1: % draft   10-19-01

2: % revised 11-26-01

3: % revised 02-18-03

4: % revised 11-08-04

5:   

6: %  preprint style

7: %\documentstyle[preprint,aps,psfig]{revtex}

8: \documentclass[preprint,aps]{revtex4}

9: %  galley style

10: %\documentstyle[aps,epsf,twocolumn]{revtex}

11: %  preprint style, small

12: %\documentstyle[draft,aps,epsf]{revtex}

13: %\documentstyle[12pt]{article}

14: \usepackage{graphicx}

15: 

16: %useful macros

17: \newcommand {\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}

18: \newcommand {\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}

19: \newcommand {\be}{\begin{equation}}

20: \newcommand {\ee}{\end{equation}}

21: \newcommand {\qslash}{q\!\!\!/}

22: \newcommand {\muslash}{\mu\!\!\!/}

23: \newcommand {\Dslash}{D\!\!\!/}

24: 

25: \begin{document}

26: 

27: 

28: %\draft

29: %\preprint{SUNY-NTG-01-41}

30: 

31: \title{Instantons and Monte Carlo Methods in 

32: Quantum Mechanics}

33: 

34: \author{T.~Sch\"afer$^{1,2}$}

35: 

36: \address{

37: $^1$Department of Physics, North Carolina State University,

38: Raleigh, NC 27695\\ 

39: $^2$Riken-BNL Research Center, Brookhaven National 

40: Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973}

41: 

42: 

43: \begin{abstract}

44:  In these lectures we describe the use of Monte Carlo

45: simulations in understanding the role of tunneling 

46: events, instantons, in a quantum mechanical toy model.

47: We study, in particular, a variety of methods that 

48: have been used in the QCD context, such as Monte Carlo

49: simulations of the partition function, cooling and

50: heating, the random and interacting instanton

51: liquid model, and numerical simulations of non-Gaussian

52: corrections to the semi-classical approximation.

53:  

54: \end{abstract}

55: \maketitle

56: 

57: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

58: \section{Introduction}

59: \label{sec_intro}

60: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

61: 

62:  We consider a non-relativistic particle moving in a potential 

63: $V(x)$. The Hamiltonian of the system is given by

64: \be

65: \label{H}

66:  H = \frac{p^2}{2m} + \lambda \left(x^2-\eta^2\right)^2 . 

67: \ee

68: We can rescale $x$ and $t$ such that $2m=\lambda=1$. We will 

69: also use $\hbar=1$. This means that the system is characterized 

70: by just one dimensionless parameter, $\eta$. The potential $V(x)$ 

71: with $\eta=1.4$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_spec}a. The physics of 

72: this system is easy to understand. Classically, there are two 

73: degenerate minima at $x=\pm \eta$. Quantum mechanically, the two 

74: states can mix. If the potential barrier is very high, $\eta\to

75: \infty$, the wave functions of the ground state and the first 

76: excited state are approximately given by 

77: \be

78: \label{psipm}

79: \psi_{0,1}(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\psi_-(x)\pm \psi_+(x)), 

80: \ee

81: where $\psi_\pm(x)$ are the ground state wave functions in the 

82: left and right minimum of the potential. The energy splitting

83: between the ground state and the first excited state is 

84: exponentially small. The WKB approximation gives

85: \be

86:  \Delta E = E_1-E_0 = \sqrt{\frac{6S_0}{\pi}}\omega

87:    \exp(-S_0),

88: \ee

89: where $\omega=4\eta$ and $S_0=m^2\omega^3/(12\lambda)=4\eta^3/3$. 

90: 

91:  Applications of the WKB method and of instantons to the 

92: double well potential are discussed in many reviews and

93: text books \cite{Polyakov:1976fu,Vainshtein:1981wh,Coleman:1978ae,Shuryak:1988ck,Kleinert:1995,Zinn-Justin:1993wc,Schafer:1996wv,Forkel:2000sq}.

94: It is not our intention to present another review on the 

95: subject in these lecture notes. Instead, we will use 

96: the double well potential to illustrate a number of 

97: numerical methods that have proven useful in the context

98: of QCD and other gauge theories. 

99:  

100: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

101: \section{Exact Diagonalization}

102: \label{sec_diag}

103: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

104: 

105: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

106: \begin{figure}

107: \begin{minipage}{8cm}

108: \includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip=true]{pot.eps}

109: \end{minipage}  

110: \begin{minipage}{8cm}

111: \includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip=true]{spectrum.eps}  

112: \end{minipage}

113: \caption{\label{fig_spec}

114: a) Double well potential $V(x)=(x^2-\eta^2)^2$ for $\eta=1.4$.

115: We have indicated the position of the ground state and the 

116: first three excited state. b) Spectrum of the double well potential 

117: as a function of the parameter $\eta$. In this figure we show 

118: the position of the first six states. We clearly observe that 

119: positive and negative parity states become degenerate as $\eta\to

120: \infty$.}

121: \end{figure}

122: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

123: 

124:  The quantum mechanical problem defined by the Hamiltonian 

125: equ.~(\ref{H}) can be solved by determining the eigenvalues 

126: and eigenvectors of $H$. This can be achieved by choosing a

127: basis and numerically diagonalizing the Hamilton operator in 

128: that basis. We have chosen a simple harmonic oscillator basis 

129: defined by the eigenstates of

130: \be

131: \label{H_0}

132:  H_0 = \frac{p^2}{2m}+\frac{1}{2}m\omega_0^2 x^2.

133: \ee

134: The value of $\omega_0$ is arbitrary, but the truncation 

135: error of the eigenvalues computed in a finite basis will 

136: depend on the choice of $\omega_0$. In practice, however, 

137: this dependence is quite weak. The eigenstates of $H_0$ 

138: satisfy $H_0|n\rangle = |n\rangle \omega_0(n+1/2)$. The 

139: Hamiltonian of the anharmonic oscillator has a very 

140: simple structure in this basis. The only non-zero matrix 

141: elements are

142: \bea

143:  \langle n|H|n\rangle &=&

144:     3A c^4 \left[(n+1)^2+n^2\right]

145:    + B c^2 (2n+1)

146:    + \omega_0 (n+1/2) + c ,\\

147:  \langle n|H|n+2\rangle &=&

148:      A c^4 (4n+6)\sqrt{(n+1)(n+2)}

149:     +B c^2 \sqrt{(n+1)(n+2)}, \\

150:  \langle n|H|n+4\rangle &=&

151:      c^4 \sqrt{(n+1)(n+2)(n+3)(n+4)},

152: \eea

153: as well as the corresponding hermitian conjugates. We have

154: also defined $A=1$, $B=-2\eta^2-\omega_0^2/4$, $C=\eta^4$

155: and $c=1/\sqrt{\omega_0}$. Note that both $H$ and $H_0$ 

156: conserve parity. We can decompose the matrix $H_{nm}=\langle 

157: n|H|m\rangle$ into even and odd components, $H=H_{even}+H_{odd}$, 

158: such that the eigenvectors of $H_{even}$ and $H_{odd}$ have 

159: positive and negative parity, respectively.

160: 

161:  With the choice $\omega_0=4\eta$ even modest basis sizes such 

162: as $N=40$ are sufficient in order to determine the first few 

163: eigenvectors very accurately. In Fig.~\ref{fig_spec}b we show the 

164: first six eigenvalues as a function of the parameter $\eta$. 

165: We clearly observe that as $\eta$ increases pairs of eigenvalues 

166: corresponding to even and odd eigenfunctions become almost 

167: degenerate. In this limit the eigenfunctions are of the form

168: given in equ.~(\ref{psipm}).

169: 

170: 

171: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

172: \section{Quantum Mechanics on a Euclidean Lattice }

173: \label{sec_latt}

174: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

175: 

176:  An alternative to the Hamiltonian formulation of the 

177: problem is the Feynman path integral \cite{Feynman}.

178: The path integral for the anharmonic oscillator is given by 

179: \be

180: \label{pathint}

181:  \langle x_1| e^{-iHt_1}|x_0\rangle = 

182:   \int_{x(0)=x_0}^{x(t_1)=x_1} {\cal D}x\, e^{iS}, 

183:   \hspace{1cm}

184:   S=\int_0^{t_1} dt\, \left(

185:    \frac{1}{4}\dot{x}^4-(x^2-\eta^2)^2 \right).

186: \ee

187: In the following we shall consider the euclidean 

188: partition function

189: \be

190: \label{z}

191:  Z(T) = \int {\cal D}x\, e^{-S_E}, \hspace{1cm}

192:   S_E=\int_0^{\beta} d\tau\, \left(

193:    \frac{1}{4}\dot{x}^4+(x^2-\eta^2)^2 \right),

194: \ee

195: where $\beta=1/T$ is the inverse temperature. The partition 

196: function can be expressed in terms of the eigenvalues of the 

197: Hamiltonian, $Z(T)=\sum_n\exp(-E_n/T)$. In the following we 

198: shall study numerical simulations using a discretized euclidean 

199: action. For this purpose we discretize the euclidean time coordinate 

200: $\tau_i=ia,\,i=1,\ldots n$. The discretized action is given by

201: \be

202: \label{S_disc}

203:  S = \sum_{i=1}^{n}\left\{ \frac{1}{4a} (x_i-x_{i-1})^2

204:   + a(x_i^2-\eta^2)^2 \right\},

205: \ee

206: where $x_i=x(\tau_i)$. We shall consider periodic boundary 

207: conditions $x_0=x_n$. The discretized euclidean path integral 

208: is formally equivalent to the partition function of a statistical 

209: system of ``spins'' $x_i$ arranged on a one-dimensional lattice. 

210: This statistical system can be studied using standard Monte-Carlo 

211: sampling methods. In the following we will simply use the Metropolis 

212: algorithm \cite{Creutz:1980gp,Shuryak:1984xr,Shuryak:1987tr}.

213: The Metropolis method generates an ensemble of configurations

214: $\{x_i\}^{(k)}$ where $i=1,\ldots, n$ labels the lattice points

215: and $k=1,\ldots,N_{conf}$ labels the configurations. Quantum 

216: mechanical averages are computed by averaging observables 

217: over many configurations, 

218: \be 

219: \langle {\cal O} \rangle = \lim_{N_{conf}\to\infty}

220:  \frac{1}{N_{conf}}\sum_{k=1}^{N_{conf}}

221:  {\cal O}^{(k)}

222: \ee

223: where ${\cal O}^{(k)}$ is the value of the classical observable

224: ${\cal O}$ in the configuration $\{x_i\}^{(k)}$. The configurations 

225: are generated using Metropolis updates $\{x_i\}^{(k)}\to \{x_i\}^{(k+1)}$. 

226: The update consists of a sweep through the lattice during which a trial 

227: update $x_i^{(k+1)}= x_i^{(k)} +\delta x$ is performed for every lattice 

228: site. Here, $\delta x$ is a random number. The trial update is accepted 

229: with probability

230: \be

231:  P\left(x_i^{(k)}\to x_i^{(k+1)}\right)=

232:    \min\left\{\exp(-\Delta S),1\right\},

233: \ee 

234: where $\Delta S$ is the change in the action equ.~(\ref{S_disc}). 

235: This ensures that the configurations $\{x_i\}^{(k)}$ are distributed 

236: according the ``Boltzmann'' distribution $\exp(-S)$. The distribution 

237: of $\delta x$ is arbitrary as long as the trial update is micro-reversible, 

238: i.~e.~is equally likely to change $x_i^{(k)}$ to $x_i^{(k+1)}$ and back. 

239: The initial configuration is also arbitrary. In order to study 

240: equilibration it is often useful to compare an ordered (cold)

241: start with $\{x_i\}^{(0)}=\{\eta\}$ to a disordered (hot) start $

242: \{x_i\}^{(0)}=\{r_i\}$, where $r_i$ is a random variable. 

243: 

244:  The advantage of the Metropolis algorithm is its simplicity 

245: and robustness. The only parameter to adjust is the distribution

246: of $\delta x$. We typically take $\delta x$ to be a Gaussian random 

247: number with the width of the distribution adjusted such that the 

248: average acceptance rate for the trial updates is around $50\%$. 

249: Fluctuations of ${\cal O}$ provide an estimate in the error

250: of $\langle {\cal O}\rangle$. We have

251: \be 

252: \Delta \langle {\cal O} \rangle =

253:  \sqrt{\frac{\langle {\cal O}^2\rangle -\langle{\cal O}\rangle^2}

254:             {N_{conf}}}. 

255: \ee

256: This requires some care, because the error estimate is based on 

257: the assumption that the configurations are statistically independent. 

258: In practice this can be monitored by computing the auto-correlation 

259: ``time'' in successive measurements ${\cal O}(\{x_i\}^{(k)})$. 

260: The auto-correlation time of different observables can be 

261: very different. For example, successive measurements of the 

262: total energy decorrelate very quickly, but measurements

263: of the topological charge have a much longer correlation

264: time. 

265: 

266:  The energy eigenvalues and wave functions of the quantum 

267: mechanical problem can be obtained from the euclidean correlation 

268: functions

269: \be

270: \label{qm_cor}

271:  \Pi(\tau)=\langle O(0)O(\tau)\rangle.

272: \ee

273: Here, $O(\tau)$ is an operator that can be constructed from the 

274: variables $x(\tau)$, e.g. some integer power $O(\tau)=

275: x(\tau)^n$. The euclidean correlation functions are related

276: to the quantum mechanical states via spectral representations.

277: The spectral representation is obtained by inserting a 

278: complete set of states into the expectation value 

279: equ.~(\ref{qm_cor}). We find

280: \be 

281: \label{spec}

282: \Pi(\tau)= \sum_n |\langle 0|O(0)|n\rangle|^2 

283:  \exp(-(E_n-E_0)\tau),

284: \ee

285: where $E_n$ is the energy of the state $|n\rangle$ and 

286: $|0\rangle$ is the ground state of the system. We can 

287: write this as

288: \be

289: \Pi(\tau)= \int dE\, \rho(E) \exp(-(E-E_0)\tau).

290: \ee

291: In the case we are studying here there are only bound

292: states and the spectral function $\rho(E)$ is a sum of 

293: delta-functions. Equ.~(\ref{spec}) shows that the euclidean 

294: correlation function is easy to construct once the energy 

295: eigenvalues and eigenfunctions are known. This fact was

296: used in order to calculate the solid lines shown in 

297: Figs.~(\ref{fig_cor}). The inverse problem is well defined 

298: in principle, but numerically much harder. In the 

299: following we will concentrate on extracting just the

300: first few energy levels. A technique that can be used 

301: on order determine the spectral function from euclidean

302: correlation functions is the maximum entropy image 

303: reconstruction method, see \cite{Jarrel:1996,Asakawa:2000tr}.

304: 

305: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

306: \begin{figure}

307: \begin{center}

308: \leavevmode

309: \includegraphics[width=9cm]{config.eps}  

310: \end{center}  

311: \caption{\label{fig_path}

312: Typical euclidean path obtained in a Monte Carlo simulation

313: of the discretized euclidean action of the double well 

314: potential for $\eta=1.4$. The lattice spacing in the 

315: euclidean time direction is $a=0.05$ and the total number 

316: of lattice points is $N_\tau=800$. The green curve shows 

317: the corresponding smooth path obtained by running 100 

318: cooling sweeps on the original path. }

319: \end{figure}

320: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

321: 

322:  The Monte Carlo method is very useful in calculating 

323: expectation values in quantum or statistical mechanics. 

324: However, the Monte Carlo method does not directly give 

325: the partition function or the free energy. In principle

326: one can reconstruct the free energy from the energy 

327: eigenvalues but this is not very practical since, as 

328: we just mentioned, it is hard to compute the full spectrum. 

329: A very effective method for computing the free energy is 

330: the adiabatic switching technique. The idea is to start 

331: from a reference system for which the free energy is 

332: known and calculate the free energy difference to the 

333: real system using Monte Carlo methods. 

334: 

335:  For this purpose we write the action as $S_\alpha=S_0+\alpha

336: \Delta S$ where $S$ is the full action, $S_0$ is the action

337: of the reference system, $\Delta S$ is defined by $\Delta S

338: =S-S_0$, and $\alpha$ is a coupling constant. The action 

339: $S_\alpha$ interpolates between the real and the reference 

340: system. Integrating the relation $\partial \log Z(\alpha)/

341: (\partial\alpha)=-\langle \Delta S \rangle_\alpha$ we find

342: \be

343: \label{adiab}

344:  \log(Z(\alpha=1))=\log(Z(\alpha=0)) 

345:  - \int_0^1 d\alpha'\, \langle \Delta S\rangle_{\alpha'} \;\; ,

346: \ee

347: where $\langle .\rangle_\alpha$ is an expectation value 

348: calculated using the action $S_\alpha$. In the present case 

349: it is natural to use the harmonic oscillator as a reference

350: system. In that case

351: \be 

352:  Z(\alpha=0) = \sum_n \exp(-\beta E_n^0) 

353:   = \frac{\exp(-\beta\omega_0/2)}{1-\exp(-\beta\omega_0)},

354: \ee

355: where $\omega_0$ is the oscillator constant. Note that the

356: free energy of the anharmonic oscillator should be independent

357: of $\omega_0$. The integral over the coupling constant $\alpha$ 

358: can easily be calculated in Monte Carlo simulations by slowly

359: changing $\alpha$ from 0 to 1 during the simulation. In 

360: order to estimate systematic errors due to incomplete equilibration 

361: it is useful to repeat the calculation with $\alpha$ changing 

362: from 1 to 0 and study possible hysteresis effects. 

363: 

364: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

365: \section{Numerical Results}

366: \label{sec_num}

367: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

368: 

369:   Numerical results from Monte Carlo simulations of the euclidean 

370: path integral are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig_path}-\ref{fig_cor}. The 

371: numerical data were obtained using the program {\tt qm.for} which 

372: is described in more detail in the appendix. A typical path that 

373: appears in the Monte Carlo simulation is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_path}. 

374: The figure clearly shows that there are two characteristic time scales 

375: in the problem. On short time scales the motion is controlled by the

376: oscillation time $\tau_{osc}\sim \omega^{-1}\sim (4\eta)^{-1}$. 

377: For large $\tau$ the system is governed by the tunneling time 

378: $\tau_{tun} \sim \exp(-4\eta^3/3)$. In order to perform reliable

379: simulations we have to make sure that the lattice spacing $a$ is 

380: small compared to $\tau_{osc}$ and that the total length of 

381: the lattice $Na$ is much larger than the tunneling time

382: \be

383:  a\ll \tau_{osc}, \hspace{0.5cm} \tau_{tun}\ll Na .

384: \ee

385: A typical choice of parameters for the case $\eta=1.4$ is a number 

386: of lattice points $N=800$, a lattice spacing $a=0.05$ and a number 

387: of Metropolis sweeps $N_{conf}=10^5$. 

388: 

389: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

390: \begin{figure}

391: \begin{center}

392: \leavevmode

393: \includegraphics[width=9cm]{psi2.eps}  

394: \end{center}  

395: \caption{\label{fig_psi}

396: Probability distribution $|\psi(x)|^2$ in the double well 

397: potential for $\eta=1.4$. The solid line shows the ``exact''

398: numerical result obtained by diagonalizing the Hamiltonian

399: in an oscillator basis whereas the histogram shows the 

400: distribution of $x$ for an ensemble of euclidean paths. }

401: \end{figure}

402: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

403: 

404:   Fig.~\ref{fig_psi} shows the distribution of $x_i$ obtained 

405: in the Monte Carlo simulation compared to the square of the 

406: ground state wave function computed by the diagonalization 

407: method discussed in section \ref{sec_diag}. As $\eta$ is 

408: increased and the potential barrier becomes larger the tunneling

409: time increases exponentially and the number of configurations

410: needed to reproduce the correct wave function becomes very

411: large. 

412: 

413: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

414: \begin{figure}

415: \begin{center}

416: \leavevmode

417: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{qmcor.eps}  

418: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{dqmcor.eps}  

419: \end{center}  

420: \caption{\label{fig_cor}

421: Fig.~a shows the correlation functions $\langle {\cal O}(0)

422: {\cal O}(\tau)\rangle$ in the double well potential for 

423: $\eta=1.4$ and ${\cal O}=x,x^2,x^3$. The solid lines are ``exact'' 

424: numerical results obtained by diagonalizing the Hamiltonian in an 

425: oscillator basis whereas the data point were obtained from  Monte

426: Carlo simulations with $a=0.05$ and $N_\tau=800$. Fig.~b shows

427: the logarithmic derivative of the correlators in Fig.~a. In the 

428: case of the $\langle x^2(0)x^2(\tau)\rangle$ we subtracted the

429: constant contribution.} 

430: \end{figure}

431: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

432: 

433:  Fig.~\ref{fig_cor} shows the correlation functions of the 

434: operators $x,x^2$ and $x^3$. The solid lines show the result 

435: obtained using the spectral representation equ.~(\ref{spec})

436: together with the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions determined

437: by numerical diagonalization of the Hamiltonian. The data 

438: points show the results from the Monte Carlo simulation. There 

439: is a small systematic disagreement for small $\tau$ which is 

440: related to discretization errors but the overall agreement 

441: is excellent. Energy levels and matrix elements can be obtained

442: from the logarithmic derivative of the correlation function, 

443: \be

444:  C(\tau)= -\frac{d\log\Pi(\tau)}{d\tau} = 

445:  \frac{\sum_n (E_n-E_0) |\langle 0|O(0)|n\rangle|^2 

446:  \exp(-(E_n-E_0)\tau)}

447:       {\sum_n |\langle 0|O(0)|n\rangle|^2 \exp(-(E_n-E_0)\tau)}.

448: \ee

449: In the limit $\tau\to\infty$ the function $C(\tau)$ converges to 

450: the energy splitting between the ground state and the first excited 

451: state that has a non-vanishing transition amplitude $\langle 0|O(0)

452: |n\rangle$. Because of parity invariance, $O=x^n$ connects the 

453: groundstate to parity even/odd levels for $n$ even/odd. Since the 

454: first excited state is parity odd we have

455: \be 

456: \lim_{\tau\to\infty} \frac{d}{d\tau} \log \langle x(\tau)x(0)\rangle 

457:  = \lim_{\tau\to\infty}\frac{d}{d\tau} \log \langle x^3(\tau)x^3(0)\rangle 

458:   = E_1-E_0.

459: \ee

460: For even powers of $x$ the situation is more complicated

461: because the correlator has a constant term $|\langle 0|x^{2n}

462: |0\rangle|^2$. After subtracting the constant part, the logarithmic 

463: derivative of the correlation function of even powers of $x$ tends 

464: to $(E_2-E_0)$. Numerical results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_cor}b. 

465: We observe that the logarithmic derivative of $\langle x(\tau) x(0)

466: \rangle$ converges very rapidly to $\Delta E_1=(E_1-E_0)$. The 

467: numerical results for $\Delta E_2=(E_2-E_0)$ have large 

468: uncertainties. These uncertainties are related to the fact that 

469: the correlator $\langle x^2(\tau)x(0)\rangle$ is dominated by

470: the subtraction constant $\langle x^2\rangle^2$. The logarithmic

471: derivative of the $\langle x^3(\tau)x^3(0)\rangle$ correlator

472: also tends to $\Delta E_1$, but receives larger contributions 

473: from excited states. This feature can be used in order to extract 

474: the energies of higher states. The idea is very simple. From the 

475: matrix elements $c_1=\langle 0|x|1\rangle$ and $d_1=\langle 0|

476: x^3|1\rangle$ we can determine a new operator ${\cal O}=x/c_1-

477: x^3/d_1$ that does not couple to the first excited state. This 

478: operator predominantly couples to the third excited state. 

479: Repeating this procedure we can determine the energies of 

480: higher excited states. The problem is that correlation

481: functions of higher powers of $x$ are more and more noisy.

482: As a result, finding the energies of highly excited states

483: is very hard, even in the simple problem considered here.

484: 

485: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

486: \begin{figure}

487: \begin{center}

488: \includegraphics[width=9cm,clip=true]{free_energy.eps}  

489: \end{center}  

490: \caption{\label{fig_F}

491: Free energy $F=-T\log(Z)$ of the anharmonic oscillator 

492: as a function of the temperature $T=1/\beta$ with $\beta

493: =na$. The solid line was calculated using the spectrum 

494: of the Hamiltonian. The data points were obtained using 

495: Monte Carlo calculations and the adiabatic switching 

496: method.}

497: \end{figure}

498: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

499: 

500:  In Fig.~\ref{fig_F} we show Monte Carlo results for the 

501: partition function compared to ``exact'' results based on 

502: the spectrum of the anharmonic oscillator obtained in 

503: Sect.~\ref{sec_diag}. The Monte Carlo results agree with 

504: the direct calculations but the Monte Carlo method is 

505: effectively limited to a small range of temperatures.

506: If the temperature is very small the partition function

507: is dominated by the ground state contribution. In that case,

508: it is much more efficient to compute the ground state 

509: energy directly by measuring the expectation value of the 

510: Hamiltonian, $E_0=\langle H\rangle$ , with $H=\dot{x}^2/4

511: +V(x)$. There is one subtlety with this approach: If a 

512: naive one-sided discretization of the time derivative is 

513: used then the continuum limit of the expectation value 

514: of the kinetic energy diverges. This problem can be 

515: addressed by using an improved discretization of the kinetic

516: energy \cite{Feynman}, or by using the Virial theorem.

517: The Virial theorem implies that 

518: \be 

519: \langle H \rangle = \langle T+V \rangle

520:  = \langle \frac{x}{2}V'+V \rangle .

521: \ee

522: At high temperature more and more states contribute. The 

523: main difficulty with the Monte Carlo approach in this 

524: regime is that discretization errors have to be carefully 

525: monitored.

526: 

527: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

528: \section{Extracting the Instanton Content using Cooling}

529: \label{sec_cool}

530: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

531: 

532:  From Fig.~\ref{fig_path} we can clearly see that for this particular

533: choice of the parameter $\eta$ a typical path contains two 

534: components, one related to quantum fluctuations with frequency

535: $\omega$, and one related to tunneling events, instantons. In 

536: the continuum limit the instanton solution can be found from 

537: the classical equation of motion

538: \be 

539: \frac{\delta}{\delta x(\tau)} S_E = 0

540: \hspace{0.5cm}\Rightarrow\hspace{0.5cm}

541: m\ddot{x}=V'(x).

542: \ee

543: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

544: \begin{figure}

545: \begin{center}

546: \leavevmode

547: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{qmcoolcor.eps}  

548: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{dqmcoolcor.eps}  

549: \end{center}  

550: \caption{\label{fig_cor_cool}

551: Same as Fig.~\ref{fig_cor} but the correlation functions are 

552: evaluated from cooled Monte Carlo configurations. The 

553: number of cooling sweeps is $N_{cool}=200$. }

554: \end{figure}

555: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

556: The solution which satisfies the boundary condition 

557: $x(\tau\to\pm\infty)=\pm\eta$ is given by

558: \be 

559: x_{I}(\tau) = \eta\tanh\left[

560:   \frac{\omega}{2}(\tau-\tau_0)\right],

561: \ee

562: where $\omega=4\eta$ and $\tau_0$ is the ``location'' of the 

563: instanton. The anti-instanton solution is simply given by 

564: $x_{A}(\tau)=-x_I(\tau)$. The classical action of the instanton is 

565: \be

566:  S_0 = \frac{4\eta^3}{3} .

567: \ee

568: The tunneling rate $n_{I+A}=N_{I+A}/\beta$ is exponentially

569: small, $n_{I+A}\sim\exp(-S_0)$. In order to determine the 

570: pre-factor one has to study small fluctuations around the 

571: instanton solution. This calculation has been carried out 

572: to next-to-leading order in the semi-classical expansion. The 

573: result is \cite{Zinn-Justin:1993wc,Kleinert:1995,Wohler:pg}

574: \be 

575: \label{idens}

576: n_{I+A}= 8\eta^{5/2} \sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi}}

577:  \exp\left(-S_0-\frac{71}{72}\frac{1}{S_0}\right).

578: \ee

579: The tunneling events can be studied in more detail after removing

580: short distance fluctuations. A well known method for doing this

581: is ``cooling'' \cite{Hoek:1985gj,Hoek:1986hq}. In the cooling method 

582: we only accept Metropolis updates that lower the action. This will 

583: drive the system towards the nearest classical solution. Since instantons 

584: are classical solutions, cooling can be used to study the instanton

585: content of a quantum configurations. This is clearly seen 

586: in Fig.~\ref{fig_path}. The black line is the original, quantum,

587: configuration. The green line is the same configuration after

588: 200 cooling sweeps. It is easy to check that this configuration

589: is very close to a linear superposition of independent 

590: tunneling events. For this purpose we can extract the instanton

591: and anti-instanton locations from the zero crossings and 

592: compare the cooled configuration to the simple ``sum ansatz''

593: \be 

594: \label{sum}

595: x_{sum}(\tau) =  \eta \left\{ \sum_{i} Q_i\tanh\left[

596:   \frac{\omega}{2}(\tau-\tau_i)\right] -1 \right\},

597: \ee

598: where $Q_i=\pm 1$ is the topological charge of the instanton. 

599: The most important question is to what extent physical observables

600: in the cooled configurations resemble those in the original 

601: configurations. This provides a measure of the importance of 

602: instantons in the double well potential. In Fig.~\ref{fig_cor_cool}

603: we show correlation functions measured in the cooled configurations. 

604: These results should be compared with the full correlation functions 

605: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_cor}. We observe that the correlation functions 

606: are quite different. Short distance fluctuations eliminated by cooling 

607: obviously play an important role. We observe, however, that the level

608: splitting between the ground state and the first excited 

609: state is clearly dominated by semi-classical configurations. 

610: The logarithmic derivative of both the $\langle x(0)x(\tau)

611: \rangle$ and $\langle x^3(0)x^3(\tau)\rangle$ correlation

612: functions is very well reproduced in the cooled configurations.

613: 

614: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

615: \section{The density of instantons}

616: \label{sec_dens}

617: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

618: 

619:  The cooling method can also be used in order to get an 

620: estimate of the total density of instantons and anti-instantons. 

621: While the net topological charge, the number of instantons

622: minus the number of anti-instantons, is unambiguously defined

623: the same is not true for the total number of topological objects. 

624: There is no clear distinction between a large quantum fluctuation

625: and a very close instanton-anti-instanton pair. In the cooling 

626: method this is reflected by the fact that the number of instantons, 

627: extracted from the number of zero crossings in the cooled 

628: configuration, depends on the number of cooling sweeps. 

629: 

630: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

631: \begin{figure}

632: \begin{center}

633: \leavevmode

634: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{idens.eps}  

635: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{sinst_f.eps}  

636: \end{center}  

637: \caption{\label{fig_n_cool}

638: Instanton density and instanton action as a function of the 

639: number of cooling sweeps for different values of the parameter 

640: $\eta$. The solid and dashed green lines in Fig.~a shows the 

641: semi-classical instanton density at one and two-loop order. 

642: The solid line in Fig.~b shows the classical instanton action.}

643: \end{figure}

644: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

645: 

646:  It is clear, however, that the instanton density should be

647: well defined in the semi-classical limit. In this limit there is an 

648: exponentially large separation of scales between the tunneling 

649: time $\tau_{tun}$ and the scale of ordinary quantum fluctuations

650: $\tau_{osc}$. This separation of scales can also be exploited 

651: in the cooling method. Cooling is a local algorithm which implies

652: that it takes on the order of $\tau/a$ cooling sweeps in order 

653: to affect coherent structures that exist at a scale $\tau$. We

654: expect that the number of instantons measured using the cooling

655: method is approximately given by the sum of two exponentials, 

656: $N_I(n_{cool})=N_{osc}\exp(-n_{cool}a/\tau_{osc})+N_{tun}\exp(-n_{cool}

657: a/\tau_{tun})$. The first exponential describes the disappearance

658: of quantum fluctuations on a time scale $\tau_{osc}$ and the 

659: second exponential reflects instanton-anti-instanton annihilation

660: occurring on a time scale $\tau_{tun}$. 

661: 

662:  Numerical results for $N_I(n_{cool})$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_n_cool}. 

663: We observe that the data is consistent with the presence of two 

664: distinct time scales and that the description in terms of two 

665: exponentials becomes better as the semi-classical limit $\eta\to

666: \infty$ is approached. We also note that after the quantum noise

667: has disappeared the instanton density is close to the semi-classical

668: result equ.~(\ref{idens}). A more detailed comparison is shown 

669: in Fig.~\ref{fig_idens}. In this figure we show the instanton

670: density after 10 cooling sweeps, the one and two-loop semi-classical 

671: result, as well as the level spacing between the ground state and

672: the first excited state. 

673: 

674: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

675: \begin{figure}

676: \begin{center}

677: \leavevmode

678: \includegraphics[width=9cm,clip=true]{idens_f_log.eps}  

679: \end{center}  

680: \caption{\label{fig_idens}

681: Instanton density as a function of the parameter $\eta$.

682: The blue symbols show the instanton density extracted 

683: from Monte Carlo configurations after 10 cooling sweeps. 

684: The red symbols show the results of a Monte Carlo calculation

685: of non-Gaussian effects. The green lines show the semi-classical 

686: instanton density at one and two-loop order. The black line shows 

687: $\Delta E/2$ where $\Delta E$ is the splitting between the ground 

688: state and the first excited state.}

689: \end{figure}

690: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

691: 

692:  We observe that for $\eta>1.2$, corresponding to a classical 

693: instanton action $S_0>2$, the number of instantons extracted 

694: using the cooling method agrees very well with the semi-classical

695: approximation. We also note that the two-loop result is a 

696: clear improvement over the one-loop approximation for classical 

697: actions as small as $S_0\sim 1$. Finally, we observe that the 

698: instanton density is close to the level splitting even in the

699: regime where $S_0$ is less than one. 

700: 

701: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

702: \begin{figure}

703: \begin{center}

704: \leavevmode

705: \includegraphics[width=9cm,clip=true]{qmidens_conf.eps}    

706: \end{center}  

707: \caption{\label{fig_ngauss}

708: Quantum mechanical paths which appear in a Monte-Carlo 

709: calculation of the one-instanton partition function 

710: in the double well potential. The calculation involves

711: adiabatic switching between the Gaussian effective 

712: potential and the full potential. The smooth curves

713: are the initial configurations in the zero and one-instanton

714: sector. The Monte Carlo updates in the one-instanton 

715: sector involve a constraint which keeps the instanton

716: location fixed.}

717: \end{figure}

718: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

719:   

720:  In Fig.~\ref{fig_n_cool} we also show a Monte Carlo calculation

721: of the instanton density on a small lattice. The idea is very 

722: simple. The one-loop calculation of the tunneling rate is 

723: based on expanding the action around the classical path to 

724: quadratic order 

725: \be 

726: \label{s_gauss}

727:  S = S_0 + \frac{1}{2} \int d\tau\, 

728:  \delta x(\tau) \left.\frac{\delta^2 S}{\delta x^2}

729:   \right|_{x_I(\tau)}  \delta x(\tau) + \ldots ,

730: \ee

731: where $\delta x(\tau)=x(\tau)-x_I(\tau)$. As in Sect.~\ref{sec_latt}

732: we can introduce a new action $S_\alpha$ that interpolates between

733: the full action and the Gaussian approximation, $S_\alpha= S_{gauss}

734: +\alpha \Delta S$ with $\Delta S= S-S_{gauss}$. The exact quantum

735: weight of an instanton can be determined by integrating over the

736: coupling constant $\alpha$. We have

737: \be

738:  n = n_{gauss}\exp\left[

739:   -\int_0^1 d\alpha  \left( \langle \Delta S\rangle_\alpha^{(1)}

740:   - \langle \Delta S\rangle_\alpha^{(0)} \right)\right],

741: \ee

742: where $\langle .\rangle_\alpha^{(n)}$ is an expectation value

743: in the $n$-instanton sector at coupling $\alpha$. The method 

744: is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig_ngauss}. The figure shows typical

745: paths that contribute to $\langle \Delta S\rangle$ in the zero

746: and one-instanton sector. The resulting estimate of the instanton

747: density is also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_idens}. The Monte Carlo 

748: results show that the instanton density is reduced compared

749: to the one-loop estimate. For classical instanton actions 

750: $S_0>3$ the result is in agreement with the two-loop estimate

751: and the cooling calculation. It is hard to push the Monte Carlo

752: calculation to instanton actions $S_0<3$ because transitions

753: between the zero and two (four, six, $\ldots$) sector become

754: too frequent. 

755: 

756: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

757: \section{The instanton liquid model}

758: \label{sec_ilm}

759: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

760: 

761: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

762: \begin{figure}

763: \begin{center}

764: \leavevmode

765: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{rcor.eps}  

766: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{drcor.eps}  

767: \end{center}  

768: \caption{\label{fig_cor_rilm}

769: Same as Fig.~\ref{fig_cor} but the correlation functions are 

770: evaluated from a random instanton configuration.}

771: \end{figure}

772: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

773: 

774:  Given the success of the semi-classical approximation in predicting 

775: the splitting between the ground state and the first excited state

776: it seems natural to study the correlation functions in the semi-classical

777: approximation in more detail. We begin by considering the contribution

778: from the classical path only. In this case the partition function is 

779: given by

780: \be 

781: \label{rilm}

782: Z = \sum_{n_I,n_A}\frac{\delta_{n_I,n_A}}{n_I!n_A!}\left(\prod_{i}

783:   \int d\tau_i\right) \exp(-S).

784: \ee

785: Here, $n_I,n_A$ are the number of instanton and anti-instantons, 

786: $\tau_i$ are the (anti) instanton positions, and $S_0$ is the 

787: classical action. In the next section we will discuss the 

788: problem of choosing the correct path for a multi-instanton 

789: configuration in more detail. The simplest choice is the sum 

790: ansatz given in equ.~(\ref{sum}). The coordinate correlation 

791: function is given by 

792: \be 

793: \Pi_{cl}(\tau) = \langle x_{cl}(0)x_{cl}(\tau) \rangle ,

794: \ee

795: where $\langle . \rangle$ denotes an ensemble average over 

796: the collective coordinates $\tau_i$. The distribution of 

797: collective coordinates is controlled by the partition function

798: equ.~(\ref{rilm}). The simplest approximation is to ignore 

799: the interaction between instantons. In this case the action 

800: is $S=(n_I+n_A)S_0$ and the distribution of collective 

801: coordinates is random. This is known as the instanton gas

802: model or the random instanton approximation. 

803: 

804: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

805: \begin{figure}

806: \begin{center}

807: \leavevmode

808: \includegraphics[width=9cm,clip=true]{veff_inst.eps}    

809: \end{center}  

810: \caption{\label{fig_veff}

811: Gaussian effective potential for small fluctuations

812: around a single instanton path centered at $\tau=0$. }

813: \end{figure}

814: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

815: 

816:  Correlation functions in a random instanton gas are shown 

817: in Fig.~\ref{fig_cor_rilm}. We note that the result is 

818: very similar to the cooled correlation functions shown 

819: in Fig.~\ref{fig_cor_cool}. This is in agreement with 

820: our earlier observation that the cooled configurations

821: are very close to a simple superposition of instantons. 

822: Like the the cooling calculation the random instanton 

823: gas reproduces the splitting between the ground state 

824: and the first excited state, but it does not give a

825: good description of other aspects of the correlation 

826: functions. 

827: 

828: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

829: \begin{figure}

830: \begin{center}

831: \leavevmode

832: \includegraphics[width=9cm,clip=true]{config_gauss.eps}    

833: \end{center}  

834: \caption{\label{fig_conf_gauss}

835: Typical random instanton configuration and the same 

836: configuration with Gaussian fluctuations. The noisy 

837: path was generated using 10 heating sweeps in the 

838: Gaussian potential around the classical path. This figure 

839: should be compared with Fig.~\ref{fig_path}.}

840: \end{figure}

841: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

842: 

843:  It is clear that the main feature that is missing from the 

844: ensemble of classical paths is quantum fluctuations. Quantum 

845: fluctuations appear at next order in the semi-classical

846: approximation. We already noted that quantum fluctuations

847: determine the pre-exponential factor in the tunneling 

848: rate, see equ.~(\ref{idens}). We can write the path as

849: $x(\tau)=x_{cl}(\tau)+\delta x(\tau)$ where $x_{cl}(\tau)$

850: is the classical path and $\delta x(\tau)$ is the fluctuating 

851: part. To second order in $\delta x$ the action is given by

852: equ.~(\ref{s_gauss}). For a single instanton it is possible

853: to determine the propagator $\langle \delta x(0)\delta x(\tau)

854: \rangle$ analytically, see equ.~(39) in \cite{Schafer:1996wv}. 

855: For an ensemble of instantons we can approximate the 

856: propagator as a sum of contributions due to individual 

857: instantons. This is the procedure that is used in the 

858: QCD calculations described in 

859: \cite{Shuryak:1992jz,Shuryak:1992ke,Schafer:1995pz,Schafer:1995uz}.

860: 

861: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

862: \begin{figure}

863: \begin{center}

864: \leavevmode

865: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{qmgausscor.eps}  

866: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{dqmgausscor.eps}  

867: \end{center}  

868: \caption{\label{fig_cor_gauss}

869: Same as Fig.~\ref{fig_cor} but the correlation functions 

870: are evaluated in a random instanton ensemble with Gaussian

871: fluctuations. }

872: \end{figure}

873: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

874: 

875:  Alternatively, we can determine the correlation function

876: numerically, using the ``heating'' method. As the name

877: suggests, this is essentially the inverse of the cooling 

878: method. We begin from a classical path and determine the 

879: Gaussian effective potential for small fluctuations around 

880: the path. For a single instanton, the action is given by

881: \be 

882:  S= \int d\tau\, \left( 

883:  \frac{1}{4} \delta \dot{x}^2(\tau) 

884:  + 4\eta^2 \left[ 1 -\frac{3}{2\cosh^2(2\eta(\tau-\tau_I))}

885:  \right]\delta x^2(\tau) \right),

886: \ee

887: see Fig.~\ref{fig_veff}. This action has one zero mode

888: $\delta x(\tau)=-S_0^{-1/2}dx_{cl}(\tau-\tau_I)/(d\tau_I)$

889: which corresponds to translations of the instanton solution. 

890: We can eliminate the corresponding non-Gaussian fluctuations

891: by imposing a constraint on the location of the instanton. 

892: Using the simple identity

893: \be

894:  1 = \int d\tau_I\, \delta( x(\tau_I))\, 

895:    \left|\dot x(\tau_I)\right|

896: \ee

897: we see that the corresponding Jacobian is the velocity

898: $\dot x(\tau_I)$. We can now perform Monte Carlo calculations 

899: using the Gaussian action for a multi-instanton configuration. 

900: The method is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig_conf_gauss}. The 

901: black line shows the classical path and the green path is 

902: the same path with Gaussian fluctuations included. Clearly, 

903: this path looks very similar to the full quantum path 

904: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_path}. There are still some 

905: differences, however. We notice, in particular, that the 

906: fluctuations around the minima of the potential are 

907: not completely symmetric. This is related to non-Gaussian

908: effects. We also observe that the heated random instanton

909: path lacks large excursions from the minima of the potential

910: that do not lead to a tunneling event. These effects are

911: due to a combination of instanton interactions and large 

912: non-Gaussian effects. 

913: 

914:  Correlation functions in the random instanton configurations with 

915: Gaussian fluctuations included are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_cor_gauss}. 

916: We observe that the correlation functions are in much better 

917: agreement with the exact results than the correlators obtained

918: from the classical path only. We also see that the correlators

919: not only describe the splitting between the ground state and

920: the first excited state but also provide a reasonable 

921: description of the second excited state. 

922: 

923: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

924: \section{Instanton interactions}

925: \label{sec_int}

926: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

927: 

928: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

929: \begin{figure}

930: \begin{center}

931: \leavevmode

932: \includegraphics[width=9cm,clip=true]{sint_sum.eps}  

933: \end{center}  

934: \caption{\label{fig_sint}

935: Instanton-anti-instanton interaction in units of $S_0$ as

936: a function of the instanton-anti-instanton separation. The solid

937: line shows the result in the sum ansatz. The triangles show the

938: same data plotted as a function of the zero crossing distance.

939: The streamline interaction is shown as the circles and the 

940: squares show the effective interaction extracted from the 

941: cooled intanton-anti-instanton distribution shown in 

942: Fig.~\ref{fig_zdist}.}

943: \end{figure}

944: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

945: 

946:  Another feature that is missing from the random instanton 

947: ensemble is the correlation between tunneling events due

948: to the interaction between instantons. In QCD instanton 

949: interactions, in particular those mediated by fermions, are

950: very important and lead to qualitative changes in the instanton

951: ensemble. In the quantum mechanical model studied here the interaction

952: between instantons is short range and only leads to relatively small 

953: effects. These effects can nevertheless be clearly identified in 

954: very accurate calculations. We refer to \cite{Schafer:1996wv} for

955: a discussion of the contribution of instanton-anti-instanton 

956: pairs to the ground state energy. 

957: 

958:  The simplest method for studying the instanton-anti-instanton 

959: interaction is to construct a trial function and compute 

960: its action. For the sum ansatz given in equ.~(\ref{sum}) 

961: the result is shown as the solid line in Fig.~\ref{fig_sint}.

962: Asymptotically, the action is given by $S_{IA}(\tau_{IA})=2S_0

963: (1-6\exp(-\eta\tau_{IA})+\ldots)$ where $\tau_{IA}=|\tau_I-\tau_A|$ 

964: is the instanton-anti-instanton separation. In the opposite limit,

965: $\tau_{IA}\to 0$, the instanton and anti-instanton annihilate and

966: the action tends to zero. It is clear, however, that in this limit 

967: the sum ansatz is at best an approximate solution to the classical 

968: equation of motion, and it is not obvious how the path should be 

969: chosen. 

970: 

971: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

972: \begin{figure}

973: \begin{center}

974: \leavevmode

975: \includegraphics[width=8cm,clip=true]{stream_prof.eps}  

976: \includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip=true]{stream_act.eps}  

977: \end{center}  

978: \caption{\label{fig_stream}

979: Solution of the streamline equation for an instanton-anti-instanton

980: pair. Figure a shows the streamline path and the Fig.~b shows the 

981: action density. The paths correspond to $S/S_0=2.0,1.8,\ldots,0.2,

982: 0.1$.}

983: \end{figure}

984: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

985: 

986:  The best way to deal with this problem is the ``streamline" or 

987: ``valley" method \cite{Balitsky:1986qn,Verbaarschot:1991sq}. The 

988: method is based on the observation that in the space of all 

989: instanton-anti-instanton paths there is one almost flat direction 

990: along which the action slowly varies between $2S_0$ and 0. All other 

991: directions correspond to perturbative fluctuations. We can force the 

992: instanton-anti-instanton path to descend along the almost flat 

993: direction by adding a constraint

994: \be

995: S_\xi = \xi(\lambda) \int d\tau\, 

996:  \left( x(\tau)-x_\lambda(\tau)\right) 

997:  \frac{dx_\lambda(\tau)}{d\lambda}

998: \ee

999: to the classical action. Here, $\lambda$ labels the different

1000: instanton-anti-instanton paths along the streamline and $\xi(\lambda)$

1001: is a Lagrange multiplier. We find the streamline configuration by 

1002: starting from a well separated IA pair and letting the system evolve 

1003: using the method of steepest descent. This means that we have to solve

1004: \be

1005: \label{qm_stream}

1006: \xi(\lambda)\frac{dx_\lambda(\tau)}{d\lambda} = 

1007:   \left.\frac{\delta S}{\delta x (\tau)}\right|_{x=x_\lambda},

1008: \ee

1009: with the boundary condition that $x_{\lambda=0}(\tau)\simeq x_{sum}(\tau)$ 

1010: corresponds to a well separated instanton-anti-instanton pair. Note that

1011: $\xi(\lambda)$ is an arbitrary function that reflects the reparametrization 

1012: invariance of the streamline solution. A sequence of paths obtained by 

1013: solving equ.~(\ref{qm_stream}) numerically is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_stream}. 

1014: We also show the action density $s=\dot x^2/4+V(x)$. We can see clearly how 

1015: the two localized solutions merge and eventually disappear as the 

1016: configuration progresses down the valley.

1017: 

1018:  There is no unique way to parametrize the streamline path 

1019: and extract the instanton-anti-instanton action as a function of the 

1020: separation between the tunneling events. The simplest possibility

1021: is to used the distance between the zero crossings $\tau_z$. This 

1022: definition has the advantage of being very easy to use, but it 

1023: prevents us from exploring the part of the streamline trajectory

1024: where the instanton and anti-instanton are so close that the

1025: path never crosses zero. In Fig.~\ref{fig_sint} we compare results 

1026: for $S_{IA}(\tau_z)$ obtained from the sum ansatz and the streamline 

1027: solution. We observe that for instanton separations $\tau_z>0.3$ the 

1028: results are very similar. We also note, however, that for $\tau_z

1029: <0.6$ the zero crossing distance is quite different from the

1030: parameter $\tau_I-\tau_A$ that appears in the sum ansatz. 

1031: 

1032: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1033: \begin{figure}

1034: \begin{center}

1035: \leavevmode

1036: \includegraphics[width=9cm,clip=true]{zdist.eps}  

1037: \end{center}  

1038: \caption{\label{fig_zdist}

1039: Distribution of instanton-anti-instanton separations after 

1040: 10 cooling sweeps. The separation was extracted from the 

1041: distance of the zero-crossings in the cooled configuration.}

1042: \end{figure}

1043: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1044: 

1045:  One can show that the ambiguities that arise in trying to

1046: define the instanton-anti-instanton interaction at short 

1047: distance correspond to similar ambiguities that arise in the 

1048: perturbative expansion because and are related to the factorial 

1049: growth of higher order terms in the expansion. Only the sum of 

1050: the perturbative and the instanton contribution is well defined 

1051: and leads to unique predictions for the groundstate energy. 

1052: In these lectures we shall not discuss this problem any 

1053: further. Instead, we will study the question whether the

1054: full quantum configurations contain evidence of the correlations 

1055: between instantons that the classical instanton-anti-instanton

1056: interaction implies. 

1057: 

1058: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1059: \begin{figure}

1060: \begin{center}

1061: \leavevmode

1062: \includegraphics[width=9cm,clip=true]{iconf.eps}    

1063: \end{center}  

1064: \caption{\label{fig_iconf}

1065: Typical instanton configuration in an interacting instanton 

1066: calculation. The figure shows the location $x$ of the 

1067: first 10 instantons (blue) and anti-instantons (red) 

1068: over a period of 3000 configurations.}

1069: \end{figure}

1070: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1071: 

1072:  In Fig.~\ref{fig_zdist} we show a histogram of the 

1073: instanton-anti-instanton separation determined in Monte 

1074: Carlo simulations of the quantum mechanical partition function. 

1075: The data were obtained by measuring the zero crossing distance

1076: after 10 cooling sweeps. For comparison we also show the $IA$ 

1077: distribution in the random instanton gas. We observe that there 

1078: is an enhancement of close $IA$ pairs which corresponds to an 

1079: attractive instanton-anti-instanton interaction. The exact magnitude 

1080: of this enhancement depends sensitively on the number of cooling 

1081: sweeps. As emphasized in the previous paragraph, this is not necessarily 

1082: a shortcoming of the cooling method. We can try to translate the 

1083: enhancement in the $IA$ distribution into an effective interaction 

1084: using the classical relation $n(\tau_{IA})\sim n_0(\tau_{IA})\exp(-

1085: S_{IA}(\tau_{IA}))$. Here, $n(\tau_{IA})$ is the $IA$ distribution, 

1086: $n_0(\tau_{IA})$ is the distribution in the random theory and $S_{IA}

1087: (\tau_{IA})$ is the instanton-anti-instanton interaction. The result 

1088: is also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_sint}. We observe that the interaction 

1089: extracted from the $IA$ distribution is significantly weaker than the 

1090: classical result. This may imply that the full quantum interaction is 

1091: weaker than the classical result, or that too many close pairs are 

1092: lost during cooling. This question can be studied in more detail using 

1093: the methods discussed in Sect.~\ref{sec_dens}. 

1094: 

1095:  Finally, we address the question how to include correlations 

1096: between tunneling events in the instanton calculation. For 

1097: this purpose we include the instanton-anti-instanton interaction

1098: in the instanton liquid partition function equ.~(\ref{rilm}). 

1099: In this context we again have to address the problem of close

1100: instanton-anti-instanton pairs. The simplest approach is to

1101: add a short range repulsive core which excludes configurations

1102: that are not semi-classical. The hard core interaction can be 

1103: adjusted in order to reproduce the $IA$ distribution found in the 

1104: cooling calculation. In practice we have chosen $S_{core}(\tau_{IA})=

1105: A_c \exp(-\tau_{IA}/\tau_c)$ with $A_c=3$ and $\tau_c=0.3$. In 

1106: Fig.~\ref{fig_iconf} we show a typical set of instanton and 

1107: anti-instanton trajectories from an interacting instanton calculation. 

1108: Correlations between instantons are clearly visible. In particular, 

1109: we observe that a number of close instanton-anti-instanton pairs 

1110: are formed. We have also studied correlation functions in the 

1111: interacting instanton ensemble. We find that differences as compared 

1112: to the random ensemble are rather subtle and a detailed study of

1113: non-Gaussian effects is necessary in order to establish the 

1114: importance of instanton interactions. 

1115: 

1116: 

1117: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1118: \section{Summary}

1119: \label{sec_sum}

1120: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1121: 

1122:   In these lectures we presented Monte Carlo methods for 

1123: studying the euclidean path integral in Quantum Mechanics.

1124: We also supply a set of computer codes written in fortran 

1125: that were used to generate the data shown in the figures.

1126: We encourage the reader to play around with these programs

1127: in order to get a deeper appreciation of the path integral 

1128: and of Monte Carlo methods. 

1129: 

1130:  We should note that Monte Carlo calculations of the 

1131: euclidean path integral are an extremely poor way to compute 

1132: the spectrum or the correlation functions of the anharmonic

1133: oscillator. The code based on diagonalizing the Hamiltonian

1134: is both much faster and much more accurate than the Monte

1135: Carlo codes. The purpose of the Monte Carlo codes is 

1136: entirely pedagogical. However, if we proceed from quantum 

1137: mechanics to systems involving many more degrees of freedom, 

1138: such as four-dimensional field theories, Hamiltonian methods

1139: become more and more impractical and Monte Carlo calculations

1140: based on the euclidean path integral provide the most efficient 

1141: method for computing the spectrum and the correlation functions

1142: known to date. 

1143: 

1144:  We also discussed Monte Carlo methods for studying the 

1145: contribution of instantons to the euclidean path integral. 

1146: In the case of the double well potential there is a parameter,

1147: $\eta$, which controls the instanton action $S_0=4\eta^3/3$.

1148: If $S_0\gg 1$ then instantons are easily identified but the

1149: tunneling rate is small. If $S_0\sim 1$ then instantons are 

1150: very abundant but it is hard to determine the instanton density  

1151: precisely. We focused on the case $S_0\sim 3$ which is at 

1152: the boundary of the semi-classical regime. Even though the 

1153: expansion parameter $1/S_0$ is not very small the instanton

1154: density is still well determined and agrees with the level

1155: splitting. We also noticed, however, that non-Gaussian 

1156: effects are important in this regime. 

1157: 

1158:  Ultimately, we are interested in the question to what 

1159: extent these results can be generalized to QCD. In QCD 

1160: there is no free parameter that controls the applicability 

1161: of the semi-classical expansion. Unlike the case of the 

1162: double well potential, instantons in QCD can have any 

1163: size. Asymptotic freedom implies that the action of small

1164: instantons is big, but the action of instantons with size

1165: $\rho\sim\Lambda_{QCD}^{-1}$ is of order one. Nevertheless, 

1166: lattice calculations support the idea that the tunneling density 

1167: is sizable, $(N/V)\simeq \Lambda_{QCD}^4 \simeq 1\,{\rm fm}^{-4}$, 

1168: and that instantons do not strongly overlap \cite{Chu:1994vi}. 

1169: The typical instanton size is found to be $\rho\sim (0.3-0.4)$ 

1170: fm which implies a typical instanton action $S_0\simeq 

1171: (5-10)$. The reason that the density is big even though 

1172: the action is significantly larger than one is related 

1173: to the fact that QCD instantons have many more collective 

1174: coordinates, 12 (4 coordinates, 1 size, 7 color angles) 

1175: compared to just one in the case of the double well potential.

1176: As a consequence the pre-exponential factor in the tunneling 

1177: rate is numerically large. 

1178: 

1179:  There are some important differences between QCD and the

1180: double well potential. In a typical lattice QCD configuration 

1181: quantum fluctuations of the gauge field are much bigger than 

1182: the classical gauge fields associated with instantons. This 

1183: implies that one cannot ``see'' instantons in the gauge 

1184: configurations in the same way that one can immediately 

1185: identify tunneling events in the quantum mechanical paths.

1186: Compare, for example, Fig.~\ref{fig_path} with Fig.~1

1187: in \cite{Chu:1994vi}. Only after some amount of cooling do 

1188: instantons emerge from the quantum noise. On the other hand, 

1189: fermions provide an important diagnostic tool in QCD that is 

1190: not available in the simple bosonic model analyzed in these 

1191: lectures. Instantons lead to localized chiral zero modes of 

1192: the Dirac operators that can easily be identified even in noisy

1193: quantum configurations. 

1194:  

1195: \begin{thebibliography}{20}

1196: 

1197: \bibitem{Polyakov:1976fu}

1198: A.~M.~Polyakov,

1199: %``Quark Confinement And Topology Of Gauge Groups,''

1200: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 120}, 429 (1977).

1201: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B120,429;%%

1202: 

1203: \bibitem{Vainshtein:1981wh}

1204: A.~I.~Vainshtein, V.~I.~Zakharov, V.~A.~Novikov and M.~A.~Shifman,

1205: {\it ABC Of Instantons},

1206: Sov.\ Phys.\ Usp.\  {\bf 24}, 195 (1982); 

1207: also in ITEP Lectures on Particle Physics and Field theory,

1208: World Scientific, Singapore (1999). 

1209: %%CITATION = SOPUA,24,195;%%

1210: 

1211: \bibitem{Coleman:1978ae}

1212: S.~Coleman, 

1213: {\it The Uses Of Instantons}, 

1214: Lecture delivered at 1977 Int. School of Subnuclear Physics, 

1215: Erice, Italy (1977);  also in Aspects of Symmetry, 

1216: Cambridge University Press (1985). 

1217: 

1218: \bibitem{Shuryak:1988ck}

1219: E.~V.~Shuryak,

1220: {\it The QCD Vacuum, Hadrons And The Superdense Matter},

1221: World Scientific, Singapore (1988).

1222: %%CITATION = 00327,8,1;%%

1223: 

1224: \bibitem{Kleinert:1995}

1225: H.~Kleinert, 

1226: {\it Path integrals in quantum mechanics, statistics, and polymer physics},

1227: World Scientific, Singapore (1995).

1228: 

1229: \bibitem{Zinn-Justin:1993wc}

1230: J.~Zinn-Justin,

1231: {\it Quantum field theory and critical phenomena},

1232: Oxford University Press (1993).

1233: %%CITATION = IMPHA,85,1;%%

1234: 

1235: \bibitem{Schafer:1996wv} 

1236: T.~Sch{\"a}fer and E.~V.~Shuryak, 

1237: Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf 70}, 323 (1998),

1238: [hep-ph/9610451].

1239: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9610451;%%

1240: 

1241: \bibitem{Forkel:2000sq}

1242: H.~Forkel,

1243: %``A primer on instantons in QCD,''

1244: preprint, hep-ph/0009136.

1245: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0009136;%%

1246: 

1247: \bibitem{Feynman}

1248: R.~P.~Feynman, A.~R.~Hibbs, 

1249: {\it Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals},

1250: McGraw-Hill, New York (l965).

1251: 

1252: \bibitem{Creutz:1980gp}

1253: M.~Creutz and B.~Freedman,

1254: %``A Statistical Approach To Quantum Mechanics,''

1255: Annals Phys.\  {\bf 132}, 427 (1981).

1256: %%CITATION = APNYA,132,427;%%

1257: 

1258: \bibitem{Shuryak:1984xr}

1259: E.~V.~Shuryak and O.~V.~Zhirov,

1260: %``Testing Monte Carlo Methods For Path Integrals In Some Quantum Mechanical

1261: %Problems,''

1262: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 242}, 393 (1984).

1263: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B242,393;%%

1264: 

1265: \bibitem{Shuryak:1987tr}

1266: E.~V.~Shuryak,

1267: %``Toward The Quantitative Theory Of The 'Instanton Liquid' 4. Tunneling In The Double Well Potential,''

1268: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 302}, 621 (1988).

1269: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B302,621;%%

1270: 

1271: \bibitem{Asakawa:2000tr}

1272: M.~Asakawa, T.~Hatsuda and Y.~Nakahara,

1273: %``Maximum entropy analysis of the spectral functions in lattice QCD,''

1274: Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\  {\bf 46}, 459 (2001)

1275: [hep-lat/0011040].

1276: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0011040;%%

1277: 

1278: \bibitem{Jarrel:1996}

1279: M.~Jarrell, and J.~E.~Gubernatis,

1280: % "Bayesian Inference and the Analytic Continuation .. ", 

1281: Phys.\ Rep.\ {\bf 269}, 133 (1996).

1282: 

1283: \bibitem{Wohler:pg}

1284: C.~F.~Wohler and E.~V.~Shuryak,

1285: %``Two Loop Corr To The Instanton Density For The Double Well Potential,''

1286: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 333}, 467 (1994)

1287: [hep-ph/9402287].

1288: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9402287;%%

1289: 

1290: \bibitem{Hoek:1985gj}

1291: J.~Hoek,

1292: %``Cooling Of SU(3) Lattice Gauge Field Configurations And The Eta-Prime

1293: %Mass,''

1294: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 166}, 199 (1986).

1295: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B166,199;%%

1296: 

1297: \bibitem{Hoek:1986hq}

1298: J.~Hoek, M.~Teper and J.~Waterhouse,

1299: %``Topology And The Eta-Prime Mass In SU(3) Lattice Gauge Theory,''

1300: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 180}, 112 (1986).

1301: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B180,112;%%

1302: 

1303: \bibitem{Shuryak:1992jz}

1304: E.~V.~Shuryak and J.~J.~M.~Verbaarschot,

1305: %``Quark propagation in the random instanton vacuum,''

1306: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 410}, 37 (1993)

1307: [hep-ph/9302238].

1308: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9302238;%%

1309: 

1310: \bibitem{Shuryak:1992ke}

1311: E.~V.~Shuryak and J.~J.~M.~Verbaarschot,

1312: %``Mesonic correlation functions in the random instanton vacuum,''

1313: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 410}, 55 (1993)

1314: [hep-ph/9302239].

1315: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9302239;%%

1316: 

1317: %\cite{Schafer:1995pz}

1318: \bibitem{Schafer:1995pz}

1319: T.~Sch{\"a}fer and E.~V.~Shuryak,

1320: %``The instanton liquid in QCD at zero and finite temperature,''

1321: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 53}, 6522 (1996)

1322: [hep-ph/9509337].

1323: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9509337;%%

1324: 

1325: \bibitem{Schafer:1995uz}

1326: T.~Sch{\"a}fer and E.~V.~Shuryak,

1327: %``Hadronic Correlation Functions in the Interacting Instanton Liquid,''

1328: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54}, 1099 (1996)

1329: [hep-ph/9512384].

1330: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9512384;%%

1331: 

1332: \bibitem{Balitsky:1986qn}

1333: I.~I.~Balitsky and A.~V.~Yung,

1334: %``Collective-Coordinate Method For Quasizero Modes,''

1335: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 168}, 113 (1986).

1336: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B168,113;%%

1337: 

1338: \bibitem{Verbaarschot:1991sq}

1339: J.~J.~M.~Verbaarschot,

1340: %``Streamlines and conformal invariance in Yang-Mills theories,''

1341: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 362}, 33 (1991)

1342: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 386}, 236 (1992)].

1343: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B362,33;%%

1344: 

1345: \bibitem{Chu:1994vi}

1346: M.~C.~Chu, J.~M.~Grandy, S.~Huang and J.~W.~Negele,

1347: %``Evidence for the role of instantons in hadron structure from lattice QCD,''

1348: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 49}, 6039 (1994)

1349: [hep-lat/9312071].

1350: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9312071;%%

1351: 

1352: 

1353: \end{thebibliography}

1354: 

1355: \newpage 

1356: 

1357: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1358: \appendix

1359: \section{Computer Codes}

1360: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1361: 

1362: \noindent 

1363: All programs are written in standard fortran 77, have extensive 

1364: comments and do not require any libraries. Some of the programs 

1365: contain subroutine for generating random numbers or for diagonalizing 

1366: matrices that were taken from Numerical Recipes (Numerical Recipes

1367: in Fortran, W.~H.~Press, S.~A.~Teukolsky, W.~T.~Vetterling and

1368: B.~D.~Flannery, Cambridge University Press). 

1369: \vspace*{0.5cm}

1370: 

1371: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1372: \noindent

1373: {\bf 1. qmdiag.for}

1374: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1375: 

1376: \noindent 

1377: This programs computes the spectrum and the eigenfunctions

1378: of the anharmonic oscillator. The results are used in order 

1379: to compute euclidean correlation functions. 

1380: 

1381: \noindent

1382: Input: {\tt fort.05}

1383: 

1384: \begin{tabular}{p{2.2cm}p{14cm}}

1385: $f$ & minimum of anharmonic oscillator potential $V(x)=(x^2-f^2)^2$ \\

1386: $N$ & dimension of basis used for diagonalizing $H$ (choose $N\geq 40$)\\

1387: $\omega_0$ & unperturbed oscillator frequency (choose $\omega_0\sim 4f$) 

1388: \end{tabular}

1389: \vspace*{0.3cm}

1390: 

1391: \noindent

1392: Output: {\tt qmdiag.dat}

1393: 

1394: \begin{tabular}{p{2.2cm}p{13cm}}

1395: $E_n$   &  eigenvalue of Hamiltonian \\

1396: $c_n$   &  dipole matrix element $c_n^2=|\langle 0|x|n\rangle|^2$\\

1397: $d_n$   &  quadrupole matrix element $d_n^2=|\langle 0|x^2|n\rangle|^2$\\

1398: $e_n$   &  quadrupole matrix element $d_n^2=|\langle 0|x^3|n\rangle|^2$\\

1399: $\psi(x)$ & ground state wave function \\

1400: $\langle x(0)x(\tau)\rangle$ & euclidean correlation function, 

1401:            also for $x^2$ and $x^3$\\

1402: $d\log\Pi/(d\tau)$ & log derivative of $\Pi(\tau)= \langle x(0)x(\tau)

1403:            \rangle$ \\

1404: $Z(\beta)$ & partition function  

1405: \end{tabular}

1406: 

1407: \newpage

1408: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1409: \noindent

1410: {\bf 2. qm.for}

1411: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1412: 

1413: \noindent 

1414: This programs computes correlation functions of the anharmonic

1415: oscillator using Monte Carlo simulations on a euclidean 

1416: lattice. 

1417: 

1418: \noindent

1419: Input: {\tt fort.05}

1420: 

1421: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1422: $f$ & minimum of anharmonic oscillator potential  $V(x)=(x^2-f^2)^2$  \\

1423: $n$ & number of lattice points in the euclidean time direction 

1424:        ($n\sim 800$) \\

1425: $a$ & lattice spacing ($a\sim 0.05$)  \\

1426: $ih$& $ih=0$ cold start $x_i=-f$, $ih=1$ hot start $x_i=ran()$   \\

1427: $n_{eq}$ & number of equilibration sweeps before first measurement

1428:        $(n_{eq}\sim 100)$  \\

1429: $n_{mc}$ & number of Monte Carlo sweeps ($n_{mc}\sim 10^5$)  \\

1430: $\delta x$ &width of Gaussian distribution used for Monte Carlo

1431:             update $x_i^{(n)}\to x_i^{(n+1)}$ ($\delta x \sim 0.5$) \\ 

1432: $n_{p}$ & number of points on which correlation functions are 

1433:           measured $\langle x_ix_{i+1}\rangle,\ldots,$

1434:           $\langle x_i x_{i+n_p}\rangle$ $(n_p\sim 20)$  \\

1435: $n_{mea}$ & number of measurements of the correlation function

1436:             in a given Monte Carlo configuration ${x_i}$ ($n_{mea}\sim 5$)  \\

1437: $n_{pri}$ & number of Monte Carlo configurations between output 

1438:            of averages to output  file ($n_{pri}\sim 100$)   

1439: \end{tabular}

1440: \vspace*{0.3cm}

1441: 

1442: \noindent

1443: Output: {\tt qm.dat}

1444: 

1445: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1446: $S_{tot}$ &average total action per configuration  \\

1447: $V_{av},T_{av}$ &  average potential and kinetic energy \\

1448: $\langle x^n\rangle$  & expectation value $\langle x^n\rangle$ 

1449:              ($n=1,\ldots,4$)      \\

1450: $\Pi(\tau)$ & euclidean correlation function $\Pi(\tau) = 

1451:               \langle O(0)O(\tau)\rangle$ for $O=x$, $x^2$, $x^3$.

1452:               Results are given in the format $\tau, \Pi(\tau)$,

1453:               $\Delta\Pi(\tau)$, $d\log(\Pi)/(d\tau)$, $\Delta[ 

1454:               d\log(\Pi)/(d\tau)]$, where $\Delta\Pi(\tau)$ is 

1455:               the statistical error in $\Pi(\tau)$.  

1456: \end{tabular}

1457: 

1458: 

1459: \newpage

1460: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1461: \noindent

1462: {\bf 3. qmswitch.for}

1463: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1464: 

1465: \noindent

1466: The program {\tt qmswicth.for} computes the free energy $F=-T\log(Z)$ 

1467: of the anharmonic oscillator using the method of adiabatic switching 

1468: between the harmonic and the anharmonic oscillator. The action is

1469: $S_\alpha=S_0+\alpha(S-S_0)$. The code switches from $\alpha=0$ to 

1470: $\alpha=1$ and then back to $\alpha=0$. Hysteresis effects are

1471: used in order to estimate errors from incomplete equilibration.

1472: Most input parameters are the same as in {\tt qm.for}. Additional 

1473: parameters are given below. 

1474: 

1475: \noindent

1476: Input: {\tt fort.05}

1477: 

1478: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1479: $\omega_0$   & oscillator constant of the reference system

1480:                 ($\omega_0\sim 4f$) \\

1481: $n_{switch}$ & number of steps in adiabatic switching ($n_{switch}

1482:                 \sim 20$)  \\

1483: \end{tabular}

1484: \vspace*{0.3cm}

1485: 

1486: \noindent 

1487: Output: {\tt qmswitch.dat}

1488: 

1489: \noindent

1490: The output file contains many details of the adiabatic switching 

1491: procedure. The final result for the free energy is given as $F=F_0

1492: +\delta F$, where $F_0$ is the free energy of the harmonic oscillator 

1493: and $\delta F$ is the integral over $\alpha$. We estimate the uncertainty 

1494: in the final result as $F\pm \Delta F(stat)\pm \Delta F(equ) \pm \Delta 

1495: F(disc)$, where $\Delta F(stat)$ is the statistical error, $\Delta F(equ)$ 

1496: is due to incomplete equilibration (hysteresis), and $\Delta F(disc)$ is 

1497: due to discretizing the $\alpha$ integral.

1498: 

1499: \vspace*{0.3cm}

1500: 

1501: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1502: \noindent

1503: {\bf 4. qmcool.for}

1504: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1505: 

1506: \noindent 

1507: This programs is identical to ${\tt qm.for}$ except that 

1508: expectation values are measured both in the original 

1509: and in cooled configurations. We only specify additional 

1510: input parameters. 

1511: 

1512: \noindent

1513: Input: {\tt fort.05}

1514: 

1515: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1516: $n_{st}$   & number of Monte Carlo configurations between successive 

1517:              cooled configurations. The number of cooled configurations 

1518:              is $n_{conf}/n_{st}$ ($n_{st}\sim 20$). \\

1519: $n_{cool}$ & number of cooling sweeps ($n_{cool}\sim 50$) 

1520: \end{tabular}

1521: \vspace*{0.3cm}

1522: 

1523: \noindent

1524: Output: {\tt qmcool.dat}

1525: 

1526: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1527: $\Pi(\tau)$ & correlation functions are given in the same format 

1528:                as in ${\tt qm.dat}$ \\

1529: $N_{I+A}$   & total number of instantons extracted from number 

1530:                of zero crossings \\

1531:             & as a function of the number of cooling sweeps \\

1532: $S_{tot}$   & total action vs number of cooling sweeps  \\

1533: $S/N$       & action per instanton. $S_0$ is the continuum 

1534:                result for one instanton 

1535: \end{tabular}

1536: \vspace*{0.3cm}

1537: 

1538: \newpage

1539: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1540: \noindent 

1541: {\bf 5. qmidens.for}

1542: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1543: 

1544: \noindent 

1545: The program {\tt qmidens.for} calculates non-Gaussian corrections

1546: to the instanton density using adiabatic switching between the 

1547: Gaussian action and the full action. The calculation is performed

1548: in both the zero and one-instanton-sector. The details of the

1549: adiabatic switching procedure are very similar to the method

1550: used in {\tt qmswitch.for}. Note that the total length of 

1551: the euclidean time domain, $\beta=na$, cannot be chosen too

1552: large in order to suppress transitions between the one-instanton

1553: sector and the three, five, etc.~instanton sector. Most input 

1554: parameters are defined as in {\tt qm.for}. 

1555: 

1556: \noindent

1557: Input: {\tt fort.05}

1558: 

1559: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1560: $n_{switch}$ & number of steps in adiabatic switching ($n_{switch}

1561:                 \sim 20$)  \\

1562: \end{tabular}

1563: \vspace*{0.3cm}

1564: 

1565: \noindent 

1566: Output: {\tt qmidens.dat}

1567: 

1568: \noindent

1569: The output file contains many details of the adiabatic 

1570: switching procedure. The final result for the instanton

1571: density is compared to the Gaussian (one-loop) approximation.

1572: Note that the method breaks down if $f$ is too small or 

1573: $\beta$ is too large. 

1574: 

1575: \newpage

1576: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1577: \noindent

1578: {\bf 6. rilm.for}

1579: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1580: 

1581: \noindent 

1582: This program computes correlation functions of the anharmonic

1583: oscillator using a random ensemble of instantons. The 

1584: multi-instanton configuration is constructed using the 

1585: sum ansatz. Note that, in contrast to RILM calculations 

1586: in QCD, the fields and correlation functions are computed

1587: on a lattice.

1588: 

1589: \noindent

1590: Input: {\tt fort.05}

1591: 

1592: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1593: $f$ & minimum of anharmonic oscillator potential $V(x)=(x^2-f^2)^2$  \\

1594: $n$ & number of lattice points in the euclidean time direction 

1595:        ($n\sim 800$) \\

1596: $a$ & lattice spacing ($a\sim 0 05$)  \\

1597: $N_{I+A}$ & number of instantons (has to be even).  The program 

1598:        displays the one and two-loop result for the parameters 

1599:        $(f,\beta=na)$. \\

1600: $n_{mc}$ & number of configurations ($n_{mc}\sim 10^3$) \\

1601: $n_{p}$ & number of points on which correlation functions are 

1602:           measured $\langle x_ix_{i+1}\rangle,\ldots,$

1603:           $\langle x_i x_{i+n_p}\rangle$ $(n_p\sim 20)$ \\

1604: $n_{mea}$ & number of measurements of the correlation function

1605:             in a given Monte Carlo configuration ${x_i}$ 

1606:             ($n_{mea}\sim 5$) \\

1607: $n_{pri}$ & number of Monte Carlo configurations between output 

1608:             of averages to output  file ($n_{pri}\sim 100$)

1609: \end{tabular}

1610: \vspace*{0.3cm}

1611: 

1612: \noindent

1613: Output: {\tt rilm.dat}

1614: 

1615: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1616: $S_{tot}$ &average total action per configuration. \\

1617: $V_{av},T_{av}$ &  average potential and kinetic energy.\\

1618: $\langle x^n\rangle$  & expectation value $\langle x^n\rangle$ 

1619:             ($n=1,\ldots,4$)     \\

1620: $\Pi(\tau)$ & euclidean correlation function $\Pi(\tau) = 

1621:             \langle O(0)O(\tau)\rangle$ for $O=x$, $x^2$, $x^3$.

1622:             Results are given in the format $\tau$, $\Pi(\tau)$,

1623:             $\Delta\Pi(\tau)$, $d\log(\Pi)/(d\tau)$, $\Delta[ 

1624:             d\log(\Pi)/(d\tau)]$.

1625: \end{tabular}

1626: \vspace*{0.3cm}

1627: 

1628: \newpage

1629: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1630: \noindent 

1631: {\bf 7. rilm\_gauss.for}

1632: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1633: 

1634: \noindent 

1635: This program generates the same random instanton ensemble as 

1636: {\tt rilm.for} but it also includes Gaussian fluctuations 

1637: around the classical path. This is done by performing a

1638: few heating sweeps in the Gaussian effective potential.

1639: Most input parameters are defined as in {\tt rilm.for}. 

1640: Additional input parameters are given below. 

1641: 

1642: \noindent

1643: Input: {\tt fort.05}

1644: 

1645: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1646: $n_{heat}$ & number of heating steps ($n_{heat} \sim 10$) \\

1647: $\delta x$ & coordinate update ($\delta x\sim 0.5$) 

1648: \end{tabular}

1649: 

1650: \vspace*{0.5cm}

1651: 

1652: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1653: \noindent 

1654: {\bf 8. iilm.for}

1655: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1656: 

1657: \noindent 

1658: This program computes correlation functions of the anharmonic

1659: oscillator using an interacting ensemble of instantons. The 

1660: multi-instanton configuration is constructed using the sum 

1661: ansatz. The configuration is discretized on a lattice and

1662: the total action is computed using the discretized lattice 

1663: action. Very close instanton-anti-instanton pairs are 

1664: excluded by adding an nearest neighbor interaction with 

1665: a repulsive core. Most input parameters are the same as

1666: in ${\tt rilm.for}$. Additional input parameters are 

1667: 

1668: \noindent

1669: Input: {\tt fort.05}

1670: 

1671: \begin{tabular}{p{2.0cm}p{13cm}}

1672: $\tau_{core}$ & range of hard core interaction ($\tau_{core}\sim 0.3$) \\

1673: $A_{core}$    & strength of hard core interaction ($A_{core}\sim 3.0$) \\

1674: $dz$          & average position update ($dz\sim 1$)

1675: \end{tabular}

1676: 

1677: 

1678: \end{document}

1679: 

1680: 

1681: 

1682: 

1683: 

1684: