REVIEW 7 cited by
Probing Non-Graviton Spectra in $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM via BMN truncation and S-Duality
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
The one-loop cohomology of N=4 SYM is conjectured to be isomorphic to the exact cohomology. As a result, its truncations are expected to be subrings of the exact cohomology. We study the superconformal index restricted over one such truncation known as the BMN truncation. We present a systematic algorithm to compute the BMN index using the method of residues. We compute the BMN index for SU(N) SYM for N = 2,...,6 in closed form. It is expressed as a rational function of the fugacity. A term of the type (1-x) in the denominator indicates the presence of a bosonic generator counted with fugacity x. We find a rich and universal set of such terms in the denominator showing an interesting bosonic Fock space in the spectrum of protected operators. This Fock space cannot be explained as coming from the non-interacting supersymmetric graviton gas far away from the black hole as in the grey-galaxy solutions because the charges of the bosonic generators are not compatible with those of the supersymmetric gravitons. This suggests a novel microstructure within the supersymmetric black hole itself. We also examine the indices of S-dual pairs SO(2N+1) and Sp(N) SYM. Although their full 1/16-BPS indices coincide, we find discrepancies in their BMN-sector indices. As the BMN indices restricted to the graviton sector are expected to be the same, this mismatch allows us to identify non-graviton cohomologies. We explicitly find one of them in the SO(7) theory that is responsible for the mismatch of the BMN index. We also show that indices restricted to other one-loop cohomology truncations, in general, do not match under S-duality. If the conjecture of exactness of one-loop cohomology is correct, this suggests the presence of new cohomology subrings that match under S-duality with the letter-based truncations of the one-loop cohomology. This offers a way to check the one-loop exactness conjecture.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
Two roads to fortuity in ABJM theory
Enumerates 244 fortuitous operators in ABJM theory and identifies a truncation matching the BMN subsector of N=4 SYM to lift an infinite tower of representatives.
-
Mass-Flow Invariance of $Q$-Cohomology in BMN Matrix Quantum Mechanics
Q-cohomology in BMN matrix QM is mass-flow invariant via a similarity transformation of the nilpotent supercharge component.
-
Finite-$N$ BMN index across all vacuum sectors
Finite-N BMN index summed over all vacuum sectors for N≤9 reveals order-N² entropy growth that survives the sum and dominance switching from single- to double-partition sectors starting at N=5.
-
Super-Chevalley Restriction and Relative Lie Algebra Cohomology over the 2|3 Algebra
The 3|2 super-Chevalley restriction map fails to be an isomorphism for so(7) due to a non-Cartan class; explicit fortuitous classes counter stable-image expectations for sl(2) and so(7); relative cohomologies of (so7,...
-
Loop Corrected Supercharges from Holomorphic Anomalies
The complete one-loop supercharge for 4d Lagrangian SUSY gauge theories is derived in the holomorphic twist, packaged for N=4 SYM as a compact superfield formula.
-
Quantum black hole cohomologies
In SU(2) maximal SYM, certain classical fortuitous cohomologies stay unlifted at one loop while many heavier core ones are lifted, and classical entropy exceeds protected-state entropy by ≥1.2% in the Cardy limit.
-
Quantum black hole cohomologies
In the SU(2) maximal SYM theory, some fortuitous cohomologies are lifted by 1-loop corrections while the lightest and hairy versions are not, yielding at least 1.2% higher entropy for classical cohomologies than for s...
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.