Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 41 references

Exact Finite-$N$ eRS Surface-Defect Indices and Giant-Graviton Corrections in $\mathcal N=4$ SYM

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The finite-N superconformal index with antisymmetric surface-defect insertions reduces exactly to a bilateral free-fermion determinant on the locus $t=q$, $p=uv$.

desk verdict Solid one-charge result, plausible but unproven all-rank determinant; worth refereeing once the r>1 step is supplied. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.01349 v1 pith:ZYZZHFEH submitted 2026-08-02 hep-th

Ji-Seong Chae This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords superconformalindexN=4supersymmetricYang-MillssurfacedefectsellipticRuijsenaars-Schneideroperatorsgiantgravitonexpansionfree-fermiondeterminantFredholmfinite-Ncorrections
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims an exact finite-$N$ solution of the $\mathcal N=4$ $U(N)$ superconformal index after inserting an antisymmetric elliptic Ruijsenaars-Schneider (eRS) surface-defect operator. On the codimension-one locus $t=q$, $p=uv$, the interacting difference operators become conjugate to free shifts and the self-glued index becomes a bilateral free-fermion determinant, giving exact formulas for every antisymmetric rank and making the $u\leftrightarrow v$ structure explicit. On the boundary $v=0$, the determinant yields the complete stable tower of pure $u^{kN}$ corrections, separating the ordinary finite-$N$ and giant-graviton coefficients $g_k$ from the defect-specific dressing $c_k$ and from the full inserted coefficients $h_k$. The value is that surface-defect insertions supply protected observables that resolve finite-$N$ spectral information the ordinary index alone cannot see.

What carries the argument

Free-shift conjugation combined with Frobenius-Kronecker determinantization. After conjugation by the elliptic Vandermonde $\Delta_p(z)=\prod_{i<j} z_j\,\theta(z_i/z_j;p)$, the rank-$r$ eRS operator becomes the elementary-symmetric polynomial in free $q$-shifts, so Slater determinants are exact eigenfunctions with eigenvalue $e_r(q^{n_1},\dots,q^{n_N})$. The self-gluing density is then rewritten by the Frobenius determinant identity in terms of the Kronecker kernel $\Phi_\tau(z;p)=\theta(\tau z;p)/(\theta(\tau;p)\theta(z;p))$, whose bilateral Laurent expansion makes the one-particle operator diagonal in the Fourier basis with eigenvalue $\kappa_n$. The finite-$N$ index is the $[\xi^N\alpha^r]$ coefficient of $\det[1+\xi(1+\alpha Q)K_\tau]$, converting an interacting many-body trace into one-particle traces without needing individual elliptic-Macdonald norms.

What would settle it

Independently evaluate the original $U(N)$ matrix integral on $t=q$, $p=uv$ for $N=3$, rank $r=1$, and nonzero $p$, and compare with the bilateral determinant formula; any mismatch beyond meromorphic continuation would falsify the exact claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that at $t=q$, $p=uv$, the self-glued $\mathcal N=4$ $U(N)$ index with any antisymmetric rank-$r$ eRS insertion equals an exact canonical average over $N$ occupied bilateral Fourier levels: $$\frac{$I_N^{{[r,+]}}$}{I_N} = \frac{\$\theta$(\tau u^N;p)}{\$\theta$(\tau q^r u^N;p)} \; \frac{[\xi^N\$\alpha$^r]\,\Xi_\tau}{[\xi^N]\,\Xi_\tau}, \qquad \Xi_\tau = \prod_{n\in\mathbb{Z}} \bigl[1+\xi\kappa_n(1+\$\alpha$ q^n)\bigr],\quad \kappa_n = \frac{u^n}{(p;p)_\$infty^{2}$\,(1-\tau p^n)}.$$ The auxiliary parameters $\xi$, $\alpha$, and $\tau$ cancel from the physical ratio; $r=0$ is the uninserted index. On the boundary $v=0$, the formula reduces to the closed expectation $E_N(u,q)=\sum_{i=1}^N q^{N-i}\prod_{j=i}^N (1-u^j)/(1-q u^j)$, from which the complete stable $c_k$ and $h_k$ towers are extracted. The paper also establishes that the leading inserted coefficient decomposes as $h_1=g_1+c_1$, with $g_1$ reproduced by a maximal-D3 protected fluctuation determinant and $c_1$ by a selected giant-defect intersection Jeffrey-Kirwan residue.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the elliptic-Macdonald spectral expansion of the self-gluing Cauchy kernel, imported from an unpublished source, is complete and orthogonal at finite $N$ with nonzero norms; the paper relies on that theorem without proving it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At $v=0$, every stable $u^{kN}$ coefficient $c_k$ and $h_k$ is given by a closed product formula, so the entire defect-resolved tower is known at any finite $N$.
  • At $t=q$, $p=uv$, the rank-$r$ antisymmetric family provides $N+1$ distinct protected spectral weightings, with $r=0$ recovering the ordinary index and higher ranks resolving moments of the partition-weight distribution.
  • The bilateral determinant resums the $v$-reflected and mixed $u$-$v$ giant sectors that a truncated expansion in $p=uv$ would miss for large enough $N$.
  • The leading defect dressing $c_1(u,q)=-(1-q)/(1-q/u)$ is fixed by the boundary index and matched by a selected JK residue with effective character $AB=u/q$, as an equality of full meromorphic functions.
  • A balanced second-order expansion around $t=q$ supplies the first interacting finite-$N$ corrections, including the connected four-trace cumulant required for consistency with the strict large-$N$ index.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same free-shift diagonalization should extend to other insertions built from the eRS hierarchy, so symmetric or higher-representation defects may admit analogous bilateral determinants on the same locus; the paper does not show this.
  • The distinction between one marked hole and independently dressing every hole gives a testable signature: the two prescriptions agree at $k=1$ but diverge at $k=2$, so a low-$N$ two-hole check can discriminate them.
  • If a ten-dimensional brane construction can derive $AB=u/q$ and the selected JK chamber, the bulk derivation of $c_1$ would be complete; the proposed M5-M5$'$-M2 and D3-D3$'$-KK5 endpoint arrays are the natural place to look.
  • Because the specialization keeps $u$ and $v$ independent, one can define stable mixed $u^a v^b$ coefficients; the paper computes only the first mixed $u^N v^N$ sector, leaving a full two-charge stable tower as a natural extension.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the finite-N superconformal index of N=4 U(N) SYM with antisymmetric elliptic Ruijsenaars-Schneider (eRS) surface-defect insertions on the locus t=q, p=uv. Section 2 derives the exact one-charge expectation E_N(u,q) and the stable coefficients c_k and h_k. Section 3 represents the two-charge index as a coefficient of a bilateral free-fermion determinant and states an exact formula, Eq. (130) and its ratio form Eq. (213), for every antisymmetric rank r. It also develops a second-order expansion away from the solvable locus. Section 4 gives a D3-brane interpretation of the leading coefficients and a conditional Jeffrey-Kirwan match for the defect dressing c1. The paper closes with an explicit list of open problems and limitations.

Significance. The one-charge result in Section 2.2 is a solid and largely self-contained finite-N computation: the partition-sum derivation is transparent, the recursion (56) is explicit, and the distinction among the bulk ratio R_N, the defect expectation E_N, and the full ratio R_N^[1] is well organized. The bilateral determinant formula (130) is elegant and, if fully established for all r, would be a significant exact finite-N result on a nontrivial locus, with the u-v exchange symmetry made manifest. The paper is also commendably explicit about what remains open, especially the microscopic derivation of the effective character AB=u/q. However, the all-rank claim currently rests on a one-sentence row-shift argument that is verified only for r=0 and r=1, and the initial spectral derivation in Section 2.2 depends on an unpublished input whose status is not stated.

major comments (2)
  1. [3.2, Eqs. (129)-(130)] The central formula (130), and its ratio form (213), is claimed for every antisymmetric rank r=0,...,N. The step from the Fredholm coefficient (129) to (130) is not actually derived for r>1: the text states that shifting r rows reproduces the r-fold difference operator and changes theta(tau u^N;p) to theta(tau q^r u^N;p), but it does not show the q^{r(r-1)/2} prefactor, the elliptic theta cross-factors, or the overall normalization, and the displayed checks cover only r=0 and r=1. Since a missing q-power or (p;p)_infty factor could first appear at r=2, this is a load-bearing gap. Please supply a complete proof of the generalized Frobenius row-shift identity for general r, or at minimum an explicit N=2, r=2 constant-term contour check together with an argument that the normalization cannot acquire additional r-dependent factors.
  2. [2.2, Eqs. (28)-(32)] The derivation of the defect-inserted spectral trace uses the completeness and norm properties of the elliptic-Macdonald/eRS expansion from the unpublished preprint [32]. The final determinant route in Section 3 does not need those norms, and the one-charge result can be obtained directly from the Schur-basis eigenvalue at p=0, t=q. Nevertheless, as written the manuscript's initial derivation of the defect observable is not self-contained and depends on an input whose mathematical status is not stated. Please either state the precise spectral theorem used and its proof status, or restructure Section 2.2 so that the eigenvalue action on the relevant basis is derived explicitly and the unpublished input is not load-bearing.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix A.3] The text says 'The accompanying code checks' the Fredholm expression against direct integration, but no code or repository is provided in the arXiv submission. Please indicate where the code can be obtained or describe the checks in sufficient detail to be reproducible.
  2. [Section 5.1] The paragraph beginning 'Relation to previous work' is followed by a second, nearly identical paragraph beginning 'The present work combines an exact boundary solution with an independent bulk calculation.' This duplication should be removed.
  3. [Section 4] The text contains the placeholder 'appendix??' in the sentence introducing the JK-residue and convention audit. The intended appendix reference should be fixed.
  4. [Appendix A.2] The heading 'Contruction of formal perturbation framework' contains a typo; it should read 'Construction'.
  5. [Section 2.1, after Eq. (22)] The phrase 'on the locust =q' in the sentence introducing the specialization is missing a space; it should read 'on the locus t=q'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the finite-N tower and bilateral determinant are derived from the matrix integral, and the posterior JK and hole-operator matches are explicitly labeled as conditional.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is self-contained. Equation (45) is a direct evaluation of the partition sum (36) for the rank-one eRS eigenvalue, and the stable coefficients c_k and h_k follow from the exact reindexing (49)-(53) plus the functional equations (54) and (75); no fitted parameter enters. The two-charge formula (130)/(213) is obtained from the Frobenius determinant identity (119), the bilateral Fourier kernel (120)-(123), and the free-shift conjugation (113)-(117); the rank-r eigenvalue is derived, not assumed, at Eq. (117). The paper's reliance on Ref. [32] is limited to the completeness and orthogonality of the elliptic-Macdonald spectral expansion used in Section 2.2; Section 3 explicitly avoids individual eigenfunction norms, so the assumed spectral theorem is an external input rather than a circular one. The hole-space weights eta_a in Eq. (91) are openly 'the unique diagonal weights required to reproduce the stable defect coefficients' (Eqs. (92)-(93)), and the JK match for c1 is explicitly conditional on the supplied character AB=u/q and the chamber choice, with the microscopic origin stated as open; these are posterior consistency checks, not predictions used to derive the boundary results. No self-citation chain is load-bearing, since Refs. [32] and [34] are by other authors, and the low-N contour checks are independent benchmarks. The unproven all-rank r>1 step in Eq. (130) is a completeness and correctness concern, but it is a missing proof rather than a circular reduction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The load-bearing inputs are the spectral decomposition of the Cauchy kernel (Eq. 28, Ref. [32]), the Frobenius-Kronecker determinant identity (Eq. 119, Refs. [38,39]), and meromorphic continuation from the convergence domain (Eq. 104). The auxiliary tau cancels in physical ratios. The hole weights eta_a are introduced to reproduce exact coefficients and the KK5 completion is explicitly conjectural; neither affects the central exact formulas.

free parameters (2)
  • tau (auxiliary Frobenius parameter) = none (cancels)
    Introduced in Eq. (118) to build the one-particle determinant; cancels from the normalized physical index, so it is not a physical free parameter.
  • eta_a hole weights = defined by Eq. (91) from c1, (u;u)_infty, (u^2/q;u)_infty
    Chosen so that the hole-representation trace reproduces the exact stable coefficients c_k; it is a rewriting, not an input to the derivation.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Completeness and orthonormality of the elliptic-Macdonald/eRS spectral expansion of the kernel K_u(z,y;p,q,t) under the self-gluing measure (Eqs. 28-29).
    The defect insertion becomes multiplication by an eigenvalue only if the eigenfunction basis diagonalizes the self-glued trace. The theorem is imported from Ref. [32] and not proved in this paper.
  • standard math Frobenius determinant identity (Eq. 119) and bilateral Fourier-Laurent expansion of the Kronecker kernel (Eq. 120).
    Used to convert the N-body self-gluing density into a one-particle determinant. Cited to Refs. [38,39].
  • domain assumption Meromorphic continuation of exact formulas from the convergence domain |u|<1, |v|<1, |p|<|uq|<1 to the physical fugacity domain.
    The paper states that the final formulas are meromorphic identities and extend beyond the initial domain without a detailed proof.
  • domain assumption Identification of the eRS difference operators with antisymmetric surface-defect insertions in the index.
    This physical identification is established prior art (Refs. [19-21]) and is assumed throughout.
invented entities (2)
  • Hole-space operators K_h and Q_h with eta_a weights
    purpose: Provide a complementary free-fermion representation of the stable coefficients c_k; eta_a chosen so Tr(K_h^n Q_h) = -c_{n+1}.
    These are auxiliary mathematical constructs defined after the exact coefficients are known; they carry no independent falsifiable content.
  • KK5 endpoint completion (D3-D3'-KK5 brane array)
    purpose: Candidate microscopic completion of the eRS defect GLSM, intended to reduce (4,4) to (2,2) degrees of freedom.
    The paper explicitly labels it a candidate, not a derivation; no independent handle such as a predicted index or spectrum is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exact Finite-$N$ eRS Surface-Defect Indices and Giant-Graviton Corrections in $\mathcal N=4$ SYM." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZYZZHFEH

@misc{pith2026260801349,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exact Finite-$N$ eRS Surface-Defect Indices and Giant-Graviton Corrections in $\mathcal N=4$ SYM},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZYZZHFEH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.01349}
}
abstract

We study the finite-$N$ superconformal index of four-dimensional $\mathcal N=4$ $U(N)$ Yang--Mills theory with antisymmetric elliptic Ruijsenaars--Schneider (eRS) insertions. The eRS insertions turn the uninserted index, which is an unweighted spectral sum, into a family of protected observables weighted by eRS eigenvalues and therefore retain finite-$N$ information not determined by the ordinary index alone On the codimension-one locus $t=q$, $p=uv$, the eRS operators become conjugate to free shifts, allowing us to rewrite the self-glued index as a bilateral free-fermion determinant. This gives exact finite-$N$ formulas for all antisymmetric ranks and makes the $u\leftrightarrow v$ structure manifest. On the boundary $v=0$, we determine the complete stable tower of pure $u^{kN}$ defect-resolved corrections, while the bilateral two-charge formula captures the reflected $v^{kN}$ sectors and mixed $u$--$v$ contributions, including the first mixed giant-graviton sector. We also develop the expansion away from the solvable locus through second order. Finally, we reproduce the ordinary one-giant coefficient from a maximal-D3 determinant and identify the additional microscopic input required to complete the bulk derivation of the defect correction.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [32]

    Superconformal index forN = 4Super Yang–Mills and elliptic Macdonald polynomials

    Gao-fu Ren and Min-xin Huang. Superconformal index forN = 4Super Yang–Mills and elliptic Macdonald polynomials. 2026. arXiv:2604.00924

    arXiv 2026

  2. [1]

    Counting chiral primaries in N = 1, d=4 superconformal field theories.Nucl

    Christian Romelsberger. Counting chiral primaries in N = 1, d=4 superconformal field theories.Nucl. Phys. B, 747:329–353, 2006. doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.03.037

    doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.03.037 2006

  3. [2]

    An Index for 4 dimensional super conformal theories.Commun

    Justin Kinney, Juan Martin Maldacena, Shiraz Minwalla, and Suvrat Raju. An Index for 4 dimensional super conformal theories.Commun. Math. Phys., 275:209–254, 2007. doi: 10.1007/s00220-007-0258-7. 36

    doi:10.1007/s00220-007-0258-7 2007

  4. [3]

    Invasion of the giant gravitons from anti-de Sitter space.JHEP, 06:008, 2000

    John McGreevy, Leonard Susskind, and Nicolaos Toumbas. Invasion of the giant gravitons from anti-de Sitter space.JHEP, 06:008, 2000. doi: 10.1088/1126-6708/2000/06/008

    doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2000/06/008

  5. [4]

    Giant Gravitons from Holomorphic Surfaces.JHEP, 11:027, 2000

    Andrei Mikhailov. Giant Gravitons from Holomorphic Surfaces.JHEP, 11:027, 2000. doi: 10.1088/1126-6708/2000/11/027

    work page doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2000/11/027 2000

  6. [5]

    Supersymmetric States ofN = 4Yang–Mills from Giant Gravitons.JHEP, 12:006, 2007

    Indranil Biswas, Davide Gaiotto, Subhaneil Lahiri, and Shiraz Minwalla. Supersymmetric States ofN = 4Yang–Mills from Giant Gravitons.JHEP, 12:006, 2007. doi: 10.1088/ 1126-6708/2007/12/006

    work page 2007

  7. [6]

    Schur index of theN = 4 U(N)supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory via the AdS/CFT correspondence.Phys

    Reona Arai, Shota Fujiwara, Yosuke Imamura, and Tatsuya Mori. Schur index of theN = 4 U(N)supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory via the AdS/CFT correspondence.Phys. Rev. D, 101:086017, 2020. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.101.086017

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.086017 2020

  8. [7]

    Finite-N superconformal index via the AdS/CFT correspondence.PTEP, 2021:123B05, 2021

    Yosuke Imamura. Finite-N superconformal index via the AdS/CFT correspondence.PTEP, 2021:123B05, 2021. doi: 10.1093/ptep/ptab141

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptab141 2021

Show all 41 references
  1. [8]

    The giant graviton expansion.JHEP, 08:025, 2024

    Davide Gaiotto and Ji Hoon Lee. The giant graviton expansion.JHEP, 08:025, 2024. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2024)025

    2024 doi

  2. [9]

    Unitary matrix models, free fermion ensembles, and the giant graviton expansion.Pure Appl

    Sameer Murthy. Unitary matrix models, free fermion ensembles, and the giant graviton expansion.Pure Appl. Math. Quart., 19:299–340, 2023. doi: 10.4310/PAMQ.2023.v19.n1.a12

    2023 doi

  3. [10]

    Liu and Neville Joshua Rajappa

    James T. Liu and Neville Joshua Rajappa. FiniteN indices and the giant graviton expansion. JHEP, 04:078, 2023. doi: 10.1007/JHEP04(2023)078

    2023 doi

  4. [11]

    Comments on the Giant-Graviton Expansion of the Superconformal Index

    Dan Stefan Eniceicu. Comments on the Giant-Graviton Expansion of the Superconformal Index. 2023

    2023

  5. [12]

    Giant graviton expansion from eigenvalue instantons

    Yiming Chen, Raghu Mahajan, and Haifeng Tang. Giant graviton expansion from eigenvalue instantons. 2024

    2024

  6. [13]

    Liu, and Neville Joshua Rajappa

    Nizar Ezroura, James T. Liu, and Neville Joshua Rajappa. Analytic continuation and the giant graviton expansion. 2024

    2024

  7. [14]

    The giant graviton expansion in AdS5×S 5.SciPost Phys., 17:098, 2024

    Giorgos Eleftheriou, Sameer Murthy, and Martí Rosselló. The giant graviton expansion in AdS5×S 5.SciPost Phys., 17:098, 2024. doi: 10.21468/SciPostPhys.17.4.098

    2024 doi

  8. [15]

    LargeN Schur index ofN = 4SYM from semiclassical D3 brane

    Matteo Beccaria and Alejandro Cabo-Bizet. LargeN Schur index ofN = 4SYM from semiclassical D3 brane. 2024. arXiv:2402.12172

    2024 arXiv

  9. [16]

    On the brane expansion of the Schur index

    Matteo Beccaria and Alejandro Cabo-Bizet. On the brane expansion of the Schur index. JHEP, 08:073, 2023. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2023)073

    2023 doi

  10. [17]

    Giant graviton expansion of Schur index and quasimodular forms.JHEP, 05:282, 2024

    Matteo Beccaria and Alejandro Cabo-Bizet. Giant graviton expansion of Schur index and quasimodular forms.JHEP, 05:282, 2024. doi: 10.1007/JHEP05(2024)282

    2024 doi

  11. [18]

    Simple-Sum Giant Graviton Expansions for Orbifolds and Orientifolds

    Shota Fujiwara, Yosuke Imamura, Tatsuya Mori, Shuichi Murayama, and Daisuke Yokoyama. Simple-Sum Giant Graviton Expansions for Orbifolds and Orientifolds. 2023. arXiv:2310.03332

    2023 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Davide Gaiotto, Leonardo Rastelli, and Shlomo S. Razamat. Bootstrapping the supercon- formal index with surface defects.JHEP, 01:022, 2013. doi: 10.1007/JHEP01(2013)022

    2013 doi

  13. [20]

    Alday, Mathew Bullimore, Martin Fluder, and Lotte Hollands

    Luis F. Alday, Mathew Bullimore, Martin Fluder, and Lotte Hollands. Surface defects, the superconformal index and q-deformed Yang–Mills.JHEP, 10:018, 2013. doi: 10.1007/ JHEP10(2013)018. 37

    2013

  14. [21]

    The superconformal index and an elliptic algebra of surface defects.JHEP, 10:062, 2014

    Mathew Bullimore, Martin Fluder, Lotte Hollands, and Paul Richmond. The superconformal index and an elliptic algebra of surface defects.JHEP, 10:062, 2014. doi: 10.1007/ JHEP10(2014)062

    2014

  15. [22]

    2d Index and Surface operators.JHEP, 03:080, 2014

    Abhijit Gadde and Sergei Gukov. 2d Index and Surface operators.JHEP, 03:080, 2014. doi: 10.1007/JHEP03(2014)080

    2014 doi

  16. [23]

    M2-brane surface operators and gauge theory dualities in Toda.JHEP, 04:183, 2016

    Jaume Gomis and Bruno Le Floch. M2-brane surface operators and gauge theory dualities in Toda.JHEP, 04:183, 2016. doi: 10.1007/JHEP04(2016)183

    2016 doi

  17. [24]

    Constable, Johanna Erdmenger, Zachary Guralnik, and Ingo Kirsch

    Neil R. Constable, Johanna Erdmenger, Zachary Guralnik, and Ingo Kirsch. Intersecting D3- branes and holography.Phys. Rev. D, 68:106007, 2003. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.68.106007

    2003 doi

  18. [25]

    The Field Theory of Intersecting D3-branes

    Eric Mintun, Joseph Polchinski, and Sichun Sun. The Field Theory of Intersecting D3-branes. JHEP, 08:118, 2015. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2015)118

    2015 doi

  19. [26]

    4D and 2D superconformal index with surface operator

    Yu Nakayama. 4D and 2D superconformal index with surface operator. 2011. arXiv:1105.4883

    2011 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Holographic Tests for Giant Graviton Expansion

    Seunggyu Kim and Eunwoo Lee. Holographic Tests for Giant Graviton Expansion. 2024

    2024

  21. [28]

    Schur line defect correlators and giant graviton expansion.JHEP, 06:088,

    Matteo Beccaria. Schur line defect correlators and giant graviton expansion.JHEP, 06:088,

  22. [29]

    Giant graviton expansion for general Wilson line operator indices.JHEP, 09:202, 2024

    Yosuke Imamura, Akihiro Sei, and Daisuke Yokoyama. Giant graviton expansion for general Wilson line operator indices.JHEP, 09:202, 2024. doi: 10.1007/JHEP09(2024)202

    2024 doi

  23. [30]

    The exact Schur index ofN = 4SYM.JHEP, 11:210, 2015

    Jun Bourdier, Nadav Drukker, and Jan Felix. The exact Schur index ofN = 4SYM.JHEP, 11:210, 2015. doi: 10.1007/JHEP11(2015)210

    2015 doi

  24. [31]

    Deformed Schur indices and Macdonald polynomials

    Yasuyuki Hatsuda. Deformed Schur indices and Macdonald polynomials. 2025. arXiv:2503.03952

    2025 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Hee-Cheol Kim, Anton Nedelin, and Shlomo S. Razamat. On Ruijsenaars–Schneider spectrum from superconformal indices and ramified instantons.JHEP, 02:010, 2025. doi: 10.1007/JHEP02(2025)010

    2025 doi

  26. [34]

    Unitary matrix models, quantized symmetric functions and spin chain

    Gao-fu Ren. Unitary matrix models, quantized symmetric functions and spin chain. 2026

    2026

  27. [35]

    Correlation function of Schur process with application to local geometry of a random three-dimensional Young diagram.J

    Andrei Okounkov and Nikolai Reshetikhin. Correlation function of Schur process with application to local geometry of a random three-dimensional Young diagram.J. Am. Math. Soc., 16:581–603, 2003. doi: 10.1090/S0894-0347-03-00425-9

    2003 doi

  28. [36]

    Macdonald processes.Probab

    Alexei Borodin and Ivan Corwin. Macdonald processes.Probab. Theory Relat. Fields, 158: 225–400, 2014. doi: 10.1007/s00222-013-0482-3

    2014 doi

  29. [37]

    Correlation functions of the Schur process through Macdonald difference operators.J

    Amol Aggarwal. Correlation functions of the Schur process through Macdonald difference operators.J. Combin. Theory Ser. A, 131:88–118, 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.jcta.2014.11.009

    2015 doi

  30. [38]

    A determinant of the Chudnovskys generalizing the elliptic Frobenius–Stickelberger–Cauchy determinantal identity.Electron

    Tewodros Amdeberhan. A determinant of the Chudnovskys generalizing the elliptic Frobenius–Stickelberger–Cauchy determinantal identity.Electron. J. Combin., 7(1):N6,

  31. [39]

    Kronecker theta function and a decomposition theorem for theta functions I

    Zhi-Guo Liu. Kronecker theta function and a decomposition theorem for theta functions I. 2020. 38

    2020

  32. [40]

    Equal-charge projection of theN = 4index: exact large- N formula and finite-rankU(3)coefficients

    Miguel Tierz. Equal-charge projection of theN = 4index: exact large- N formula and finite-rankU(3)coefficients. 2026. arXiv:2607.03735. 39

    2026 arXiv

  33. [2024]

    doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2024)088

    2024 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.