# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The quantum version of the inverse scattering method paved the way for the discovery and solution of new exactly solvable two-dimensional lattice models. Of particular interest are non-homogeneous vertex models whose transfer matrix are constructed by mixing different local vertex operators. These operators, known as Lax $``$-operators, define the local structure of Boltzmann weights of the system. A sufficient condition for integrability is that all the $``$-operators should satisfy the Yang-Baxter equation with the same invertible $`R`$-matrix. More precisely we have ,

$$R(\lambda \mu )_{𝒜i}(\lambda )_{𝒜i}(\mu )=_{𝒜i}(\mu )_{𝒜i}(\lambda )R(\lambda \mu )$$
(1)   
The auxiliary space $`𝒜`$ corresponds to the horizontal degrees of freedom of the vertex model in the square lattice. The operator $`_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ is a matrix in the auxiliary space $`𝒜`$ and its matrix elements are operators on the quantum space $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{L}{}}}V_i`$, where $`V_i`$ represents the vertical space of states and $`i`$ the sites of a one-dimensional lattice of size $`L`$. The tensor product in formula (1) is taken with respect the auxiliary space and $`\lambda `$ is a spectral parameter. One way of producing a mixed vertex model is by choosing $``$-operators intertwining between different representations $`V_i`$ of a given underlying algebra. This approach has first been used by Andrei and Johannesson  to study the Heisenberg model in the presence of an impurity of spin-S and by De Vega and Woynarovich  to construct alternating Heisenberg spin chains. Subsequently, several papers have discussed physical properties of the latter models  as well as considered generalizations to include other Lie algebras  and superalgebras .

In this paper, which we are pleased to dedicate to James McGuire, we construct and solve mixed vertex models whose $``$-operators can be expressed in terms of the generators of the braid-monoid algebra . In particular, we show that the recent results by Abad and Rios  and by Links and Foerster  for the $`SU(3)`$ and $`gl(2|1)`$ algebras can be reobtained from such algebraic approach. The novel feature as compared to these works is that we are able to diagonalize the corresponding transfer matrix by using a standard variant of the nested Bethe ansatz approach. Furthermore, this algebraic approach allows us to derive extensions to the $`SU(N)`$ and $`Sl(N|M)`$ algebras in a more direct way.

This paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we recall the basics of the braid-monoid algebra and show how it produces two different $``$-operators satisfying the Yang-Baxter equation (1). In section 3 a mixed vertex model based on the $`SU(N)`$ algebra is diagonalized by the algebraic Bethe ansatz method.

## 2 Braid-monoid L-operators

It is well known that the braid algebra produces the simplest rational $`R`$-matrix solution of the Yang-Baxter equation. In this case the braid operator becomes a generator of the symmetric group and the $`R`$-matrix is given by

$$R(\lambda )=I_i+\lambda b_i$$
(2)   
where $`I_i`$ is the identity and $`b_i`$ is the braid operator acting on the sites $`i`$ and $`i+1`$ of a one-dimensional chain. Here we choose the braid operator as the graded permutation between $`N`$ bosonic and $`M`$ fermionic degrees of freedom 

$$b_i=\underset{a,b=1}{\overset{N+M}{}}(1)^{p(a)p(b)}e_{ab}^ie_{ba}^{i+1}$$
(3)   
where $`p(a)`$ is the Grassmann parity of the $`a`$-th degree of freedom, assuming values $`p(a)=0`$ for bosons and $`p(a)=1`$ for fermions.

The $`R`$-matrix (2,3) has a null Grassmann parity, and consequently can produce a vertex operator $`_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ satisfying either the Yang-Baxter equation or its graded version . In the latter case, the tensor product in formula (1) should be taken in the graded sense(supertensor product) . In the latter case the associated $``$-operator is

$$_{𝒜i}(\lambda )=\lambda I_i+b_i$$
(4)   
The next step is to search for extra $``$-operators which should satisfy equation (1) with the $`R`$-matrix (2,3). As we shall see below, this is possible when we enlarge the braid algebra by including a Temperley-Lieb operator $`E_i`$. This operator satisfies the following relations

$$\begin{array}{c}E_i^2=qE_i,E_iE_{i\pm 1}E_i=E_i,E_iE_j=E_jE_i|ij|2\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)   
where $`q`$ is a $`c`$-number. It turns out that the braid operator (3) together with the monoid $`E_i`$ close the braid-monoid algebra  at its degenerated point ($`b_i^2=I_i`$). The extra relations between $`b_i`$ and $`E_i`$ closing the degenerated braid-monoid algebra are (see e.g )

$$\begin{array}{c}b_iE_i=E_ib_i=\widehat{t}E_i\hfill \\ E_ib_{i\pm 1}b_i=b_{i\pm 1}b_iE_{i\pm 1}=E_iE_{i\pm 1}\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)   
where the constant $`\widehat{t}`$ assumes the values $`\pm 1`$.

Now we have to solve the Yang-Baxter equation (1) with the $`R`$-matrix (2,3) assuming the following general ansatz for the $``$-operator

$$_{𝒜i}(\lambda )=f(\lambda )I_i+g(\lambda )b_i+h(\lambda )E_i$$
(7)   
where $`f(\lambda )`$, $`g(\lambda )`$ and $`h(\lambda )`$ are functions to be determined as follows. Substituting this ansatz in equation (1), and taking into account the braid-monoid relations, we find two classes of solutions. The first one has $`h(\lambda )=0`$ and clearly corresponds to the standard solution already given in equation (4). The second one is new and is giving by $`g(\lambda )=0`$. We find that the new $``$-operator, after normalizing the solution by function $`h(\lambda )`$, is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )=\widehat{t}(\lambda +\eta )I_iE_i$$
(8)   
where $`\eta `$ is an arbitrary constant. This constant can be fixed imposing unitary property, i.e $`\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )I_i`$. By using this property and the first equation (5) we find

$$\eta =\frac{q}{2\widehat{t}}$$
(9)   
After having found two distincts $``$-operators which satisfy the Yang-Baxter algebra with the same $`R`$-matrix, the construction of an integrable mixed vertex model becomes standard . The monodromy matrix of a vertex model mixing $`L_1`$ operators of type $`_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ and $`L_2`$ operators of type $`\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ is written as

$$𝒯^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda )=\overline{}_{𝒜L_1+L_2}(\lambda )\overline{}_{𝒜L_1+L_21}(\lambda )\mathrm{}\overline{}_{𝒜1}(\lambda )$$
(10)   
where $`\overline{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ is defined by

$$\overline{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )=\{\begin{array}{cc}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )\hfill & \text{if }i\{\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _{L_1}\}\text{ }\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )\hfill & \text{ otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$
(11)   
and the partition $`\{\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _{L_1}\}`$ denotes a set of integer indices assuming values in the interval $`1\alpha _iL_1+L_2`$. Although the integrability does not depend on how we choose such partition, the construction of $`local`$ conserved charges commuting with the respective transfer matrix does. One interesting case is when the number of operators $`_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ are equally distributed ($`L_1=L_2=L`$) in an alternating way in the monodromy matrix . In this case, the first non-trivial charge, known as Hamiltonian, is given in terms of nearest neighbor and next-to-nearest neighbor interactions. More specifically, the expression for the Hamiltonian in the absence of fermionic degrees of freedom($`M=0`$) is

$$H=\underset{modd}{\overset{2L}{}}\stackrel{~}{}_{m1,m}(0)+\underset{ieven}{\overset{2L}{}}\stackrel{~}{}_{n2,n1}(0)\stackrel{~}{}_{n,n1}(0)P_{n2,n}$$
(12)   
where in the computations it was essential to use the unitary property $`\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(0)\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(0)=\frac{q^2}{4}I_i`$ at the regular point $`\lambda =0`$. We also recall that $`P_{ij}`$ denotes permutation between sites $`i`$ and $`j`$(equation (3) with $`M=0`$).

We close this section discussing explicit representations for the monoid $`E_i`$. Such representations can be found in terms of the invariants of the superalgebra $`Osp(N|2M)`$, where $`N`$ and $`2M`$ are the number of bosonic and fermionic degrees of freedom, respectively. Here we shall consider a representation that respects the $`U(1)`$ invariance, which will be very useful in Bethe ansatz analysis. Following ref.  the monoid is written as

$$E_i=\underset{a,b,c,d=1}{\overset{N+2M}{}}\alpha _{ab}\alpha _{cd}^1e_{ac}^ie_{bd}^{i+1}$$
(13)   
and the matrix $`\alpha `$ has the following block anti-diagonal structure

$$\alpha =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}O_{N\times M}& O_{N\times M}& _{N\times N}\\ O_{M\times M}& _{M\times M}& O_{M\times N}\\ _{M\times M}& O_{M\times M}& O_{M\times N}\end{array}\right)$$
(14)   
where $`_{k_1\times k_2}`$ and $`O_{k_1\times k_2}`$ are the anti-diagonal and the null $`k_1\times k_2`$ matrices, respectively. We also recall that for $`\widehat{t}=1`$ the sequence of grading is $`f_1\mathrm{}f_Mb_1\mathrm{}b_Nf_{M+1}\mathrm{}f_{2M}`$ and the Temperley-Lieb parameter $`q`$ is the difference between the number of bosonic and fermionic degrees of freedom

$$q=N2M$$
(15)   
Finally, we remark that new $`\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ operators are obtained only when $`N+2M3`$. Indeed, for the special cases $`N=2`$, $`M=0`$ and $`N=0`$, $`M=1`$ it is possible to verify that such operator has the structure of the 6-vertex model, which is precisely the same of $`_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$, modulo trivial phases and scaling. In the cases $`N=3`$,$`M=0`$ and $`N=1`$,$`M=1`$ we reproduce, after a canonical transformation, the $``$-operators used recently in the literature  to construct mixed $`SU(3)`$ and $`tJ`$ models. As we shall see in next section, however, an important advantage of our approach is that representation (14) is the appropriate one to allows us to perform standard nested Bethe Ansatz diagonalization.

## 3 Bethe ansatz diagonalization

In this section we look at the problem of diagonalization of the transfer matrix $`T^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda )=Tr_𝒜[𝒯^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda )]`$, namely

$$T^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda )|\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Lambda }(\lambda )|\mathrm{\Phi }$$
(16)   
by means of the quantum inverse scattering method.

For sake of simplicity we restrict ourselves to the case of mixed vertex models in the absence of fermionic degrees of freedom. In this case the $``$-operators $`_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ are given by formulae (4) and (8) with $`M=0`$, $`\widehat{t}=1`$ and $`\eta =N/2`$. An important object in this framework is the reference state $`|0`$ we should start with in order to construct the full Hilbert space $`|\mathrm{\Phi }`$. The structure of the $``$-operators suggests us to take the standard ferromagnetic pseudovacuum as our reference state, i.e

$$|0=\underset{i=1}{\overset{L_1+L_2}{}}|0_i,|0_i=\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\\ \mathrm{}\\ 0\end{array}\right)_N$$
(17)   
where the index $`N`$ represents the length of the vectors $`|0_i`$. It turns out that this state is an exact eigenvector of the transfer matrix, since both operators $`_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ satisfy the following important triangular properties

$$_{𝒜i}(\lambda )|0_i=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}a(\lambda )|0_i& & & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& b(\lambda )|0_i& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& b(\lambda )|0_i\end{array}\right)_{N\times N}$$
(18)   
and

$$\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )|0_i=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )|0_i& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& \\ 0& \stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )|0_i& 0& \mathrm{}& \\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& \stackrel{~}{a}(\lambda )|0_i\end{array}\right)_{N\times N}$$
(19)   
where the symbol $``$ stands for non-null values that are not necessary to evaluate in this algebraic approach. The functions $`a(\lambda )`$, $`b(\lambda )`$, $`\stackrel{~}{a}(\lambda )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )`$ are obtained directly from expressions (8,9), and they are given by

$$a(\lambda )=\lambda +1,b(\lambda )=\lambda ,\stackrel{~}{a}(\lambda )=\lambda +\frac{N}{2}1,\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )=\lambda +\frac{N}{2}$$
(20)   
To make further progress we have to write an appropriate ansatz for the monodromy matrix $`𝒯^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda )`$ in the auxiliary space $`𝒜`$. The triangular properties (18,19) suggest us to seek for standard structure used in nested Bethe ansatz diagonalization of $`SU(N)`$ vertex models ,

$$𝒯^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda )=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A(\lambda )& B_i(\lambda )\\ C_i(\lambda )& D_{ij}(\lambda )\end{array}\right)_{N\times N}$$
(21)   
where $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},N1`$. As a consequence of properties (18,19) we derive how the monodromy matrix elements act on the reference state. The fields $`B_i(\lambda )`$ play the role of creation operators while $`C_i(\lambda )`$ are annihilation fields, i.e $`C_i(\lambda )|0=0`$. Furthermore, the action of the “diagonal” operators $`A(\lambda )`$ and $`D_{ij}(\lambda )`$ are given by

$$A(\lambda )|0=[a(\lambda )]^{L_1}[\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )]^{L_2}|0$$
(22)   
$$D_{ii}(\lambda )|0=[b(\lambda )]^{L_1}[\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )]^{L_2}|0\text{ for }iN1,D_{N1,N1}(\lambda )|0=[b(\lambda )]^{L_1}[\stackrel{~}{a}(\lambda )]^{L_2}|0$$
(23)   
$$D_{i,j}(\lambda )|0=0\text{ for }ij\text{ and }jN1,D_{i,N1}(\lambda )|00\text{ for }iN1$$
(24)   
We observe that although matrix $`D_{ij}(\lambda )|0`$ is non-diagonal it is up triangular, which is an important property to carry on higher level Bethe ansatz analysis. In order to construct other eigenvectors we need to use the commutation relations between the monodromy matrix elements which are obtained by extending the Yang-Baxter relation to the monodromy matrix ansatz (21). Due to the structure of the $`R`$-matrix, the commutation rules are the same of that already known for isotropic $`SU(N)`$ models , and the most useful relations for subsequent derivations are

$$A(\lambda )B_i(\mu )=\frac{a(\mu \lambda )}{b(\mu \lambda )}B_i(\mu )A(\lambda )\frac{1}{b(\mu \lambda )}B_i(\lambda )A(\mu )$$
(25)   
$$D_{ij}(\lambda )B_k(\mu )=\frac{1}{b(\lambda \mu )}B_p(\mu )D_{iq}(\lambda )r^{(1)}(\lambda \mu )_{pq}^{jk}\frac{1}{b(\lambda \mu )}B_j(\lambda )D_{ik}(\mu )$$
(26)   
$$B_i(\lambda )B_j(\mu )=B_p(\mu )B_q(\lambda )r^{(1)}(\lambda \mu )_{pq}^{ij}$$
(27)   
where $`r^{(1)}(\lambda )_{pq}^{ij}`$ are the elements of the $`R`$-matrix $`I_i+\lambda b_i`$ on the subspace $`(N1)\times (N1)`$. The eigenvectors are given in terms of the following linear combination 

$$|\mathrm{\Phi }_{m_1}(\lambda _1^{(1)},\mathrm{},\lambda _{m_1}^{(1)})=B_{a_1}(\lambda _1^{(1)})\mathrm{}B_{a_{m_1}}(\lambda _{m_1}^{(1)})^{a_{m_1}\mathrm{}a_1}$$
(28)   
where the components $`^{a_{m_1}\mathrm{}a_1}`$ are going to be determined a posteriori.

By carring on the diagonal fields $`A(\lambda )`$ and $`D_{ii}(\lambda )`$ over the above $`m_1`$-particle state we generate the so-called wanted and unwanted terms. The wanted terms are those proportional to $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_{m_1}(\lambda _1^{(1)},\mathrm{},\lambda _{m_1}^{(1)})`$ and they contribute directly to the eigenvalue $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})`$. These terms are easily obtained by keeping only the first term of the commutation rules (25,26) each time we turn $`A(\lambda )`$ and $`D_{ii}(\lambda )`$ over one of the $`B_{a_i}(\lambda _i^{(1)})`$ component. The result of this computations leads us to the following expression

$`T^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda )|\mathrm{\Phi }_{m_1}(\lambda _1^{(1)},\mathrm{},\lambda _{m_1}^{(1)})`$ $`=`$ $`[a(\lambda )]^{L_1}[\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )]^{L_2}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m_1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _i^{(1)}\lambda )}{b(\lambda _i^{(1)}\lambda )}}|\mathrm{\Phi }_{m_1}(\lambda _1^{(1)},\mathrm{},\lambda _{m_1}^{(1)})`$ (29)   
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m_1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{b(\lambda \lambda _i^{(1)})}}B_{b_1}(\lambda _1^{(1)})\mathrm{}B_{b_{m_1}}(\lambda _{m_1}^{(1)})T^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _j^{(1)}\})_{b_1\mathrm{}b_{m_1}}^{a_1\mathrm{}a_{m_1}}^{a_{m_1}\mathrm{}a_1}`$   
$`+\mathrm{unwanted}\mathrm{terms}`$   
where $`T^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _j^{(1)}\})`$ is the transfer matrix of the following inhomogeneous auxiliary vertex model

$$T^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})_{b_1\mathrm{}b_{m_1}}^{a_1\mathrm{}a_{m_1}}=r^{(1)}(\lambda \lambda _1^{(1)})_{b_1d_1}^{aa_1}r^{(1)}(\lambda \lambda _2^{(1)})_{b_2d_2}^{d_1a_2}\mathrm{}r^{(1)}(\lambda \lambda _{m_1}^{(1)})_{b_{m_1}d_{m_1}}^{d_{m_11}a_{m_1}}D_{ad_{m_1}}(\lambda )|0$$
(30)   
The unwanted terms arise when one of the variables $`\lambda _i^{(1)}`$ of the $`m_1`$-particle state is exchanged with the spectral parameter $`\lambda `$. It is known  how to collect these in a close form, thanks to the commutation rule (27) which makes possible to relate different ordered multiparticle states. We find that the unwanted terms of kind $`B_{a_1}(\lambda _1^{(1)})\mathrm{}B_{a_i}(\lambda )\mathrm{}B_{a_{m_1}}(\lambda _{m_1}^{(1)})`$ are cancelled out provided we impose further restriction to the $`m_1`$-particle state rapidities $`\lambda _i^{(1)}`$, namely

$`\left[a(\lambda _i^{(1)})\right]^{L_1}\left[\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda _i^{(1)})\right]^{L_2}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1ji}{\overset{m_1}{}}}b(\lambda _i^{(1)}\lambda _j^{(1)}){\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _j^{(1)}\lambda _i^{(1)})}{b(\lambda _j^{(1)}\lambda _i^{(1)})}}^{a_{m_1}\mathrm{}a_1}=`$   
$`T^{(1)}(\lambda =\lambda _i^{(1)},\{\lambda _j^{(1)}\})_{a_1\mathrm{}a_{m_1}}^{b_1\mathrm{}b_{m_1}}^{b_{m_1}\mathrm{}b_1},i=1,\mathrm{},m_1`$ (31)   
Now it becomes necessary to introduce a second Bethe ansatz in order to diagonalize the auxiliary transfer matrix $`T^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})`$. The only difference as compare to standard cases  is the presence of the “gauge” matrix $`g_{ab}=D_{ab}(\lambda )|0`$. It turns out that this problem is still integrable since the tensor product $`gg`$ commutes with the auxiliary $`R`$-matrix $`r^{(1)}(\lambda )`$ <sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1 This occurs because the off-diagonal elements $`D_{i,N1}(\lambda )`$ belongs to a commutative ring.(see e.g ref. ). From equations (23,24) we also note that this gauge does not spoil the triangular form of the monodromy matrix associated to $`T^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})`$ when it acts on the usual ferromagnetic state,

$$|0^{(1)}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{m_1}{}}\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\\ \mathrm{}\\ 0\end{array}\right)_{N1}$$
(32)   
By defining $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})`$ as the eigenvalue of the auxiliary transfer matrix $`T^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})`$, i.e

$$T^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})_{a_1\mathrm{}a_{m_1}}^{b_1\mathrm{}b_{m_1}}^{b_{m_1}\mathrm{}b_1}=\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})^{a_{m_1}\mathrm{}a_1}$$
(33)   
we derive from equation (29) that the eigenvalue of $`T^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda )`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})=[a(\lambda )]^{L_1}[\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )]^{L_2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{m_1}{}}\frac{a(\lambda _i^{(1)}\lambda )}{b(\lambda _i^{(1)}\lambda )}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{m_1}{}}\frac{1}{b(\lambda \lambda _i^{(1)})}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})$$

and the nested Bethe ansatz equations (31) become

$$\left[a(\lambda _i^{(1)})\right]^{L_1}\left[\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda _i^{(1)})\right]^{L_2}\underset{j=1ji}{\overset{m_1}{}}b(\lambda _i^{(1)}\lambda _j^{(1)})\frac{a(\lambda _j^{(1)}\lambda _i^{(1)})}{b(\lambda _j^{(1)}\lambda _i^{(1)})}=\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)}(\lambda =\lambda _i^{(1)},\{\lambda _j^{(1)}\}),i=1,\mathrm{},m_1$$
(34)   
In order to find the auxiliary eigenvalue $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)}(\lambda =\lambda _i^{(1)},\{\lambda _j^{(1)}\})`$ we have to introduce a new set of variables $`\{\lambda _1^{(2)},\mathrm{},\lambda _{m_2}^{(2)}\}`$ which parametrize the eigenvectors of $`T^{(1)}(\lambda ,\{\lambda _i^{(1)}\})`$. The structure of the commutations rules as well as the eigenvector ansatz (28) remains basically the same, and the expression for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(1)}(\lambda =\lambda _i^{(1)},\{\lambda _j^{(1)}\})`$ will again depend on another auxiliary inhomogeneous vertex model having $`(N2)`$ states per link. We repeat this procedure until we reach the $`(N2)`$th step, where the auxiliary problem becomes of $`6`$-vertex type. Since this nesting approach is well known in the literature , we here only present our final results. The eigenvalue of the transfer matrix $`T^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda )`$ is given by

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{L_1,L_2}(\lambda ;\{\lambda _j^{(1)}\},\mathrm{},\{\lambda _j^{(N1)}\})`$ $`=`$ $`[a(\lambda )]^{L_1}[\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )]^{L_2}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m_1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _j^{(1)}\lambda )}{b(\lambda _j^{(1)}\lambda )}}`$ (35)   
$`+[b(\lambda )]^{L_1}[\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )]^{L_2}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{N2}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m_l}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda \lambda _j^{(l)})}{b(\lambda \lambda _j^{(l)})}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m_{l+1}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _j^{(l+1)}\lambda )}{b(\lambda _j^{(l+1)}\lambda )}}`$   
$`+[b(\lambda )]^{L_1}[\stackrel{~}{a}(\lambda )]^{L_2}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m_{N1}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda \lambda _j^{(N1)})}{b(\lambda \lambda _j^{(N1)})}}`$   
while the nested Bethe ansatz equations are given by

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _i^{(1)})}{b(\lambda _i^{(1)})}}\right]^{L_1}={\displaystyle \underset{j=1,ji}{\overset{m_1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _i^{(1)}\lambda _j^{(1)})}{a(\lambda _j^{(1)}\lambda _i^{(1)})}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m_2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _j^{(2)}\lambda _i^{(1)})}{b(\lambda _j^{(2)}\lambda _i^{(1)})}}`$   
$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1,ji}{\overset{m_l}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _i^{(l)}\lambda _j^{(l)})}{a(\lambda _j^{(l)}\lambda _i^{(l)})}}={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m_{l1}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _i^{(l)}\lambda _j^{(l1)})}{b(\lambda _i^{(l)}\lambda _j^{(l1)})}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m_{l+1}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{b(\lambda _j^{(l+1)}\lambda _i^{(l)})}{a(\lambda _j^{(l+1)}\lambda _i^{(l)})}},l=2,\mathrm{},N2`$   
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{a}(\lambda _i^{(N1)})}{\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda _i^{(N1)})}}\right]^{L_2}={\displaystyle \underset{j=1,ji}{\overset{m_{N1}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _j^{(N1)}\lambda _i^{(N1)})}{a(\lambda _i^{(N1)}\lambda _j^{(N1)})}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m_{N2}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a(\lambda _i^{(N1)}\lambda _j^{(N2)})}{b(\lambda _i^{(N1)}\lambda _j^{(N2)})}}`$ (38)   
We would like to close this paper with the following remarks. First we note that it is possible to perform convenient shifts in the Bethe ansatz rapidities, $`\{\lambda _i^{(p)}\}\{\lambda _i^{(p)}\}\frac{p}{2}`$, in order to present the results (36-39) in a more symmetrical form. For instance, after these shifts, the nested Bethe ansatz equations can be compactly written as

$$\left[\frac{\lambda _i^{(a)}\frac{\delta _{a,w}}{2}}{\lambda _i^{(a)}+\frac{\delta _{a,w}}{2}}\right]^{L_w}=\underset{b=1}{\overset{r}{}}\underset{k=1,ki}{\overset{m_b}{}}\frac{\lambda _i^{(a)}\lambda _k^{(b)}\frac{C_{a,b}}{2}}{\lambda _i^{(a)}\lambda _k^{(b)}+\frac{C_{a,b}}{2}},i=1,\mathrm{},m_a;a=1,\mathrm{},N1$$
(39)   
where $`C_{ab}`$ is the Cartan matrix of the $`A_N`$ Lie algebra and $`w=1,N1`$. We note that for $`N=3`$ we recover the results by Abad and Rios . It is also straightforward to extend the above Bethe ansatz results to the superalgebra $`Sl(N|M)`$. The $`N=0`$ case is the simplest one, since the only modification is the addition of minus signs in functions $`\stackrel{~}{a}(\lambda )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{b}(\lambda )`$.

Next remark concerns the physical meaning of the $``$-operators as scattering $`S`$-matrices. It is known that $`_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$ might represent the scattering matrix of particles belonging to the fundamental representation of $`SU(N)`$. The extra solution $`\stackrel{~}{}_{𝒜i}(\lambda )`$, however, should be seen as the forward scattering amplitude between a particle and an antiparticle. In fact, it is possible to show that the whole particle-antiparticle scattering(even backward amplitudes) can be closed in terms of the braid-monoid algebra. We leave a detailed analysis of this possibility, their Bethe ansatz properties as well as generalizations to include trigonometric solutions for a forthcoming paper .

## Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Fapesp ( Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de S. Paulo) and Cnpq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico).