The Painlevé analysis for N=2 super KdV equations

The Painlev\'e analysis of a generic multiparameter N=2 extension of the Korteweg-de Vries equation is presented. Unusual aspects of the analysis, pertaining to the presence of two fermionic fields, are emphasized. For the general class of models considered, we find that the only ones which manifestly pass the test are precisely the four known integrable supersymmetric KdV equations, including the SKdV

_1

case.

Note:

Harvmac (b mode : 29 p); various minor modifications -- to appear in J. Math Phys

References(23)

Figures(0)

[1]

J. Weiss
,
M. Tabor
,
G. Carnavale

- J.Math.Phys. 24 (1983) 522

[2]

The Painleve Property for Fermionic Extensions of the Korteweg-de Vries Equation

P. Mathieu
(
- Laval U.
)

- Phys.Lett.A 128 (1988) 169-171
•
DOI:
- 10.1016/0375-9601(88)90903-6

[3]

L. Hlavatý

- Phys.Lett.A 137 (1989) 173

[4]

The Supersymmetric Boussinesq equation

- Phys.Lett.A 157 (1991) 113-118
•
DOI:
- 10.1016/0375-9601(91)90081-I

[5]

A SUPER KORTEWEG-DE VRIES EQUATION: AN INTEGRABLE SYSTEM

B.A. Kupershmidt
(
- Tennessee U., Tullahoma and
- Los Alamos
)

- Phys.Lett.A 102 (1984) 213-215
•
DOI:
- 10.1016/0375-9601(84)90693-5

[6]

Supersymmetric Extension of the Korteweg-de Vries Equation

Pierre Mathieu
(
- Laval U.
)

- J.Math.Phys. 29 (1988) 2499
•
DOI:
- 10.1063/1.528090

[7]

Superconformal Algebra and Supersymmetric Korteweg-de Vries Equation

Pierre Mathieu
(
- Laval U.
)

- Phys.Lett.B 203 (1988) 287-291
•
DOI:
- 10.1016/0370-2693(88)90554-0

[8]

A Supersymmetric extension of the Kadomtsev-Petviashvili hierarchy

- Commun.Math.Phys. 98 (1985) 65-77
•
DOI:
- 10.1007/BF01211044

[9]

Nonperturbative solution of the superVirasoro constraints

K. Becker
(
- CERN
)
,
M. Becker
(
- CERN
)

- Mod.Phys.Lett.A 8 (1993) 1205-1214
•
e-Print:
- hep-th/9301017
•
DOI:
- 10.1142/S0217732393002695

[10]

Still, another integrable system has been found to satisfy the Painlevé test [3]. However, it is also rather trivial (cf. its precise form given below) and thereby easily proved to be integrable directly (see also But most importantly for us, it is not supersymmetric

D.-G. Zhang
,
B.-Z. Li

- Phys.Lett.A 171 (1992) 43

[11]

$N=2$ Superconformal Algebra and Integrable O(2) Fermionic Extensions of the Korteweg-de Vries Equation

C.A. Laberge
(
- Laval U.
)
,
P. Mathieu
(
- Laval U.
)

- Phys.Lett.B 215 (1988) 718-722
•
DOI:
- 10.1016/0370-2693(88)90048-2

[12]

A New N=2 supersymmetric Korteweg-De Vries equation

P. Labelle
(
- Laval U.
)
,
P. Mathieu
(
- Laval U.
)

- J.Math.Phys. 32 (1991) 923-927
•
DOI:
- 10.1063/1.529351

[13]

Z. Popowicz

- Phys.Lett.A 174 (1993) 411

[14]

Odd biHamiltonian structure of new supersymmetric N=2, N=4 Korteweg-de Vries equation and odd SUSY Virasoro - like algebra

Z. Popowicz
(
- Wroclaw U.
)

- Phys.Lett.B 459 (1999) 150-158
•
e-Print:
- hep-th/9903198
•
DOI:
- 10.1016/S0370-2693(99)00633-4

[15]

New nonlocal charges in SUSY integrable models

Ashok K. Das
(
- Rochester U.
)
,
Ziemowit Popowicz
(
- Wroclaw U.
)

- Phys.Lett.A 274 (2000) 30-36
•
e-Print:
- nlin/0004034
•
DOI:
- 10.1016/S0375-9601(00)00523-5

[16]

OSP(N,2) AKNS EQUATIONS

P. Mathieu
(
- Laval U.
)
,
M. Thiebault
(
- Laval U.
)

- Lett.Math.Phys. 18 (1989) 9
•
DOI:
- 10.1007/BF00397052

[17]

Complete integrability of the coupled KdV - mKdV system

e-Print:
- nlin/0010041

[18]

M. Jimbo
,
M.D. Kruskal
,
T. Miwa

- Phys.Lett.A 92 (1982) 52

[19]

R. Conte
,
A.P. Fordy
,
A. Pickering

- Physica D 69 (1993) 33

[20]

See also Open problems for SuperKdV equations for a pedagogical introduction to the supersymmetric KdV equations

P. Mathieu

e-Print:
- math-ph/0005007

[21]

Integrable supersymmetry breaking perturbations of N=1, N=2 superconformal minimal models

Didier A. Depireux
(
- Laval U.
)
,
Pierre Mathieu
(
- Laval U.
)

- Phys.Lett.B 308 (1993) 272-278
•
e-Print:
- hep-th/9301131
•
DOI:
- 10.1016/0370-2693(93)91284-T

[22]

Notice that even if the Painlevé analysis breaks the O(2) invariance, we are still free to choose the sign of k0. Clearly, in a formulation in terms of the redefined fields ξ(±) = ξ(1) ±iξ(2), we would be free to take either ξ (+) 0 or ξ (-) 0 as an arbitrary function, the other being null

[23]

in Painlevé transcendents, D. Levi and P. Winternitz (eds.) Pressand references therein

J. Weiss