text:
# Radio Emission from an Ultraluminous X-Ray Source

> The physical nature of ultraluminous x-ray sources is uncertain. Stellar mass black holes with beamed radiation and intermediate mass black holes with isotropic radiation are two plausible explanations. We discovered radio emission from an ultraluminous x-ray source in the dwarf irregular galaxy NGC 5408. The x-ray, radio and optical fluxes as well as the x-ray spectral shape are consistent with beamed relativistic jet emission from an accreting stellar black hole. If confirmed, this would suggest that the ultraluminous x-ray sources may be stellar-mass rather than intermediate mass black holes. However, interpretation of the source as a jet-producing intermediate-mass black hole cannot be ruled out at this time.

One of the most enigmatic results to emerge from x-ray population studies of galaxies is the discovery of non-nuclear x-ray sources which appear to have luminosities factors of 10 to 100’s times the Eddington luminosity for a neutron star – the so-called ultraluminous x-ray sources (?, ?, ?). The physical nature of these sources is controversial and possible models include very luminous supernova remnants (?), gamma-ray burst remnants (?), accreting stellar-mass compact objects with radiation which is beamed mechanically (?) or relativistically (?), or accreting intermediate mass black holes (?) with masses between 100 to several 1000 solar masses. The detection of x-ray variability in several sources suggests that these sources are powered by accretion of material from a companion star or interstellar gas (?, ?) and are not supernova or gamma-ray burst remnants. If the radiation from these variable sources is isotropic, then a high inferred luminosity requires an intermediate-mass black hole. If the radiation is beamed, then a stellar-mass black hole could explain the observations.

Optical counterpart searches have shown that ultraluminous x-ray sources preferentially occur near star-forming regions (?) although they are also found in old globular clusters (?, ?). In star-forming systems, one unique massive star counterpart has been identified (?) and nebulae have been detected around several sources (?). In some cases, counterpart searches have shown that the sources are background objects (?). Further identification of optical and radio counterparts is needed to reveal the physical nature of the ultraluminous x-ray sources.

The dwarf irregular galaxy NGC 5408 contains a well studied ultraluminous x-ray source, 2E 1400.2-4108 (?, ?, ?, ?). We observed the galaxy for a total exposure of 4683 s with the Chandra X-Ray Observatory on 7 May 2002 using the High-Resolution Mirror Assembly and the Advanced Camera Imaging Spectrometer spectroscopic array operated in an imaging mode suitable for a high count rate source (?). Images in the 0.3–8 keV band showed a point source (we place an upper limit on the source diameter of $`0.9^{\prime \prime }`$) at a position of $`\alpha (\mathrm{J2000})=`$ 14h 03m 19s.63, $`\delta (\mathrm{J2000})=`$ -41 22 58′′.7 with an error radius of $`1^{\prime \prime }`$ at 90% confidence and a flux of $`2.7\times 10^{12}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ in the 0.3–8 keV band corrected for Galactic absorption along the line of sight. If the x-ray emission is isotropic, then the source luminosity would be $`1.1\times 10^{40}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ in the 0.3–8 keV band at the distance of 4.8 Mpc to NGC 5408 (?). The long-term x-ray light curve (Fig. 1) shows variability at a level of 40%.

A 4.8 GHz radio map of NGC 5408 from the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) showed a radio source at the location of the x-ray source. We reprocessed the 8 hour ATCA observation of NGC 5408 taken on 31 March 2000 (?) to produce a natural weighted map that provides optimum signal to noise ratio for point sources at the cost of angular resolution. We detected a 4.8 GHz radio source with a flux of $`0.26\pm 0.04\mathrm{mJy}`$ (1$`\sigma `$ error) at a position of $`\alpha (\mathrm{J2000})=`$ 14h 03m 19s.606 and $`\delta (\mathrm{J2000})=`$ -41 22 59′′.572 (J2000) with an error radius of $`0.1^{\prime \prime }`$ at 90% confidence (?), consistent with the Chandra position within the astrometric uncertainties. No source is present at the same location in 8.64 GHz data obtained simultaneously with the 4.8 Ghz data and we place an upper limit (3$`\sigma `$) on the flux of 0.12 mJy based on the rms noise near that location. From the 4.8 GHz detection and the 8.64 GHz upper limit, we place a lower bound on the radio spectral index $`\alpha _r>1.0`$, defined so $`S_\nu \nu ^{\alpha _r}`$. From radio source counts (?) at 4.9 GHz, the probability of chance occurrence of a 0.18 mJy or brighter background radio source within the Chandra error circle is less than $`1.0\times 10^5`$. To estimate the probability of chance coincidence with a radio source internal to the galaxy, we compare with NGC 1569 which is a dwarf irregular similar to NGC 5408 and has two sources which would have a 4.8 GHz flux of 0.18 mJy or larger if placed at the distance to NGC 5408 (?). The probability of chance coincidence within $`1^{\prime \prime }`$ of the Chandra source given 2 radio sources within the optical extent of NGC 5408 is less than 0.002. Further, all of the radio sources in NGC 1569 have $`\alpha _r<0.6`$, which is inconsistent with the steep spectrum of our radio source.

Several optical sources in a Hubble Space Telescope (HST) image of NGC 5408 (Fig. 2) lie within the ATCA/HST error circle; note that the relative error circle is dominated by the HST astrometric uncertainty. The brightest object in the radio or x-ray error circles has a visual magnitude of 22.1. The colors of the objects detected in both bands are similar to those of the overall stellar population of the galaxy (?). None of the objects show evidence of extended emission.

Given the radio counterpart and the brightest optical counterpart in the Chandra error circle (which we take as an upper limit to the optical flux), we find that the x-ray to optical flux ratio (?) is $`f_x/f_v>380`$. We can also calculate two-point spectral indices (?, ?) between the radio, optical, and x-ray bands using the flux density at 4.8 GHz, the V band, and 1 keV. We find that the radio to x-ray index $`\alpha _{rx}=0.16`$, the optical to x-ray index $`\alpha _{ox}<0.18`$, and the radio to optical index $`\alpha _{ro}>0.15`$. The ratio $`f_x/f_v`$ of the object is much larger than the ratios found for stars, normal galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and AGN (?, ?). We rule out the possibility that the object is a member of any of these classes of source. Identification as a blazar is ruled out because the $`f_x/f_v`$ exceeds that of known blazars (?, ?), the radio spectrum is inconsistent with those of blazars which have $`\alpha _r<0.8`$ (?), and the x-ray to radio flux ratio is $`9\times 10^9`$ which is an order of magnitude larger than the most extreme known blazar (?).

Some young supernova remnants have high x-ray luminosities. However, supernova remnants produce copious optical line emission, which is not detected here. Taking the brightest source in the Chandra error circle, the upper limit on the H$`\alpha `$ emission is $`7\times 10^{15}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ if all of the flux in the HST F606W filter is H$`\alpha `$ emission. A similarly obtained upper limit on the \[Oiii\] emission is $`1.6\times 10^{14}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$. These upper limits are below the line fluxes measured for highly x-ray luminous supernova remnants (?, ?). Optical line emission could be hidden by a high obscuring column (?), but such obscuration is inconsistent with the relatively low absorbing column density found from the x-ray spectrum (Fig. 3). Also, the observed x-ray variability would be unexpected for a supernova remnant. The line fluxes and the $`f_x/f_v`$ ratio are also inconsistent with identification of the source as a young supernova.

X-ray binaries and rotation-powered neutron stars sometimes have high $`f_x/f_v`$ ratios similar to what we find for the source in NGC 5408. The x-ray variability indicates the source is not a rotation-powered neutron star. If the source was located in the Milky Way, the luminosity would be of order $`10^{33}10^{34}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$. Radio emissions when detected from Galactic x-ray binaries in such low luminosity states (?, ?) have a flat or inverted spectra which is inconsistent with the steep spectrum of the source and suggests that the source is not a low-luminosity x-ray binary in the Milky Way. The steep radio spectrum is consistent with optically thin synchrotron emission as produced by x-ray binaries in high luminosity states or during state transitions (?, ?, ?) and is consistent with the source being an x-ray binary in NGC 5408. The source x-ray variability may be less than seen from many x-ray binaries, but is consistent with that of Cyg X-1.

Radio emissions from x-ray binaries are associated with relativistic jets. The radio emission we detected from the ultraluminous x-ray source in NGC 5408 is probably from a relativistic jet. It could be from an accreting stellar-mass black hole producing relativistic jets (a microquasar) beamed toward us (?). The intensity of isotropic rest-frame emission from a continuous jet with a power law spectrum with radio spectral index $`\alpha _r`$ is amplified by a factor $`\delta ^{2+\alpha _r}`$ where $`\delta =\gamma ^1(1\beta \mathrm{cos}\theta )^1`$ is the Doppler factor (for the approaching jet) where $`\beta `$ is the jet speed as a fraction of the speed of light and $`\gamma =(1\beta ^2)^{0.5}`$. The Galactic microquasar GRS 1915+105 has $`\delta =0.34`$ and a distance near $`11\mathrm{kpc}`$ (?). GRS 1915+105 is highly variable. Radio fluxes of about $`300\mathrm{mJy}`$ at 4.8 GHz are observed in bright radio flares when superluminal jets are resolved, whereas the more typical radio fluxes are about $`10\mathrm{mJy}`$ while the source is x-ray active but not undergoing a bright radio flare. If the ATCA observation happened to catch the NGC 5408 source during such a bright flare, then a Doppler factor as low as $`\delta =2.1`$ would suffice to produce the observed radio flux (with $`\alpha _r=1.0`$). However, the probability of catching such an event with a single radio observation is low unless the NGC 5408 source is an extremely active jet source. Scaling from the more typical radio flux of GRS 1915+105 of about $`10\mathrm{mJy}`$, we find that a Doppler factor $`\delta >5.8`$ would be needed to produce the observed flux. This is compatible with the constraints on the ejecta velocities for GRS 1915+105. If $`\gamma =5`$ as inferred for GRS 1915+105, then tilts of the jet axis relative to the line of sight of up to $`10^{}`$ could produce $`\delta >5.8`$. Roughly 1 out of 70 of extragalactic microquasars should be aligned like this. A steeper radio spectral index or higher intrinsic luminosity would reduce the required $`\delta `$.

The x-ray emission could also be relativistically beamed jet emission (?). The fact that $`\alpha _r>\alpha _{rx}`$ rules out the possibility that a single component spectrum, like synchrotron emission, produces both the radio and x-ray emission. Inverse-Comptonization of photons from a massive companion star by a jet may power the ultraluminous x-ray sources (?). The x-ray spectrum predicted by this process has the form of a broken power law with the break near 1 keV and a cutoff at energies above the x-ray band. The Chandra x-ray spectrum is consistent with this form (Fig. 3) with a break energy of $`0.65\pm 0.06\mathrm{keV}`$ and a spectral index at high energies of $`\alpha _x=2.1\pm 0.2`$. The beaming pattern for inverse-Compton emission with a photon source external to the jet, e.g. from the companion star, varies as $`\delta ^{3+2\alpha _x}`$ for a continuous jet, so very large amplifications are possible, e.g. $`4\times 10^5`$ for $`\delta =6`$. Hence, the jet x-ray luminosity may be as low as $`10^{34}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$. The break energy we measure is similar to what has been modeled (?). However, our measured x-ray spectral parameters would imply an unusually steep power law index for the injected relativistic electrons of $`p=4.2\pm 0.4`$.

If the source is an accreting black hole and the x-ray emission is isotropic, then the luminosity implies a minimum mass of $`80M_{}`$. The spectral index of the hard spectral component, if the spectrum is fitted with the sum of a power law plus thermal accretion disk emission, is $`\alpha _x=1.75\pm 0.34`$ which is similar to that found for black hole candidate x-ray binaries in their high flux states (?). The temperature of the soft thermal component is $`kT=0.11\pm 0.03\mathrm{keV}`$ which is lower than found for stellar mass black holes in the Milky Way (?). Such a low temperature is also unlikely to arise from mechanically beamed radiation from a stellar-mass black hole (?). Some other ultraluminous sources have high temperatures, which is inconsistent with the presence of intermediate mass black holes unless they are very rapidly rotating (?). The low temperature found for the NGC 5408 source is consistent with that expected for a non-rotating black hole with a mass above $`100M_{}`$ (?, ?). The radio spectral index and the radio to x-ray flux ratio are similar to the (highly variable) ones measured for microquasars (?, ?) suggesting that the radio emission could arise from jets similar to those produced by microquasars. The source lies about $`12^{\prime \prime }`$ from the star formation regions of NGC 5408 that contain super star clusters, giving a projected displacement of 280 pc. An x-ray binary with a speed of 10 km/s, from either interactions in a cluster or a supernova kick, could traverse this distance in 30 My. Hence, an intermediate mass black hole could have formed in one of the observed super star clusters (?) and moved to the present location within the life time of a massive companion star.

The ultraluminous x-ray sources have been interpreted as evidence for intermediate mass black holes (?). The results presented here show that the radio, optical, and x-ray properties of the ultraluminous x-ray source in NGC 5408 are consistent with beamed emission of a relativistic jet from a stellar-mass black hole. This suggests that, at least some of, the ultraluminous x-ray sources may be beamed emission from stellar-mass black holes (?).


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

One of the phenomenological motivations for SUSY GUTs is the successful unification of the gauge couplings near the scale $`M_G210^{16}`$ GeV. Besides the nice unification picture SUSY provides a natural understanding of the gauge hierarchy problem, but there are puzzles which need to be understood. Namely, one should find natural ways for baryon number conservation and the resolution of the doublet-triplet (DT) splitting problem. The minimal $`SU(5)`$ and $`SO(10)`$ GUTs also suffer from the problem of wrong asymptotic mass relations: $`\widehat{M}_e^0=\widehat{M}_d^0`$ and $`\widehat{M}_e^0=\widehat{M}_d^0\widehat{M}_u^0`$ for $`SU(5)`$ and $`SO(10)`$ respectively. Higher dimensional orbifold constructions suggest rather economical ways for simultaneously resolving these problems -. Therefore, they give new insights for GUT model building111Proton stability and DT splitting in superstring derived models were discussed in .. There are scenarios (not orbifold GUT constructions), which can give unification near the TeV scale . However, Let us note, that within orbifold GUTs only in some particular cases power law low scale unifications is possible . While usually, within 5D $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ GUTs, the unification is logarithmic (like in 4D) and $`M_G`$ is still in the $`10^{16}`$ GeV range , , with all GUT states lying far above the electro-weak scale ($`100`$ GeV). This makes a test of most GUT models impossible in present and future high energy colliders.

In a recent paper  by Dienes, Dudas and Gherghetta the possibility of an orbifold construction was suggested where the compactification scale $`\mu _0=1/R`$ ($`R`$ is the radius of the compact extra dimension(s)) lies in the TeV range, while the GUT scale is still near $`10^{16}`$ GeV. If GUT symmetry breaking occurs by boundary conditions upon compactification, then above $`\mu _0`$ there appear signatures of the GUT model: the KK modes of gauge bosons, which correspond to broken generators, will have masses $`\stackrel{>}{_{}}\mu _0`$. In , these states were called GUT precursors, since their appearance indeed would be a characteristic feature of the GUT model.

In this paper we present a detailed study of the possibility of light precursors coming from 5D GUTs compactified on an $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold. We show that even if there is no power law relative running of gauge couplings, there is a non universal logarithmic contribution which for low $`\mu _0`$ becomes significantly large and does not allow unification with minimal field content. For unification, some extension should be done. We present an extension of 5D SUSY SU(5), with additional matter introduced on a brane, which can have unification in a range $`10^{10}10^{16}`$ GeV, depending on the selection of extended matter. We analyze also the 5D non SUSY $`SU(5)`$ model and it turns out that also this one requires extensions, which seem to be rather complicated. As an alternative GUT model, we study the extended GUT gauge group $`SU(6)`$. As it turns out, the non SUSY version of the 5D SU(6) GUT can naturally give unification with light precursors. In all considered scenarios with successful unification, the GUT scale can lie between scales $`10^{10}`$ GEV and $`10^{16}`$ GeV, while the precursors have $``$TeV masses. These values of $`M_G`$ allow one to embed the GUT scenario either in heterotic or in Type $`\mathrm{I}`$ string theory (depending on which value for $`M_G`$ is realized).

## 2 Renormalization for $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold 5D GUTs

In this section we present expressions, which will be useful for studying gauge coupling unification for 5D GUTs.

As it was shown in , a realistic 5D $`SU(5)`$ GUT can be built if compactification occurs on an $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold. For this case, on one of the fixed points we have the $`SU(3)_c\times SU(2)_L\times U(1)_YG_{321}`$ gauge group and minimal field content. If instead of $`SU(5)`$ some extended gauge group is considered, compactification on an $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold still turns out to be an economical possibility for realistic model building.

It is assumed that the fifth (space like) dimension $`y`$ parameterizes a compact $`S^{(1)}`$ circle with radius $`R`$. All states, introduced at 5D level, should have definite $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parities $`(P,P^{})`$, where $`Z_2:yy`$, $`Z_2^{}:y^{}y^{}`$ ($`y^{}=y+\pi R/2`$). Therefore, there are only the following options for parity prescription:

$$(P,P^{})=(+,+),(+,),(,+),(,),$$
(2.1)
and the corresponding KK states have masses

$$2n\mu _0,(2n+1)\mu _0,(2n+1)\mu _0,(2n+2)\mu _0,$$
(2.2)
respectively, were $`\mu _0=1/R`$ is the compactification scale and $`n`$ is the quantum number in the KK mode expansion. In a GUT scenario, KK states become relevant for gauge coupling running if $`\mu _0`$ lies below the GUT scale $`M_G`$. The solution of one loop RGE has the form

$$\alpha _a^1(M_G)=\alpha _a^1(M_Z)\frac{b_a}{2\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_Z}+\mathrm{\Delta }_a,$$
(2.3)
with

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_a=\mathrm{\Delta }_a^0+\mathrm{\Delta }_a^{KK},$$
(2.4)
where $`b_a`$ corresponds to the contribution of SM or MSSM states (depending which case we consider) and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_a^0=\frac{(b_a^{M_I})_\alpha }{2\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{(M_I)_\alpha }$$
(2.5)
includes contributions from all additional brane and zero-mode states $`\alpha `$ with mass $`(M_I)_\alpha `$. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_a^{KK}`$ comes from the contributions of the KK states (except zero-modes)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_a^{KK}=\frac{\gamma _a}{2\pi }S_1\frac{\delta _a}{2\pi }S_2,$$
(2.6)
where $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$ include contributions from KK states with masses $`(2n+2)\mu _0`$ and $`(2n+1)\mu _0`$ resp.:

$$S_1=\underset{n=0}{\overset{N}{}}\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{(2n+2)\mu _0},S_2=\underset{n=0}{\overset{N^{}}{}}\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{(2n+1)\mu _0}.$$
(2.7)
In (2.7), $`N`$ and $`N^{}`$ are the maximal numbers of appropriate KK states which lie below $`M_G`$, e.g.

$$(2N+2)\mu _0\stackrel{<}{_{}}M_G,(2N^{}+1)\mu _0\stackrel{<}{_{}}M_G.$$
(2.8)
KK states with masses larger than $`M_G`$ are irrelevant. For a given $`M_G/\mu _0`$ the $`N`$ and $`N^{}`$ can be calculated from (2.8). Imposing the condition of gauge coupling unification

$$\alpha _1(M_G)=\alpha _2(M_G)=\alpha _3(M_G)\alpha _G,$$
(2.9)
from (2.3), eliminating $`\alpha _G`$ and $`\mathrm{ln}M_G/M_Z`$, we find for the strong coupling at the $`M_Z`$ scale

$$\alpha _3^1=\frac{b_1b_3}{b_1b_2}\alpha _2^1\frac{b_2b_3}{b_1b_2}\alpha _1^1+\frac{b_1b_3}{b_1b_2}\mathrm{\Delta }_2\frac{b_2b_3}{b_1b_2}\mathrm{\Delta }_1\mathrm{\Delta }_3,$$
(2.10)
where $`\alpha _a`$ in (2.10) stands for $`\alpha _a(M_Z)`$. Also, from (2.3) one can obtain

$$\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_Z}=\frac{2\pi }{b_1b_2}(\alpha _1^1\alpha _2^1)+\frac{2\pi }{b_1b_2}(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\mathrm{\Delta }_2),$$
(2.11)
and finally the value of the unified gauge coupling

$$\alpha _G^1=\alpha _2^1\frac{b_2}{2\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_Z}+\mathrm{\Delta }_2.$$
(2.12)
It is straightforward to present some expressions, which will also be useful for further estimates. For $`N,N^{}1`$ the $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$ can be approximated by using Stirling’s formula

$$S_1(N+1)\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{\mu _0}(N+\frac{3}{2})\mathrm{ln}(N+1)+(1\mathrm{ln}2)(N+1)\mathrm{ln}\sqrt{2\pi }\frac{1}{12(N+1)}+\mathrm{},$$

$$S_2(N^{}+1)\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{\mu _0}(2N^{}+\frac{3}{2})\mathrm{ln}(2N^{}+1)+(N^{}+\frac{1}{2})\mathrm{ln}N^{}+(1+\mathrm{ln}2)N^{}+1\mathrm{}$$
(2.13)
The combination, which will matter for the analysis below, is

$$S=S_2S_1,$$
(2.14)
which according to (2.13), for $`N=N^{}1`$ reduces to the simple form

$$S\mathrm{ln}\sqrt{\pi N}+\frac{7}{12N}+𝒪(\frac{1}{N^2}).$$
(2.15)
## 3 5D $`SU(5)`$ GUT on $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold

We start our studies of orbifold GUT models with a 5D $`SU(5)`$ theory. The fifth dimension is compact and is considered to be an $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold. In terms of the $`G_{321}`$, the adjoint of $`SU(5)`$ reads

$$\mathrm{𝟐𝟒}=C(8,1)_0+W(1,3)_0+S(1,1)_0+X(3,\overline{2})_5+Y(\overline{3},2)_5,$$
(3.1)
where subscripts are the hypercharge $`Y=\frac{1}{\sqrt{60}}\mathrm{Diag}(2,2,2,3,3)`$ in the $`1/\sqrt{60}`$ units. In the 5D gauge multiplet the 4D gauge field $`A(24)`$ is accompanied by an adjoint scalar $`\mathrm{\Phi }(24)`$. In order to achieve $`SU(5)G_{321}`$ breaking, the gauge fragments $`A_X`$, $`A_Y`$ \[see decomposition in (3.1)\] must have negative orbifold parity. This will insure the masses of their KK modes to be proportional to $`\mu _0`$. Since the fragments $`\mathrm{\Phi }_X`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Y`$ should become the longitudinal modes of $`A_X`$, $`A_Y`$, the former should carry opposite orbifold parity. Having only one $`Z_2`$, the $`\mathrm{\Phi }_X`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Y`$ would contain massless zero modes, which are phenomenologically unacceptable. That’s why the projection on an $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold should be considered. Below we study SUSY and non-SUSY cases separately.

### 3.1 SUSY case

The 5D $`N=1`$ SUSY gauge multiplet in 4D notation constitutes a $`N=2`$ SUSY supermultiplet $`V_{N=2}=(V,\mathrm{\Sigma })`$, where $`V`$ is 4D $`N=1`$ gauge supermultiplet and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a chiral superfield. Ascribing to the fragments \[in decomposition (3.1)\] of $`V(24)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(24)`$ the following $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parities

$$(V_C,V_W,V_S)(+,+),(V_X,V_Y)(,+),$$

$$(\mathrm{\Sigma }_C,\mathrm{\Sigma }_W,\mathrm{\Sigma }_S)(,),(\mathrm{\Sigma }_X,\mathrm{\Sigma }_Y)(+,),$$
(3.2)
at the $`y=0`$ fixed point we will have a 4D $`N=1`$ SUSY $`G_{321}`$ gauge theory. We introduce three families of quark-lepton superfields and two MSSM Higgs doublets at the $`y=0`$ fixed point \[this $`3`$-brane is identified with our 4D world\]. We are looking for cases in which $`\mu _0`$ lies much below $`M_G`$; in order to have perturbativity up to the GUT scale, we then always assume that matter and higgses are introduced on the brane. This means that they do not have KK excitations. Therefore, the zero modes at the $`y=0`$ brane are just the MSSM content. Other states, including the $`X`$, $`Y`$ gauge bosons, are projected out. Taking all this into account, and also (3.2), (2.1), (2.2), for $`b_a`$ and $`\gamma _a`$, $`\delta _a`$ \[defined in (2.6)\] we have $`(b_1,b_2,b_3)=(\frac{33}{5},1,3)`$,

$$(\gamma _1^{},\gamma _2^{},\gamma _3)=(0,4,6),(\delta _1,\delta _2,\delta _3)=(10,6,4).$$
(3.3)
From this and (2.10)-(2.12), taking also into account (2.4)-(2.7), we get for ’minimal’ 5D SUSY $`SU(5)`$ the following relations

$$\alpha _3^1=\frac{12}{7}\alpha _2^1\frac{5}{7}\alpha _1^1\frac{3}{7\pi }S,$$
(3.4)
$$\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_Z}=\frac{5\pi }{14}(\alpha _1^1\alpha _2^1)+\frac{5}{7}S,$$
(3.5)
$$\alpha _G^1=\alpha _2^1\frac{1}{2\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_Z}+\frac{2}{\pi }S_1+\frac{3}{\pi }S_2.$$
(3.6)
Here, (3.4) and (3.5) show that $`\alpha _3`$ and $`M_G`$ are determined by the function $`S`$, which is defined in (2.14). For simplicity let’s take $`N=N^{}`$, which for large values allows to use approximation (2.13). With this, from (3.4) we see that already $`N=N^{}=10^6`$ gives an unacceptably large $`\alpha _3(M_Z)`$($`0.13`$), while (3.5) gives an increased value of the GUT scale($`410^{18}`$ GeV). The situation becomes even worse for larger $`N`$, $`N^{}`$, because the function $`S`$ grows logarithmically. Therefore, we conclude that, in this minimal setting, the compactification scale $`\mu _0M_G/(2N)`$ can not be lowered below $`410^{12}`$ GeV. The first two terms in (3.4) would give a nice value for $`\alpha _3`$($`0.116`$), which coincides with the one loop 4D $`SU(5)`$ prediction. To maintain this, one should take $`S0`$, which means $`\mu _0M_G`$. This excludes light precursors in the framework of minimal 5D SUSY $`SU(5)`$.

Light precursors from extended 5D SUSY SU(5)

With specific extension of minimal 5D SUSY $`SU(5)`$, it is possible to get successful unification with low $`\mu _0`$. Let’s at the $`y=0`$ brane introduce the following vector like states

$$N_E\times (E^c+\overline{E}^c),N_L\times (L+\overline{L}),$$
(3.7)
where under $`G_{321}`$, $`E^c`$ and $`L`$ have precisely the same transformation properties as a right handed charged lepton and a left handed lepton doublet respectively. $`\overline{E}^c`$, $`\overline{L}`$ have conjugate quantum numbers and $`N_E`$, $`N_L`$ denote the numbers of corresponding vector like pairs. Assuming that they have 4D masses $`M_E`$, $`M_L`$, above these scales these states will contribute to the $`b`$-factors as

$$(b_1,b_2,b_3)^E=(\frac{6}{5},0,0)N_E,(b_1,b_2,b_3)^L=(\frac{3}{5},1,0)N_L.$$
(3.8)
In this case, the RGEs are modified and have the form

$$\alpha _3^1=\frac{12}{7}\alpha _2^1\frac{5}{7}\alpha _1^1+\frac{3N_E}{7\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_E}\frac{9N_L}{14\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_L}\frac{3}{7\pi }S,$$
(3.9)
$$\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_Z}=\frac{5\pi }{14}(\alpha _1^1\alpha _2^1)\frac{3N_E}{14\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_E}+\frac{N_L}{14\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_L}+\frac{5}{7}S,$$
(3.10)
$$\alpha _G^1=\alpha _2^1\frac{1}{2\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_Z}\frac{N_L}{2\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_L}+\frac{2}{\pi }S_1+\frac{3}{\pi }S_2.$$
(3.11)
From (3.9), (3.10) we see that by suitable selections of $`N_E`$, $`N_L`$ and of the mass scales, it is possible to cancel the large logarithmic contribution coming from $`S`$ and obtain a reasonable value for $`\alpha _3(M_Z)`$. At the same time, it is possible to get various values of $`M_G`$. The different cases of unification, estimated through (3.9), (3.10), are presented in Table 1. As we see, for relatively large $`N_E`$ and $`N_L`$, it is also possible to have a lower unification scale. For the considered cases the $`\mu _0`$ lies in the TeV range.

### 3.2 Non-SUSY case

In this subsection, we study the possibility of light precursors for the non-SUSY case. For the non supersymmetric model, the higher dimensional extension is more straightforward than for the SUSY one. As was pointed out at the beginning of sect. 3, in a 5D extension the 4-dimensional gauge field should be accompanied by a real scalar. As far as the matter and Higgs fields are concerned, we introduce them on the brane. The $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold parities for bulk states still are chosen in such a way as to break $`SU(5)`$ down to the $`G_{321}`$. It is easy to check that also for minimal 5D non-SUSY $`SU(5)`$, the light precursors are incompatible with unification due to large logarithmic corrections \[caused by $`S`$ of (2.14)\] coming from bulk states.

Light precursors from extended 5D non-SUSY SU(5)

Also here we extend the model by introducing (at the $`y=0`$ brane) vector like states with the transformation properties of (3.7), but now instead of superfields, under $`\overline{E}^c`$, $`E^c`$, $`\overline{L}`$, $`L`$ we assume fermionic states. Their contribution to the $`b`$-factors are

$$(b_1,b_2,b_3)^E=(\frac{4}{5},0,0)N_E,(b_1,b_2,b_3)^L=(\frac{2}{5},\frac{2}{3},0)N_L.$$
(3.12)
With this setting the one loop solutions of RGEs have the forms

$$\alpha _3^1=\frac{333}{218}\alpha _2^1\frac{115}{218}\alpha _1^1+\frac{23N_E}{109\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_E}\frac{44N_L}{109\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_L}\frac{21}{218\pi }S,$$
(3.13)
$$\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_Z}=\frac{30\pi }{109}(\alpha _1^1\alpha _2^1)\frac{12N_E}{109\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_E}+\frac{4N_L}{109\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_L}+\frac{105}{109}S,$$
(3.14)
$$\alpha _G^1=\alpha _2^1+\frac{19}{12\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_Z}\frac{N_L}{3\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{M_L}+\frac{7}{2\pi }S_1+\frac{21}{4\pi }S_2.$$
(3.15)
From them it follows that one can get successful unification with light precursors. Cases with different mass scales and number of vector like states are presented in Table 2. As we see, the $`N_E`$, $`N_L`$ should be large. This indicates that an extension is complicated.

## 4 5D SU(6) GUT on $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold

In the previous section we have seen that in order to have light precursors within 5D $`SU(5)`$ GUTs, one has to extend the matter sector. We will now discuss the extension of the gauge group. The smallest unitary group (in rank), which includes $`SU(5)`$ is an $`SU(6)`$ and we will consider here its 5D gauge version. The symmetry breaking of $`SU(6)`$ should occur in two stages. Through compactification, by proper selection of the $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold parities, the $`SU(6)`$ can be reduced to one of its subgroups $``$. For the latter, there are three possibilities: $`=_{331}=SU(3)_c\times SU(3)_L\times U(1)`$, $`=_{421}=SU(4)_c\times SU(2)_L\times U(1)`$ and $`=_{51}=SU(5)\times U(1)`$. The $``$ gauge symmetry is realized at the $`y=0`$ fixed point and its further breaking to the $`G_{321}`$ must occur spontaneously, by the VEV of an appropriate scalar field. As it turns out, the cases of $`=_{421}\mathrm{or}_{51}`$ do not allow for light precursors, while the non-SUSY case of $`=_{331}`$ gives an interesting possibility. The 5D SUSY SU(6) with minimal field content does not lead to unification with light precursors. Of course, some extensions of SUSY $`SU(6)`$ versions in the matter sector can give the desirable result, but since we are looking for an $`SU(6)`$ model with minimal matter/Higgs content, we will not pursue this possibility and concentrate on the non-SUSY version.

Light precursors from 5D non-SUSY SU(6)

The adjoint representation $`\mathrm{𝟑𝟓}`$ of the $`SU(6)`$, in terms of $`_{331}=SU(3)_c\times SU(3)_L\times U(1)`$ decomposes as

$$\mathrm{𝟑𝟓}=C(8,1)_0+L(1,8)_0+S(1,1)_0+C\overline{L}(3,\overline{3})_2+\overline{C}L(\overline{3},3)_2,$$
(4.1)
where the subscripts denote $`U(1)`$ hypercharges

$$Y_{U(1)}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{12}}(1,1,1,1,1,1),$$
(4.2)
in $`1/\sqrt{12}`$ units (the $`SU(6)`$ normalization). Choosing the $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parities of the fragments of $`A_\mu (35)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(35)`$ \[together they form a 5D gauge field $`𝐀=(A,\mathrm{\Phi })`$\] as

$$(A_C,A_L,A_S)(+,+),(A_{C\overline{L}},A_{\overline{C}L})(,+),$$

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }_C,\mathrm{\Phi }_L,\mathrm{\Phi }_S)(,),(\mathrm{\Phi }_{C\overline{L}},\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{C}L})(+,),$$
(4.3)
at the $`y=0`$ fixed point we will have $`_{331}`$ gauge symmetry. For its breaking down to $`G_{321}`$, we introduce a Higgs field $`H`$ at the $`y=0`$ brane transforming under $`_{331}`$ as $`(1,3)_1`$. Its third component’s non zero VEV $`Hv`$ induces the breaking $`SU(3)_L\times U(1)\stackrel{v}{}SU(2)_L\times U(1)_Y`$, where

$$Y=\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}Y_{U(1)^{}}+\frac{2}{\sqrt{5}}Y_{U(1)},$$
(4.4)
and $`Y_{U(1)^{}}`$ is the $`SU(3)_L`$ generator

$$Y_{U(1)^{}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{12}}\mathrm{Diag}(1,1,2).$$
(4.5)
At the $`y=0`$ fixed point we also introduce three families of matter

$$u^c(\overline{3},1)_2,Q(3,3)_0,E^c(1,\overline{3})_2,d_{1,2}^c(\overline{3},1)_1,_{1,2}(1,\overline{3})_1,$$
(4.6)
where we marked the transformation properties under $`_{331}`$. Under $`G_{321}`$

$$Q=(q,\overline{D}^c),E^c=(e^c,\overline{L}),=(l,\xi ),$$
(4.7)
where $`\xi `$ is a SM singlet. It is easy to verify that (4.6) effectively constitute anomaly free $`15+\overline{6}_{1,2}`$ chiral multiplets of the $`SU(6)`$ gauge group. Together with these, at the $`y=0`$ brane, we introduce an $`h(1,3)_1`$ Higgs, containing the SM Higgs doublet. With the brane couplings $`Qd_{1,2}^cH^+`$, $`E^c_{1,2}H^+`$, after substituting the $`H`$’s VEV $`v`$, the extra $`\overline{D}^c`$ and $`\overline{L}`$ states form massive states with one superposition of $`d_{1,2}^c`$ and $`l_{1,2}`$ respectively and therefore decouple. So, below the scale $`v`$, we have the SM with its minimal content. Taking all this into account, above the scale $`v`$, the $`b`$-factors are

$$(b_1,b_{3L},b_3)=(\frac{37}{6},1,5),$$
(4.8)
while taking into account (4.3) the $`\gamma `$ and $`\delta `$-factors read

$$(\gamma _1,\gamma _{3L},\gamma _3)=(0,\frac{21}{2},\frac{21}{2}),(\delta _1,\delta _{3L},\delta _3)=(21,\frac{21}{2},\frac{21}{2}).$$
(4.9)
From (4.4), it follows that

$$\gamma _Y=\frac{21}{10},\delta _Y=\frac{189}{10},b_Y=\frac{71}{15}.$$
(4.10)
Using (4.8)-(4.10) we derive

$$\alpha _3^1=\frac{333}{218}\alpha _2^1\frac{115}{218}\alpha _1^1\frac{319}{654\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{v}\frac{483}{218\pi }S,$$
(4.11)
$$\mathrm{ln}\frac{v}{M_Z}=\frac{30\pi }{109}(\alpha _1^1\alpha _2^1)\frac{215}{218\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{M_G}{v}\frac{63}{109}S,$$
(4.12)
From (4.11) we already see, that with help of the last two terms, the wrong prediction of minimal non-SUSY $`SU(5)`$ \[$`(\alpha _3^1)_{SU(5)}^{\mathrm{min}}=\frac{333}{218}\alpha _2^1\frac{115}{218}\alpha _1^11/0.07`$\] can be improved. Namely, for $`N=N^{}=310^6`$, $`M_G/v=1.27`$ we obtain successful unification with $`\alpha _3(M_Z)=0.119`$, $`v710^{10}`$ GeV. Therefore, unification occurs at $`M_G8.810^{10}`$ GeV and the compactification scale is $`\mu _0=14.7`$ TeV, i.e. we have light precursors.

## 5 Discussions and conclusions

In this paper we have presented a detailed study of the possibility of light precursors within concrete 5D GUTs. We have shown that compactification on a $`S^{(1)}/Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold introduces corrections, which significantly affect gauge coupling unification. In order to compensate these corrections, specific extensions are needed. Achieving successful unification with light precursors, the prediction for $`\alpha _3(M_Z)`$ will not be affected by possible brane localized gauge kinetic terms, since the bulk is sufficiently large. Although the relative running of gauge couplings is logarithmic, the coupling itself has power law running. According to (2.13), in the ultraviolet limit ($`NN^{}\mathrm{}`$) we have $`S_1S_2(1\mathrm{ln}2)N`$ and the dominant contribution to the renormalization (2.3) comes from KK states: $`\alpha _a^1\frac{\gamma _a+\delta _a}{2\pi }(1\mathrm{ln}2)N`$. For a given GUT, $`\gamma _a+\delta _a=\mathrm{const}.\stackrel{~}{b}`$ and the effective coupling is  $`\alpha _a^{\mathrm{eff}}=(1\mathrm{ln}2)N\alpha _a=\frac{2\pi }{\stackrel{~}{b}}`$. Indeed $`\alpha _5^1(\alpha ^{\mathrm{eff}})^1\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the ultraviolet cut off and $`\alpha _5`$ is the 5D gauge coupling. The $`\alpha ^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ remains perturbative if $`\stackrel{~}{b}`$ is large and negative: $`\frac{2\pi }{\stackrel{~}{b}}4\pi `$. It is easy to check that, in all models considered above, this condition is well satisfied. Therefore, at the ultraviolet limit $`\alpha ^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ approaches a perturbativly fixed value.

As far as the fundamental scale $`M_{}`$ (5D Planck scale) is concerned, with the simplest setting the four and five dimensional Planck scales are related as  $`M_{\mathrm{Pl}}^2M_{}^3R`$ and for $`1/R`$ TeV we have $`M_{}10^{14}`$ GeV. To have a self-consistent picture of unification, we need the unification scale $`M_G`$ to lie below the $`M_{}`$. Attempting to embed the presented scenarios into string theory, one also should make the values of scales self-consistent222For detailed discussions see .. In perturbative heterotic string theory $`M_{\mathrm{string}}M_{}`$ and there is a similar relation ($`M_{\mathrm{Pl}}^2M_{}^3R`$). Therefore, $`M_G`$ still should lie below the $`10^{14}`$ GeV. However, within the context of Type $`\mathrm{I}`$ (non perturbative) strings, $`M_{}`$ can be close to $`10^{16}`$ GeV, which allows to have unification in this region. Within the scenarios considered in this paper, it is possible to have $`M_G`$ in the range of $`(10^{11}10^{16})`$ GeV. This allows the models to be embedded either in heterotic or in Type $`\mathrm{I}`$ string theory.

Acknowledgements

Research of F.P.C. is supported by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (grant SFRH/BD/4973/2001).

Note added: After the submission of this paper into the arXive, we were informed by authors of , that the presence of additional logarithmic contributions into the relative gauge coupling runnings was reported in the Pascos’03 meeting by E. Dudas .


text:
# Enhanced the thermal Entanglement in Anisotropy Heisenberg 𝑋𝑌𝑍 Chain

## I Introduction

Entanglement is an important resource in quantum information . The ideal case which Quantum computing and quantum communication are put into use is to find entanglement resource in solid system at a finite temperature. The Heisenberg model is a simple but realistic and extensively studied solid state system . Recently, Heisenberg interaction is not localized in spin system. It can be realized in quantum dots , nuclear spins , cavity QED . This effect Hamiltonian can be used for quantum computation  and controlled NOT gate . The thermal entanglement in isotropic Heisenberg spin chain has been studied in the absence  and in the presence of an external magnetic $`B`$ . The entanglement of two-qubit isotropic Heisenberg system decreases with the increasing $`T`$ and vanishes beyond a critical value $`T_c`$ , which is independent of $`B.`$ Pairwise entanglement in $`N`$-qubit isotropic Heisenberg system in certain degree can be increased by increasing the temperature or the external field $`B`$ . Anisotropic Heisenberg spin chain has been investigated in the case of $`B=0`$  and $`B0`$ . For a two-qubit anisotropic Heisenberg $`XY`$ chain, one is able to produce entanglement for finite $`T`$ by adjusting the magnetic field strength . However, the entanglement by increasing $`T`$ or $`B`$, in two-qubit anisotropic Heisenberg $`XY`$ chain  or in $`N`$-qubit isotropic Heisenberg chain , is very weak. How to produce strong entanglement is worthy to study.

On the other hand, we have not find the work about two-qubit or the $`N`$-qubit anisotropic $`XYZ`$ Heisenberg chain in the presence of magnetic field. Although the $`N`$-qubit Heisenberg chain has been studied  , in Ref.  the authors studied the maximum possible nearest neighbor entanglement for ground state in a ring of $`N`$ qubits, and in  they just investigated the case of isotropy $`N`$ qubits Heisenberg chain. In this paper, we study the entanglement of two-qubit anisotropic Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain and the pairwise entanglement of three-qubit anisotropic Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain. Introducing the interaction of the z-component of two neighboring spins not only improve the critical temperature $`T_c`$ but also enhance the entanglement for fixed $`B`$ and $`T`$ in particular regions. In the case of anisotropic three-qubit Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain, the effect of partial anisotropy $`\gamma `$ make the revival phenomenon more apparent than in two-qubit chain; for a fixed $`T`$, one can obtain a robust entanglement by controlling $`B`$ and $`J_z`$.

The Hamiltonian of $`N`$-qubit anisotropic Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ model in an external magnetic field $`B`$ is

$$H=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}[J_x\sigma _i^x\sigma _{i+1}^x+J_y\sigma _i^y\sigma _{i+1}^y+J_z\sigma _i^z\sigma _{i+1}^z+B(\sigma _i^z+\sigma _{i+1}^z)],$$
(1)
where $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_j=(\sigma _j^x,\sigma _j^y,\sigma _j^z)`$ is the vector of Pauli matrices and $`J_i(i=x,y,z)`$ is real coupling coefficient. The coupling coefficient $`J_i`$ of arbitrary nearest neighbor two qubits is equal in value. For the spin interaction, the chain is said to be antiferromagnetic for $`J_i>0`$ and ferromagnetic for $`J_i`$ $`<0`$.

For a system in equilibrium at temperature $`T`$ , the density operator is $`\rho =Z^1\mathrm{exp}(H/k_BT)`$, where $`Z=Tr[\mathrm{exp}(H/k_BT)]`$ is the partition function and $`k_B`$ is Boltzmann’s constant. For simplicity we write $`k_B=1`$. Entanglement of two qubits can be measured by concurrence $`C`$ which is written as $`C=\mathrm{max}(0,2\mathrm{max}\{\lambda _i\}_{i=1}^4\lambda _i)`$ , where $`\lambda _i`$ is the square roots of the eigenvalues of the matrix $`R=\rho S\rho ^{}S`$, $`\rho `$ is the density matrix, $`S=\sigma _1^y\sigma _2^y`$ and $``$ stand for complex conjugate. The concurrence is available no matter what $`\rho `$ is pure or mixed.

## II Two-qubit Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain

Now, we consider the Hamiltonian for anisotropic two-qubit Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain in an external magnetic field $`B`$. The Hamiltonian can be expressed as

$$H=J(\sigma _1^+\sigma _2^{}+\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^+)+J\gamma (\sigma _1^+\sigma _2^++\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^{})+\frac{J_z}{2}\sigma _1^z\sigma _2^z+\frac{B}{2}(\sigma _1^z+\sigma _2^z)$$
(2)
where $`\sigma ^\pm =\frac{1}{2}(\sigma ^x\pm i\sigma ^y)`$ is raising and lowering operator respectively, and $`J=\frac{J_x+J_y}{2},`$ $`\gamma =\frac{J_xJ_y}{J_x+J_y}`$. The parameter $`\gamma `$ $`(0<\gamma <1)`$ measure the anisotropy (partial anisotropy) in $`XY`$ plane. When the Hamiltonian of the system has the form of Eq.(2), in the standard basis $`\{|00,|01,|10,|11\}`$, the density matrix of the system can be written as

$$\rho _{12}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}u_1\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill & v\hfill \\ 0\hfill & w\hfill & z\hfill & 0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & z\hfill & w\hfill & 0\hfill \\ v\hfill & 0\hfill & 0\hfill & u_2\hfill \end{array}\right).$$
(3)
These nonzero matrix element can be calculated through

$`u_1`$ $`=`$ $`Tr(|0000|\rho ),u_2=Tr(|1111|\rho ),`$ (4)
$`w`$ $`=`$ $`Tr(|0101|\rho ),v=Tr(|0011|\rho ),z=Tr(|0110|\rho ).`$ (5)
The square roots of the eigenvalues of the matrix $`R`$ are $`\lambda _{1,2}=|w\pm z|,\lambda _{3,4}=|\sqrt{u_1u_2}\pm v|`$. Therefore, we can calculate the concurrence.

The eigenvalues and eigenstates of $`H`$ are easily obtained as $`H|\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm =(\frac{J_z}{2}\pm J)|\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm `$, $`H|\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm =(\frac{J_z}{2}\pm \eta )|\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm ,`$with the eigenstates $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|01\pm |10)`$, $`|\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\eta (\eta B)}}[(\eta B)|00\pm J\gamma |11]`$, where $`\eta =\sqrt{B^2+(J\gamma )^2}`$. One can notice that the eigenstates are the same as the case of $`J_z=0`$. Because the basises $`|01`$ and $`|10`$ are the two degenerate eigenstates of $`\sigma _1^z\sigma _2^z`$ with eigenvalue $`1`$, hence the superposition of the two degenerate states $`|01`$ and $`|10`$ still is the eigenstate of $`\sigma _1^z\sigma _2^z`$, that is, $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm `$ is the eigenstate of $`J_z=0`$ as well as that of $`J_z0`$. The same reason account for $`|\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm `$ both as an eigenstate of Eq.(2) and as that of the case of $`J_z=0`$ . From Eq.(4), tracing on the eigenstates, we obtain the square roots of the eigenvalues of the matrix $`R`$

$`\lambda _{1,2}`$ $`=`$ $`Z^1e^{\frac{\beta J_z}{2}}e^{\pm \beta J},`$ (6)
$`\lambda _{3,4}`$ $`=`$ $`Z^1e^{\frac{\beta J_z}{2}}|\sqrt{1+({\displaystyle \frac{J\gamma }{\eta }}\mathrm{sinh}\beta \eta )^2}{\displaystyle \frac{J\gamma }{\eta }}\mathrm{sinh}\beta \eta |,`$ (7)
where the partition function $`Z=2(e^{\frac{J_z}{2T}}\mathrm{cosh}\beta \eta +e^{\frac{\beta J_z}{2}}\mathrm{cosh}\beta J)`$. Because the concurrence is invariant under the substitutions $`JJ`$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$ , we will consider the case $`J>0`$ and $`0<\gamma <1`$. But with substitution $`J_zJ_z`$ the the concurrence is variant. We choose $`J_z>0`$, and we will state the reason later.

We first review the circumstance of anisotropic Heisenberg $`XY`$ chain, which is analyzed in . At $`T=0,`$ exist a critical magnetic field $`B_c`$. As $`B`$ cross $`B_c`$, the concurrence $`C`$ drops suddenly then undergoes a ”revival” for sufficient large $`\gamma .`$ However, we noticed that $`B_c`$ decrease with the increasing of the anisotropic parameter $`\gamma `$. Although with $`\gamma `$ increasing the critical temperature $`T_c`$ is improved, the entanglement, when temperature is in the revival region, is very weak.

With $`\gamma =0.3`$, we show the concurrence as a function of $`B`$ and $`T`$ for two values of $`J_z`$ in Fig. 1. For $`J_z=0`$ (Fig.1a) corresponding to the circumstance of anisotropic Heisenberg $`XY`$ chain , one can observe a revival phenomenon and the weak entanglement in revival region. For the convenience of representation, we define the main region in which concurrence $`C`$ keeping its constant and maximal value. Comparing Fig. 1 (a) with (b), we find that with the increasing of $`J_z,`$ the main region is extended in terms of $`B`$ and $`T`$, i.e., the critical magnetic field $`B_c`$ is broadened and the critical temperature $`T_c`$ in main region is improved. That is to say, the range of concurrence $`C`$ keeping its constant and maximal is extended in terms of $`B`$ and $`T,`$ so we can obtain strong entanglement in the extended range.

We can understand the effect of $`J_z`$ on $`B_c`$ from the case of $`T=0`$. For $`T=0`$ under the condition of $`J_zJ`$, $`C`$ can be written analytically as

$$C(T=0)=\{\begin{array}{c}1\text{ for }\eta <J+J_z\\ (1J\gamma /\eta )/2\text{ for }\eta =J+J_z\\ J\gamma /\eta \text{ for }\eta >J+J_z\end{array}$$
(8)
The parameters $`J`$, $`\eta `$ and $`\gamma `$ are independent of $`J_z`$ in the case of two interacting qubits. Comparing Eq.(6) with Eq.(6) of Ref., we can see clearly that if $`J_z`$ is positive, $`J_z`$ makes the intersection points of piecewise function shift. In this paper, we consider the case of $`J_z>0`$. Fig. 2 shows the concurrence at $`T=0`$ for three values of positive $`J_z`$. It show clearly that concurrence drops sharply at a finite value of magnetic field $`B`$, which is called critical magnetic field $`B_c`$, at which the quantum phase transition occurs. But with the increasing of $`J_z`$, $`B_c`$ is increased. The interaction of the z-component of two neighboring spins $`J_z`$ causes a shift in the locations of the phase transitions. Namely, the presence of positive Jz increases the region over which the concurrence C attains its maximum value.This result means that in larger region of $`B`$ and $`T`$ we can obtain stronger entanglement. The effect of $`J_z`$ is different with that of $`\gamma `$ on changing $`B_c`$. In the case of $`J_z=0`$ , although with the increasing of $`\gamma `$ the critical temperature $`T_c`$ is increased, the larger the values of $`\gamma `$, the smaller the critical magnetic field $`B_c`$. Here, introducing the z-component interaction of two neighboring spins not only extends critical magnetic field $`B_c`$ but also improves critical temperature $`T_c`$ and the entanglement (we will further show it in Fig. 3).

Let us consider concurrence changing with temperature for different values of $`J_z`$ in a fixed $`B`$ ($`B=1.1`$). We plot it in Fig. 3 with $`\gamma =0.3`$. We notice that existing a critical temperature $`T_c`$ at which the entanglement vanishes. Obviously, $`T_c`$ is improved monotonously with increasing of $`J_z`$. Under the condition $`J_z=0`$ (corresponding to $`XY`$ model ), the concurrence exhibit a revival phenomenon, but the maximal values of entanglement in both area are small. If introducing the $`J_z`$, the critical external magnetic field $`B_c`$ become larger so that $`B=1.1`$ is less than $`B_c`$ (the critical magnetic when $`J_z=0.2,0.5`$ or $`J_z=0.9`$), thus we observe the maximal value of entanglement 1. In the temperature range $`0<T<1.725`$ , the larger $`J_z`$ the stronger entanglement. Therefore, $`J_z`$ not only improve the critical temperature $`T_c,`$ but also enhance the entanglement for particular fixed $`B`$ and $`\gamma .`$

## III The pairwise entanglement in three qubits

The calculation of pairwise entanglement in $`N`$ qubits is very complicated due to the anisotropy in Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain. Here we just calculate the pairwise entanglement in three qubits to show the effects of $`J_z`$ . We now solve the eigenvalue problems of the three-qubit $`XYZ`$ Hamiltonian. We list the eigenvalues and the corresponding eigenvectors as follow

$`E_{1,2}`$ $`=`$ $`J{\displaystyle \frac{J_z}{2}}+B:|\mathrm{\Phi }_{1,2}=\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}})|110+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}|101{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}})|011),`$ (9)
$`E_{3,4}`$ $`=`$ $`J+{\displaystyle \frac{J_z}{2}}B\pm \eta _{}:|\mathrm{\Phi }_{3,4}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\eta _{}[\eta _{}\pm (J_z2BJ)]}}}[(J_z2BJ\pm \eta _{})|000+J\gamma {\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{2}{}}}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^n|110];`$ (10)
$`E_{5,6}`$ $`=`$ $`J{\displaystyle \frac{J_z}{2}}B:|\mathrm{\Phi }_{5,6}=\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}})|010+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}|100{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}})|001);`$ (11)
$`E_{7,8}`$ $`=`$ $`J+{\displaystyle \frac{J_z}{2}}+B\pm \eta _+:|\mathrm{\Phi }_{7,8}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\eta _+[\eta _+\pm (J_z+2BJ)]}}}[(J_z+2BJ\pm \eta _+)|111+J\gamma {\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{2}{}}}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^n|010].`$ (12)
where $`\eta _\pm =\sqrt{(J_zJ\pm 2B)^2+3(J\gamma )^2},\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ is the cyclic right shift operator . The reduced density matrix of two nearest-neighbor qubits in $`N`$ qubits system also has the form of Eq.(3). Employing Eq.(4) and tracing on the basis of eigenstates shown in Eq. (7), one can get the density matrix $`\mu _1`$, $`\mu _2,w`$, $`z,v`$, then further obtain the concurrence. Here we do not write the expressions of $`\lambda _i`$ because it is very long. We will directly plot some curves to show the effect of $`J_z`$ on enhancing entanglement.

Fig.4 show concurrence as a function of $`B`$ and $`T`$ with $`\gamma =0.3`$, $`J_z=0.9`$ and $`J=1.0`$ in three-qubit $`XYZ`$ Heisenberg chain. We see that with the same $`\gamma =0.3,`$ the effect of partial anisotropy $`\gamma `$ make the revival phenomenon more apparent than in two-qubit chain. When $`B=4`$ in Fig. 1, the largest critical temperature $`T_c`$ produced by $`\gamma `$ is about $`1.0`$ (Fig.1a); due to the restrain of $`J_z`$ the maximum temperature only caused by $`\gamma `$ is below 0.8(Fig.1b). However, in three-qubit system if $`B=4`$ with the same set of parameters, comparing Fig.1b with Fig.4, the critical temperature $`T_c`$ in revival region almost equal to $`1.8`$. The stronger effect of $`\gamma `$ implies that if we aim to obtain strong entanglement we can decrease $`\gamma `$ properly and increase $`J_z`$, otherwise increasing $`\gamma `$ can make the revival phenomenon more evident. Of course, the coupling constant $`J_z`$ also increase magnetic field $`B_c`$ and expend the region of concurrence keeping constant in terms of $`B`$ and $`T`$ as it do in two-qubit (for the limited of the page,we do not plotted here) .

For $`T=0.6`$, Fig.5 show concurrence as function of $`B`$ and $`J_z`$. There is no entanglement for $`B=0`$, which corresponds with Fig.4. If $`J_z`$ is below a certain value, in case of Fig. 5 the value is about $`0.2`$, the entanglement appears in one area corresponding to the ”revival” on condition that the magnetic field is larger than a certain value, and the certain value of $`B`$ is increased with the enhanced of $`J_z`$. But, if $`J_z`$ is larger than $`0.2`$, there are two areas appearing entanglement, and the entanglement appearing in the lower range of $`B`$ can be much stronger than that in higher magnetic field. In the lower range of $`B`$, for a certain $`B`$, the large $`J_z`$ the large concurrence. Thus, in the $`N`$-qubits $`XYZ`$ system, for a fixed $`T`$, one can obtain a robust entanglement by controlling $`B`$ and $`J_z`$.

## IV Conclusion

The thermal entanglement in anisotropic $`XYZ`$ Heisenberg chain is investigated. Through analyzing the two-qubit system, we find that with the increasing of $`J_z,`$ the critical magnetic field $`B_c`$ is increased; the coupling along $`Z`$ not only improves the critical temperature $`T_c`$, but also enhances the entanglement for certain fixed $`B`$. We also analyze the entanglement between two nearest neighbors in three qubits and find that the effect of partial anisotropy is more evident than it do in two-qubit system. The pairwise entanglement exhibit a interesting phenomenon. For certain fixed $`B`$ , if the coupling constant $`J_z`$ is small, the pairwise entanglement only exists in relative strong magnetic field $`B`$ and the entanglement is weak. By increasing $`J_z,`$ in lower range of $`B`$ , one can obtain a strong entanglement. Therefore, interaction constant of the z-component of two neighboring spins $`J_z`$ play important role in enhancing entanglement and in improving the critical temperature.

This work was supported by Ministry of Science and Technology of China under Grant No.2100CCA00700

The captions of the figure:

Fig. 1 Concurrence in two-qubit Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain is plotted vs $`T`$ and $`B`$, where (a): $`J_z=0`$, (b): $`J_z=0.9`$. For all plotted $`J=1.0`$, $`\gamma =0.3`$.

Fig. 2 Concurrence in two-qubit Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain vs $`B`$ at zero temperature for various values of $`J_z`$ with $`\gamma =0.3`$ and $`J=1.0`$. From left to right $`J_z`$ equal to 0, 0.5, 0.9, respectively.

Fig.3 Concurrence in two qubits Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain is plotted vs $`T`$ . For all plotted $`J=1.0`$, $`B=1.1`$,$`\gamma =0.3`$.From top to bottom $`J_z`$ equal to 0.9, 0.5, 0.2, 0, respectively.

Fig.4 Pairwise entanglement in three-qubit Heisenberg $`XYZ`$ chain is plotted as a function of $`T`$ and $`B`$, where $`\gamma =0.3`$, $`J=1.0`$, $`J_z=0.9`$.

Fig.5 Pairwise entanglement is plotted as a function of $`B`$ and $`J_z`$, where $`T=0.6`$, $`J=1.0`$, $`\gamma =0.3`$ .


text:
# Results on zeta functions for codes 11footnote 1 Presented at the Fifth Conference on Algebraic Geometry, Number Theory, Coding Theory and Cryptography, University of Tokyo, January 17-19, 2003

## 1 Introduction

In  we introduced, for an arbitrary linear code, its zeta function, as a different way to describe the weight distribution of the code. The definition is motivated by properties of algebraic curves and of codes constructed with those curves. After analyzing the definition more carefully for its coding theoretic meaning, we formulated in  an equivalent definition in terms of puncturing and shortening operations. Both definitions are recalled in this paper together with some basic properties of zeta functions for codes.
We introduce a polynomial $`g(w)`$ of small degree that interpolates the normalized differences

$$\left(\frac{A_w}{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{w}\right)}(q1)\frac{A_{w1}}{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{w1}\right)}\right)(1)^{wd},$$

for $`w=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$ (Lemma 1). The fact that the polynomial is both of small degree and has many zeros when the minimum distance $`d`$ is large leads us to an alternative proof for the Mallows-Sloane upper bounds (as a special case of the bounds in Theorem 3). The polynomial $`g(w)`$ determines the zeta polynomial of a linear code and vice versa (Proposition 1).
Pellikaan defined a two-variable zeta function for curves . For codes, we can consider a similar two-variable zeta function. In the approach that we take here, we first formulate a version of Greene’s Theorem for normalized rank-generating polynomials (4). Then we define the two-variable zeta function in terms of the normalized rank-generating polynomial (7). And we show that this is compatible with Definition 2 for the one-variable zeta function.
Clifford’s theorem on the dimension of special divisors has an analogue for codes. We use an argument from  to show that the corresponding result holds for self-dual codes, but in general not for formally self-dual codes.

## 2 Weight enumerators and zeta functions

Let $`C`$ be a linear code of length $`n`$ and minimum distance $`d`$ over the finite field of $`q`$ elements. Let $`A_i`$ be the number of words of weight $`i`$ in $`C`$. The weight enumerator of the code $`C`$ is defined as

$$A(x,y)=x^n+\underset{i=d}{\overset{n}{}}A_ix^{ni}y^i$$

###### Definition 1 ()

For a given weight enumerator $`A(x,y)`$, of a $`q`$-ary linear code of length $`n`$ and minimum distance $`d`$, define $`P(T)`$ as the unique polynomial of degree at most $`nd`$ such that

$$[T^{nd}]\frac{P(T)}{(1T)(1qT)}(y+(xy)T)^n=\frac{A(x,y)x^n}{q1}$$

Let $`a_w=A_w/\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{w}\right)`$, for $`w=0,1,\mathrm{},n`$. Define the normalized weight enumerator as

$$a(t)=\frac{1}{q1}(a_d+a_{d+1}t+\mathrm{}+a_nt^{nd})$$

###### Definition 2 ()

For a given normalized weight enumerator $`a(t)`$, of a $`q`$-ary linear code of length $`n`$ and minimum distance $`d`$, define $`P(T)`$ as the unique polynomial of degree at most $`nd`$ such that

$$\frac{P(T)}{(1T)(1qT)}(1T)^{d+1}a(\frac{T}{1T})(modT^{nd+1})$$

As a brief motivation for Definition 1, consider the special case $`P(T)=1`$, and recall that

$$\frac{1}{(1T)(1qT)}$$

is a generating function for the number of monic polynomials of degree at most a given degree $`a`$, say. To interpret the modified generating function in the definition, we use

$$\frac{(y(1T)+xT)}{1T}=y+xT+xT^2+\mathrm{}$$

It is then clear that the coefficient at $`x^{ni}y^iT^a`$ gives the number of those monic polynomials of degree at most $`a`$ that have precisely $`ni`$ zeros in a given subset $`\{x_1,\mathrm{},x_n\}F_q`$. Thus the weight enumerator $`A(x,y)`$ that corresponds to $`P(T)=1`$ is realized by the linear code

$$C=\{(f(x_1),\mathrm{},f(xn):fF_q[x]_a\}$$

The code $`C`$ has $`k=a+1,d=na`$ and meets the Singleton bound $`dn(k1)`$. Definition 2 is motivated by the following property of the normalized weight enumerator.

###### Theorem 1 ()

The expression

$$a(t)(1+t)^d(modt^{nd+1})$$

is invariant under puncturing or shortening.

To have well-defined puncturing (projection) and shortening (restriction) operations on a weight enumerator, independent of the choice of a coordinate, we average over all coordinates, so that the effect on the weight enumerator $`A(x,y)`$ is given by

$$\frac{1}{n}(\frac{}{_x}+\frac{}{_y})\text{(puncturing)}\frac{1}{n}(\frac{}{_x})\text{(shortening)}$$

The following properties are derived in . For nondegenerate linear codes, with both $`d2`$ and $`d^{}2`$,

$$\mathrm{deg}P(T)=n+2dd^{}\text{ and }P(1)=1$$

Duality, as contained in the MacWilliams identities

$$A_C^{}(x,y)=\frac{1}{|C|}A_C(x+(q1)y,xy),$$

becomes

$$P^{}(T)=P(1/qT)q^gT^{g+g^{}},$$

where $`g=n+1kd`$ and $`g^{}=n+1k^{}d^{}`$.

The zeros of the zeta polynomial play a rôle in the following upper bound for the minimum distance. Writing $`P(T)=a_d/(q1)(1+aT+\mathrm{})`$, Definition 2 yields

$$a_d(ad+q)=a_{d+1}$$

or

$$d+1=q+1+aa_{d+1}/a_dq+1+a$$

Thus, estimates for the reciprocal zeros of $`P(T)`$, and in particular for their sum $`a`$, yield upper bounds for the minimum distance of a linear code.

The following theorem describes the zeros of $`P(T)`$ for an interesting infinite family of weight enumerators. For a self-dual code of type (IV), that is to say defined over $`F_4`$ with only words of even weight, $`3dn+6`$ (). When the bound is met the weight enumerator of the code is uniquely determined.

###### Theorem 2 ()

Let $`A(x,y)`$ be the unique weight enumerator of type (IV) with $`d=m+3`$ and $`n=3m+3`$, for $`m`$ odd. Let $`P(T)`$ be the associated zeta polynomial and let $`Q(T)=P(T)(1+2T)`$. Then

$$Q(\frac{T^2}{2})=\lambda _mC_m^{m+1}(\frac{T^1+T}{2})T^m$$

where $`C_m^{m+1}`$ is an ultraspherical polynomial of degree $`m`$ with $`m`$ real zeros on $`[1,1]`$, and $`\lambda _m`$ a constant depending on $`m`$. In particular $`Q(e^{i2\theta }/2)=0`$ if and only if $`C_m^{m+1}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )=0`$.

Details for this section and related results can be found in , , , .

## 3 The Mallows-Sloane bounds

As in the previous section, let $`a_w=A_w/\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{w}\right)`$.

###### Lemma 1

For a linear code of length $`n`$, minimum distance $`d`$ and dual minimum distance $`d^{}`$, there exists a unique polynomial $`g(w)`$ of degree $`nd^{}`$ such that

$$g(w)=\left(a_w(q1)a_{w1}\right)(1)^{wd},\text{ for }w=1,2,\mathrm{},n.$$

Proof. We choose $`g(w)`$ of degree at most $`nd^{}`$ such that it interpolates the right hand side correctly for $`w=1,2,\mathrm{},nd^{}+1`$. It remains to show (1) $`g(w)`$ interpolates correctly in $`nd^{}+2,\mathrm{},n`$, and (2) $`\mathrm{deg}g(w)=nd^{}`$. Let $`S\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}`$ be a subset of size $`s`$ and consider the subcode of $`C`$ of words with support on $`S`$. Averaging over all $`S`$ of size $`s`$ gives for the average size of such a subcode

$$\underset{w=0}{\overset{n}{}}a_w\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s}{w}\right)$$

On the other hand for $`s>nd^{}`$, the size of each such subcode equals

$$q^{k(ns)}$$

Thus, for $`s>nd^{}`$,

$`{\displaystyle \underset{w=0}{\overset{s+1}{}}}a_w\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s+1}{w}}\right)=q{\displaystyle \underset{w=0}{\overset{s}{}}}a_w\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s}{w}}\right),`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{w=1}{\overset{s+1}{}}}a_w\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s}{w1}}\right)=(q1){\displaystyle \underset{w=0}{\overset{s}{}}}a_w\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s}{w}}\right),`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{w=0}{\overset{s}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s}{w}}\right)(a_{w+1}(q1)a_w)=0.`$
With elementary calculus, this says that the value for

$$(1)^w(a_w(q1)a_{w1})$$

at $`w=s+1`$ is the polynomial extrapolation of the values at $`w=1,\mathrm{},s`$. This proves claim (1). For $`s=nd^{}`$, the average size of a subcode exceeds $`q^{kd^{}}`$, and the extrapolation relation cannot be used to obtain the value at $`w=nd^{}+1`$ from the values at $`w=1,\mathrm{},nd^{}`$. This clearly implies claim (2). $`\mathrm{}`$

Since $`g(w)`$ has zeros at $`2,3,\mathrm{},d1`$, we obtain $`d2nd^{}`$. And when equality holds,

$$g(w)=(q1)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{w2}{d2}\right)(1)^{wd}$$

For a general weight enumerator, let $`P(T)=p_0+p_1T+\mathrm{}+P_rT^r`$ be the zeta polynomial, with $`r=n+2dd^{}`$. Then

###### Proposition 1

$$g(w)=(q1)\left(p_0\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{w2}{d2}\right)p_1\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{w2}{d1}\right)+\mathrm{}+(1)^rp_r\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{w2}{d+r2}\right)\right)$$

###### Theorem 3 ()

Let the code $`C`$ have all weights divisible by $`c`$. Then

$$d+cd^{}n+c(c+1)$$

If moreover the code is binary, even, and contains the allone word, then

$$2d+cd^{}n+c(c+2)$$

Proof. We give a proof based on Lemma 1. From $`g(w)`$ we can obtain a polynomial $`h(w)`$ of same degree such that

$$h(w)=\left(a_w(q1)^ca_{wc}\right)(1)^{wd},\text{ for }w=c,c+1,\mathrm{},n.$$

It has at least $`(c1)/c(nc)+1/c(d2c)`$ zeros, and

$$(c1)n(c1)c+d2ccncd^{}d+cd^{}n+c(c+1)$$

For the second claim, the degree of $`h(w)`$ drops to at most $`nd^{}1`$. It has at least $`(c1)/c(nc)+2/c(d2c)`$ zeros, and

$$(c1)n(c1)c+2d4ccncd^{}c2d+cd^{}n+c(c+2)$$

$`\mathrm{}`$

When applied to self-dual codes, with $`d=d^{}`$, we recover the Mallows-Sloane upper bounds ().

$`\begin{array}{cccc}\text{Type I}\hfill & (q=2,c=2):\hfill & & d2n/8+2.\hfill \\ \text{Type II}\hfill & (q=2,c=4):\hfill & & d4n/24+4.\hfill \\ \text{Type III}\hfill & (q=3,c=3):\hfill & & d3n/12+3.\hfill \\ \text{Type IV}\hfill & (q=4,c=2):\hfill & & d2n/6+2.\hfill \end{array}`$
## 4 Two-variable zeta functions

Pellikaan defined, for an algebraic curve over a finite field, the two-variable zeta function as the convergent power series

$$Z(T,u)=\underset{[D]}{}\frac{u^{l(D)}1}{u1}T^{\mathrm{deg}D}$$

The summation is over divisor classes $`[D]`$. For a finite field of size $`q`$ and for $`u=q`$, it agrees with the Hasse-Weil zeta function: $`Z(T,q)=Z(T)`$. Some familiar properties of the Hasse-Weil zeta function generalize to the Pellikaan zeta function . Thus $`Z(T,u)`$ is a rational function in the variables $`T`$ and $`u`$, with functional equation

$$Z(T,u)=Z(\frac{1}{uT},u)u^{g1}T^{2g2}$$

The vanderGeer-Schoof two-variable zeta function gives a generalization to number fields. In the version for curves it is defined as

$$\zeta ^{GS}(s,t)=\underset{[D]}{}q^{sh^0+th^1}$$

where $`h^0=dimL(D)`$ and $`h^1=dim\mathrm{\Omega }(D)=dimL(KD)`$. We use it in the form

$$Z^{GS}(x,y)=\underset{[D]}{}x^{h_0}y^{h_1}$$

so that $`\zeta ^{GS}(s,t)=Z^{GS}(q^s,q^t)`$. Deninger gives the relation between $`Z(T,u)`$ and $`\zeta ^{GS}(s,t)`$ (Proposition 2.1 ). For $`Z^{GS}`$ it becomes,

$$Z(T,u)(u1)T^{1g}=Z^{GS}(uT,T^1)$$
(1)
Two-variable rank-generating polynomials for matroids go back to Whitney and to important papers in graph theory by Tutte. The columns in the generating matrix of a code form a set $`G`$. For each subset $`A`$ of columns, let

$`r(A)`$ $`=\mathrm{rank}(A)`$ (rank)
$`\rho (A)`$ $`=|A|`$ (degree)
$`n(A)`$ $`=\rho (A)r(A)`$ (nullity)
The rank-generating polynomial (or Whitney polynomial, or corank-nullity polynomial, e.g. ) is defined as

$$W_G(x,y)=\underset{AG}{}x^{r(G)r(A)}y^{|A|r(A)}$$

For a code with column set $`G`$, the weight enumerator is given by Greene’s Theorem , which can be written in the form

$$\frac{A(x,y)}{(xy)^ky^{nk}}=W_G(\frac{qy}{xy},\frac{xy}{y})$$

The rank-generating polynomial of a code depends only on the generators of the code. To compute the weight enumerator of a code after taking coefficients in an extension field, only $`q`$ needs to be replaced. We give a version of Greene’s theorem for the normalized rank-generating polynomial. Let

$`W_n(x,y)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}\right)}}{\displaystyle \underset{AG,|A|=i}{}}x^{r(G)r(A)}y^{|A|r(A)}.`$ (2)
$`A_n(x,y)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}\right)}}A_ix^{ni}y^i`$ (3)
Then

$`A_n(s,t)(s+t)^{n+1}=`$ $`W_n({\displaystyle \frac{qt}{s+t}},{\displaystyle \frac{s+t}{t}})(s+t)^kt^{nk}s^{n+1}`$
$`+`$ $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n({\displaystyle \frac{qs}{s+t}},{\displaystyle \frac{s+t}{s}})(s+t)^ks^{nk}t^{n+1}`$ (4)
The relation is written as a polynomial identity but the polynomial $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n`$ has a priori no particular meaning, so the relation could as well be used with $`s=1`$ as a congruence relation modulo $`t^{n+1}`$,

$$A_n(1,t)(1+t)^{n+1}W_n(\frac{qt}{1+t},\frac{1+t}{t})(1+t)^kt^{nk}(modt^{n+1})$$
(5)
An exception is for binary self-complementary codes that have $`A_n(s,t)=A_n(t,s)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n=W_n`$. We want to show that there is a natural definition of a two-variable zeta function for codes that is compatible with our earlier definitions for the one-variable case.

To relate the two-variable zeta function of Pellikaan and the rank-generating polynomial, let, for a special divisor $`E`$ on the curve,

$`r(E)`$ $`=l(K)l(KE)`$
$`\rho (E)`$ $`=\mathrm{deg}(E)`$
$`n(E)`$ $`=\mathrm{deg}(E)(l(K)l(KE))=l(E)1`$
These definitions do not make the set of special divisors into a representable matroid (unless we allow a somewhat wider definition) but they seem perfectly natural and give a satisfactory correspondence. The canonical divisor $`K`$ has rank $`l(K)1`$ and the rank-generating polynomial for special divisors becomes

$$W(x,y)=\underset{[E]}{}x^{l(KE)1}y^{l(E)1}$$

which is similar to the vanderGeer-Schoof two-variable zeta function.

To define a two-variable zeta function for codes, we use two properties of the two-variable zeta function for curves: (1) the number of divisor classes of given degree is constant and equal to $`h`$. (2) the zeta function consists of a finite contribution and an infinite tail that only depends on $`h`$. The first property holds with $`h=1`$ for the normalized rank-generating polynomial $`W_n(x,y)`$. For the second property we add an infinite tail to $`W_n`$.

$$W_n^+(x,y)=W_n(x,y)+\frac{x^{k+1}}{1x}+\frac{y^{nk+1}}{1y}.$$
(6)
For a normalized rank-generating function $`W_n^+`$, define a two-variable zeta function, in analogy with (1), via

$$Z(T,u)(u1)T^{1g}=W_n^+(uT,T^1)$$
(7)
We show that this definition is compatable with the one-variable zeta function in Definition 2, such that $`Z(T,q)=Z(T)`$. We modify (5) to include contributions of the infinite tail that was added to $`W_n`$ in (6). Let $`x=qt/(1+t)`$.

$$(\frac{qt}{1+t})^{k+1}\frac{1+t}{1(q1)t}(1+t)^kt^{nk}0(modt^{n+1})$$

Let $`y=(1+t)/t`$.

$$(\frac{1+t}{t})^{nk+1}\frac{t}{1}(1+t)^kt^{nk}(1+t)^n(modt^{n+1})$$

Combined with (5) and (6) this gives

$$(A_n(1,t)1)(1+t)^{n+1}W_n^+(\frac{qt}{1+t},\frac{1+t}{t})(1+t)^kt^{nk}(modt^{n+1}).$$

Or, using $`A_n(1,t)1=(q1)a(t)t^d`$ and (7),

$$a(t)t^d(1+t)^{n+1}Z(\frac{t}{1+t},q)(\frac{t}{1+t})^{1g}(1+t)^kt^{nk}(modt^{n+1}).$$

Finally, with $`d=n+1kg`$ this reduces to

$$a(t)(1+t)^{d+1}Z(\frac{t}{1+t},q)(modt^{n+1d})$$

which agrees with Definition 2 after the substitution $`t=T/(1T)`$. Compare also with Theorem 1.

As an example, an MDS code of length $`n`$ and dimension $`k`$ has

$$W_n(x,y)=x^k+\mathrm{}+x+1+y+\mathrm{}+y^{nk},$$

$$W_n^+(x,y)=\frac{1xy}{(1x)(1y)},$$

and

$$Z(T,u)=\frac{T^1}{(1uT)(1T^1)}=\frac{1}{(1T)(1uT)}$$

The passage from $`W_n`$ to $`W_n^+`$ to define the two-variable zeta function of a code is in line with Theorem 1. The effect of puncturing on the polynomial $`W_n`$ is $`W_nW_ny^{nk}`$, and the effect of shortening is $`W_nW_nx^k`$. Thus by adding an infinite tail, $`W_n^+`$ has become invariant under puncturing or shortening.

## 5 A Clifford type theorem for self-dual codes

We give an interpretation of Clifford’s theorem for self-dual codes. In , , Clifford’s theorem is used to give estimates for the weight distributions of geometric Goppa codes. Clifford’s theorem says

$$l(E)1+l(KE)1l(K)1$$

which corresponds to an inequality

$$n(A)+r(G)r(A)r(G)2r(A)|A|$$

for representable matroids.

###### Proposition 2

The inequality $`2r(A)|A|`$ holds for any code that contains its dual and for any choice of columns $`A`$. In the special case of a self-dual code $`C`$, equality holds if and only if $`C=C_1C_2`$ for self-dual codes $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ that are supported on $`A`$ and the complement of $`A`$, respectively.

Proof. Corank and nullity are dual notions and $`k^{}r^{}(\overline{A})=|A|r(A)`$. The subcode of the dual code with support on $`A`$ therefore has dimension $`|A|r(A)`$. The subcode is self-orthogonal and thus $`2|A|2r(A)|A|`$, with equality if and only if it is self-dual. Using duality twice, we have $`k^{}+|\overline{A}|2r^{}(\overline{A})=k+|A|2r(A)`$. And for a self-dual code, $`2r(A)=|A|`$ if and only if $`2r(\overline{A})=|\overline{A}|`$ if and only if both $`A`$ and $`\overline{A}`$ support selfdual codes, in which case clearly $`C=C_1C_2`$ as required. $`\mathrm{}`$

A short argument to prove the Clifford inequality for self-dual codes is provided by \[10, Theorem 3.9\]. The $`n=2k`$ columns in a self-dual code divide in at least one way into two independent subsets of size $`k`$ each. Let the subset $`A`$ have $`a_1`$ columns in the first subset and $`a_2`$ columns in the second subset. Then $`2r(A)2\mathrm{max}\{a_1,a_2\}a_1+a_2=|A|`$.

The inequality $`2r(A)|A|`$ for self-dual codes, does in general not hold for formally self-dual codes. It is easy to find a formally self-dual code for which the inequality fails. We may take $`(10)`$ with dual code $`(01)`$.


text:
# 1 General discussion

## 1 General discussion

False vacuum decay by the tunneling in the WKB approximation is described by the $`O(4)`$-symmetric bounce solution, $`\varphi _b(\sqrt{\stackrel{}{x}^2+\tau ^2})`$. In the limit of small energy-density difference, $`ϵ`$, between the true and false vacuum the bounce looks like a large four-dimensional spherical bubble of true vacuum separated by a thin wall from a sea of false vacuum. The evolution of the system after tunneling is described by the $`O(3,1)`$ invariant solution that is obtained by the analytic continuation of the bounce to the Minkowskian time $`\tau it`$, see . Since the field $`\varphi `$ describing the bubble nucleation end expansion is coupled to itself and to the fluctuation field, the false vacuum decay through the barrier penetration is accompanied by the particle production. Using the formalism developed in  for the calculation of particle number the particle production by the thin-walled bubble was considered in . However, we fail to corroborate the main conclusion of  that for the momentum comparable to the curvature scale of the bubble there is a strong enhancement of the particle production. In this paper we would like to point out that, in general, the particle production in the thin-wall approximation is strongly suppressed. The calculations have been undertaken to exhibit the exponential suppression of the particle production, even when the momentum is comparable to the curvature scale of the bubble, rather than for actual use in calculation of particle number at all momenta. Throughout this paper the metric signature in Minkowski space-time is $`(,+,+,+)`$ and units $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$ are used. The calculations are present in sec.2.

## 2 Particle spectrum

Throughout this paper we restrict ourselves to the consideration of thin-wall case. This approximation for the bubble formation is considered in . We consider a scalar field $`\varphi `$ defined by the Lagrange density

$$=\frac{1}{2}(_\mu \varphi )^2U(\varphi ).$$
(1)
The potential has the form

$$U(\varphi )=\frac{\lambda }{2}\varphi ^2(\varphi 2a)^2ϵ(\varphi ^3/2a^33\varphi ^4/16a^4),$$
(2)
where $`\lambda ,a`$ and $`ϵ`$ are positive parameters. The potential (2) has a local minimum at $`\varphi _f=0,U(0)=0,`$ and a global minimum at $`\varphi _t=2a,U(2a)=ϵ.`$ Bounce solution with a good accuracy is $`\varphi _b=a\{1\mathrm{tanh}(\mu [\rho R])\}`$ where $`\mu =a\sqrt{\lambda }`$ and $`R=2\mu ^3/ϵ\lambda `$. Thickness of the bubble wall is $`L=2/\mu `$. For the potential (2) the condition for the validity of the thin-wall approximation is $`R/L=\mu ^4/ϵ\lambda 1`$. In other words, in this limiting case the energy-density difference between the true and false vacuum is much smaller than the height of the barrier $`U(\varphi )`$. For the calculation of particle spectrum we use the standard technique developed in . The results relevant for our discussion can be summarized as follows. The coordinate system used in the Euclidean region is $`(\rho ,\chi ,\theta ,\phi )`$ where $`(\theta ,\phi )`$ are usual angle coordinates on two-dimensional sphere and $`(\rho ,\chi )`$ are related to $`r=|\stackrel{}{x}|`$ and $`\tau `$ as follows

$`r=\rho \mathrm{sin}(\chi ),\tau =\rho \mathrm{cos}(\chi ),`$
$`0\chi \pi /2,0\rho <\mathrm{}.`$ (3)
The coordinate system in the Minkowski region may obtained by replacement $`(\rho ,\chi )(i\rho _M,i\chi _M)`$, which yields

$`r=\rho _M\mathrm{sinh}(\chi _M),t=\rho _M\mathrm{cosh}(\chi _M),`$
$`0<\chi _M<\mathrm{},0<\rho _M<\mathrm{}.`$ (4)
The basic equation which governs the fluctuation field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t,\stackrel{}{x})`$ reads

$$\left[_M^2\frac{3}{\rho _M}_M+\frac{1}{\rho _M^2}\widehat{L}^2U^{\prime \prime }(\varphi _b)\right]\mathrm{\Phi }=0,$$
(5)
where $`_M`$ denotes the partial derivative with respect to $`\rho _M`$ and $`\widehat{L}`$ is the Laplacian operator on three-dimensional unit hyperboloid. Since the bounce solution has $`O(3,1)`$ symmetry in Minkowski region one can label $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ by the eigenvalues of the angular momentum, $`(l,m)`$ as well as by the radial momentum, $`p`$, and write

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=Y_{plm}(\chi ,\theta ,\phi )\frac{\psi _M(\rho _M)}{\rho _M^{3/2}},$$
(6)
where $`Y_{plm}`$ are eigenfunctions of the operator $`\widehat{L}^2`$ with eigenvalues $`1+p^2`$. After substituting Eq.(6) into Eq.(5) and analytically continuing of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ to the Euclidean region by replacement $`\rho _Mi\rho ,\chi _Mi\chi `$ one obtains the equation for the fluctuation field in the under-barrier region

$$\left[_\rho ^2+\frac{(p^2+1/4)}{\rho ^2}U^{\prime \prime }(\varphi _b)\right]\psi =0,$$
(7)
where $`\psi (\rho )\psi _M(i\rho )`$. This is a zero-energy Schrödinger equation

$$[_\rho ^2V(\rho )]\psi =0$$
(8)
of a particle in the potential

$$V(\rho )=\frac{(p^2+1/4)}{\rho ^2}+2\mu ^2\{3\mathrm{tanh}^2(\mu [\rho R])1\}+ϵ\text{-term}.$$
(9)
Thus, $`\psi _M(\rho _M)`$ is given by solving Eq.(8) with $`\rho `$ replaced by $`i\rho `$. Since in the thin-wall approximation $`\varphi _b(0)`$ is very close to the true vacuum value $`2a`$ the solution obtained in this way after the analytical continuation at the turning point $`\rho =0`$ will have the form

$$\psi _M(\rho _M)=c_1(p)\sqrt{\rho _M}e^{\pi p/2}H_{ip}^{(1)}(\omega \rho _M)+c_2(p)\sqrt{\rho _M}e^{\pi p/2}H_{ip}^{(2)}(\omega \rho _M),$$

where $`\omega ^2=U^{\prime \prime }(\varphi _b(0))`$. At $`\tau =\mathrm{}`$ the field $`\varphi `$ is in false vacuum state and correspondingly the fluctuation field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ satisfies the vanishing boundary condition when $`\rho \mathrm{}`$. The spectrum of created particles $`n(p)`$ is given by

$$n(p)=\frac{1}{(|c_1(p)/c_2(p)|^21)}.$$
(10)
For detailed description of the general formalism see .
If $`p`$ is of order or smaller than $`\mu R`$ one can approximate the potential $`V`$ as follows

$$V=\{\begin{array}{cc}4\mu ^2v/\rho ^2\hfill & \rho _+<\rho ,\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{v}_3(x+v_2/v_3)^2k\hfill & |x|L,\hfill \\ 4\mu ^2v/\rho ^2\hfill & \rho <\rho _{},\hfill \end{array}$$
(11)
where $`v=p^2+1/4,x=\rho R,v_1=v/R^2+2\mu ^2,v_2=v/R^3,v_3=6\mu ^43v/R^4,\stackrel{~}{v}_3=v_3(6+(p/\mu R)^2)/24,k=v_3(v_1/v_3+v_2^2/v_3^2),\rho _\pm =R\pm L`$. We have neglected the contribution coming from the $`ϵ`$-term because at $`\varphi =0`$ this term equals zero and at $`\varphi a`$ this is of order $`ϵ\lambda /\mu ^2\mu ^2`$. The general solution of Eq.(8) in regions $`|\rho R|>L`$ is written in terms of modified Bessel functions. For solving this equation we have used the program package Maple 7.
In region $`\rho <\rho _{}`$ the solution reads

$$\psi =a_1\sqrt{\rho }I_{ip}(2\mu \rho )+a_2\sqrt{\rho }K_{ip}(2\mu \rho ).$$
(12)
In region $`|x|L`$, the exact solution to this equation is expressed in terms of Whittaker $`W,M`$ functions . Using the program package Maple 7 one finds that in region $`|x|L`$ the solution has the form

$$\psi =a_3W(b,1/4,z^2)/\sqrt{|z|}+a_4M(b,1/4,z^2)/\sqrt{|z|},$$
(13)
where $`z=\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/4}(x+v_2/v_3),b=k/4\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/2}`$. For $`s=p/\mu R`$ by taking into account that in the thin-wall approximation $`(\mu R)^2(\mu R)^4`$ one gets

$`k/v_3^{1/2}=(v+2\mu ^2R^2+v^2/(6\mu ^4R^43v))/\sqrt{6\mu ^4R^43v}`$
$`((2+s^2)\mu ^2R^2+v^2/6\mu ^4R^4)/\sqrt{6\mu ^4R^4}(2+s^2)/\sqrt{6},`$
and

$`(\pm 2/\mu +v_2/v_3)v_3^{1/4}=(\pm 2/\mu R+v/(6\mu ^4R^43v))(6\mu ^4R^43v)^{1/4}`$
$`(\pm 2/\mu R+v/6\mu ^4R^4)\mu R6^{1/4}\pm 2\times 6^{1/4}.`$
It is convenient to introduce the following notations

$`W_\pm (s)=W(b,1/4,z^2)/\sqrt{|z|}|_{\pm \stackrel{~}{z}},W_\pm ^{}(s)=\left\{W(b,1/4,z^2)/\sqrt{|z|}\right\}^{}|_{\pm \stackrel{~}{z}},`$
$`M_\pm (s)=M(b,1/4,z^2)/\sqrt{|z|}|_{\pm \stackrel{~}{z}},M_\pm ^{}(s)=\left\{M(b,1/4,z^2)/\sqrt{|z|}\right\}^{}|_{\pm \stackrel{~}{z}},`$
where $`\pm \stackrel{~}{z}=z(x=\pm L)\pm 0.1304\times (6+s^2)^{1/4}`$ and the prime denotes differentiation with respect to $`z`$. These quantities are needed for the matchings at $`\rho _\pm `$. Using the program package Maple 7 one can estimate $`W_\pm ,W_\pm ^{},M_\pm ,M_\pm ^{}`$ at the desired value of $`s`$.
In region $`\rho >\rho _+`$ the solution satisfying the vanishing boundary condition when $`\rho \mathrm{}`$ reads

$$\psi =a_5\sqrt{\rho }K_{ip}(2\mu \rho ).$$
(14)
For our purposes the quantity of immediate interest is $`n(p)=|a_1(p)/a_2(p)\pi |^2`$, see . So, one can omit the common multiplier of $`a_1,a_2`$ coefficients as well as the common multiplier of $`a_3,a_4`$ coefficients. The matching at $`\rho _+`$ gives

$$\begin{array}{cc}a_3M_+^{}K_{ip}(2\mu \rho _+)M_+\{K_{ip}(2\mu \rho _+)/2\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/4}\rho _++K_{ip}^{}(2\mu \rho _+)2\mu /\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/4}\},\hfill & \\ a_4W_+\{K_{ip}(2\mu \rho _+)/2\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/4}\rho _++K_{ip}^{}(2\mu \rho _+)2\mu /\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/4}\}W_+^{}K_{ip}(2\mu \rho _+),\hfill & \end{array}$$
(15)
the proportionality coefficients are the same for $`a_3`$ and $`a_4`$, here and below the prime denotes differentiation with respect to the whole argument. The matching at $`\rho _{}`$ gives

$`a_1\{K_{ip}(2\mu \rho _{})/2\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/4}\rho _{}+K_{ip}^{}(2\mu \rho _{})2\mu /\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/4}\}\{a_3W_{}+a_4M_{}\}`$
$`K_{ip}(2\mu \rho _{})\{a_3W_{}^{}+a_4M_{}^{}\},`$
$`a_2\{I_{ip}(2\mu \rho _{})/2\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/4}\rho _{}+I_{ip}^{}(2\mu \rho _{})2\mu /\stackrel{~}{v}_3^{1/4}\}\{a_3W_{}+a_4M_{}\}+`$ (16)
$`I_{ip}(2\mu \rho _{})\{a_3W_{}^{}+a_4M_{}^{}\},`$
the proportionality coefficients are the same for $`a_1`$ and $`a_2`$. In the thin-wall approximation $`\mu \rho _\pm 1`$ and for evaluating the modified Bessel functions of the $`2\mu \rho _\pm `$’s one can use the asymptotic formulae.
For $`p\sqrt{\mu R}`$ one can use the following asymptotic expansions , see ,

$$\begin{array}{c}I_{ip}(x)\mathrm{exp}(x)\{1+(4p^2+1)/8x+\mathrm{}\}/\sqrt{2\pi x},\hfill \\ I_{ip}^{}(x)\mathrm{exp}(x)\{1(34p^2)/8x+\mathrm{}\}/\sqrt{2\pi x},\hfill \\ K_{ip}(x)\mathrm{exp}(x)\{1(4p^21)/8x+\mathrm{}\}\sqrt{\pi /2x},\hfill \\ K_{ip}^{}(x)\mathrm{exp}(x)\{1+(34p^2)/8x+\mathrm{}\}\sqrt{\pi /2x}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(17)
For $`p\mu R`$ the asymptotic expansions of modified Bessel functions of purely imaginary order and their derivatives are derived in . Motivated in part by the fact that $`K_{ip}(x)`$, where $`x`$ is real variable, is the imaginary part of $`I_{ip}(x)`$ up to a multiplicative factor, recent investigations have been carried out on the real part $`I_{ip}(x)`$, denoted by $`L_{ip}(x)`$,

$$L_{ip}(x)=\frac{1}{2}\{I_{ip}(x)+I_{ip}(x)\}.$$

Any of $`L_{ip}(x),K_{ip}(x)`$ and $`I_{ip}(x)`$ can be constructed from the remaining two functions by the identity

$$I_{ip}(x)=L_{ip}(x)i\frac{\mathrm{sinh}(p\pi )}{\pi }K_{ip}(x).$$
(18)
Both $`K_{ip}(x)`$ and $`L_{ip}(x)`$ are real valued and even functions of $`p`$.
For $`p<x`$, introducing $`p=x\mathrm{sin}\theta `$, where $`0<\theta <\pi /2`$, the leading terms of asymptotic expansions are

$$\begin{array}{c}L_{ip}(p\mathrm{csc}\theta )\mathrm{exp}(p[\mathrm{cot}\theta +\theta ])/\sqrt{2p\pi \mathrm{cot}\theta }+\mathrm{exp}(p[\pi \theta \mathrm{cot}\theta ])3p\mathrm{cot}^2\theta /2\pi ,\hfill \\ L_{ip}^{}(p\mathrm{csc}\theta )\mathrm{exp}(p[\mathrm{cot}\theta +\theta ])\sqrt{\mathrm{cot}\theta /2p\pi }+\mathrm{exp}(p[\pi \theta \mathrm{cot}\theta ])\mathrm{tan}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta /3\pi ,\hfill \\ K_{ip}(p\mathrm{csc}\theta )\mathrm{exp}(p[\mathrm{cot}\theta +\theta ])\sqrt{\pi /2p\mathrm{cot}\theta },\hfill \\ K_{ip}^{}(p\mathrm{csc}\theta )\mathrm{exp}(p[\mathrm{cot}\theta +\theta ])\mathrm{sin}\theta \sqrt{\pi \mathrm{cot}\theta /2p}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(19)
For $`px`$ the leading terms of asymptotic expansions take the form

$$\begin{array}{c}L_{ip}(p)\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\{Bi(0)/2^{2/3}p^{1/3}+Bi^{}(0)/2^{1/3}p^{5/3}70\},\hfill \\ L_{ip}^{}(p)\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\{Bi^{}(0)/2^{1/3}p^{2/3}Bi(0)/2^{2/3}p^{4/3}5\},\hfill \\ K_{ip}(p)\pi \mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\{2^{1/3}Ai(0)/p^{1/3}+2^{2/3}Ai^{}(0)/70p^{5/3}\},\hfill \\ K_{ip}^{}(p)\pi \mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\{2^{2/3}Ai^{}(0)/p^{2/3}2^{1/3}Ai(0)/5p^{4/3}\},\hfill \end{array}$$
(20)
where $`Ai,Bi`$ are Airy functions.
For $`p>x`$, introducing $`p=x\mathrm{cosh}\nu `$ and $`\alpha =p(\mathrm{tanh}\nu \nu )+\pi /4`$, where $`\nu >0`$, the leading terms of asymptotic expansions are

$$\begin{array}{c}L_{ip}(p\text{sech}\nu )\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\sqrt{\mathrm{coth}\nu }\{\mathrm{cos}\alpha +\mathrm{sin}\alpha \}/\sqrt{2p\pi },\hfill \\ L_{ip}^{}(p\text{sech}\nu )\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\mathrm{cosh}\nu \{\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\alpha \}/\sqrt{2p\pi \mathrm{coth}\nu },\hfill \\ K_{ip}(p\text{sech}\nu )\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\sqrt{2\pi \mathrm{coth}\nu }\{\mathrm{cos}\alpha \mathrm{sin}\alpha \}/\sqrt{p},\hfill \\ K_{ip}^{}(p\text{sech}\nu )\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\sqrt{2\pi }\mathrm{cosh}\nu \{\mathrm{sin}\alpha +\mathrm{cos}\alpha \}/\sqrt{p\mathrm{coth}\nu }.\hfill \end{array}$$
(21)
We can now analyze the particle spectrum. Using the leading asymptotic terms from Eq.(17) for small values of $`p`$ one gets

$$n(p)16(\mu R)^2\mathrm{exp}(8\mu R).$$
(22)
Notice that this result is different from that one obtained in  for small values of $`p`$. Taking into account that $`W_\pm ,M_\pm ,W_\pm ^{},M_\pm ^{}`$ are real valued functions from Eqs.(15,2,18) one obtains

$$a_2Re(a_2)+i\frac{\mathrm{sinh}(p\pi )}{\pi }a_1,$$

and correspondingly

$$n(p)=\frac{1}{(\pi Re(a_2)/a_1)^2+\mathrm{sinh}^2(p\pi )}.$$
(23)
Thus, If $`p1`$ from Eq.(23) one simply concludes that $`n(p)`$ is suppressed at least as

$$n(p)\mathrm{exp}(2p\pi ).$$
(24)
As it is clearly seen from Eq.(23) $`n(p)`$ vanishes for that values of $`p`$ at which $`Re(a_2)/a_1`$ becomes infinity. Using Eqs.(19,20,21) one can easily estimate the term $`Re(a_2)/a_1`$ with exponential accuracy. If $`p`$ is large, of order $`\mu R`$, but small than $`2\mu R`$ such that $`\mathrm{arcsin}(p/x)`$ is not very close to $`\pi /2`$ from Eq.(19) one gets

$$Re(a_2)/a_1\mathrm{exp}(4p[\mathrm{cot}\theta +\theta ]),$$
(25)
where $`0<\theta <\pi /2`$. For the values of $`\theta `$ very close to $`\pi /2`$ one has to use Eq.(20). If $`p`$ is close to $`2\mu R`$ using Eq.(20) one gets

$$Re(a_2)/a_1\mathrm{exp}(4\pi \mu R).$$
(26)
For $`p`$ of order $`\mu R`$ such that $`p>2\mu R`$ from Eq.(21) one gets

$$Re(a_2)/a_1\mathrm{exp}(2p\pi ).$$
(27)
For very large momentum, assuming for instance $`p(\mu R)^2`$, one can approximate $`V(\rho )`$ as follows

$$V=\{\begin{array}{cc}4\mu ^2v/\rho ^2\hfill & \rho _+\rho ,\hfill \\ 2\mu ^2v/\rho ^2\hfill & |x|<L,\hfill \\ 4\mu ^2v/\rho ^2\hfill & \rho \rho _{}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(28)
Namely, we have replaced the well of the second term of Eq.(9) in region $`|x|<L`$ by the square well, and if $`p`$ is very large one can neglect the contribution coming from such a deformation of the potential in region $`|x|<L`$ in comparison with the term $`v/\rho ^2`$. Now in region $`|x|<L`$ the general solution of Eq.(8) is expressed in terms of Bessel functions of purely imaginary order. With no loss of generality one can choose the solution in this region to be real valued function. For instance in this region one can take

$$\psi =a_3\sqrt{\rho }Re(J_{ip}(\sqrt{2}\mu \rho ))+a_4\sqrt{\rho }Re(Y_{ip}(\sqrt{2}\mu \rho )).$$
(29)
It is clear that for the particle spectrum one gets again the Eq.(23) and simply concludes that for very large momentum $`n(p)`$ is suppressed at least as

$$n(p)\mathrm{exp}(2p\pi ).$$
(30)
The asymptotic behavior of Bessel functions of large purely imaginary order can be found in . Namely, in  one can find the asymptotic expansions of $`J_{ip}(x)`$ and $`H_{ip}^{(1)}(x)`$,

$$\begin{array}{c}J_{ip}(x)\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\mathrm{exp}(i\sqrt{p^2+x^2}ip\text{arsh}(p/x)i\pi /4)/\sqrt{2}\pi (p^2x^2)^{1/4},\hfill \\ H_{ip}^{(1)}(x)\sqrt{2}\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)\mathrm{exp}(i\sqrt{p^2+x^2}ip\text{arsh}(p/x)i\pi /4)/\pi (p^2+x^2)^{1/4},\hfill \end{array}$$
(31)
and using the standard relation $`Y_{ip}(x)=i\{J_{ip}(x)H_{ip}^{(1)}(x)\}`$ can determine the asymptotic behavior of $`Y_{ip}(x)`$. Using Eqs.(21,31) one can easily estimate the ratio $`Re(a_2)/a_1`$ with exponential accuracy. The matchings at $`\rho _+,\rho _{}`$ give $`a_{3,4}\mathrm{exp}(p\pi )`$ and $`a_1\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2),a_2\mathrm{exp}(p\pi /2)`$ respectively. Correspondingly, for very large momentum

$$Re(a_2)/a_1\mathrm{exp}(2p\pi ).$$
(32)
Thus, we have explicitly shown that, in general, the particle production in the thin-wall approximation is exponentially suppressed. Using Eqs.(21,31) one can also evaluate the ultraviolet finiteness of the number of created particles. Without carrying out the explicit computation from these asymptotic formulae one concludes that for very large momentum the particle production is controlled by the term $`n(p)\mathrm{exp}(2p\pi )\times (`$rational function of $`p)`$. As an unessential to this problem we do not take into account the terms enclosed in the braces in Eq.(21). For this expression the integral $`\underset{p(\mu R)^2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}n(p)`$ is certainly convergent. So we infer that the number of created particles is ultraviolet finite. This completes the review.

## Acknowledgments

It is our pleasure to acknowledge helpful conversations with Professors A. Khelashvili, G. Lavrelashvili and I. Lomidze.