1: \documentclass[a4paper,12pt]{article}

2: 

3: \topmargin -5mm

4: \textheight 21cm

5: 

6: \oddsidemargin 0cm \evensidemargin 0cm

7: \textwidth 16cm

8: 

9: \renewcommand{\title}[1]{

10:  \begin{center}

11:   \Large \bf #1

12:  \end{center}

13: }

14: 

15: \renewcommand{\author}[3]{

16:  \begin{center} #1 \\

17:   {\it #2} \\

18:   {\small E-mail: \texttt{#3}}

19:  \end{center}

20: }

21: 

22: %%%

23: %% new-line_command:on in caption

24: %

25: \makeatletter

26: \long\def\@caption#1[#2]#3{\par

27:   \begingroup%                                        <--- [1]

28:     \def\\{\protect\\}%                               <--- [2]

29: %    \def\\{\relax}%                                  <--- [2']

30:     \addcontentsline{\csname ext@#1\endcsname}{#1}%

31:       {\protect\numberline{\csname the#1\endcsname}{\ignorespaces #2}}%

32:   \endgroup%                                          <--- [1]

33:   \begingroup \@parboxrestore \if@minipage \@setminipage \fi

34:     \normalsize

35:     \@makecaption{\csname fnum@#1\endcsname}{\ignorespaces #3}\par

36:   \endgroup}

37: \makeatother

38: %

39: %%

40: %%%

41: 

42: \usepackage{amssymb}

43: \usepackage{amsmath}

44: 

45: \usepackage{theorem}

46: %\theoremstyle{break}

47: %\newtheorem{proposition}{Proposition}

48: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}

49: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}

50: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}

51: 

52: \font\mathsm=cmmi9

53: \font\mybb=msbm10 at 12pt

54: \def\bb#1{\hbox{\mybb#1}}

55: \font\mybbs=msbm10 at 9pt

56: \def\bbs#1{\hbox{\mybbs#1}}

57: 

58: \font\mathsm=cmmi9

59: \font\mybb=msbm10 at 12pt

60: \font\mybbs=msbm10 at 9pt

61: 

62: \def\ad{\hbox{\rm ad}}

63: \def\cale{{\cal{E}}}\def\calv{\cal{V}}

64: \def\intl{\int\limits}

65: \def\tr{{\hbox{\rm Tr}}}

66: \def\half{{1\over 2}} 

67: 

68: \newcommand{\Slash}[1]{\ooalign{\hfil$\slash$\hfil\crcr$#1$}}

69: \newcommand{\Backslash}[1]{\ooalign{\hfil$\backslash$\hfil\crcr$#1$}}

70: 

71: \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}

72: 

73: \pagestyle{plain}

74: 

75: \begin{document}

76: 

77: \begin{titlepage}

78: 

79: \baselineskip 5mm

80: 

81: \begin{flushleft}

82: %November 2005

83: %January 2006

84: February 2006

85: \end{flushleft}

86: 

87: \begin{flushright}

88: %KSTS/RR-05/0000 \\

89: %OCHA-PP-256 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\

90: %hep-th/0511085 \ \ \ \ \

91: OCHA-PP-256 \ \ \\

92: hep-th/0511085

93: \end{flushright}

94: 

95: \title{Dimensional Reduction of Seiberg-Witten Monopole Equations,

96:  ${\cal N}=2$ Noncommutative Supersymmetric Field Theories and Young Diagrams}

97: 

98: \author{Akifumi Sako${}^{\dagger}$ \ , 

99: \ Toshiya Suzuki${}^{\S} {}^{\ast}$  \\ \ }

100: {${}^{\dagger}$ Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science and

101:  Technology, Keio University\\

102: 3-14-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama 223-8522, Japan\\ \ \\

103: ${}^{\S}$ Department of Physics, Faculty of Engineering, Musashi

104:  Institute of Technology\\

105: 1-28-1 Tamazutsumi, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo 158-8557, Japan\\ 

106: ${}^{\ast}$ Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Ochanomizu University\\

107: 2-1-1 Otsuka, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 112-8610, Japan\\ \  }

108: {${}^{\dagger}$ sako@math.keio.ac.jp\\

109: \makebox{}\hspace{18mm} ${}^{\ast}$ tsuzuki@phys.ocha.ac.jp}

110: 

111: %\vspace{1cm}

112: 

113: \abstract{

114: We investigate the Seiberg-Witten monopole equations on noncommutative

115: (N.C.)

116:  ${\mathbb R}^4$ at the large N.C. parameter limit, 

117: in terms of the equivariant cohomology.

118: In other words, ${\cal N}=2$ supersymmetric U(1) gauge

119: theories with hypermultiplet on N.C.${\mathbb R}^4$ are studied. 

120: It is known that 

121: after topological twisting partition functions of ${\cal N}>1$

122:  supersymmetric theories on N.C. ${\mathbb R}^{2D}$ are invariant under N.C.parameter

123: shift, then the partition functions can be calculated 

124: by its dimensional reduction.

125: %\cite{sako-suzuki}.

126: At the large N.C. parameter limit, 

127: the Seiberg-Witten monopole equations are reduced to ADHM equations with

128:  the Dirac equation reduced to $0$ dimension.

129: The equations are equivalent to 

130: the dimensional reduction of non-Abelian $U(N)$ Seiberg-Witten monopole

131: equations in $N \rightarrow \infty$.

132: The solutions of the equations are also interpreted as a configuration

133: of 

134: brane anti-brane system. 

135: The theory has global symmetries under torus actions

136: originated in space rotations and gauge symmetries.

137: We investigate the Seiberg-Witten monopole equations reduced to

138:  $0$ dimension  

139: and the fixed point equations of the torus actions.

140: We show that the Dirac equation reduced to $0$ dimension is trivial when

141:  the fixed point equations and the ADHM equations are satisfied.

142: %%%

143: %% @@@0214

144: %

145: For finite $N$, it is known that the fixed points of the ADHM data are isolated and are

146:  classified by the

147:  Young diagrams.

148: %%%%%

149: We give a new proof of this statement 

150: by solving the ADHM equations and the fixed point equations

151: concretely and by giving graphical interpretations of the field components

152: and these equations.

153: %%%%%

154: }

155: 

156: \end{titlepage}

157: 

158: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

159: %

160: % intro

161: % 

162: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

163: \section{Introduction} \label{intro}

164: The Seiberg-Witten theory causes a revolution of nonperturbative analysis

165: for ${\cal N} = 2$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theories

166: \cite{Seiberg-Witten1,Seiberg-Witten2}.

167: In the Seiberg-Witten theory, the instanton effects of ${\cal N} = 2$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills

168: theories are encoded in the pre-potential,

169: which is defined by using the Seiberg-Witten curve.

170: (See, for example, \cite{some_review} and references there in.)

171: The Seiberg-Witten theory also provides a powerful tool, the monopole equation, to investigate

172: the topology of $4$ dimensional manifolds

173: \cite{Witten1,Witten2}.

174: The monopole equations are more tractable than the instanton equation, and

175: yield many results in  mathematics as well as physics. 

176: 

177: Meanwhile, instanton calculus has developed by using

178: ADHM data or D-instanton. (See, for example, \cite{Dorey}.)

179: Particularly, an important calculation technology for

180: ${\cal N}= 2$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theories 

181: is brought by Nekrasov \cite{Nekrasov}. 

182: After \cite{Nekrasov}, many related works have been made \cite{Fl-Po}-\cite{Fu-Mo-Po-Ta}.

183: In \cite{Nekrasov} and so on,

184: the localization theorem plays an essential role

185: \cite{Lo-Ne-Sh}-\cite{Mo-Ne-Sh1}. (See also \cite{DH,AB}.)

186: The localization theorem is valid when the

187: theory has symmetries which correspond to some group action 

188: and the group

189: action has isolated fixed points.

190: It is expected that many kinds of calculations of ${\cal N} >1$ supersymmetric gauge theory

191: are carried out by using this theorem.

192: 

193: It is shown that

194: partition functions of

195: ${\cal N} >1$ supersymmetric gauge theories on

196: noncommutative (N.C.) ${\mathbb R}^{2D}$ are invariant under the N.C.

197: parameter change \cite{sako-suzuki}.

198: Therefore we can perform the calculation at the large N.C. 

199: parameter limit.

200: As discussed in \cite{sako-suzuki}-\cite{sako2}, taking this limit causes dimensional reduction,

201: and 

202: we can calculate the partition functions by using the theory

203: after dimensional reduction.

204: For this reason, it is important to investigate the dimensional reduction.

205: 

206: In this article, we will study a $0$ dimensional model given by

207: dimensional reduction of

208: Seiberg-Witten monopole equations

209: derived from ${\cal N}= 2$ supersymmetric $U(1)$

210: theory on N.C. ${\mathbb R}^{4}$.

211: %%%%% suzuki@@@

212: The equations are equivalent to the ADHM equations and the Dirac equation reduced to $0$ dimension. 

213: %%%%%

214: The equations are also equivalent to 

215: the dimensional reduction of non-Abelian $U(N)$ Seiberg-Witten monopole

216: equations on commutative ${\mathbb R}^4$ at the large $N$ limit.

217: %%%%%%%%%%% NEW

218: In this paper, we investigate both cases of finite $N$ and infinite $N$.

219: The finite $N$ case is not only the toy model,

220: but also the model that is possible to be implanted into

221: the $N= \infty$ theory and the results are valid for some special cases

222: of $N= \infty$ model.

223: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

224: We will find that

225: the solutions of the equations are also interpreted as a configuration

226: of 

227: brane anti-brane system. 

228: The theory has global symmetries under torus actions

229: originated in space rotations and gauge symmetries.

230: The torus actions define their fixed point equations.

231: %%%%% suzuki@@@

232: %We will show that solutions satisfying the fixed point equations and 

233: %dimensional reduction of the Seiberg-Witten equations

234: %are given by ADHM data, and solutions are

235: %isolated. 

236: %The fixed points of ADHM data is classified by Young diagram \cite{Nakajima}.

237: We will investigate the fixed point equations and 

238: the dimensional reduction of the Seiberg-Witten monopole equations.

239: We will show that the Dirac equation is trivial when the fixed point

240: equations and the ADHM equations are satisfied.

241: %%%

242: %% @@@0214

243: %

244: For finite $N$ case, it is known that solutions satisfying the fixed point equations and the ADHM

245: equations are isolated and classified by the Young diagrams \cite{Nakajima}.

246: %%%%%

247: We will give a new proof of this statement 

248: by solving the ADHM equations and the fixed point equations

249: concretely and by giving graphical interpretation of the field components

250: and these equations.

251: 

252: Here is the organization of this article.

253: In section 2, we review the ${\cal N}= 2$ supersymmetric gauge

254: theory on ${\mathbb R}^{4}$ and N.C. ${\mathbb R}^{4}$ with a hypermultiplet.

255: In section 3, a D-brane interpretation is discussed.

256: In section4, we deform the BRS transformation by using the global symmetries

257: of the theory.

258: In section 5, we solve the Seiberg-Witten monopole equations reduced to

259: $0$ dimension and the fixed point equations, and 

260: show our main claims.

261: In section 6, we briefly comment on the localization theorem.

262: Section 7 is summary of this article.

263: 

264: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

265: %

266: % n=2

267: %

268: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

269: \section{${\cal N}= 2$ Supersymmetric $U(1)$ Theory on N.C. ${\mathbb R}^{4}$} \label{n=2theory}

270: In this section we review ${\cal N}= 2$ supersymmetric 

271: theory and its topological twist 

272: on ${\mathbb R}^{4}$ and N.C. ${\mathbb R}^{4}$.

273: We consider the case with hypermultiplet 

274: \cite{Hyun-Park-Park1}-\cite{Labastida3}.

275: For conventions in this article, see appendix \ref{conv}.

276: 

277: At first, we set up the model of the ${\cal N}= 2$ supersymmetric 

278: theory on ${\mathbb R}^{4}$.

279: $SO(4)$ spacetime rotation of

280: $4$ dimensional Euclidean space is locally equivalent to $SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_R$.

281: ${\cal N}= 2$ supersymmetric theories have

282: $SU(2)_I$ R-Symmetry.

283: The supersymmetry generators $Q_{\alpha i}$, $\bar{Q}_{\dot{\alpha} i}$ 

284: have indices $i=1,2$ for the R-symmetry.

285: ${\cal N}= 2$ supersymmetric

286: theories on ${\mathbb R}^{4}$ have following symmetry;

287: \begin{eqnarray}

288: H = SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_R \otimes SU(2)_I \ .

289: \end{eqnarray}

290: The supersymmetric gauge multiplet is given by

291: \begin{eqnarray}

292: \begin{array}{ccc}

293: \quad         &A_{\mu} \quad &{}\\

294:  \psi^1 \quad       &\phantom{\psi^q}\quad &\psi^2 \ \ .\\

295:  \quad         &\phi \quad &{}

296: \end{array}

297: \end{eqnarray}

298: Here 

299: $\psi^1$,$\psi^2$ and $\bar{\psi}^1$,$\bar{\psi}^2$

300: are Weyl spinors and their CPT conjugate. $\phi$ and

301: $\bar \phi$ are scalar fields.

302: Their quantum number of $H$ are assigned as

303: \begin{eqnarray}

304: \begin{array}{ccc}

305: \psi^1 = (1/2,0,1/2),&\psi^2 = (1/2,0,1/2),&\phi = (0,0,0),\\

306: \bar{\psi}^1=(0,1/2,1/2),&\bar{\psi}^2 = (0,1/2,1/2),&\bar \phi =(0,0,0).

307: \end{array}

308: \end{eqnarray}

309: The action functional is given by

310: \begin{eqnarray}

311: L=& -\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu}^{a}F^{\mu \nu}_{a}

312: -i\bar{\psi}_{\dot{\alpha} i}^{a}

313: \bar{\sigma}^{\mu \dot{\alpha}\alpha}D_{\mu}\psi_{\alpha a}{}^{i}

314: -D_{\mu}\bar{\phi}^{a}

315: D^{\mu}\phi_{a}

316: \\

317: & -\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\psi^{\alpha ia}[\bar{\phi},\psi_{\alpha i}]_{a}

318: - \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\bar{\psi}_{\dot{\alpha}}{}^{ia}

319: [\phi,\bar{\psi}^{\dot{\alpha}}{}_{i}]_{a}-

320: \frac{1}{2}[\bar{\phi},\phi]^2,\ .

321: \end{eqnarray}

322: The supersymmetric transformation with parameter $\xi$ and ${\bar \xi}$

323: are written as

324: \begin{eqnarray}

325: \delta A_{\mu}&=&

326: i\xi^{\alpha i}\sigma_{\mu \alpha\dot{\alpha}}

327: \bar{\psi}^{\dot{\alpha}}{}_{i}

328: -i\psi^{\alpha

329: i}\sigma_{\mu \alpha\dot{\alpha}}\bar{\xi}^{\dot{\alpha}}{}_{i},

330: \nonumber \\

331: \delta\psi_{\alpha}{}^{i}&=

332: &\sigma^{\mu \nu \, \beta}_{\,\,\alpha}\xi_{\beta}{}^{i}F_{\mu \nu}

333:     +\sqrt{2}i\sigma^{\mu}_{\alpha\dot{\alpha}}D_{\mu}

334:     \phi \bar{\xi}^{\dot{\alpha} i}

335:     +[\phi,\bar{\phi}] \xi_{\alpha}{}^{i},

336:      \nonumber \\

337: \delta\bar{\psi}_{\dot{\alpha} i} &=

338: &-\bar{\xi}_{\dot{\beta} i}

339: \bar{\sigma}^{\mu \nu \dot{\beta}}_{\quad \,\dot{\alpha}}

340: F_{\mu \nu}

341:    +\sqrt{2}i\xi^{\alpha i}\sigma^{\mu}_{\alpha \dot{\alpha}}

342:    D_{\mu}\bar{\phi}

343:    -[\phi,\bar{\phi}]\bar{\xi}_{\dot{\alpha} i},

344:      \nonumber \\

345: \delta \phi&=

346: &\sqrt{2}\xi^{\alpha i}\psi_{\alpha i},

347:       \nonumber \\

348: \delta\bar{\phi}&=

349: &\sqrt{2}\bar{\xi}^{\dot{\alpha}}_{i}\bar{\psi}_{\dot{\alpha}}{}^{i}.

350: \end{eqnarray}

351: 

352: To classify the solutions of BPS equations by equivariant cohomology,

353: let us introduce topological twist here \cite{Witten01,Witten02}.

354: We use a diagonal

355: subgroup $SU(2)_{R'}$ in $SU(2)_R \otimes SU(2)_I$ of

356: $H$. We redefine the spacetime rotation group by

357: \begin{eqnarray}

358: K' := SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_{R'},

359: \end{eqnarray}

360: Then combinations of spinors whose 

361: quantum number of $H$ are

362: $(1/2,0,1/2)\oplus (0,1/2,1/2)$

363: have quantum number $(1/2,1/2)\oplus (0,1)\oplus (0,0)$ of 

364: $K'$.

365: Particularly $(0,0)$ is scalar and 

366: $Q = \epsilon^{\dot{\alpha}i}\bar{Q}_{\dot{\alpha}i}$ is

367: a BRS operator.

368: Fermionic fields are similarly topological twisted as

369: $\psi^i \ (\frac{1}{2} , 0, \frac{1}{2}) 

370: \rightarrow  \psi_{\mu} \ (\frac{1}{2} , \frac{1}{2})\ 

371: $

372: and $

373: \bar{\psi}^i \ (0,\frac{1}{2} , \frac{1}{2}) 

374: \rightarrow \chi_{\mu \nu} \ (0,1) \ \oplus \ \eta \ (0,0)$.

375: BRS transformations are given as

376: \begin{eqnarray}

377: {\hat \delta} A_\mu &= i\psi_\mu, \ \ \ \ \ 

378: {\hat \delta} \psi_\mu &= - D_\mu \phi,\ \ \ \ \ 

379: {\hat \delta} \phi = 0,

380: \nonumber \\

381: {\hat \delta} \chi_{\mu\nu} &= H_{\mu\nu},\ \ \ \ \ 

382: {\hat \delta} \bar\phi &= i\eta,

383: \nonumber \\

384: {\hat \delta} H_{\mu\nu} &= i[\phi,\chi_{\mu\nu}],\ \ \ \ \ 

385: {\hat \delta} \eta &= [\phi,\bar\phi] \ .

386: \end{eqnarray}

387: %%%%%%%%%%% NEW

388: Here we introduce auxiliary field $H_{\mu \nu}$.

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

390: 

391: Next step, let us introduce hypermultiplets.

392: ${\cal N}=2$ hypermultiplet consists from two Weyl fermions 

393: $\lambda_{\!q}$ and $\lambda_{\!\tilde{q}}^\dagger$ and two

394: complex scalar boson ;

395: $q$ and $\tilde q^\dagger$

396: \begin{eqnarray}

397:  &\lambda_q & \nonumber \\

398:  q\quad         & &{\tilde{q}}^{\dagger} \ .\nonumber \\

399:  \quad         &{\lambda}_{\tilde{q}}^\dagger\quad &{}\nonumber

400: \end{eqnarray}

401: The definition of the symbol $\dagger$ is seen in appendix \ref{conv}.

402: Their supersymmetric transformations are given by

403: \begin{eqnarray}

404: \delta q^{i}&=

405: &-\sqrt{2}\xi^{\alpha i}\lambda_{q\alpha}

406: +\sqrt{2}\bar{\xi}_{\dot{\alpha}}{}^{i}

407: \bar{\lambda}_{\tilde{q}}^{\dot{\alpha}},

408:    \nonumber \\

409: \delta\lambda_{q\alpha}&=

410: &-\sqrt{2}i\sigma^{\mu}_{\alpha\dot{\alpha}}

411:    D_{\mu}q^{i}\bar{\xi}^{\dot{\alpha}}{}_{i}

412:    -2T_{a}q^{i}\bar{\phi}^{a}\xi_{\alpha i},

413:   \nonumber \\

414: \delta\bar{\lambda}_{\tilde{q}}^{\dot{\alpha}}&=

415: &-\sqrt{2} i\bar{\sigma}^{\mu \dot{\alpha}\alpha}

416: D_{\mu}q^{i}\xi_{\alpha i}

417:  +2T_{a}q^{i}\phi^{a}\bar{\xi}^{\dot{\alpha}}{}_{i},

418: \end{eqnarray}

419: where $T_a$ is a generator of gauge group.

420: In the following, we consider the case that

421: representation of the 

422: gauge group of the hypermultiplet is fundamental

423: representation.

424: After topological twisting, 

425: BRS transformations are given by

426: %%%

427: %% @@@0214

428: %

429: \begin{eqnarray}

430: {\hat \delta} q^{\dot\alpha}&=&

431:  {\psi}_{\!q}^{\dot{\alpha}},\ \ 

432: {\hat \delta} q_{\dot\alpha}^{\dagger}=

433:   {\psi}^{\dagger}_{\!q \dot{\alpha}} ,

434: \nonumber \\

435: {\hat \delta} {\psi}_{\!q}^{\dot{\alpha}}&=&

436: -i \phi^{a}T_a q^{\dot{\alpha}},\ \ 

437: {\hat \delta} {\psi}^{\dagger}_{\!q\dot{\alpha}}=

438: i q_{\dot\alpha}^{\dagger}\phi^{a}T_{a}, \nonumber \\

439: {\hat \delta} \chi_{q \alpha} &=& H_{q \alpha},\ \ {\hat \delta}

440:  \chi^{\dag \alpha}_{q} = H^{\dag \alpha}_{q} \nonumber \\

441: {\hat \delta} H_{q \alpha} &=& -i \phi^a T_a \chi_{q \alpha},\ \ {\hat

442:  \delta} H^{\dag \alpha}_{q} = i \chi^{\dag \alpha}_{q} \phi^a T_a, 

443: \end{eqnarray}

444: where fields are rescaled 

445: \footnote{

446: \begin{eqnarray}

447: \phi \rightarrow \frac{i}{2\sqrt{2}}\phi, \

448: \sqrt{2}\bar{\lambda}_{\!q}^{\dot{\alpha}}

449: \rightarrow \bar{\lambda}_{\!q}^{\dot{\alpha}},\ 

450: \sqrt{2}\bar{\lambda}_{\!q\dot{\alpha}}

451: \rightarrow \bar{\lambda}_{\!q\dot{\alpha}},\nonumber

452: \end{eqnarray}

453: } and also auxiliary field $H_{q \alpha}$ is

454: introduced. After topological twisting, we

455: rename the fermions as $\lambda_q \rightarrow \chi_q $ and 

456: $\bar{\lambda}_q \rightarrow \psi_q$.\\

457: 

458: Using these field contents, let us construct the action of 

459: Seiberg-Witten theory.

460: The action with fundamental hypermultiplet terms are defined by

461: \begin{eqnarray}

462: S = k - \hat{\delta} \Psi

463: \end{eqnarray}

464: where $k$ is instanton number 

465: \begin{eqnarray}

466: k =  \frac{1}{8\pi^2}\int \tr(F_A\wedge F_A),

467: \end{eqnarray}

468: and $\Psi$ is a gauge fermion;

469: \begin{eqnarray}

470: \Psi 

471: &=&

472: -\chi^{\mu\nu a}_+\{

473: H^{a}_{+\mu\nu }-

474: s_{+\mu\nu}^a

475: \}

476: -\chi^{\dagger\alpha}_q\{

477: H_{q\alpha}-

478: s_\alpha

479: \}

480: -\{

481: H^{\dagger\alpha}_q - 

482: s^{\dagger\alpha}

483: \}\chi_{q\alpha}

484: \nonumber

485: \\

486: & &

487: + i[\phi,{\bar{\phi}}]^a\eta^a

488: +D_\mu{\bar{\phi}}^a\psi^{\mu a}

489: -(

490: -iq^\dagger_{\dot{\alpha}}{\bar{\phi}}

491: )\psi^{\dot{\alpha}}_q

492: -\psi^\dagger_{q\dot{\alpha}}(

493: i{\bar{\phi}}q^{\dot{\alpha}} 

494: ) \ ,

495: %&=& \int d^4\!x\sqrt{g} \biggl[

496: %\chi^{\mu \nu }_a\left(H^a_{\mu \nu } -i F^{+a}_{\mu \nu }\right)

497: %-\frac{1}{2} g^{\mu \nu }(D_\mu \bar\phi)_a \psi^a_{\nu}

498: %+\frac{1}{8}[\phi,\bar\phi]_a \eta^a

499: %\biggr] \ , 

500: %\nonumber \\

501: %\Psi_p&=&\intl_X d^4 x \sqrt{g} \tr\left[i\bar{\phi}  D_\mu\psi^\mu \ .

502: \end{eqnarray}

503:  Here

504:  \begin{eqnarray}

505: s^{\mu \nu}(A,q,q^\dagger) &=& F^{+\mu \nu }_a +q^\dagger\bar\sigma^{\mu \nu }T_a q.

506: \nonumber \\

507: s^{\alpha}(A,q) &=& \sigma^\mu  D_\mu  q =\Slash{D}q \ .

508: \label{mono}

509: \end{eqnarray}

510: After integration of the auxiliary fields $H_{+ \mu \nu} $

511: and $H_q$, the bosonic action are given as

512: \begin{eqnarray}

513: S_B

514: &=& \int\!d^4\!x\sqrt{g}

515: \biggl[ \frac{1}{4}|s^{\mu \nu}|^2 +\frac{1}{2}|s^{\alpha}|^2\biggl] +

516: \cdots \ .

517: \label{sboson}

518: \end{eqnarray}

519: Notice that when the gauge group is $U(1)$ and the theory is defined on simple type 

520: commutative manifolds

521: we get the Seiberg-Witten invariants as the partition function of this

522: model \cite{Witten1,Witten2,Hyun-Park-Park1,Hyun-Park-Park2}.

523: {}From (\ref{sboson}) we get the BPS equations, 

524: \begin{eqnarray}

525: s^{\mu \nu}(A,q,q^\dagger) =0 \ , \  s^{\alpha}(A,q)=0  \ , \label{mono_eq}

526: \end{eqnarray}

527: which is known as the non-Abelian Seiberg-Witten monopole equations.

528: 

529: In the following, we investigate some 

530: properties of ${\cal N}= 2$ supersymmetric gauge

531: theory on N.C. ${\mathbb R}^{4}$

532: whose noncommutativity is defined as

533: \begin{eqnarray}

534: [x^{\mu} , x^{\nu} ] = i \theta^{\mu \nu} \ ,

535: \end{eqnarray}

536: where the $\theta^{\mu \nu}$ is an element of an antisymmetric matrix

537: and called N.C. parameter.

538: For simplicity, we take 

539: \begin{eqnarray}

540: (\theta^{\mu \nu} )=

541: \left(

542: \begin{array}{cc|cc}

543: 0& \theta^1 & 0 & 0 \\

544: -\theta^1 & 0 & 0& 0 \\

545: \hline

546: 0 & 0& 0& \theta^2 \\

547: 0& 0& -\theta^2 & 0

548: \end{array}

549: \right) \ \ . \label{theta1}

550: \end{eqnarray}

551: 

552: In the following, we only use operator formalisms to describe the

553: N.C. field theory, therefore

554: the fields are operators acting on the Hilbert space ${\cal H}$.

555: Then differential operators $\partial_{\mu}$ are expressed by using

556: commutation brackets

557: $ -i \theta^{ -1}_{\mu \nu}[ x^{\nu} , \ *] \equiv [ \hat{\partial}_{\mu} , 

558: * ]$

559: and $\int d^{2D} x $ is replaced with $ det (\theta )^{1/2}Tr_{\cal H} $.

560: \\

561: 

562: When we consider only the case of N.C. ${\mathbb R}^{4}$,

563: field theories are expressed by the Fock space formalism.

564: (See appendix in \cite{sako-suzuki}.)

565: In the Fock space representation,

566: fields are expressed as $A_{\mu}= \sum {A_{\mu}}^{n_1 n_2}_{m_1 m_2}

567: |n_1 ,n_2 \rangle \langle m_1 , m_2|$ ,

568: $\psi_{\mu}= \sum {\psi_{\mu}}^{n_1 n_2}_{m_1 m_2}

569: |n_1 ,n_2 \rangle \langle m_1 , m_2|$ , etc.

570: Therefore, the above BRS transformations are expressed as

571: \begin{eqnarray}

572: \hat{\delta} {A_{\mu}}^{n_1 n_2}_{m_1 m_2} = {\psi_{\mu}}^{n_1 n_2}_{m_1 

573: m_2}

574: \ \ , \ \ \hat{\delta} {\psi_{\mu}}^{n_1 n_2}_{m_1 m_2} = (D_{\mu} \phi )^{n_1 n_2}_{m_1 m_2}\ \ , \ \  \cdots \ \ .

575: \end{eqnarray}

576: where the covariant derivative is defined by

577: $D_{\mu}\  * := [\hat{\partial}_{\mu} + i A_{\mu}\ ,\  * \ ]$

578: with $\hat{\partial}_{\mu}:= -i \theta^{ -1}_{\mu \nu} x^{\nu} $.

579: The action functional is given by

580: \begin{eqnarray}

581: S&=& Tr_{\cal H} \

582: L ( A_{\mu}, \dots ;

583: \hat{\partial}_{z_i}, \hat{\partial}_{\bar{z}_i} ) \nonumber \\

584: &=& Tr_{\cal H}  tr

585:  \hat{\delta}\Psi  \ . \label{ctreinta} 

586: \end{eqnarray}

587: Let us change the dynamical variables as

588: \begin{eqnarray}

589: &&A_{\mu} \rightarrow \frac{1}{\sqrt{\theta}} \tilde{A}_{\mu} , \ \

590: \psi_{\mu} \rightarrow \frac{1}{\sqrt{\theta}} \tilde{\psi}_{\mu}  , \ \

591: \bar{\phi} \rightarrow \frac{1}{\theta} \tilde{\bar{\phi}} , \ \

592: \eta \rightarrow \frac{1}{\theta} \tilde{\eta} , \ \ 

593: q \rightarrow \frac{1}{\sqrt{\theta}} \tilde{q} , \ \

594: q^{\dagger} \rightarrow \frac{1}{\sqrt{\theta}} \tilde{q}^{\dagger}

595: \nonumber \\

596: &&

597: \chi_{\mu \nu}^+ \rightarrow \frac{1}{\theta} \tilde{\chi}_{\mu \nu}^+  ,

598: \ \

599: H_{\mu \nu}^+ \rightarrow \frac{1}{\theta} \tilde{H}_{\mu \nu}^+ , \ \

600: \phi \rightarrow \tilde{\phi} \ \  

601: \psi_q \rightarrow \frac{1}{\sqrt{\theta}} \tilde{\psi_q} , \ \

602: \psi^{\dagger}_q \rightarrow \frac{1}{\sqrt{\theta}} 

603: \tilde{\psi}^{\dagger}_q , \nonumber \\

604: && 

605: \chi_q \rightarrow \frac{1}{{\theta}} \tilde{\chi_q} , \ \ 

606: \chi_q^{\dagger} 

607:  \rightarrow \frac{1}{{\theta}} \tilde{\chi_q}^{\dagger}

608: , \ \ 

609: H_{q} \rightarrow \frac{1}{\theta} \tilde{H}_{q} , \ \

610: H_{q}^{\dagger} \rightarrow \frac{1}{\theta} \tilde{H}_{q}^{\dagger} 

611: . \label{weight1} 

612: \end{eqnarray}

613: Note that this changing does not cause nontrivial Jacobian

614: from the path integral measure because of the BRS symmetry.

615: Then, the action is rewritten as

616: \begin{eqnarray}

617: S \rightarrow \frac{1}{\theta^2} \tilde{S} \ \ \ , \ \ \

618: L( A_{\mu}, \dots ;

619: \hat{\partial}_{z_i}, \hat{\partial}_{\bar{z}_i} ) \rightarrow 

620: \frac{1}{\theta^2} L(\tilde{A}_{\mu} , \dots ; -a_i^{\dagger}

621: , a_i )\ \ .

622: \end{eqnarray}

623: Here the action in LHS

624: depends on $\theta$ because the derivative is given

625: by $\partial_{z_i}= - \sqrt{\theta^{ -1}} [ a_i^{\dagger} , \ ] $ and so on.

626: In contrast, the action $\tilde{S}$ in RHS

627: does not depend on $\theta$ because all $\theta$ parameters are

628: factorized out.

629: Using the BRS symmetry, it is proved that

630: the partition function is invariant under the

631: deformation of $\theta$, because

632:  $ \delta_{\theta} Z = -2 (\delta \theta ) \theta^{-3}\langle

633: \tilde{S} \rangle =0$.

634: As discussed in \cite{sako-suzuki}, the partition function

635: of this theory is possible to be determined by using a lower dimension

636: theory that is given by dimensional reduction.

637: Therefore, the investigation of the dimensional reduction of the theories is important.

638: 

639: 

640: The dimensional reduction of Seiberg-Witten monopole equations (\ref{mono})

641: are expressed as

642: \begin{eqnarray}

643: P^{\mu \nu \rho \tau}_+

644: [A_{\rho} , A_{\tau} ] + q \bar\sigma^{\mu \nu } q^\dagger =0 \ ,

645: \label{pre_ADHM} \\

646: \sigma^\mu  A_\mu  q = 0\ ,

647: \label{mono_reduction}

648: \end{eqnarray}

649: where $P^{\mu \nu \rho \tau}_+$ is a selfdual projection operator.

650: These expressions are valid for the dimensional reduction of the non-Abelian

651: theory on commutative ${\mathbb R}^4$.

652: Using $q_+ := (q_{\dot 1} + q_{\dot 2})/{\sqrt 2}$ and 

653: $q_- := (q_{\dot 1} - q_{\dot 2})/{\sqrt 2}$, if we start from the $U(1)$ theory

654: on N.C.${\mathbb R}^4$, the equation (\ref{pre_ADHM}) is 

655: rewritten as ADHM equations :

656: \begin{eqnarray}

657: [ A_{z_1} , A_{z_1}^{\dagger} ] + [ A_{z_2} , A_{z_2}^{\dagger} ]

658: + q_- q_-^{*T} -q_+ q_+^{*T} &=& 0 \ , \nonumber \\

659: {}[A_{z_1} , A_{z_2}] + q_- q_+^{*T} &=& 0 \ . \label{ADHM}

660: \end{eqnarray}

661: 

662: Note that these operators in (\ref{ADHM}) are expressed by infinite dimensional matrices and the ADHM equations correspond to the instanton of $U(N)$ gauge group with instanton number $N$ at the large $N$ limit.

663: We consider the finite $N$ situation in the next section.

664: 

665: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

666: %

667: % d-brane

668: %

669: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

670: \section{D-brane Interpretation} \label{d-brane}

671: In this article, we study detail of the solution of (\ref{pre_ADHM}) and (\ref{mono_reduction}).

672: On the N.C. ${\mathbb R}^4$ the fields appearing in (\ref{pre_ADHM}) and (\ref{mono_reduction})

673: is infinite dimensional matrix acting on Hilbert space.

674: But the equations are important even if the dimension of the matrix is finite,

675: because there is a corresponding physical model.

676: In this section, we consider the correspondence between Seiberg-Witten

677: monopole equations, D-brane picture and (\ref{pre_ADHM}) (\ref{mono_reduction}) \cite{Popov}.

678: 

679: At first, we construct the physical model

680: by using the similar manner of the article \cite{Popov}. 

681: (See also \cite{Popov1}-\cite{Szabo}.)

682: 

683: The generalized second order effective action of $N$ $D3$-brane $N$

684: $\bar{D}3$-brane

685: system without topological terms are given by

686: \begin{eqnarray}

687: \int tr \left\{ \frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu}^{(N)}  F^{(N){\mu \nu}}

688: + \frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu}^{(\bar{N})}  F^{(\bar{N}){\mu \nu}}

689: + | D^{\mu} \phi |^2 + \frac{1}{2}(\tau^2- \phi \bar{\phi})^2

690: \right\} \ .

691: \end{eqnarray}

692: Here the $F_{\mu \nu}^{(N)}$ and $F_{\mu \nu}^{(\bar{N})}$ are

693: the curvature of the $A^{(N)}$ 

694: and $A^{(\bar{N})}$ , respectively, where

695: $A^{(N)}$ 

696: and $A^{(\bar{N})}$ correspond to open strings attached on $D3$-brane

697: and $\bar{D}3$-brane.

698: Up to topological terms, we can rewrite this action as

699: \begin{eqnarray}

700: \int tr \left\{ \frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu}^{(\bar{N})}  F^{(\bar{N}){\mu \nu}}

701: +\frac{1}{2}|F_{{z}^1 \bar{z}^1}^{(N)}+F_{{z}^2 \bar{z}^2}^{(N)} 

702: +(\phi \bar{\phi} - \tau^2)|^2

703: +8| F_{{z}^1 {z}^2} |^2

704: +2|D_{\bar{z}_{\bar{1}}}\phi|^2 +2|D_{\bar{z}_{\bar{2}}}\phi|^2

705: \right\} \ .

706: \end{eqnarray}

707: 

708: {}From this action, considering the case of $A_{\mu}^{(\bar{N})}=0$,

709: stationary points are given by

710: \begin{eqnarray}

711: F_{{z}^1 \bar{z}^1}^{(N)}+F_{{z}^2 \bar{z}^2}^{(N)} 

712: + q_- q_-^{*T} 

713: &=& \zeta \ \ , \\  

714: F_{{z}^1 {z}^2}^{(N)} &=& 0 \ \ , \\

715: D_{\bar{z}^1} q_-  &=& 0 \ \ , \\

716: D_{\bar{z}^2} q_- &=& 0 \ ,

717: \end{eqnarray}

718: where we replace $\phi$ by $q_-$ and $\tau^2$ by $\zeta$. Then, this is

719: the Seiberg-Witten monopole 

720: equations with $q_+=0$ condition and back ground constant field $\zeta$.

721: (See also the next section.) 

722: %In the following sections, we will consider the case with $\zeta$ and 

723: This case corresponds to the $\zeta >0$ as we will see in 

724: section \ref{solution}.

725: Note that $q_-$ can be regarded as a complex scalar

726: field when we  consider ${\mathbb R}^4$ case.

727: 

728: %That is why, if we consider the dimensional reduction of above model to zero dimension, we get (\ref{pre_ADHM}),(\ref{mono_reduction}).

729: The solution of (\ref{pre_ADHM}),(\ref{mono_reduction}) of finite matrix model is 

730: realized as some $D3$-$\bar{D}3$ configuration. 

731: 

732: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

733: %

734: % equation

735: %

736: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

737: \section{Deformed BRS Transformation} \label{equation}

738: In this section, we will investigate the symmetry of the dimension reduction of

739: (\ref{ctreinta}) to $0$ dimension,

740: and deform the BRS symmetry

741: as ${\cal G} \otimes T^{N+2}$ equivariant derivative,

742: where ${\cal G}$ is the gauge transformation group of $U(N)$ and $T^{N+2}$

743: is the torus action,

744: in order to derive the fixed point equations.

745: Note that the $U(N)$ symmetry is caused from the $U(1)$ symmetry if we consider the N.C. theory.

746: As explained in section \ref{n=2theory}, the action functional is defined by

747: infinite dimensional matrices when we start from N.C. theories,

748: then N.C.$U(1)$ gauge symmetry is expressed by $U(\infty)$ symmetry.

749: %%%

750: %% @@@0214

751: %

752: For simplicity, in some discussions of this paper, 

753: we restrict our

754: analysis to the finite dimensional, $N \times N$, matrix case.

755: ( Only proof of the theorem \ref{prop5} in section \ref{solution} and 

756: the calculations of the 

757: partition function of a toy model in section \ref{localization}

758: are based on discussions of finite $N$.) 

759: All of the fields contents , $A_{\mu} , q $, etc, are given by $N \times N$ matrices.

760: Then the $U(\infty)$ symmetry is also truncated to $U(N)$.

761: {}From the viewpoint of N.C.field theory, there might be another type of solutions which is not studied in this article, and the following analysis 

762: might not be completed.

763: On the other hand, as discussed in the previous section,

764: the finite $N \times N$ theory has a $D3$-${\bar D}3$ brane

765: interpretation, then it has physical applications.

766: 

767: 

768: 

769: The path integral for cohomological field theories

770: reduced to the integral over the moduli space of vacuum.

771: In our case, the moduli space is defined by solutions of

772: (\ref{pre_ADHM}),(\ref{mono_reduction}).

773: As demonstrated in \cite{Nekrasov}, 

774: the localization theorem is a powerful tool for path integrals of

775: cohomological field theories.

776: The localization theorem is valid when a theory under consideration has

777: symmetries under some group actions, and the group actions have isolated

778: fixed points. 

779: (For the localization theorem, see also section \ref{localization}.)

780: Therefore, to investigate solutions of the fixed point equation is

781: important. This is the main subject of this paper.

782: 

783: 

784: Adding to the $U(N)$ gauge symmetry and the Lorentz symmetry

785: $SO(4)=SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_R$,

786: the action reduced to $0$ dimension has the next extra unitary symmetry, denoted

787: by ${\tilde U}(N)$,

788: \begin{equation}

789: \delta^{{\tilde U}(N)} q_{\dot \alpha} = i q_{\dot \alpha} b,

790: \label{extra}

791: \end{equation}

792: where $b$ is a generator of ${\tilde U}(N)$.\footnote{

793: When we consider the case that $q_{\dot \alpha}$ is a $N \times k$

794: matrix in the next section,

795: then the symmetry becomes ${\tilde U}(k)$;

796: \begin{equation}

797: \delta^{{\tilde U}(k)} q_{\dot \alpha} = i q_{\dot \alpha} b \ , \ b \in

798:  {\tilde u}(k).

799: \end{equation}

800: }

801: Recall that $q$ and $q^{\dagger}$ are fundamental representation of the gauge group.

802: The gauge transformation of $q$ is defined by left action of the $U(N)$.

803: %%%%% suzuki@@@

804: %Then, the additional symmetry of ${\tilde U}(N)$ appear as the similar symmetry to the gauge transformation but its transformation is defined by right action, after dimensional reduction.

805: Notice that if we define the gauge transformation by using right action,

806: we can define another gauge symmetry with the corresponding gauge field.

807: We do not introduce this gauge field, then the symmetry appears only

808: after the dimensional reduction.

809: %%%%%

810: This is the origin of ${\tilde U}(N)$.

811: 

812: Now we use the Abelian subgroup $U(1)^2 \otimes

813: U(1)^N$ of $SO(4) \otimes {\tilde

814: U}(N)$. That is, we consider the following symmetry of the action.

815: \begin{eqnarray}

816: \delta^{U(1)^2 \otimes U(1)^N} A_{z_i} &=& - i \epsilon_i A_{z_i}, \\

817: \delta^{U(1)^2 \otimes U(1)^N} q_{\dot \alpha} &=& + i {{M_{R}}_{\dot

818:  \alpha}}^{\dot \beta} q_{\dot \beta} + i q_{\dot \alpha} b, 

819: \end{eqnarray}

820: where

821: $b = \mbox{diag.} (b_1,\cdots,b_N)$ is a generator of an Abelian

822: subgroup $U(1)^N$ of ${\tilde U}(N)$, and $\epsilon_i \ (i=1,2)$ is a

823: generator of an Abelian subgroup $U(1)^2$ of $SO(4)$, defined by

824: \begin{equation}

825: \delta A_{\mu} = {M_\mu}^\nu A_\nu \ \ \ , \ \ \ {M_\mu}^\nu = \left(

826: \begin{array}{cccc}

827: 0 & - \epsilon_1 & & \\

828: + \epsilon_1 & 0 & & \\

829:  & & 0 & - \epsilon_2 \\

830:  & & - \epsilon_2 & 0

831: \end{array}

832: \right).

833: \end{equation}

834: Also ${{M_{R}}_{\dot \alpha}}^{\dot \beta}$ is the generator of 

835: $U(1) \subset SU(2)_R$,

836: \begin{equation}

837: {{M_{R}}_{\dot

838:  \alpha}}^{\dot \beta} = \left(

839: \begin{array}{cc}

840: 0 & \epsilon_+ \\

841: \epsilon_+ & 0

842: \end{array}

843: \right) \ \ \ , \ \ \ \epsilon_+ = \frac{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2}{2}.

844: \end{equation}

845: 

846: By using above $U(1)^2 \otimes U(1)^N$, let us deform

847: the BRS symmetry from $\hat{\delta}$ to $\tilde{\delta}$.

848: We define the deformation by replacing $\hat{\delta}^2=\delta^{U(N) gauge}_{(-\phi)}$ to

849: \begin{equation}

850: {\tilde \delta}^{2} = \delta^{U(N) gauge}_{(-\phi)} + \delta^{U(1)^N}_{(b)}+

851:  \delta^{U(1)^2}_{(\epsilon_{1} , \epsilon_{2})}.

852: \end{equation}

853: %%%

854: %% @@@0214

855: %

856: Here $\delta^G_{(\Delta)}$ is a gauge transformation operator with the

857: group $G$ and the transformation parameter $\Delta$.

858: Then, for $\psi_{z_{i}}$ and $\psi_{q{\dot \alpha}}$, the BRS transformation rules are

859: given by,

860: \begin{eqnarray}

861: {\tilde \delta}^{2} A_{z_{i}} &=& {\tilde \delta} \psi_{z_{i}} = i [A_{z_{i}} , \phi] - i

862:  \epsilon_{i} A_{z_{i}}, \label{brsA} \\

863: {\tilde \delta}^{2} q_{\dot \alpha} &=& {\tilde \delta} \psi_{q {\dot \alpha}} = - i \phi

864:  q_{\dot \alpha} + {{M_{R}}_{\dot \alpha}}^{\dot \beta} q_{\dot \beta}

865:  + i q_{\dot \alpha} b, \label{brsq1} \\

866: {\tilde \delta}^{2} q^{\dag {\dot \alpha}} &=& {\tilde \delta} {\psi_{q}}^{\dag \dot

867:  \alpha} = q^{\dag {\dot \alpha}} i \phi - {{M_{R}}^{\dot

868:  \alpha}}_{\dot \beta} q^{\dag {\dot \beta}} - i b q^{\dag {\dot

869:  \alpha}}. \label{brsq2}

870: \end{eqnarray}

871: 

872: Now we list the equations, solutions of which we will investigate.

873: Some of them are the equations of motion,

874: often called BPS equations.

875: They are the same as (\ref{pre_ADHM}) or

876: (\ref{ADHM}),(\ref{mono_reduction}).

877: However we take some deformation of them, to remove singular solutions.

878: We introduce a nonzero number $\zeta$, and take

879: \begin{eqnarray}

880: & & i ( [A_{z_1} , A_{{\bar z}_1}] + [A_{z_2} , A_{{\bar z}_2}] ) +

881: q ({\bar \sigma}_{z_1 {\bar z}_1} + {\bar \sigma}_{z_2 {\bar z}_2})

882: q^{\dag} = i \zeta, \label{eq1} \\

883: & & i [A_{z_1} , A_{z_2}] + q {\bar \sigma}_{z_1 z_2} q^{\dag} = 0,

884:  \label{eq2} \\

885: & & ( A_{z_1} \sigma^{z_1} + A_{{\bar z}_1} \sigma^{{\bar

886:  z}_1} + A_{z_2} \sigma^{z_2} + A_{{\bar z}_2} \sigma^{{\bar

887:  z}_2}) q = 0. \label{eq3}

888: \end{eqnarray}

889: (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2}) are realized by the redefinition of $s^{\mu

890: \nu}(A,q,q^\dagger)$

891: \begin{eqnarray}

892:  & & s^{\mu \nu}(A,q,q^\dagger) \rightarrow F^{+\mu \nu }

893:  +q \bar\sigma^{\mu \nu }q^{\dagger} - \zeta^+_{\mu \nu},

894: \nonumber \\

895:  & & \zeta_{z_1 {\bar z_1}} + \zeta_{z_2 {\bar z_2}} = i \zeta \ , \ \zeta_{z_1

896:  z_2} = 0. 

897: \end{eqnarray}

898: This constant $\zeta$ is considered as a back ground field and we define its BRS

899: transformation by $\tilde{\delta} \zeta =0$.

900: Then, we find that all of the above discussions in previous sections 

901: are valid although we add this back ground field. 

902: For later use, we rewrite them into

903: \begin{eqnarray}

904: & &  [A_{z_1} , A_{{\bar z}_1}] + [A_{z_2} , A_{{\bar z}_2}] 

905: -(q_{\dot 2} q_{\dot 1}^{* T} + q_{\dot 1} q_{\dot 2}^{* T}) = \zeta, \label{eq1r} \\

906: & & [A_{z_1} , A_{z_2}] + \frac{1}{2}(q_{\dot 1} q_{\dot 1}^{* T} -

907:  q_{\dot 2} q_{\dot 2}^{* T}) + \frac{1}{2}(q_{\dot 1} q_{\dot 2}^{* T} - q_{\dot 2} q_{\dot 1}^{* T}) = 0,

908:  \label{eq2r} \\

909: & & (A_{{\bar z}_1} - A_{z_2}) q_{\dot 2}

910:  - (A_{{\bar z}_1} + A_{z_2}) q_{\dot 1} = 0,

911:  \label{eq3r1} \\

912: & & (A_{{\bar z}_2} + A_{z_1}) q_{\dot 2}

913:  - (A_{{\bar z}_2} - A_{z_1}) q_{\dot 1} = 0.

914:  \label{eq3r2}

915: \end{eqnarray}

916: The rest of the equations to be investigated are

917: the fixed point equations of the deformed BRS transformation

918: (\ref{brsA}) - (\ref{brsq2}). They are given

919: by

920: \begin{eqnarray}

921:  & & i [A_{z_{i}} , \phi] - i \epsilon_{i} A_{z_{i}} = 0, \label{eq4} \\

922:  & & - i \phi q_{\dot \alpha} + {{M_{R}}_{\dot \alpha}}^{\dot \beta}

923:   q_{\dot \beta} + i q_{\dot \alpha} b = 0. \label{eq5}

924: \end{eqnarray}

925: 

926: In the next section, we will investigate solutions of

927: (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2}),(\ref{eq3}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}), and will

928: show that they have isolated solutions.

929: This fact guarantees that the localization theorem is valid to our case.

930: 

931: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

932: %

933: % solution

934: %

935: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

936: \section{Solutions of (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2}),(\ref{eq3}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5})} \label{solution}

937: In this section, we solve

938: (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2})(\ref{eq3}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}), and show

939: that these equations have only isolated solutions and the solutions are expressed by the Young diagrams.

940: Notice that our analysis is also valid to a case where $q_{\alpha}$'s

941: are $N \times k , (k \neq N)$ matrices,

942:  though we will treat $q_{\alpha}$ as $N \times N$ matrices in this section.

943: If we take $q_{\dot \alpha}$ to be $N \times k$, $q_{\dot \alpha}^{* T}$

944: to be $k \times N$ and $b \in u(k)$, our proof in this section includes a new

945: proof for Prop.5.6. in \cite{Nakajima}.

946: 

947: First of all, we diagonalize $\phi$ by using the $U(N)$ gauge symmetry,

948: \begin{equation}

949:  \phi = \mbox{diag.} (\phi_1 , \phi_2 , \cdots , \phi_N).

950: \end{equation}

951: 

952: Next we tackle (\ref{eq4}) and (\ref{eq5}).

953: {}From (\ref{eq4}) we see immediately that

954: if and only if,

955: \begin{equation}

956:  \phi_J - \phi_I = \epsilon_i,

957: \end{equation}

958: $A_{z_i \ I J}$ could be non-zero,

959: \begin{equation}

960: A_{z_i \ I J} \neq 0.

961: \end{equation}

962: Also from (\ref{eq5}) we see that

963: if and only if,

964: \begin{equation}

965:  \phi_I = b_J \pm \epsilon_{+},

966: \end{equation}

967: $q_{\dot 1 \ I J}$ and $q_{\dot 2 \ I J}$ could be non-zero,

968: \begin{equation}

969:  q_{\dot 1 \ I J} = \pm q_{\dot 2 \ I J} \neq 0.

970: \end{equation}

971: Notice $q_{\dot 1 \ I J}$ and $q_{\dot 2 \ I J}$ are not independent

972: from one another.

973: 

974: These observations lead us to the following proposition.

975: \begin{lemma}

976: If (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) have a solution,

977: then

978: $\phi_{I}$ takes any of $\varphi_{[x_{\hat I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}$, given by 

979: \begin{equation}

980: \varphi_{[x_{\hat I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} = x_{\hat I} + n_1 \epsilon_1 + n_2

981:  \epsilon_2 \ \ \ , \ \ \ n_1 , n_2 \in {\mathbb Z} 

982: \end{equation}

983: where

984: \begin{equation}

985: x_{\hat I} \in \{ b_{I}^{(-)} \in {\mathbb R} , I = 1,\cdots,N |

986:  b_{I}^{(-)} := b_{I} - \epsilon_+ \},

987: \end{equation}

988: or

989: \begin{equation}

990: x_{\hat I} \in \{ y_{\bar I} \in {\mathbb R} , {\bar I} = 1,\cdots,{\bar

991:  N} | \forall I,n_1,n_2, \ y_{\bar I} \neq b_{I}^{(-)} + n_1 \epsilon_1

992:  + n_2 \epsilon_2 \}.

993: \end{equation}

994: \label{prop1}

995: \end{lemma}

996: (proof)\\

997: Suppose that $\phi_I$ does not take any of $\varphi_{[x_{\hat

998: I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}$ given above. This implies that 

999: $ \exists I, \forall J, \ q_{\dot \alpha \ I J} = 0, A_{z_i \ I J} = A_{z_i \ J I} =

1000: 0$.

1001: Consider (\ref{eq1}).

1002: It is easy to see that the $(I,I)$ component of

1003: LHS of (\ref{eq1}) is $0$,

1004: whereas the $(I,I)$ component of RHS of (\ref{eq1}) is $ i

1005: \zeta \neq 0$. 

1006: Therefore no solution to (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) is allowed. $\blacksquare$

1007: 

1008: For a set of all $\{\varphi_{[x_{\hat I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} | x_{\hat I} \ \mbox{is given} \}$, assign a graph $P_{[x_{\hat I}]}$. 

1009: See Fig.\ref{f1}. 

1010: \begin{figure}

1011:  \centering

1012:  \includegraphics[width=40mm,clip]{f1.eps}

1013:  \caption{ $P_{[{\hat x}_I]}$ }

1014:  \label{f1}

1015: \end{figure}

1016: In Fig.\ref{f1}, the origin, denoted by the black square, corresponds to the eigenvalue

1017: $\varphi_{[x_{\hat I}]}^{(0,0)} = x_{\hat I}$,

1018: and other lattice points $(n_1,n_2)$, denoted by black dots,

1019: correspond to eigenvalues $\varphi_{[x_{\hat I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}$. 

1020: For given a set of $P_{[x_{\hat I}]}$,

1021: $\phi$ is written as

1022: \begin{eqnarray}

1023: \phi &=& \bigoplus_{I} \left(

1024: \begin{array}{cccc}

1025: \varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} {\bf

1026:  1}_{N_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}} & & & \\

1027:  & \varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n'_1,n'_2)} {\bf

1028:  1}_{N_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n'_1,n'_2)}}& & \\

1029:  & & \varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n''_1,n''_2)} {\bf

1030:  1}_{N_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n''_1,n''_2)}}& \\

1031:  & & & \ddots

1032: \end{array}

1033: \right) \\

1034: & & \bigoplus_{\bar I} \left(

1035: \begin{array}{cccc}

1036: \varphi_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} {\bf

1037:  1}_{N_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}} & & & \\

1038:  & \varphi_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n'_1,n'_2)} {\bf

1039:  1}_{N_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n'_1,n'_2)}}& & \\

1040:  & & \varphi_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n''_1,n''_2)} {\bf

1041:  1}_{N_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n''_1,n''_2)}}& \\

1042:  & & & \ddots 

1043: \end{array}

1044: \right).

1045: \label{phi1}

1046: \end{eqnarray}

1047: In each ${I}$-th or ${\bar I}$-th block, we suppose that eigenvalues

1048: $\varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}$ or $\varphi_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}$ are arranged by order,

1049: \begin{eqnarray}

1050:  & & 

1051: \varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} <

1052: \varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n'_1,n'_2)} <

1053: \varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n''_1,n''_2)} < \cdots, \nonumber \\

1054:  & & 

1055: \varphi_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} < \varphi_{[y_{\bar

1056: I}]}^{(n'_1,n'_2)} < \varphi_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n''_1,n''_2)} < \cdots.

1057: \label{order}

1058: \end{eqnarray}

1059: 

1060: The index $I$ is mapped to the triad of indices $( {\hat I},(n_1,n_2) )$,

1061: \begin{equation}

1062: I \mapsto ( {\hat I},(n_1,n_2) ).

1063: \end{equation}

1064: We denote the degeneracy of $\varphi_{[x_{\hat

1065: I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}$ as $N_{[x_{\hat I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}$,

1066: \begin{equation}

1067: {}^{\#} \{ \phi_I | \phi_I = \varphi_{[x_{\hat I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} \} = N_{[x_{\hat

1068:  I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} \geq 0,

1069: \end{equation} 

1070: \begin{equation}

1071: \sum_{\hat I} \sum_{(n_1,n_2)} N_{[x_{\hat I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} = N.

1072: \end{equation}

1073: 

1074: $A_{z_i}$ takes a similar block structure,

1075: \begin{eqnarray}

1076:  A_{z_i} &=& \bigoplus_{I} \left(

1077: \begin{array}{ccc}

1078:  & \vdots & \\

1079: \cdots & A_{z_i \ (I,(n_1,n_2)),(I,(m_1,m_2))} & \cdots \\

1080:  & \vdots & 

1081: \end{array}

1082: \right) \nonumber \\

1083:  & & \bigoplus_{\bar I} \left(

1084: \begin{array}{ccc}

1085:  & \vdots & \\

1086: \cdots & E_{z_i \ ({\bar I},(n_1,n_2)),({\bar I},(m_1,m_2))} & \cdots \\

1087:  & \vdots & 

1088: \end{array}

1089: \right),

1090: \label{A1}

1091: \end{eqnarray}

1092: where 

1093: %the size of $A_{z_i \ (I,(n_1,n_2)),(I,(m_1,m_2))}$ and 

1094: %the size of $E_{z_i \ ({\bar I},(n_1,n_2)),({\bar I},(m_1,m_2))}$ are

1095: %given by,

1096: \begin{eqnarray}

1097:  A_{z_i \ (I,(n_1,n_2)),(I,(m_1,m_2))} && \mbox{ is a }

1098:  N_{[b_I^{(-)}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} \times N_{[b_I^{(-)}]}^{(m_1,m_2)} \ \mbox{complex matrix , and }

1099:  \nonumber \\

1100:  E_{z_i \ ({\bar I},(n_1,n_2)),({\bar I},(m_1,m_2))} && \mbox{ is a }

1101:  N_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} \times N_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(m_1,m_2)} \ \mbox{complex matrix}.  \nonumber

1102: \end{eqnarray}

1103: A non-trivial component of $A_{z_1}$ appears in 

1104: $\{ ({\hat I},(n_1,n_2)) \ , \ ({\hat I},(n_1 -1,n_2)) \}$-th block 

1105: and, that of $A_{z_2}$ appears in  

1106: $\{ ({\hat I},(n_1,n_2)) \ , \ ({\hat I},(n_1,n_2 -1)) \}$-th block,

1107: \begin{eqnarray}

1108: A_{z_1 \ (I,(n_1,n_2)),(I,(n_1-1,n_2))} \neq 0  &,& 

1109: E_{z_1 \ ({\bar I},(n_1,n_2)),({\bar I},(n_1-1,n_2))} \neq 0 \\

1110: A_{z_2 \ (I,(n_1,n_2)),(I,(n_1,n_2-1))} \neq 0  &,& 

1111: E_{z_2 \ ({\bar I},(n_1,n_2)),({\bar I},(n_1,n_2-1))} \neq 0 \ .

1112: \end{eqnarray}

1113: By adding left-arrows connecting $(n_1,n_2)$ and $(n_1 -1,n_2)$

1114: and down-arrows connecting $(n_1,n_2)$ and $(n_1,n_2 -1)$ to

1115: the graph $P_{[x_{\hat I}]}$,

1116: we obtain a graph $G_{[x_{\hat I}]}$. For example, see

1117: Fig.\ref{f2}. The left-arrow corresponds to $A_{z_1}$'s non-trivial

1118: component, and the down-arrow corresponds to $A_{z_2}$'s non-trivial

1119: component. 

1120: \begin{figure}

1121:  \centering

1122:  \includegraphics[width=40mm,clip]{f2.eps}

1123:  \caption{ $G_{[{\hat x}_I]}$ }

1124:  \label{f2}

1125: \end{figure}

1126: Also the non-trivial components of $q_{\dot \alpha}$ are

1127: \begin{eqnarray}

1128: q_{{\dot 1} \ (I , (0,0)) , J } = - q_{{\dot 2} \ (I ,

1129:   (0,0)) , J } \neq 0 &,& \mbox{for} \ I,J, \ \mbox{s.t.} \ \phi_I = b_J

1130:   + \epsilon_+ ,

1131: \label{q1a} \\

1132: q_{{\dot 1} \ (I , (1,1)) , J } = + q_{{\dot 2} \ (I ,

1133:   (1,1)) , J } \neq 0 &,& \mbox{for} \ I,J, \ \mbox{s.t.} \ \phi_I = b_J - \epsilon_+ .

1134: \label{q1b}

1135: \end{eqnarray}

1136: 

1137: {}From (\ref{A1}),(\ref{q1a}),(\ref{q1b}), we obtain

1138: the next proposition.

1139: \begin{lemma}

1140: If $\phi_I$ takes any of $\varphi_{[{y_{\bar I}}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} = y_{\bar

1141:  I} + n_1 \epsilon_1 + n_2 \epsilon_2$,

1142: then (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) have no solution.

1143: \label{prop2}

1144: \end{lemma}

1145: (proof) \\

1146: Suppose that some $\phi_I$ are given

1147: by

1148: \begin{equation}

1149: \phi_I = \varphi_{[y_{\bar I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}.

1150: \end{equation}

1151: Then, LHS of (\ref{eq1r}), equivalent to (\ref{eq1}),

1152: is given by 

1153: \begin{eqnarray}

1154:  & & \mbox{LHS of (\ref{eq1r})} = \sum_{i=1,2} [A_{z_i} , A_{{\bar z}_i}] - (q_{\dot 2} q_{\dot 1}^{*

1155:   T} + q_{\dot 1} q_{\dot 2}^{* T}) \nonumber \\

1156:  &=&  

1157: \left(

1158: \begin{array}{cc}

1159: \bigoplus_{I} \sum_{i=1,2} [A^{I}_{z_i} , A^{I}_{{\bar z}_i}] - (q_{\dot

1160:  2} q_{\dot 1}^{* T} + q_{\dot 1} q_{\dot 2}^{* T}) & 0 \\

1161: 0 & \bigoplus_{\bar I} \sum_{i=1,2} [E^{\bar I}_{z_i} , E^{\bar I}_{{\bar z}_i}]

1162: \end{array}

1163: \right),

1164: \label{lhseq1r}

1165: \end{eqnarray}

1166: because the non-trivial components of $q_{\dot \alpha}$ are given by

1167:  (\ref{q1a}),(\ref{q1b}).

1168: On the other hand, RHS of (\ref{eq1r}) is proportional to a unit matrix,

1169: \begin{equation}

1170: \mbox{RHS of (\ref{eq1r})} = \zeta 

1171: \left(

1172: \begin{array}{cc}

1173: \bigoplus_{I} {\bf 1}^{I,I} & 0 \\

1174: 0 & \bigoplus_{\bar I} {\bf 1}^{{\bar I},{\bar I}}

1175: \end{array}

1176: \right).

1177: \label{rhseq1r}

1178: \end{equation}

1179: The $({\bar I} \ , \ {\bar I})$ block of (\ref{lhseq1r}) is a traceless matrix,

1180: whereas the $({\bar I} \ , \ {\bar I})$ block of (\ref{rhseq1r}) has a non-zero

1181: trace.

1182: These are mutually exclusive. $\blacksquare$ \\

1183: When we consider the case of $N=\infty$, we can not use the 

1184: nature that the commutator is traceless, then

1185: this proof is not correct. But we can prove this statement

1186: even if $N=\infty$. Because, if $[E^{\bar I}_{z_i} , E^{\bar I}_{{\bar z}_i}]$

1187: is not traceless, we can show that the curvature $F$ does not converge

1188: to zero at infinity. 

1189: This means that if the set of the gauge fields is

1190: $\{A | \lim_{x\rightarrow \infty}|F(x)|=0 \}$,

1191: then this theorem still holds. 

1192: By the same reason, the theorem \ref{prop4} in this section is valid

1193: for $N=\infty$ case.

1194: That is why, all theorems in this section 

1195: without the theorem \ref{prop5}

1196: holds for $N=\infty$ case. 

1197: 

1198: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1199: \begin{corollary}

1200: (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) can have a solution,

1201: if and only if $\phi$ is given by

1202: \begin{equation}

1203: \phi = \bigoplus_{I} \bigoplus_{(n_1,n_2) \in G_{[b^{(-)}_{I}]}} \varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} {\bf

1204:  1}_{N_{[b^{(-)}_{I}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}},

1205: \label{phi2}

1206: \end{equation}

1207: \begin{equation}

1208: \varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} = b^{(-)}_{I} + n_1 \epsilon_1 + n_2

1209:  \epsilon_2,

1210: \label{barphibI} 

1211: \end{equation}

1212: and $A_{z_i}$ is given by

1213: \begin{equation}

1214:  A_{z_i} = \bigoplus_{I} A^{I}_{z_i}.

1215: \label{A2}

1216: \end{equation}

1217: \label{prop3}

1218: \end{corollary}

1219: 

1220: {}From now on, we suppose that the parameter $\zeta$ is a positive number,

1221: \begin{equation}

1222: \zeta > 0.

1223: \label{zeta>0}

1224: \end{equation}

1225: (If we assume $\zeta < 0$, we have to change some statements

1226: in the following theorems, but essentially same theorems hold.)

1227: Then we obtain the next theorem.

1228: \begin{theorem}

1229: Let $G_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}$ be a graph defined from the eigenvalues

1230:  $\varphi_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}^{(n_1,n_2)}$ given by (\ref{phi2}).

1231: Also let $\zeta$ be positive.

1232: The following three conditions

1233: are necessary

1234: for a solution of (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq4}) and (\ref{eq5}) to exist. \\

1235: (1) $G_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}$ consists of one connected part. \\

1236: (2) $G_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}$ includes the origin $(0,0)$. \\

1237: (3) All points $(n_1,n_2)$ in $G_{[b_{I}^{(-)}]}$ must be in $n_1 \leq 0 \ , \ n_2 \leq 0$.

1238: \label{prop4}

1239: \end{theorem}

1240: (proof) \\

1241: First of all, notice that $A^I_{z_i}$ is a direct sum of upper triangle (block) matrices and $A^I_{{\bar

1242: z}_i}$ is of lower triangle (block) matrices, (remember (\ref{order}),)

1243: \begin{eqnarray}

1244:  & &  A^I_{z_i} = \bigoplus_{a} A^{I \ (a)}_{z_i} = \bigoplus_{a} \left(

1245: \begin{array}{ccccc}

1246: 0 & * & \cdots & * & * \\

1247: 0 & 0 & \cdots & * & * \\

1248: \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\

1249: 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & * \\

1250: 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0

1251: \end{array}

1252: \right),

1253: \label{utri} \\

1254:  & & A^I_{{\bar z}_i} = \bigoplus_{a} A^{I \ (a)}_{{\bar z}_i} = \bigoplus_{a} \left(

1255: \begin{array}{ccccc}

1256: 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 \\

1257: * & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 \\

1258: \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\

1259: * & * & \cdots & 0 & 0 \\

1260: * & * & \cdots & * & 0

1261: \end{array}

1262: \right),

1263: \label{dtri}

1264: \end{eqnarray}

1265: where the index $a$ labels connected diagrams $G_{[b_I^{(-)}]}^{(a)}$ in $G_{[b_I^{(-)}]}$. See Fig.\ref{f3}.

1266: \begin{figure}

1267:  \centering

1268:  \includegraphics[width=40mm,clip]{f3.eps}

1269:  \caption{ $G_{[b_I^{(-)}]}$ consists of connected graphs $G_{[b_I^{(-)}]}^{(a)}$ }

1270:  \label{f3}

1271: \end{figure}

1272: {}From (\ref{utri}) and (\ref{dtri}), we obtain

1273: \begin{equation}

1274: [A^{I \ (a)}_{z_i} , A^{I \ (a)}_{{\bar z}_i}] =

1275: \left(

1276: \begin{array}{ccc}

1277: M_{min} & * & 0 \\

1278: * & M_{int} & * \\

1279: 0 & * & M_{max}

1280: \end{array}

1281: \right), \label{AA2} 

1282: \end{equation}

1283: where

1284: \begin{eqnarray}

1285:  & & M_{min} = + \sum_{(m_1,m_2)} A^{I \ (a)}_{z_i \ (n_1^{min},n_2^{min}) ,

1286:  (m_1,m_2) } A^{I \ (a)}_{{\bar z}_i \ (m_1,m_2)

1287:  , (n_1^{min},n_2^{min})}, \label{AA2min} \\

1288:  & & M_{max} = - \sum_{(m_1,m_2)} A^{I \ (a)}_{{\bar z}_i \

1289:       (n_1^{max},n_2^{max}),(m_1,m_2)} A^{I \ (a)}_{z_i \

1290:       (m_1,m_2),(n_1^{max},n_2^{max})}, \label{AA2max}

1291: \end{eqnarray}

1292: and

1293: \begin{equation}

1294: M_{int} = \left(

1295: \begin{array}{cccc}

1296: M_{int}^{(n_1,n_2)} & * & * & \\

1297: * & M_{int}^{(n'_1,n'_2)} & * & \\

1298: * & * & M_{int}^{(n''_1,n''_2)} & \\

1299:  & & & \ddots 

1300: \end{array}

1301: \right), \label{AA2int}

1302: \end{equation}

1303: \begin{eqnarray}

1304: M_{int}^{(n_1,n_2)} &=&

1305:  + \sum_{(m_1,m_2)} A^{I \ (a)}_{z_i \ (n_1,n_2),(m_1,m_2)} A^{I \ (a)}_{{\bar z}_i \

1306:   (m_1,m_2),(n_1,n_2)} \nonumber \\ 

1307:  & & - \sum_{(m_1,m_2)} A^{I \ (a)}_{{\bar z}_i \

1308:   (n_1,n_2),(m_1,m_2)} A^{I \ (a)}_{z_i \ (m_1,m_2),(n_1,n_2)},

1309:   \nonumber \\

1310:  & &  \ \ \ \cdots \ \ \ .

1311:  \label{AA2intn}

1312: \end{eqnarray}

1313: $(n_1^{min},n_2^{min})$ in (\ref{AA2min}) denotes the point corresponding to the

1314: lowest eigenvalue in $G_{[b_I^{(-)}]}^{(a)}$,

1315: and

1316: $(n_1^{max},n_2^{max})$ in (\ref{AA2max}) denotes the point corresponding to the

1317: highest eigenvalue in $G_{[b_I^{(-)}]}^{(a)}$.

1318: Also

1319: $(n_1,n_2), \cdots $ in (\ref{AA2int}) denote other points corresponding to

1320: intermediate eigenvalues in $G_{[b_I^{(-)}]}^{(a)}$. 

1321: Let us consider a $\{ (I \ (a)) \ , \ (I \ (a)) \}$ block of (\ref{eq1r}),

1322: \begin{equation}

1323: \sum_{i=1,2} [A^{I \ (a)}_{z_i} , A^{I \ (a)}_{{\bar z}_i}] 

1324: -(q_{\dot 2} q_{\dot 1}^{* T} + q_{\dot 1} q_{\dot 2}^{* T})_{ \{ (I \

1325: (a)) \ , \ (I \ (a)) \} } = \zeta \ {\bf 1}_{ \{ (I \ (a)) \ , \ (I \

1326:  (a)) \} }.

1327: \label{eq1rIa}

1328: \end{equation}

1329: If a connected part $G^{(a)}_{[b_I^{(-)}]}$ does not include $(0,0)$ or

1330: $(1,1)$, the second term in LHS of (\ref{eq1rIa}) vanishes, since the

1331: non-trivial components of $q_{\dot \alpha}$ are given by (\ref{q1a}),(\ref{q1b}).

1332: We have supposed $\zeta > 0$, so (\ref{AA2})-(\ref{AA2intn}) tell us that

1333: such $G^{(a)}_{[b_I^{(-)}]}$ does not exist.

1334: 

1335: Next, consider the $\{(I,(n_1^{max},n_2^{max})) \ , \

1336: (I,(n_1^{max},n_2^{max})) \}$

1337: block of (\ref{eq1r}),

1338: \begin{eqnarray}

1339:  & & - \sum_{(m_1,m_2)} A^I_{{\bar z}_i \

1340:       (n_1^{max},n_2^{max}),(m_1,m_2)} A^I_{z_i \

1341:       (m_1,m_2),(n_1^{max},n_2^{max})} \nonumber \\

1342:  & & -(q_{\dot 2}

1343:  q_{\dot 1}^{* T} + q_{\dot 1} q_{\dot 2}^{* T})_{\{ (I,(n_1^{max},n_2^{max})) \ , \ (I,(n_1^{max},n_2^{max})) \}} \nonumber \\

1344:  &=& \zeta \ {\bf 1}_{N^{(n_1^{max},n_2^{max})}_{[b^{(-)}_I]}}.

1345: \label{eq1rmax}

1346: \end{eqnarray}

1347: If 

1348: \begin{equation}

1349: n_1^{max} > 1 \ \ \ \mbox{or} \ \ \ n_2^{max} > 1,

1350: \end{equation}

1351: the second term in LHS of (\ref{eq1rmax}) vanishes,

1352: since the non-trivial components of $q_{\dot \alpha}$ are given by (\ref{q1a}),(\ref{q1b}),

1353: then  

1354: \begin{equation}

1355: \mbox{LHS of (\ref{eq1rmax})} = - \sum_{(m_1,m_2)} A^I_{{\bar z}_i \

1356:       (n_1^{max},n_2^{max}),(m_1,m_2)} A^I_{z_i \

1357:       (m_1,m_2),(n_1^{max},n_2^{max})} \leq 0.

1358: \end{equation}

1359: On the other hand, 

1360: \begin{equation}

1361: \mbox{RHS of (\ref{eq1rmax})} = \zeta > 0.

1362: \end{equation}

1363: These are inconsistent from each other.

1364: Then, we conclude

1365: \begin{equation}

1366: n_1^{max} \leq 1 \ \ \ \mbox{and} \ \ \ n_2^{max} \leq 1.

1367: \end{equation}

1368: 

1369: Consider the maximal case, the $\{ (I , (1,1)) \ , \ (I , (1,1)) \}$ component of

1370: (\ref{eq1r}).

1371: The first term in LHS is

1372: \begin{equation}

1373: - \sum_{(m_1,m_2)} A^I_{{\bar z}_i \

1374:       (1,1),(m_1,m_2)} A^I_{z_i \

1375:       (m_1,m_2),(1,1)} \leq 0,

1376: \end{equation}

1377: and the second term is

1378: \begin{equation}

1379: -(q_{\dot 2} q_{\dot 1}^{* T} + q_{\dot 1} q_{\dot 2}^{* T})

1380:  = - 2 q_{\dot 1} q_{\dot 1}^{* T} \leq 0 .

1381: \end{equation}

1382: Again, RHS is $\zeta > 0$. Then we see that the $\{ I (1,1) \}$

1383: component does not exist.

1384: Repeating similar arguments, we conclude that

1385: \begin{equation}

1386: (n_1^{max},n_2^{max}) = (0,0).

1387: \end{equation}

1388: We have finished the proof of Theorem\ref{prop4}. $\blacksquare$

1389: 

1390: Let us introduce such a map ${\cal I}$, that

1391: \begin{eqnarray}

1392: & & {\cal I} \ : \ \{ \ l \ | \ l = 1 , \cdots , M \ \} \rightarrow \{

1393:   \ I \ | \ I = 1 , \cdots , N \ \} \ , \ M \leq N, \\

1394: & & N_{[b_{{\cal I}(l)}]}^{(0,0)} \neq 0.

1395: \end{eqnarray}

1396: For each $l$, assign a connected graph $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$.

1397: For example, see Fig.\ref{f4}.

1398: \begin{figure}

1399:  \centering

1400:  \includegraphics[width=30mm,clip]{f4.eps}

1401:  \caption{ $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$ }

1402:  \label{f4}

1403: \end{figure}

1404: %

1405: For given $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$, non-trivial components of $A_{z_i}$ are

1406: \begin{equation}

1407: A_{z_1 \ \{ l , (n_1 - 1 , n_2) \} \{ l , (n_1 , n_2) \} } \neq 0 \ \ \

1408:  , \ \ \ (n_1 - 1 , n_2),(n_1 , n_2) \in C_{{\cal I}(l)},

1409: \label{a1n}

1410: \end{equation}

1411: and

1412: \begin{equation}

1413: A_{z_2 \ \{ l , (n_1 , n_2 - 1) \} \{ l , (n_1 , n_2) \} } \neq 0 \ \ \

1414:  , \ \ \ (n_1 , n_2 - 1),(n_1 , n_2) \in C_{{\cal I}(l)}.

1415: \label{a2n}

1416: \end{equation}

1417: Also non-trivial components of $q_{\dot \alpha}$ are

1418: \begin{equation}

1419:  q_{\dot 1 \ I = \{ l , (0,0) \},J = {\cal I}(l)} = - q_{\dot 2 \ I = \{

1420:   l , (0,0) \},J = {\cal I}(l)} \neq 0.

1421: \label{qn}

1422: \end{equation}

1423: 

1424: For the non-trivial components (\ref{a1n}) - (\ref{qn}),

1425: (\ref{eq1}) and (\ref{eq2}) are reduced to

1426: \begin{eqnarray}

1427:  & & { \ \ } A_{z_1} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1,n_2) \} , \{ l , (n_1+1,n_2)\} }

1428:   A_{{\bar z}_1} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1+1,n_2) \} , \{ l , (n_1,n_2)\} }

1429:   \nonumber \\

1430:  & & - A_{{\bar z}_1} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1,n_2) \} , \{ l , (n_1-1,n_2)\} }

1431:   A_{z_1} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1-1,n_2) \} , \{ l , (n_1,n_2)\} } \nonumber \\

1432:  & & + A_{z_2} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1,n_2) \} , \{ l , (n_1,n_2+1)\} }

1433:   A_{{\bar z}_2} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1,n_2+1) \} , \{ l , (n_1,n_2)\} }

1434:   \nonumber \\

1435:  & & - A_{{\bar z}_2} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1,n_2) \} , \{ l , (n_1,n_2-1)\} }

1436:   A_{z_2} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1,n_2-1) \} , \{ l , (n_1,n_2)\} } \nonumber \\

1437:  & & + 2 q_{\dot 1} {}_{\{l,(n_1,n_2)\},J} \ q_{\dot 1}^{* T}

1438:   {}_{J,\{l,(n_1,n_2)\}} \nonumber \\

1439:  & & = \zeta,

1440: \label{aarn}

1441: \end{eqnarray}

1442: and

1443: \begin{eqnarray}

1444:  & & { \ \ } A_{z_1} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1,n_2) \} , \{ l , (n_1+1,n_2)\} }

1445:   A_{z_2} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1+1,n_2) \} , \{ l , (n_1+1,n_2+1)\} }

1446:   \nonumber \\

1447:  & & - A_{z_2} {}_{ \{ l , (n_1,n_2) \} , \{ l , (n_1,n_2+1)\} } A_{z_1}

1448:   {}_{ \{ l , (n_1,n_2+1) \} , \{ l , (n_1+1,n_2+1)\} } \nonumber \\

1449:  & & = 0.

1450: \label{aacn}

1451: \end{eqnarray}

1452: 

1453: On the other hand, the Dirac equation reduced to $0$ dimension

1454: (\ref{eq3}) gives no constraint,

1455: which follows from the next theorem.

1456: \begin{theorem}

1457: If $A_{z_i}$ and $q_{\dot \alpha}$ satisfy eqs.(\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2})

1458:  and eqs.(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}), they satisfy 

1459:  the Dirac equation reduced to $0$

1460:  dimension (\ref{eq3}) automatically. 

1461: \label{propD}

1462: \end{theorem}

1463: (proof) \\

1464: {}From (\ref{qn}), (\ref{eq3}) is reduced to

1465: \begin{equation}

1466: A_{{\bar z}_1} q_{\dot 1} = 0 \ , \ A_{{\bar z}_2} q_{\dot 1} = 0.

1467: \label{eqq1n}

1468: \end{equation}

1469: Since we have taken the ordering (\ref{order}),

1470: $A_{{\bar z}_i \ (l,(n_1,n_2)),(l,(m_1,m_2))}$ and $q_{{\dot 1} \

1471: (l,(n_1,n_2)),J={\cal I}(l)}$ have the next structures,

1472: \begin{equation}

1473: A_{{\bar z}_i \ (l,(n_1,n_2)),(l,(m_1,m_2))} = 

1474: \left(

1475: \begin{array}{ccccc}

1476: 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 \\

1477: * & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 \\

1478: \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\

1479: * & * & \cdots & 0 & 0 \\

1480: * & * & \cdots & * & 0

1481: \end{array}

1482: \right) \ , \ q_{{\dot 1} \ (l,(n_1,n_2)),J={\cal I}(l)} = 

1483: \left(

1484: \begin{array}{c}

1485: 0 \\

1486: \vdots \\

1487: 0 \\

1488: *

1489: \end{array}

1490: \right).

1491: \end{equation}

1492: So, (\ref{eqq1n}) always holds. $\blacksquare$

1493: 

1494: The above theorem means that the solutions of 

1495: the dimensional reduction of the Seiberg-Witten monopole equations with the constant back ground under the fixed point conditions of the torus actions are equivalent to the solutions of the N.C.ADHM equations with the same fixed point conditions.

1496: 

1497: %%%%%%%%%% NEW

1498: The above discussions and theorems are valid for 

1499: infinite $N$ as well as finite $N$. 

1500: In the following, we consider only a finite $N$ case

1501: to study more details.

1502: As we saw in section \ref{d-brane}, the finite $N$ case

1503: itself has a physical picture.

1504: Furthermore, solutions and their

1505: natures of finite $N$ models are important even if we consider

1506: the N.C. field theory, because such solutions are possible

1507: to be embedded in infinite $N$ solutions.

1508: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1509: 

1510: %%%

1511: %% non-degeneracy

1512: %

1513: {}From now on, we suppose that $\phi_I$ does not degenerate,

1514: \begin{equation}

1515: N_{[b_I^{(-)}]}^{(n_1,n_2)} \leq 1.

1516: \label{nondege}

1517: \end{equation}

1518: The reason is as follows.\footnote{

1519: We tried to prove the non-degeneracy of $\phi_I$'s by using a

1520: graphical consideration similar to one in the proof of

1521: Theorem\ref{prop5}. Although for several simple cases we succeeded in

1522: proving that the non-degeneracy is necessary for

1523: (\ref{eq1})-(\ref{eq3}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) to have a solution,

1524: we does not have a complete proof for general cases yet.

1525: } \\

1526:  (i) The solution of (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2})(\ref{eq3}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) is

1527: clearly included in solutions of

1528: (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}). 

1529: The non-degeneracy of the solutions of

1530: (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) is the very same

1531: one considered in \cite{Nakajima}. See the argument at the end of section

1532: \ref{n=2theory} and above discussions. In this case, the non-degeneracy

1533: is certified. \\

1534: (ii) It is clear that the degenerate solutions do not contribute to

1535: the path integral for the partition function, because 

1536: the factor $\prod_{I \neq J}(\phi_I - \phi_J)$ in (\ref{formula})

1537: becomes zero if there are degenerate solutions of

1538: $\phi_I$ \cite{Nekrasov}. \\

1539: %

1540: %%

1541: %%%

1542: 

1543: Let us give graphical interpretations of

1544: (\ref{a1n}),(\ref{a2n}),(\ref{qn}).

1545: \begin{flushleft}

1546: \begin{itemize}

1547:  \item $A_{z_1} \ {}_{\{l,(n_1,n_2)\} \{l,(n_1+1,n_2)\}}$ corresponds to

1548:        a left-arrow connecting $(n_1,n_2)$ and

1549:        $(n_1+1,n_2)$ in $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$. See Fig.\ref{fa1}. The number

1550:        of non-trivial real components, ${}^{\#}\{A_{z_1}\}$, is given by two

1551:        times of the number of the left-arrows. 

1552:        %%@@@@@ ``real"

1553:  \item $A_{z_2} \ {}_{\{l,(n_1,n_2)\} \{l,(n_1,n_2+1)\}}$ corresponds to

1554:        a down-arrow connecting $(n_1,n_2)$ and $(n_1,n_2+1)$

1555:        in $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$. See Fig.\ref{fa2}. The number of

1556:        nontrivial components, ${}^{\#}\{A_{z_2}\}$, is given by two times of

1557:        the number of the down-arrows.

1558:  \item $q_{\dot 1} \ {}_{I=\{l,(0,0)\} J={\cal I}(l)}$ corresponds to the

1559:        origin $(0,0)$ in $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$. See Fig.\ref{fq}. The

1560:        number of non-trivial components, ${}^{\#}\{q\}$, is given by $2$.

1561: \end{itemize}

1562: \end{flushleft}

1563: 

1564: \begin{figure}

1565: \begin{minipage}{4cm}

1566:  \centering

1567:  \includegraphics[width=20mm,clip]{fa1.eps}

1568:  \caption{ $A_{z_1}$ }

1569:  \label{fa1}

1570: %\end{figure}

1571: \end{minipage}

1572: \begin{minipage}{4cm}

1573: %\begin{figure}

1574:  \centering

1575:  \includegraphics[width=20mm,clip]{fa2.eps}

1576:  \caption{ $A_{z_2}$ }

1577:  \label{fa2}

1578: %\end{figure}

1579: \end{minipage}

1580: \begin{minipage}{4cm}

1581: %\begin{figure}

1582:  \centering

1583:  \includegraphics[width=20mm,clip]{fq.eps}

1584:  \caption{ $q_{\dot 1}$ }

1585:  \label{fq}

1586: \end{minipage}

1587: \end{figure}

1588: 

1589: The total number of undetermined  %%@@@@@ ``real"

1590: real variables is ${}^{\#}\{A_{z_1}\} +

1591: {}^{\#}\{A_{z_2}\} + {}^{\#}\{q\}$.\\

1592: 

1593: Also graphical meanings of 

1594: equations (\ref{aarn}),(\ref{aacn}) and the

1595: residual gauge symmetry $U(1)^{N}$ are given as follows.

1596: \begin{flushleft}

1597: \begin{itemize}

1598:  \item Each equation of (\ref{aarn}) corresponds to 

1599:        ending points of left-arrow or down-arrow or the origin in

1600:        $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$. In other words, each point $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$

1601:        corresponds to each equation of (\ref{aarn}).

1602: See Fig.\ref{faar}.  The number of nontrivial

1603:        constraints, ${}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aarn})}\}$ is

1604:        given by the number of points.

1605:  \item Each equation of (\ref{aacn}) corresponds to a

1606:        hook connecting $(n_1,n_2)$ and $(n_1+1,n_2+1)$, which includes

1607:        a intermediating point $(n_1+1,n_2)$ or $(n_1,n_2+1)$, in $C_{{\cal

1608:        I}(l)}$. See Fig.\ref{faac}. The number of nontrivial

1609:        constraints, ${}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aacn})}\}$, is given by two times

1610:        of the number of hooks.

1611:  \item Each $U(1)$ factor of the residual gauge symmetry $U(1)^N$

1612:        corresponds to each point $(n_1,n_2)$ in $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$. See

1613:        Fig.\ref{fu1}. The number of the degrees of the residual gauge

1614:        symmetry $U(1)^N$, denoted by ${}^{\#}\{U(1)\}$, is given by the number

1615:        of points.

1616: \end{itemize}

1617: \end{flushleft}

1618: \begin{figure}[hbt]

1619: \begin{minipage}{5cm}

1620:  \centering

1621:  \includegraphics[width=30mm,clip]{faar.eps}

1622:  \caption{ Eq.(\ref{aarn}) }

1623:  \label{faar}

1624: \end{minipage}

1625: %\end{figure}

1626: %\begin{figure}

1627: \begin{minipage}{5cm}

1628:  \centering

1629:  \includegraphics[width=30mm,clip]{faac.eps}

1630:  \caption{ Eq.(\ref{aacn}) }

1631:  \label{faac}

1632: \end{minipage}

1633: %\end{figure}

1634: %\begin{figure}

1635: \begin{minipage}{5cm}

1636:  \centering

1637:  \includegraphics[width=30mm,clip]{fu1.eps}

1638:  \caption{ $U(1)$ gauge symmetry }

1639:  \label{fu1}

1640: \end{minipage}

1641: \end{figure}

1642: The total number of real constraints is ${}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aarn})}\} +

1643: {}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aacn})}\} + {}^{\#}\{U(1)\}$. \\

1644: %%% @@@@``real"

1645: 

1646: Now let us prove the next theorem. %%%%@@@@@ will

1647: \begin{theorem}

1648: Let $N$ be a finite natural number.

1649: If and only if $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$ is a Young diagram,

1650: (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2}),(\ref{eq3}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) has a solution,

1651: and the solution is an isolated one.

1652: \label{prop5}

1653: \end{theorem}

1654: (proof) \\

1655: {}From theorem \ref{prop1}-\ref{propD}, it is enough to show that

1656: if and only if $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$ is a Young diagram,

1657: (\ref{aarn}) and (\ref{aacn}) has only an isolated solution.

1658: %

1659: Consider a graph $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$ as a {\it quadrangulation} of a $2$

1660: dimensional surface.

1661: Here we admit {\it quadrangulations} to include some segments which do

1662: not make faces, like the graph in Fig. \ref{fquad}.\footnote{

1663: If one considers a dual graph, then one finds that

1664: the dual graph gives a quadrangulation of a $2$ dimensional surface

1665: in the usual meaning.

1666: The dual graph is obtained from the original graph by

1667: replacing original points by dual faces and original segments connecting

1668: original points by dual segments gluing

1669: dual faces.}

1670: \begin{figure}

1671:  \centering

1672:  \includegraphics[width=30mm,clip]{fquad.eps}

1673:  \caption{ A quadrangulation may include some segments which do not make faces.}

1674:  \label{fquad}

1675: \end{figure}

1676: We start with cases, where $2$ dimensional surfaces have no hole.

1677: Recall the well-known formula for the Euler number $\chi$ of graphs,

1678: \begin{equation}

1679: \chi = 2 - 2h -b = {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{points} \} - {}^{\#} \{

1680: \mbox{segments} \} + {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{faces} \},

1681: \label{euler}

1682: \end{equation}

1683: where $h$ denotes the number of handles of graphs,

1684: and $b$ denotes the number of boundaries of graphs.

1685: %\footnote{ 

1686: %An original graph and the corresponding dual graph give the same values of $h$ and

1687: %$b$, then give the same Euler number $\chi$.

1688: %}

1689: 

1690: In our case, $h = 0$ and $b = 1$.

1691: Then we obtain,

1692: \begin{equation}

1693: \chi = 1 = {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{points} \} - {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{segments} \} + {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{faces} \}.

1694: \end{equation}

1695: Notice that

1696: \begin{equation}

1697: {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{points} \} = {}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aarn})}\} = {}^{\#}\{U(1)\},

1698: \label{points}

1699: \end{equation}

1700: and

1701: \begin{equation}

1702: {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{segments} \} = \frac{{}^{\#}\{A_{z_1}\} + {}^{\#}\{A_{z_2}\}}{2}.

1703: \label{edges}

1704: \end{equation}

1705: Also one sees that

1706: \begin{equation}

1707: {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{faces} \} \leq \frac{{}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aacn})}\}}{2},

1708: \label{faces}

1709: \end{equation}

1710: and that, in (\ref{faces}), the equation holds when the graph $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$ is a Young diagram. See Fig.\ref{fgy}.

1711: \begin{figure}

1712: \begin{minipage}{70mm}

1713:  \centering

1714:  \includegraphics[width=40mm,clip]{fgy.eps}

1715:  \caption{ Young diagram and \\ \hspace{19mm} variant diagram} %%@@@ caption

1716:  \label{fgy}

1717: \end{minipage}

1718: \hspace{5mm}

1719: \begin{minipage}{70mm}

1720:  \centering

1721:  \includegraphics[width=40mm,clip]{fgnsc.eps}

1722:  \caption{ Graph without a hole and \\ \hspace{19mm} graph with a hole }

1723:  \label{fgnsc}

1724: \end{minipage}

1725: \end{figure}

1726: Then we obtain

1727: \begin{eqnarray}

1728:  & & \left( {}^{\#}\{A_{z_1}\} +

1729: {}^{\#}\{A_{z_2}\} + {}^{\#}\{q\} \right) - \left( {}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aarn})}\} +

1730: {}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aacn})}\} + {}^{\#}\{U(1)\} \right) \nonumber \\

1731:  &=& 2 {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{segments} \} + 2 - 2 {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{points} \} - {}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aacn})}\} \nonumber \\

1732:  &\leq& - 2 \left( {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{points} \} - {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{segments} \} + {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{faces} \} \right) + 2 \nonumber \\

1733:  &=& - 2 + 2 \nonumber \\

1734:  &=& 0.

1735: \end{eqnarray}

1736: {}From this, we find that if and only if $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$ is

1737: a Young diagram, we can have a solution to (\ref{aarn}),(\ref{aacn}),

1738: and that the solution is an isolated one.

1739: 

1740: Now let us turn to a case, where

1741: $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$ has some holes.

1742: A diagrams with holes is constructed from one without holes

1743: by adding pieces of diagrams.

1744: For example, see Fig.\ref{fgnsc}.

1745: %\begin{figure}

1746: % \centering

1747: % \includegraphics[width=40mm,clip]{fgnsc.eps}

1748: % \caption{ Graph without/with a hole }

1749: % \label{fgnsc}

1750: %\end{figure}

1751: In Fig.\ref{fgnsc}, some white dots are added to make a hole.

1752: %%%%@@@ circles => dots

1753: Under this operation, the number of undetermined variables increases by

1754: \begin{equation}

1755: \Delta \ {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{undetermined variables} \} = \Delta \

1756:  {}^{\#}\{A_{z_1}\} + 

1757:  \Delta \ {}^{\#}\{A_{z_2}\} = 2 \times 4 + 2 \times 2  = 12.

1758: \end{equation}

1759: On the other hand, the number of constraints increases by

1760: \begin{equation}

1761: \Delta \ {}^{\#} \{ \mbox{constraints} \} = \Delta \

1762:  {}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aarn})}\} + 

1763:  \Delta \ {}^{\#}\{\mbox{Eq.(\ref{aacn})}\} + \Delta \ {}^{\#}\{U(1)\} = 5 + 2 \times 2 + 5 = 14.

1764: \end{equation}

1765: As implied by the above example,

1766: one can show that ``puncture'' operations make the number of constraints greater

1767:  than that of undetermined variables in general.

1768: We conclude that if $C_{{\cal I}(l)}$ has some holes,

1769: then (\ref{aarn}),(\ref{aacn}) have no solution.

1770: 

1771: We have finished the proof for Theorem\ref{prop5}. $\blacksquare$\\

1772: 

1773: As mentioned in the top of this section,

1774: we have shown that

1775: (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2}),(\ref{eq3}),(\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) have only

1776: isolated solutions, and the solutions are expressed by the Young

1777: diagrams. 

1778: 

1779: At the end of this section,

1780: we comment on the case that the $q$ are not square matrices. %%%@@@

1781: Let us compare above cases with

1782: the case of ${\mathbb C}^{[n]}$ and the ADHM data

1783: for usual U(N) instanton.

1784: We have investigated the case that $q_{\dot{\alpha}}$ and 

1785: $q_{\dot{\alpha}}^{\dagger}$ are

1786: $N \times N$ square matrices.

1787: It is clear that the above theorem is valid even if $q_{\dot{\alpha}}$

1788: and  $q_{\dot{\alpha}}^{\dagger}$ are $N \times k$ and $k \times N$

1789: for arbitrary  $k \in {\mathbb Z}$,

1790: respectively.

1791: In this case, our equations (\ref{eq1}) - (\ref{eq2}) are 

1792: ADHM equations corresponding to U(N) instanton of $k$ instanton number

1793: with Dirac equation reduced to $0$ dimension.

1794: The Dirac equation (\ref{eq3}) makes no nontrivial

1795: equations when we introduce $\zeta$.

1796: Then, our models are completely equivalent to the case of ADHM

1797: equations with fixed point equations of torus action,

1798: that is discussed in Nakajima's lecture note \cite{Nakajima}

1799: and others \cite{Nekrasov,Nakajima-Yoshioka,Nekrasov-Okounkov}.

1800: The proof for the correspondence with ADHM data and the Young diagrams

1801: is given by \cite{Nakajima}.

1802: In this light, our proof in this section is a new version for the 

1803: Nakajima's theorem.

1804: %Indeed, Nakajima's proof is made by using eigen state $V^{(p,q)}$

1805: %of the torus action, whose eigen value is given by $t_1^p t_2^q$.

1806: We solved the fixed point equation of the torus action directly.

1807: By virtue of the concrete solution, the correspondence

1808: between fields components, ADHM equations and Young diagrams are clarified.

1809: 

1810: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1811: %

1812: % localization

1813: % 

1814: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1815: \section{Localization Theorem} \label{localization}

1816: Though, in this paper, we does not perform the summation of the solutions nor

1817: obtain the partition function of our model,

1818: we make comment on the localization theorem 

1819: \cite{Lo-Ne-Sh}-\cite{AB}, which is a

1820: powerful tool for the calculation of path integral of cohomological

1821: field theories,

1822: in order to explain our motivation.

1823: To carry out the calculation of infinite $N$ case, that is N.C.${\mathbb R}^4$

1824: case, is difficult.

1825: Therefore we consider the toy model that is given by the same type

1826: Lagrangian of section \ref{n=2theory} but its all fields are finite

1827: $N\times N$ matrices.

1828: 

1829: For our purpose,

1830: one of the most suitable expression of the localization theorem

1831: is one given in \cite{Bruzzo,Bruzzo1}.

1832: This is expressed as follows.

1833: 

1834: Let

1835: ${\tilde \delta}$ be the deformed BRS transformation defined in section \ref{equation}.

1836: As explained in section \ref{n=2theory},

1837: the action $S$ is given by a BRS exact function.

1838: Now we redefine the action as

1839: \begin{equation}

1840: S = {\tilde \delta} \Psi(\phi,{\cal B},{\cal F}).

1841: \end{equation}

1842: The difference between ${\hat \delta} \Psi$ and ${\tilde \delta} \Psi$

1843:  causes no effect to the path integral, because the integral of

1844:  equivariant cohomology is equal to that of original cohomology.

1845: Here we have used the notation ${\cal

1846:  B},{\cal F}$ to denote the BRS doublet fields collectively.

1847: Then the localization theorem tells us that

1848: \begin{equation}

1849: Z = \int \frac{D \phi}{U(N)} D {\cal B} D {\cal F} e^{-{\tilde \delta} \Psi} = \int

1850:  \prod_{I=1}^{N} d \phi_I \frac{\prod_{I \neq J}(\phi_I -

1851:  \phi_J)}{Sdet^{\frac{1}{2}} {\cal L}}.

1852: \label{formula}

1853: \end{equation}

1854: $\phi_I$ are the eigenvalues of $\phi$, and

1855: the superdeterminant $Sdet {\cal L}$ is defined by

1856: \begin{equation}

1857: Sdet {\cal L} = Sdet \left(

1858: \begin{array}{cc}

1859: \frac{\partial (Q)_{\cal B}}{\partial {\cal F}} & 

1860: \frac{\partial (Q)_{\cal B}}{\partial {\cal B}} \\

1861: \frac{\partial (Q)_{\cal F}}{\partial {\cal F}} &

1862: \frac{\partial (Q)_{\cal F}}{\partial {\cal B}}

1863: \end{array}

1864: \right),

1865: \end{equation}

1866: where $(Q)_{\cal B}$ and $(Q)_{\cal F}$ are defined by

1867: the representation of the deformed BRS transformation ${\tilde \delta}$ on the fields ${\cal

1868: B},{\cal F}$,

1869: \begin{equation}

1870: Q = (Q)_{\cal B} \frac{\partial}{\partial {\cal B}} + (Q)_{\cal F} \frac{\partial}{\partial {\cal F}}.

1871: \end{equation}

1872: Note that this expression is analogue of

1873: \begin{equation}

1874: {\tilde d} = d + i_{X},

1875: \end{equation}

1876: where $X$ is a vector defining the Lie derivative ${\cal L}_X$

1877: associated with ${\cal G} \otimes T^{N+2}$ action. See

1878: (\ref{brsA}),(\ref{brsq1}),(\ref{brsq2}).

1879: In our case, we obtain

1880: \begin{eqnarray}

1881: Z &=& \int \prod_{I=1}^N d \phi_I \prod_{I \neq J} (\phi_I - \phi_J)

1882:  \prod_{I=1}^{N} \frac{(\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2)\{ -(\phi_I - b_I)^2 +

1883:  \epsilon_-^2 \}}{\epsilon_1 \epsilon_2 \{ -(\phi_I - b_I)^2 +

1884:  \epsilon_+^2 \}} \nonumber \\

1885:  & & \prod_{I \neq J} \frac{\{ (\phi_I - \phi_J)^2 - 4 \epsilon_+^2 \}^{\frac{1}{2}}

1886:   \{ -(\phi_I - b_J)^2 + \epsilon_-^2 \}}{\{ -(\phi_I - b_J)^2 +

1887:   \epsilon_+^2 \} \{(\phi_I - \phi_J)^2 - \epsilon_1^2\}^{\frac{1}{2}} \{(\phi_I -

1888:   \phi_J)^2 - \epsilon_2^2\}^{\frac{1}{2}}}, 

1889: \label{formula'}

1890: \end{eqnarray}

1891: where $\epsilon_- = (\epsilon_1 - \epsilon_2) / 2$.

1892: 

1893: Some comments might be necessary.

1894: This formula is derived by using a some version of localization theorem,

1895: which reduces the integral $\int D {\cal B} D {\cal F}$,

1896: and this is valid only if the BPS equations of the action

1897: (\ref{eq1}),(\ref{eq2}),(\ref{eq3}) and

1898: the fixed point equations of the deformed BRS symmetry

1899: (\ref{eq4}),(\ref{eq5}) have isolated

1900: solutions for a given value of $\phi_I$'s.

1901: %%%

1902: %% @@@0214

1903: %

1904: The integral $\int \prod_I d \phi_I$

1905: is remained, and this should be understood as the contour

1906: integral. In order to define an appropriate contour, 

1907: we use $\epsilon_i \rightarrow \epsilon_i + i 0$ prescription.

1908: The poles correspond to the

1909: isolated solutions \cite{Lo-Ne-Sh}-\cite{Mo-Ne-Sh1}.

1910: 

1911: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1912: %

1913: % conclusion

1914: %

1915: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1916: \section{Conclusion} \label{conclusion}

1917: The solutions of the Seiberg-Witten monopole equations reduced to $0$ dimension

1918: which also satisfy the fixed point equations of torus actions

1919: were classified,

1920: where the torus action is induced from the global symmetries.

1921: More concretely speaking, we deformed the BRS transformation 

1922: of the topological twisted ${\cal N}=2$ gauge theory 

1923: on ${\mathbb R}^4$ with a hypermultiplet

1924: to the T-equivariant derivative

1925: by using the global symmetries.

1926: The global symmetries contain torus actions.

1927: Using these symmetries, the deformed BRS transformation was defined 

1928: to satisfy the nilpotency up to the Lie derivative of the group actions.

1929: Then we classified the solutions of the fixed point equations of these

1930: deformed BRS transformations.

1931: 

1932: We showed that the Seiberg-Witten monopole equations are

1933: reduced to the ADHM equations with the Dirac equation reduced to $0$

1934: dimension

1935: at the large N.C. parameter limit.

1936: These equations are described by using infinite dimensional matrices.

1937: We showed that the Dirac equation reduced to $0$ dimension is trivial

1938: when the ADHM equations and the fixed point

1939: equations are satisfied. %condition of the torus actions.

1940: It is known that the solutions of the ADHM equations with 

1941: the fixed point equations 

1942: are isolated ones,

1943: and are classified by the Young diagrams, when matrix size is finite.

1944: We gave a new proof of this statement, too.

1945: %Also we show when $\zeta > 0$ the Dirac eq. is trivial.

1946: Then, we found that we can perform the path integral 

1947: by using the localization formula,

1948: in order to get

1949: the partition functions of the finite dimensional matrix model.

1950: This finite dimensional matrix model is given as 

1951: reduced theory to $0$ dimension from 

1952: the topological twisted ${\cal N}=2$ non-Abelian gauge theory 

1953: on ${\mathbb R}^4$ with a hypermultiplet,

1954: because the size of matrix is truncated to finite dimension from

1955: infinite dimension.

1956: We gave the result of the partition function of this toy model.

1957: The complete calculation of the partition function for 

1958: the ${\cal N}=2$ $U(1)$ gauge theory 

1959: on N.C. ${\mathbb R}^4$ is remained.

1960: This calculation might reveal the relation between the Seiberg-Witten

1961: monopole and the instanton.

1962: We hope to report on this task elsewhere.

1963: 

1964: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1965: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1966: %%%%% appendix

1967: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1968: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1969: \appendix

1970: 

1971: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1972: %

1973: % convention

1974: %

1975: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1976: \section{Convention} \label{conv}

1977: 

1978: \subsection{Complex coordinate}

1979: We define the complex coordinate $z^i,{\bar z}^i \ (i=1,2)$ as

1980: \begin{eqnarray}

1981: & & z^1 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x^1 + i x^2) \ , \ {\bar z}^1 =

1982:  \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x^1 - i x^2) \ \ , \nonumber \\

1983: & & z^2 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x^3 + i x^4) \ , \ {\bar z}^2 =

1984:  \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x^3 - i x^4) \ \ .

1985: \end{eqnarray}

1986: Also, $\partial_{z^i},\partial_{{\bar z}^i}$ are given by

1987: \begin{eqnarray}

1988: & & \partial_{z^1} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\partial_1 - i \partial_2) \ , \

1989:  \partial_{{\bar z}^1} =

1990:  \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\partial_1 + i \partial_2) \ \ , \nonumber \\

1991: & & \partial_{z^2} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\partial_3 - i \partial_4) \ , \

1992:  \partial_{{\bar z}^2} =

1993:  \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\partial_3 + i \partial_4) \ \ .

1994: \end{eqnarray}

1995: Then, we obtain

1996: \begin{equation}

1997: \partial_{z^i} z^j = \delta_i^j \ , \ \partial_{{\bar z}^i} {\bar z}^j =

1998:  \delta_i^j \ \ .

1999: \end{equation}

2000: 

2001: \subsection{Spinor index}

2002: $\epsilon^{\alpha \beta}$,$\epsilon^{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}}$ and $\epsilon_{\alpha \beta}$,$\epsilon_{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}}$ are defined by

2003: \begin{equation}

2004: \epsilon^{\alpha \beta} = \epsilon^{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}} = \left(

2005: \begin{array}{cc}

2006: 0 & +1 \\

2007: -1 & 0

2008: \end{array}

2009: \right) \ , \ 

2010: \epsilon_{\alpha \beta} = \epsilon_{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}} = \left(

2011: \begin{array}{cc}

2012: 0 & -1 \\

2013: +1 & 0

2014: \end{array}

2015: \right) \ \ .

2016: \end{equation}

2017: In other words, $\epsilon_{\alpha \beta}$,$\epsilon_{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}}$ are defined to be the inverses

2018: of $\epsilon^{\alpha \beta}$,$\epsilon^{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}}$,

2019: \begin{equation}

2020: \epsilon^{\alpha \beta} \epsilon_{\beta \gamma} =

2021:  \delta^\alpha_\gamma \ , \ \epsilon^{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}}

2022:  \epsilon_{{\dot \beta} {\dot \gamma}} =

2023:  \delta^{\dot \alpha}_{\dot \gamma} \ \ . 

2024: \end{equation}

2025: Then a spinor with upper indices and a spinor with lower indices are

2026: related as,

2027: \begin{eqnarray}

2028: & & \psi^\alpha = \epsilon^{\alpha \beta} \psi_\beta \ , \ \psi_\alpha =

2029:  \epsilon_{\alpha \beta} \psi^\beta \ \ , \nonumber \\

2030: & & \psi^{\dot \alpha} = \epsilon^{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}}

2031:  \psi_{\dot \beta} \ , \ \psi_{\dot \alpha} =

2032:  \epsilon_{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}} \psi^{\dot \beta} \ \ .

2033: \end{eqnarray}

2034: 

2035: 

2036: We use the following definition for the $4$ dimensional Pauli

2037: matrix $\sigma^{\mu} \ (\mu=1,2,3,4)$,

2038: \begin{eqnarray}

2039: & & (\sigma^{\mu})_{\alpha {\dot{\alpha}}} 

2040: = \left( \sigma^1 , \sigma^2 , \sigma^3 , \sigma^4 \right) 

2041: = \left( i {\bf 1} \ , \ - {\vec \tau} \right) \ ,

2042: \nonumber \\

2043: & & ({\bar \sigma}^{\mu})^{{\dot \alpha} \alpha} 

2044: = \left( {\bar \sigma}^1 , {\bar \sigma}^2 , {\bar \sigma}^3 , {\bar \sigma}^4 \right) 

2045: = \left( i {\bf 1} \ , \ + {\vec \tau} \right) \ , 

2046: \end{eqnarray}

2047: where

2048: \begin{equation}

2049: {\vec \tau} = \left(

2050: \left( 

2051: \begin{array}{cc}

2052: 0 & +1 \\

2053: +1 & 0       

2054: \end{array}

2055: \right)

2056:  , 

2057: \left( 

2058: \begin{array}{cc}

2059: 0 & -i \\

2060: +i & 0       

2061: \end{array}

2062: \right)

2063:  , 

2064: \left( 

2065: \begin{array}{cc}

2066: +1 & 0 \\

2067: 0 & -1       

2068: \end{array}

2069: \right)

2070: \right) \ .

2071: \end{equation}

2072: We define $\sigma^{\mu\nu} , {\bar \sigma}^{\mu\nu}$ as

2073: \begin{eqnarray}

2074: & & {(\sigma^{\mu\nu})_\alpha}^\beta 

2075: = \frac{i}{4} {\left(

2076: \sigma^\mu {\bar \sigma}^\nu - \sigma^\nu {\bar \sigma}^\mu

2077: \right)_\alpha}^\beta \ ,

2078: \nonumber \\

2079: & & {({\bar \sigma}^{\mu\nu})^{\dot \alpha}}_{\dot \beta} 

2080: = \frac{i}{4} {\left(

2081: {\bar \sigma}^\mu \sigma^\nu - {\bar \sigma}^\nu \sigma^\mu 

2082: \right)^{\dot \alpha}}_{\dot \beta} \ .

2083: \end{eqnarray}

2084: {}From this definition, $\sigma^{\mu\nu}$ and ${\bar \sigma}^{\mu\nu}$

2085: satisfy the anti selfdual relation and the selfdual relation respectively,

2086: \begin{equation}

2087: \sigma^{\mu\nu} = - * \sigma^{\mu\nu} \ , \ {\bar \sigma}^{\mu\nu}

2088:  = + * {\bar \sigma}^{\mu\nu} \ \ .

2089: \end{equation}

2090: 

2091: \subsection{$\dagger$ symbol}

2092: For a scalar matrix $M$ and a vector matrix $M_{\mu}$,

2093: the symbol $\dagger$ denotes the usual hermite conjugation for them,

2094: \begin{equation}

2095: M^{\dagger} = M^{* T} \ , \ {M_\mu}^{\dagger} = {M_\mu}^{* T},

2096: \end{equation}

2097: where the symbol $*$ denotes the complex conjugation and the symbol $T$

2098: denotes the transposition. On the other hand, for an undotted spinor

2099: matrix $M_\alpha$ and a dotted spinor matrix $M_{\dot \alpha}$, 

2100: ${M_\alpha}^\dagger$ and ${M_{\dot \alpha}}^\dagger$ are defined by,

2101: \begin{equation}

2102: {M_\alpha}^\dagger = \epsilon^{\alpha \beta} {M_\beta}^{* T} \ , \

2103:  {M_{\dot \alpha}}^\dagger = \epsilon^{{\dot \alpha} {\dot \beta}}

2104:  {M_{\dot \beta}}^{* T} \ \ .

2105: \end{equation}

2106: This definition makes ${M_\alpha}^\dagger$ and ${M_{\dot

2107: \alpha}}^\dagger$ to transform in the same rules as $M_\alpha$ and

2108: $M_{\dot \alpha}$ under $SU(2)_L$ and $SU(2)_{R (R')}$ respectively.

2109: 

2110: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2111: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2112: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2113: 

2114: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2115: %

2116: % bib

2117: %

2118: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2119: \begin{thebibliography}{00}

2120: 

2121: %%%

2122: %% intro

2123: %

2124: 

2125: \bibitem{Seiberg-Witten1}

2126: N. Seiberg and E. Witten,

2127: {\it Monopole Condensation, And Confinement In N=2 Supersymmetric

2128: 	Yang-Mills Theory}, Nucl.Phys. B426 (1994) 19-52, {\tt hep-th/9407087}.

2129: 

2130: \bibitem{Seiberg-Witten2}

2131: N. Seiberg and E. Witten,

2132: {\it Monopoles, Duality and Chiral Symmetry Breaking in N=2

2133: 	Supersymmetric QCD}, Nucl.Phys. B431 (1994) 484-550,

2134: 	{\tt hep-th/9408099}.

2135: 

2136: %%

2137: 

2138: \bibitem{some_review}

2139: W. Lerche, {\it Introduction to Seiberg-Witten Theory and its Stringy

2140: 	Origin}, Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl. 55B (1997) 83-117,

2141: 	Fortsch.Phys. 45 (1997) 293-340, {\tt hep-th/9611190}.

2142: 

2143: %%

2144: 

2145: \bibitem{Witten1}

2146: E. Witten, {\it Monopoles and Four-Manifolds}, Math.Res.Lett. 1 (1994)

2147: 	769-796, {\tt hep-th/9411102}.

2148: 

2149: \bibitem{Witten2}

2150: E. Witten, {\it Yang-Mills Theory on a Four Manifolds}, J.Math.Phys.35

2151: 	(1994) 5101.

2152: 

2153: %%

2154: 

2155: \bibitem{Dorey}

2156:  N. Dorey, T.J. Hollowood, V.V. Khoze and M.P. Mattis, 

2157: {\it The Calculus of Many Instantons}, 

2158: Phys.Rept. 371 (2002) 231-459,

2159: {\tt hep-th/0206063}.

2160: 

2161: %%

2162: 

2163: \bibitem{Nekrasov}

2164: N. A. Nekrasov, {\it Seiberg-Witten prepotential from instanton counting},

2165: Adv.Theor.Math.Phys. 7 (2004) 831-864, {\tt hep-th/0206161}. 

2166: 

2167: %%

2168: 

2169: \bibitem{Fl-Po}

2170: R. Flume and R. Poghossian, {\it An Algorithm for the Microscopic

2171: 	Evaluation of the Coefficients of the Seiberg-Witten

2172: 	Prepotential}, Int.J.Mod.Phys. A18 (2003) 2541, {\tt hep-th/0208176}.

2173: 

2174: \bibitem{Bruzzo}

2175: U. Bruzzo, F. Fucito, J. F. Morales and A. Tanzini,

2176: {\it Multi-Instanton Calculus and Equivalent Cohomology}, 

2177: JHEP 0305(2003)054, 

2178: {\tt hep-th/0211108}.

2179: 

2180: \bibitem{Iq-KaPo}

2181: A. Iqbal and A.-K. Kashani-Poor, {\it Instanton Counting and

2182: 	Chern-Simons Theory}, Adv.Theor.Math.Phys. 7 (2004) 457-497,

2183: 	{\tt hep-th/0212279}.

2184: 

2185: \bibitem{Lo-Ma-Ne}

2186: A. S. Losev, A. Marshakov and N. A. Nekrasov, {\it Small Instantons,

2187: 	Little Strings and Free Fermions}, {\tt hep-th/0302191}.

2188: 

2189: \bibitem{Iq-KaPo1}

2190: A. Iqbal and A.-K. Kashani-Poor, {\it SU(N) Geometries and Topological

2191: 	String Amplitudes}, {\tt hep-th/0306032}.

2192: 

2193: \bibitem{Nakajima-Yoshioka}

2194: H. Nakajima and K. Yoshioka,

2195: {\it Instanton counting on blowup. I. 4-dimensional pure gauge theory},

2196: 	{\tt math.AG/0306198}.

2197: 

2198: \bibitem{Ha-To}

2199: A. Hanany and D. Tong, {\it Vortices, Instantons and Branes}, JHEP 0307

2200: 	(2003) 037, {\tt hep-th/0306150}.

2201: 

2202: \bibitem{Nekrasov-Okounkov}

2203:  N. Nekrasov and A. Okounkov, 

2204:  {\it Seiberg-Witten theory and random partitions},

2205: {\tt hep-th/0306238}.

2206: 

2207: \bibitem{Bruzzo1}

2208: U. Bruzzo and F. Fucito,

2209: {\it Superlocalization Formulas and Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theories}, 

2210: Nucl. Phys. B 678 (2004) 638, {\tt math-ph/0310036}.

2211: 

2212: \bibitem{Eg-Ka}

2213: T. Eguchi and H. Kanno, {\it Topological Strings and Nekrasov's

2214: 	formulas}, JHEP 0312 (2003) 006, {\tt hep-th/0310235}.

2215: 

2216: \bibitem{Ho-Iq-Va}

2217: T. J. Hollowood, A. Iqbal and C. Vafa, {\it Matrix Models, Geometric

2218: 	Engineering and Elliptic Genera}, {\tt hep-th/0310272}.

2219: 

2220: \bibitem{Ko-Sa}

2221: Y. Konishi and K. Sakai, {\it Asymptotic Form of Gopakumar-Vafa

2222: 	Invariants from Instanton Counting}, Nucl.Phys. B682 (2004)

2223: 	465-483, {\tt hep-th/0311220}.

2224: 

2225: \bibitem{Iq-Ne-Ok-Va}

2226: A. Iqbal, N. Nekrasov, A. Okounkov and C. Vafa, {\it Quantum Foam and

2227: 	Topological Strings}, {\tt hep-th/0312022}.

2228: 

2229: \bibitem{Konishi}

2230: Y. Konishi, {\it Topological Strings, Instantons and Asymptotic Forms of

2231: 	Gopakumar-Vafa Invariants}, {\tt hep-th/0312090}.

2232: 

2233: \bibitem{Eg-Ka1}

2234: T. Eguchi and H. Kanno, {\it Geometric transitions, Chern-Simons gauge

2235: 	theory and Veneziano type amplitudes}, Phys.Lett. B585 (2004)

2236: 	163-172, {\tt hep-th/0312234}.

2237: 

2238: \bibitem{Tachikawa}

2239: Y. Tachikawa, {\it Five-dimensional Chern-Simons terms and Nekrasov's

2240: 	instanton counting}, JHEP 0402 (2004) 050, {\tt hep-th/0401184}.

2241: 

2242: \bibitem{Marshakov}

2243: A. Marshakov, {\it Strings, Integrable Systems, Geometry and Statistical

2244: 	Models}, {\tt hep-th/0401199}.

2245: 

2246: \bibitem{Fl-Fu-Mo-Po}

2247: R. Flume, F. Fucito, J. F. Morales and R. Poghossian, {\it Matone's

2248: 	Relation in the Presence of Gravitational Couplings}, JHEP 0404

2249: 	(2004) 008, {\tt hep-th/0403057}.

2250: 

2251: \bibitem{Ma-Wy}

2252: M. Marino and N. Wyllard, {\it A note on instanton counting for N=2

2253: 	gauge theories with classical gauge groups}, JHEP 0405 (2004)

2254: 	021, {\tt hep-th/0404125}.

2255: 

2256: \bibitem{Ne-Sh}

2257: N. Nekrasov and S. Shadchin, {\it ABCD of instantons},

2258: 	Commun.Math.Phys. 252 (2004) 359-391, {\tt hep-th/0404225}.

2259: 

2260: \bibitem{Be-Bo-Ma-Ma-Na}

2261: G. Bertoldi, S. Bolognesi, M. Matone, L. Mazzucato and Y. Nakayama,

2262: {\it The Liouville Geometry of N=2 Instantons and the Moduli of

2263: 	Punctured Spheres}, JHEP 0405 (2004) 075, {\tt hep-th/0405117}.

2264: 

2265: \bibitem{Fu-Mi}

2266: H. Fuji and S. Mizoguchi, {\it Gravitational Corrections for

2267: 	Supersymmetric Gauge Theories with Flavors via Matrix Models},

2268: 	Nucl.Phys. B698 (2004) 53-91, {\tt hep-th/0405128}.

2269: 

2270: \bibitem{Ma-Ma-Oh}

2271: T. Matsuo, S. Matsuura and K. Ohta, {\it Large N limit of 2D Yang-Mills

2272: 	Theory and Instanton Counting}, JHEP 0503 (2005) 027, {\tt

2273: 	hep-th/0406191}.

2274: 

2275: \bibitem{Fu-Mo-Po}

2276: F. Fucito, J. F. Morales and R. Poghossian, {\it Multi instanton

2277: 	calculus on ALE spaces}, Nucl.Phys. B703 (2004) 518-536, {\tt

2278: 	hep-th/0406243}.

2279: 

2280: \bibitem{Fu-Mo-Po1}

2281: F. Fucito, J. F. Morales and R. Poghossian, {\it Instantons on Quivers

2282: 	and Orientifolds}, JHEP 0410 (2004) 037, {\tt hep-th/0408090}.

2283: 

2284: \bibitem{Ma-Na-Ta-Ta}

2285: T. Maeda, T. Nakatsu, K. Takasaki and T. Tamakoshi, {\it

2286: 	Five-Dimensional Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theories and Random

2287: 	Plane Partitions}, JHEP 0503 (2005) 056, {\tt hep-th/0412327}.

2288: 

2289: \bibitem{Ma-Na-Ta-Ta1}

2290: T. Maeda, T. Nakatsu, K. Takasaki and T. Tamakoshi, {\it

2291: Free Fermion and Seiberg-Witten Differential in Random Plane

2292: 	Partitions}, Nucl.Phys. B715 (2005) 275-303, {\tt

2293: 	hep-th/0412329}.

2294: 

2295: \bibitem{Aw-Ka}

2296: H. Awata and H. Kanno, {\it Instanton counting, Macdonald function and

2297: 	the moduli space of D-branes}, JHEP 0505 (2005) 039, {\tt

2298: 	hep-th/0502061}.

2299: 

2300: \bibitem{Ma-Oh}

2301: S. Matsuura and K. Ohta, {\it Localization on D-brane and Gauge

2302: 	theory/Matrix model}, {\tt hep-th/0504176}.

2303: 

2304: \bibitem{Ma-Na-No-Ta}

2305: T. Maeda, T. Nakatsu, Y. Noma and T. Tamakoshi, {\it Gravitational

2306: 	Quantum Foam and Supersymmetric Gauge Theories}, {\tt

2307: 	hep-th/0505083}.

2308: 

2309: \bibitem{Fu-Mo-Po-Ta}

2310: F.Fucito, J.F.Morales, R.Poghossian and A.Tanzini, {\it N=1

2311: 	Superpotentials from Multi-Instanton Calculus}, {\tt

2312: 	hep-th/0510173}.

2313: 

2314: %%

2315: 

2316: \bibitem{Lo-Ne-Sh}

2317: A. Losev, N. Nekrasov and S. Shatashvili, {\it Issues in Topological

2318: 	Gauge Theory}, Nucl.Phys. B534 (1998) 549-611, {\tt

2319: 	hep-th/9711108}.

2320: 

2321: \bibitem{Mo-Ne-Sh}

2322: G.Moore, N.Nekrasov and S.Shatashvili, {\it Integrating Over Higgs

2323: 	Branches}, Commun.Math.Phys. 209 (2000) 97-121, {\tt

2324: 	hep-th/9712241}.

2325: 

2326: \bibitem{Lo-Ne-Sh1}

2327: A. Losev, N. Nekrasov and S. Shatashvili, {\it Testing Seiberg-Witten

2328: 	Solution}, {\tt hep-th/9801061}.

2329: 

2330: \bibitem{Mo-Ne-Sh1}

2331: G. Moore, N. Nekrasov and S. Shatashvili, {\it D-particle bound states

2332: 	and generalized instantons}, Commun.Math.Phys. 209 (2000) 77-95,

2333: 	{\tt hep-th/9803265}.

2334: 

2335: %%

2336: 

2337: \bibitem{DH}

2338: J.J. Duistermaat and G.J. Heckman, Invent. Math. 69 (1982) 259.

2339: 

2340: \bibitem{AB}

2341: M. Atiyah and R. Bott, Topology 23 No 1 (1984) 1.

2342: 

2343: %%

2344: 

2345: \bibitem{sako-suzuki}

2346: A.Sako and T. Suzuki, {\it Partition functions of Supersymmetric Gauge Theories in Noncommutative

2347: 	${\mathbb R}^{2D}$ and their Unified Perspective}, {\tt hep-th/0503214}.

2348: 

2349: \bibitem{sako}

2350: A. Sako, S-I. Kuroki and T. Ishikawa,

2351: {\it Noncommutative Cohomological Field Theory and GMS soliton},

2352: J.Math.Phys.43(2002)872-896, {\tt hep-th/0107033}.

2353: 

2354: \bibitem{sako1}

2355: A. Sako, S-I. Kuroki and T. Ishikawa,

2356: {\it Noncommutative-shift invariant field theory},

2357: proceeding of 10th Tohwa International Symposium on String Theory,

2358: (AIP conference proceedings 607, 340).

2359: 

2360: \bibitem{sako2}

2361: A.Sako,

2362: {\it Noncommutative Cohomological Field Theories and Topological Aspects of Matrix models},

2363: {\tt hep-th/0312120}.

2364: 

2365: %%

2366: 

2367: \bibitem{Nakajima}

2368: H. Nakajima, {\it Lectures on Hilbert Schemes of Points on Surfaces},

2369: 	AMS University Lectures Series, 1999.

2370: 

2371: %%%

2372: %% n=2

2373: %

2374: 

2375: \bibitem{Hyun-Park-Park1}

2376:  S. Hyun, J. Park and J.-S. Park,

2377: {\it Topological QCD}, Nucl.Phys. B453 (1995) 199-224, {\tt

2378: 	hep-th/9503201}.

2379: 

2380: \bibitem{Hyun-Park-Park2}

2381: S. Hyun, J. Park and J.-S. Park, {\it N=2 Supersymmetric QCD and Four

2382: 	Manifolds; (I) the Donaldson and the Seiberg-Witten Invariants},

2383: 	{\tt hep-th/9508162}.

2384: 

2385: \bibitem{Labastida1}

2386: M. Alvarez and J.M.F. Labastida,

2387: {\it Topological Matter in Four Dimensions},

2388: Nucl. Phys. B437 (1995) 356-390, {\tt hep-th/9404115}.

2389: 

2390: \bibitem{Labastida2}

2391: J.M.F. Labastida and M. Marino,

2392: {\it A Topological Lagrangian for Monopoles on Four-Manifolds},

2393: Phys. Lett. B351 (1995) 146, {\tt hep-th/9503105}.

2394: 

2395: \bibitem{Labastida3}

2396: J.M.F. Labastida and M. Marino,

2397: {\it Non-Abelian Monopoles on Four-Manifolds},

2398: Nucl. Phys. B448 (1995) 373-398, {\tt hep-th/9504010}.

2399: 

2400: %%

2401: 

2402: \bibitem{Witten01}

2403: E. Witten,

2404: {\it Topological quantum field theory},

2405: Commun.Math.Phys.117 (1988) 353.

2406: 

2407: \bibitem{Witten02}

2408: E. Witten,

2409: {\it Introduction to cohomological field theories},

2410: Int.J.Mod.Phys.A.6 (1991) 2273.

2411: 

2412: %%%

2413: %% d-brane

2414: %

2415: 

2416: \bibitem{Popov}

2417: A. D. Popov, A. G. Sergeev and  M. Wolf, {\it Seiberg-Witten Monopole

2418: 	Equations on Noncommutative $R^4$}, J.Math.Phys. 44 (2003)

2419: 	4527-4554, {\tt hep-th/0304263}.

2420: 

2421: %%

2422: 

2423: \bibitem{Popov1}

2424: O. Lechtenfeld, A. D. Popov and R. J. Szabo,

2425: {\it Noncommutative Instantons in Higher Dimensions, Vortices and 

2426: Topological K-Cycles}, JHEP 0312 (2003) 022, {\tt hep-th/0310267}.

2427: 

2428: \bibitem{Baulieu-Kanno}

2429: L. Baulieu and H. Kanno and I. M. Singer,

2430: {\it Special Quantum Field Theories In Eight and Other Dimensions},

2431: Commun.Math.Phys. 194 (1998) 149-175, {\tt hep-th/9704167}.

2432: 

2433: \bibitem{Pesando}

2434: I. Pesando, {\it On the Effective Potential of the Dp- anti Dp system in

2435: 	type II theories}, Mod.Phys.Lett. A14 (1999) 1545-1564, {\tt

2436: 	hep-th/9902181}.

2437: 

2438: \bibitem{Kennedy}

2439: C. Kennedy and A. Wilkins,

2440: {\it Ramond-Ramond Couplings on Brane-Antibrane Systems},

2441: 	Phys.Lett. B464 (1999) 206-212, {\tt hep-th/9905195}.

2442: 

2443: \bibitem{Takayanagi}

2444: T. Takayanagi, S. Terashima and T. Uesugi,

2445: {\it Brane-Antibrane Action from Boundary String Field Theory},

2446: JHEP 0103 (2001) 019, {\tt hep-th/0012210}.

2447: 

2448: \bibitem{Alishahiha}

2449: M. Alishahiha, H. Ita and Y. Oz,

2450: {\it On Superconnections and the Tachyon Effective Action},

2451: Phys.Lett. B503 (2001) 181-188, {\tt hep-th/0012222}.

2452: 

2453: \bibitem{Suyama}

2454: T. Suyama, {\it BPS Vortices in Brane-Antibrane Effective Theory}, {\tt

2455: 	hep-th/0101002}.

2456: 

2457: \bibitem{Szabo}

2458: R. J. Szabo, {\it Superconnections, Anomalies and Non-BPS Brane

2459: 	Charges}, J.Geom.Phys. 43 (2002) 241-292, {\tt hep-th/0108043}.

2460: 

2461: %%%

2462: %% equation

2463: %

2464: 

2465: %%%

2466: %% solution

2467: %

2468: 

2469: %%%

2470: %% localization

2471: %

2472: 

2473: %%%

2474: %% conclusion

2475: %

2476: 

2477: \end{thebibliography}

2478: 

2479: \end{document}

2480: 

2481: 

2482: 

2483: 

2484: 

2485: 

2486: 

2487: 

2488: