times m_e`$ and denote the electron band mass, as required for reproducing the indicated experimental results, by $`m_b`$. Since quantum fluctuations, with respect to the mean-field approximation for CFs give rise to mass renormalisation , we reserve $`m_{}`$ to denote the renormalised CF mass. Our numerical results imply $`m_b{}_{}{}^{>}16\times m_b^0`$ and $`m_{}0.5\times m_b{}_{}{}^{>}8\times m_b^00.54\times m_e`$. This value is in good accord with the CF mass as deduced both from the values of the energy gaps $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\nu _e}`$ separating the CF LLs (determined from the activated temperature dependence of the longitudinal resistivities, $`\varrho _{xx}`$, centred around $`\nu _e`$’s close to $`1/2`$)  and the amplitude of the oscillations in $`\varrho _{xx}`$, for varying $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$, viewing these as the Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations corresponding to CFs . For completeness, according to Park and Jain , the scale of the low-energy excitations of a 2DES may be determined by either the ‘activation mass’ $`m_a`$ or the ‘polarisation mass’ $`m_p`$, the latter being often the case for $`\nu _\mathrm{e}>1`$. For $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=1/2`$ ($`n_e=1.26\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2) Kukushkin, et al.  have reported a CF mass equal to $`2.27\times m_e`$ which the authors suggest to be the $`m_p`$ of CFs. In view of the fact that the experiments in Ref.  are based on optical excitations, involving $`q0`$, we suggest the possibility that the mass measured by these authors may be not $`m_p`$, but $`m_b`$, consistent with the requirement of a Kohn’s theorem  (note the aspect $`q0`$).

In the experiments by Willett, et al. , the relative change $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s`$ in the velocity $`v_s`$ of SAWs as well as the damping $`\kappa `$ in their amplitudes, while propagating on the surface of samples at distance $`d`$ from the 2DES, were measured; here the change $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s`$ is relative to the $`v_s`$ corresponding to the case where the conductivity of the 2DES is infinitely large (see further on). Theoretically, $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s`$ is determined by the ‘on-the-mass-shell’ value of the longitudinal conductivity $`\sigma _{xx}(q,\omega )`$ of the 2DES as follows

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }v_s}{v_s}=\frac{\alpha ^2/2}{1+[\sigma _{xx}(q)/\sigma _m]^2},$$
(1)
where $`\sigma _{xx}(q)\sigma _{xx}(q,\omega =v_sq)`$, $`\sigma _m`$ is a constant to be specified below, and  $`\alpha ^2/2=`$ $`(e_{14}^2\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_r/\{Hϵ_0ϵ_r^2\})`$ $`|F(qd)|^2`$; here $`e_{14}0.145`$ Cm-2 is the piezoelectric constant for AlxGa1-xAs, $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_r=ϵ_r\left(1+\{(ϵ_r1)/(ϵ_r+1)\}\mathrm{exp}(2qd)\right)^1`$ (c.f. Eq. (A4) in Ref. ), $`H28.8\times 10^{10}`$ Nm-2, $`ϵ_0=8.854\mathrm{}\times 10^{12}`$ Fm-1 denotes the vacuum permittivity, $`ϵ_r`$ is the relative dielectric constant of the bulk of the host material which we take to be equal to $`12.4`$, and $`F(x):=A_1\mathrm{exp}(ax)\mathrm{sin}(bx+c)+A_2\mathrm{exp}(x)`$ (c.f. Eq. (51) in Ref. ), where $`A_13.18`$, $`a0.501`$, $`b0.472`$, $`c2.41`$ and $`A_23.10`$; further,

$$\sigma _m:=\frac{\omega e^2}{q^2v(q)}|_{\omega =v_sq}2ϵ_0\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_rv_s,$$
(2)
where in the second expression on the right-hand side we have replaced the e-e interaction function $`v(q)`$ by the Coulomb function $`v(q)=e^2/(2ϵ_0\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_rq)`$; we have further made use of the dispersion of acoustic phonons and employed $`\omega =v_sq`$, where $`v_s`$ stands for the sound velocity which in GaAs amounts to $`3010`$ ms-1.

Our calculations are based on  (see also Eq. (208) in Ref. ) $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s+i\kappa /q=(\alpha ^2/2)\left(\gamma v(q)K_{00}(q,\omega =v_sq)\right)`$, where $`K_{00}(q,\omega )`$ describes the change in $`n_e`$ to linear order in the external potential ; the minus sign here has its origin in our convention with regard to the sign of $`e`$. In the literature, the constant $`\gamma `$ is invariably identified with unity, this on account of the fact that $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s`$ is the deviation of the measured $`v_s`$ with respect to the $`v_s`$ pertaining to the case where $`\sigma _{xx}(q)\mathrm{}`$. We maintain $`\gamma `$ in our considerations, following the fact that, experimentally, the reference $`v_s`$ does not correspond to an infinitely large $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ (owing to impurities, and $`q0`$).

In the present work we employ the ‘modified random phase approximation’ (MRPA) for $`K_{00}(q,\omega )`$ due to Simon and Halperin  which takes account of the renormalisation of the mass of CFs and which approaches the RPA for $`K_{00}(q,\omega )`$ as $`q0`$, the latter coinciding to leading order (proportional to $`q^2`$) with the exact $`K_{00}(q,\omega )`$ for $`q0`$ and any $`\omega `$ at which both $`K_{00}^{\mathrm{rpa}}(q,\omega )`$ and $`K_{00}(q,\omega )`$ are bounded, which is the case for $`|\omega |<\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _c:=e\mathrm{\Delta }B/m_b`$ (see in particular Eq. (5.6) in Ref. ). The $`K_{00}^{\mathrm{mrpa}}`$ has thus the property that it conforms with the requirement of a Kohn’s theorem  according to which $`K_{00}(q0,\omega )`$ must be determined by $`m_b`$ rather than $`m_{}`$. For the explicit expression concerning $`K_{00}^{\mathrm{mrpa}}(q,\omega )`$ corresponding to $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=p/(2np+1)`$ in terms of elementary functions, we refer the reader to Ref.  (we have presented and employed $`K_{00}^{\mathrm{mrpa}}(q,\omega =0)`$ in Ref. ). We mention that for the purpose of calculating $`K_{00}^{\mathrm{mrpa}}(q,\omega )`$, which depends on $`p`$ and $`n`$, for a continuous range of $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ around zero, we first determine $`\nu _\mathrm{e}`$ from $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=hn_e/(eB)`$, with $`B`$ the total applied magnetic flux density, and subsequently obtain the required $`p`$ from $`p=[\nu _\mathrm{e}/(12\nu _\mathrm{e})]`$ if $`\nu _\mathrm{e}<1/2`$, and $`p=[(1\nu _e)/(12(1\nu _\mathrm{e}))]`$ if $`\nu _\mathrm{e}>1/2`$, where $`[x]`$ denotes the greatest integer less than or equal to $`x`$. The $`\nu _\mathrm{e}`$ corresponding to the thus-obtained $`p`$ remains constant for certain ranges of values of $`B`$, which causes artificial stepwise-constant behaviour in the functions of $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ that depend on $`K_{00}^{\mathrm{mrpa}}(q,\omega )`$.

We model the effects of the impurity scattering through substituting $`\omega +i/\tau _0`$ for $`\omega `$ in $`K_{00}^{\mathrm{mrpa}}(q,\omega )`$. Here $`\tau _0`$ stands for the scattering time which is related to the mean-free path $`\mathrm{}_0=v_F\tau _0`$, where $`v_F`$ stands for the Fermi velocity. In general, the substitution $`\omega \omega +i/\tau _0`$ amounts to solving the Boltzmann equation within the framework of the relaxation-time approximation, neglecting the so-called current-conservation correction which has been found to have no significant consequences in contexts similar to that of our present considerations (see Sec. 4.1.4 in Ref. ). With (from here onwards we suppress ‘mrpa’) $`K_{00}^{}(q,\omega +i/\tau _0)\mathrm{Re}\left\{K_{00}(q,\omega +i/\tau _0)\right\}`$ and $`\gamma ^{}:=\mathrm{Re}\{\gamma \}`$, from the above-presented expression for $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s+i\kappa /q`$ we obtain

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }v_s}{v_s}=\frac{\alpha ^2}{2}\left(\gamma ^{}v(q)K_{00}^{}(q,v_sq+i/\tau _0)\right).$$
(3)
We eliminate $`\gamma ^{}`$, whose value has no influence on the form of $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s`$, by requiring that $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s`$, as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$, coincide with the experimental $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }B0`$.

In Fig. 1 we present $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ for the cases where $`n_e=6.92\times 10^{10}`$ cm-2, $`f:=\omega /(2\pi )=8.5`$ GHz (left panel), to be compared with Fig. 4 in Ref. , and $`n_e=1.6\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2, $`f=10.7`$ GHz (right panel), to be compared with Fig. 1 in Ref. . The excellent agreement between the theoretical results corresponding to an enhanced $`m_b`$ (with respect to $`m_b^0`$) and experimental results, in particular when these are compared with those obtained within the same theoretical framework in which $`m_{}`$ retains the same enhanced value as compared with $`m_b^0`$ but $`m_b=m_b^0`$ (curves (c)), strongly support the viewpoint that under the conditions where $`\nu _\mathrm{e}1/2`$, the bare band mass $`m_b^0`$ should be enhanced. This observation is compatible with the experimental finding with regard to the stronger than the theoretically-predicted divergence  of the CF mass for $`\nu _\mathrm{e}1/2`$ . In this connection we should emphasise that the closer one approaches $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=1/2`$, the less sensitive $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s`$ becomes with respect to the further increase of $`m_{}`$ (or $`m_b`$ for that matter); our choices $`m_b=16\times m_b^0`$ and $`m_{}=0.5\times m_b`$ are based on the consideration that the experimental features corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ in the range $`0.11`$ T be reproduced. The results in Fig. 1 obtained through employing the semi-classical $`\sigma _{\mu \nu }`$, due to Cohen, Harrison and Harrison (CHH)  (see also Appendix B in Ref.  as well as Eqs. (2) and (3) in Ref. ), bring out the inadequacy of the semi-classical approach; curves marked by (d) unequivocally demonstrate the shortcoming of strictly adhering to the viewpoint that CFs behaved like non-interacting electrons exposed to a reduced magnetic field — curves marked by (b), which are similarly based on the CHH $`\sigma _{\mu \nu }`$, owe their resemblance to the experimental results to the fact that in their calculation explicit account has been taken of the conditions which are specific to the regime corresponding to $`\nu _\mathrm{e}1/2`$. With reference to our earlier work , it is appropriate to compare curve (a) in the right panel of Fig. 1 with the curves in Fig. 1 of the work by Mirlin and Wölfle  and compare both with the experimental trace in Fig. 1 of Ref. . One observes that our present result, in contrast with those in Ref. , precisely reproduces almost all features of the experimental trace, such as the values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s`$ at $`\mathrm{\Delta }B0,0.38,0.54,1.0`$ T.

From Eqs. (1) and (3) we obtain

$$\frac{\sigma _{xx}(q)}{\sigma _m}=\left(\left(\gamma ^{}v(q)K_{00}^{}(q,v_sq+i/\tau _0)\right)^11\right)^{1/2},$$
(4)
according to which $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ interestingly does not explicitly depend upon $`\alpha ^2/2`$. Unless we set $`\gamma ^{}=1`$, we eliminate $`\gamma ^{}`$ in Eq. (4) by requiring that for given values of $`\sigma _m`$ and $`q`$, $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ according to Eq. (4) yield the corresponding experimental SAW velocity shift.

In Fig. 2 we present our theoretical $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ in comparison with its SAW-derived experimental $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ by Willett, et al.  (see the middle panel of Fig. 2 herein). The details in Fig. 2 again support our above finding with regard to $`m_b`$ and $`m_{}`$, that a mere enhancement of $`m_{}`$ with respect to $`m_b^0`$ is not sufficient (see inset \[B\]). We also observe that a finite $`\mathrm{}_0`$ is most crucial to the experimentally-observed linear behaviour of the SAW-deduced $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ for $`q`$ in the range $`(0.015/a_0,0.075/a_0`$), with $`a_0`$ the Bohr radius (see curve (c)); the original observation with regard to $`\sigma _{xx}(q)q`$ for $`q2/\mathrm{}_0`$  thus turns out to be relevant for values of $`q`$ far outside the experimental range. We note that $`\mathrm{}_00.5`$ $`\mu `$m coincides with that reported in the pertinent experimental articles. A further aspect that our present results in Fig. 2 clarify is that, in contrast to earlier observations (see the paragraph following Eq. (7.6) in Ref.  and that following Eq. (211) in Ref. ), the available experimental results by no means are in conflict with the predictions of Eq. (2): our theoretical results for $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ in Fig. 2 have been obtained through multiplying $`\sigma _{xx}(q)/\sigma _m`$ by the same  $`\sigma _m`$ that has been employed to determine $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ from the SAW-deduced $`\sigma _{xx}(q)/\sigma _m`$. Thus, rather than Eq. (2) being inadequate, the empirical method of determining $`\sigma _m`$ (which employs the dc conductivity ) should be considered as inappropriate.

We now briefly focus on the physical significance of the expression for $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s`$ in Eq. (1). To this end, let $`\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(𝐫,t)`$ denote an applied time-dependent external potential, representing that corresponding to the SAWs. The change in the Hamiltonian of the system, following the application of $`\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}`$, has the form $`\delta \widehat{H}(t)=\mathrm{d}^2r\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(𝐫,t)\widehat{\psi }^{}(𝐫t)\widehat{\psi }(𝐫t)`$, where $`\widehat{\psi }^{}(𝐫t)`$, $`\widehat{\psi }(𝐫t)`$ denote creation and annihilation field operators. Denoting the change in the energy of the system corresponding to $`\delta \widehat{H}(t)`$ by $`\delta E(t)`$, we have  $`\delta E(t)=`$ $`\mathrm{d}^2r`$ $`\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(𝐫,t)\overline{n}_e(𝐫,t)`$, where $`\overline{n}_e(𝐫,t):=_0^1d\lambda n_e^{(\lambda )}(𝐫,t)`$. Here $`n_e^{(\lambda )}(𝐫,t)`$ stands for the instantaneous number density of the system corresponding to $`\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}^{(\lambda )}(𝐫,t):=\lambda \delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(𝐫,t)`$. By assuming $`\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(𝐫,t)\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(𝐫)\mathrm{exp}(i\omega _0t)`$, one obtains for $`\delta (\omega ):=dt`$ $`\delta E(t)\mathrm{exp}(i\omega t)`$, $`\delta (\omega )=\mathrm{d}^2r\mathrm{d}^2r^{}\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(𝐫)\overline{K}_{00}(𝐫,𝐫^{};\omega \omega _0)\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(𝐫^{})`$, where $`\overline{K}_{00}(𝐫,𝐫^{};\omega ):=_0^1d\lambda (1\lambda )K^{(\lambda )}(𝐫,𝐫^{};\omega )`$ . Under the assumption that $`\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(𝐫)`$ be weak, the dependence upon $`\lambda `$ of $`K_{00}^{(\lambda )}`$ can be neglected so that $`\overline{K}_{00}2^1K_{00}^{(0)}`$ where $`K_{00}^{(0)}`$ stands for the density-density response function of the uniform, unperturbed, system. To second order in $`\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(q)`$, one thus obtains $`\delta (\omega )=2^1K_{00}(q,\omega \omega _0)|\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(q)|^2`$. Let now $`\overline{\delta E}_t:=_0^td\tau \delta E(\tau )`$, from which one readily obtains $`\overline{\delta E}_t2^1|\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(q)|^2d\omega K_{00}(q,\omega \omega _0)\{1\mathrm{exp}(i\omega t)\}/(2\pi i\omega )`$. For large $`t`$, the integrand of the $`\omega `$ integral becomes highly oscillatory so that to the leading order in $`1/t`$, $`d\omega K_{00}(q,\omega \omega _0)\{1\mathrm{exp}(i\omega t)\}/(2\pi i\omega )K_{00}(q,\omega _0)d\omega \{1\mathrm{exp}(i\omega t)\}/(2\pi i\omega )=K_{00}(q,\omega _0)`$. Since $`K_{00}(q,\omega )`$ is an even function of $`\omega `$, we eventually obtain $`\overline{\delta E}_t2^1K_{00}(q,\omega _0)|\delta v_{\mathrm{ext}}(q)|^2`$, for $`t1/\omega _0`$. This expression, which coincides with Eq. (14) in Ref. , is the fundamental link between $`K_{00}(q,\omega )`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_s/v_s+i\kappa /q`$ presented above. These details make explicit first, that only small-amplitude perturbations are correctly accounted for by Eq. (1) (and similarly, Eq. (3)), and second, that the observation of “geometric resonance” and the “cyclotron frequency deduced from dc transport” though, as suggested by Willett, et al. , inconsistent with “a non-interacting, semi-classical quasiparticle model \[for CFs\]”, are in fact not inconsistent with the physical picture that the above derivation brings out: that the mechanism underlying the SAW-based experiments does not involve any resonance phenomenon in the usual sense and that the SAW experiments, which involve a long-time integration of the fluctuations in the total energy of 2DESs, unveil $`K_{00}(q,\omega )`$ at $`\omega =\omega _0v_sq`$ and $`q=\omega _0/v_s`$, independent of the magnitude of the CF cyclotron frequency $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _c`$ and consequently of that of the CF mass $`m_{}`$.

In conclusion, by strictly adhering to the microscopic theory of CFs, we have established that the SAW-based experimental results by Willett and co-workers close to $`\nu _\mathrm{e}=1/2`$ can be remarkably accurately reproduced provided the electron band mass $`m_b`$ be substantially enhanced with respect to $`m_b^0`$; in this picture, the (observed) large value of the CF mass $`m_{}`$ follows from a subsequent reduction of $`m_b`$ (owing to quantum fluctuations) rather than a direct enhancement of $`m_b^0`$. We have further established that a finite mean-free path $`\mathrm{}_0`$ is essential to the experimentally-observed linearity in the SAW-deduced $`\sigma _{xx}(q)`$ in the range $`1.56{}_{}{}^{<}q{}_{}{}^{<}7.68`$ $`\mu `$m-1, and that there exists no discrepancy between the theoretical and experimental values for $`\sigma _m`$.

I thank Professors D. E. Khmel’nitskiǐ and P. B. Littlewood for a discussion and Professor B. I. Halperin and Drs S. H. Simon and R. L. Willett for kindly clarifying some aspects concerning the empirical $`\sigma _m`$. With appreciation I acknowledge hospitality of Cavendish Laboratory.


text:
# The Verlinde formula for parabolic bundles

## 1 Introduction

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^g`$ be a compact Riemann surface of genus $`g`$, and $`G`$ $`=SU(n)`$. We introduce the central element $`c`$ $`=\mathrm{diag}(e^{2\pi id/n},\mathrm{},e^{2\pi id/n})`$ for $`d`$ coprime to $`n.`$ In this paper we prove the Verlinde formula for the Riemann-Roch number of a line bundle over the moduli space $`_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ of representations of the fundamental group of a Riemann surface of genus $`g`$ with one boundary component, for which the loop around the boundary is constrained to lie in the conjugacy class of $`c\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ (for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐭_+)`$. (Here, $`𝐭`$ denotes the Lie algebra of the maximal torus $`T`$ of $`G`$, and $`𝐭_+`$ the fundamental Weyl chamber.) We also prove the Verlinde formula for the moduli space $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$ of representations of the fundamental group of a Riemann surface of genus $`g`$ with $`s+1`$ boundary components for which the loop around the 0-th boundary component is sent to the central element $`c`$ and the loop around the $`j`$-th boundary component is constrained to lie in the conjugacy class of $`\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(j)})`$ for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(j)}𝐭_+`$, where we have introduced the notation $`𝚲=(\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)},\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(2)},\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(b)}).`$ The methods extend the proof we gave in Section 11 of  for the Verlinde formula for the moduli space $`M(n,d)`$ of holomorphic vector bundles of coprime rank $`n`$ and degree $`d`$ and fixed determinant, which can alternatively be described as the space of representations of the fundamental group of a Riemann surface of genus $`g`$ with one boundary component into $`G`$ which send the loop around the boundary to the central element $`c`$. Our proofs are valid for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in a suitable neighbourhood of $`0`$ and $`𝚲`$ in a suitable neighbourhood of $`\mathrm{𝟎}`$.

Our earlier work  used the Riemann-Roch formula to prove a formula for the dimension of the space of holomorphic sections of powers of a certain line bundle over $`M(n,d)`$; in the case of $`M(n,d)`$ the higher cohomology vanishes, so the Riemann-Roch formula gives the dimension of the zeroth cohomology group. In this paper we exploit the fact that the related moduli spaces $`_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and more generally $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$ defined above (which appear in algebraic geometry as moduli spaces of bundles with parabolic structure, where the parameters $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(s)}`$ $`𝐭_+`$ are equivalent to the specification of weights; see for example ) fibre over $`M(n,d)`$ provided the weights are sufficiently small. When these spaces admit a prequantum line bundle, we may push forward along the fibre to obtain a formula for the Riemann-Roch number of the prequantum line bundle on the total space in terms of the evaluation of appropriate cohomology classes on the fundamental class of $`M(n,d)`$. Formulas for the intersection numbers in $`M(n,d)`$ were proved in ; we apply these formulas together with the fibration to recover the Verlinde formula in this more general situation.

The layout of this paper is as follows. In Section 2 we review results from  on the cohomology ring of $`M(n,d)`$, while in Section 3 we summarize results on symplectic fibrations. Section 4 contains our proofs of the Verlinde formula: in Section 4.1 we first review the proof for $`M(n,d)`$ from , while Section 4.2 gives the proof for $`_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and Section 4.3 gives the proof for $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$.

Acknowledgements: This paper relies heavily on the author’s earlier joint work with F. Kirwan, notably on the paper  where the Verlinde formula for $`M(n,d)`$ is proved. We would like to acknowledge the hospitality of Université Paris-Sud (Orsay), where part of the work was completed.

## 2 Review of results on the cohomology of moduli spaces

Theorem (Atiyah-Bott 1982)  The cohomology ring of $`M(n,d)`$ over $`𝐐`$ is generated by elements $`\{a_r,b_r^j,f_r\}`$ (for $`r=2,\mathrm{},n`$ and $`j=1,\mathrm{},2g`$), where

$$a_rH^{2r}(M(n,d)),$$

$$b_r^jH^{2r1}(M(n,d)),$$

$$f_rH^{2r2}(M(n,d)).$$

If $`U`$ is the universal vector bundle over $`M(n,d)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }^g`$, the elements $`a_r,b_r^j,f_r`$ are obtained by decomposing $`c_r(U)`$ in terms of

$$_{s=0}^2H^{2rs}(M(n,d))H^s(\mathrm{\Sigma }^g)$$

using the Künneth formula.

###### Remark 2.1

The Verlinde formula (for $`M(n,d)`$ as well as for $`_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$) may be deduced from pairings involving only $`f_2`$ and the $`a_j`$.

We review the results of , where formulas were proved for intersection pairings in the cohomology of $`M(n,d)`$.

###### Remark 2.2

If $`M`$ is a symplectic manifold equipped with the Hamiltonian action of a Lie group $`G`$, and $`0`$ is a regular value of the moment map $`\mu :M𝐠^{}`$, then the Kirwan map is the map

$$\kappa :H_G^{}(M)H_G^{}(\mu ^1(0))H^{}(M_{\mathrm{red}}).$$

In this paper we are using the notation $`\kappa `$ to refer to the restriction to the image of $`H_G^{}(\mathrm{pt})S(𝐠^{})^G`$ in the domain $`H_G^{}(M)`$. In the case where $`M_{\mathrm{red}}=M(n,d)`$, this restricted map is simply the Chern-Weil map for the universal bundle restricted to $`M(n,d)\times \{\mathrm{pt}\}.`$

###### Theorem 2.3

Let $`c=\mathrm{diag}(e^{2\pi id/n},\mathrm{},e^{2\pi id/n})`$ where $`d\{1,\mathrm{},n1\}`$ is coprime to $`n`$, and suppose that $`\eta H_G^{}(\{\mathrm{pt}\})`$ is a polynomial $`Q(\tau _2,\mathrm{},\tau _n)`$ in the equivariant cohomology classes $`\tau _rH_G^{2r}(\mathrm{pt})`$ $`S(𝐠^{})^G`$ for $`2rn`$ (where $`\tau _r`$ is the $`r`$-th elementary symmetric polynomial), which generate the $`G`$-equivariant cohomology of a point, and map under the Kirwan map $`\kappa `$ to classes $`a_rH^{2r}(M(n,d))`$. Let $`f_2`$ be the cohomology class of the symplectic form. Then the pairing $`\kappa (\eta )\mathrm{exp}(f_2)[M(n,d)]`$ is given by

$$_{M(n,d)}\kappa (\eta )\mathrm{exp}(f_2)=\frac{(1)^{n_+(g1)}}{n!}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_1=0}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_{n1}=0}\left(\frac{_{wW_{n1}}e^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]],X}_{T^{2g}}\eta e^\omega }{𝒟^{2g2}_{1jn1}(\mathrm{exp}(Y_j)1)}\right),$$

where $`n_+=\frac{1}{2}n(n1)`$ is the number of positive roots of $`G=SU(n)`$ and $`X=(X_1.\mathrm{},X_n)𝐭𝐂`$ has coordinates $`Y_1=X_1X_2,\mathrm{},Y_{n1}=X_{n1}X_n`$ defined by the simple roots, while $`W_{n1}S_{n1}`$ is the Weyl group of $`SU(n1)`$ embedded in $`SU(n)`$ in the standard way using the first $`n1`$ coordinates. The quantity $`𝒟(X)=_{\gamma >0}\gamma (X)`$ is the product of the positive roots. The element $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ is the unique element of $`𝐭`$ which satisfies $`\mathrm{exp}\stackrel{~}{c}=c`$ and belongs to the fundamental domain defined by the simple roots for the translation action on $`𝐭`$ of the integer lattice $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^I`$ (in other words, the fundamental alcove).

Also, the notation $`[[\gamma ]]`$ means the unique element which is in the fundamental domain defined by the simple roots for the translation action on $`𝐭`$ of the integer lattice and for which $`[[\gamma ]]`$ is equal to $`\gamma `$ plus some element of the integer lattice.

Theorem 2.3 is a special case of Theorem 8.1 of : this special case suffices to prove the Verlinde formulas.

## 3 Symplectic fibrations

Let $`\stackrel{~}{c}𝐭`$ be an element of the closed fundamental alcove $`D_+`$ satisfying $`\mathrm{exp}\stackrel{~}{c}=c`$. The interior of the fundamental alcove will be denoted $`D_+^o`$.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n^g`$ denote an oriented two-manifold of genus $`g`$ with $`b`$ oriented boundary components $`S_1,\mathrm{},S_b`$.

###### Definition 3.1

Let $`𝚲=(\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)},\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(b)})`$ be a collection of $`b`$ values in $`D_+`$. The moduli space of representations is defined by

$$_{g,b}(𝚲)=_{g,b}(𝚲)/G,$$

where

$$_{g,b}(𝚲)=\{\rho \mathrm{Hom}(\pi _1(\mathrm{\Sigma }_b^g),G):\rho ([S_a])\mathrm{Cl}(\mathrm{exp}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(a)}),a=1,\mathrm{},b\}$$
(3.1)
and $`G`$ acts on $`_{g,b}(𝚲)`$ by conjugation. Here, $`\mathrm{Cl}(\mathrm{exp}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{[a]})`$ denotes the conjugacy class of $`\mathrm{exp}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{[a]}`$ in $`G`$.

The fundamental group of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_b^g`$ is the free group on $`2g+b`$ generators with one relation:

$$\pi _1(\mathrm{\Sigma }_n^g)=<x_1,\mathrm{},x_{2g},y_1,\mathrm{},y_b:\underset{j=1}{\overset{g}{}}[x_j,x_{j+g}]=\underset{r=1}{\overset{b}{}}y_r>.$$

Thus we have

$$_{g,n}(𝚲)=\{(h_1,\mathrm{},h_{2g},\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _b)G^{2g+b}:\underset{j=1}{\overset{g}{}}[h_j,h_{j+g}]=\underset{r=1}{\overset{b}{}}\beta _r,\beta _r\mathrm{Cl}(\mathrm{exp}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(r)})\}/G.$$
(3.2)
For later convenience we make a slight modification of this definition: We put

$$_{g,b}(c,𝚲)=\{(h_1,\mathrm{},h_{2g},\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _b)G^{2g+b}:\underset{j=1}{\overset{g}{}}[h_j,h_{j+g}]=c\underset{r=1}{\overset{b}{}}\beta _r,\beta _r\mathrm{Cl}(\mathrm{exp}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(r)})\}/G,$$
(3.3)
where $`c=\mathrm{diag}(e^{2\pi id/n},\mathrm{},e^{2\pi id/n}).`$ In particular we have

$$_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\{(h_1,\mathrm{},h_{2g},\beta )G^{2g+1}:\underset{j=1}{\overset{g}{}}[h_j,h_{j+g}]=c\beta ,\beta \mathrm{Cl}(\mathrm{exp}\mathrm{\Lambda })\}/G.$$

Results on symplectic fibrations of moduli spaces were developed in , and used there for purposes distinct from the objectives of the present paper. We have

###### Theorem 3.2

There is a neighbourhood $`U`$ of $`0`$ in $`𝐭`$ such that if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }U`$ then there is a fibration

$$\pi :_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })M(n,d)$$
(3.4)
with fibre $`𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (the orbit of the adjoint action of $`G`$ on $`𝐠`$). Further, the symplectic form $`\omega _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on $`_{g,1}(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ satisfies

$$\omega _\mathrm{\Lambda }=\pi ^{}\omega _{n,d}+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }$$
(3.5)
where $`\omega _{n,d}`$ is the symplectic form on $`M(n,d)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ restricts on each fibre of $`\pi `$ to the standard Kirillov-Kostant symplectic form $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on the coadjoint orbit $`𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

Proof: This follows by general results regarding symplectic fibrations associated to symplectic reduction at a regular value: see , Theorem 6.1 for a proof. Note that $`M(n,d)`$ is obtained by reducing an appropriate extended moduli space at a regular value of the moment map and that the 2-form $`\omega _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is nondegenerate in a neighbourhood of the preimage of this regular value under the moment map: see Proposition 5.5 of .

###### Remark 3.3

The region $`U`$ is characterized as the component of the complement of the union of the walls $`H_{v,n}`$ in $`𝐭_+`$ whose closure contains $`0`$, where

$$H_{v,n}=\{\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐭:v(\mathrm{\Lambda })=n\}$$

for one of the fundamental weights $`v`$ and $`n𝐙`$. Clearly the $`H_{v,n}`$ are the hyperplanes where the function  encoding the volume of the $`_{g,1}(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is not smooth : in other words they bound the region of regular values of the moment map, which is the region where the symplectic fibration of Theorem 3.2 exists. We thank A. Szenes for this observation, which is explained in .

###### Proposition 3.4

If $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a regular element of $`𝐭^{}`$, the coadjoint orbit $`𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is diffeomorphic to the homogeneous space $`G/T`$ so its cohomology is given by

$$H^{}(𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda })\frac{S(𝐭^{})}{S(𝐭^{})^W},$$
(3.6)
in other words the quotient of ring of polynomials on $`𝐭`$ by the subring of symmetric polynomials.

We have the following proposition:

###### Proposition 3.5

The space $`_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is a splitting manifold for the universal bundle $`U_{M(n,d)\times \{\mathrm{pt}\}}`$ over $`M(n,d)\times \{\mathrm{pt}\}M(n,d)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_0^g:`$ in other words

$$\pi ^{}\left(U_{M(n,d)\times \{\mathrm{pt}\}}\right)=L_1\mathrm{}L_n$$

where $`c_1(L_j)=e_j`$ for a collection of classes $`e_j`$ in $`H^2\left(_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })\right)`$ (for $`j=1,\mathrm{},n`$). Here, when $`j=1,\mathrm{},n1`$, $`e_j`$ restricts on the fibres of $`\pi `$ to the generator $`\alpha _j`$ $`(j=1,\mathrm{},n1)`$ of $`H^2(G/T,𝐙)H^1(T,𝐙)`$ corresponding to the $`j`$-th fundamental weight of $`SU(n)`$ (an element of $`\mathrm{Hom}(T,U(1))`$, which is isomorphic to $`H^1(T,𝐙)`$) and $`e_n=(e_1+\mathrm{}+e_{n1}).`$

Proof: This follows from the algebro-geometric description of the moduli space of parabolic bundles (see for instance ): it is the moduli space parametrizing holomorphic bundles over $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0^g`$ together with a flag in the fibre of each bundle over a basepoint $`(\{pt\})\mathrm{\Sigma }_0^g`$. The flag structure enables us naturally to split the universal bundle into a sum of holomorphic line bundles.

###### Proposition 3.6

If $`\tau _r`$ is the $`r`$-th elementary symmetric polynomial (for $`r=2,\mathrm{},n`$) then $`\tau _r(e_1,\mathrm{},e_n)=\pi ^{}a_r`$, where $`a_r=c_r(U_{M(n,d)\times \{\mathrm{pt}\}}).`$

Proof: See p. 284 (Section 21) of  for results on the properties of splitting manifolds and flag bundles. There, it is proved that for a complex vector bundle $`E`$ over a complex manifold $`M`$ with splitting manifold $`\mathrm{Fl}(E)`$, we have

$$H^{}\left(\mathrm{Fl}(E)\right)=\frac{H^{}(M)[e_1,\mathrm{},e_n]}{_{i=1}^n(1+e_i)=c(E)},$$
(3.7)
where the $`e_jH^2(\mathrm{Fl}(E))`$ restrict (for $`j=1,\mathrm{},n`$) on the fibre $`U(n)/U(1)^n`$ $`G/T`$ (where $`G=SU(n)`$ and $`T`$ is its maximal torus) to the images under the coboundary map (in the Leray-Serre spectral sequence) of the elements $`H_{U(1)^n}^1(\{pt\},𝐙)`$ $`=\mathrm{Hom}(U(1)^n,U(1))`$ given by a basis for the weight lattice of $`U(1)^n`$.

The following is a standard result (see for instance , Lemma 7.22):

###### Proposition 3.7

Let $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _n`$ (subject to $`_{j=1}^n\alpha _j=0`$) be the basis for $`H_T^2(\{pt\})`$ (the second equivariant cohomology group of a point for the maximal torus $`T`$ of $`SU(n)`$) which was introduced in Proposition 3.5. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=_{i=1}^{n1}\mathrm{\Lambda }_i\widehat{u}_i`$ where $`\widehat{u}_i`$ is the $`i`$-th simple root: note that the simple roots are the basis of $`𝐭`$ dual to the fundamental weights, which were introduced in Proposition 3.5 to define the generators $`\alpha _j`$. Then the standard Kirillov-Kostant symplectic form $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on $`𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j\alpha _j.$$

## 4 Application to the Verlinde formula

### 4.1 The Verlinde formula for $`M(n,d)`$

###### Definition 4.1

The highest root $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}`$ is given by $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}(X)=X_nX_1`$ or $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}(X)=Y_1+\mathrm{}+Y_{n1}`$.

###### Definition 4.2

The Verlinde function $`V_{n,d}(g,k)`$ is given by

$$V_{n,d}(g,k)=\underset{\mu \mathrm{\Delta }(r)}{}\frac{e^{2\pi i\mu \rho ,\stackrel{~}{c}}}{(S_{0\mu }(k))^{2g2}}$$

where $`\rho `$ is half the sum of the positive roots and

$$S_{0\mu }(k)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}r^{(n1)/2}}\underset{\gamma >0}{}2\mathrm{sin}\pi \gamma ,\mu /r.$$

(See  (A.44) and  (3.16).) Here, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^W`$ is the weight lattice, identified with points in $`𝐭`$. We have introduced the quantity

$$r=k+n;$$
(4.1)
we have also introduced

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(r)=\{\mu \mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{reg}}^W𝐭_+:\mu ,\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}<r\}.$$

The Verlinde formula is a formula for the dimension $`D_{n,d}(g,k)`$ of the space of holomorphic sections of powers of $``$ , where $``$ is a particular line bundle over $`M(n,d)`$: it has been proved by Beauville and Laszlo , Faltings , Kumar, Narasimhan and Ramanathan  and Tsuchiya, Ueno and Yamada . In  Bismut and Labourie have given a proof of the Verlinde formula using techniques from symplectic geometry.

In this section we review the results from Section 11 of , showing how the Verlinde formula follows from the formula (Theorem 2.3) for intersection pairings in $`M(n,d)`$.

A line bundle $``$ over $`M(n,d)`$ may be defined for which $`c_1()=nf_2`$, since $`nf_2H^2(M(n,d),𝐙)`$ (see ). Whenever $`k`$ is a positive integer divisible by $`n`$, we then define

$$D_{n,d}(g,k)=dimH^0(M(n,d),^{k/n}).$$
(4.2)
Verlinde’s conjecture says that the Verlinde function specifies the dimension of the space of holomorphic sections of $`^{k/n}`$:

###### Theorem 4.3

(Verlinde’s conjecture)

$$D_{n,d}(g,k)=V_{n,d}(g,k).$$

We review the method of Section 11 of , where we gave a proof of Verlinde’s conjecture for $`M(n,d)`$: an outline of the method we use was given by Szenes  (Section 4.2).

In fact $`H^i(M(n,d),^m)=0`$ for all $`i>0`$ and $`m>0`$ (see Section 11 of  for references and an outline of the proof). So $`D_{n,d}(g,k)`$ is given for $`k>0`$ by the Riemann-Roch formula:

$$D_{n,d}(g,k)=_{M(n,d)}\mathrm{ch}^{k/n}\mathrm{Td}M(n,d).$$
(4.3)
We use the following results to convert (4.3) into a form to which we may apply our previous results.

###### Lemma 4.4

For any complex manifold $`M`$ the Todd class of $`M`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{Td}(M)=e^{c_1(M)/2}\widehat{A}(M)$$

where $`c_1(M)`$ is the first Chern class of the holomorphic tangent bundle of $`M`$, and $`\widehat{A}(M)`$ is the $`A`$-hat genus of $`M`$.

Proof: See for example , pages 97-99.

###### Proposition 4.5

We have

$$\widehat{A}(M(n,d))=\kappa \left(\underset{\gamma >0}{}\frac{\gamma /2}{\mathrm{sinh}\gamma /2}\right)^{2g2}.$$

Proof: This is proved by Newstead in .

###### Lemma 4.6

We have

$$c_1(M(n,d))=2nf_2.$$

Proof: This is proved in , Théorème F .

Of course the Chern character of $`^{k/n}`$ is given by $`\mathrm{ch}^{k/n}=e^{kf_2}.`$ Thus we obtain

###### Proposition 4.7

The quantity $`D_{n,d}(g,k)`$ is given by

$$D_{n,d}(g,k)=_{M(n,d)}e^{(k+n)f_2}\kappa \left(\underset{\gamma >0}{}\frac{\gamma }{e^{\gamma /2}e^{\gamma /2}}\right)^{2g2}.$$

Proof: This follows immediately from (4.3), Lemmas 4.4 and 4.6 and Proposition 4.5.

###### Theorem 4.8

We have

$$D_{n,d}(g,k)=\frac{(1)^{n_+(g1)}}{n!}\underset{wW_{n1}}{}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_1=0}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_{n1}=0}(e^{r[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]],X}_{T^{2g}}e^{r\omega }\times $$

$$\underset{\gamma >0}{}\left(\frac{\gamma (X)}{e^{\gamma (X)/2}e^{\gamma (X)/2}}\right)^{2g2}\frac{1}{_{j=1}^l(e^{rY_j}1)𝒟(X)^{2g2}}).$$
(4.4)
Proof: This is a direct consequence of Corollary 4.7 and Theorem 2.3. Note that because the factor $`e^{f_2}`$ in the statement of Theorem 2.3 has been replaced by $`e^{rf_2}`$, it is necessary to replace $`e^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]],X}`$ by $`e^{r[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]],X}`$, and $`e^{Y_j}1`$ by $`e^{rY_j}1`$.

We introduce $`Z_j=\mathrm{exp}Y_j`$. Since for any $`wW_{n1}`$ we have that

$$[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]=[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_1\widehat{u}_1+[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_2\widehat{u}_2+\mathrm{}+[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_{n1}\widehat{u}_{n1}$$

in terms of the standard basis vectors

$$\widehat{u}_j=(0,\mathrm{},0,1,1,0,\mathrm{},0)$$

for the integer lattice $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^I`$ of $`𝐭`$, with $`n[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_j𝐙`$ for all $`j`$, and $`0[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_j<1`$ for all $`j`$. We obtain

$$e^{r[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_,X}=Z_1^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_1r}Z_2^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_2r}\mathrm{}Z_{n1}^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_{n1}r}.$$

(Recall that $`k`$ and $`r`$ are divisible by $`n`$ so $`e^{r\stackrel{~}{c},X}`$ is a well defined single valued function of $`Z_1`$, $`\mathrm{},Z_{n1}`$.) Thus we can equate $`D_{n,d}(g,k)`$ with

$$\frac{(1)^{n_+(g1)}}{n!}\underset{wW_{n1}}{}\mathrm{Res}_{Z_1=1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Z_{n1}=1}(\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\frac{1}{Z_j}\right)_{T^{2g}}e^{r\omega }\times $$

$$\frac{Z_1^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_1r}Z_2^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_2r}\mathrm{}Z_{n1}^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_{n1}r}}{_{\gamma >0}(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2})^{2g2}(Z_1^r1)\mathrm{}(Z_{n1}^r1)})$$

$$=\frac{(1)^{n1+n_+(g1)}}{n!}\underset{wW_{n1}}{}\mathrm{Res}_{Z_1=1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Z_{n1}=1}(\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\frac{1}{Z_j}\right)\times $$
(4.5)
$$_{T^{2g}}e^{r\omega }\frac{Z_1^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_1r}Z_2^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_2r}\mathrm{}Z_{n1}^{[[w\stackrel{~}{c}]]_{n1}r}}{_{\gamma >0}(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2})^{2g2}(Z_1^r1)\mathrm{}(Z_{n1}^r1)}).$$

Here, we have introduced $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ defined (for the root $`\gamma =u_r+u_{r+1}+\mathrm{}+u_{s1}`$, where the $`u_j𝐭^{}`$ are identified via the usual inner product with the $`\widehat{u}_j𝐭`$) by

$$\stackrel{~}{\gamma }(Z_1,\mathrm{},Z_{n1})=Z_r\mathrm{}Z_{s1}.$$
(4.6)
We also have

###### Lemma 4.9

$$_{T^2}e^\omega =n$$

and hence

$$_{T^{2g}}e^{r\omega }=r^{(n1)g}n^g.$$

Proof: This follows from the calculation given in Lemma 10.10 of .

The following may be proved by the same method as in Section 2 of  (see also ):

###### Proposition 4.10

Suppose $`\nu `$ $`𝐭`$ is of the form $`\nu =_{j=1}^{n1}\nu _j\widehat{u}_j`$ with $`0\nu _j<1`$ for all $`j`$ (in other words $`\nu `$ is in the interior of the fundamental alcove). Define the meromorphic function $`f`$ on the complexification $`T^𝐂`$ of $`T`$ as follows:

$$f(Z)=(1)^{n1}(1)^{n_+(g1)}r^{(n1)(g1)}n^{g1}\frac{Z_1^{\nu _1r}\mathrm{}Z_{n1}^{\nu _{n1}r}}{_{\gamma >0}(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2})^{2g2}}.$$
(4.7)
Then we have that

$$\frac{1}{(n1)!}\mathrm{Res}_{Z_1=1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Z_{n1}=1}\underset{wW_{n1}}{}\underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\left(\frac{r}{Z_j}\right)\frac{[[wf]](Z)}{_{j=1}^{n1}(Z_j^r1)}$$
(4.8)
$$=\underset{\mu \mathrm{\Delta }(r)}{}f(\mathrm{exp}2\pi i\mu /r).$$

Here, $`W_{n1}`$ is the permutation group on $`\{1,\mathrm{},n1\}`$ which is (isomorphic to) the Weyl group of $`SU(n1)`$, and $`[[wf]]`$ is the function

$$[[wf]](Z)=(1)^{n1}(1)^{n_+(g1)}r^{(n1)(g1)}n^{g1}\frac{Z_1^{[[w\nu ]]_1r}\mathrm{}Z_{n1}^{[[w\nu ]]_{n1}r}}{_{\gamma >0}(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2})^{2g2}}.$$
(4.9)
For a root $`\gamma `$, the quantity $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ was defined by (4.6).

Remark: Notice that we have

$$\underset{\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }(r)}{}f(\mathrm{exp}2\pi i\lambda /r)=\frac{1}{n1}\underset{m_j=1}{\overset{r1}{}}f\left(e^{2\pi i(_jm_jw_j)/r}\right).$$

(Here, the $`w_j`$ are the fundamental weights, which are dual to the simple roots $`\{\widehat{u}_j\}`$.) The set $`\{X𝐭:`$ $`X=_j\lambda _j\widehat{u}_j,0\lambda _j<1,j=1,\mathrm{},n1\}`$ is a fundamental domain for the action of the integer lattice $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^I`$ on $`𝐭`$, while the set $`\{X𝐭_+𝐭:\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}(X)<1\}`$ is a fundamental domain for the affine Weyl group $`W_{\mathrm{aff}}`$ (the semidirect product of the Weyl group and the integer lattice), and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^I`$ has index $`(n1)!`$ (rather than $`n!`$) in $`W_{\mathrm{aff}}`$ (in other words a fundamental domain for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^I`$ contains $`(n1)!`$ fundamental domains for $`W_{\mathrm{aff}}`$).

Applying Proposition 4.10 we find (noting that $`(1)^{n1}=c^\rho `$ when $`n`$ and $`d`$ are coprime) that

$$D_{n,d}(g,k)=(1)^{n_+(g1)}r^{(n1)(g1)}n^{g1}c^\rho \underset{\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }(r)}{}\frac{e^{2\pi i\stackrel{~}{c},\lambda }}{_{\gamma >0}(e^{2\pi i\frac{\gamma }{2r},\lambda }e^{2\pi i\frac{\gamma }{2r},\lambda })^{2g2}}.$$
(4.10)
This gives

$$D_{n,d}(g,k)=(1)^{n_+(g1)}r^{(n1)(g1)}n^{g1}\underset{\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }(r)}{}\frac{e^{2\pi i\stackrel{~}{c},\lambda +\rho }}{_{\gamma >0}(2i\mathrm{sin}\pi \gamma ,\lambda /r)^{2g2}}$$
(4.11)
$$=r^{(n1)(g1)}n^{g1}\underset{\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }(r)}{}\frac{e^{2\pi i\stackrel{~}{c},\lambda +\rho }}{_{\gamma >0}\left(2\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi \gamma ,\lambda }{r}\right)^{2g2}}.$$
(4.12)
Comparing with Definition 4.2, we see that $`D_{n,d}(g,k)=V_{n,d}(g,k)`$. This completes the proof of Theorem 4.3.

### 4.2 The Verlinde formula for $`_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$

There is a more general version of Verlinde’s conjecture which applies to the case of $`_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐭`$, and let $`k`$ be a positive integer divisible by $`n`$. If $`k\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is in the weight lattice $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^W`$, then the cohomology class of $`k\omega `$ is a class in integral cohomology, and hence is the first Chern class of a line bundle over $`_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ (denoted $`^{k/n}`$). Notice that $`kf_2`$ is automatically in integral cohomology, since $`nf_2`$ is in integral cohomology.

###### Definition 4.11

$$D_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\underset{j0}{}(1)^j\mathrm{dim}H^j(_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda }),^{k/n})$$

Note that the argument sketched in Section 11 of  does not generalize to show that $`H^j(_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda }),^{k/n})=0`$ when $`j>0`$, unlike the situation for $`M(n,d)`$. (However, in  Teleman has constructed an alternative argument showing the vanishing of these higher cohomology groups.)

We introduce $`\lambda =k\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

###### Definition 4.12

The Verlinde function is

$$V_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\underset{\mu \mathrm{\Delta }(r)}{}\frac{e^{2\pi i\mu \rho ,\stackrel{~}{c}}S_{\lambda \mu }(r)}{(S_{0\mu }(r))^{2g1}}$$

where

$$S_{\lambda \mu }(r)=\frac{(\sqrt{1})^{n(n1)/2}}{\sqrt{n}r^{(n1)/2}}\underset{wW}{}(1)^we^{2\pi iw(\lambda +\rho ),\mu +\rho /r}.$$
(4.13)
###### Theorem 4.13

*\[*Verlinde’s conjecture for parabolic bundles\] There exists a neighbourhood $`U`$ of $`0`$ in $`𝐭`$ such that, for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }U`$ for which $`k\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }^W`$, we have

$$D_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda })=V_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda }).$$

The proof of Theorem 4.13 proceeds by a sequence of lemmas. By the Riemann-Roch formula, we have

$$D_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda })=_{_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })}\mathrm{ch}(^{k/n})\mathrm{Td}(_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda }))$$
(4.14)
We now use the fibration from Theorem 3.2 to integrate over the fibre in order to obtain an integral over the base $`M(n,d)`$: the latter is then evaluated using Theorem 2.3. First we observe that because the Todd class is multiplicative, it decomposes as the product of Todd classes corresponding to the fibre and the base:

###### Lemma 4.14

$$\mathrm{Td}(_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda }))=\mathrm{Td}(T_{\mathrm{vert}}_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda }))\pi ^{}\mathrm{Td}(M(n,d)).$$

Here we have introduced $`T_{\mathrm{vert}}_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$, the vertical tangent bundle of the fibre of (3.4), so

$$\pi _{}\mathrm{Td}(_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda }))=\mathrm{Td}(M(n,d))\pi _{}\mathrm{Td}(T_{\mathrm{vert}}_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })).$$

Next we recall that since the fibre of (3.4) is just a homogeneous space $`G/T`$, we can express its Todd class in terms of the generators introduced in Proposition 3.5.

###### Lemma 4.15

$$\mathrm{Td}(𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda })=\left(\underset{\gamma >0}{}\frac{\gamma ()}{1e^{\gamma ()}}\right).$$

Here, $`=(e_1,\mathrm{},e_n)`$ is regarded as a member of $`H^2(𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda })𝐭`$ so one can naturally pair it with the root $`\gamma 𝐭^{}`$ to obtain an element $`(\gamma ,)=\gamma ((e_1,\mathrm{},e_n))`$ in $`H^2(𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda },𝐑).`$

Proof: This is proved (for example) in Section 14 of . Here, the $`e_i`$ were introduced in Proposition 3.5.

To obtain the Riemann-Roch number we must compute

$$_{_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })}\mathrm{ch}(^{k/n})\mathrm{Td}(_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })).$$
(4.15)
Using the fact that

$$\mathrm{ch}(^{k/n})=\mathrm{exp}(k\omega _\mathrm{\Lambda })$$

and the decomposition of $`\omega _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ given by (3.5), we find that we must compute

$$_{_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })}\left(e^{k\pi ^{}\omega _{n,d}}\pi ^{}\mathrm{Td}(M(n,d))\right)\left(e^{k\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }}\mathrm{Td}(T_{\mathrm{vert}}_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda }))\right)$$
(4.16)
where $`T_{\mathrm{vert}}_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is the vertical tangent bundle of the fibres.

We shall integrate over the fibre appearing in (3.4): on this fibre we see that

$$e^{k\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }}\mathrm{Td}(T_{\mathrm{vert}}_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda }))$$

becomes

$$\mathrm{exp}\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}\lambda _je_j\right)\underset{\gamma >0}{}\frac{(\gamma ,)e^{(\gamma ,)/2}}{e^{(\gamma ,)/2}e^{(\gamma ,)/2}}$$
(4.17)
Recall that we have introduced

$$=(e_1,\mathrm{},e_n).$$

To do the integral we reorganize it in terms of Weyl invariant and Weyl anti-invariant cohomology classes. We replace the expression in (4.17) by

$$𝒯()\underset{\gamma >0}{}(\gamma ,),$$
(4.18)
where

$$𝒯()=\frac{1}{|W|}\underset{vW}{}(1)^v\frac{e^{v(\lambda +\rho ),}}{_{\gamma >0}e^{(\gamma ,)/2}e^{(\gamma ,)/2}.}$$

Recall that $`\rho `$ is half the sum of the positive roots.

Note that the quantity $`𝒯()`$ is invariant under the transformation $`w`$. Hence by Propositions 3.4 and 3.6, $`𝒯()`$ $`=\pi ^{}𝒮_\lambda (a_2,\mathrm{},a_n)`$ for an appropriate polynomial $`𝒮_\lambda (a_2,\mathrm{},a_n)`$ in the $`a_2,\mathrm{},a_n`$. Here, $`𝒮_\lambda `$ is defined by

$$𝒮_\lambda (\kappa (\tau _2),\mathrm{},\kappa (\tau _n))=\kappa \left(\frac{_{vW}(1)^ve^{(v(\lambda +\rho ),X)}}{_{\gamma >0}e^{(\gamma ,X)/2}e^{(\gamma ,X)/2}}\right).$$
(4.19)
The $`a_j`$ satisfy $`a_j=\kappa (\tau _j)`$ where $`\tau _j`$ is the $`j`$-th elementary symmetric polynomial ($`\tau _jS(𝐭^{})^W`$) and $`\kappa `$ is the Kirwan map. The integral over the fibre reduces to

$$_{M(n,d)}𝒮_\lambda (\kappa (\tau _2),\mathrm{},\kappa (\tau _n))e^{k\omega _{n,d}}\mathrm{Td}(M(n,d))_{𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda }}\underset{\gamma >0}{}(\gamma ,)$$
(4.20)
where $`𝒮_\lambda `$ is defined in (4.19). Now the integral

$$_{𝒪_\mathrm{\Lambda }}\underset{\gamma >0}{}(\gamma ,)$$

gives the Euler characteristic of the orbit, which is simply $`|W|`$ $`=n!`$ (, Chap. 14). Thus the integral over the total space $`_{g,1}(c,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is reduced to an integral over the base space $`M(n,d)`$: it becomes

$$_{M(n,d)}𝒮_\lambda (\kappa (\tau _2),\mathrm{}\kappa (\tau _n))e^{k\omega _{n,d}}\mathrm{Td}(M(n,d)).$$
(4.21)
(Notice that the argument of $`\kappa `$ in (4.19) is the quotient of two Weyl anti-invariant functions of the variable $`X`$ and hence is Weyl invariant.)

A generalization of Theorem 2.3 (proved by an extension of the proof of Theorem 2.3 given in ) is

###### Theorem 4.16

In the notation from the statement of Theorem 2.3, let

$$\alpha =\kappa \left(\underset{vW}{}(1)^v\frac{e^{v\nu ,X}}{_{\gamma >0}(e^{\gamma ,X}e^{\gamma ,X})}\right)$$

be a formal cohomology class in $`H^{}(M(n,d))`$, where $`\nu 𝐭^{}`$. (Note that the argument of $`\kappa `$ is a Weyl invariant function of $`X`$.) Then $`\kappa (\eta )\alpha \mathrm{exp}(f_2)[M(n,d)]`$ is given by

$$_{M(n,d)}\kappa (\eta )\alpha \mathrm{exp}(f_2)=\frac{(1)^{n_+(g1)}}{n!}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_1=0}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_{n1}=0}$$

$$\left(\frac{_{wW_{n1}}_{vW}(1)^ve^{[[w(\stackrel{~}{c}+v\nu )]],X}_{T^{2g}}\eta e^\omega }{𝒟_n^{2g2}_{\gamma >0}(e^{\gamma ,X/2}e^{\gamma ,X/2})_{1jn1}(\mathrm{exp}(Y_j)1)}\right),$$

Recall that the notation $`[[\gamma ]]`$ means the unique element which is in the fundamental domain defined by the simple roots for the translation action on $`𝐭`$ of the integer lattice and for which $`[[\gamma ]]`$ is equal to $`\gamma `$ plus some element of the integer lattice.

The expression in (4.21) is the type of integral computed by Theorem 4.16. A straightforward modification of the proof of Proposition 4.7 gives that the Riemann-Roch number is

$$V_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda })=_{M(n,d)}e^{(k+n)f_2}\kappa \left(\underset{\gamma >0}{}\frac{\gamma (X)^{2g2}}{\left(e^{\gamma (X)/2}e^{\gamma (X)/2}\right)^{2g1}}\underset{vW}{}(1)^ve^{(v(\lambda +\rho ),X)}\right).$$
(4.22)
Using Theorem 4.16 this leads to (in a manner similar to the proof of Theorem 4.8)

$$V_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\frac{(1)^{n_+(g1)}}{n!}\underset{wW_{n1}}{}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_1=0}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_{n1}=0}_{T^{2g}}e^{r\omega }\times $$
(4.23)
$$\underset{\gamma >0}{}(\frac{(\gamma (X))^{2g2}}{(e^{\gamma (X)/2}e^{\gamma (X)/2})^{2g1}}\frac{_{vW}(1)^ve^{r[[w(\stackrel{~}{c}+v(\lambda +\rho )/r)]],X}}{_{j=1}^l(e^{rY_j}1)𝒟(X)^{2g2}}.$$

This yields in turn (just as in (4.5))

$$V_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\frac{(1)^{n1+n_+(g1)}}{n!}\underset{wW_{n1}}{}\underset{vW}{}(1)^v\mathrm{Res}_{Z_1=1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Z_{n1}=1}\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\frac{1}{Z_j}\right)\times $$
(4.24)
$$_{T^{2g}}e^{r\omega }\frac{Z_1^{r[[w(\stackrel{~}{c}+v(\lambda +\rho )/r)]]_1}Z_2^{r[[w(\stackrel{~}{c}+v(\lambda +\rho )/r)]]_2}\mathrm{}Z_{n1}^{r[[w(\stackrel{~}{c}+v(\lambda +\rho )/r)]]_{n1}}}{_{\gamma >0}(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2})^{2g1}(Z_1^r1)\mathrm{}(Z_{n1}^r1)}$$

Finally we may use Proposition 4.10 to obtain an expression equivalent to (4.24):

###### Theorem 4.17

We have

$$V_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\underset{\mu \mathrm{\Delta }(r)}{}\frac{e^{2\pi i\mu +\rho ,\stackrel{~}{c}}S_{\lambda \mu }(r)}{S_{0\mu }^{2g1}}$$

where

$$S_{\lambda \mu }(r)=\frac{(\sqrt{1})^{n(n1)/2}}{\sqrt{n}r^{(n1)/2}}\underset{vW}{}(1)^ve^{2\pi iv(\lambda +\rho ),\mu +\rho /r}.$$
(4.25)
Since the formula given in Theorem 4.17 is the formula for $`D_{n,d}(g,k,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$, we have proved Theorem 4.13. The proof of Theorem 4.17 is valid when $`\mathrm{\Lambda }U`$.

### 4.3 The Verlinde formula for $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$

More generally, there are spaces $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$ which fibre over $`M(n,d)`$ with fibre $`𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)}}\times \mathrm{}\times 𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(b)}}`$ for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(j)}`$ sufficiently close to $`0`$. We introduce the notation $`𝚲=(\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)},\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(b)})`$. We restrict to those $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(j)}`$ for which $`k\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(j)}\mathrm{\Lambda }^W`$; we denote $`k\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(j)}`$ by $`\lambda ^{(j)}`$.

###### Proposition 4.18

There is a neighbourhood $`𝐔`$ of the element $`(0,\mathrm{},0)`$ $`𝐭^b`$ such that if $`𝚲𝐔`$ then there is a fibration

$$\pi :_{g,b}(c,𝚲)M(n,d)$$

with fibre $`𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)}}\times \mathrm{}\times 𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(b)}}`$. Further, the symplectic form on $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$ satisfies

$$\omega _𝚲=\pi ^{}\omega _{n,d}+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_𝚲$$
(4.26)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_𝚲`$ restricts on each fibre to the sum of the Kirillov-Kostant symplectic forms

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{b}{}}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(j)}}$$

on the product of the coadjoint orbits $`𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(j)}}.`$

Proof: The proof is as in Theorem 3.2. We use the fact that $`M(n,d)`$ is the reduced space at the regular value $`\mathrm{𝟎}`$ of a symplectic manifold equipped with a Hamiltonian action of $`G^b`$, and that at orbits of the $`G^b`$ action close to $`0`$, the corresponding reduced spaces are the $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$. This extends the argument of Proposition 5.5 of , using the fact that the action of $`G^b`$ is free on the zero locus of the moment map: this action is given in (5.9) and (5.10) of , and it is straightforward to verify that the action is free when the moment map takes the value $`\{\mathrm{𝟎}\}.`$

###### Remark 4.19

The region $`𝐔`$ is characterized as the component whose closure contains $`(0,\mathrm{},0)`$ in the complement in $`𝐭_{+}^{}{}_{}{}^{b}`$ of the union of the walls

$$\{(\mathrm{\Lambda }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_b):\underset{(w_1,\mathrm{},w_b)W^b}{}w_j\mathrm{\Lambda }_jH_{v,n}\}.$$

Here the walls $`H_{v,n}`$ were introduced in (3.3). This observation is due to A. Szenes .

###### Proposition 4.20

We have

$$\pi ^{}\left[U|_{M(n,d)\times \{\mathrm{pt}\}}\right]=_{j=1}^n_{s=1}^bL_j^{(s)},$$

where $`c_1(L_j^{(s)})=e_j^{(s)}`$ restricts on the $`s`$-th orbit $`𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(s)}}`$ in the fibre of $`\pi `$ to the generator $`\alpha _j^{(s)}`$ of $`H^2(𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(s)}})`$ corresponding to the $`j`$-th fundamental weight of $`SU(n)`$.

As in Lemma 4.14, we have

$$\mathrm{Td}(_{g,b}(c,𝚲))=\mathrm{Td}(T_{\mathrm{vert}}_{g,b}(c,𝚲))\pi ^{}\mathrm{Td}(M(n,d)),$$

where $`\mathrm{Td}(T_{\mathrm{vert}}_{g,b}(c,𝚲))`$ is the vertical tangent bundle of $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$. The integral over the fibres decomposes as a product (as in (4.17)) of factors of the form

$$_{𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(s)}}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{b}{}}\lambda _j^{(s)}e_j^{(s)}\right)\underset{\gamma >0}{}\frac{(\gamma ,^{(s)})e^{(\gamma ,^{(s)})/2}}{e^{(\gamma ,^{(s)})/2}e^{(\gamma ,^{(s)})/2}}$$
(4.27)
where $`^{(s)}=(e_1^{(s)},\mathrm{},e_n^{(s)}).`$ (Here we have introduced a basis $`\{e_j^{(s)}\}`$ for $`H^2(𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(s)}})`$, following Propositions 3.4 and 3.5.) Each of the integrals (4.27) is of the form

$$𝒮_{\lambda ^{(s)}}(\kappa (\tau _2),\mathrm{},\kappa (\tau _n))$$

where $`𝒮_\lambda `$ was defined in (4.19). From the product of these integrals over the $`𝒪_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(s)}}`$, we obtain

$$V_{n,d}(g,k,𝚲)=_{M(n,d)}e^{rf_2}\times $$
(4.28)
$$\times \kappa \left(\underset{\gamma >0}{}\frac{\gamma (X)^{2g2}}{\left(e^{\gamma (X)/2}e^{\gamma (X)/2}\right)^{2g2+b}}\underset{s=1}{\overset{b}{}}\underset{v_sW}{}(1)^{v_s}e^{(v_s(\lambda ^{(s)}+\rho ),X)}\right).$$

Using Theorem 4.16, (4.28) leads to

$$V_{n,d}(g,k,𝚲)=\frac{(1)^{n_+(g1)}}{n!}\underset{wW_{n1}}{}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_1=0}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Y_{n1}=0}_{T^{2g}}e^{r\omega }\times $$
(4.29)
$$\times \underset{\gamma >0}{}\left(\frac{\gamma (X)^{2g2}}{(e^{\gamma (X)/2}e^{\gamma (X)/2})^{2g2+b}}\right)\underset{s=1}{\overset{b}{}}\underset{v_sW}{}(1)^{v_s}\frac{\mathrm{exp}(r[[w\stackrel{~}{c}+_s(v_s(\lambda ^{(s)}+\rho )/r]],X)}{_{j=1}^l(e^{rY_j}1)𝒟(X)^{2g2}}.$$

This leads in turn (just as in (4.5) and (4.24)) to

$$V_{n,d}(g,k,𝚲)=\frac{(1)^{n1+n_+(g1)}}{n!}\underset{wW_{n1}}{}\underset{v_1W}{}\mathrm{}\underset{v_bW}{}(1)^{v_1}\mathrm{}(1)^{v_b}\times $$
(4.30)
$$\times \mathrm{Res}_{Z_1=1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{Res}_{Z_{n1}=1}\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\frac{1}{Z_1}\times \mathrm{}\times \frac{1}{Z_{n1}}\right)_{T^{2g}}e^{r\omega }$$

$$\times \frac{Z_1^{r[[w(\stackrel{~}{c}+_{s=1}^bv_s(\lambda ^{(s)}+\rho )/r)]]_1}Z_2^{r[[w(\stackrel{~}{c}+_{s=1}^bv_s(\lambda ^{(s)}+\rho )/r)]]_2}\mathrm{}Z_{n1}^{r[[w(\stackrel{~}{c}+_{s=1}^bv_s(\lambda ^{(s)}+\rho )/r)]]_{n1}}}{_{\gamma >0}(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{1/2})^{2g2+b}(Z_1^r1)\mathrm{}(Z_{n1}^r1)}$$

Finally we may use Proposition 4.10 to recover

###### Theorem 4.21

The Riemann-Roch number of $`_{g,b}(c,𝚲)`$ is given by

$$_{_{g,b}(c,𝚲)}\mathrm{ch}(^{k/n})\mathrm{Td}(_{g,b}(c,𝚲))=$$

$$=\underset{\mu }{}\frac{e^{2\pi i\mu \rho ,\stackrel{~}{c}}_{s=1}^bS_{\mu \lambda ^{(s)}}(r)}{(S_{0\mu }(r))^{2g2+b}}.$$

The proof of Theorem 4.21 is valid when $`𝚲𝐔`$.