text:
# 1 Transversity

## 1 Transversity

The transverse polarization of quarks inside a transversely polarized nucleon, denoted by $`h_1`$, $`\delta q`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }_Tq`$, is a fundamental twist-2 quantity, as important as the unpolarized distributions $`q`$ and the helicity distributions $`\mathrm{\Delta }q`$. It is given by

$$h_1(x,Q^2)=q_{}^{}(x,Q^2)q_{}^{}(x,Q^2),$$
(1)
that is the difference between the number density of quarks with transverse spin parallel and antiparallel to the nucleon spin . Fig. 1 shows the three fundamental quark distributions as seen in Deep Inelastic Scattering.

Transversity is the same as the helicity distribution only in a non relativistic approximation, but is expected to differ from it for a relativistic nucleon. Not much is known bout it, apart from the fact that it should obey the Soffer’s inequality

$$2|h_1|(q+\mathrm{\Delta }q),$$
(2)
and that its integral is related to the tensor charge

$$a_q^t=_0^1[h_{1q}(x,Q^2)h_{1\overline{q}}(x,Q^2)]𝑑x,$$
(3)
for which some estimates have been obtained using non perturbative QCD models .

When represented in the helicity basis (see Fig. 2) $`h_1`$ relates quarks with different helicities, revealing its chiral-odd nature. This is the reason why this important quantity has never been measured in DIS: the electromagnetic or QCD interactions are helicity conserving, there is no perturbative way of flipping helicities and $`h_1`$ decouples from inclusive DIS dynamics, as shown in Fig. 2a.

However, it can be accessed in semi-inclusive deep inelastic scatterings (SIDIS), where some non perturbative chiral-odd effects may take place in the non perturbative fragmentation process, Fig. 2b. Similarly, it could be accessed in Drell-Yan polarized processes, $`p^{}p^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{}X`$, where transverse spin asymmetries

$$A_{TT}=\frac{d\sigma ^{}d\sigma ^{}}{d\sigma ^{}+d\sigma ^{}}$$
(4)
are related to the convolution of two transversity distributions. However, one expects very small numerical values for such asymmetries .

## 2 $`𝒉_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ in SIDIS

In order to measure the unknown transversity distribution in semi-inclusive DIS, one needs a chiral-odd partner to associate with $`h_1`$; these are usually new fragmentation functions and several suggestions have been made , which we shall briefly consider.

### 2.1 The Collins function

A chiral-odd function which might occurr in the fragmentation of a transversely polarized quark into, say, a pion was first introduced by Collins  and is schematically represented in Fig. 3; it describes an azimuthal asymmetry in the hadronization process of a transversely polarized quark.

Such a function can give origin to a single spin asymmetry in $`\mathrm{}p^{}\mathrm{}\pi X`$ processes, as indeed observed by HERMES , and certainly observable by COMPASS experiments:

$$A_N=\frac{d\sigma ^{}d\sigma ^{}}{d\sigma ^{}d\sigma ^{}}$$
(5)
At leading twist, this asymmetry, if attributed to the Collins function $`\mathrm{\Delta }^ND_{\pi /q^{}}`$, is given by:

$$A_N^\pi =\frac{_qe_q^2h_{1q}(x)\mathrm{\Delta }^ND_{\pi /q^{}}(z,k_{})}{2_qe_q^2q(x)\widehat{D}_{\pi /q}(z,k_{})}\frac{2(1y)}{1+(1y)^2}\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Phi }_C,$$
(6)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_C`$ is the azimuthal angle between the fragmenting quark polarization vector $`𝑷_𝒒`$ and the pion transverse momentum $`𝒌_{}`$. Thus, $`A_N`$ clearly gives access to the transversity distributions $`h_{1q}`$, via the (unknown) Collins function: notice that a careful study of the dependence of $`A_N`$ on the different DIS variables might help in obtaining separate information on $`h_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^ND_{\pi /q^{}}`$; also, selection of particular kinematical ranges might help in the flavour decomposition .

### 2.2 The Sivers function

A mechanism similar to the Collins fragmentation was suggested for the proton distributions , and the corresponding function denoted by $`\mathrm{\Delta }^Nf_{q/p^{}}`$ or $`f_{1T}^{}`$ ; it can again be described by Fig. 3 if one replaces the initial transversely polarized quark with a transversely polarized proton and the final pion with a quark . The Sivers asymmetry was much debated, despite its phenomenological succes , because of some supposed problems with QCD time-reversal properties: however, very recently, a series of papers  have clarified the situation and fully promoted the rights of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^Nf_{q/p^{}}`$.

When attributing the asymmetry (5) to the Sivers mechanism, at leading twist, one obtains:

$$A_N^\pi =\frac{_qe_q^2\mathrm{\Delta }^Nf_{q/p^{}}(x,k_{})D_{\pi /q}(z)}{_qe_q^2q(x,k_{})D_{\pi /q}(z)}\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Phi }_S,$$
(7)
to be compared with Eq. (6). The Sivers asymmetry does not allow access to transversity – it is a chiral-even function – but might contribute to $`A_N`$; such a contribution should be separated from that of the Collins asymmetry, if we want to use data on $`A_N`$ to extract information on $`h_1`$. This is in principle possible if one notices that Eq. (7) does not depend on $`y`$ and that the azimuthal angle dependence is different from the one in Eq. (6); $`\mathrm{\Phi }_S`$ is now the angle between the proton polarization vector and the quark $`𝒌_{}`$.

### 2.3 Other ways to approach transversity

Other approaches to elusive transversity have been proposed . For example, within DIS, in Ref.  it was suggested to look at final states with two pions, originating from $`s`$ and $`p`$ wave states, whose interference might supply the necessary phase for a single spin asymmetry: these are the so-called interference fragmentation functions. They might avoid the danger that, in single inclusive production, the sum over many different channels averages the phases to zero.

Another possibility of measuring $`h_1`$ goes via the SIDIS production of spin 1 vector particles ; for example, one (measurable) non diagonal element of the helicity density matrix of a spin 1 meson, is related to $`h_1`$ and some unknown fragmentation amplitudes .

## 3 $`𝚲`$ polarization

Let us now turn to the second issue. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hyperons have the peculiar feature of revealing their polarization through the angular distribution of their weak decay, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }p\pi `$; indeed such a feature has allowed many interesting measurements with unexpected and somewhat mysterious results .

Let us consider the SIDIS processes, $`\mathrm{}(\lambda )p(\mu )\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }(h)X`$, within QCD factorization theorem at leading order, with several spin configurations, described by the helicities $`\lambda ,\mu `$ and $`h`$; the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s are required to be produced in the current quark fragmentation region. The kinematics and our choice of reference frames are explicitely shown in Fig. 4; the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay is observed in the helicity rest frame ($`x_H,y_H,z_H`$).

We define

$$\frac{d\sigma ^{\mathrm{}(\lambda )p(\mu )\mathrm{\Lambda }(h)X}}{dxdydz}d\sigma _{\lambda \mu }^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_h}.$$
(8)
Neglecting weak interaction contributions there are 4 independent helicity observables, which can be chosen and written as:

the unpolarized cross-section

$$d\sigma ^\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{2\pi \alpha ^2}{sx}\frac{1+(1y)^2}{y^2}\underset{q}{}e_q^2q(x)D_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z),$$
(9)
the double spin asymmetry

$$A_{}=\frac{d\sigma _{++}^\mathrm{\Lambda }d\sigma _+^\mathrm{\Lambda }}{2d\sigma ^\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\frac{y(2y)}{1+(1y)^2}\frac{_qe_q^2\mathrm{\Delta }q(x)D_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z)}{_qe_q^2q(x)D_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z)},$$
(10)
the spin transfer from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (with an unpolarized nucleon)

$$P_{+0}=\frac{d\sigma _{+0}^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_+}d\sigma _{+0}^\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}}{d\sigma ^\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\frac{y(2y)}{1+(1y)^2}\frac{_qe_q^2q(x)\mathrm{\Delta }D_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z)}{_qe_q^2q(x)D_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z)},$$
(11)
and the spin transfer from $`N`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (with an unpolarized lepton)

$$P_{0+}=\frac{d\sigma _{0+}^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_+}d\sigma _{0+}^\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}}{d\sigma ^\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\frac{_qe_q^2\mathrm{\Delta }q(x)\mathrm{\Delta }D_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z)}{_qe_q^2q(x)D_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z)}$$
(12)
The above quantities are all measurable; $`P_{+0}`$ means the polarization of the hyperon $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ semi-inclusively produced in the DIS scattering of a longitudinally polarized lepton (+ helicity) off an unpolarized proton (helicity 0), and so on. These combined measurements allow to obtain new information and/or to test available information on longitudinally polarized and unpolarized fragmentation and distribution functions, $`q`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }q`$, $`D`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }D`$. A detailed discussion with numerical estimates, as well as a complete list of references, can be found in -.

In particular, the above measurements should give some new information on the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ fragmentation functions; infact, from $`e^+e^{}`$ data one can only extract information on

$$\underset{q}{}[D_q^\mathrm{\Lambda }+D_{\overline{q}}^\mathrm{\Lambda }]\mathrm{and}\underset{q}{}[\mathrm{\Delta }D_q^\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Delta }D_{\overline{q}}^\mathrm{\Lambda }].$$
(13)
### 3.1 Transverse polarization, polarized protons

We consider the process $`\mathrm{}p^{}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}X`$ with an unpolarized lepton, a transversely polarized proton ($`S_N`$) and the measurement of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ trasverse polarization $`P_N`$; trasverse means orthogonal to the $`\gamma ^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ plane, see Fig. 4. One has:

$$P_N^{[0S_N]}=\frac{2(1y)}{1+(1y)^2}\frac{_qe_q^2h_{1q}(x)\mathrm{\Delta }_TD_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z)}{_qe_q^2q(x)D_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z)},$$
(14)
where the transversity distribution $`h_1`$ appears coupled to $`\mathrm{\Delta }_TD=D_{}^{}D_{}^{}`$, the chiral-odd transversity fragmentation function (so far unknown).

Eq. (14) offers a direct access to the product of $`h_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_TD`$ and one might hope to obtain separate information by studying the $`x`$ and $`z`$ dependences of $`P_N`$. Notice that there is no dependence on any $`k_{}`$ in this case. Notice also that neglecting contributions from sea quarks (which should be safe in the large $`x`$ and $`z`$ regions) Eq. (14) simplifies to:

$$P_N^{[0S_N]}\frac{2(1y)}{1+(1y)^2}\frac{4h_{1u}+h_{1d}}{4u+d}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_TD_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/u}}{D_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/u}}$$
(15)
Convolutions of the same unknown functions appear in the transverse polarization of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s produced in $`pp`$ interactions with one transversely polarized proton, $`pp^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}X`$, for example at RHIC :

$$P_N(\mathrm{\Lambda })\underset{abc}{}f_{a/p}h_{1b}\mathrm{\Delta }d\widehat{\sigma }^{abc\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_TD_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/c},$$
(16)
where $`f_{a/p}`$ is a parton (quark or gluon) distribution function and the $`\mathrm{\Delta }d\widehat{\sigma }`$ are differences of polarized elementary QCD interactions. A combined measurement of $`P_N`$ in both processes might help to extract more information.

### 3.2 Transverse polarization, unpolarized protons

This case is particularly interesting, as it relates to the longstanding problem of understanding the transverse polarization of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s and other hyperons produced in the unpolarized collisions of nucleons. This polarization might originate from spin effects in the fragmentation of unpolarized quarks into polarized baryons, the so-called polarizing fragmentation functions . These functions $`\mathrm{\Delta }^ND_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}/q}`$ can, again, be described by Fig. 3 if one takes an initial unpolarized quark and replaces the final pion with a transversely (up or down) polarized $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ baryon .

Indeed the polarizing fragmentation functions can contribute to the transverse $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization in SIDIS ;

$`P_N(\mathrm{\Lambda },x,y,z,p__T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_qe_q^2q(x)\mathrm{\Delta }^ND_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}/q}(z,p__T)}{_qe_q^2q(x)\widehat{D}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/q}(z,p__T)}}`$ (17)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(4u+d)\mathrm{\Delta }^ND_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}/u}+s\mathrm{\Delta }^ND_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}/s}}{(4u+d)\widehat{D}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/u}+s\widehat{D}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/s}}},`$
where $`p__T`$ is the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ transverse momentum in the $`\gamma ^{}p`$ c.m. frame.

Eq. (17) holds for neutral current, parity conserving, SIDIS processes. Even more interesting is the same quantity for the charged current weak process $`\nu p\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}X`$, investigated by NOMAD collaboration ; in such a case one has an almost direct measurement of the polarizing fragmentation function:

$$P_N^{[\nu \mathrm{}]}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }^ND_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}/u}}{\widehat{D}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }/u}}$$
(18)
Details and estimates can be found in Ref. .

## 4 Conclusions

The transversity distribution, last fundamental missing piece of the polarized nucleon structure, can be accessed in semi-inclusive DIS. At the moment this looks like the most promising approach to the elusive transversity and should be strongly pursued. Ongoing and future COMPASS experiments offer an almost unique opportunity.

The main difficulty with measuring transversity is the necessity of coupling it to another unknown chiral-odd function, which is often very interesting by itself; the actual data are always products or convolutions of these new functions. However, luckily, the unknown functions depend essentially on different kinematical variables and one can devise a strategy to obtain separate information, provided enough data are available.

Typically, transversity contributes to spin asymmetries; another problem is that of controlling other possible contributions – independent of transversity – to these asymmetries. This might arise in case of Sivers and Collins contributions to $`A_N`$; whereas the latter is coupled to $`h_1`$, the former is not and such a contribution must be understood before drawing conclusions on $`h_1`$ from data on $`A_N`$. Also in this case some strategies are possible.

The measurement of transverse $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization in SIDIS processes initiated by transversely polarized proton is a little explored, so far, channel to access $`h_1`$; the chiral-odd partner in this case is the transversity fragmentation function, which, again, is unknown: however, contrary to Collins function, it does not require any intrinsic quark motion and does not vanish when $`k_{}=0`$. Moreover, one can expect it to be similar to the analogous longitudinal fragmentation function, and easy to model. Also, information on $`\mathrm{\Delta }_TD`$ can be obtained from other processes.

We will learn more about transversity only by combining information from as many processes as possible, in different reactions and different kinematical ranges; the QCD $`Q^2`$ evolution of $`h_1`$ is known and should also be tested. Once a first knowledge about transversity is available, its many phenomenological applications to the explanation of observed spin asymmetries will test and improve our knowledge.


format: text

text:
# OUTP-03-06P hep-th/0302024 Inflation and Kähler Stabilization of the Dilaton

## 1 Introduction

The problem of a runaway dilaton in theories arising from the low-energy limit of a string theory has been widely discussed. The most frequently quoted mechanism for attempting to stabilize the dilaton is via an effective potential generated when some hidden sector gauge symmetry is driven to strong coupling. The gauginos charged under the strong group condense , with vevs that depend on the string-scale coupling and hence provide an effective non-perturbative superpotential for the dilaton. If more than one group has a gaugino condensate at comparable scales as in the racetrack models , or if non-perturbative string physics is accounted for as in Kähler stabilization , then the dilaton may have a non-trivial minimum in its scalar potential, as well as the supersymmetry preserving minimum at zero coupling.

The question of why, during the cosmological evolution of our universe, we should expect the dilaton to be found in the minimum at non-trivial coupling is also well-known . The minimum generated by the above mechanism is typically rather shallow, at least in comparison to the energies of the very early universe. Generically one expects that, starting from an arbitrary value, the dilaton would either not approach or else overshoot such a minimum and roll away to zero coupling. Possible solutions to this tend to invoke friction in the dilaton’s equation of motion, generated either from cosmological expansion  or higher Kaluza–Klein modes of the dilaton that are expected to be present at high energies . Here I will concentrate on a different issue: how do we know that, throughout the evolution of the universe, the dilaton’s potential had a minimum located in the same place as today? Since each term in the effective supergravity scalar potential couples to the dilaton, at energies in the early universe above the current dilaton mass (typically of order 10-100 TeV), we may expect that the dilaton potential has a different form. For example, during inflation we expect that some term in this scalar potential dominated the energy density of the universe. Since we are not inflating today, there is no reason to expect that this same term is still important and so it does not necessarily play any part in dilaton stabilization today. How can we know whether such a term would have provided a non-trivial dilaton minimum at all, let alone one close to today’s value?

This issue is important for various reasons. Of course, various cosmological implications of varying coupling constants have been widely discussed recently in e.g., however here we will consider issues relating more to inflation. Firstly, we do not wish to exacerbate the Brustein–Steinhardt problem. For example, if we make the very naïve approximation that the effective dilaton potential instantaneously switched from its inflationary form to today’s form at the end of slow-roll inflation111In this paper we make the assumption that the dilaton itself is not the inflaton., then we do not wish to have to guide it to its new minimum again. Indeed, if this was originally done using higher KK modes as in , then a reheat temperature high enough to re-excite these would presumably also be high enough to generate all manner of dangerous relics. Of course, this is just the usual statement of the moduli problem  as applied to the dilaton field. However it is also important for a second, possibly more urgent reason specific to the dilaton (at least in the weakly-coupled heterotic theory). Inflationary model building concerns itself in part with generating sufficiently flat potentials for slow-roll to occur. A promising way to achieve this without unnatural tuning is to note that, in a globally supersymmetric theory, any potential that is tuned to be flat at tree level will remain so to all orders in perturbation theory so long as supersymmetry remains unbroken. After SUSY breaking, such a potential will become sloped due to quantum corrections. In SUGRA there is also the difficulty that gravitational interactions generate a mass for canonical scalar fields of the same order as their potential; the $`\eta `$ problem (see e.g. ). Suggested ways of overcoming the $`\eta `$-problem include the use of non-canonical forms for the Kähler potential arising for fields well below the string scale , or identifying the slow-roll and string moduli fields , or perhaps by driving inflation via a D-term . Assuming one or other of these is successful, then the slope of the scalar potential will again depend on quantum corrections and it is here that the dilaton plays a crucial rôle. If these quantum corrections are to be under reasonable calculational control then we had better ensure that during inflation the dilaton is stabilized in the weak-coupling regime of some theory. Even assuming that it is, clearly the spectral index of primordial fluctuations $`n_k`$ will depend on the location of the dilaton. This conclusion is true irrespective of any renormalization of the coupling constants that must be accounted for in running down from the string scale to the inflationary scale. Therefore, if we wish inflationary model building to be at all predictive, it is essential that we know where the dilaton is stabilized during inflation. Even so, we may still expect that there will be some degeneracy in $`n_k`$ between different inflationary potentials and different dilaton minima. With our present lack of knowledge about the form of the potential during inflation, together with a far from completely satisfactory explanation of how to stabilize the dilaton even today, let alone during less well-understood epochs, it seems almost hopeless to attempt to resolve this situation at present by anything other than very model-dependent statements. Nonetheless, we will see that some reasonably generic, natural mechanisms may provide significant help.

I will assume that the dilaton is stabilized via corrections to the Kähler potential, perhaps arising through non-perturbative string physics. If these are to be relevant in the field-theoretic regime, they should be described in the Kähler potential by some function $`g(1/\mathrm{Re}S)`$. Much previous work in the subject has concerned itself finding vacua that follow from a specific choice of this function, such as those suggested by Shenker . However, various forms are commonly discussed and there is even some debate as to whether any of them realistically represent the true form of string non-perturbative corrections. Here we will keep this function completely arbitrary, except to assume that its presence in the Kähler potential is capable of providing an acceptable minimum. In the next section, I briefly review the model of Binétruy, Gaillard and Wu  which treats Kähler stabilization using in the linear multiplet formalism. Section 3 follows the standard path and considers the vacuum today. I will be less interested here in particular examples, but rather will simply list the usual constraints that the corrections to the Kähler potential must satisfy if they are to be capable of providing a phenomenologically reasonable vacuum, with e.g. vanishing cosmological constant and SUSY breaking at $``$ 1 TeV. Having considered the properties of the present vacuum, section 4 returns to the full scalar potential and hence examines the vacuum during inflation. Again I stress that we will not be concerned with building specific inflationary models, but rather we will attempt to find a reasonable generic scheme that ensures the dilaton potential has a minimum during inflation. The key will be to assume that the scalar fields acquire vevs which depend on the dilaton only via the condensate itself. This is a natural mechanism, being the hidden sector precursor to generation of visible sector SUSY breaking masses. Additionally, in this picture the inflationary energy density is always provided by the matter $`F`$-terms. This is a standard assumption of much string-inspired inflationary model building, but here it will follow from the above mechanism. Remarkably, the models which have energy density compatible with the COBE bound $`V^{1/4}6.7ϵ^{1.4}\times 10^{16}`$ GeV also tend to stabilize the dilaton close to today’s value. This is true despite the many orders of magnitude difference between the effective cosmological constants during inflation and today. Similar ideas were pursued in  where the authors allowed scalar field vevs to be generated by vacuum shifting to cancel a D-term. However, the results here are more general, and in particular do not depend on any form for the Kähler corrections. Finally, the conclusions will discuss the obtained results and try to understand why they hold. I argue that ultimately, this can be traced to the supersymmetry structure of the higher dimensional theory.

## 2 The model

In this paper I assume that, both today and during inflation, the dilaton is stabilized through corrections to the Kähler potential. For convenience, we will work in the linear supermultiplet formalism of , although since this has been shown to be equivalent to the usual chiral formulation in ref , we expect the same results to hold there also. In this formalism, for each semi-simple hidden sector gauge group $`𝒢_a`$ the gaugino condensate superfields $`U_a\mathrm{Tr}(W^\alpha W_\alpha )_a`$ are identified with the chiral projections of the vector superfields as

$`U_a`$ $`=`$ $`(𝒟_{\dot{\alpha }}𝒟^{\dot{\alpha }}8R)V_a`$
$`\overline{U}_a`$ $`=`$ $`(𝒟^\alpha 𝒟_\alpha 8\overline{R})V_a`$ (2.1)
with the overall vector superfield $`V=_aV_a`$ having the dilaton $`l`$ as its lowest component: $`l=V|_{\theta =\overline{\theta }=0}`$. Compared to the chiral formulation, we have roughly $`l1/(S+\overline{S})`$. Considering for simplicity an orbifold compactification, the Kähler potential is

$$K=\mathrm{ln}(V)+g(V)\underset{I}{}\mathrm{ln}(T_I+\overline{T}_I\underset{A}{}|\mathrm{\Phi }_{AI}|^2)$$
(2.2)
where here I consider only untwisted chiral matter fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{AI}`$. The function $`g(V)`$ is supposed to describe the contribution of string non-perturbative effects to the Kähler potential, and clearly this affects also the dilaton kinetic term. A simple calculation shows this to be

$$_{\mathrm{kinetic}}\frac{(lg^{}+1)}{4l^2}_\mu l^\mu l$$
(2.3)
where the prime denotes differentiation with respect to $`l`$. The string non-perturbative effects also modify the string-scale gauge coupling of the effective field theory:

$$2\pi \alpha =\frac{l}{1+f(l)}$$
(2.4)
and in the 4D Einstein frame, $`f`$ is related to $`g`$ via

$$V\frac{dg}{dV}=f(V)V\frac{df}{dV},$$
(2.5)
with $`f(0)=g(0)=0`$ as required in the weak-coupling limit.

The gaugino condensates are described by the Veneziano-Yankielowicz superpotential , appropriately generalised to incorporate SUGRA as well as the presence of several gaugino condensates and/or gauge-invariant matter condensates. There are also superpotentials for the matter fields and terms describing quantum corrections to any possible unconfined gauge groups. It is of course important to preserve the modular invariance of the underlying string theory, and a Green-Schwarz counterterm is introduced to this end (it is assumed that the modular anomaly is completely cancelled by this term). The reader is referred to refs.  for details.

Upon solving the equations of motion, the authors find the following expression for the condensates $`u_a=U_a|_{\theta =\overline{\theta }=0}`$

$$|u_a|^2=A^2\mathrm{exp}\left[\mathrm{ln}(l)+g(l)\frac{(1+f)}{b_al}+\frac{b_{E_8}b_a}{b_a}\underset{I}{}\mathrm{ln}x_I\right]\underset{I}{}\left|\eta (t_I)\right|^{4(b_{E_8}b_a)/b_a}$$
(2.6)
where $`t_I=T_I|_{\theta =\overline{\theta }=0}`$, $`x_It_I+\overline{t}_I_A|\varphi _{AI}|^2`$ and $`\eta (t_I)`$ is the Dedekind $`\eta `$-function, which ensures that (2.6) is modular invariant. The constants $`b_a`$ and $`b_a^{}`$ are related to the $`\beta `$-functions for the condensing gauge group $`𝒢_a`$. In particular ,

$$b_a=\frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\left(C_a\frac{1}{3}\underset{A}{}C_a^A\right)$$
(2.7)
where $`C_a`$ and $`C_a^A`$ are the quadratic Casimirs for the group $`G_a`$ in the adjoint and matter represenations, respectively. This is $`1/8\pi ^2`$ times the co-efficient of the one-loop $`\beta `$-function for the coupling, and gives $`b_{E_8}=30/8\pi ^20.38`$ whereas, for typical choices of hidden sector groups and matter representations , $`b_a0.1`$. The constant of proportionality $`A^2`$ in (2.6) again depends on the group structure, matter representations and Yukawa couplings present in the entire model; we allow this the fairly generous range $`10^410^4`$ (see ) though its value will not be crucial here. Notice that the condensate depends on the dilaton explicitly through the exponentials of both the Kähler potential and the inverse of the string-scale gauge coupling, and implicitly through any dilaton dependence of the matter fields $`\varphi _{AI}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{AI}|_{\theta =\overline{\theta }=0}`$ or $`t_I`$ moduli. This of course follows from the interpretation of the condensate scale as the energy at which the logarithmic running of $`\alpha `$ causes it to become strong. As pointed out in  for the whole perturbative model to make sense in the first place, we of course require that the theory started out from reasonably weak coupling, and so we assume without further justification $`b_al1`$ at all times.

One practical advantage of Kähler stabilization is that, even in the presence of several condensing gauge groups, the physical properties of the vacuum are dominated by the condensate coming from $`𝒢_+`$ the group with the largest beta function coefficient $`b_+`$. The condensate scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ and gravitino mass $`\stackrel{~}{m}`$ are then given by

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ $`=`$ $`|u_+|^2^{\frac{1}{6}}`$ (2.8)
$`\stackrel{~}{m}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{b_+}{4}}|u_+|`$ (2.9)
in reduced Planck units. So, as usual, the condensate plays the rôle of an effective non-perturbative superpotential for the dilaton $`b_+u_+/4e^{K/2}W_{\mathrm{np}}`$.

The final expression we require is the effective scalar potential for the model. This was presented in . Neglecting the twisted sector matter fields, it is given by the somewhat complicated form

$$\begin{array}{c}V=\frac{e^K}{1+b_{E_8}l}\underset{I}{}\left[\left|(2\xi (t_I)x_I+1)B_I\underset{A}{}\varphi _{AI}\frac{W}{\varphi _{AI}}\right|^2+x_I\underset{A}{}\left|\frac{W}{\varphi _{AI}}+2\xi (t_I)B_I\overline{\varphi }_{AI}\right|^2\right]\hfill \\ \hfill +(lg^{}+1)e^K\left|\frac{b_+u_+e^{K/2}}{4}\left(1+\frac{1}{b_+l}\right)W\right|^23e^K\left|\frac{b_+u_+e^{K/2}}{4}W\right|^2\end{array}$$
(2.10)
where $`\xi (t_I)=\frac{1}{\eta (t_I)}\frac{d\eta }{dt_I}`$ and $`B_I`$ is defined by

$$B_I=\underset{A}{}\varphi _{AI}\frac{W}{\varphi _{AI}}We^{K/2}\frac{u_+}{4}(b_{E_8}b_+).$$
(2.11)
Modular invariance of the scalar potential requires that, up to a possible modular invariant function that would contain singularities, the superpotential has the form

$$W=\underset{n}{}c_n\underset{AI}{}\varphi _{AI}^{p_n^{AI}}\eta (t_I)^{2(p_n^{AI}1)}$$
(2.12)
for some powers $`p_n^{AI}`$ with Yukawa couplings $`c_n`$ that we will assume are $`𝒪(1)`$. For a cubic superpotential, we take $`_{AI}p_n^{AI}=3`$ in each term $`n`$.

In comparison with the usual chiral formulation, the first line of (2.10) approximately corresponds to the $`F`$-terms for the $`t_I`$-moduli and matter fields, while the second line contains the dilaton $`F`$-term together with the usual $`3e^K|W|^2`$ piece, bearing in mind the interpretation of the condensate as a non-perturbative contribution to the superpotential. Notice also the factor involving $`1/(1+b_{E_8}l)`$ which multiplies the moduli and matter $`F`$-terms; this arises from the Green-Schwarz counterterm preserving modular invariance in the theory.

## 3 The dilaton potential today

Following the standard assumptions, we assume that at least one matter field in each term in the superpotential and its derivatives has zero vev today (or at least has a vev $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$). Minimizing the remaining potential with respect to $`t_I`$, the moduli are found  to be located at their self-dual points where $`(4\xi \mathrm{Re}(t_I)+1)=0`$. This is in accordance with the general result which states that these self-dual points are always extrema of the scalar potential . Such a stabilization of the $`t_I`$-moduli causes their $`F`$-terms to vanish and accordingly in these models SUSY is broken by a non-vanishing dilaton $`F`$-term. Thus the remaining scalar potential is

$$V=\left[(lg^{}+1)\left(1+\frac{1}{b_+l}\right)^23\right]\frac{b_+^2|u_+|^2}{16}.$$
(3.1)
In order to obtain a phenomenologically viable model, we would now wish to impose that the dilaton is at the minimum of its potential, in a vacuum with zero cosmological constant and an acceptable values for the gauge coupling and gravitino mass. This corresponds to the conditions

$`(1+b_+l)^2(lg^{}+1)3b_+^2l^2|_{l=l_0}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (3.2)
$`f^{\prime \prime }+{\displaystyle \frac{6b_+^2}{(1+b_+l)^3}}|_{l=l_0}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (3.3)
$`f^{\prime \prime \prime }{\displaystyle \frac{18b_+^3}{(1+b_+l)^4}}|_{l=l_0}`$ $`<`$ $`0`$ (3.4)
where (3.2) corresponds to the vanishing of the remaining scalar potential and (3.3)-(3.4) ensure that the dilaton is at a minimum. Additionally, constraints on the GUT scale coupling and SUSY breaking scales may be interpreted as requiring

$`{\displaystyle \frac{l}{2\pi (1+f)}}|_{l=l_0}=`$ $`\alpha _0`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{25}}`$ (3.5)
$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c=10^{13}\mathrm{GeV}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{m}=1\mathrm{TeV}.`$ (3.6)
As mentioned in the introduction, much previous work on these models has now specified particular forms (e.g. those of ) for the function $`f(l)`$ (and hence also $`g(l)`$) so as to proceed to find viable examples. While it is certainly interesting that this can be done in practice, here I shall pursue a different route and examine the implications of the above constraints more generally.

Firstly, notice that (3.2) implies

$$lg^{}+1>\frac{3b_+^2l^2}{(1+b_+l)^2}$$
(3.7)
for $`ll_0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ as otherwise there would be a vacuum with lower energy222Of course we also have $`V=0`$ at $`l=0`$; the SUSY preserving, uncoupled vacuum.. Next consider the gauge coupling. Expanding $`f(l)`$ around $`f(l_0)`$ gives

$$\frac{1}{2\pi \alpha }=\frac{1}{2\pi \alpha _0}\frac{3b_+^2}{(1+b_+l_0)^2}(ll_0)+\frac{1}{l_0}\underset{n=3}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d^nf}{dl^n}|_{l=l_0}\frac{(ll_0)^n}{n!},$$
(3.8)
where the first and second order terms are evaluated explicitly using (3.2)-(3.3). Eq (3.8) determines how the GUT scale coupling changes if the dilaton is located away from its true minimum. What is important to notice is that the first and second order terms always induce a negligible change in $`\alpha `$ for $`b_+|ll_0|1`$, in other words throughout the entire “weakly-coupled” regime. Any significant change in the GUT scale coupling is therefore traceable to the presence of large higher order derivatives in the expansion (3.8). Indeed, such terms can generically be present, since eqs (3.2)-(3.4) do not restrict their magnitude. To paraphrase: if $`\alpha `$ does not change significantly during inflation, then $`|l_il_0|`$ is sufficiently small that higher order derivatives of $`f`$ are unimportant. We shall see if this is reasonable in the next section.

## 4 The dilaton potential during inflation

Let us now proceed to examine the dilaton potential during inflation. Since we do not know a priori which term is responsible for inflation, at first sight this seems to require the somewhat daunting task of investigating the full scalar potential (2.10). However the COBE bound requires

$$V^{1/4}6.7ϵ^{1/4}\times 10^{16}\mathrm{GeV},$$
(4.1)
with typical slow-roll parameters $`ϵ`$ giving $`V^{1/4}10^{14}`$ GeV. If we assume this energy density is provided by the vevs of some scalar field(s) as in hybrid inflation (see e.g. ), then of course we require $`\varphi _{AI}1`$ and therefore $`WW/\varphi _{AI}`$ for $`𝒪`$(1) Yukawa couplings. This simplifies the potential to

$$\begin{array}{c}V=\frac{e^K}{1+b_{E_8}l}\underset{I}{}\left[\left|(2\xi x_I+1)e^{K/2}\frac{u_+}{4}(b_{E_8}b_+)\right|^2+x_I\underset{A}{}\left|\frac{W}{\varphi _{AI}}\right|^2\right]\hfill \\ \hfill +(lg^{}+1)e^K\left|\frac{u_+b_+e^{K/2}}{4}\left(1+\frac{1}{b_+l}\right)\right|^23e^K\left|\frac{b_+u_+e^{K/2}}{4}\right|^2.\end{array}$$
(4.2)
For the theory to be under control, we must also have $`|u_+|1`$ in reduced Planck units, but notice that we cannot simply neglect the condensate; until we know where the dilaton is stabilized we do not know the condensate scale in comparison to $`\frac{W}{\varphi _{AI}}`$ (of course, as yet there are no observational constraints on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ during inflation). To proceed further, in this paper I will make the fairly natural assumption that a typical scalar field acquires a vev connected to the condensate scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$, at whatever value this turns out to be.333In  the authors followed an alternative route and obtained the inflationary scale by vacuum shifting to cancel a $`D`$-term. A natural expectation would be $`\varphi _{AI}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ for some scalar field(s) $`\varphi _{AI}`$. However, there may be some fields which acquire vevs proportional to some other power of the condensate scale, perhaps due to a global symmetry which restricts the way they appear in the superpotential (see e.g. ). For this reason, let us take a typical scalar vev to be

$$|\varphi _{AI}|^2|u_+|^{2\lambda }|\eta (t_I)|^4$$
(4.3)
where $`\lambda `$ is any positive power and the Dedekind $`\eta `$-function is present to ensure the correct behaviour under modular transformations (the condensate itself being invariant). Of course, this is exactly the mechanism that generically provides SUSY breaking masses in the observable sector today (with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c\stackrel{~}{m}`$ via gravity mediation). Additionally, during inflation this mechanism has the advantage of being able to provide a high inflationary energy scale in a consistent way. The point is that in a string theory, all mass scales under $`m_s`$ (in particular the inflationary scale $`V^{1/4}`$) must be generated dynamically. A condensate or gauge-symmetry breaking scalar field vev will only form if it is energetically permitted. This may be inhibited in the presence of a large inflationary potential from some other source, and so inflation would be in danger of preventing its own SUSY breaking cause . Of course, it is not necessary for all the fields to acquire the same vevs with the same powers $`\lambda `$; this will be discussed further later. At present, let us assume that all sums are restricted to their dominant term(s). Again, I have ignored the possibility of additional modular invariant functions in the vevs, and $`𝒪`$(few) numerical factors will not affect the argument.

At first sight, it appears that there are now various cases to consider; depending on $`\lambda `$, with $`|u_+|^21`$ we may consider the dominant contribution to $`V`$ to originate from either the matter, moduli or dilaton $`F`$-terms during inflation. However, let us consider the stabilization of the $`t_I`$-moduli. With the scalar vevs as in (4.3) and using (2.6) we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{|u_+|^2}{t_J}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{b_{E_8}b_+}{b_+}}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{I}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{x_I}}{\displaystyle \frac{x_I}{t_J}}+2\xi (t_J)\right]|u_+|^2`$ (4.4)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{b_{E_8}b_+}{b_+}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2\xi (t_J)(t_J+\overline{t}_J)+1}{x_J}}|u_+|^2\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{|u_+|^2}{t_J}}{\displaystyle \underset{AI}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\varphi _{AI}|^2}{x_I}}\right]`$ (4.5)
and so the condensate is extremised at the self dual points where $`4\xi (t_J)\mathrm{Re}t_J+1=0`$. Now, from (4.2) it is clear that these points also extremise the dilaton $`F`$-term and the supergravity $`3|W_{\mathrm{np}}|^2`$ term, as these only depend on the moduli via the condensate. Consider next the matter $`F`$-terms. With a cubic superpotential of the form (2.12) and matter vevs (4.3) we have

$$\left|\frac{W}{\varphi _{AI}}\right|^2=|u_+|^{4\lambda }|A_{AI}|^2\underset{JI}{}\left|\eta (t_J)\right|^4$$
(4.6)
where $`|A_{AI}|^2=\left|_nc_np_n^{AI}\right|^2`$ is a constant. Hence for the matter $`F`$-terms we find

$`e^K(1+b_{E_8}l){\displaystyle \frac{V}{t_J}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{A,I}{}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{K}{t_J}}x_I+{\displaystyle \frac{x_I}{t_J}}+x_I{\displaystyle \frac{}{t_J}}\right]\left|{\displaystyle \frac{W}{\varphi _{AI}}}\right|^2`$ (4.7)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{A,I}{}}x_I\left|{\displaystyle \frac{W}{\varphi _{AI}}}\right|^2\left[{\displaystyle \underset{K}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{x_K}}{\displaystyle \frac{x_K}{t_J}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{x_I}}{\displaystyle \frac{x_I}{t_J}}+2\xi (t_J)(\delta _I^J1)\right]+\mathrm{}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{A,IJ}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{x_I}{x_J}}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{W}{\varphi _{AI}}}\right|^2\left[2\xi (t_J)(t_J+\overline{t}_J)+1\right]+\mathrm{}`$
where the ellipses represent terms proportional to $`|u_+|^2/t_J`$. Hence the matter $`F`$-terms are also minimized at the self-dual points. Considering finally the moduli $`F`$-terms, from (4.2) it is clear that these are not minimized at the self-dual points, but rather where $`2\xi (t_I)x_I+1=0`$. However, at the self-dual points the only remaining pieces of the moduli $`F`$-terms are

$$\frac{(b_{E_8}b_+)^2}{4(1+b_{E_8}l)}\underset{I}{}\left|\xi (t_I)u_+\underset{A}{}|\varphi _{AI}|^2\right|^2.$$
(4.8)
Since $`|u_+|^21`$ for the theory to be under control, it is clear that (4.8) is negligible compared to either the dilaton or matter $`F`$-terms in (4.2) for generic scalar field vevs of the form (4.3), irrespective of $`\lambda `$. Hence the overall potential is minimized444It may further be shown that the points $`t_I=e^{i\pi /6}`$ are minima, whereas $`t_I=1`$ are saddle points of the potential; see . when $`4\xi (t_I)\mathrm{Re}(t_I)+1=0`$ and we may neglect the moduli $`F`$-terms henceforth. This approximation will of course eventually cease to be valid as the universe evolves - the remaining small pieces from the moduli $`F`$-terms will eventually destabilize the potential and drive $`|\varphi _{AI}|^20`$ for at least one field in each term in the superpotential and its derivatives, as is the case in the true vacuum today.

Let us now return to our primary goal - the stabilization of the dilaton during inflation. We have seen that, whatever the value of $`\lambda `$ the inflationary potential will be dominated by either the matter or dilaton $`F`$-terms. With $`t_I=e^{i\pi /6}`$ these are

$`V`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^K}{1+b_{E_8}l}}|u_+|^{4\lambda }|\eta (e^{i\pi /6})|^8{\displaystyle \underset{A,I}{}}|A_{AI}|^2+V_0`$ (4.9)
$`=`$ $`C{\displaystyle \frac{le^g}{1+b_{E_8}l}}|u_+|^{4\lambda }+V_0`$
for $`C=|\eta (e^{i\pi /6})|^8_{A,I}|A_{AI}|^2/3`$ where with $`𝒪`$(1) Yukawa couplings we expect $`1C10`$. In (4.9), $`V_0`$ is the form of the scalar potential today as given by (3.1), although of course as yet we do not know its value during inflation.

As explained in the introduction, if one is to justify the standard predictions of inflationary models whose slow-roll parameters come from higher-order, coupling-constant dependent terms in the potential (perhaps arising as quantum corrections) then it is necessary that the dilaton be stabilized somewhere near to its value today. Here we do not attempt solve the Brustein-Steinhardt problem  and explain how the dilaton dynamically settled into this minimum (e.g. rather than the one at $`l=0`$ which is always present), but simply try to ensure that if it can be solved before inflation, it will not arise again afterwards. In order to achieve a minimum in the dilaton potential close to the one today, it again appears that there are two separate cases to consider. Firstly, $`\lambda `$ may be large enough that the matter $`F`$-terms are typically much smaller than the $`V_0`$ contribution (at values of $`ll_0`$), and therefore $`V_0`$ would then drive $`ll_0`$ irrespective of the matter term. Since we must have $`|u_+|1`$ for a sub-Planckian condensate, this will occur when $`\lambda >1/2`$ as then the matter $`F`$-terms are typically suppressed compared to the $`V_0`$ term. Secondly, it may be that the matter $`F`$-term itself has a minimum close to $`l=l_0`$. To examine this case, consider the matter $`F`$-terms. Using eqs (2.5) and (2.6), these are minimized when

$`lg^{}+1|_{l=l_i}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{b_{E_8}b_+l^2}{(2\lambda (1+b_+l)+b_+l)(1+b_{E_8}l)}}|_{l=l_i}`$ (4.10)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{b_{E_8}b_+l^2}{2\lambda +b_+l}}|_{l=l_i},`$
where in the second line I make the usual weak-coupling approximations $`b_{E_8}l_i,b_+l_i1`$. Comparison with (3.7) shows that such a value can only exist if

$$\lambda <\frac{b_{E_8}}{6b_+}.$$
(4.11)
The point is that the functions $`f(l)`$ and $`g(l)`$ are supposed to be determined by non-perturbative aspects of the underlying string model. We have specified phenomenologically desirable properties in section 3, but once these are fixed, we are not free to retune the functions during inflation555In particular this is true if the $`t_I`$ moduli are fixed at the same place during inflation as today, even if $`g(l)g(l,t_I)`$, though it is not clear that this would allow such a stabilization.. Expanding $`lg^{}`$ around $`l=l_0`$ gives

$$\frac{b_{E_8}b_+l_i^2}{2\lambda +b_+l_i}=3b_+^2l_0^2+6b_+^2l_0(l_il_0)+\underset{n=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d^n(lg^{})}{dl^n}|_{l_0}\frac{(l_il_0)^n}{n!}$$
(4.12)
where I have used eqs. (3.2)-(3.3) and (4.10) to evaluate the zeroth and first order terms. In this equation, the derivatives in the sum are (linear combinations of) those in (3.8), evaluated at the same place $`l=l_0`$ and are therefore of the same magnitude. Since the explicit terms on the lhs and rhs of (4.12) are much smaller than those of (3.8), it is clear that the difference $`|l_il_0|`$ between the dilaton minima during inflation and today will not cause a significant change in $`\alpha `$. Additionally, for typical compactifications  the rhs of (4.11) is at least 2/3 so this case smoothly overlaps with the previous one where $`ll_0`$ because of the presence of $`V_0`$. We therefore have the remarkable conclusion that all vevs of the form (4.3) will stabilize the dilaton at a value with $`\alpha \alpha _0`$. As explained in the introduction, this provides some justification for the usual predictions of inflationary model-building.

Let us now investigate the the dilaton mass. In comparing this to the Hubble rate, it is of course important to consider the field $`D`$ with canonical kinetic terms. Eq. (2.3) shows that this is given by

$$\frac{1}{4}_\mu D^\mu D=\frac{(lg^{}+1)}{4l^2}_\mu l^\mu l$$
(4.13)
and hence we now define

$$\eta _D\frac{1}{V}\frac{d^2V}{dD^2}|_{l_i}=\frac{1}{V}\left(\frac{dl}{dD}\right)^2\frac{d^2V}{dl^2}|_{l_i}.$$
(4.14)
Again using the approximation $`l_i=l_0`$ and now considering the case where $`\lambda <1/2`$ so that the matter term dominates in its own right, we have

$$\eta _D(lg^{})^{}\frac{(2\lambda +b_+l_i)^2}{b_{E_8}b_+^2l_i^2}\frac{4\lambda +1}{b_+l_i}$$
(4.15)
and so in order to hold the dilaton in place at its minimum during inflation we require

$$(lg^{})^{}|_{l_i}\frac{4\lambda +b_+l_i}{(2\lambda +b_+l_i)^2}b_{E_8}b_+l_i$$
(4.16)
which is not unreasonable, given that $`b_+l_i1`$. By comparison, at $`l=l_0`$ we have $`(lg^{})^{}6b_+^2l_0`$ but we may expect it to be significantly larger here as higher order curvature terms come into play.

Finally, consider the inflationary energy scale. The energy density during inflation will always be of the order of the matter $`F`$-terms. This is because either this term dominates in its own right (for $`\lambda <1/2`$) or $`V_0`$ dominates and attempts to minimize itself at $`l=l_0`$ where $`V_0=0`$, with this minimization now leaving a residual piece of the order of the matter $`F`$-terms. This is in accordance with the standard assumptions of inflationary model-building , but here it emerges as the only residual term if typical scalars acquire vevs as in (4.3) and the moduli and dilaton are stabilized. Taking $`l_i=l_0`$ as a crude approximation, we find

$`V^{\frac{1}{4}}`$ $``$ $`|u_+|^\lambda \left({\displaystyle \frac{le^g}{1+b_{E_8}l}}\right)_{l_0}^{\frac{1}{4}}`$ (4.17)
$``$ $`|u_+|^{\lambda +\frac{1}{2}}A^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi \alpha b_+}}\right]_{l_0}`$
where in the second line I have used eq. (2.6) and neglected $`𝒪(1)`$ factors from the $`t_I`$ moduli and Yukawa coupling terms. This may be evaluated using eqs. (3.5)-(3.6) once the full group structure, matter representations and Yukawa couplings of the hidden sector are specified. However, it is clear that a very wide range of inflationary scales are possible using the general scheme (4.3). Purely as an example, a particularly natural choice might be to take $`A1`$, $`b_+0.05`$ and $`\lambda =1/3`$ so that $`|\varphi _{AI}|\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$. This gives $`V10^{14}`$ GeV, which is comfortably compatible with the COBE bound (4.1).

## 5 Conclusions

In this paper I have argued that the predictions for the spectral index of fluctuations $`n_k`$ that follow from inflationary models usually assume that the GUT scale coupling was the same during inflation as today. This could be false if the dilaton was stabilized at a different value during inflation, and we could even lose all calculability if either the theory became strongly coupled or there was no (non-trivial) dilaton minimum. I have not addressed the complicated issue of why we should expect the theory to have a weak-coupling description in the first place , but merely assumed that it does. I have then shown that, if dilaton stabilization is due to corrections to the Kähler potential , then during inflation the dilaton will be stabilized at a value which causes negligible change in $`\alpha `$, provided the inflationary energy density arises from vevs of the form (4.3). I do not claim that this is the only way of achieving such a result. Indeed in  other mechanisms were proposed. Nor do I claim that it is not possible to achieve such results using racetrack models  although perhaps the “competing condensates” makes it less likely. However, the scheme presented here is both natural and generic, relying on the same mechanism as is known to provide vevs in the visible sector. Additionally, I have not assumed any particular form for the non-perturbative correction $`g(l)`$, except to suppose that it can provide reasonable phenomenology today. Therefore it is perhaps worthwhile to see if we can understand these results on a slightly deeper level.

In the absence of any corrections to the Kähler potential, we would find $`\alpha `$ rising as $`l`$, but (3.8) shows that corrections of the form (2.4) lead to a flattening of this dependence, which is tuned to occur around the phenomenologically acceptable value. Of course, as $`l`$ departs from $`l_0`$, higher derivative terms in (3.8) will eventually cause significant changes in $`\alpha `$. The presence of the “flattened slope” in $`\alpha `$ is precisely a consequence of the vanishing of the cosmological constant in today’s vacuum, as expressed in (3.2)-(3.4). Why is this so? The question essentially asks why the (ln of) the coupling should be the Kähler potential for the dilaton. This is of course just a consequence of the supersymmetry structure of the higher dimensional supergravity theory; $`D=10`$ SUGRA requires a dilaton to complete its supermultiplet structure, and supersymmetry then dictates how its Kähler potential and coupling to other fields are related, whatever frame is used. Now, the condensate itself depends on the dilaton only through the Kähler potential and $`\alpha `$ as in (2.6). Of course, this must be so. Therefore it is clear that there will be a flattening of the condensate’s dilaton dependence near today’s value $`l_0`$ (this is precisely what was tuned in (3.2)-(3.4)). Hence, if we can find a way to make the inflationary energy density depend on the condensate in roughly the same way as the residual form of the scalar potential today, we should expect it to have a flattened dependence near $`l=l_0`$. Such is the idea behind (4.3) and it is pleasing that this is a very natural expectation. Can we make the inflationary dilaton minimum $`l_i`$ close enough to $`l_0`$ that $`\alpha `$ is unaffected? (4.12) shows that the answer is yes, because the same higher order (logarithmic) derivatives that destabilize $`\alpha `$ also describe the difference between the $`l_i`$ and $`l_0`$. Clearly, this is because the corrections to $`\alpha `$ and the Kähler potential are related as in (2.5) which is simply a consequence of supersymmetry. Now, both sides of (4.12) are $`1`$ and so we need to “mix in” far less of the higher order derivative terms in order to satisfy this compared to the amount that would cause an appreciable variation in $`\alpha `$.

Although this paper is written with hybrid inflation in mind, such as commonly arises in string inspired constructions, no attempt has been made to specify any inflationary model. In particular, I have not identified a slow-roll field, or the slope of the potential down which it evolves and this deserves some comment. Candidate slow-roll fields could arise from a number of sources. Firstly, it is possible to imagine that whatever set up the condition (4.3) is not completely stable, so the inflaton is some linear combination of the matter scalar fields. Secondly, we could assume that a vev of the form (4.3) is not in fact generic, with only certain fields taking this form, others being driven to zero. In this case, one could find a situation where one (combination) of the $`t_I`$ moduli is left undetermined by the dominant terms in the potential (see e.g. ) thus providing a slow-roll field. These issues have not been dealt with here. However, we have shown that with (4.3) the dilaton and moduli are minimized so as to provide a constant energy density. Whatever terms destabilize this and lead to the true vacuum must arise from terms in (2.10) shown to be “negligible” in comparison to those kept in (4.9). Hence, they are bound to lead to slow-roll, at least in the vicinity of the potential (4.9). The assumption here is that the vevs (4.3) can be preserved in that form on a timescale comparable to, or larger than, the slow-roll timescale. The general theme here was not to build new inflationary models, but rather to try to provide some justification for the predictions of standard ones , should they be implemented in a string context. With Kähler stabilization of the dilaton, this appears to be quite plausible. It would be interesting to know whether racetrack models, or more exotic ideas, lead to the same results. In particular, it would be of great interest to know whether this can arise models of gaugino condensation in the strongly-coupled heterotic M-theory  where the necessity of stabilizing the dilaton and moduli together becomes more apparent. Finally, it is clearly important to try to pursue these ideas into post-inflationary epochs so as to attempt to make contact with apparent experimental results .

## 6 Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Subir Sarkar, John March–Russell and Oscar Vives for very helpful conversations.


text:
# The XMM-Newton View of the Nucleus of NGC 4261

## 1 Introduction

In recent years, it was established that many nearby galaxies contain supermassive black holes (e.g., Gebhardt et al. 2000). However, weak or no activity is usually detected from their cores, in the optical or X-ray band (Loewenstein et al. 2001; Kormendy & Ho 2000). This is puzzling, as at least in early-type galaxies large reservoirs of gas to feed the central black holes are available in the form of hot, diffuse galaxy halos (e.g., Fabian & Canizares 1988).

The nearby ($``$ 41 Mpc) giant elliptical NGC 4261/3C270 contains a supermassive black hole of known mass, $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}5\times 10^8M_{}`$ (Ferrarese, Ford, & Jaffe 1996). It is one of a handful of early-type galaxies where low-luminosity nuclear activity is detected. In the radio band, it exhibits a Fanaroff-Riley type I (FRI; Fanaroff & Riley 1974) morphology, with a compact core and twin jets extending E-W, oriented at $`i=(63\pm 3)`$ with respect to the line of sight (Piner, Jones, & Wehrle 2001). Optical spectroscopy reveals a Low-Ionization Nuclear Emission-Line Region (LINER; Heckman 1980) in the nucleus of the galaxy (Ho, Filippenko, & Sargent 1995). In the X-ray band, diffuse thermal emission with $`kT0.6`$ keV is present at low energies in ROSAT images (Worrall & Birkinshaw 1994). At hard X-rays, a point source is detected at the position of the radio core in a recent Chandra image; its continuum is described by a power law with photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{210keV}1.3`$, excess column density N$`{}_{H}{}^{}6\times 10^{22}`$ cm-2, and intrinsic luminosity L$`{}_{210keV}{}^{}10^{41}`$ erg s-1 (Chiaberge et al. 2002). Interestingly, an unresolved narrow ($`\sigma =0.05`$ keV) Fe K line was marginally detected at 6–7 keV with ASCA (Terashima et al. 2002; Sambruna, Eracleous, & Mushotzky 1999).

NGC 4261 exhibits significantly different optical and X-ray properties from the more luminous, broad-lined radio-loud sources (e.g., Sambruna et al. 1999 and discussion therein). It was indeed suggested that the accretion process in NGC 4261 proceeds through an Advection-Dominated Accretion Flow (Ho 1999), or that beamed emission from the jet dominates the energy production in this source (Chiaberge et al. 2002 and references therein). NGC 4261 qualifies as an important link to understand the transition from low- to high-power radio sources.

To study its nuclear X-ray properties in more detail, we acquired an XMM-Newton observation of NGC 4261. In this Letter, we present a study of the nuclear properties using the more sensitive EPIC pn data. The archival Chandra image is also used to constrain the spatial properties of the galaxy within the EPIC extraction region. A more detailed study of the XMM-Newton data will be presented in Gliozzi et al. (2003). The observations and the data reduction are described in § 2. In § 3 we give the results and discuss their significance. Throughout the paper we use a Friedman cosmology with $`H_0=75\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1\mathrm{and}q_0=0.5`$.

## 2 Observations And Data Reduction

We first used an archival 34 ks Chandra observation, obtained on 2000 May 6, to quantify the spatial properties of the source within the XMM-Newton extraction radius. Figure 1 (bottom panel) shows the Chandra ACIS-S3 image from 0.2–2 keV, with the hard X-ray (2–10 keV) contours overlaid. X-ray emission from the core, the E-W jet, the diffuse galaxy halo, and several point sources are apparent (Gliozzi et al. 2003, Chiaberge et al. 2002). Superposed on the Chandra image are the EPIC extraction radii of 10′′, 20′′, and 30′′. Within 10′′, only one point source (RA=$`12^h19^m23.50^s`$, DEC=$`05^o`$4936′′) is present; its contribution to the total X-ray flux is negligible, amounting to less than 2%. At larger radii, the relative contribution of the halo, resolved jet, and point sources increases. A detailed energy-dependent spatial analysis of the ACIS image will be presented in Gliozzi et al. (2003). Here, we only note that a point source at the position of the nucleus is present at ultra-soft energies, 0.3–0.8 keV, together with faint diffuse emission. The diffuse halo contribution is strongest at intermediate energies, 0.8–2 keV, where its spectrum peaks.

The XMM-Newton observation of NGC 4261 was carried out on 2001 October 16 (revolution 370). Only half of the proposed exposure was awarded, for a total of 30 ks. Here we report the results from the EPIC CCDs mainly from the pn camera, because of its higher sensitivity. The recorded events were reprocessed and screened with the latest available release of the XMM-Newton Science Analysis Software (SAS 5.3.3), retaining only events corresponding to patterns 0–12 (singles, doubles, triples and quadruples). After removing periods of background flares, the net exposure is $`21`$ ks. In an extraction radius of 10′′, the EPIC pn count rate in the 0.6–10 keV band is $`(1.76\pm 0.01)\times 10^1`$ counts s-1.

The source data were extracted from circular regions of different radii ranging from 10′′ to 30′′ (Figure 1). A radius of 30′′ corresponds to the maximum value before reaching the edge of chip 4 in the pn camera. A radius of 10′′ was finally chosen for the spectral analysis of the EPIC pn data because it minimizes the contribution of the extended components and point sources. A radius of 30′′ was instead used for the light curves in order to have enough photons for the timing analysis at hard X-rays (none of the point sources included in this radius is demonstrably variable in the Chandra observation). For each extraction radius, the count rate was corrected using the encircled energy function and point spread function implemented in the SAS task arfgen. Background data were extracted from source-free circular regions (r=30′′) on the same chip containing the central source. There are no signs of pile-up according to the SAS task epatplot.

## 3 Results and Discussion

### 3.1 Detection of Flux Variability

The 0.3–10 keV EPIC pn light curve from an extraction radius of 30′′ is shown in Figure 2. Low-amplitude flux variability is present, with flux excursions of a factor 1.3 (maximum/minimum) on timescales of $``$ 3 ks. A $`\chi ^2`$ test yields a probability that the flux is constant of only P$`_{\chi ^2}`$=2.5%. To verify that the variability originates in the nucleus, light curves were extracted from 20′′ and 10′′ radii. The $`\chi ^2`$ probability increases with increasing extraction radius of the light curves, indicating a progressively larger dilution of the light curve by non-nuclear light in the larger extraction radii, and confirming that the variability is indeed of nuclear origin. We identify the source of the X-ray variations with the nuclear point source detected in the Chandra image. While no flux variability is present in the Chandra light curves of the nucleus (within 2′′ extraction radius), the uncertainties are very large.

We investigated possible energy-dependences of the flux variations in the EPIC data splitting the total 0.3–10 keV band into sub-bands containing enough counts to perform the $`\chi ^2`$ test. We find significant flux changes at hard (2–10 keV) and ultra-soft (0.3–0.8 keV) energies, with P$`_{\chi ^2}`$=6% and 0.3%, respectively. As shown in Figure 2, in both energy bands the flux changes by a factor 1.5 on timescales $``$ 3–5 ks (minimum to maximum) but with different variability patterns. At intermediate energies, 0.8–2 keV, no flux variations are detected in the EPIC light curve (P$`_{\chi ^2}`$=75%), due to the presence of the spatially-extended thermal component that dilutes the nuclear light. Note that a non-thermal component is present in the spectrum at ultra-soft energies (see below).

Erratic spectral variations are also present in the plot of the hardness ratio, 0.3–0.8 keV/2–10 keV, versus time (P$`{}_{\chi ^2}{}^{}`$ 0.8%). However, there are not enough counts to perform a detailed spectral analysis as a function of time.

The detection of short-term flux variations with EPIC poses a challenge for an origin of the X-ray continuum in an Advection Dominated Accretion Flow (ADAF), the favored accretion-flow structure in low-luminsity AGNs and accretion-powered LINERs (e.g., Ho 1999). In an ADAF, the X-ray emission comes from a large volume and relatively long ($`\stackrel{>}{}`$1 day) variability timescales are expected, as indeed observed with ASCA (Terashima et al. 2002; Ptak et al. 1998). More specifically, the light-crossing time of an ADAF of radius $`r`$ in NGC 4261 is given by $`\tau =2.5\times 10^5\left(\frac{r}{100r_\mathrm{g}}\right)\left(\frac{M}{5\times 10^8\mathrm{M}_{}}\right)`$ s, where $`r_\mathrm{g}GM/c^2`$ is the gravitational radius of the black hole. Since this time scale is about 2 orders of magnitude longer than the observed variability time scale, it is unlikely that the variable component of the X-ray band originates in an ADAF.

The variable component of the X-ray flux in NGC 4261 is more likely to be associated with the inner X-ray jet. However, the detection of a relatively strong Fe K line (see below) indicates that jet emission is not dominant over the entire observed X-ray band; another continuum production mechanism must be present. Alternatively, the X-ray continuum is produced in the jet but is only mildly beamed. This is the case if the jet has a fast spine and slower walls (e.g., Chiaberge et al. 2000 and references therein), and the observed X-ray continuum is produced by the decelerated plasma.

### 3.2 Excess X-ray Absorption in the Nucleus of NGC 4261

At first we focused the spectral analysis on the time-averaged EPIC pn spectrum in the 0.6–10 keV range, where the instrument is best calibrated, with an extraction radius of 10′′ (see above). Following indications from previous X-ray observations, we first fitted the spectrum with a thermal model (`apec` in `XSPEC` v.11) plus a power law. The column density, obscuring both components, was fixed at the Galactic value of N$`{}_{H}{}^{}=1.52\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 (Dickey & Lockman 1990). The resulting fit is formally acceptable ($`\chi ^2=169`$ for 136 degrees of freedom). However, the resulting photon index ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }0.32`$) is flatter than in other LINERs and weak-line radio galaxies like NGC 4261 (e.g., Terashima et al. 2002; Sambruna et al. 1999).

The spectral fit is greatly improved ($`\chi ^2=144`$ for 135 d.o.f.) by using an absorbed power-law, which we associate with the nucleus. The column density of cold gas toward the nucleus, inferred from fitting this model to the data, is significantly in excess of the Galactic value, N$`{}_{H}{}^{}=4.4_{0.8}^{+1.8}\times 10^{22}`$ cm-2, while $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.40_{0.18}^{+0.09}`$. The measured flux of the absorbed power law component is F$`{}_{210keV}{}^{}6.4\times 10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1, and the intrinsic (absorption-corrected) luminosity is L$`{}_{210keV}{}^{}8.5\times 10^{40}`$ erg s-1. Figure 3 shows the EPIC data with the model superposed. Line-like residuals are present in 0.7–0.9 keV, which could be due to an imperfect modelling of the thermal emission from the halo (Gliozzi et al. 2003).

Prompted by the results of the timing analysis, we investigated the X-ray continuum in the ultra-soft energy range 0.3–0.8 keV. Adding the lower-energy channels down to 0.3 keV requires an additional power law component, with a fit improvement of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2`$=11.5 for 1 additional dof. The photon index of the second power law is not well determined, and assuming that ultra-soft X-ray emission comes from the same region as the hard X-rays, it was linked to the index of the primary power law. This ultra-soft component accounts for a substantial fraction of the total counts in 0.3–0.8 keV (500 counts), larger than systematic calibration uncertainties. A similar ultra-soft non-thermal component is also required to fit the ACIS-S data (Gliozzi et al. 2003).

The XMM-Newton observation confirms the previous result from Chandra that excess X-ray absorption is present in NGC 4261 (Chiaberge et al. 2002). These authors argue that the cold absorbing gas is located in the nuclear dust lane visible in the HST images (Jaffe et al. 1996), if the dust-to-gas ratio in NGC 4261 is different from Galactic. In fact, assuming a Galactic ratio the reddening implied by the X-ray column is A$`{}_{V,X}{}^{}30`$ mag, much larger than the extinction in the dust lane, A$`{}_{V,lane}{}^{}=1.22.5`$ mag (Chiaberge et al. 2002). It is not unusual for Seyferts and other AGN to have X-ray column densities in excess of those expected from the optical reddening (e.g., Maiolino et al. 2001).

To investigate the possibility of an ionized X-ray absorber, we fitted the EPIC spectrum using a warm absorber (absori), acting on the power law only. The column density NW, ionization parameter $`\xi `$, and temperature $`T_W`$, were left free to vary while the Fe abundance was fixed to solar. We find an acceptable fit ($`\chi ^2=143/133`$), although not better than the fit with the cold absorber. The best-fit parameters, N$`{}_{W}{}^{}=5.5_{3.8}^{+0.5}\times 10^{22}`$ cm-2, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.30_{0.55}^{+0.22}`$, $`\xi 2.7`$ erg cm s-1, and $`T_W10^6`$K, effectively mimic the case of a power law plus a cold absorber. This is not unexpected, as the crucial region 0.6–1 keV where most of the edges of ionized oxygen and other elements would be present is masked by the thermal component, preventing a meaningful determination of $`\xi `$. We thus conclude that it is not possible to distinguish between a cold and warm absorber with the EPIC data based on absorption properties.

The connection between the X-ray and optical absorbing media in AGN has been challenged by several authors (e.g., Weingartner & Murray 2002). It is possible that the X-ray and optical absorbers are separate gas components, with the X-ray absorbing gas lying inside the large-scale obscuring torus, perhaps in the form of an ionized wind. Such a scenario may be applicable to NGC 4261 as well as other radio-loud AGNs, including some with broad optical emission lines (e.g., 3C 445 and Arp 102B; see Sambruna et al. 1999). Indeed, there is evidence that in Arp 102B the absorbing X-ray and UV medium has the form of an outflowing wind (Eracleous, Halpern, & Charlton 2003). We do note, however, that in broad-line objects the column density of the X-ray absorber is an order of magnitude smaller than what is measured in NGC 4261, which may indicate that in NGC 4261 we are observing the combined effect of more than one absorbing component.

### 3.3 Detection of an Fe K emission line

Inspection of the residuals of the best-fit continuum component shows a sharp line-like feature around 7 keV. Adding a Gaussian line to the thermal+absorbed power law continuum model improves the fit to the EPIC pn spectrum significantly, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=7.52`$ for 3 additional parameters ($`F`$-test probability PF $`\stackrel{>}{}`$90%). From the confidence contours of the line normalization versus its width, we derive that the line is detected (i.e., normalization larger than zero) at $`\stackrel{<}{}`$95% confidence, and always unresolved. A broad ($`\sigma `$ 0.5 keV) line is not excluded at $``$ 90% confidence, with EW $`\stackrel{<}{}`$490 eV.

We thus fixed the rest-energy dispersion to the spectral resolution of the EPIC pn in the Fe K range, $`\sigma =130`$ eV. (Fixing the line width to much lower values does not change the results.) To determine if the Fe line is truly from the nuclear region, and not due to an imperfect modelling of the spectrum of the diffuse halo, we extracted EPIC pn spectra from increasingly larger radii and fitted them with the same spectral model (Table 1). The Fe K line at 7 keV is detected, and its significance increases with decreasing extraction radii.

We conclude that the Fe line originates in the nucleus. Its best-fit energy is consistent with the K$`\alpha `$ emission of H-like Fe (6.95 and 6.97 keV). Its measured EW of 280 eV is consistent with the value measured by ASCA (550$`{}_{310}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+300}`$ eV, Terashima et al. 2002), and with the Chandra upper limit of 380 eV. An Fe K line at 7 keV is also present in an archival 40 ks BeppoSAX observation, with EW $`260`$ eV (Gliozzi et al. 2003).

The measured EW of the line, although subject to large uncertainties, is larger than the values measured for the Fe K$`\alpha `$ line in broad-line radio-loud AGN at 6.4 keV, where EW $``$ 100 eV (e.g., Eracleous, Sambruna, & Mushotzky 2000; Woźniak et al. 1998). In particular, it is stronger than in sources where dilution from a beamed jet component is thought to be at least partially responsible for the low EW of the Fe K$`\alpha `$ line, e.g., 3C 120. Note, however, that even in broad lined objects (as 3C 120 and 3C 390.3) there is a significant contribution to the X-ray continuum from the disk-corona based on spectral and timing properties (Gliozzi, Sambruna & Eracleous 2003). As discussed above, either radiation from the inner jet is not the dominant origin of the continuum emission in the nucleus of NGC 4261, or the X-ray continuum is produced in the slower walls of the jet.

As the uncertainties on the line profile in the modest EPIC exposure are large, we can only speculate on the line’s origin. An origin in an ionized disk (e.g., Ballantyne et al. 2002) is unlikely, as the accretion rate in NGC 4261 is relatively low compared to the Eddington rate. The disk ionization parameter has a strong dependence on the mass accretion rate, $`\xi \dot{m}^3`$ where $`\dot{m}=L/L_{\mathrm{Edd}}`$ (Matt, Fabian, & Ross 1993). To create H-like iron ions, $`\dot{m}>0.5`$ is required, while in NGC 4261 $`L/L_{\mathrm{Edd}}1\times 10^4`$ (Sambruna et al. 1999).

A possible scenario for the formation of a narrow line is thermal emission from an ADAF outflow (Narayan & Raymond 2000). While short-term X-ray flux variability rules out an ADAF as the only mechanism of production of X-rays, it is still possible that an ADAF is present in NGC 4261, contributing a fraction of the X-rays including the Fe K line. In this model, the Fe line originates from large radii and is thus narrow, with expected EWs $``$ 200 eV. Also expected in this model are emission lines of lighter elements at softer X-rays, including highly ionized Ca and Ar in the energy range 3–4 keV, with EW of several tens of eV, to which we are not sensitive. The ratios of the line intensities would be a function of the outflow’s mass and radius (Narayan & Raymond 2000).

However, the large uncertainties on the line width do not allow us to exclude a broad line, or the presence of broad wings related to a standard accretion disk. A deeper X-ray exposure is needed for more meaningful constraints on the line profile.

### 3.4 NGC 4261 in perspective

It is interesting to compare NGC 4261 to more luminous radio-loud AGN previously studied in X-rays (e.g., Sambruna et al. 1999). In Figure 3c of that paper we presented a plot of the 2–10 keV luminosity of broad- and narrow-line radio-loud AGN versus their total 5 GHz power. Extrapolating the correlation for broad-lined galaxies to the lower X-ray luminosities, NGC 4261 is overluminous by 1.5 decades in extended radio power. This raises the interesting possibility that the faint nuclear emission from this galaxy is due to a very efficient channeling mechanism of its accretion power into the jets and the radio lobes. A similar scenario was indeed proposed for the FRI galaxy IC4296 (Pellegrini et al. 2002), which also hosts a LINER nucleus. In IC4296, the accretion rate would not be different from the Bondi accretion rate and the jet would account for a large fraction of the accretion power. The LINER spectra of both sources would thus be due to a diminished, isotropic optical-to-UV luminosity.

Whether or not an ADAF or a very efficient channeling mechanism (or a combination of the two) is present in NGC 4261, it is clear that the transition from high to low nuclear luminosities in radio-loud AGN corresponds to a change of nuclear properties. Because of its well known characteristics (black hole mass, inclination, pc-scale jet), NGC 4261 has a key role to play in the study this transition.

Financial support from NASA LTSA grants NAG5-10708 (MG, RMS), NAG5-8107 (WNB), and NAG5-9982 (ME) is gratefully acknowledged. Funds were also provided by NASA grant NAG5-10243 (MG, RMS) and by the Clare Boothe Luce Program of the Henry Luce Foundation (RMS).


text:
# Kalman-filtering using local interactions

## 1 Introduction

Linear dynamical systems (LDS) are well studied and widely applied tools in both state estimation and control. Inference in LDS becomes simple, unbiased and has minimized covariance if the Kalman-filter recursion is used. Recently, there is growing interest in Kalman-filters or Kalman-filter like structures as models for neurobiological substrates. It has been suggested that Kalman-filtering (i) may occur at sensory processing (), (ii) may be the underlying computation of the hippocampus (), and may be the underlying principle in control architectures (). Detailed architectural similarities between Kalman-filter and the entorhinal-hippocampal loop as well as between Kalman-filters and the neocortical hierarchy have been described recently (). Interplay between the dynamics of Kalman-filter-like architectures and learning of parameters of neuronal networks has promising aspects for explaining known and puzzling phenomena, such as priming, repetition suppression and categorization ().

Kalman-filter is an on-line recursive algorithm. Unfortunately, Kalman-filtering requires the computation of the Kalman-gain. Recursions of the Kalman-gain matrix assume that covariance matrices of measurement noise and observation noise are known. In general, these parameter sets are not known in advance and may be subject to temporal changes. Moreover, to determine the Kalman-gain, the algorithm requires the inversion of matrices, which is hard to interpret in neurobiological terms. To our best knowledge, all suggested networks computed the Kalman-gain matrix directly, e.g., using matrix inversions.

Here, an alternative route, the recursive prediction error (RPE) method () is followed. Using this method, we were able to construct a special parametrization, which is (i) on-line and recursive and (ii) makes use of local interactions to estimate the filtering parameters, including the Kalman-gain. The next section (Section 2) reviews background materials, such as the constraints on connectionist systems (Section 2.1), the well known Kalman-filer recursion (Section 2.2). In Section 2.3 the recursive prediction error method is applied to estimate the Kalman-gain. Our particular parametrization and the corresponding architecture are provided in Section 3 and Section 3.1, respectively. Conclusions are drawn in the last section (Section 4). Detailed mapping to the neural substrate is not aimed here: There should be large differences if the goal is the mapping (i) to the control system of the brain, (ii) to the hippocampus, (iii) to the hippocampal-entorhinal loop, or, (iv) to the neocortical layers, etc. All suggestions on Kalman-filtering need to map a connectionist architecture to a part of the brain.

## 2 Background

### 2.1 Constraints on connectionist systems

Connectionist systems are special non-linear systems having graph like structures. Nodes of the graph are called neurons, whereas directed edges are the connections. Figure 1 depicts a neuron subject to *local interactions*. An interaction is called local if it is exerted by a directed connection. The targeted neuron is the subject of the interaction. The end of the directed connection is depicted by a small circle, called synapse. This synapse could be of three types here, it is either excitatory, inhibitory or of multiplying type. The first two of these types are widely considered as neuronal operations. Multiplying type synapse is, however, also possible: a neuron may affect another neuron by modulating the ‘gain’ of that neuron in a multiplicative way (). For a review on different processing capabilities of single neurons, see, e.g., ).

From the point of view of neuronal modelling,

1. the series of observations constitute the input to the model,
2. the learning task corresponds to finding the best parametrization and the best hidden variables given all past observations and subject to constraints prescribed by the norm (the measure) of a model and the noise of assumed by this model, whereas
3. filtering corresponds to the estimation of the hidden variables given the past observations.

The seminal work of Hebb () was a brilliant first attempt in its time to link neurophysiology with higher order behavioral phenomena studied by psychology. The central thesis postulated that changes in synaptic connection strength is primarily based on the correlation between the pre- and postsynaptic neural activities. Recent experiments (, for a review, see, e.g., ) revealed, however, that exact timing and temporal dynamics of the neural activities play a crucial role in forming the neuronal base of plasticity. The novel concept to generally describe the modified variants of the original form of Hebbian learning is called spike-time dependent synaptic plasticity (STDP). The term ‘spike’ denotes the fast potential change which propagates over the neurons and induces synaptic neurotransmitter release, which, in turn, may result in synaptic modifications. STDP means that strengthening occurs (i) if the neuron fires and (ii) if the excitatory synapse targeting this neuron delivered a spike within a narrow time window around the time of firing. On the other hand, weakening occurs if the delivered spike at the excitatory synapse is outside of this short time window.

### 2.2 Kalman-filter recursion

Let us consider the following linear dynamical system (LDS):

$`𝐲_t`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{𝐇𝐱}_t+𝐧_t\text{ observation process}`$ (2.1)
$`𝐱_{t+1}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{𝐅𝐱}_t+𝐦_t\text{ dynamics of hidden variables}`$ (2.2)
where $`𝐦_t𝒩(0,\mathrm{\Pi })`$, $`𝐧_t𝒩(0,\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ are independent noise processes. Here, notation $`𝒩(𝐦,\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ is a shorthand to denote a stochastic variable of expectation value $`𝐦`$ and covariance matrix $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Our task is the estimation of

hidden variables $`𝐱(t)𝐑^n`$ given the series of observations $`𝐲(\tau )𝐑^p`$, $`\tau t`$.

For estimations in squared (Euclidean) norm and Gaussian noise, the optimal solution was derived by Rudolf Kalman (). The Kalman-filter recursion is reproduced here: Let $`E`$ and $`Cov`$ denote the expectation value and the covariance matrix operators, respectively. Let us introduce the following notations: $`\widehat{𝐱}(t|\tau )=E(𝐱_t|𝐲_1,\mathrm{}𝐲_\tau )`$, $`𝐍_t=Cov(𝐱_t|𝐲_1,\mathrm{}𝐲_t)`$, and $`𝐌_t=Cov(𝐱_t|𝐲_1,\mathrm{}𝐲_{t1})`$

###### Lemma 1 (Kalman-filter recursion)

Assume that $`\widehat{𝐱}(t1|t1)`$,$`𝐍_{t1}`$ has been determined. Then

$`\widehat{𝐱}(t|t1)`$ $`=`$ $`𝐅\widehat{𝐱}(t1|t1)`$ (2.3)
$`𝐌_t`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{𝐅𝐍}_{t1}𝐅^T+\mathrm{\Pi }`$ (2.4)
$`𝐊_t^f`$ $`=`$ $`𝐌_t𝐇^T(\mathrm{𝐇𝐌}_t𝐇^T+\mathrm{\Sigma })^1`$ (2.5)
$`\widehat{𝐱}(t|t)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{𝐱}(t|t1)+𝐊_t^f\left(𝐲_t\mathrm{𝐇𝐅}\widehat{𝐱}(t1|t1)\right)`$ (2.6)
$`𝐍_t`$ $`=`$ $`(𝐈𝐊_t^f𝐇)𝐌_t`$ (2.7)
where $`𝐈`$ denotes the identity transformation (i.e., the identity matrix) and superscript $`T`$ denotes transposition.

Combining equations 2.3 and 2.6, the following filter-equation emerges:

$`\widehat{𝐱}(t+1|t+1)`$ $`=\underset{\widehat{𝐱}(t+1|t)}{\underset{}{𝐅\widehat{𝐱}(t|t)}}+𝐊_{t+1}^f\left(𝐲_{t+1}\mathrm{𝐇𝐅}\widehat{𝐱}(t|t)\right)`$ (2.8)
One may also introduce the so called prediction equation:

$`\widehat{𝐱}(t+1|t)`$ $`=𝐅\widehat{𝐱}(t|t1)+𝐊_t^p\left(𝐲_t𝐇\widehat{𝐱}(t|t1)\right)=𝐅\widehat{𝐱}(t|t)`$ (2.9)
where $`𝐊_t^p=\mathrm{𝐅𝐊}_t^f`$, which can be used to make an estimation before the $`(t+1)`$th measurement.

In the literature, the two different quantities, i.e., $`𝐊_t^f`$ (Eq. 2.5) and $`\mathrm{𝐅𝐊}_t^f`$ (Eq. 2.9) are both called Kalman-gains.

### 2.3 Review of the recursive prediction error method

Here, we shall consider the filtering task and the learning task. This latter will be restricted to the learning of parameters required for proper adjustment of the Kalman-gain.

Let us make the following notes. Iterations of $`𝐊_t^f`$, $`𝐊_t^p`$, $`𝐌_t`$, and $`𝐍_t`$ are independent from measurements on $`𝐲_1,\mathrm{}𝐲_t`$. However, these quantities depend from quantities $`\{𝐇,𝐅,\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }\}`$. The dependencies, at first sight, do not seem to admit a neuronal form. The problem is in the computation of the Kalman-gain (Eq. 2.5): this equation includes a matrix inversion, which does not admit a connectionist (i.e., artificial neuronal) network form. Moreover, it seems unlikely, that previous knowledge of covariance matrices $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ can be assumed for neuronal systems.

In the procedure that follows, we shall assume that the Kalman-gain constitutes the unknown parameter of the system. The Kalman-gain will be estimated on-line using the measured values of $`𝐲_t`$ (i.e., the input of the neuronal architecture). Because an on-line estimation makes use of (i) the estimated parameters, (ii) the optimization of the activities given the actual observations, and (iii) updates the estimated parameters given the optimized activities and the previous estimations, on-line methods are best suited to changing world. The price is that on-line estimation may not be optimal for all past observation (this is not desirable in a changing world, anyway). Instead, on-line estimation becomes optimal asymptotically. It is well known that under rather mild conditions, both Kalman-gains, i.e., $`𝐊_t^p`$ ,$`𝐊_t^f`$ converge with exponential speed to the asymptotic $`𝐊^p`$ and $`𝐊^f`$ values, respectively (i.e., $`lim_t𝐊_t=𝐊`$). In turn, on-line estimation is an attractive alternative when the goal is the estimation of the parameter(s) of the Kalman-gain. We shall substitute equations 2.3-2.7 by the on-line methods. We shall apply the recursive prediction error method () to derive recursive estimation for the Kalman-gain.

Let $`𝐊=𝐊(\theta )`$ denote the parametrization of $`𝐊`$, where $`𝐊(\theta )`$ may depend on $`\theta `$ arbitrarily. We shall use this freedom to choose a particular form of the dependence. Now, our task is to estimate $`\theta `$ and then to compute $`𝐊(\theta )`$ using the estimated value of $`\theta `$. For the sake of simplicity, variable $`\theta `$ will be scalar in the derivation below. The same derivation follows for vector and matrix variables. Also, derivation concerns the estimation of matrix $`𝐊_t^p`$, but similar derivation can be provided for matrix $`𝐊_t^f`$.

First, the prediction equation (Eq. 2.9) shall be investigated. Let $`\widehat{𝐱}(t,\theta )`$ denote the predictive estimation of the hidden variables belonging to $`\theta `$. Equation 2.9 can be written as

$`\widehat{𝐱}(t+1,\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`𝐅\widehat{𝐱}(t,\theta )+𝐊^p(\theta )(𝐲(t)𝐇\widehat{𝐱}(t,\theta ))`$ (2.10)
The goal is to find the value of $`\theta `$ that minimizes the squared norm of the reconstruction error vector, which is defined as $`ϵ(t,\theta )=𝐲(t)𝐇\widehat{𝐱}(t,\theta )`$. Vector $`𝐇\widehat{𝐱}(t,\theta )`$, which is derived from the hidden variables and should match the input in squared norm, will be called the reconstructed input. By definition, the reconstruction error vector is a stochastic variable with zero mean and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ covariance matrix ($`𝒩(0,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$). For the purpose of on-line estimation, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ covariance matrix needs to be estimated from the data. The said goal, in mathematical terms, has the following form:

$`V(\theta )=E\left(ϵ(t,\theta )^T\mathrm{\Lambda }^1ϵ(t,\theta )\right)\underset{\theta }{\mathrm{min}}`$ (2.11)
Equation 2.11 can be seen as a maximum likelihood problem. We shall apply the following procedure: (i) The expectation value will be estimated by sample averaging, i.e., stochastic gradient approximation will be used. (ii) $`\theta `$ will be minimized along the gradient. Let us make use of the notation: $`𝐰(t,\theta )=\frac{}{\theta }\widehat{𝐱}(t,\theta )`$ and let $`\widehat{𝐲}(t,\theta )=𝐇\widehat{𝐱}(t,\theta )`$ denote the reconstructed input. Minimization of Eq. 2.11 leads to: $`\widehat{\theta }(t)=\widehat{\theta }(t1)+\gamma (t)𝐯(t)^T\mathrm{\Lambda }^1ϵ(t)`$, where $`\gamma (t)>0`$ is the learning rate, shorthand $`𝐯(t,\theta )`$ is given as $`𝐯(t,\theta )=\frac{}{\theta }(\widehat{𝐲}(t,\theta )𝐲(t))`$ and a recursive equation can be derived for $`𝐰(t+1,\theta )`$ from Eq. 2.10 if it is differentiated according to $`\theta `$. The following recursive estimation can be gained for the Kalman-gain matrix $`𝐊`$:

###### Lemma 2 (Local Kalman-filter recursion)

Assume that $`\widehat{𝐱}(t)`$, $`\widehat{𝐰}(t)`$, $`\widehat{\theta }(t)`$, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^1(t)`$ are given. Then

$`\widehat{𝐲}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`𝐇\widehat{𝐱}(t)`$ (2.12)
$`ϵ(t)`$ $`=`$ $`𝐲(t)\widehat{𝐲}(t)`$ (2.13)
$`\widehat{𝐱}(t+1)`$ $`=`$ $`𝐅\widehat{𝐱}(t)+𝐊(\widehat{\theta }(t))ϵ(t)`$ (2.14)
$`\widehat{𝐯}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`𝐇\widehat{𝐰}(t)`$ (2.15)
$`\widehat{𝐰}(t+1)`$ $`=`$ $`𝐅\widehat{𝐰}(t)+𝐊^{}(\widehat{\theta }(t))ϵ(t)𝐊(\widehat{\theta }(t))\widehat{𝐯}(t)`$ (2.16)
$`\widehat{\theta }(t+1)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\theta }(t)+\gamma (t)\widehat{𝐯}^T(t)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^1(t)ϵ(t)`$ (2.17)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(t+1)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(t)+\gamma (t)\left[ϵ(t)ϵ(t)^T\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(t)\right]`$ (2.18)
where $`𝐊^{}`$ denotes $`\frac{K}{\theta }`$. The auxiliary vector $`𝐰`$, which can be derived from the hidden vector $`\widehat{𝐱}`$ by differentiation according to $`\theta `$, will play a crucial role in providing neuronal representation. For later purposes, we rewrite Eq. 2.18 into the following stable form:

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^1(t+1)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^1(t)+\gamma (t)\left[\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^1(t)\left(\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^1(t)ϵ(t)\right)\left(\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^1(t)ϵ(t)\right)^T\right]`$ (2.19)
In both recursions, i.e., in Eq. 2.18 and in Eq. 2.19, matrix $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ is an estimation of the covariance matrix of the reconstruction error vector $`ϵ`$. In recursion Eq. 2.19, the inverse of the correlation matrix is estimated directly. Update Eq. 2.18 is a signal-Hebbian learning rule. Update Eq. 2.19 is in different form and can be seen as a neural update if spike-time dependent synaptic plasticity is taken into account, as it will be described later.

## 3 Local Kalman-filter

Now, let us choose an element of matrix $`𝐊`$, say $`𝐊_{ij}`$. In what follows, we shall make the particular assumption that $`𝐊_{ij}`$ is an exponential function of $`\theta `$. This assumption allows us to simplify the architecture considerably. The simplification is warranted by the particular property of the exponential dependence that $`𝐊_{ij}^{}=𝐊_{ij}`$, which will be important when the local connectionist architecture will be presented: We can use matrix $`𝐊`$ for both purposes, i.e., for $`𝐊`$ itself and for $`𝐊^{}`$. In our formulation, the recursive correction of the Kalman-gain assumes the multiplying exponentiated gradient form ():

$`𝐊_{ij}(\theta (t+1))`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left(\gamma (t)\widehat{𝐯}(t)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^1(t)ϵ(t)\right)𝐊_{ij}(\theta (t))`$ (3.1)
Now, Eq. 2.16 can be written as

$`\widehat{𝐰}(t+1)`$ $`=`$ $`𝐅\widehat{𝐰}(t)+𝐊(\widehat{\theta }(t))\left(ϵ(t)\widehat{𝐯}(t)\right)`$ (3.2)
$`=`$ $`𝐅\widehat{𝐰}(t)+𝐊(\widehat{\theta }(t))\left(ϵ(t)(𝐇\widehat{𝐰}(t))\right)`$ (3.3)
$`=`$ $`𝐊(\widehat{\theta }(t))ϵ(t)+\left(𝐅𝐊(\widehat{\theta }(t))𝐇\right)\widehat{𝐰}(t)`$ (3.4)
### 3.1 Architecture

The reconstruction error vector ($`ϵ`$) is computed by differencing between the input ($`𝐲`$) and the estimated input $`\widehat{𝐲}`$. The circuitry is shown in Fig. 2.

Computation of the parameter $`\theta `$ of the Kalman-gain can be performed by computing vector $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1ϵ`$. To this end, vector $`ϵ`$ is to be multiplied by the inverse of the correlation matrix $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of the $`ϵ`$ vectors themselves. Matrix $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is to be learned by the RPE method.

Learning can be accomplished by Hebbian means as depicted in Fig. 3: The reconstruction error layer provides input for an auxiliary neural sub-layer. This layer will output vector $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1ϵ`$. There is a full connectivity excitatory feedback structure at this sub-layer. It is assumed that noise is present in the system and that this noise gives rise to self-strengthening for all feedback connections. This self-strengthening effect is assumed to be proportional to the connection strength, i.e., it is responsible for the first (positive) term of Eq. 2.19. It is assumed, too, that this feedback structure, called recurrent collaterals have considerable delays, feedback arrives to the excitatory synapses late and weakening of the synapses occur because of the STDP process. The weakening is proportional to the postsynaptic activity and to the activity carried by the recurrent collateral and, in turn, the negative term of Eq. 2.19 emerges. The emerging full update corresponds to Eq. 2.19.

For proper outputs, however, an additional structure is required: The excitatory feedback effect should act only once. We assume that an augmenting set of inhibitory neurons exist (these are not shown in Fig. 3) and that these inhibitory neurons are excited by the same auxiliary neural sub-layer. Moreover, it is assumed that connections originated by the inhibitory neurons target the feedback excitatory synapses of the auxiliary neural sub-layer. The extra step to excite an inhibitory layer makes the inhibitory effect delayed relative to the excitatory effect at the feedback excitatory synapses. Inhibition stops the excitatory effect and excitatory feedback can occur only once in each iteration step. It is intriguing that this complex excitatory-inhibitory structure does exist in the cortex (). It then follows that (i) the circuitry of Fig. 3 performs the RPE computation prescribed by Eq. 2.19 and that the output of the sub-layer is equal to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1ϵ`$.

Last, the parameter of the Kalman-gain is to be computed. The computation is made of three parts. First, vector $`𝐯`$ (Eq. 2.15) and vector $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1ϵ`$ are to be multiplied component-by component. Then the individual terms need to sum up to correct the previous estimation of the parameter of the Kalman-gain. Finally, the re-estimated parameter influences each outgoing connections in a uniform but non-linear fashion. This non-linear dynamic effect is the attenuation process of the Kalman-filter, i.e., the tuning of the Kalman-gain. We made the assumption that this non-linear influence is, in fact, exponential. The corresponding circuitry is shown in Fig. 4. Although, here a connectionist model is constructed, still, it may be important to emphasize that the Kalman-gain influences the output of the reconstruction error layer in a uniform fashion. It is then possible that not a full layer, but a single (or a few) neuron(s) (i) compute the scalar product of vectors $`𝐯`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1ϵ`$ and (ii) target the neurons of the reconstruction error layer to tune the Kalman-gain as required for Kalman-filtering.

The distinct parts of the RPE computation can be made recursive by means of a loop architecture. The loop architecture is depicted in Fig. 5.

Figures 2-5 demonstrate that Kalman-filtering can be performed by local means in a loop through the RPE method. This observation supports top-down modelling efforts, which have appeared recently in the literature (). The top-down modelling suggestion – that Kalman-filtering may play a role in cortical computations – calls for reinforcement from the bottom-up modelling methods of computational neuroscience. Our work makes a step towards this direction; we have transformed the suggestions of top-down modelling into a dynamical neural architecture with appealing Hebbian learning rules. The particular form of Kalman-filtering we presented here poses several questions. We list a few of them. (i) How can be this architecture mapped onto the neocortex? (ii) How can be the derived computations performed in the neural substrate? (iii) In particular, how reasonable is our assumption that the Kalman-gain exponentially depends on its parameter? These questions, which can be seen as the predictions of our model, remain open and call for further studies.

## 4 Conclusions

In this paper we have presented a neural (connectionist) representation for Kalman-filtering. The issue is worth to consider given the recent advances in the literature (). Regarding the cited works we feel that all have the problem in common: Kalman-filtering should be given a local connectionist architecture for the proposed top-down approaches. Here, we have shown that yes, connectionist representation is possible for Kalman-filtering: The recursive prediction error method suits the requirements imposed by Hebbian constraints. Moreover, RPE provides an appealing on-line learning scheme. This is a promising start. However, the mapping of the architecture to neocortical areas and the question if the predictive matrices of the Kalman-filter could be learned by Hebbian means remained open. Also, further studies starting from parameters of the neuronal substrate are in need to explore the particular predictions of the RPE model of Kalman-filtering.

## Acknowledgements

Enlightening discussions with György Buzsáki are gratefully acknowledged. We would like to thank to Gábor Szirtes his valuable comments regarding the manuscript. This work was supported by the Hungarian National Science Foundation (Grant No. OTKA 32487).