text:
# The Image of Self Intersecting QCD Strings in Four Dimensions

## I Introduction

Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) is widely regarded as the correct theory of strong interactions. However, inherently non-perturbative effects such as confinement remain hidden in the theory due to the nature of the strong coupling of QCD. In 1973, t’Hooft proposed the parameter $`N_c`$ of the color gauge group be treated as a free parameter, and considered the limit $`N_c\mathrm{}`$ applied to the expansion of a gauge theory. The resulting expansion gives Feynman diagrams which possess the same topology as the quantized dual string model with quarks at the string ends. Also, Wilson showed that lattice gauge theory in the strong-coupling approximation is a confining theory due to the formation of color charged strings formed by Faraday flux lines. However this strong coupling approximation cannot be made in the continuous theory. Later Makeenko and Migdal as well as Gervais and Nevue were able to establish to first order in the lattice spacing an equivalence between a Wilson loop

$`\mathrm{\Phi }(x^\mu (\tau ))=trT\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle A_\nu \frac{dX^\nu }{d\sigma }𝑑\sigma })`$

and solutions to the single string Schroedinger equation, provided that the gauge field satisfied the Yang-Mills equations of motion. These indirect probes suggests that the effective action for QCD in the strong coupling regime is a string-like theory. Although the precise string theory that governs strongly coupled QCD is unknown we expect this string theory to possess certain qualitative features that are characteristic of QCD. Polyakov and Balachandran et al. examined the effect of adding a term proportional to the extrinsic curvature to the Nambu-Goto action so that $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ vacua effects could be incorporated into the string ansatz. The extrinsic curvature term admits self-intersecting immersions as solutions and Nair and Mazur relate the self-intersections number to the instanton number.

In this note we will examine these self-intersecting string immersions while in a fixed frame in four-dimensions to see if these configurations possess any realistic topological properties that we expect from an effective action of QCD. We will focus our attention on the torus knot solutions of Robertson in order to be explicit. We will show that there exists topologies that supports monopole/anti-monopole fields whose flux is constrained to a finite string (tube) and in some cases to strings that are infinite in length. Furthermore we will show that there exists topologies that can support pair production and annihilation. By this we mean that the immersed world sheets have remnants that appear as finite segments of strings that emerge and dissolve in a fixed frame. These segments are related to an integer $`q`$ that appears in the self-dual solutions that we consider. We are able to show that $`q=111`$ puts an upper limit on the production of fermions. We then examine the pullback of $`\gamma _5`$ onto the world sheet and show that there can be chiral symmetry breaking “bubbles” around the points where the immersion self-intersects with itself. This helps strengthen the relationship between intersecting strings on the one hand and QCD instantons on the other. Next we verify the conjecture of Robertson  by showing that for torus knot solutions that the intersection number is given by $`\nu =4(pq)`$. We end by providing a program in MAPLE  that annimates the torus knot and torus link solutions.

## II Topological Support For QCD Processes From Self-Dual Strings

One of the questions we ask is what topologies are provided by the string to support the gauge fields and quarks in four dimensions. We are interested in the classical features of the self-intersecting instantons since these feature should appear as first order quantum corrections to the effective action of QCD in the strong coupling regime. In order to appreciate the behavior and support of the strings we need to sit in a frame and examine the topologies that the immersed string unfolds. Since the self-dual solutions have non-trivial winding number any features we find related to the self-intersection will be protected from quantum fluctuations since winding number is a topological propoerty of the string configuration. To proceed we will look at the Nambu-Goto action and include modifications introduced by Polyakov. In order to minimize the contributions of crumpled string world sheets to the effective action of QCD, Polyakov proposed the action following;

$$S=\mu \sqrt{g}𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau +\frac{1}{\alpha _0}\sqrt{g}K_b^{Aa}K_{Aa}^b𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau $$
(1)
where $`K_b^{Aa}`$ is the extrinsic curvature tensor. However the presence of the extrinsic curvature term not only acts as a regulator  for bosonic strings but also provides an avenue for the introductions of the topological instanton solutions. Furthermore it has been shown that the presence of the extrinsic curvature is necessary for the effective action of free fermions projected onto the world sheet.

The last summand to the above action can be expressed in an alternate form as;

$`S_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha _0}}{\displaystyle \sqrt{g}g^{ab}_at_{\mu \nu }_bt^{\mu \nu }d\sigma d\tau }`$ (2)
$`S_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\alpha _0}}{\displaystyle \sqrt{g}g^{ab}((_at_{\mu \nu }_a\stackrel{~}{t}^{\mu \nu })(_bt_{\mu \nu }_b\stackrel{~}{t}^{\mu \nu })\pm (_a\stackrel{~}{t}_{\mu \nu }_bt^{\mu \nu }))𝑑\sigma 𝑑\tau }`$ (4)
$`\text{where }t^{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{ab}}{\sqrt{g}}}_aX^\mu _bX^\nu `$
As with QCD, the action is minimized by searching for self-dual solutions, viz. $`_at^{\mu \nu }=_at_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\mu \nu }`$. Wheater showed that any surface embedded in four-dimensional space-time which is a complex curve is a solution to the equations of motion for the extrinsic curvature term. Robertson showed one explicit example of a self-dual string instanton is a (p,q) torus knot. These are examples of superminimal immersions into $`R^4`$. Pawelczyk has extended the classification of instantons and includes the Euler character of the surface as well . A torus is parametrized by two variables, $`u`$ and $`v`$, representing local coordinates on the surface. The torus knot is the curve on the torus defined by the constraint $`u^p+v^q=0`$. Figure 1 shows an example, the (3,2) torus knot.

For a (p,q) torus knot instanton solution the string vector is

$$X^\mu =[\mathrm{}(z^p),\mathrm{}(z^p),\mathrm{}(z^q),\mathrm{}(z^q)],$$
(5)
where $`z=\tau +i\sigma `$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ are the real and imaginary parts respectively. Note that Robertson has shown somewhat more generally that a string vector of the form

$`X^\mu =[\mathrm{}(F(z)),\mathrm{}(F(z)),\mathrm{}(G(z)),\mathrm{}(G(z))]`$
with $`F(z)`$ and $`G(z)`$ as any functions analytic in $`z`$ are also solutions to the equations of motion. These solutions automatically satisfy the Euclidean string equations

$$_\tau _\tau X^\mu +_\sigma _\sigma X^\mu =0,$$
(6)
as well as the Euclidean constraint equations

$$_\sigma X^\mu _\tau X^\mu =0,$$
(7)
and

$$(_\sigma X^\mu )^2=(_\tau X^\nu )^2.$$
(8)
To study these solutions, we create computer animated plots of the solutions over a finite time interval. We start with a particular (p,q) torus knot solution such as the (3,2) knot. This is a topologically non-trivial solution with self-intersection number $`\nu =4`$. The solution takes the form

$`X^\mu (\sigma ,\tau )=[3\tau ^2\sigma \sigma ^3,\tau ^33\tau \sigma ^2,\sigma ^2\tau ^2,2\tau \sigma ]=[x,y,z,t]`$
$`X^\mu `$ is a mapping from ($`\sigma ,\tau `$) space to ($`x,y,z,t`$) space. We choose the last coordinate to be our time parameter and invert the the last term and replace $`\tau `$ in $`X^\mu (\sigma ,\tau )`$ with the solution in terms of $`X^4=t`$ and $`\sigma `$. (One may chose other coordinates for the time such as $`X^2`$ where the $`p=1`$ cases correspond to the usual choice where $`\tau `$ is the time parameter.) In the case of the (3,2) torus knot, the inversion of the last term gives $`\tau =\frac{t}{2\sigma }`$; substitution into $`X^\mu `$ gives

$`X^\mu (\sigma ,t)=[{\displaystyle \frac{3t^2}{4\sigma }}\sigma ^3,{\displaystyle \frac{t^3}{8\sigma ^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{3t\sigma }{2}},\sigma ^2{\displaystyle \frac{t^2}{4\sigma ^2}},t].`$
For each value of the time $`X_4=t`$ we generate a plot of the string. These plots are combined to form the animation. The ranges chosen were $`\sigma =[1,1]`$, $`t=[1,1]`$. The open string is symmetric in our case but we are careful not to include characteristics that are due to this symmetry of the solution. We have marked the image of $`\sigma =1`$ and $`\sigma =1`$ in order to keep track of the string endpoints on the Reimann sheet..

There are several characterisitics that we observed:

* As opposed to finite string segments, the majority of sigments are semi-inifinte in length. This is due mainly to the inversion of the time parameter. We could have chosen $`X^2`$ to be the time component. Then for the small sector corresponding to $`p=1`$, $`t`$ would be $`\tau `$. However all other sectors would exhibit the presence of semi-infinite segments. These segments may be thought of as flux tubes that carry the monopole and anti-monopole gauge fields from a point out to infinity. One can construct gauge invariant objects that can live on these topologies (see Eq.).
* The strings interact by exchanging flux lines. Whenever two semi-infinite segments, say A and B, touch the result is that A will pass its segment above the intersection point onto B while sewing the segment that B had above the intersection point onto its lower portion. This exchange of flux lines can also take place with segments that are finite.
* For the case when $`p`$ is even and $`q=2`$ then the image is that of a single semi-infinite segment that is actually the image of the string projected back onto itself. In this case if one had assigned a quark at $`\sigma =1`$ and an anti-quarks at $`\sigma =1`$ then the endpoint of this type of image would correspond to a $`\overline{q}q`$ bound state with gauge field lines moving up and moving down the flux line that goes out to spatial infinity effectively canceling the contribution of the gauge field in the Wilson line (see Eq.). Such configurations are expected to contribute to the $`<\overline{q}q>`$ condensate. Examples of this are the (2,2), (4,2), (6,2) and (8,2).
* One of the most interesting observations is the appearance and disappearance of finite segments of lines. These segments can appear at one point, interact with some segment by exchanging flux lines and then disappear at another point. The emerging segment can have a $`\overline{q}q`$ pair attached to the ends providing topology for pair productions and pair annihilation. We will discuss this process in some detail shortly. Nice examples are (4,3), (5,3) and (1,3) torus knots.
* Surfaces that do not intersect $`p=q`$, appear as infinite or semi-infinte segments. The multiple images of the endpoints can be seen embedded in the string segment itself undergoing pair production and annihilation along the flux tube itself. This activity can also be seen in torus knots were $`p`$ is not relatively primed to $`q`$. Examples are (6,3), (4,2), and (8,4).
* Finally we note that the image of $`\sigma =\pm 1`$ does not always map into any endpoint of the image.

Figure 3 shows the (3,2) torus knot instanton at time $`t=0.60`$. The ends of the string are labeled with points, and the string is colored blue to represent $`\sigma >0`$ and red to represent $`\sigma <0`$ in order to visually distinguish these parts. The bounding box containing the plot has dimensions $`x=\mathrm{3..3},y=\mathrm{3..3},z=\mathrm{3..3}`$. In this frame we see the string broken in two halves; where part of the string around $`\sigma =0`$ leaves the bounding box and is mapped out to infinity.

Here is an example of a knot with negative intersection number. The vertical strands are semi-infinite in length. Here the broken strands are an imaging artifact. Just right of the center one can see the emergence of a finite segment. This segment will go on to exchange flux lines with the semi-infinite flux lines and then collapse back into the vacuum. These finite strands provide support for pair production and annihilation.

Figure 5 shows a sequence of frames of the (4,3) torus knot instanton. Initially, we see two string segments; at time $`t1.0`$, however, a pair of points appear. As time continues to evolve these points develop a string segment connecting the two. This finite segment interacts with the pair of strings initially seen, then the two original segments combine and disappear. This behavior is reminiscent of the early meson string model, in which a meson was seen as a $`q\overline{q}`$ pair connected by a string of gluon flux. In this interpretation, it appears as though a $`q\overline{q}`$ pair is created out of the vacuum, interacts strongly with a pair of gluon flux lines, then is annihilated back to the vacuum in the presence of a monopole/anti-monopole pair. Here it is the original string segment that we interpret as monopole-anti-monopole pairs. We emphasize that these are open string solutions that provide this topology as opposed to closed stings. The new requirement is that the opens strings be self intersecting.

The structure of the images suggests that the quarks interact with each other through non-local interactions. We would like for the strings to correspond to flux tubes of gauge fields and to have quarks on the endpoints. Lets fix the gauge, $`A_0=0`$ and consider the Wilson line integral given by the following path-ordered exponential,

$$U(\overline{X}(\sigma _+,t),\overline{X}(\sigma _{},t))=𝒫\mathrm{exp}(_\sigma _{}^{\sigma _+}A_i\frac{dX^i}{d\sigma }𝑑\sigma ).$$
(9)
Here $`\overline{X}(\sigma _+)`$ and $`\overline{X}(\sigma _{})`$ are the end points of the string as seen from a fixed frame and $`\sigma `$ is used to parameterize the string for each time, $`t`$. From the image of the string immersions it appears that non-local point particle-like interaction Lagrangians such

$$L=\overline{q}(\overline{X}(\sigma _+,t))U(\overline{X}(\sigma _+,t),\overline{X}(\sigma _{},t))q(\overline{X}(\sigma _{},t)).$$
(10)
can be supported. In order to account for the semi-infinite segments we can imagine taking one of the endpoints of the Wilson line out to spatial infinity. At spatial infinity the gauge fields approach zero and the Wilson line goes to the identity. The semi-infinite segment then can support a quark attached to the end of the segment with a monopole or anti-monopole gauge field confined to the segment. One can build an operator that respect the residual gauge invariance with

$$\overline{q}(\overline{X}(\sigma _+,t))U(\overline{X}(\sigma _+,t),\mathrm{}),$$
(11)
or either

$$U(\mathrm{},\overline{X}(\sigma _{},t))q(\overline{X}(\sigma _{},t)).$$
(12)
The lines that are infinite in extent correspond to both Wilson line endpoints being taken to spatial infinity. These configurations seem to be the catalyst for pair production and annihilation. There might be suppression to these infinite and semi-infinite segments if one uses the same “area law” arguments  one uses to suppress largely separated quark paths in pair production if the flux tubes are too far from each other. However very close pairs $`\overline{q}U`$ and $`Uq`$ may be significant and could contribute to $`<\overline{q}q>`$. To sum up the overall picture that these string suggests in that the general vacuum structure will consist of infinite and semi-infinite flux tubes as well as emerging and disappearing finite tubes and stable finite strings. The gauge fields will be confined to the surfaces of these segments suggesting that monopole and anti-monopole are pervasive and where pair production seems to be catalyzed by the presence of these monopoles/anti-monopoles. The presence of the flux tubes pouring their gauge flux out at spatial infinity is already suggested by the electric Meissner effect . The exchange of flux tubes between pair-produced segments and the other segments suggest the charge-exchange scattering processes between fermions and charged Dirac magnetic monopoles .

## III $`\overline{q}q`$ Production

The topology that supports the pair production and annihilation is not due directly to string self-intersection but is related to how the time parameter $`X^4`$ takes its values from the $`\sigma \tau `$ parameter space. This is related to the fact that the solution is self-dual, however. Let us consider the multi-valued relationship of $`\tau `$ with $`\sigma `$ for a given time, $`X_4`$. Since the $`X_4`$ coordinate only depends on $`q`$, we can examine a time sequence of the relationship of $`\sigma `$ vs. $`\tau `$. To be explicit let us consider any solution where $`q=3`$.

Here one sees that at very early times ($`t<<1`$), $`\tau `$ is a single valued function for values of $`\sigma `$ between $`1`$ and $`1`$. As time moves on, this function becomes multi-valued (here at $`t=2`$) for values where $`\sigma `$ takes values from -1 to 1. Now the physical $`\sigma \tau `$ parameter space is split into three distinct regions corresponding to three distinct images in the frame. As time moves on these region move toward the origin until at $`t=0`$ all three regions merge for an “instant” and the regions begin to recede. At some later time (here $`t=2`$) the $`\tau `$ parameter is again single valued with respect to the physically relevant values for $`\sigma `$. This picture highlights two issues about the self-dual solution that may be realized in the strong coupling regime of QCD. The first is how the multivalued nature of $`\tau `$ vs. $`\sigma `$ can cause pair production and annihilation and the second being the singularity of the map at $`t=0`$, the point of self-intersection, leads to regions where chiral symmetry can be broken. These singular points are where the string segments are allowed to exhange flux lines and also where the determinant of the induced metric vanishes. The details of this last remark will be explored in the next section. For now we will take a closer look at the issues related to production and annihilation.

From figure , one sees that from the time of the production ($`t=2`$) until the time of annihilation ($`t=2)`$, four units of time have transpired. Here we can assume that the constant $`\mu `$ from the action in Eq., sets the space and time scale since $`\mu `$ has dimensions of $`[L^2]`$. From the uncertainty principle we can estimate a typical value of $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mu }}`$ since four quarks are produced in a time $`4\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mu }}`$. This would imply that $`\mu (16M_q)^2`$ where $`M_q`$ is the quark mass. The $`q=3`$ set of torus knots correspond to the minimal pair-producing configuration. However higher $`q`$ instantons could easily surpass the bounds from the uncertainty principle by producing more quarks in nearly equal times to that of the $`q=3`$ solutions. For this reason we need to check the production capabilities of the $`q>3`$ solutions.

In order to determine the time it takes for higher $`q`$ configurations to produce and annihilate quarks we need only to ask at what time, $`t_{real}`$ are all the roots of $`\tau (\sigma =1,t_{real})`$ are real. For every value of $`q`$ there are $`q`$ regions that must merge into the $`(1<\sigma <1)`$ region and then move out again. The total production/annihilation time would then be $`2\times t_{real}`$. As an example lets examine the $`q=4`$ case.

In this case the pair production begins at $`t=\frac{8}{3\sqrt{3}}`$ where $`\tau `$ takes values of $`\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}}`$, $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}`$ and $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}`$. The time for total pair production is then $`\frac{16}{3\sqrt{3}}`$ time units or about three units of time. In this amount of time again four quarks or anti-quarks are produced and annihilated. As $`q`$ increases it empirically appears that the amount of time to undergo full pair production monotonically decreases but reaches a plateau. One can show that the total production times for different values of $`q`$ are:

$`q=3,`$ $`t_{real}=2`$ (13)
$`q=4,`$ $`t_{real}={\displaystyle \frac{8}{3\sqrt{3}}}`$ (14)
$`q=5,`$ $`t_{real}=1.37`$ (15)
$`q=6,`$ $`t_{real}=1.285`$ (16)
$`q=10,`$ $`t_{real}=1.147`$ (17)
$`q=100,`$ $`t_{real}=1.012`$ (18)
$`q=111,`$ $`t_{real}=.608`$ (19)
We observe that $`q=111`$ puts an upper limit on the value of $`q`$ that will produce any new pairs. For all values greater that $`q=111`$ some of the roots for $`\tau `$ remain complex even when $`t=0`$. By analogy with the $`q=3,4`$ and $`5`$ cases we see that there can be at most 112 quarks/anti-quarks produced in $`1.2`$ seconds by any instanton. Since the total number of quarks is limited by all torus knot instantons we can again use the uncertainty principle to get an even better estimate of $`\mu `$. We find that $`\mu (112M_q)^2`$.

Animations of several $`(p,q)`$ solutions with $`X^4`$ chosen as the time parameter can be found at http://www-hep.physics.uiowa.edu/~bacus/research.html.

## IV Chiral Symmetry Breaking Processes

As we discussed earlier, the self intersection of the world sheet can cause singular points to exist and lead to zeros in the determinant of the induced metric $`g_{ab}=_aX^\nu _bX_\nu `$. Self duality for the string instantons imply that $`t^{\mu \nu }`$ from Eq.(4) satisfy the constraint

$$t^{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}ϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }t_{\lambda \rho }+C^{\mu \nu },$$
(20)
where $`C^{1,2}=C^{2,1}=C^{3,4}=C^{4,3}=1`$ and all other entries are zero.

As we are interested in chiral symmetry, we would like to look at the pullback of $`\gamma _5`$ onto the string world sheet. In terms of functions on the world sheet we may write

$$\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_5=\frac{ϵ^{cd}}{4\sqrt{g}}\widehat{ϵ}^{EF}_cX^\mu _dX^\nu N_E^\lambda N_F^\rho \frac{1}{4}[\gamma _\mu ,\gamma _\nu ][\gamma _\lambda ,\gamma _\rho ].$$
(21)
In the above $`N_A^\mu `$ are elements of the normal bundle of the string world sheet and $`\widehat{ϵ}^{AB}`$ is the volume form associated with the normal bundle. By using self duality we can eliminate the tangent vectors from the above expression and write,

$$\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_5=\frac{1}{4}\widehat{ϵ}^{EF}C^{\mu \nu }N_E^\lambda N_F^\rho ϵ_{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }\gamma _5.$$
(22)
The normal vectors satisfy the conditions that $`_aX^\mu N_E^\mu =0,`$ and $`N_E^\mu N^{\mu F}=\delta _E^F,`$. These conditions as well as the self-duality conditions imply that a solution for the tangent and normal vectors is

$`_\sigma X^\mu `$ $`=(_\sigma X^1,_\sigma X^2,_\sigma X^3,_\sigma X^4)`$ (23)
$`_\tau X^\mu `$ $`=(_\sigma X^2,_\sigma X^1,_\sigma X^4,_\sigma X^3)`$ (24)
$`N_1^\mu `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}}(_\sigma X^3,_\sigma X^4,_\sigma X^1,_\sigma X^2)`$ (25)
$`N_2^\mu `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}}(_\sigma X^4,_\sigma X^3,_\sigma X^2,_\sigma X^1),`$ (26)
where $`g`$ is the determinant of the induced metric. For these solutions $`\sqrt{g}=g_{\sigma \sigma }`$. Without loss of generality we can take the (3,2) torus knot as an example. Here the torus knot determinant is

$`\sqrt{g}=9(\tau ^4+\sigma ^4)12\tau ^2\sigma ^2+4\sigma ^2+4\tau ^2.`$

Clearly this vanishes at $`\sigma =0,\tau =0`$. This corresponds to the point where the string self-intersects. At this point the normal bundle is ill-defined and two copies of the tangent vectors are imaged at this point. The pullback of $`\gamma _5`$ is also ill-defined when the determinant vanishes. Elsewhere on the manifold $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_5`$ can be used to construct a projection operator for chiral symmetry. However these points where the determinant vanish act as tiny “bubbles” where chiral symmetry is broken. The transition of the normal bundle going through this singularity has the effect of imposing reflections on some but not necessarily all of the components. In the (3,2) case the relationship of the normal vectors just before and just after is given by:

$$N_{1}^{\mu }{}_{before}{}^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}(_\sigma X^3,_\sigma X^4,_\sigma X^1,_\sigma X^2)$$
(27)
while

$$N_{1}^{\mu }{}_{after}{}^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}(_\sigma X^3,_\sigma X^4,_\sigma X^1,_\sigma X^2)$$
(28)
flipping the second and fourth components. Similar changes happen in both the tangent vectors and the other normal. To show that the orientation has changed consider the vector $`\overline{M}=\overline{N}_1\times \overline{N}_2`$ for the (3,2) knot. Just after the singularity, $`M_yM_y`$ while all other components remain the same. This corresponds to a change in the orientation. This pictures corresponds to the field theoretic case where the core of monopoles can be thought of as bubbles where chiral symmetry is broken. The S-wave of the fermions interact with this core which leads to processes such as those seen in .

## V  The Self-Intersection Number

It is conjectured in  that the self-intersection number of the $`(p,q)`$ torus is $`\nu =4(pq)`$. Here we explicitly calculate the self-intersection number $`\nu `$ for a general (p,q) torus-knot solution proving the conjecture. Consider an open string where $`(L\sigma L)`$ and $`(\mathrm{}<\tau <\mathrm{})`$. Starting from the general definition of the self-intersection number

$`\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\tau {\displaystyle _L^L}𝑑\sigma _at^{\mu \nu }_at^{\mu \nu }`$
which we can express in terms of the string solution $`X(\sigma ,\tau )`$ as

$`\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\tau {\displaystyle _L^L}𝑑\sigma _a({\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{cd}}{\sqrt{g}}}_cX^\mu _dX^\nu )_a({\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{cd}}{\sqrt{g}}}_cX^\mu _dX^\nu )`$
Using the general (p,q) torus-knot solution

$`X(\sigma ,\tau )=[(\sigma ^2+\tau ^2)^{p/2}\mathrm{sin}(p\mathrm{tan}^1({\displaystyle \frac{\sigma }{\tau }})),(\sigma ^2+\tau ^2)^{p/2}\mathrm{cos}(p\mathrm{tan}^1({\displaystyle \frac{\sigma }{\tau }})),`$
$`(\sigma ^2+\tau ^2)^{q/2}\mathrm{cos}(q\mathrm{tan}^1({\displaystyle \frac{\sigma }{\tau }})),(\sigma ^2+\tau ^2)^{q/2}\mathrm{sin}(q\mathrm{tan}^1({\displaystyle \frac{\sigma }{\tau }}))]`$
we find

$`\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\tau {\displaystyle _L^L}𝑑\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{8p^2q^2(pq)^2(\sigma ^2+\tau ^2)^{p+q1}}{(p^2(\sigma ^2+\tau ^2)^p+q^2(\sigma ^2+\tau ^2)^q)^2}}`$
If we let $`r^2\sigma ^2+\tau ^2`$,

$`\nu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\pi /2}^{\pi /2}}𝑑\theta {\displaystyle _0^{\frac{L}{\mathrm{cos}(\theta )}}}𝑑r{\displaystyle \frac{8p^2q^2(pq)^2r^{2(p+q1)+1}}{(p^2r^{2p}+q^2r^{2q})^2}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4((pq)qp)^2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\pi /2}^{\pi /2}}d\theta {\displaystyle \frac{1}{(pq)q^2(q^2r^{2(pq)}+p^2)}}|_0^{\frac{L}{\mathrm{cos}(\theta )}}`$
Let $`\varphi 2\theta +\pi `$,

$`\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{2(pq)}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\frac{p}{q}L^{(pq)})^2(\frac{1\mathrm{cos}(\varphi )}{2})^{(pq)}+1}}𝑑\varphi 2(pq)`$
Note the following relation;

$`{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}f(\mathrm{sin}\theta ,\mathrm{cos}\theta )𝑑\theta =i{\displaystyle _{\frac{unit}{circle}}}f({\displaystyle \frac{zz^1}{2i}},{\displaystyle \frac{z+z^1}{2}}){\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z}}`$
Then

$`\nu `$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{2(pq)}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\frac{unit}{circle}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z((\frac{p}{q}L^{(pq)})^2(\frac{1}{2}(1\frac{z+z^1}{2}))^{(pq)}+1)}}2(pq)`$
$`=`$ $`4(qp){\displaystyle \frac{4(qp)}{\pi }}\pi {\displaystyle \text{Residues in unit circle}}`$
$`=`$ $`4(qp)(1{\displaystyle \text{Residues in unit circle}})`$
Now we must find the singular points of $`f(z)=\frac{1}{z((\frac{q}{p}L^{pq})^2(\frac{1}{2}(1\frac{z+z^1}{2})^{pq}+1)}`$; they are

$`z`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`z`$ $`=`$ $`12(({\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}})^2(L)^{2(pq)})^{\frac{1}{qp}}\pm 2\sqrt{(({\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}})^2(L)^{2(pq)})^{\frac{1}{qp}}+({\displaystyle \frac{q}{p}}(L)^{(pq)})^{\frac{4}{qp}}}`$
Evaluating the residue $`(zz_0)f(z)|_{z=z_0}`$ gives zero; then we have

$`\nu =4(qp)`$
for (p,q) torus-knot solutions. This confirms the conjecture of Robertson .

## VI Computer Program

The software described in this section was used to implement and generate the animated solutions and to perform some lengthy calculations. Two symbolic computation systems were used; Maple and Mathematica.

Listing 1 shows the Maple source code which generates raw ($`x,y,z`$) coordinates for a (p,q) torus knot solution and exports them to a file. The user selects the values for $`p`$ and $`q`$, the frame numbers to start and end at, the number of data points to use for each frame, and the ranges for the parameters $`t`$ and $`\sigma `$.

### Listing 1

#----------------------------------------------------------------------#
\# Animation of the string instanton solutions. This program generates a#
\# .dat numeric data file for each frame of the animation sequence. #
\# Usage (on UNIX): maple 4D\_TorusKnot\_Data.txt & #
\# #
\# Bob Bacus c.1997 #
#------------------------- User input parameters ----------------------#
p:=3: # F=zp̂ #
q:=2: # G=-zq̂ #
startframe:=0: # Frame to start from #
endframe:=400: # Frame to end on #
points:=400: # Number of data points per frame #
lmin:=-3:lmax:=3: # Range for the time parameter #
smin:=-1:smax:=1: # Range for the length parameter #
\# ---------------------------- Main Program ---------------------------#
gc(300000):interface(screenwidth=500):Digits:=4:
readlib(unassign):readlib(write):
unassign(’t’):unassign(’l’):unassign(’n’):unassign(’u’):unassign(’s’):
assume(t,real):assume(s,real):
z:=t+I\*s:
F:=expand(zp̂):G:=expand(-zq̂):
imf:=Im(F):ref:=Re(F):reg:=Re(G):img:=Im(G): # X=\[Im(F),Re(F),Re(G),Im(G)\]
l:=(lmax-lmin)/(endframe-startframe)\*n+lmin: # n represents frame number; l is the time
v:=(smax-smin)/(points-1):
for n from startframe by 1 to endframe do
open(cat(convert(p,string),‘x‘,convert(q,string),‘-‘,convert(n,string),‘.dat‘)):
writeln(evalf(l)):
writeln(points):
for i from 1 to q-1 do
writeln(cat(‘Solution #‘,convert(i,string))):
for u from smin by v to smax do
r:=\[fsolve(subs(s=u,img)=l,t,complex)\]:r:=r\[i\]:
X:=expand(subs(t=r,imf)):Y:=expand(subs(t=r,ref)):Z:=expand(subs(t=r,reg)):
writeln(evalf(subs(s=u,\[X,Y,Z\]))):
od;
od;
close():
od;
unassign(’t’):unassign(’l’):unassign(’n’):unassign(’u’):
close():

### Listing 2

#----------------------------------------------------------------------
\# Animation of the string instanton solutions. This program generates a
\# .gif graphics file for each frame of the animation sequence.
\#
\# Bob Bacus c.1997
#------------------------- User input parameters ----------------------
p:=1: # F= zp̂
q:=2: # G=-zq̂
startframe:=0: # frame to start with
endframe:=400: # frame to end with
#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
space:=‘ ‘:gc(300000):interface(plotdevice=gif):
readlib(write):readlib(unassign):
for n from startframe by 1 to endframe do
d:=\[\]:
file:=cat(convert(p,string),‘x‘,convert(q,string),‘-‘,
convert(n,string),‘.dat‘):
indx:=parse(readline(file)):
if indx\>=0 then tp:=cat(‘p=‘,convert(p,string), ‘ q=‘,convert(q,string),‘ Time Index : ‘,substring(convert(indx,string),1..7),substring(space,1..7-length(substring(convert(
indx,string),1..7)))) else tp:=cat(‘p=‘,convert(p,string),‘ q=‘,convert(q,string),‘
Time Index:‘,substring(convert(indx,string),1..8),substring(space,1..8-length(substring(
convert(indx,string),1..8)))) fi:
points:=parse(readline(file)):
for i from 1 to q-1 do
readline(file):
j:=1:
for s from 1 to points/2 do
pt:=parse(readline(file)):
if s=1 then if linalg\[iszero\](map(Im,pt)) then
smin:=pt :b(j):=\[pt\] else b(j):=\[\] : smin:=\[2.999,2.999,2.999\] fi fi:
if s\>1 then if linalg\[iszero\](map(Im,pt)) then b(j):=\[op(b(j)),pt\] else j:=j+1 :b (j):=\[\]: fi fi:
od;
k:=1:
c(1):=\[\]:
for s from points/2+1 to points do
pt:=parse(readline(file)):
if s\<points then if linalg\[iszero\](map(Im,pt)) then c(k):=\[op(c(k)),pt\]
else k:=k+1: c(k):=\[\]: fi fi:
if s=points then if linalg\[iszero\](map(Im,pt)) then smax:=pt: c(k):=\[op(c(k)),pt\]
else smax:=\[2.999,2.999,2.999\] fi fi:
od;
L1:=\[\]:
L2:=\[\]:
for h from 1 to j do
if nops(b(h))\>0 then L1:=\[op(L1),b(h)\] fi:
od:
for h from 1 to k do
if nops(c(h))\>0 then L2:=\[op(L2),c(h)\] fi:
od:
if nops(L1)\>0 then L1:=op(1,L1): else L1:=\[\]: fi:
if nops(L2)\>0 then L2:=op(1,L2): else L1:=\[\]: fi:
d:=\[op(d),PLOT3D(POINTS(\[2.999,2.999,2.999\]),COLOR(RGB,0,0,0)),
PLOT3D(POINTS(\[smin,smax\]),COLOR(RGB,0,0,0)),PLOT3D(CURVES(L1),COLOR(RGB,1,0,0)),PLOT3D(CURVES(L2),
COLOR(RG B,0,0,1))\]:
od:
interface(plotoutput=cat(convert(p,string),‘x‘,convert(q,string),
‘-‘,convert(n,string ),‘.gif‘)):
plots\[display\](d,view=\[-3..3,-3..3,-3..3\],projection=.1,orientation=,axes=boxe d,labels=\[’x’,’y’,’z’\],scaling=constrained,titlefont=\[COURIER,10\],title=tp);
test:=readline(file):
unassign(’l’):unassign(’b’):unassign(’points’):close():
od:

## VII Acknowledgements

V.G.J. Rodgers thanks V.P. Nair for discussion.

## REFERENCES

1. G. t’Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B72 (1973) 461
2. K. G. Wilson, Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974) 2445
3. J.-L. Gervais and A. Neveu, Phys. Lett. B80 (1979) 255
4. Yu M. Makeenko and A.A. Migdal, Phys. Lett. B88 (1979) 135
5. A. A. Belavin, A. M. Polyakov, A. Schwartz, Y. Tyupkin, Phys. Lett. 59B (1975) 85
6. E. Witten, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 121
7. A. M. Polyakov, Nucl. Phys. B268 (1986) 406
8. A.P. Balachandran, F. Lizzi, G. Sparano, Nucl. Phys. B263 (1986) 608
9. P.O. Mazur and V.P. Nair, Nucl. Phys. B284 (1986) 146
10. J. Ambjorn and B. Durhuus, Phys. Lett. B188 (1987) 253
11. R.Parthasarathy and K.S.Viswanathan, Lett.Math.Phys. 48 (1999) 243
12. J. F. Wheater, Phys. Lett. B208 (1988) 388
13. G. Robertson, Phys. Lett. B 226 (1989) 244
14. B.G. Konopelchenko and G. Landolfi, Phys.Lett. B459 (1999) 522
15. J.Pawelcyzk, Phy. Rev. Lett 74 (1995) 3924; Phys. Lett. B387 (1996) 287; Nucl. Phys. B491, (1997) 515
16. V.P. Nair and C. Rosenzweig, Phys. Lett. B135 (1984) 450; Phy. Rev. D31 (1985) 401
17. Allan S. Blaer, Norman H. Christ, and Ju-Fei Tang, Phy. Rev. D25 (1982) 25
18. C.G. Callan, Jr. Phys. Rev. D25 (1982) 2141


format: text

text:
# The High-Ionization Nuclear Emission-Line Region of Seyfert Galaxies

## 1. INTRODUCTION

Seyfert galaxies have been broadly classified into two classes based on the presence or absence of broad emission lines in their optical spectra (Khachikian & Weedman 1974): Seyfert galaxies with broad lines are type 1 (hereafter S1) while those without broad lines are type 2 (S2). According to the current unified model of Seyfert nuclei (Antonucci & Miller 1985; see for a review Antonucci 1993), this difference between S1 and S2 can be explained as follows. The broad-line region (BLR) is located in the very inner region (e.g., a typical radial distance from the central black hole is $`r`$ 0.01 pc; e.g., Peterson 1993) and is surrounded by a geometrically and optically thick dusty torus. Therefore, the visibility of the central engine as well as the BLR is strongly affected by the viewing angle toward the dusty torus and then the difference between S1s and S2s is naturally understood. Indeed, this unified scheme has been supported by various observational results, for example, obscured X-ray emission in S2s (Awaki et al. 1991; Rush et al. 1996), colors of mid-infrared (MIR) emission (Pier & Krolik 1992, 1993; Murayama, Mouri, & Taniguchi 2000), MIR luminosity distributions (Heckman, Chambers, & Postman 1992; Maiolino et al. 1995), polarized broad emission lines mentioned below, and the results of multi wavelength observational tests (Mulchaey et al. 1994). In order to understand Seyfert nuclei and active galactic nuclei (AGNs) more comprehensively, any new observational tests toward the unified model are very important.

In addition to the traditional two types of Seyfert nuclei, it is known that some Seyfert nuclei show intermediate properties between S1 and S2; type 1.2 (S1.2), type 1.5 (S1.5), type 1.8 (S1.8), and type 1.9 (S1.9) (Osterbrock & Koski 1976; Osterbrock 1977, 1981b; Cohen 1983; Winkler 1992; Whittle 1992), which show both the narrow and broad components in the Balmer emission lines. It is also noted that the objects without BLR in their optical spectra (i.e., S2s) do not comprise a simple population. First, some S2s show a broad Pa$`\beta `$ line (Goodrich, Veilleux, & Hill 1994; Hill, Goodrich, & Depoy 1996; Veilleux, Goodrich, & Hill 1997), providing evidence for highly reddened BLRs in these objects. Second, the hidden BLR is detected only in a part ($``$ 20%) of S2s in the polarized optical spectra (Antonucci & Miller 1985; Miller & Goodrich 1990; Tran, Miller, & Kay 1992; Kay 1994; Tran 1995a, 1995b, 1995c); the survey promoted by Lick Observatory found 10 S2s with the hidden broad line among 50 S2s.

Another important type of Seyfert nuclei is narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies (NLS1s; Davidson & Kinman 1978). Optical emission-line properties of the NLS1s are summarized as follows (e.g., Osterbrock & Pogge 1985). (1) The Balmer lines are only slightly broader than the forbidden lines such as \[O iii\]$`\lambda `$5007 (typically less than 2000 km s-1). This property makes NLS1s a distinct type of S1s. (2) The \[O iii\]$`\lambda `$5007/H$`\beta `$ intensity ratio is smaller than 3. This criterion has introduced to discriminate S1s from S2s by Shuder & Osterbrock (1981). (3) They present strong Fe ii emission lines which are often seen in S1s but generally not in S2s. And, (4) the soft X-ray spectra of NLS1s are very steep (Puchnarewicz et al. 1992; Boller, Brandt, & Fink 1996; Wang, Brinkmann, & Bergeron 1996) and highly variable (Boller et al. 1996; Turner et al. 1999a). Because of these complex properties, it has not yet been fully understood what NLS1s are in the context of the current unified model of Seyfert nuclei while various models for NLS1s have been proposed (see for reviews Boller et al. 1996; Taniguchi, Murayama, & Nagao 1999).

Recently, Murayama & Taniguchi (1998a; hereafter MT98a) have found that S1s have excess \[Fe vii\]$`\lambda `$6087 emission with respect to S2s. This means that a significantly large fraction of the high-ionization nuclear emission-line region (HINER; Binette 1985; Murayama, Taniguchi, & Iwasawa 1998) traced by \[Fe vii\]$`\lambda `$6087 resides in a viewing-angle dependent region; i.e., the inner wall of dusty tori (Murayama & Taniguchi 1998b; see also Pier & Voit 1995). Accordingly, it turns out that the HINER provides the indicator of the viewing angle for dusty tori of Seyfert nuclei. In this paper, we report on our statistical analysis of the HINER in the various types of Seyfert nuclei.

## 2. DATA

### 2.1. Classification of Seyfert Nuclei

As mentioned in Section 1, there are a number of sub-types of Seyfert nuclei. Summarizing their definitions and properties, we broadly re-classify all the objects in the following way (see Table 1). 1) The type of S1.2 is included in the type of S1. These Seyferts together with typical S1s are abbreviated as BLS1s (broad-line type 1 Seyferts) because there is another type of S1s; i.e., NLS1s. 2) The type of S1.5 is kept as a distinct type because Seyfert galaxies belonging to this type are more numerous than those of the other intermediate-type Seyferts. 3) The types of S1.8 and S1.9 are basically included into the type of S2. The BLRs in these galaxies are reddened more seriously than those in both BLS1s and S1.5s. In this respect, S2s with the BLR detected only in their infrared spectra (e.g., broad Pa$`\beta `$ emission; hereafter S2NIR-BLR) share the same BLR properties. Therefore, we refer these types of Seyferts as type 2 Seyferts with the reddened BLR (S2RBLR). 4) Another important type of S2s is S2s with the hidden BLR which is detected in optical polarized spectra111 This type is referred either as S3 (Tran 1995a), as S1h (Véron-Cetty & Véron 1998), or as S2+ (Taniguchi & Anabuki 1999). . In this paper, we refer this type as S2HBLR. 5) S2s either with the reddened BLR or with the hidden BLR are also referred as S2+; i.e., S2+ = S2RBLR \+ S2HBLR. 6) In contrast, S2s without any evidence for the BLR are referred as S2- following Taniguchi & Anabuki (1999). And, 7) both types of S2+ and S2- are referred as S2total when necessary; i.e., S2total = S2+ \+ S2-. Our classification scheme is summarized in Table 1.

In some cases, the classification is assigned differently to a certain Seyfert nucleus among the literature. Therefore, in Table 2, we compare the types of our sample objects with those given in some previous papers (Dahari & De Robertis 1988a; Stephens 1989; Whittle 1992; Cruz-González et al. 1994; Véron-Cetty & Véron 1998). The type adopted in this paper for each galaxy is given in the last column of Table 2. The objects classified as NLS1s in the previous literature (Osterbrock & Pogge 1985; Stephens 1989; Boller et al. 1996; Véron-Cetty & Véron 1998; Vaughan et al. 1999) are categorized as NLS1.

### 2.2. Data

In order to investigate HINER properties of various types of Seyfert galaxies, we are interested in the following high-ionization emission lines; \[Fe vii\]$`\lambda `$6087, \[Fe x\]$`\lambda `$6374222It is noted that Osterbrock (1977) misidentified \[Fe x\]$`\lambda `$6374 as Fe ii $`\lambda `$6369 (see Osterbrock 1981a)., and \[Fe xi\]$`\lambda `$7892. In addition to these lines, we are also interested in the following low-ionization emission lines; \[O iii\]$`\lambda `$5007, \[S ii\]$`\lambda \lambda `$6717,6731, and \[O i\]$`\lambda `$6300, because of the comparison with the high-ionization emission lines. These lines are simply referred as \[Fe vii\], \[Fe x\], \[Fe xi\], \[O iii\], \[O i\], and \[S ii\], respectively. Here we should mention that some fraction of the \[O iii\] emission arises from the inner wall of dusty tori (Pier & Voit 1995; Murayama & Taniguchi 1998b). Therefore, it seems better to use more low-ionization emission lines such as \[O i\] or \[S ii\] as a normalization emission line. This is the reason why we have compiled the data of not only \[O iii\] but also \[O i\] and \[S ii\]. Though \[N ii\]$`\lambda `$6583 is also one of important low-ionization emission lines, we do not use this line because the deblending \[N ii\] from H$`\alpha `$ may not be well done if the spectral resolution is not so high. We have compiled the emission line data from the literature (Table 3) which are spectroscopic studies at wavelengths covering the emission lines of our interests. The number of compiled objects is 227; i.e., 31 NLS1s, 58 S1s, 67 S1.5s, 31 S2+s, and 40 S2-s.

The detection rates of \[Fe vii\], \[Fe x\], and \[Fe xi\] in the sample are given in Table 4. The fraction of objects with at least one of these high-ionization lines detected are also given. This table shows that the detection rate for the S2+ (83.9 %) is higher than those for the other types (38.7 % $``$ 64.2 %). Although the reason for this fact is not clear, it may be partly because the average redshift of the S2+s is smaller than those of the other types (see section 2.3.1) and accordingly those objects might be observed with higher S/N. Here we mention that we do not use any upper limit data in our study.

We choose the objects which show \[Fe vii\] and/or \[Fe x\] from the sample, and consequently, the object number of our sample is 124 including 9 radio-loud galaxies333In this paper, we define the radio-loud galaxy as the one which satisfies the criterion of R $`>`$ 500, where R is the ratio of radio ($`\lambda `$ = 6 cm) to optical (B band) flux density. Here the R is defined as follows; the optical flux density $`S_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ at B-band are calculated from the relation B = –2.5 $`\mathrm{log}S_{\mathrm{opt}}`$ – 48.36 (Schmidt & Green 1983), and R is derived from dividing the radio flux density at the wavelength of 6 cm by this $`S_{\mathrm{opt}}`$. ; i.e., 12 NLS1s, 23 BLS1s, 43 S1.5s (including 3 radio-loud galaxies), 27 S2+s (including 2 radio-loud galaxies), and 19 S2-s (including 4 radio-loud galaxies). Although the sample is not a statistically complete one in any sense, the data set is the largest one for the study of HINER ever compiled.

In Table 5, the redshift, the apparent B magnitude, the absolute B magnitude444In this paper, we adopt a Hubble constant H0 = 50 km s-1 Mpc-1 and a deceleration parameter q0 = 0., the radio flux density at the wavelength of 6 cm, the ratio of radio to optical flux density, the 60 $`\mu `$m luminosity, the \[O iii\] luminosity, and the references for the \[O iii\] luminosity and the emission-line flux ratios are given for each galaxy. Those magnitudes are taken from Véron-Cetty & Véron (1998), who mentioned that they had chosen the magnitudes in the smallest possible diaphragm as they were interested in the nuclei rather than in the galaxy itself. Table 3 describes the references for Table 5.

The emission-line flux ratios for each object are given in Table 6. Each ratio is the averaged value among the references. Since it is often difficult to measure the narrow Balmer component for S1s accurately, there might be the systematic error if we make reddening corrections using the Balmer decrement method (e.g., Osterbrock 1989) for all the types of Seyferts. Therefore we do not make the reddening correction for the objects in our sample. The effect of dust extinction on our result is discussed in section 3.4.

### 2.3. Selection Bias

Because we do not impose any selection criteria upon our sample, it is necessary to check whether or not the various samples are appropriate for our comparative study. Systematic difference of the redshift distribution, the intrinsic AGN power distribution, and the excitation degree of the narrow-line region (NLR) gas among the various Seyfert types may cause possible biases, thus we investigate these distributions.

#### 2.3.1 Redshift

The average redshifts and 1$`\sigma `$ deviations for each type are 0.0351$`\pm `$0.0315 for the NLS1s, 0.0550$`\pm `$0.0450 for the BLS1s, 0.0378$`\pm `$0.0401 for the S1.5s, 0.0243$`\pm `$0.0315 for the S2+s, and 0.0353$`\pm `$0.0309 for the S2-s. We show the histograms of the redshift in Figure 1. It is noted that the average redshifts of the S1 and the S1.5 sample are a little higher than those of the other samples. In order to investigate whether or not the frequency distributions of the redshift are statistically different among the types of Seyferts, we apply the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) statistical test (Press et al. 1988). The null hypothesis is that the redshift distributions among the NLS1s, the BLS1s, the S1.5s, the S2+s and the S2-s come from the same underlying population. The results are summarized in Table 7. We give the KS probabilities for the class of S2total, which means S2+ and S2- since the numbers of the S2+s and the S2-s in our sample are not so large. We give two KS probabilities for each combination; the first line gives the KS probabilities for the case including the radio-loud objects while the second line gives those for the case without the radio-loud objects. The results are nearly the same for these two cases in each combination. The results of the KS test suggest that the redshifts of the S1s are systematically higher than those of the other samples.

In this paper, our main attention is addressed to the visibility of the torus HINER emission among the different Seyfert types. Since the torus HINER is located in the inner 1 pc region around the central engine, the larger average redshift of the S1s may not affect the visibility of the torus HINER. If the S1s could have intense circumnuclear star-forming regions, such emission would contribute to the line emission. However, since it is known that S1s tend to have few such circumnuclear star-forming regions (Pogge 1989; Oliva et al. 1995; Heckman et al. 1995; González Delgado et al. 1997; Hunt et al. 1997), such contamination is expected to be negligibly small. Therefore, we conclude that our later analyses are free from the redshift difference among the samples.

#### 2.3.2 Luminosity

Current unified model of Seyfert galaxies require anisotropical nuclear radiation. This may cause systematical differences of intrinsic AGN power highly depending on selection criteria. Comparison of emission lines among different Seyfert types might suffer from this bias of intrinsic luminosity. Therefore, we investigate whether or not the intrinsic AGN power is systematically different among the different Seyfert types using the luminosities which are regarded as isotropic emission reprocessed from the nuclear radiation. We use IRAS 60$`\mu `$m and low-ionization emission lines as such isotropic emission.

We firstly check the distributions of the 60$`\mu `$m luminosity among the samples. The 60$`\mu `$m luminosity is thought to scale the nuclear continuum radiation which is absorbed and re-radiated by the dusty torus. Therefore the distribution of the 60$`\mu `$m luminosity reflects that of the intrinsic luminosity. The histograms of the 60$`\mu `$m luminosity are shown in Figure 2. There appears to be no systematic difference among the types of Seyferts. We apply the KS test where the null hypothesis is that the distribution of the 60$`\mu `$m luminosity among the various types of Seyferts come from the same underlying population. The results suggest that there is no systematic difference of the 60$`\mu `$m luminosity among the samples (see Table 8). This means that there is no bias concerning to the intrinsic luminosity in our sample.

However, the 60$`\mu `$m luminosity might be contaminated with the influence of circumnuclear star formation. Hence we secondly investigate the luminosity of the low-ionization emission lines. Because most of the flux of the low-ionization emission lines is radiated from the NLRs, it is thought to be almost independent with the viewing angle. Therefore the luminosity of a low-ionization emission line is a good tool to investigate the intrinsic power of the AGN. As shown in Figure 3, the intensity distributions of the low-ionization emission lines appear to be indistinguishable among the samples. We apply the KS test where the null hypothesis is that the luminosity of the low-ionization emission lines among various types of Seyferts come from the same underlying population. The results suggest that there is no systematic difference of the luminosity of the low-ionization emission lines among the samples (see Table 9). Therefore we conclude that there is little difference of the distribution of the intrinsic luminosity among the samples.

#### 2.3.3 Excitation of the NLR gas

There is another problem concerning our comparisons in this paper. In our study, we assume that the excitation degree of the NLRs is similar among the samples when we compare various line ratios. In order to confirm the validity of this assumption, we investigate whether or not the physical property of the NLRs is different among the various types of Seyferts. In Figure 4, we show the diagram of the intensity ratios of \[S ii\]/\[O iii\] versus \[O i\]/\[O iii\]. The diagram shows that there is little difference of the excitation degree of the NLRs among the types of Seyferts (see also Cohen 1983). This guarantees the validity of the statistical comparisons in our study.

## 3. RESULTS

Emission-line ratios of AGNs have been often discussed in the form normalized by the narrow component of Balmer lines; e.g., \[O iii\]/H$`\beta `$, \[N ii\]/H$`\alpha `$, and so on (e.g., Veilleux & Osterbrock 1987). However, since we investigate emission-line properties of S1s together with S2s, we cannot use the usual emission-line ratios in our analysis. Therefore, following the manner of MT98a, we investigate intensity ratios between a HINER line and a low-ionization forbidden emission line which is thought to be independent of the viewing-angle.

### 3.1. The Relative Strength of the \[Fe vii\] Emission

We show the histograms of the line ratios of \[Fe vii\] to \[O iii\], \[S ii\] and \[O i\], for the NLS1s, the BLS1s, the S1.5s, the S2+s, and the S2-s in Figure 5. Both the NLS1s and the BLS1s tend to have stronger \[Fe vii\] emission than the S2+s and the S2-s, being consistent with the result of MT98a. It is interesting to note that the S1.5s show a marginal nature between the S1s and the S2s.

In order to investigate whether or not the differences of the emission-line ratios among the samples are statistically real, we apply the KS test. The null hypothesis is that the observed distributions of the intensity ratios of \[Fe vii\] to the low-ionization emission lines among the NLS1s, the BLS1s, the S1.5s, the S2+s and the S2-s come from the same underlying population. The results are summarized in Table 10. It is noted that there is almost no difference between the KS probabilities in the case of including the radio-loud galaxies and excluding those objects.

The KS test leads to the following results. 1) Both the NLS1s and the BLS1s have higher \[Fe vii\] strengths than the S2+s and the S2-s although the statistical significance is marginally low for the NLS1s when we use the \[Fe vii\]/\[O i\] ratio. 2) There is no statistical difference in the relative \[Fe vii\] strength between the NLS1s and the BLS1s. 3) There is no statistical difference in the relative \[Fe vii\] strength between the S2+s and the S2-s. 4) There is no statistical difference in the relative \[Fe vii\] strength between the S1.5s and the S1s (i.e., the NLS1s and the BLS1s) although the statistical significance is marginally low for the BLS1s when we use the \[Fe vii\]/\[O iii\] ratio. And, 5) the S1.5s have higher \[Fe vii\] strengths than the S2+s and the S2-s. Because the frequency distributions of the luminosity of the low-ionization emission lines are indistinguishable among the samples (see Figure 3), the excess of the line ratios of \[Fe vii\] to the low-ionization emission lines in both the NLS1s and the BLS1s with respect to the S2+s and the S2-s is thought to be due not to the depression of the emission of the low-ionization emission lines but to the excess of the \[Fe vii\] emission.

It is considered that the inclination effect is responsible for the above results. In order to confirm this, we investigate whether or not the relative strength of the high-ionization emission lines correlate with the redshift or the intrinsic power of each AGN. As shown in Figure 6, there appears to be no correlation between the relative \[Fe vii\] strength and the redshift, the absolute B magnitude, the 60$`\mu `$m luminosity, and the \[O iii\] luminosity. Therefore the various comparisons of the emission-line flux ratios described in this paper are thought to be valid although there is slight difference in the average redshifts of the samples (see Section 2.3.1).

We also investigate the HINER properties of the S1.8s, S1.9s, S2NIR-BLR and S2HBLR, respectively. The results are shown in Figure 7. There can be seen no systematic trend. Therefore, these four sub-types are indistinguishable in the HINER properties.

### 3.2. The Relative Strength of the \[Fe x\] Emission

We present the histograms of the intensity ratios of \[Fe x\] to low-ionization emission lines in Figure 8. We apply the KS test where the null hypothesis is that the observed distributions of the intensity ratios of \[Fe x\] to the low-ionization emission lines among various types of Seyferts come from the same underlying population. The results are given in Table 11. There is also no difference between the KS probabilities in the case of including the radio-loud galaxies and excluding those objects.

The KS test leads to the following results. 1) Both the NLS1s and the BLS1s have higher \[Fe x\] strengths than the S2+s and the S2-s. However, the statistical significance is much worse than that using the \[Fe vii\] emission. 2) There is no statistical difference in the relative \[Fe x\] strength between the NLS1s and the BLS1s. 3) There is no statistical difference in the relative \[Fe x\] strength between the S2+s and the S2-s 4) There is no statistical difference in the relative \[Fe x\] strength between the S1.5s and the S1s (i.e., the NLS1s and the BLS1s). And, 5) it is not clear whether or not there is statistical difference in the relative \[Fe x\] strength between the S1.5s and the S2s (i.e., S2+s + S2-s). These results are not consistent with those using the \[Fe vii\] emission. This point will be discussed in next section.

In Figure 9, we show the diagrams of the redshift, the absolute B magnitude, the 60$`\mu `$m luminosity, and the \[O iii\] luminosity versus the relative \[Fe x\] strength. Similar to the case mentioned in the previous section, there is no correlation between the relative \[Fe x\] strength and the redshift, the absolute B magnitude, the 60$`\mu `$m luminosity, and the \[O iii\] luminosity. This result also assures the validity of our comparative study.

We also investigate the HINER properties of the S1.8s, S1.9s, S2NIR-BLR and S2HBLR, respectively. The result is shown in Figure 10. Again, there can be seen no systematic trend in this figure. Therefore, these four subclasses are indistinguishable in the HINER properties.

### 3.3. \[Fe vii\] versus \[Fe x\]

We investigate whether or not the \[Fe x\]/\[Fe vii\] ratio is different among the samples. The frequency distributions of this ratio are shown in Figure 11. We apply the KS test where the null hypothesis is that the observed distributions of the \[Fe x\]/\[Fe vii\] ratio among the various types of Seyferts come from the same underlying population. The results are given in Table 12. Although there seem to be a marginal tendency that the NLS1s have higher \[Fe x\]/\[Fe vii\] ratios than the other types of Seyferts, the KS test shows that this is not statistically real.

### 3.4. Effects of the Dust Extinction

As mentioned in section 2.2, no reddening correction has been made for all the observed emission line ratios analyzed here. However, it is known that the dust extinction is larger on average in S2s than in S1s (Dahari & De Robertis 1988a, 1988b). In order to see how the extinction affects the line ratios, we summarize the shifts of the line ratios for the following three cases; $`A_V`$ = 1.0, 5.2, and 10.0 (see Table 13). The case of $`A_V`$ = 5.2 corresponds to that of the Circinus galaxy (Oliva et al. 1994). In these estimates, we use the Cardelli’s extinction curve (Cardelli, Clayton, & Mathis 1989).

Since the wavelength of \[O i\] is relatively close to those of \[Fe vii\] and \[Fe x\], the effect of dust extinction is negligibly small even for the case of $`A_V`$ = 10.0 when the \[O i\] intensity is used as a normalizer. When normalized by \[O iii\], the effect of dust extinction leads to higher \[Fe vii\]/\[O iii\] and \[Fe x\]/\[O iii\] ratios. Because the dust extinction is larger on average in S2s than in S1s, the observational results show that these ratios are higher in the S1s than in the S2s even if the effect of the dust extinction is taken into account. On the other hand, the excess of \[Fe vii\]/\[S ii\] in both the NLS1s and the BLS1s with respect to the S2s would be extinguished if the extinction of the S2s is systematically larger (e.g., $`A_V`$ = 10) than that of the S1s. However, the average difference of the extinction between S1s and S2s is about 1 mag (Dahari & De Robertis 1988a; see also De Zotti & Gaskell 1985). Hence it is unlikely that the S2s analyzed here suffer from such larger extinction systematically. Therefore, we conclude that the results obtained in our analysis are not so seriously affected by the dust extinction.

## 4. DISCUSSION

### 4.1. The HINER in the NLS1s

Our analysis has shown that; 1) the NLS1s have higher \[Fe vii\] and \[Fe x\] strengths than the S2+s and the S2-s although the statistical significance is worse when using the \[Fe x\] emission, and 2) there are no statistical differences in the relative strength of \[Fe vii\] and \[Fe x\] between the NLS1s and the BLS1s. Several previous works suggested that strong high-ionization emission lines are often seen in NLS1s (Davidson & Kinman 1978; Osterbrock & Pogge 1985; Nagao et al. 2000). Our analysis has statistically confirmed for the first time that the HINER emission lines of the NLS1s are significantly stronger than those of the S2s. Accordingly this suggests that the NLS1s are viewed from a more face-on view toward dusty tori than the S2s. On the other hand, the second result means that there is no systematic difference in the viewing angle toward the dusty torus between the NLS1s and the BLS1s from a statistical point of view.

Many theoretical models have been proposed to explain the properties of NLS1s (e.g., Boller et al. 1996; Taniguchi et al. 1999 and references therein). Any model is required to satisfy the statistical properties of the HINER presented in this paper; i.e., the narrow line width of NLS1s cannot be explained assuming the obscuration of broad component with dusty torus. For example, Giannuzzo & Stripe (1996) mentioned a possibility that the NLS1s may be objects seen from relatively large inclination angles and thus only outer parts of the BLR can be seen, being responsible for the narrow line width. However such models appear difficult to explain the property of HINER in the NLS1s consistently.

Since our second result means that the viewing angle toward the dusty torus is nearly the same on average between the NLS1s and the BLS1s, it is possible to propose the following model if the BLR observed in optical spectra has a disk-like configuration. Suppose that the rotational axis of the BLR is different from that of the dusty torus. In this case, the BLR line width of S1s depends on the viewing angle toward the BLR disk. However, the line width does not depend on the the viewing angle toward the dusty torus unless the BLR is not hidden by the dusty torus. This model is schematically shown in Figure 12. Our results appear consistent with this model.

It is noted that the BLR emission may arise from outer parts of a warped accretion disk (Shields 1977; Nishiura, Murayama, & Taniguchi 1998; see also for a review Osterbrock 1989). Such warping of accreting gas disks may be driven by the effect of radiation pressure force (Pringle 1996, 1997). Indeed, it has been recently shown that accreting gas clouds probed water vapor maser emission at 22 GHz show evidence for significant warping (Miyoshi et al. 1995; Begelman & Bland-Hawthorn 1997). Therefore, it is likely that the rotation axis of the BLR is not necessarily to align to that of the dusty torus.

Recently, Turner, George, & Netzer (1999b) reported on the observation of the NLS1 Akn 564. They estimated the viewing angle toward the accretion disk $``$60° using a model for asymmetric Fe K$`\alpha `$ line profile and mentioned that this result is contrary to the hypothesis that NLS1s are viewed from pole-on view. However, if the rotation axis of the accretion disk is different from those of the BLR and the dusty torus (e.g., Nishiura, Murayama, & Taniguchi 1998), their observation is not inconsistent with the HINER properties presented in this paper.

### 4.2. The HINER in the S1.5s

The S1.5 is widely recognized as a distinct class of Seyferts observationally (Osterbrock & Koski 1976; Cohen 1983). However, the nature of this type of Seyferts have not yet been fully understood. Comparing the HINER properties of the S1.5s with those of the other types of Seyferts, we discuss the nature of S1.5s.

Our analysis shows that; 1) there is no statistical difference in the relative \[Fe vii\] and \[Fe x\] strengths between the S1.5s and the S1s (i.e., NLS1s + BLS1s), but 2) the S1.5s have higher \[Fe vii\] strengths than the S2+s and the S2-s although this tendency is not confirmed in the relative \[Fe x\] strength. In summary, as shown in Figures 5 and 8, although the S1.5s have an intermediate property in the HINER line strengths between the S1s and S2s, the relative HINER line strengths cover the whole observed ranges of both the S1s and the S2s. Therefore, there are three alternative ideas to explain these observational properties. The first idea is that the S1.5s are seen from an intermediate viewing angle between S1s and S2s; i.e., a significant part of the BLR is obscured by a dusty torus, resulting in a composite profile consisting of both the narrow-line region (NLR) and BLR emission. The second idea is that some S1.5s are basically S1s but a significant part of the BLR emission is accidentally obscured by dense, clumpy gas clouds. The third idea is that some S1.5s are basically S2s but a part of the BLR emission can be seen from some optically-thin regions of the dusty torus.

As shown in Figure 5, the majority of S1.5s has nearly the same relative \[Fe vii\] strengths as those of the S1s, being consistent with the second idea. The remaining minority can be explained either by the first idea or by the third one. Yet, it seems important to mention that the origin of S1.5s may be heterogeneous. Finally, it is also important to mention that the latter two ideas may explain why some Seyfert nuclei show the so-called type switching between S1 and S2; e.g., NGC 4151 (Penston & Perez 1984; Ayani & Maehara 1991). The reason for this is as follows. It seems likely that the dusty torus consists of rather small blobs which are orbiting around the central engine. When a blob is passing the line of sight to the central engine, the BLR can be obscured if the blob is optically thick enough to hide it. If we assume that the blob is located at a radial distance of 0.1 pc from the central engine and the mass of the supermassive black hole is 107 M, the Keplerian velocity is estimated to be V$`{}_{\mathrm{rot}}{}^{}`$ 660 km s-1. Since the typical time scale of the observed type switchings is $``$ 10 years, this blob could move 2 $`\times `$ 1016 cm. This is almost consistent with the typical size of the BLR, $``$ 0.01 pc (e.g., Peterson 1993). This idea also suggests that a typical size of such blobs is $``$ 0.01 pc.

### 4.3. The HINER in the “S2+s”

As presented in section 3, there is no statistical difference in the relative strengths of \[Fe vii\] and \[Fe x\] between S2+s and S2-s . Among the subtypes of S2+s (i.e., S1.8, S1.9, S2NIR-BLR and S2HBLR), there is no systematic difference in the HINER properties (see Figures 7 and 10). On the other hand, the S2+s have weaker \[Fe vii\] strength than the S1.5s (Table 10). These facts suggest that there is a systematic difference in the viewing angle toward dusty tori between the S1.5s and the S2+s; i.e., the S2+s might be those which are seen with large inclination angle and the emission radiated from the BLR reach us through the occasionally thin dusty tori. All these arguments imply that S2+s are viewed from large inclination angles, leading to more significant extinction of the BLR emission with respect to BLS1s and S1.5s. This appears consistent with earlier implications (e.g., Miller & Goodrich 1990; Heisler, Lumsden, & Bailey 1997).

### 4.4. The Nature of HINER Traced by \[Fe x\]

As presented in sections 3.1 and 3.2, both the NLS1s and the BLS1s have higher HINER emission-line strengths than the S2+s and the S2-s. However, comparing the KS probabilities given in Table 10 and Table 11, in particular those concerning to the relative intensities normalized by \[O iii\], this tendency is much more prominent in the analysis using \[Fe vii\] rather than \[Fe x\]. As proposed by MT98a, the excess \[Fe vii\] emission in the S1s appears attributed to the significant contribution from the torus HINER. Therefore, the weaker excess emission in \[Fe x\] implies that the major \[Fe x\] emitting region may be not the torus HINER but either the clumpy NLR HINER or the extended HINER or both because the latter two HINERs show less viewing angle dependence (see MT98a).

Another interesting property related to the \[Fe x\] emission is the observed \[Fe x\]/\[Fe vii\] ratios (see Figure 11). The average ratios are compared among the sample in Table 14. It is remarkable that some S1s and S2s have very higher ratios; e.g., \[Fe x\]/\[Fe vii\] $``$ 1. Therefore, in order to investigate the origin of the \[Fe x\] emission, it is interesting to compare the observed line ratios of \[Fe x\]/\[Fe vii\] with several theoretical predictions. Because simple one-zone models are known to predict too weak high-ionization emission lines (e.g., Pelat, Alloin, & Bica 1987; Dopita et al. 1997), we investigate multi-component photoionization models; 1) optically thin multi-cloud model (Ferland & Osterbrock 1986), and 2) the locally optimally emitting cloud model (LOC model; Ferguson et al. 1997). As shown in Table 14, these models predict smaller line ratios. On the other hand, the low-density interstellar matter (ISM) model by Korista & Ferland (1989) predicts higher line ratios of \[Fe x\]/\[Fe vii\]. They mentioned that such HINER will be observed out to 1 – 2 kpc. Indeed, extended HINERs have been found in some Seyfert galaxies; NGC 3516 (Golev et al. 1995), Tololo 0109$``$383 (Murayama et al. 1998), and NGC 4051 (Nagao et al. 2000). Alternatively, shock models may also be responsible for the observed higher \[Fe x\]/\[Fe vii\] ratios. Viegas-Aldrovandi & Contini (1989) calculated those ratios introducing the shock component. As shown in Table 14, such models can also explain those higher line ratios.

Which is the appropriate model for the higher line ratios of \[Fe x\]/\[Fe vii\], highly ionized low-density ISM or shock-driven ionization? In order to distinguish these two models, we compare the observed \[Fe xi\]/\[Fe x\] ratios with model results in Table 14. The \[Fe xi\] emission is observed in only 19 Seyfert nuclei (e.g., Grandi 1978; Cohen 1983; Penston et al. 1984; Erkens et al. 1997).As shown in Table 14, the low-density ISM models of Korista & Ferland (1989) appear consistent with the observed \[Fe xi\]/\[Fe x\]ratios. Though Viegas-Aldrovandi & Contini (1989) did not calculate this line ratio, Evans et al. (1999) mentioned that the ionization state in the emission-line region ionized by shocks is somewhat lower than that ionized by a typical nonthermal continuum. Therefore, it is likely that some Seyfert galaxies have the extended HINER described by Korista & Ferland (1989), being responsible for the unusually strong \[Fe x\] emission. This idea also explains why the excess \[Fe x\] emission is less significant in the S1s than the excess \[Fe vii\] emission.

## 5. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The anisotropic property of the radiation from the HINER traced \[Fe vii\] reported by MT98a has been statistically confirmed using the larger sample. The line ratios of \[Fe x\] to the low-ionization emission lines show a rather isotropic property with respect to those of \[Fe vii\] to the low-ionization emission lines. This may be interpreted by an idea that a significant fraction of the \[Fe x\] emission arises from low-density ISM as suggested by Korista & Ferland (1989). We note that the \[Fe x\] emission is not suitable to investigate the viewing angle toward the dusty tori of Seyfert nuclei.

We have also investigated the HINER properties of the intermediate-type of Seyfert nuclei. Using the frequency distributions of the line ratios of \[Fe vii\] to the low-ionization emission lines, we find the following suggestions. (1) The NLS1s are viewed from a more face-on orientation toward dusty tori than the S2s. (2) The line ratios of S1.5s are distributed in a wide range from the smallest value of the S2s to the largest value of the S1s. This suggests that the S1.5s are heterogeneous populations. (3) The HINER properties of the S1.8s, the S1.9s and the objects showing a broad Pa$`\beta `$ line or polarized broad Balmer lines are considerably different from those of the S1s. These facts mean that the “S2+” objects are those which are seen from a large inclination angle and their BLR emission comes through optically-thin line of sights toward the dusty tori.

We would like to thank the anonymous referee for useful comments and suggestions and Yuji Ikeda, Shingo Nishiura and Yasuhiro Shioya for useful advice. This research has made use of the NED (NASA extragalactic database) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under construct with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. TM is supported by a Research Fellowship from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young Scientists. A part of this work was made when YT visited the Astronomical Data Analysis Center (ADAC) of the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan. YT thanks the staff of ADAC, in particular Shin-ichi Ichikawa, for their kind hospitality. This work was financially supported in part by Grant-in-Aids for the Scientific Research (Nos. 10044052, and 10304013) of the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, and Science.