text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The boundary value problem for linear operators in non-trivial regions leads to complications and quite often it is necessary to resort to the numerical analysis even for the simplest operators which possess a known kernel in the whole space, such as e.g. Laplace operator in the $`\text{R}^n`$ .

The possibility of a new approach to these problems appeared along with developing the theory of point interactions in quantum mechanics, firstly stimulated by the famous Kronig-Penney model , and systematically investigated in  where self-adjoint extensions for Hamiltonian with point-like interactions have been constructed so that the explicit form for resolvent has been obtained for some physically significant systems. It is in reference  that it has been already pointed out that the limiting case of infinitely strong point interaction allows effectively to split the space in two separated regions that lead to two boundary problems on half line.

This important trick has been successfully developed in  and it allows one to write down the explicit expressions for the Green function of Schrödinger equation for the particle in one dimensional and radial boxes with Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions provided the appropriate problem in the whole space has been solved. The technique that has been successfully used for such a derivation is a direct summation of perturbation series (Dyson series ), effectively leading to geometrical progression due to the specific form of the perturbation. We would like to stress here, that numerous analytical results obtained up to now are related to quantum one-dimensional problems (as e.g., Krein’s formula ), effective one-dimensional problems after variables’ separation (’radial problem’), and point-like interactions (see  and recent book  for detailed references which include both solvable $`\delta `$-perturbation cases and boundary value problems).

The question naturally arising here is whether it is possible to generalize these constructions to higher dimensional boundary problems. As we will see, and this will be the main aim of this work, it can be done at least for Dirichlet boundary conditions for arbitrary linear evolution operators in topologically trivial region (homeomorphic to a ball in $`R^d`$), when assuming some natural conditions for the propagator of “free particle” to be fulfilled. It is worthwhile to mention here that we intend neither to construct the self-ajoint extension of appropriate singular perturbed operators , nor to perform a detailed investigation of convergence properties of appropriate perturbation series (as is well known the answer may be negative even for regular perturbations, see e.g. ). To the contrary, we intend to propose explicit construction of Green function for non-separable case and demonstrate its validity by known examples. Generally speaking the problem we will solve can be formulated on an abstract level of the theory of linear operators by introducing some generalization of projector operators, but we expect that it could only shadow simple foundation of the approach we use. Moreover, although, admittedly, the manipulations with perturbation series and the subsequent limit of infinitely large coupling constant are rather formal, we do not know another way to obtain the Green function representation for general boundary problem that we will construct in this paper.

## 2 Series summation for singular perturbed system

Let us have a linear evolution equation in $`R^d`$ of the form

$$\left(\frac{}{t}\widehat{}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐱)=0,$$
(1)
with explicitly time independent operator $`\widehat{}`$ acting on the function defined over $`\mathrm{R}^\mathrm{d}`$ and obeying Dirichlet boundary condition $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐱)|_\mathrm{\Gamma }=0`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{𝐱:P(𝐱)=0\}`$ is the boundary (hyper-surface) of the region $``$ under consideration, in which we seek the solutions of equation (1).

We start from a consideration of the “free particle”, omitting the boundary condition, and assuming that propagator for that case, given by

$$K^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };t)=<𝐱^{\prime \prime }|e^{\widehat{}t}|𝐱^{}>\theta (t),$$
(2)
is already known. Here $`\theta `$ is the Heaviside unit-step function, incorporated into (2) to ensure causality property $`K(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };t)=0`$, when $`t<0`$. The propagator $`K`$ possesses the composition property

$$K(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };t)=\underset{\mathrm{R}^\mathrm{d}}{}𝑑𝐱_1K(𝐱^{},𝐱_1;t_1)K(𝐱_1,𝐱^{\prime \prime };tt_1).$$
(3)
which follows from the semi-group property with respect to the time evolution, which in turn is automatically fulfilled for an explicitly time-independent operator $`\widehat{}`$ and the decomposition of unity in an appropriate functional space, namely

$$\text{ Id}=\underset{x}{}|xx|,$$
(4)
where summation (integration) is performed over discrete (continuous) index enumerating states (see e.g, ). These properties are natural for most of physically significant models so that our consideration is not very restrictive.

Now we will emulate the boundary condition by introducing into (1) the additional singular potential term of the form $`V^\delta =\gamma \delta _P(𝐱)`$. The generalized $`\delta `$-function used here is a distribution concentrated on the hyper-surface $`P`$ . In the limiting case of $`\gamma \mathrm{}`$ the corresponding one dimensional problem turns out to be a Dirichlet boundary problem on the half line  (see the discussion in introduction). We will demonstrate explicitly that the same situation is met in higher dimensions.

We will use the method expounded in , performing a perturbation expansion, starting from the formula for the propagator of the singular perturbed problem

$$K(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };t)=<𝐱^{\prime \prime }|e^{(\widehat{}+V^\delta )t}|𝐱^{}>\theta (t).$$
(5)
The formal perturbation series over powers of $`V^\delta `$ can be constructed as in the quantum mechanics  and reads

$`K^\delta (𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };t)=K^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };t)+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\gamma ^n{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}}dt_1{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{R}^\mathrm{d}}{}}d𝐱_1K^0(𝐱^{},𝐱_1;t_10)\delta _P(𝐱_1)\times `$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=2}{\overset{n}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑t_j{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{R}^\mathrm{d}}{}}𝑑𝐱_jK^0(𝐱_{j1},𝐱_j;t_jt_{j1})\delta _P(𝐱_j)\right]K^0(𝐱_n,𝐱^{\prime \prime };tt_n).`$ (6)
The convergence questions appearing at this moment should be treated for every problem considered separately, e.g. for Schrödinger equation the existence of well defined Green function has been proven rigorously in some cases . For arbitrary linear evolution equation we must stay on the formal level only to go further.

After performing the Laplace transformation for the Green function, defined by

$$G(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{Et}K(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };t)𝑑t,$$
(7)
the following series representation can be written

$`G^\delta (𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)=G^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\gamma ^n{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{R}^\mathrm{d}}{}}d𝐱_1G^0(𝐱^{},𝐱_1;E)\delta _P(𝐱_1)\times `$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=2}{\overset{n}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{R}^\mathrm{d}}{}}𝑑𝐱_jG^0(𝐱_{j1},𝐱_j;E)\delta _P(𝐱_j)\right]G^0(𝐱_n,𝐱^{\prime \prime };E).`$ (8)
The behaviour of $`G^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)`$ at coincident space arguments in spaces with $`d>2`$ may lead to divergence of integrals in (2), but we will not discuss this in details, since the appropriate procedures of regularizations are well known (for point-like perturbations in quantum mechanics see e.g., ). We only point out that for most interesting cases of two and three-dimensional quantum problems there are no singularities within our approach, opposite to the models described in . Indeed, the short distance behaviour of the Green function in d-dimensional spaces is (, f.6.2.1.2)

$$G(\text{x}^{},\text{x}^{\prime \prime },k)|\text{x}^{}𝐱^{\prime \prime }|^{1d/2}Y_{1d/2}(k|𝐱^{}𝐱^{\prime \prime }|),$$
(9)
where $`Y_n(x)`$ is Bessel function , so that the relevant underlying singularities are integrable for d=2,3. For higher dimension (or) and other operator $``$, some sort of regularization should be used as e.g. in .

Returning to our problem, now we can introduce new coordinates by the map $`F:𝐱=\{x_1,..x_d\}𝐲=\{y_1,..,y_d\}`$ with Jacobian $`J=\frac{(y_1,..,y_d)}{(x_1,..,x_d)}`$ so that the equation of hyper-surface $`P`$ will be given by $`y_d=\eta `$ (see e.g.,). We designate all coordinates except the last one namely $`\{y_i:i=1,..d1\}`$, by $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, so that $`𝐲=\{\mathrm{\Omega },y_d\}`$. Then, the integrations over $`\delta `$-functions are simply projections on the submanifold, defined by $`y_d=\eta `$ and we get

$`G^\delta (𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)=G^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\gamma ^n{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}\sqrt{g}_1d\mathrm{\Omega }_1G^0(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},(y_d)^{},\mathrm{\Omega }_1,\eta ;E)\times `$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=2}{\overset{n}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}\sqrt{g}_j𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_jG^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_{j1},\eta ,\mathrm{\Omega }_j,\eta ;E)\right]G^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_n,\eta ,\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E),`$ (10)
where the integration is performed over the hyper-surface $`P`$, $`g=\mathrm{det}(g^{\mu \nu })`$, $`g^{\mu \nu }=\frac{x^\mu }{y^\nu }|_P`$ is an induced metric tensor on $`P`$ and we introduce coordinates $`\mathrm{\Omega },y_d`$ corresponding to the initial and final points $`𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime }`$. Now we want to expand the Green function $`G^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_{j1},\eta ,\mathrm{\Omega }_j,\eta ;E)`$ in a series of functions defined on $`P`$. Let us choose an appropriate full (complete) orthonormal system of functions $`\{f_\kappa (\mathrm{\Omega })\}`$ on the boundary $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of the region $``$, where $`\kappa `$ is some multi-index enumerating the system $`f`$, with a standard $`L_2(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ scalar product

$$<f_\kappa ,f_\kappa ^{}>=\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }}{}\sqrt{g(\mathrm{\Omega })}\overline{f}_\kappa (\mathrm{\Omega })f_\kappa ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }=\delta _{\kappa ,\kappa ^{}}.$$
(11)
For example, the case of axially symmetric closed surfaces has been recently treated by Prodan , where the projection of the resolvent operator on such surfaces has been investigated.

We represent $`G^0`$ in the form

$$G^0(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\xi ,\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\eta ;E)=\underset{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}{}𝒢_{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\xi ,\eta ;E)f_\kappa ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\overline{f}_{\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })$$
(12)
so that the coefficient $`𝒢_{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\xi ,\eta ;E)`$ is expressed as

$$𝒢_{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\xi ,\eta ;E)=\sqrt{g(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})g(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })}G^0(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\xi ,\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\eta ;E)f_\kappa ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\overline{f}_{\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{}𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }$$
(13)
Then, substituting (12) into (2) we get

$`G^\delta (𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)=G^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\gamma ^n{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}\sqrt{g}_1d\mathrm{\Omega }_1{\displaystyle \underset{\kappa ^{},\kappa _1}{}}𝒢_{\kappa ^{},\kappa _1}((y_d)^{},\eta ;E)\times `$
$`f_\kappa ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\overline{f}_{\kappa _1}(\mathrm{\Omega }_1){\displaystyle \underset{j=2}{\overset{n}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}\sqrt{g}_jd\mathrm{\Omega }_j{\displaystyle \underset{\kappa _{j1},\kappa _j}{}}𝒢_{\kappa _{j1},\kappa _j}(\eta ,\eta ;E)f_{\kappa _{j1}}(\mathrm{\Omega }_{j1})\overline{f}_{\kappa _j}(\mathrm{\Omega })\right]\times `$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\kappa _n,\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}{}}𝒢_{\kappa _n,\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}((y_d)^{\prime \prime },\eta ;E)f_{\kappa _n}(\mathrm{\Omega }_n)\overline{f}_{\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })=`$
$`G^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)+\gamma {\displaystyle \underset{\kappa ^{},\kappa _1,\kappa _n\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}{}}𝒢_{\kappa ^{},\kappa _1}((y_d)^{},\eta ;E)𝒢_{\kappa _n,\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\eta ,(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E)f_\kappa ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\overline{f}_{\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })\times `$
$`\left[\delta _{\kappa _1,\kappa _n}+\gamma 𝒢_{\kappa _1,\kappa _n}(\eta ,\eta ;E)+\gamma ^2{\displaystyle \underset{\kappa _2}{}}𝒢_{\kappa _1,\kappa _2}(\eta ,\eta ;E)𝒢_{\kappa _2,\kappa _n}(\eta ,\eta ;E)+\mathrm{}\right]`$ (14)
where we used the orthonormality of the functions (11). After summing up the geometrical progression we obtain

$`G^\delta (𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)=G^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)+`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}{}}\left[𝒢((y_d)^{},\eta ;E)(\gamma ^1𝒢(\eta ,\eta ;E))^1𝒢(\eta ,(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E)\right]_{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}f_\kappa ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\overline{f}_{\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }).`$ (15)
For the brevity of notation we used matrix form within the square brackets, and $`(\gamma 𝒢)^n`$ is an ordinary matrix power. Taking the limit $`\gamma \mathrm{}`$ we get finally

$`G^\delta (𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)=G^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}{}}\left[𝒢((y_d)^{},\eta ;E)𝒢(\eta ,\eta ;E)^1𝒢(\eta ,(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E)\right]_{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}f_\kappa ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\overline{f}_{\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }),`$ (16)
which is the main result of our paper.

## 3 Discussion

As it is easily seen, the last formula solves an appropriate Dirichlet boundary problem. Indeed, the statement that the object constructed above satisfies the differential equation (1) is evident from the construction and, if $`(y_d)^{}=\eta `$ or $`(y_d)^{\prime \prime }=\eta `$, that is if the initial or the final points are on a boundary, the term in the square brackets simply gives the free Green function expansion coefficient and the whole sum becomes the free Green function cancelling the first term in (2), which means that the Dirichlet boundary condition is obeyed.

It is worthwhile to point out here that the spectrum of the system under consideretion is given by such values of $`E`$ that $`𝒢(\eta ,\eta ;E)`$ is non-invertible. In two dimensional case the multi-index $`\kappa `$ becomes an ordinary one and we obtain the condition of vanishing determinant

$$\text{Det}𝒢(\eta ,\eta ;E)=0.$$
(17)
From the last equation it is easily seen that our approach looks like some alternative and generalization of the boundary integral method , where the spectrum of 2-D billiard can be obtained based on an integral of Green function’s normal derivative over the boundary.

It is also easy to demonstrate that formula (2) leads to a known one for the case of the separability of variables. Let us do it explicitly for the 2-D case of quantum particle in a circular region ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{𝐱:|𝐱|=R\}`$). An appropriate formula for the Green function in polar coordinates ($`r,\varphi `$) reads  (see also  for alternative derivation)

$`G(𝐱,𝐱^{};E)={\displaystyle \underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}G_l(r,r^{},E)e^{im(\varphi ^{}\varphi )},`$ (18)
$`G_l(r,r^{};E)=G_l^0(r,r^{};E){\displaystyle \frac{G_l^0(r^{},R;E)G_l^0(R,r^{};E)}{G_l^0(R,R;E)}}.`$ (19)
A natural choice of the functions’ family is of course $`f_m(\varphi )=\mathrm{exp}\{im\varphi \}`$. Expanding the free particle Green function in the same manner as in (18) and calculating the coefficient of equation (12) one can see that

$$𝒢_{mm^{}}(r,r^{};E)=G_m^0(r,r^{};E)\delta _{mm^{}},$$
(20)
so that the matrix inversion becomes trivial and after the substitution of (20) into (2), formula (19) follows immediately. Similar arguments may be used for other separable quantum problems.

Thus, we see, that indeed we have successfully constructed the explicit representation for the Green function of linear evolutional equation with Dirichlet boundary condition, based on Green function in the whole space, thereby generalizing results already known in separable cases in quantum mechanics.

The formula (2) can be rewritten in a more formal way, introducing the series expansion of $`G^\delta (𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)`$ in a manner like (12) for $`G^0`$. Then,

$`𝒢_{\kappa ^{}\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}^\delta ((y_d)^{},(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E)=𝒢_{\kappa ^{}\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}((y_d)^{},(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E)`$
$`\left[𝒢((y_d)^{},\eta ;E)𝒢(\eta ,\eta ;E)^1𝒢(\eta ,(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E)\right]_{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}`$ (21)
or in operator notation

$`\widehat{𝒢}^\delta ((y_d)^{},(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E)=\widehat{𝒢}((y_d)^{},(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E)`$
$`\widehat{𝒢}((y_d)^{},\eta ;E)\widehat{𝒢}(\eta ,\eta ;E)^1\widehat{𝒢}(\eta ,(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E).`$ (22)
The last expression is suitable for further formal manipulations in the case of double $`\delta `$-perturbation $`V=\gamma (\delta (y_da)+\delta (y_db))`$, where the system is being ”squeezed” into a narrow shell $`a\eta b`$, simulating the quantization on a hyper-surface in the limit $`ab`$ in a manner similar to  (see the equation 2.15 in ), but the detailed analysis will be published elsewhere.

It should be mentioned also, that our approach can be modified also to be used for more general perturbation of the form $`\stackrel{~}{V}^\delta =\gamma h(𝐱)\delta _P(𝐱)`$ with arbitrary function $`h`$. Then similar arguments show that the only difference from the case considered above is that one should change $`\sqrt{g}`$ to $`\sqrt{g}h(\mathrm{\Omega },\eta )`$. Then, we should use another function family for the expansion or, it may be more convenient to expand into the series not the Green function but the product

$$\sqrt{h(\mathrm{\Omega };\xi )h(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\eta )}G^0(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\xi ,\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\eta ;E)=\underset{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}{}\stackrel{~}{𝒢}_{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\xi ,\eta ;E)f_\kappa ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\overline{f}_{\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }),$$
(23)
and the final formula becomes

$`\stackrel{~}{G}^\delta (𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E)=G^0(𝐱^{},𝐱^{\prime \prime };E){\displaystyle \underset{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_\kappa ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\overline{f}_{\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })}{\sqrt{h(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },(y_d)^{})h(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },(y_d)^{\prime \prime })}}}\times `$
$`\left[\stackrel{~}{𝒢}((y_d)^{},\eta ;E)\stackrel{~}{𝒢}(\eta ,\eta ;E)^1\stackrel{~}{𝒢}(\eta ,(y_d)^{\prime \prime };E)\right]_{\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{\prime \prime }}.`$ (24)
Such a generalization may be useful for the systems with the boundary whose initial shape is not very convenient for the construction of the function family set $`f_\kappa `$ and when it is easy to perform some transformations before using the proposed approach. In this case, after a transformation to the new coordinates (and, e.g., accompanied by the “local time rescaling” ), the initially pure $`\delta `$-function perturbation really transforms to a non-uniform one like discussed above.

## Acknowledgements

The financial support by the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of Slovenia is acknowledged with thanks. This work was supported also by the Rector’s Fund of the University of Maribor. G.K. acknowledges the support by the postdoctoral Grant No. SZF-CAMTP01-MZS/1997 of the Slovenian Science Foundation.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Here we review some recent developments in the theory of isomonodromic deformations on Riemann sphere and elliptic curve. For both cases we show how to derive Schlesinger transformations together with their action on tau-function, and construct classes of solutions in terms of multi-dimensional theta-functions.

The theory of isomonodromic deformations of ordinary matrix differential equations of the type

$$\frac{d\mathrm{\Psi }}{d\lambda }=A(\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi },$$
(1.1)
where $`A(\lambda )`$ is a matrix-valued meromorphic function on $`\overline{}`$, is a classical area intimately related to the matrix Riemann-Hilbert problem on the Riemann sphere. Over the last 20 years this has become a powerful tool in areas like soliton theory, statistical mechanics, theory of random matrices, quantum field theory etc. The main object associated with the isomonodromic deformation equations is the so-called $`\tau `$-function.

After the classical work of Schlesinger  the important contributions to the development of the subject were made in the papers of Jimbo, Miwa and their collaborators in the early 80’s .

There are only a few cases where the matrix Riemann-Hilbert problem may be solved explicitly in terms of known special functions.

However, as was already discovered by Schlesinger himself, there exists a large class of transformations which allow to get an infinite chain of new solutions starting from the known ones. They share the characteristic feature that they shift the eigenvalues of the residues of the connection $`A(\lambda )`$ in (1.1) by integer or half-integer values, thus changing the associated monodromies by sign only. These transformations – nowadays called Schlesinger transformations – were systematically studied in . In particular, it turns out that being written in terms of the $`\tau `$-functions the superposition laws of these transformations provide a big supply of discrete integrable systems.

Recently in papers  it was solved a class of $`2\times 2`$ Riemann-Hilbert problems with arbitrary off-diagonal monodromy matrices in terms of multidimensional theta-functions. The equations for $`\tau `$-function were integrated in the paper  to give the following result:

$$\tau (\{\lambda _j\})=[det𝒜]^{\frac{1}{2}}\underset{j<k}{}(\lambda _j\lambda _k)^{\frac{1}{8}}\mathrm{\Theta }[{}_{𝐪}{}^{𝐩}](0|𝐁).$$

where all the objects associated to auxiliary hyperelliptic curve are defined below in Sect.2.3.

The natural question of generalizing the theory of isomonodromic deformations on the sphere to higher genus surfaces was addressed by several authors. Here, we mention the contributions of Okamoto  and Iwasaki .

For the case of the torus, recently two different explicit forms of equations of isomonodromic deformations were proposed. In work of the author and Samtleben  it were studied isomonodromic deformations of non-singlevalued meromorphic connection on the torus whose “twists” (which determine the transformation of the connection $`A(\lambda )`$ with respect to tracing along basic cycles of the torus) vary with respect to the deformation parameters. The isomonodromic deformation equations for these connections hence contain transcendental dependence on the dynamical variables, which makes it difficult to analyse this system in a way analogous to the Schlesinger system on the sphere. On the other hand, Takasaki  considered connections on the torus whose twists remain invariant with respect to the parameters of deformation. In Takasaki’s form, the equations of isomonodromic deformations have already the same degree of non-linearity as the ordinary Schlesinger system.

In the paper  it were constructed transformations of Schlesinger type for elliptic isomonodromic deformations in Takasaki form, and it was derived the action of these transformation on elliptic version of $`\tau `$-function. Here we review these results, and, in addition, present the generalization of results of the paper  to elliptic case. We show how to solve certain class of Riemann-Hilbert problems on the torus in terms of Prym theta-functions. In turn, this allows to construct a class of algebro-geometric solutions of elliptic Schlesinger system.

In sect.2 we introduce Schlesinger system on the Riemann sphere. For $`2\times 2`$ case we discuss elementary Schlesinger transformations together with their action on $`\tau `$-function and, following , derive class of algebro-geometric solutions of the Schlesinger system in terms of theta-functions of auxiliary hyperelliptic curve. In sect.3 we describe equations of elliptic isomonodromic deformations with constant twists , and, following , construct elliptic version of elementary Schlesinger transformations. The new result of this paper \- the construction of algebro-geometric solutions of elliptic Schlesinger system in terms of Prym theta-functions - is presented in sect.3.

## 2 Schlesinger system on the Riemann sphere: Schlesinger transformations and algebro-geometric solutions

### 2.1 Schlesinger system

Consider the following ordinary linear differential equation (1.1) for a matrix-valued function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )SL(2,)`$ and

$$A(\lambda )=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{A_j}{\lambda \lambda _j},$$
(2.2)
where the residues $`A_j𝔰𝔩(2,)`$ are independent of $`\lambda `$. Regularity at $`\lambda =\mathrm{}`$ requires

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}A_j=0,$$
(2.3)
and allows to further impose the initial condition $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda =\mathrm{})=I`$. The matrix $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ defined in this way lives on the universal covering $`X`$ of $`P^1\{\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _N\}`$. Its asymptotical expansion near the singularities $`\lambda _j`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )=G_j\mathrm{\Psi }_j(\lambda \lambda _j)^{T_j}C_j,$$
(2.4)
with $`G_j,C_jSL(2,)`$ constant, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_j=I+𝒪(\lambda \lambda _j)SL(2,)`$ holomorphic around $`\lambda =\lambda _j`$, and where $`T_j`$ is a traceless diagonal matrix with eigenvalues $`\pm t_j`$. The residues $`A_j`$ of (2.2) are encoded in the local expansion as

$$A_j=G_j^{}T_j^{}G_j^1.$$
(2.5)
Upon analytical continuation around $`\lambda =\lambda _j`$, the function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ in $`P^1\{\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _N\}`$ changes by right multiplication with some monodromy matrices $`M_j`$

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )M_j,`$ (2.6)
$`M_j`$ $`=`$ $`C_j^1e^{2\pi iT_j}C_j^{}.`$
In the sequel we shall consider the generic case when none of $`t_j`$ is integer or half-integer.

The assumption of independence of all monodromy matrices $`M_i`$ of the positions of the singularities $`\lambda _j`$: $`M_i/\lambda _j=0`$ is called the isomonodromy condition; it implies the following dependence of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ on $`\lambda _j`$

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\lambda _j}=\frac{A_j}{\lambda \lambda _j}\mathrm{\Psi },$$
(2.7)
as follows from (2.4) and normalization of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ at $`\mathrm{}`$. Compatibility of (1.1) and (2.7) then is equivalent to the classical Schlesinger system :

$$\frac{A_j}{\lambda _i}=\frac{[A_j,A_i]}{\lambda _j\lambda _i},ij,\frac{A_j}{\lambda _j}=\underset{ij}{}\frac{[A_j,A_i]}{\lambda _j\lambda _i},$$
(2.8)
describing the dependence of the residues $`A_j`$ on the $`\lambda _i`$. Obviously, the eigenvalues $`t_j`$ of the $`A_j`$ are integrals of motion of the Schlesinger system. The functions $`G_j`$ have the following dependence on $`\lambda _j`$: :

$$\frac{G_j}{\lambda _i}=\frac{A_iG_j}{\lambda _i\lambda _j},ij,\frac{G_j}{\lambda _j}=\underset{ij}{}\frac{A_iG_j}{\lambda _i\lambda _j},$$
(2.9)
which obviously implies (2.8).

To introduce the notion of the $`\tau `$-function for the Schlesinger system, one notes that (2.8) is a multi-time Hamiltonian system  with respect to the Poisson structure on the residues $`A_j`$

$$\{A_i^\alpha ,A_j^\beta \}=\delta _{ij}\epsilon ^{\alpha \beta \gamma }A_j^\gamma ,$$
(2.10)
($`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma `$ denoting $`𝔰𝔩(2)`$ algebra indices with the completely antisymmetric structure constants $`\epsilon ^{\alpha \beta \gamma }`$) and Hamiltonians

$$H_i=\frac{1}{4\pi \mathrm{i}}_{\lambda _i}\mathrm{tr}A^2(\lambda )𝑑\lambda =\frac{1}{2}\underset{ji}{}\frac{\mathrm{tr}A_iA_j}{\lambda _j\lambda _i}.$$
(2.11)
Explicitly, (2.8) takes the form

$$\frac{A_j}{\lambda _i}=\{H_i,A_j\},$$
(2.12)
and all the Hamiltonians $`H_j`$ Poisson-commute.

The $`\tau `$-function $`\tau (\{\lambda _j\})`$ of the Schlesinger system then is defined as the generating functions of the Hamiltonians

$$\frac{\mathrm{ln}\tau }{\lambda _j}=H_j,$$
(2.13)
where compatibility of these equations follows from (2.8). This $`\tau `$-function is closely related to the Fredholm determinant of a certain integral operator associated to the Riemann-Hilbert problem (see  for details).

### 2.2 Schlesinger transformations on the Riemann sphere

Schlesinger transformations are symmetry transformations of the Schlesinger system (2.8) which map a given solution $`\left\{A_j(\{\lambda _i\})\right\}`$ to another solution $`\left\{\widehat{A}_j(\{\lambda _i\})\right\}`$ with the same number and positions of poles $`\lambda _j`$ such that the related eigenvalues $`t_j`$ are shifted by integer or half-integer values $`t_jt_j+n_j/2,n_j`$. The monodromy matrices $`M_j`$ hence remain invariant or change sign under this transformation. We shall restrict ourselves to elementary Schlesinger transformations, which change only two $`t_j`$’s, say, $`t_k`$ and $`t_l`$ for $`kl`$ by $`\pm 1/2`$. The transformed variables will be denoted by $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }},\widehat{A}_j,\widehat{t}_j`$, etc. Without loss of generality we consider the case

$$\widehat{t}_j=\{\begin{array}{cc}t_j+\frac{1}{2}\hfill & \text{for }j=k,l\hfill \\ t_j\hfill & \text{else}\hfill \end{array}.$$
(2.14)
Our presentation here mainly follows . For the transformed function $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ we make the ansatz

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}(\lambda )=F(\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda ),$$
(2.15)
with

$$F(\lambda )=\sqrt{\frac{\lambda \lambda _k}{\lambda \lambda _l}}S_++\sqrt{\frac{\lambda \lambda _l}{\lambda \lambda _k}}S_{},$$
(2.16)
where the matrices $`S_\pm `$ do not depend on $`\lambda `$ and are uniquely determined by :

$$S_\pm ^2=S_\pm ,S_++S_{}=I,S_+G_l^1=S_{}G_k^1=0.$$
(2.17)
By $`G_j^\alpha `$ here we denote the $`\alpha `$-th column of the matrix $`G_j`$ ($`\alpha =1,2`$). Combining the columns $`G_k^1`$ and $`G_l^1`$ into a $`2\times 2`$ matrix

$$G=(G_k^1,G_l^1),$$
(2.18)
we can deduce from (2.17) the following simple formula for $`S_\pm `$:

$$S_\pm =GP_\pm G^1,$$
(2.19)
with projection matrices

$$P_+=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),P_{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$

It is easy to check using the local expansion of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ at the singularities $`\lambda _j`$ (2.4) and the defining relations for $`S_\pm `$ (2.19) that the transformed function $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ at $`\lambda _j`$ has a local expansion of the form (2.4) with the same matrices $`C_j`$ and the desired transformation (2.14) of the $`t_j`$. The matrices $`G_j`$ change to new matrices $`\widehat{G}_j`$. Thus, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ satisfies the system

$$\frac{\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}}{\lambda }=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\widehat{A}_j}{\lambda \lambda _j}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }},\frac{\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}}{\lambda _j}=\frac{\widehat{A}_j}{\lambda \lambda _j}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }},$$
(2.20)
where the functions $`\widehat{A}_j(\{\lambda _i\})`$ build a new solution of the Schlesinger system (2.8).

On the level of the residues $`A_j`$, the form of the Schlesinger transformation is not very transparent; however, it turns out that the associated $`\tau `$-function transforms in a rather simple way. Namely, for $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ we find

$$\mathrm{tr}\widehat{A}^2=\mathrm{tr}A^2+2\mathrm{tr}\left[F^1\frac{dF}{d\lambda }A\right]+\mathrm{tr}\left[F^1\frac{dF}{d\lambda }\right]^2.$$
(2.21)
For example, the Hamiltonians $`H_j`$ for $`jk,l`$ transform as follows:

$$\widehat{H}_jH_j=\left(\frac{1}{\lambda _j\lambda _k}\frac{1}{\lambda _j\lambda _l}\right)\mathrm{tr}\left[A_jS_+\right]=\frac{\mathrm{tr}\left[A_jGP_+G^1\right]}{\lambda _j\lambda _k}+\frac{\mathrm{tr}\left[A_jGP_{}G^1\right]}{\lambda _j\lambda _l}$$

$$=\mathrm{tr}\left[\frac{G}{\lambda _j}G^1\right]$$

according to (2.9). Hence the transformed $`\tau `$-function $`\widehat{\tau }`$ is given by $`\widehat{\tau }=f(\lambda _k,\lambda _l)detG\tau `$ with some function $`f(\lambda _k,\lambda _l)`$ to be determined from the transformation of $`H_k`$, $`H_l`$. Taking into account the transformation of Hamiltonians $`H_k`$ and $`H_l`$ following from (2.21) we find the following formula describing the action of elementary Schlesinger transformation (2.14) on the $`\tau `$-function:

$$\widehat{\tau }\left(\{\lambda _j\}\right)=\left\{(\lambda _k\lambda _l)^{1/2}detG\right\}\tau \left(\{\lambda _j\}\right).$$
(2.22)
Other elementary Schlesinger transformations like may be obtained in a similar way by building the matrix $`G`$ from $`G_k^1`$ and $`G_l^2`$ instead of (2.18), etc.. Moreover, all such transformations with different $`k`$ and $`l`$ may be superposed to get the general Schlesinger transformation which simultaneously shifts an arbitrary number of the $`t_j`$ by some integer or half-integer constants. These general transformations were in detail studied in .

### 2.3 Algebro-geometric solutions of Schlesinger system

Let us take $`N=2g+2`$ and introduce the hyperelliptic curve $``$ of genus $`g`$ by the equation

$$w^2=\underset{j=1}{\overset{2g+2}{}}(\lambda \lambda _j)$$
(2.23)
with branch cuts $`[\lambda _{2j+1},\lambda _{2j+2}]`$. Let us choose the canonical basis of cycles $`(a_j,b_j),j=1,\mathrm{},g`$ such that the cycle $`a_j`$ encircles the branch cut $`[\lambda _{2j+1},\lambda _{2j+2}]`$. Cycle $`b_j`$ starts from one bank of branch cut $`[\lambda _1,\lambda _2]`$, goes to the second sheet through he branch cut $`[\lambda _{2j+1},\lambda _{2j+2}]`$, and comes back to another bank of the branch cut $`[\lambda _1,\lambda _2]`$.

The dual basis of holomorphic 1-forms on $``$ are given by $`\frac{\lambda ^{k1}d\lambda }{w},k=1,\mathrm{},g`$.

Let us introduce two $`g\times g`$ matrices of $`a`$\- and $`b`$-periods of these 1-forms:

$$𝒜_{kj}=_{a_j}\frac{\lambda ^{k1}d\lambda }{w},_{kj}=_{b_j}\frac{\lambda ^{k1}d\lambda }{w}.$$
(2.24)
The holomorphic 1-forms

$$dU_k=\frac{1}{w}\underset{j=1}{\overset{g}{}}(𝒜^1)_{kj}\lambda ^{j1}d\lambda $$
(2.25)
satisfy the normalization conditions $`_{a_j}𝑑U_k=\delta _{jk}`$.

The matrices $`𝒜`$ and $``$ define the symmetric $`g\times g`$ matrix of $`b`$-periods of the curve $``$: $`𝐁=𝒜^1`$.

Let us cut the curve $``$ along all basic cycles to get the fundamental polygon $`\widehat{}`$. For any meromorphic 1-form $`dW`$ on $``$ we can define the integral $`_Q^P𝑑W`$, where the integration contour lies inside of $`\widehat{}`$ (if $`dW`$ is meromorphic, the value of this integral might also depend on the choice of integration contour inside of $`\widehat{}`$). The vector of Riemann constants corresponding to our choice of the initial point of this map is given by the formula (see ) $`K_j=\frac{j}{2}+\frac{1}{2}_{k=1}^g𝐁_{jk}`$.

The characteristic with components $`𝐩^g/2^g`$, $`𝐪^g/2^g`$ is called half-integer characteristic: the half-integer characteristics are in one-to-one correspondence with the half-periods $`\mathrm{𝐁𝐩}+𝐪`$. To any half-integer characteristic we can assign parity which by definition coincides with the parity of the scalar product $`4𝐩,𝐪`$.

The odd characteristics which will be of importance for us in the sequel correspond to any given subset $`S=\{\lambda _{i_1},\mathrm{},\lambda _{i_{g1}}\}`$ of $`g1`$ arbitrary non-coinciding branch points. The odd half-period associated to the subset $`S`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{𝐁𝐩}^S+𝐪^S=\underset{j=1}{\overset{g1}{}}_{\lambda _1}^{\lambda _{i_j}}𝑑UK$$
(2.26)
where $`dU=(dU_1,\mathrm{},dU_g)^t`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ the neighbourhood of the infinite point $`\lambda =\mathrm{}`$, such that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ does not overlap with projections of all basic cycles on $`\lambda `$-plane. Let the $`2\times 2`$ matrix-valued function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\lambda )`$ be defined in the domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of the first sheet of $``$ by the following formula,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\lambda \mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\phi (\lambda )\phi (\lambda ^{})& \\ \psi (\lambda )\psi (\lambda ^{})& \end{array}\right),$$
(2.27)
where functions $`\phi `$ and $`\psi `$ are defined in the fundamental polygon $`\widehat{}`$ by the formulas:

$$\phi (\lambda )=\mathrm{\Theta }[{}_{𝐪}{}^{𝐩}](_{\lambda _1}^\lambda dU+_{\lambda _1}^{\lambda _\phi }dU|𝐁)\mathrm{\Theta }[{}_{𝐪^S}{}^{𝐩^S}]\left(_{\lambda _\phi }^\lambda dU\right|𝐁),$$
(2.28)
$$\psi (\lambda )=\mathrm{\Theta }[{}_{𝐪}{}^{𝐩}](_{\lambda _1}^\lambda dU+_{\lambda _1}^{\lambda _\psi }dU|𝐁)\mathrm{\Theta }[{}_{𝐪^S}{}^{𝐩^S}]\left(_{\lambda _\psi }^\lambda dU\right|𝐁),$$
(2.29)
with two arbitrary (possibly $`\{\lambda _j\}`$-dependent) points $`\lambda _\phi `$, $`\lambda _\psi `$ and arbitrary constant complex characteristic $`[{}_{𝐪}{}^{𝐩}]`$; $``$ is the involution on $``$ interchanging the sheets. An odd theta characteristic $`[{}_{𝐪^S}{}^{𝐩^S}]`$ corresponds to an arbitrary subset $`S`$ of $`g1`$ branch points via Eq. (2.26).

Since domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ does not overlap with projections of all basic cycles of $``$ on $`\lambda `$-plane, domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$ does not overlap with the boundary of $`\widehat{}`$, and functions $`\phi (\lambda ^{})`$ and $`\psi (\lambda ^{})`$ in (2.27) are uniquely defined by (2.28), (2.29) for $`\lambda \mathrm{\Omega }`$.

Now choose some sheet of the universal covering $`X`$, define new function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ in subset $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of this sheet by the formula

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda \mathrm{\Omega })=\sqrt{\frac{det\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^1)}{det\mathrm{\Phi }(\lambda )}}\mathrm{\Phi }^1(\mathrm{}^1)\mathrm{\Phi }(\lambda )$$
(2.30)
and extend on the rest of $`X`$ by analytical continuation.

Function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ (2.30) transforms as follows with respect to the tracing around basic cycles of $``$ (by $`T_{a_j}`$ and $`T_{b_j}`$ we denote corresponding operators of analytical continuation):

$$T_{a_j}[\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )]=\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )e^{2\pi ip_j\sigma _3};T_{b_j}[\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )]=\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )e^{2\pi iq_j\sigma _3}$$

The following statement proved in the paper  claims that function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ satisfies condition of isomonodromy, and, therefore, provides a class of solutions of Schlesinger system:

###### Theorem 2.1

Let $`𝐩,𝐪^g`$ be an arbitrary set of $`2g`$ constants such that characteristic $`[{}_{𝐪}{}^{𝐩}]`$ is not half-integer. Then:

1. Function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(QX)`$ defined by (2.30) is independent of $`\lambda _\phi `$ and $`\lambda _\psi `$, and satisfies the linear system (2.2) with

$$A_j\mathrm{res}|_{\lambda =\lambda _j}\left\{\mathrm{\Psi }_\lambda \mathrm{\Psi }^1\right\},$$
(2.31)
which in turn solve the Schlesinger system (2.8).
2. Monodromies (2.6) of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ around points $`\lambda _j`$ are given by

$$M_j=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& m_j\\ m_j^1& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(2.32)
where constants $`m_j`$ may be expressed in terms of $`𝐩`$ and $`𝐪`$ as follows:

$$m_1=im_2=i\mathrm{exp}\{2\pi i\underset{k=1}{\overset{g}{}}p_k\}$$

$$m_{2j+1}=i\mathrm{exp}\{2\pi iq_j2\pi i\underset{k=j}{\overset{g}{}}p_k\}$$

$$m_{2j+2}=i\mathrm{exp}\{2\pi iq_j2\pi i\underset{k=j+1}{\overset{g}{}}p_k\}$$

for $`j=1,\mathrm{},g`$.
3. The $`\tau `$-function, corresponding to solution (2.5) of the Schlesinger system, has the following form:

$$\tau (\{\lambda _j\})=[det𝒜]^{\frac{1}{2}}\underset{j<k}{}(\lambda _j\lambda _k)^{\frac{1}{8}}\mathrm{\Theta }[{}_{𝐪}{}^{𝐩}](0|𝐁).$$
(2.33)

## 3 Elliptic isomonodromic deformations: Schlesinger transformations and algebro-geometric solutions

### 3.1 Isomonodromic deformations on the torus

Consider the elliptic curve $`E`$ with periods $`1`$ and $`\mu `$ together with the canonical basis of cycles $`(a,b)`$. A (naive) straightforward generalization of the idea of isomonodromic deformations from the complex plane to the torus $`E`$ runs into difficulties related to the absence of meromorphic functions on the torus with just one simple pole. An independent variation of the simple poles of a meromorphic connection $`A`$ on the torus preserving the monodromies around the singularities and basic cycles is impossible for the following simple reason. Existence of such a deformation would imply a version of (2.7) with the function $`\frac{A_j}{\lambda \lambda _j}`$ on the r.h.s. being substituted by a meromorphic function with only one simple pole on the torus, which gives rise to the contradiction. Therefore, one of the underlying assumptions has to be relaxed.

E.g. one may consider the case where not all the poles of the connection $`A`$ are varied independently. Another possibility is the assumption that some of the poles of $`A`$ are of order higher then one . A third alternative which we shall consider here, is to relax the condition of single-valuedness of the connection $`A`$ on $`E`$ and assume that $`A`$ has “twists” with respect to analytical continuation along the basic cycles $`a`$ and $`b`$, i.e.

$$A(\lambda +1)=QA(\lambda )Q^1,A(\lambda +\mu )=RA(\lambda )R^1,$$

where the matrices $`Q,R`$ do not depend on $`\lambda `$. By a gauge transformation of the form $`ASAS^1+dSS^1`$ with $`S`$ holomorphic but possibly multi-valued, one may bring the connection into a form where $`Q=I`$ and $`R=e^{\kappa \sigma _3}`$, where $`\sigma _\alpha `$ denote the Pauli matrices:

$$\sigma _1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),\sigma _2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \mathrm{i}\\ \mathrm{i}& 0\end{array}\right),\sigma _3=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$

The equations of isomonodromic deformations with this choice of the twist were considered in  where the multi-valuedness of $`A`$ had a natural origin in the holomorphic gauge fixing of Chern-Simons theory on the punctured torus. The resulting equations however are rather complicated in comparison with the Schlesinger system on the sphere. This is due to the fact that the twist $`\kappa `$ itself becomes a dynamical variable – i.e. changes under isomonodromic deformations – and in generic situation has a highly non-trivial $`\lambda _j`$-dependence. Therefore, instead of being bilinear with respect to the dynamical variables, this Schlesinger system on the torus becomes highly transcendental.

An alternative form of the elliptic Schlesinger system was proposed by Takasaki  who considered the restriction $`Q=\sigma _3`$, $`R=\sigma _1`$, related to the classical limit of Etingof’s elliptic version of the Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov-Bernard system on the torus . This choice of fixing the twists turns out to be compatible with the isomonodromic deformations equations, therefore essentially simplifying the dynamics as compared to . It results into studying isomonodromic deformations of the system

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Psi }}{d\lambda }}`$ $`=`$ $`A(\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi },`$ (3.34)
$`A(\lambda )`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{3}{}}}A_j^\alpha w_\alpha (\lambda \lambda _j)\sigma _\alpha ,`$
with $`\lambda `$. Functions $`w_\alpha `$ on the torus are defined in Appendix (see (A.87)). The connection $`A(\lambda )`$ obviously has only simple poles on $`E`$ and the following twist properties, cf. (A.88)

$$A(\lambda +1)=\sigma _3A(\lambda )\sigma _3,A(\lambda +\mu )=\sigma _1A(\lambda )\sigma _1.$$
(3.35)
Since the residues of all $`w_\alpha `$ at $`\lambda =0`$ coincide, the residue of $`A(\lambda )`$ at $`\lambda _j`$ is

$$A_j\underset{\alpha }{}A_j^\alpha \sigma _\alpha .$$

As in the case of the Riemann sphere, the function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ has regular singularities at $`\lambda =\lambda _j`$ with the same local properties (2.4)–(2.6). The twist properties of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ take the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda +1)=\sigma _3\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )M_a\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda +\mu )=\sigma _1\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )M_b,$$
(3.36)
with monodromy matrices $`M_a`$, $`M_b`$ along the basic cycles of the torus. Moreover, as in the case of Riemann sphere, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ has monodromies $`M_j`$ around the singularities $`\lambda _j`$.

The isomonodromy condition on the torus requires that all monodromies $`M_j`$, $`M_a`$ and $`M_b`$ are independent of the positions of singularities $`\lambda _j`$ and the module $`\mu `$ of the torus. As on the Riemann sphere this implies that the function $`\mathrm{\Psi }/\lambda _j\mathrm{\Psi }^1`$ has the only simple pole at $`\lambda =\lambda _j`$ with residue $`A_j`$. In addition, it has the following twist properties

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\lambda _j}}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\lambda +1)`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma _3{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\lambda _j}}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\lambda )\sigma _3,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\lambda _j}}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\lambda +\mu )`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma _1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\lambda _j}}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\lambda )\sigma _1.`$
Therefore,

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\lambda _j}=\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{3}{}}A_j^\alpha w_\alpha (\lambda \lambda _j)\sigma _\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }.$$
(3.37)
To derive the equation with respect to module $`\mu `$ we observe that $`\mathrm{\Psi }/\mu \mathrm{\Psi }^1`$ is holomorphic at $`\lambda =\lambda _j`$ (but not at $`\lambda =\lambda _j+\mu `$ ) and has twist properties

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\mu }}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\lambda +1)`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma _3{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\mu }}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\lambda )\sigma _3,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\mu }}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\lambda +\mu )`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma _1\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\mu }}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\lambda ){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\lambda }}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\lambda )\right)\sigma _1.`$
Taking into account the periodicity properties of the functions $`𝒵_\alpha `$ (A.90), this hence implies

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\mu }=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{3}{}}A_j^\alpha 𝒵_\alpha (\lambda \lambda _j)\sigma _\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }.$$
(3.38)
The compatibility conditions of the equations (3.34), (3.37) and (3.38) then yield the $`\lambda _i`$ and $`\mu `$ dependence of the residues $`A_j`$. The result is summarized in the following

###### Theorem 3.1

 Isomonodromic deformations of the system (3.34) are described by the following elliptic version of the Schlesinger system:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dA_j}{d\lambda _i}}`$ $`=`$ $`[A_j,{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{3}{}}}A_i^\alpha w_\alpha (\lambda _j\lambda _i)\sigma _\alpha ],ij,`$ (3.39)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dA_j}{d\lambda _j}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{ij}{}}[A_j,{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{3}{}}}A_i^\alpha w_\alpha (\lambda _j\lambda _i)\sigma _\alpha ],`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dA_j}{d\mu }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}[A_j,{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{3}{}}}A_i^\alpha 𝒵_\alpha (\lambda _j\lambda _i)\sigma _\alpha ].`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

The corresponding equations for the matrices $`G_j`$ from (2.4) take a form analogous to the equations (2.9) on the Riemann sphere:

$$\frac{G_j}{\lambda _i}=\underset{\alpha }{}A_i^\alpha w_\alpha (\lambda _i\lambda _j)\sigma _\alpha G_j,\frac{G_j}{\lambda _j}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{\alpha }{}A_i^\alpha w_\alpha (\lambda _i\lambda _j)\sigma _\alpha G_j.$$
(3.40)
The system (3.39) admits a multi-time Hamiltonian formulation with respect to the Poisson structure (2.10) on the residues

$$\{A_i^\alpha ,A_j^\beta \}=\delta _{ij}\epsilon ^{\alpha \beta \gamma }A_j^\gamma .$$
(3.41)
The Hamiltonians describing deformation with respect to the variables $`\lambda _i`$ and to the module $`\mu `$ of the torus are respectively given by

$`H_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi i}}{\displaystyle _{\lambda _i}}\mathrm{tr}A^2(\lambda )𝑑\lambda ={\displaystyle \underset{ji}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}A_j^\alpha A_i^\alpha w_\alpha (\lambda _j\lambda _i),`$ (3.42)
$`H_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle _a}\mathrm{tr}A^2(\lambda )𝑑\lambda ={\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}A_i^\alpha A_j^\alpha 𝒵_\alpha (\lambda _i\lambda _j).`$ (3.43)
The representation of $`H_\mu `$ as contour integral along the basic $`a`$-cycle in (3.43) was derived in . All Hamiltonians Poisson-commute as a direct consequence of (3.41).

The $`\tau `$-function of the elliptic Schlesinger system (3.39) is defined as generating function $`\tau (\{\lambda _j\},\mu )`$ of the Hamiltonians

$$\frac{\mathrm{ln}\tau }{\lambda _j}=H_j,\frac{\mathrm{ln}\tau }{\mu }=H_\mu ;$$
(3.44)
it is uniquely determined up to an arbitrary $`(\mu ,\{\lambda _j\})`$-independent multiplicative constant. Compatibility of equations (3.44) is a corollary of the elliptic Schlesinger system.

### 3.2 Schlesinger transformations for elliptic isomonodromic deformations

The natural generalization of the notion of Schlesinger transformations on the Riemann sphere to the elliptic case was given in the paper . Starting from any solution of the elliptic Schlesinger system (3.39) with associated function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ satisfying (3.34) and (3.36) we construct a new solution $`\widehat{A}_j`$, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ with eigenvalues $`\widehat{t}_j`$ which differ from the $`t_j`$ by integer or half-integer values. In particular, we will consider the elliptic analog of the elementary Schlesinger transformation (2.14) on the Riemann sphere. The following construction was inspired by the papers , .

As an elliptic analog of the function $`F(\lambda )`$ from (2.16) we shall choose the following ansatz

$`F(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f(\lambda )}{\sqrt{detf(\lambda )}}},`$ (3.45)
$`f(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{3}{}}}J_\alpha w_\alpha \left(\lambda \frac{1}{2}(\lambda _k+\lambda _l)\right)\sigma _\alpha ,`$
where the functions $`J_\alpha (\lambda _j,\mu )`$ depend on $`G_k`$ and $`G_l`$ and will be defined below. The elementary elliptic Schlesinger transformation is described by the following

###### Theorem 3.2

 Let the functions $`\left\{A_j(\{\lambda _i\})\right\}`$ satisfy the elliptic Schlesinger system (3.39) with twist properties (3.35) and let the function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ satisfy the associated linear system (3.34). For two arbitrary non-coinciding poles $`\lambda _k`$ and $`\lambda _l`$, define the new function

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}(\lambda )F(\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda ),$$
(3.46)
where $`F(\lambda )`$ is given by formula (3.45) and $`\lambda `$-independent coefficients $`J_\alpha `$ are defined by

$$\underset{\alpha }{}J_\alpha w_\alpha \left(\frac{1}{2}(\lambda _k\lambda _l)\right)\sigma _\alpha \frac{1}{2}G\sigma _3G^1;$$
(3.47)
as above we denote by $`G`$ the matrix (2.18) containing the first columns of the matrices $`G_k`$ and $`G_l`$.

Then the function $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}(\lambda )`$ satisfies the equations (3.34), (3.37), (3.38) and the twist conditions (3.36) with the transformed functions

$$\widehat{A}_j\left(\{\lambda _i\}\right)\mathrm{res}_{\lambda =\lambda _j}\left\{\frac{d\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}}{d\lambda }\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^1\right\}.$$
(3.48)
In turn, the functions $`\widehat{A}_j`$ satisfy the elliptic Schlesinger system (3.39). For the eigenvalues $`t_j`$ we have

$$\widehat{t}_j=\{\begin{array}{cc}t_j+\frac{1}{2}\hfill & \text{for }j=k,l\hfill \\ t_j\hfill & \text{else}\hfill \end{array}.$$

The monodromy matrices $`\widehat{M}_j`$, $`\widehat{M}_a`$ and $`\widehat{M}_b`$ of the function $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ coincide with the monodromies of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, except for $`\widehat{M}_k=M_k`$ and $`\widehat{M}_l=M_l`$.

Proof. The proper local behaviour of function $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ at singularities $`\lambda _j`$ is ensured by the relations

$$S_\pm ^2=S_\pm ,S_++S_{}=I,S_+G_l^1=S_{}G_k^1=0;$$
(3.49)
for

$$S_\pm \frac{1}{2}\underset{\alpha }{}J_\alpha w_\alpha \left(\frac{1}{2}(\lambda _k\lambda _l)\right)\sigma _\alpha =GP_\pm G^1,$$

which in complete analogy to (2.17) describe annihilation of the vectors $`G_k^1`$ and $`G_l^1`$ by the matrices $`f(\lambda _k)`$ and $`f(\lambda _l)`$, respectively. Obviously, equations (3.49) are a consequence of (3.47). Similarly to the case of the sphere, it is then easy to verify that (3.49) provide the required asymptotical expansions (2.4) for the function $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ with parameters $`\widehat{G}_j`$, $`C_j`$ and $`\widehat{t}_j`$.

Concerning the global behavior of $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ we note that the prefactor $`(detf(\lambda ))^{1/2}`$ in (3.45) provides the condition $`det\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}=1`$ and kills the simple pole of $`f(\lambda )`$ at $`\lambda =(\lambda _k+\lambda _l)/2`$. Therefore, the only singularities of $`F(\lambda )`$ on $`E`$ are the zeros of $`detf(\lambda )`$. Since $`detf(\lambda )`$ has only one pole – this is the second order pole at $`\lambda =(\lambda _k+\lambda _l)/2`$ – it must have also two zeros on $`E`$ whose sum according to Abel’s theorem equals $`\lambda _k+\lambda _l`$. According to (3.49) these are precisely $`\lambda _k`$ and $`\lambda _l`$. It remains to check that $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ satisfies conditions (3.36) with the same matrices $`M_a`$ and $`M_b`$. This follows from the twist properties

$$f(\lambda +1)=\sigma _3f(\lambda )\sigma _3,f(\lambda +\mu )=\sigma _1f(\lambda )\sigma _1,$$

which in turn follow from (3.45) and the periodicity properties (A.88) of the functions $`w_j(\lambda )`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

As a result of rather long calculations one can prove the elliptic analog of formula (2.22) describing the transformation of the $`\tau `$-function under the action of elliptic Schlesinger transformations.

###### Theorem 3.3

 The $`\tau `$-function $`\widehat{\tau }`$ corresponding to the Schlesinger-transformed solution $`\widehat{A}_j`$ (3.48) of the elliptic Schlesinger system is related to the $`\tau `$-function corresponding to the solution $`A_j`$ as follows

$$\widehat{\tau }(\{\lambda _j\},\mu )=\left\{\left[w_1w_2w_3\left(\frac{\lambda _k\lambda _l}{2}\right)\right]^{1/2}det\left[GJ^{1/2}\right]\right\}\tau (\{\lambda _j\},\mu ),$$
(3.50)
where $`G`$ is the matrix (2.18) containing the first columns of the matrices $`G_k`$, $`G_l`$,

$$J\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{3}{}}J_A\sigma _A$$

and the functions $`J_\alpha `$ are defined in terms of $`G`$ via (3.47).

The natural open problem arising here is to construct elliptic generalizations of integrable chains associated to ordinary Schlesinger system .

In the next section we shall present the extension of construction of algebro-geometric solutions of Schlesinger system to the case of elliptic isomonodromic deformations.

### 3.3 Algebro-geometric solutions of elliptic Schlesinger system

To construct theta-functional solutions of elliptic Schlesinger system (3.39) let us assume that $`N=2g`$ and introduce two-sheet covering $``$ of torus $`E`$ with branch points $`\lambda _1,\mathrm{}\lambda _{2g}`$. Genus of $``$ equals $`g+1`$. Denote by $``$ the involution of $``$ interchanging the sheets of the covering. Let us choose the canonical basis of cycles on $``$ in such a way (see figure 6.2 on p.215 of ) that

$$a_1^{}=a_{g+1},b_1^{}=b_{g+1}$$

$$a_j^{}=a_j,b_j^{}=b_j,j=2,\mathrm{},g.$$

The basic holomorphic differentials $`dU_1,\mathrm{},dU_{g+1}`$ on $``$ normalized by

$$_{a_j}𝑑U_k=\delta _{jk},j,k=1,\mathrm{},g+1$$

transform as follows under the action of involution $``$:

$$dU_1(P^{})=dU_{g+1}(P)dU_j(P^{})=dU_j(P),j=2,\mathrm{},g$$
(3.51)
Let us introduce the following Prym differentials $`dV_j,j=1,\mathrm{},g`$:

$$dV_1=\frac{1}{2}(dU_1+dU_{g+1})dV_j=dU_jj=2,\mathrm{},g$$
(3.52)
and symmetric $`g\times g`$ matrix of their $`b`$-periods:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{jk}=_{b_j}𝑑V_k$$
(3.53)
which has positively-defined imaginary part.

###### Remark 3.1

Differentials $`dV_j`$ and matrix $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ were first introduced by Bobenko  in the studies of classical tops admitting elliptic Lax representation. These objects are related to standard Prym differentials $`dW_j`$ and standard Prym matrix $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{Prym}`$ as follows: $`dW_1=2dV_1`$, $`dW_j=dV_j,j=2,\mathrm{},g`$; $`\mathrm{\Pi }=2S\mathrm{\Pi }^{Prym}S`$ where $`S`$ is diagonal matrix $`S=\mathrm{diag}(\frac{1}{2},1,\mathrm{},1)`$.

Denote by $`\widehat{}`$ the universal covering of curve $``$.

###### Theorem 3.4

Define $`2\times 2`$ matrix-valued function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(P)`$ on $`\widehat{}`$ by the formulas

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(P)=\mathrm{\Phi }(P)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\phi (P)\phi (P)& \\ \psi (P)\psi (P)& \end{array}\right),$$
(3.54)
where

$$\phi (P)=\mathrm{\Theta }[{}_{𝐪}{}^{𝐩}]\left(_{\lambda _1}^PdV\right|\mathrm{\Pi }),\psi (P)=\mathrm{\Theta }[{}_{𝐪+\frac{1}{2}𝐞_1}{}^{𝐩}]\left(_{\lambda _1}^PdV\right|\mathrm{\Pi });$$
(3.55)
$`𝐩,𝐪`$ are arbitrary constant vectors such that $`p_1=0`$. Then the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is holomorphic and invertible on $``$ outside of branch points $`\lambda _j`$ and transforms as follows with respect to analytical continuation along the basic cycles of $``$:

$$T_{a_1}[\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]=\sigma _1\mathrm{\Phi }(P)$$
(3.56)
$$T_{b_1}[\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]=\sigma _3\mathrm{\Phi }(P)e^{2\pi iq_1\sigma _3}e^{\pi i\mathrm{\Pi }_{11}2\pi i_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V_1}$$
(3.57)
$$T_{a_j}[\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]=\mathrm{\Phi }(P)e^{2\pi ip_j\sigma _3}$$
(3.58)
$$T_{b_j}[\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]=\mathrm{\Phi }(P)e^{2\pi iq_j\sigma _3}e^{\pi i\mathrm{\Pi }_{jj}2\pi i_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V_j}$$
(3.59)
for $`j=2,\mathrm{},g`$.

Proof. Taking into account the definition of Prym differentials $`dV_j`$ (3.52) we see that

$$T_{a_1}\left[_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V\right]=_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V+\frac{𝐞_1}{2}$$

$$T_{a_j}\left[_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V\right]=_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V+𝐞_1,j=2,\mathrm{},g$$

$$T_{b_j}\left[_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V\right]=_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V+\mathrm{\Pi }𝐞_j,j=1,\mathrm{},g$$

Substituting these expressions into the formulas for $`\phi `$ and $`\psi `$ and taking into account behaviour of 1-forms $`dU_j`$ under the action of involution $``$ (3.51) we derive the following transformation properties of functions $`\phi `$ and $`\psi `$:

$$T_{a_1}[\phi (P)]=\psi (P)T_{a_1}[\psi (P)]=\phi (P)$$
(3.60)
$$T_{a_1}[\phi (P^{})]=\psi (P^{})T_{a_1}[\psi (P^{})]=\phi (P^{})$$
(3.61)
$$T_{b_1}[\phi (P)]=e^{2\pi iq_1}e^{\pi i\mathrm{\Pi }_{11}2\pi i_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V_1}\phi (P)$$
(3.62)
$$T_{b_1}[\psi (P)]=e^{2\pi iq_1}e^{\pi i\mathrm{\Pi }_{11}2\pi i_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V_1}\psi (P)$$
(3.63)
$$T_{b_1}[\phi (P^{})]=e^{2\pi iq_1}e^{\pi i\mathrm{\Pi }_{11}2\pi i_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V_1}\phi (P^{})$$
(3.64)
$$T_{b_1}[\psi (P^{})]=e^{2\pi iq_1}e^{\pi i\mathrm{\Pi }_{11}2\pi i_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V_1}\psi (P^{})$$
(3.65)
and

$$T_{a_j}[\phi (P)]=e^{2\pi ip_j}\phi (P)$$
(3.66)
$$T_{a_j}[\phi (P^{})]=e^{2\pi ip_j}\phi (P^{})$$
(3.67)
$$T_{b_j}[\phi (P)]=e^{2\pi iq_j}e^{\pi i\mathrm{\Pi }_{jj}2\pi i_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V_j}\phi (P)$$
(3.68)
$$T_{b_j}[\phi (P^{})]=e^{2\pi iq_j}e^{\pi i\mathrm{\Pi }_{jj}2\pi i_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V_j}\phi (P^{})$$
(3.69)
Transformation laws of $`\psi `$ along cycles $`a_j,b_j`$ for $`j>1`$ coincide with transformation laws of $`\phi `$.

Combining the above relations into matrix form, we come to the transformation laws (3.56) - (3.59).

It remains to verify non-degeneracy of $`\mathrm{\Phi }(P)`$ outside of singularities $`\lambda _j`$. We know that $`det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)`$ has at least simple zeros at the points $`\lambda _j`$ (at these points the columns of $`\mathrm{\Phi }(P)`$ are proportional to each other). To check that $`det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)`$ does not vanish on $`\widehat{}`$ outside of $`\lambda _j`$ let us first observe that

$$T_{a_1}[det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]=det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)T_{a_j}[det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]=det\mathrm{\Phi }(P),j=2,\mathrm{},g,$$
(3.70)
$$T_{b_j}[det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]=e^{2\pi i\mathrm{\Pi }_{jj}4\pi i_{\lambda _1}^P𝑑V_j}det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)j=1,\mathrm{},g.$$
(3.71)
Now let us calculate the integral

$$_\widehat{}d\mathrm{ln}det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)$$
(3.72)
$$=_{a_1}d\left\{\mathrm{ln}det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)\mathrm{ln}detT_{b_1}[\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]\right\}+_{a_{n+1}}d\left\{\mathrm{ln}det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)\mathrm{ln}detT_{b_{n+1}}[\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]\right\}$$

$$+\underset{j=2}{\overset{g}{}}_{a_j}d\left\{\mathrm{ln}det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)\mathrm{ln}detT_{b_1}[\mathrm{\Phi }(P)]\right\}.$$

Taking into account (3.70) and (3.71) as well as normalization of the basic integrals $`dU_j`$ we see that the first two terms of the r.h.s. of this expression equal $`2\pi i`$, whereas each term in the sum equals $`4\pi i`$. Altogether, we get $`4\pi ig`$, and, therefore, $`det\mathrm{\Phi }(P)`$ has in $`\widehat{}`$ exactly $`2g`$ zeros which coincide with $`\lambda _j`$.

Let us also choose some domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }E`$ which does not overlap with projections of all basic cycles on $`E`$. Then domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$ does not overlap with the boundary of $`\widehat{}`$ and functions $`\phi ^{}(P)`$ and $`\psi ^{}(P)`$ are uniquely defined in $`\widehat{}`$ by (3.55). Let us now choose some sheet of universal covering $`X`$ of torus $`E`$ with punctures $`\{\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{2g}\}`$, and define new function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ in subset $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of this sheet by the formula

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda \mathrm{\Omega })=\frac{1}{\sqrt{det\mathrm{\Phi }(\lambda )}}\mathrm{\Phi }(\lambda ).$$
(3.73)
Then we extend function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ on the rest of $`X`$ by analytical continuation.

The following theorem shows that function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ satisfies conditions of isomonodromy, and, therefore, generates a class of solutions of elliptic Schlesinger system (3.39):

###### Theorem 3.5

Function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda X)`$ defined by formulas (3.54), (3.55) and (3.73) is holomorphic and invertible on $`X`$ outside of the points $`\lambda _j,j=1,\mathrm{},2g`$. Moreover, it transforms as follows with respect to analytical continuation along basic cycles of $`E`$:

$$T_a[\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )]=i\sigma _1\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )T_b[\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )]=i\sigma _3\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )e^{2\pi iq_1\sigma _3}$$
(3.74)
and around closed cycles surronding points $`\lambda _j`$:

$$T_{\lambda _j}[\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )]=\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )M_j$$
(3.75)
where $`T_b`$, $`T_b`$ and $`T_{\lambda _j}`$ denote corresponding operators of analytical continuation;

$$M_j=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& m_j\\ m_j^1& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(3.76)
and

$$m_1=im_2=i\mathrm{exp}\{2\pi i\underset{j=2}{\overset{g}{}}p_j\}$$
(3.77)
$$m_{2l}=i\mathrm{exp}\{2\pi iq_l2\pi i\underset{k=l+1}{\overset{g}{}}p_k\}$$
(3.78)
$$m_{2l1}=i\mathrm{exp}\{2\pi iq_l2\pi i\underset{k=l}{\overset{g}{}}p_k\}$$
(3.79)
for $`l=2,\mathrm{},g`$.

Proof. Holomorphy and invertibility of function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ follows from the same statements concerning function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ (3.54). Relations (3.74) directly follow from (3.56), (3.57). To calculate $`m_j`$ let us observe that, according to (3.56) - (3.59), monodromies of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ are related to constants $`𝐩`$ and $`𝐪`$ as follows:

$$M_{2j}M_{2j1}=e^{2\pi ip_j\sigma _3},j=2,\mathrm{},g$$
(3.80)
$$M_{2j1}M_{2j2}=e^{2\pi i(q_jq_{j1})\sigma _3},j=3,\mathrm{},g$$
(3.81)
$$M_3M_2=e^{2\pi iq_2}$$
(3.82)
Moreover, we order monodromies is such a way that

$$M_aM_bM_a^1M_b^1M_{2g}\mathrm{}M_1=I$$
(3.83)
(since $`M_a=I`$ first four factors in this relation drop out). Monodromy $`M_1`$ corresponding to our choice of basic cycles equals $`i\sigma _1`$. Altogether all these relations lead to (3.76), (3.77) - (3.79) after elementary calculations. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 3.1

Residues

$$A_j(\{\lambda _j\},\mu )\mathrm{res}|_{\lambda =\lambda _j}\mathrm{\Psi }_\lambda \mathrm{\Psi }^1$$
(3.84)
satisfy elliptic Schlesinger system (3.39).

## 4 Outlook

Let us mention several applications of the mathematical results described above. Recently  it was established close relationship between Schlesinger system and Ernst equation of general relativity, which allows to apply to the Ernst equation all results of sect.2. In particular, one can get in this way a class of algebrogeometric solutions of Ernst equation , which turns out to coincide with the class of algebrogeometric solutions of Ernst eqation known since 1988 . It is rather satisfactory that certain subclass of genus 2 algebrogeometric solutions of Ernst equation recently found realistic physical application in the problem of description of different kinds of dust discs . Another application of construction of sect.2 is the theory of $`SU(2)`$-invariant gravitational instantons  where it allows to considerably simplify the results of Hitchin .

So far we don’t know about physical applications of elliptic version of Schlesinger system, and all results of sect.3 have at the moment pure mathematical significance; however we strongly believe that such applications will be found in the near future.

## Appendix A Some elliptic functions

The elliptic theta-function with characteristic $`[p,q]`$ ($`p,q`$) on a torus $`E`$ is defined by the series

$$\vartheta [p,q](\lambda |\mu )=\underset{m}{}e^{\pi \mathrm{i}\mu (m+p)^2+2\pi \mathrm{i}(m+p)(\lambda +q)}.$$
(A.85)
Let us introduce on the torus $`E`$ the standard Jacobi theta-functions:

$`\vartheta _1(\lambda )`$ $``$ $`\vartheta [\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}](\lambda |\mu ),`$ (A.86)
$`\vartheta _2(\lambda )`$ $``$ $`\vartheta [\frac{1}{2},0](\lambda |\mu ),`$
$`\vartheta _3(\lambda )`$ $``$ $`\vartheta (\lambda )\vartheta [0,0](\lambda |\mu ),`$
$`\vartheta _4(\lambda )`$ $``$ $`\vartheta [0,\frac{1}{2}](\lambda |\mu ),`$
and corresponding theta-constants

$$\vartheta _j\vartheta _j(0),j=2,3,4.$$

We define the following three combinations of Jacobi theta-functions:

$$w_1(\lambda )=\pi \vartheta _2\vartheta _3\frac{\vartheta _4(\lambda )}{\vartheta _1(\lambda )},w_2(\lambda )=\pi \vartheta _2\vartheta _4\frac{\vartheta _3(\lambda )}{\vartheta _1(\lambda )},w_3(\lambda )=\pi \vartheta _3\vartheta _4\frac{\vartheta _2(\lambda )}{\vartheta _1(\lambda )}.$$
(A.87)
All these functions have simple poles at $`\lambda =0`$ with residue 1. Moreover, they possess the following periodicity properties:

$`w_1(\lambda +1)=w_1(\lambda )`$ $`w_1(\lambda +\mu )=w_1(\lambda ),`$ (A.88)
$`w_2(\lambda +1)=w_2(\lambda )`$ $`w_2(\lambda +\mu )=w_2(\lambda ),`$
$`w_3(\lambda +1)=w_3(\lambda )`$ $`w_3(\lambda +\mu )=w_3(\lambda ).`$
Let us also define the following functions $`𝒵_\alpha `$:

$$𝒵_1=\frac{w_1}{2\pi i}\frac{\vartheta _4^{}(\lambda )}{\vartheta _4(\lambda )},𝒵_2=\frac{w_2}{2\pi i}\frac{\vartheta _3^{}(\lambda )}{\vartheta _3(\lambda )},𝒵_3=\frac{w_3}{2\pi i}\frac{\vartheta _2^{}(\lambda )}{\vartheta _2(\lambda )}.$$
(A.89)
which have the periodicity properties:

$`𝒵_1(\lambda +1)=𝒵_1(\lambda )`$ $`𝒵_1(\lambda +\mu )=𝒵_1(\lambda )w_1,`$ (A.90)
$`𝒵_2(\lambda +1)=𝒵_2(\lambda )`$ $`𝒵_2(\lambda +\mu )=𝒵_2(\lambda )+w_2,`$
$`𝒵_3(\lambda +1)=𝒵_3(\lambda )`$ $`𝒵_3(\lambda +\mu )=𝒵_3(\lambda )+w_3.`$
It is easy to verify the identity

$$\frac{dw_\alpha }{d\mu }(\lambda )=\frac{d𝒵_\alpha }{d\lambda }(\lambda ),$$
(A.91)
which follows from analyticity and twist properties of both sides.

Notice also that functions $`w_\alpha `$ may be represented as ratios of Jacobi’s elliptic functions as follows:

$$w_1(\lambda )=\frac{1}{\mathrm{sn}(\lambda )},w_2(\lambda )=\frac{\mathrm{dn}(\lambda )}{\mathrm{sn}(\lambda )},w_3(\lambda )=\frac{\mathrm{cn}(\lambda )}{\mathrm{sn}(\lambda )}.$$
(A.92)
In calculation of transformation of elliptic $`\tau `$-function under the action of elliptic Schlesinger transformations one has to use also the summation theorem and some integral relations for functions $`w_\alpha `$ .


text:
# Higher Dimensional Schwinger-like Anomalous Effective Action *footnote **footnote *Accepted for publication on Phys.Rev.D

## Abstract

We construct explicit form of the anomalous effective action, in arbitrary even dimension , for Abelian vector and axial gauge fields coupled to Dirac fermions. It turns out to be a surprisingly simple extension of $`2`$D Schwinger model effective action.

Problem of anomalies in field theory is an outstanding and old one. Since the early days of their discovery ,, anomalies have been approached and investigated in many ways §§§Due to proliferation of literature on this subject, we are not able to quote all papers containing important contributions. We apologize to the authors of unquoted papers.. Only in two spacetime ($`2`$D) dimensions the corresponding anomalous effective action was calculated thanks to a particularly simple, anomalous Feynman diagram. In this way famous Schwinger model and Liouville gravity anomalous actions were found  We have given a reference of one of a comprehensive reviews on the two-dimensional models. . Extending the calculation of the effective action from $`2`$D to $`4`$D one is faced with considerable technical difficulties for the explicit calculation of the finite, i.e. non-local  part of the anomalous triangle diagram. On the other hand, it is the non-local part of the effective action,, which is unambiguous and is the source of the anomalous behavior ,. Knowledge of the effective action, apart from giving a complete information on the theory, has proven crucial in the recent study of the two-dimensional gauge and gravitational anomalous theories in the light-cone gauge which has lead to important developments and understanding of this theory as related to strings .Surprisingly enough, though gravity is more complicated than Yang-Mills gauge theory, it turned out that the $`4`$D gravitational effective action could have been derived starting from the trace anomaly itself . On the other hand, to our best knowledge, apart from mentioned $`2`$D examples, the form of the $`4`$D or higher dimensional anomalous gauge effective action is not present in the literature. Fortunately, difficulty related to the calculation of the effective action have not hindered study of anomalies since methods of anomaly calculation have been designed in such a way to avoid explicit knowledge of the effective action, so that divergences of the anomalous currents, were extracted from local counter-terms, , , .

In this paper, we would like to present the complete, anomalous, effective action for an Abelian gauge field theory coupled to Dirac fermions in even dimensions $`D=2k`$.
To properly pave our way let us briefly recall the origin of gauge anomalies. Dirac fermions coupled to external gauge fields can be integrated out in a path integral and give the anomalous gauge field effective action induced by quantum effects. We choose to depart from a standard treatment of axial anomaly where chiral symmetry is a global invariance  of the theory. Namely, fermions will posses local axial symmetry, so we introduce both vector and axial vector gauge fields in the covariant derivative. This approach is crucial in order to be able to construct effective action from which axial and vector current can be recovered.
Guidelines for construction of anomalous effective action are potentially anomalous Feynman diagrams, which in $`2k`$ dimensions, have $`k+1`$ fermion propagators  with $`2m+1`$ axial vertices and $`k2m`$ vector gauge field vertices. The odd number of vertices with axial vector gauge field follow from the condition $`\left(\gamma ^5\right)^{2m+1}=\gamma ^5`$ and therefore such diagrams have the same internal structure as those with one axial vertex. On the basis of the above reasoning we found the general form of the anomalous gauge effective action in $`D=2k`$ dimensions to be

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }={\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{m_{max}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{2m+1}e^{k2m}}{(2\pi )^k}}{\displaystyle d^{2k}xϵ^{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{2k4m}\nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{4m}}F_{\mu _3\mu _4}\mathrm{}\times F_{\mu _{2k4m1}\mu _{2k4m}}}`$ $`\times `$ (1)
$`F_{\nu _1\nu _2}^5\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\nu _{4m1}\nu _{4m}}^5\left[F_{\mu _1\mu _2}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}\left(^\mu A_\mu ^5\right)2𝐚A_{\mu _1}A_{\mu _2}^5\right]`$ (2)
Short explanation is needed for the meaning of $`m_{max}`$. The value of the integer $`m`$ is restricted by $`m(k1)/2`$, thus $`m_{max}`$ represents the maximal integer  obtained from such relation.
From general arguments, as well as from explicit calculations, one expects that the extraction of anomalies is subject to regularization arbitrariness. This regularization dependence is seen in (2) through the presence of an arbitrary parameter $`𝐚`$ in the local part of the effective action . The axial gauge current obtained from (2) is

$`J^{5\mu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta A_\mu ^5}}`$ (3)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{m_{max}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{2m}e^{k2m}}{(2\pi )^k}}[ϵ^{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{2k4m}\nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{4m}}{\displaystyle \frac{^\mu }{\mathrm{}}}(F_{\mu _1\mu _2}\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\mu _{2k4m1}\mu _{2k4m}}F_{\nu _1\nu _2}^5\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\nu _{4m1}\nu _{4m}}^5)`$ (4)
$`4mϵ^{\mu \mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _{2k4m+2}\nu _3\nu _4\mathrm{}\nu _{4m}}F_{\mu _3\mu _4}\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\mu _{2k4m+1}\mu _{2k4m+2}}F_{\nu _3\nu _4}^5\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\nu _{4m1}\nu _{4m}}^5{\displaystyle \frac{_{\mu _2}}{\mathrm{}}}A^5`$ (5)
$`+ϵ^{\mu \mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _{2k4m}\nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{4m}}F_{\mu _3\mu _4}\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\mu _{2k4m1}\mu _{2k4m}}F_{\nu _3\nu _4}^5\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\nu _{4m1}\nu _{4m}}^5\times `$ (6)
$`\times (\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}𝐚mF_{\nu _1\nu _2}A_{\mu _2}^5+2𝐚m(14m)F_{\nu _1\nu _2}^5A_{\mu _2})]`$ (7)
from (7) one finds anomalous divergence of the axial currents as

$`_\mu J^{5\mu }=(𝐚1){\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{m_{max}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{2m}e^{k2m}}{(2\pi )^k}}`$ $`ϵ^{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{2k4m}\nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{4m}}F_{\mu _1\mu _2}\times \mathrm{}\times `$ (9)
$`F_{\mu _{2k4m1}\mu _{2k4m}}F_{\nu _1\nu _2}^5\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\nu _{4m1}\nu _{4m}}^5`$
On the other hand, the vector current obtained from (2) is

$`J^\mu `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta A_\mu }}={\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{m_{max}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{2m+1}e^{k2m1}}{(2\pi )^k}}ϵ^{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{2k4m}\nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{4m}}F_{\mu _5\mu _6}\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\mu _{2k4m1}\mu _{2k4m}}`$ (10)
$`\times `$ $`F_{\nu _1\nu _2}^5\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\nu _{4m1}\nu _{4m}}^5[(k2m)F_{\mu _3\mu _4}{\displaystyle \frac{_{\mu _2}}{\mathrm{}}}\left(^\rho A_\rho ^5\right)`$ (11)
$``$ $`𝐚(k2m)F_{\mu _3\mu _4}A_{\mu _2}^5+𝐚(k2m1)F_{\mu _3\mu _4}^5A_{\mu _2}]`$ (12)
which leads to the vector gauge current anomalous divergence as

$`_\mu J^\mu =`$ $`𝐚{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{m_{max}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{2m+1}e^{k2m1}}{(2\pi )^k}}ϵ^{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{2k4m}\nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _{4m}}F_{\mu _1\mu _2}^5F_{\mu _3\mu _4}\times \mathrm{}\times `$ (13)
$`\times `$ $`F_{\mu _{2k4m1}\mu _{2k4m}}F_{\nu _1\nu _2}^5\times \mathrm{}\times F_{\nu _{4m1}\nu _{4m}}^5`$ (14)
In the above result one recognizes a well known pattern of incompatibility of classical symmetries, i.e. no choice of the parameter $`𝐚`$ can preserve both symmetries at the quantum level. To be truthful, it is the divergence of the axial current which normally appears in the literature ,. From the above result it is clear why, i.e. all explicit method of calculation assume gauge invariant regularization which in our language implies the choice $`𝐚=0`$. Furthermore, previous considerations were limited to global axial symmetry which amounts to setting all axial gauge fields couplings to zero. We strongly suggest the use of the parameter $`𝐚`$ in the formulae, and only a posteriori choose a particular value, i.e. a definite regularization scheme. In this way one can easily track the interplay and incompatibility of the classical symmetries at the quantum level. Furthermore, it permits easy shift from one local symmetry to another, no matter how complicated the expressions for currents are.

In order to make the general formalism more transparent, as well as to verify the agreement with known results, let us start from $`2`$D. From (2), choosing $`k=1`$, one finds effective action as

$$S=\frac{eg}{2\pi }d^2xϵ^{\mu \nu }\left[F_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}\left(^\rho A_\rho ^5\right)2𝐚A_\mu A_\nu ^5\right]$$
(15)
Exploiting a $`2`$D identity $`A_\mu =ϵ_{\mu \nu }A^{5\nu }`$ ($`e=g)`$, transforms (15) in the well known form of the Schwinger effective action

$$S=\frac{e^2}{4\pi }d^2x\left[F_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}F^{\mu \nu }+2𝐚A^\mu A_\mu \right]$$
(16)
together with the anomalous divergences of vector and axial vector current

$`_\mu J^\mu =𝐚{\displaystyle \frac{e}{\pi }}ϵ^{\mu \nu }_\mu A_\nu ^5=𝐚{\displaystyle \frac{e}{\pi }}_\mu A^\mu `$ (17)
$`_\mu J^{5\mu }=(𝐚1){\displaystyle \frac{e}{\pi }}ϵ^{\mu \nu }_\mu A_\nu `$ (18)
To proceed a step further, we take $`k=2`$ in (2) and find, to our best knowledge, so far unreported $`4`$D effective anomalous action

$$S=\frac{ge^2}{4\pi ^2}d^4xϵ^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }\left[F_{\mu \nu }F_{\alpha \beta }\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}\left(^\rho A_\rho ^5\right)2𝐚A_\mu A_\nu ^5F_{\alpha \beta }\right]$$
(19)
which enables us to find explicit  form of the vector and axial vector currents as

$`J^\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{eg}{4\pi ^2}}ϵ^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }\left[F_{\alpha \beta }{\displaystyle \frac{_\nu }{\mathrm{}}}\left(^\rho A_\rho ^5\right)2𝐚F_{\alpha \beta }A_\nu ^5+𝐚F_{\alpha \beta }^5A_\nu \right]`$ (20)
$`J^{5\mu }={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{4\pi ^2}}ϵ^{\rho \nu \alpha \beta }\left[{\displaystyle \frac{^\mu }{\mathrm{}}}\left(F_{\rho \nu }F_{\alpha \beta }\right)+2𝐚\delta _\mu ^\rho F_{\alpha \beta }A_\nu \right]`$ (21)
In spite of the complicated form of currents (20) and (21), one finds simple looking, well known, $`4`$D divergences

$`_\mu J^\mu =eg{\displaystyle \frac{𝐚}{4\pi ^2}}ϵ^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }F_{\mu \nu }F_{\alpha \beta }^5`$ (22)
$`_\mu J^{5\mu }=e^2{\displaystyle \frac{(𝐚1)}{4\pi ^2}}ϵ^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }F_{\mu \nu }F_{\alpha \beta }`$ (23)
We shall also exhibit a $`6`$D ($`k=3`$) results because it is the first dimension in which more than one axial vertex can be present. In fact, one finds $`m=0`$ (one axial vertex), $`m=1`$ (three axial vertices). They give the anomalous action as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{ge}{(2\pi )^3}d^6xϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma \tau \omega }\left(e^2F_{\rho \sigma }F_{\tau \omega }+g^2F_{\rho \sigma }^5F_{\tau \omega }^5\right)\left[F_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}A^52𝐚A_\mu A_\nu ^5\right]$$
(24)
(24) leads to the anomalous divergences of currents as

$$_\mu J^\mu =g\frac{𝐚}{(2\pi )^3}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma \tau \omega }F_{\mu \nu }^5\left[e^2F_{\rho \sigma }F_{\tau \omega }+g^2F_{\rho \sigma }^5F_{\tau \omega }^5\right]$$
(25)
$$_\mu J^{5\mu }=e\frac{𝐚1}{(2\pi )^3}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma \tau \omega }F_{\mu \nu }\left[e^2F_{\rho \sigma }F_{\tau \omega }+g^2F_{\rho \sigma }^5F_{\tau \omega }^5\right]$$
(26)
In (25) and (26) we see the appearance of axial vertices, in particular the difference in the axial current conservation compared to . The presence of additional $`F_{\rho \sigma }^5`$ is caused by the local axial symmetry considered in this paper.

In summary, we have constructed anomalous effective action for Abelian gauge fields which represents higher dimensional extension of $`2`$D Schwinger model. To our satisfaction, the anomalous effective action turns out to have particularly simple form whose kernel is a $`2`$D effective action written in terms of independent vector and axial vector gauge fields.The higher dimensional input is all encoded in the sequence of vector and axial vector gauge field strengths which contract remaining indices in the $`2k`$-dimensional Levi-Civita tensor.