Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 73 references

Exact algorithm expresses U(N) singlet Hamiltonian entries as polynomials in N

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 03:54 UTC pith:VBMSZMF6

load-bearing objection The one-matrix algorithm is real, validated, and reusable; the multi-matrix promise is a formal reduction that the abstract oversells. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.13725 v2 pith:VBMSZMF6 submitted 2026-07-15 hep-th math-phmath.MPquant-ph

An exact algorithm for U(N) matrix models in the gauge-invariant singlet sector

Enrico M. Brehm , Jean Cazalis This is my paper
classification hep-th math-phmath.MPquant-ph
keywords U(N) matrix modelsgauge-invariant singlet sectorSchur polynomialsrestricted Schur polynomialssymmetric group charactersdouble cosetsHamiltonian truncationnon-planar dynamics
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper claims that in the gauge-invariant (singlet) sector of bosonic U(N) matrix models, every Hamiltonian matrix element can be computed exactly, as a closed-form polynomial in the rank N, by reducing the problem to double cosets of symmetric-group subgroups and evaluating symmetric-group character sums. This is achieved in a basis of Schur polynomials (one matrix) or restricted Schur polynomials (several matrices) that diagonalizes the free Hamiltonian and organizes the Hilbert space by excitation number. If the claim holds, the truncated Hamiltonian can be assembled once from precomputed group-theoretic data and then diagonalized for any N and any coupling constants, giving controlled numerical access to finite-N, non-planar singlet dynamics that is hard to reach by other methods. The one-matrix implementation is validated against the exact mapping to N non-interacting fermions, with rapid convergence of low-lying eigenvalues as the cutoff grows. The multi-matrix extension is outlined but not demonstrated at the same level; the authors identify restricted characters of the symmetric group as the central bottleneck.

Core claim

The central claim is that matrix elements ⟨R|H|S⟩ (one matrix) and ⟨R,r,a,b|H|S,s,c,d⟩ (multiple matrices) reduce to sums over double cosets S_n\S_p/S_m, with each contribution evaluated by Fourier analysis on the center of the group algebra or on the centralizer algebra of a Young subgroup. The final expressions, equations (3.30) and (3.55), express the matrix elements as products of character sums: ordinary irreducible characters of S_n in the one-matrix case, and restricted characters of S_n in the multi-matrix case, multiplied by explicit powers of N arising from loop counting. The N-dependence and the coupling dependence factor completely: the group-theoretic weights are independent of

What carries the argument

The machinery is Schur-Weyl duality paired with double-coset reduction. The singlet basis is built from Young projectors P_R (elements of the center of the group algebra C[S_n]) for one matrix, and from centralizer-basis elements P^{R,r}_{ab} for several matrices; these are contractions of creation operators weighted by characters of the symmetric group. A matrix element is first turned into a sum over permutations via Wick's theorem, then the summand is shown to be constant on double cosets S_n \ S_p / S_m, so the sum collapses to a few orbit representatives. Each representative contributes a trace of the form tr((P_R⊗P_S)·τ) or its restricted analogue; expanding the projectors in class sum

Load-bearing premise

The multi-matrix claim requires restricted characters of the symmetric group to be computable at practically useful cutoffs; the paper provides no new algorithm for them and notes current methods stall around cutoff 14, so the D>1 extension cannot yet deliver the advertised finite-N access.

What would settle it

Take the D=2 commutator-squared interaction at N=2 with a small cutoff, compute the Hamiltonian matrix by direct Wick contractions in the full Fock-space singlet sector, and compare with formula (3.55) evaluated using restricted characters computed by an independent eigenvalue method; any mismatch in a single matrix element falsifies the multi-matrix formula. For the one-matrix formula, a mismatch between the Λ=20 spectrum and the exact fermion spectrum beyond truncation error would falsify it; the paper's own convergence plots already show the expected agreement.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • For the one-matrix model, the symbolic Hamiltonian at cutoff Λ can be diagonalized for any N without re-running the group-theoretic computation; the paper demonstrates convergence to the fermion-mapping spectrum at Λ=20 for N up to 20 (within 0.8% for N≤15).
  • The same precomputed data serve any coupling and mass, turning parameter scans into fast sparse eigenvalue problems.
  • For multiple matrices, matrix elements factor into restricted-character sums; if those characters can be supplied, the commutator-squared interaction (the bosonic part of BFSS/BMN) becomes accessible for finite N and finite coupling.
  • The framework also yields transition amplitudes and time evolution in the singlet sector, since all Hamiltonian matrix elements are available.
  • Because entries are polynomials in N, the same symbolic matrix encodes all N at once, so 1/N and non-planar corrections can be read off directly from its coefficients.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If an efficient restricted-character algorithm emerges (analogous to Murnaghan-Nakayama), the multi-matrix extension could move from outline to practice and open a route to finite-N, finite-coupling studies of holographic matrix models beyond the planar limit.
  • The polynomial-in-N structure suggests extracting 1/N corrections by Taylor-expanding the eigenvalues of the symbolic matrix around N=∞, effectively turning the code into a source of non-planar data; the paper does not pursue this.
  • A natural test is to compare the D=2 commutator-squared spectrum at small N against existing bootstrap or tensor-network results; agreement would certify the restricted-character route.
  • The SU(N) generalization is explicitly left open; since BFSS/BMN use SU(N), bridging the tracelessness constraint (e.g. via penalty terms) would be the most consequential extension, but the paper only sketches it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a group-theoretic algorithm for computing matrix elements of gauge-invariant observables in the U(N)-singlet sector of bosonic matrix models. In the one-matrix case, the singlet basis is the Schur polynomial basis and matrix elements of the quartic interaction are reduced to sums over double cosets of symmetric-group subgroups, followed by character sums; the final entries are closed-form polynomials in N. The authors implement this one-matrix algorithm, validate it against the exact mapping to N non-interacting fermions, and report good convergence of low-lying eigenvalues. For multiple matrices, they propose an analogous construction based on restricted Schur polynomials and restricted characters of the symmetric group, but this part is not implemented and depends on restricted-character data that the paper states are currently unavailable beyond cutoff Λ=14.

Significance. If the one-matrix part stands, it is a valuable contribution: the matrix elements are derived from first principles, contain no fitted parameters, are assembled once as polynomials in N, and are checked against an independent exact method. The public code and reproducible convergence data are additional strengths. The multi-matrix part, however, is a formal reduction rather than a delivered algorithm, because its central ingredient — restricted characters of S_n — is neither computed nor supplied with a new algorithm. The paper is transparent about this bottleneck, but the title, abstract, and final sentence claim more than is currently realized.

major comments (2)
  1. [Appendix B.7 and Eqs. (3.33), (3.56)] The multi-matrix algorithm is conditional on the restricted characters χ^{R,r}_{ab}(Ω) of S_n restricted to S_n. The text itself states that no Murnaghan–Nakayama-type algorithm is known and that existing methods reach only cutoff Λ=14 (Section 3.2, refs. [50,51]). No new restricted-character algorithm, implementation, or multi-matrix numerical test is supplied. Thus Eq. (3.55) is a formal expression, not a working algorithm at useful cutoffs, and the abstract's claim of 'direct access to finite-N, finite-coupling dynamics' is unsupported for D>1. Please either narrow the title/abstract/conclusions to the one-matrix algorithm with a conditional multi-matrix reduction, or provide a genuine restricted-character computation.
  2. [Appendix B.7 and Eqs. (3.33), (3.56)] The complexity analysis relies on the 'observed minimal coset-count bounds' in Eq. (B.55), checked only for n,n' up to 30 and explicitly left without proof. The claimed efficiency ('at most quadratic in n', and ultimately O(n^{-1} exp(π√(6n)))) depends on this bound. Since complexity is a central advertised advantage, this should either be proved or clearly labeled as a conjecture, with the resulting complexity stated as conditional.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (3.27)] In the evaluation of tr(P_Sρ), the displayed factor |C_ρ| appears to be inverted: the standard average over conjugates gives (1/|C_ρ|) tr([β][ρ]), not |C_ρ| tr([β][ρ]). The final formula (3.30) is consistent with the corrected version, so this is likely a typo, but it should be fixed for reproducibility.
  2. [Figure 9] The figure captions state g = 1.0 for all N, while the text sets the coupling to g^2/2 = m^2/N (with m=2). These are inconsistent (e.g. for N=12, g≈0.816, not 1.0). Please reconcile the captions with the stated mean-field choice.
  3. [Appendix B.7] The text first says the number of coset representatives is 'at most quartic in n' and later says the optimized choice is 'at most quadratic in n'. This is confusing; please clarify that the quartic bound applies to a fixed expansion and the quadratic bound to the optimized choice between (3.30) and (3.31).
  4. [Section 3.2] Minor wording: 'the cost of computing one restricted characters' should be 'one restricted character' or 'all restricted characters for the sector'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the one-matrix derivation is self-contained and validated against an independent fermion mapping; the multi-matrix bottleneck is a stated limitation, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is not circular. Matrix elements are obtained by exact group-theoretic reduction: Wick contractions, double-coset enumeration, and character sums, culminating in formulas (3.30) and (3.55). No parameter is fitted to the quantities being predicted. The one-matrix implementation is validated against the exact fermion mapping reviewed in Appendix E, which is derived independently via diagonalization and the Vandermonde measure; the validation is an external benchmark rather than an input to the algorithm. The choice of mean-field coupling is a test setting, not used to determine matrix elements. The multi-matrix extension is explicitly conditioned on the availability of restricted characters of the symmetric group; the paper states that 'no algorithm comparable to the Murnaghan–Nakayama rule is known' and that existing methods reach only cutoff Λ = 14. This is an acknowledged computational limitation, not a circular step: the formula (3.55) is a formal reduction that would become effective if such characters were supplied. Self-citations appear only as background notation or context, not as load-bearing justification for the main derivation. The unproven coset-count bound (B.55) affects complexity estimates, not the correctness or circularity of the matrix-element formulas. Overall, the derivation does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

The one-matrix algorithm relies on standard representation theory, Wick's theorem, and a known fermion mapping; the multi-matrix algorithm additionally depends on the availability of restricted characters, which the paper does not provide, and the complexity estimate depends on an unproven coset-count bound. No free parameters are fitted to data; physical mass m and coupling g are inputs.

axioms (8)
  • standard math Schur–Weyl duality: End_{U(N)}((C^N)^{⊗n}) is generated by S_n, with decomposition V^{⊗n} = ⊕_{R⊢n, ℓ(R)≤N} V^R_{U(N)} ⊗ V^R_{S_n} (eq. 2.13).
    Invoked throughout §2.2 to identify U(N)-invariant tensors with elements of C[S_n]; standard theorem from [33], Appendix C.
  • standard math The Schur/restricted Schur states form complete orthogonal bases with normalizations (2.22)/(2.33).
    The paper proves orthogonality for one matrix in §2.2; for multiple matrices it relies on cited results [35,42,43] without reproducing the proof.
  • standard math Wick's theorem in the matrix-entry basis (eq. D.56).
    Used to evaluate vacuum expectation values in (2.24) and (3.8); proven by induction in Appendix D.5, so independent of the central claim.
  • standard math First fundamental theorem of invariant theory: U(N)-invariant polynomials are generated by traces (ref. [33]).
    Justifies restriction to trace words for observables in §1.2 and Appendix D.3.
  • domain assumption One-matrix singlet sector maps exactly to N non-interacting fermions via the Δ(λ) transform (Appendix E, ref. [36]).
    This is the validation benchmark; it is a known exact mapping, not re-derived here. If this mapping were wrong, the numerical validation would lose its anchor.
  • domain assumption Antinormal-ordering coefficients in Tables 2 and 3 are correct.
    Obtained via Mathematica symbolic computation and stated without proof; the entire Hamiltonian assembly depends on these decompositions of tr(X^4) and tr([X1,X2]^2).
  • domain assumption Restricted characters χ^{R,r}_{ab}(Ω) can be computed to the needed sector/cutoff for the multi-matrix algorithm.
    The paper supplies no algorithm for them, says no Murnaghan–Nakayama analogue is known, and cites methods limited to cutoff 14 (§3.2). The multi-matrix formula (3.55) is conditional on this.
  • ad hoc to paper The observed minimal coset-count bounds (B.55) hold for all n,n'.
    Used to state complexity as O(n^2 p(n)^3); the authors explicitly leave the proof for future work, so the complexity claims are not fully certified.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 41474 in / 14315 out tokens · 141780 ms · 2026-08-02T03:54:09.966531+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Matrix models appear as fundamental descriptions of M-theory and D-brane dynamics, and via the gauge/gravity duality their gauge-invariant, or singlet, sector describes the purely gravitational degrees of freedom in the holographic dual. We present a new exact algorithm for computing observables of bosonic U(N) matrix models in the gauge-invariant singlet sector. This sector is spanned by an orthogonal basis of Schur polynomials (for a single matrix) and restricted Schur polynomials (for multiple matrices), which diagonalizes the free Hamiltonian and provides a natural truncation of the Hilbert space by excitation number. Matrix elements of the interaction Hamiltonian, or any gauge-invariant observable, are evaluated through a group-theoretic reduction to cosets and double cosets of suitable subgroups of the symmetric group, together with character sums on the symmetric group. The resulting entries are closed-form polynomials in the gauge-group rank N, assembled from group-theoretic data that are precomputed once and can be reused for any N and any coupling constants. We validate the one-matrix implementation against the exact mapping to N non-interacting fermions, demonstrating rapid convergence of the low-lying spectrum with the cutoff. The multi-matrix extension is outlined; its main bottleneck is the computation of restricted characters of the symmetric group, for which no algorithm comparable to the Murnaghan--Nakayama rule is currently known. The framework gives direct access to finite-N, finite-coupling dynamics of gauge-invariant states and opens a new computational window on the non-planar regime of holographic matrix models.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Maldacena,The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv

    J.M. Maldacena,The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231 [hep-th/9711200]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  2. [2]

    Maldacena,A simple quantum system that describes a black hole,2303.11534

    J. Maldacena,A simple quantum system that describes a black hole,2303.11534

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  3. [3]

    Banks, W

    T. Banks, W. Fischler, S.H. Shenker and L. Susskind,M theory as a matrix model: A Conjecture,Phys. Rev. D55(1997) 5112 [hep-th/9610043]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  4. [4]

    Seiberg,Why is the matrix model correct?,Phys

    N. Seiberg,Why is the matrix model correct?,Phys. Rev. Lett.79(1997) 3577 [hep-th/9710009]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  5. [5]

    Berenstein, J.M

    D.E. Berenstein, J.M. Maldacena and H.S. Nastase,Strings in flat space and pp waves from N=4 superYang-Mills,JHEP04(2002) 013 [hep-th/0202021]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  6. [6]

    Dasgupta, M.M

    K. Dasgupta, M.M. Sheikh-Jabbari and M. Van Raamsdonk,Matrix perturbation theory for M theory on a PP wave,JHEP05(2002) 056 [hep-th/0205185]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  7. [7]

    Becker and M

    K. Becker and M. Becker,A Two loop test of M(atrix) theory,Nucl. Phys. B506(1997) 48 [hep-th/9705091]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  8. [8]

    Becker, M

    K. Becker, M. Becker, J. Polchinski and A.A. Tseytlin,Higher order graviton scattering in M(atrix) theory,Phys. Rev. D56(1997) R3174 [hep-th/9706072]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  9. [9]

    Helling, J

    R. Helling, J. Plefka, M. Serone and A. Waldron,Three graviton scattering in M theory, Nucl. Phys. B559(1999) 184 [hep-th/9905183]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  10. [10]

    Herderschee and J

    A. Herderschee and J. Maldacena,Three point amplitudes in matrix theory,J. Phys. A57 (2024) 165401 [2312.12592]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    Banks, W

    T. Banks, W. Fischler, I.R. Klebanov and L. Susskind,Schwarzschild black holes from matrix theory,Phys. Rev. Lett.80(1998) 226 [hep-th/9709091]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  12. [12]

    Banks, W

    T. Banks, W. Fischler, I.R. Klebanov and L. Susskind,Schwarzschild black holes in matrix theory. 2.,JHEP01(1998) 008 [hep-th/9711005]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  13. [13]

    Klebanov and L

    I.R. Klebanov and L. Susskind,Schwarzschild black holes in various dimensions from matrix theory,Phys. Lett. B416(1998) 62 [hep-th/9709108]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  14. [14]

    Halyo,Six-dimensional Schwarzschild black holes in M(atrix) theory,hep-th/9709225

    E. Halyo,Six-dimensional Schwarzschild black holes in M(atrix) theory,hep-th/9709225

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  15. [15]

    Horowitz and E.J

    G.T. Horowitz and E.J. Martinec,Comments on black holes in matrix theory,Phys. Rev. D 57(1998) 4935 [hep-th/9710217]. – 56 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  16. [16]

    Kabat and W

    D.N. Kabat and W. Taylor,Spherical membranes in matrix theory,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2(1998) 181 [hep-th/9711078]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  17. [17]

    Hyakutake,Black hole and fuzzy objects in the BFSS matrix model,Phys

    Y. Hyakutake,Black hole and fuzzy objects in the BFSS matrix model,Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 046023 [1801.07869]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  18. [18]

    Du and V

    H. Du and V. Sahakian,Emergent geometry from stochastic dynamics, or Hawking evaporation in M(atrix) theory,JHEP03(2019) 061 [1812.05020]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  19. [19]

    Miller, A

    N. Miller, A. Strominger, A. Tropper and T. Wang,Soft gravitons in the BFSS matrix model, JHEP11(2023) 174 [2208.14547]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  20. [20]

    Tropper and T

    A. Tropper and T. Wang,Lorentz symmetry and IR structure of the BFSS matrix model, JHEP07(2023) 150 [2303.14200]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  21. [21]

    Herderschee and J

    A. Herderschee and J. Maldacena,Soft Theorems in Matrix Theory,2312.15111

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  22. [22]

    Shin and K

    H. Shin and K. Yoshida,Thermodynamic behavior of fuzzy membranes in PP-wave matrix model,Phys. Lett. B627(2005) 188 [hep-th/0507029]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  23. [23]

    Asplund, D

    C. Asplund, D. Berenstein and D. Trancanelli,Evidence for fast thermalization in the plane-wave matrix model,Phys. Rev. Lett.107(2011) 171602 [1104.5469]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  24. [24]

    Brady and V

    L. Brady and V. Sahakian,Scrambling with Matrix Black Holes,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 046003 [1306.5200]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  25. [25]

    Costa, L

    M.S. Costa, L. Greenspan, J. Penedones and J. Santos,Thermodynamics of the BMN matrix model at strong coupling,JHEP03(2015) 069 [1411.5541]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  26. [26]

    Pramodh and V

    S. Pramodh and V. Sahakian,From Black Hole to Qubits: Evidence of Fast Scrambling in BMN theory,JHEP07(2015) 067 [1412.2396]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  27. [27]

    Asano, V.G

    Y. Asano, V.G. Filev, S. Kov´ aˇ cik and D. O’Connor,The non-perturbative phase diagram of the BMN matrix model,JHEP07(2018) 152 [1805.05314]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  28. [28]

    Asano, S

    Y. Asano, S. Kov´ aˇ cik and D. O’Connor,The Confining Transition in the Bosonic BMN Matrix Model,JHEP06(2020) 174 [2001.03749]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  29. [29]

    Axenides, E

    M. Axenides, E. Floratos and G. Linardopoulos,M2-brane Dynamics in the Classical Limit of the BMN Matrix Model,Phys. Lett. B773(2017) 265 [1707.02878]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  30. [30]

    C. Gray, V. Sahakian and W. Warfield,Emergent geometry through quantum entanglement in Matrix theories,JHEP21(2020) 072 [2103.06941]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  31. [31]

    Gharibyan, M

    H. Gharibyan, M. Hanada, M. Honda and J. Liu,Toward simulating superstring/M-theory on a quantum computer,JHEP07(2021) 140 [2011.06573]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  32. [32]

    Maldacena and A

    J. Maldacena and A. Milekhin,To gauge or not to gauge?,JHEP04(2018) 084 [1802.00428]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  33. [33]

    Goodman and N.R

    R. Goodman and N.R. Wallach,Symmetry, Representations, and Invariants, vol. 255 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer New York, New York, NY (2009)

    2009

  34. [34]

    Brehm, Y

    E.M. Brehm, Y. Guo, K. Jansen and E. Rinaldi,Simulating matrix models with tensor networks,Journal of High Energy Physics2025(2025) 116

    2025

  35. [35]

    R.d.M. Koch, M. Kim and A.L. Mahu,A pedagogical introduction to restricted Schur polynomials with applications to heavy operators, Sept., 2024,2409.15751

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Br´ ezin, C

    E. Br´ ezin, C. Itzykson, G. Parisi and J.B. Zuber,Planar diagrams,Communications in Mathematical Physics59(1978) 35. – 57 –

    1978

  37. [37]

    Han, S.A

    X. Han, S.A. Hartnoll and J. Kruthoff,Bootstrapping Matrix Quantum Mechanics,Phys. Rev. Lett.125(2020) 041601 [2004.10212]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  38. [38]

    Corley, A

    S. Corley, A. Jevicki and S. Ramgoolam,Exact Correlators of Giant Gravitons from dual N=4 SYM, Feb., 2002,hep-th/0111222

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  39. [39]

    James, A

    G.D. James, A. Kerber, P. Cohn and G. Robinson,The Representation Theory of the Symmetric Group, no. volume 16 in Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1984)

    1984

  40. [40]

    Sagan,The Symmetric Group: Representations, Combinatorial Algorithms, and Symmetric Functions, no

    B.E. Sagan,The Symmetric Group: Representations, Combinatorial Algorithms, and Symmetric Functions, no. 203 in Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer, New York, NY, second edition ed. (2010)

    2010

  41. [41]

    Mattioli and S

    P. Mattioli and S. Ramgoolam,Permutation centralizer algebras and multimatrix invariants, Physical Review D93(2016) 065040

    2016

  42. [42]

    Bhattacharyya, S

    R. Bhattacharyya, S. Collins and R.d.M. Koch,Exact multi-matrix correlators,Journal of High Energy Physics2008(2008) 044

    2008

  43. [43]

    Bhattacharyya, R.d.M

    R. Bhattacharyya, R.d.M. Koch and M. Stephanou,Exact multi-restricted Schur polynomial correlators,Journal of High Energy Physics2008(2008) 101

    2008

  44. [44]

    Koch and A

    R.d.M. Koch and A. Jevicki,Structure of loop space at finite N,Journal of High Energy Physics2025(2025) 11

    2025

  45. [45]

    R.d.M. Koch, M. Kim and H.J.R. Van Zyl,From symmetry to structure: Gauge-invariant operators in multi-matrix quantum mechanics,Journal of High Energy Physics2026(2026) 31. [46]GAP – Groups, Algorithms, and Programming, Version 4.14.0, Dec., 2024

    2026

  46. [47]

    Barvinok,Asymptotic Estimates for the Number of Contingency Tables, Integer Flows, and Volumes of Transportation Polytopes,International Mathematics Research Notices2009 (2009) 348

    A. Barvinok,Asymptotic Estimates for the Number of Contingency Tables, Integer Flows, and Volumes of Transportation Polytopes,International Mathematics Research Notices2009 (2009) 348

    2009

  47. [48]

    Barvinok and J

    A. Barvinok and J. Hartigan,An asymptotic formula for the number of non-negative integer matrices with prescribed row and column sums,Transactions of the American Mathematical Society364(2012) 4323

    2012

  48. [49]

    Mathematica

    Wolfram Research, Inc., “Mathematica.” Wolfram Research, Inc., 2025

    2025

  49. [50]

    Padellaro, S

    A. Padellaro, S. Ramgoolam and R. Suzuki,Eigenvalue systems for integer orthogonal bases of multi-matrix invariants at finite N,Journal of High Energy Physics2025(2025) 111

    2025

  50. [51]

    Ramgoolam,Finite-dimensional algebras, gauge-string duality and thermodynamics, Feb., 2026,2602.04845

    S. Ramgoolam,Finite-dimensional algebras, gauge-string duality and thermodynamics, Feb., 2026,2602.04845

    arXiv 2026

  51. [52]

    De Comarmond, R.d.M

    V. De Comarmond, R.d.M. Koch, and K. Jefferies,Surprisingly Simple Spectra, Journal of High Energy Physics2011(2011) 6

    2011

  52. [53]

    Koch and S

    R.d.M. Koch and S. Ramgoolam,A double coset ansatz for integrability in AdS/CFT, Journal of High Energy Physics2012(2012) 83

    2012

  53. [54]

    Pasukonis and S

    J. Pasukonis and S. Ramgoolam,From counting to construction of BPS states inN= 4 SYM,Journal of High Energy Physics2011(2011) 78

    2011

  54. [55]

    Dolan,Counting BPS operators in N=4 SYM,Nuclear Physics B790(2008) 432

    F.A. Dolan,Counting BPS operators in N=4 SYM,Nuclear Physics B790(2008) 432. – 58 –

    2008

  55. [56]

    D’Hoker, A.V

    E. D’Hoker, A.V. Ryzhov, P. Heslop and P. Howe,Systematics of quarter BPS operators in N= 4 SYM,Journal of High Energy Physics2003(2003) 038

    2003

  56. [57]

    Ramgoolam, M.C

    S. Ramgoolam, M.C. Wilson and A. Zahabi,Quiver asymptotics:N= 1free chiral ring, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical53(2020) 105401

    2020

  57. [58]

    Lei and S

    Y. Lei and S. Ramgoolam,Critical dimensions and small cycle dominance from all-orders asymptotics ofd-matrix theory, Mar., 2026,2603.29610

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  58. [59]

    Corley and S

    S. Corley and S. Ramgoolam,Finite factorization equations and sum rules for BPS correlators inN = 4SYM theory,Nuclear Physics B641(2002) 131

    2002

  59. [60]

    R.d.M. Koch, M. Dessein, D. Giataganas and C. Mathwin,Giant graviton oscillators, Journal of High Energy Physics2011(2011) 9

    2011

  60. [61]

    R.d.M. Koch, P. Diaz and N. Nokwara,Restricted Schur polynomials for fermions and integrability in the su(2|3) sector,Journal of High Energy Physics2013(2013) 173

    2013

  61. [62]

    Brown,Half-BPS SU(N) correlators inN= 4 SYM,Journal of High Energy Physics 2008(2008) 044

    T.W. Brown,Half-BPS SU(N) correlators inN= 4 SYM,Journal of High Energy Physics 2008(2008) 044

    2008

  62. [63]

    Alcock-Zeilinger and H

    J. Alcock-Zeilinger and H. Weigert,Compact construction algorithms for the singlets of SU(N) over mixed tensor product spaces, July, 2019,1812.11223

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  63. [64]

    Fulton and J

    W. Fulton and J. Harris,Representation Theory, vol. 129 ofGraduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer New York, New York, NY (2004)

    2004

  64. [65]

    Jacobson,Basic Algebra II, W.H

    N. Jacobson,Basic Algebra II, W.H. Freeman, New York, 2nd ed ed. (1985)

    1985

  65. [66]

    Tung,Group Theory in Physics, World Scientific, Philadelphia (1985)

    W.-K. Tung,Group Theory in Physics, World Scientific, Philadelphia (1985)

    1985

  66. [67]

    Kosmann-Schwarzbach,Groups and Symmetries: From Finite Groups to Lie Groups, Universitext, Springer International Publishing, Cham (2022)

    Y. Kosmann-Schwarzbach,Groups and Symmetries: From Finite Groups to Lie Groups, Universitext, Springer International Publishing, Cham (2022)

    2022

  67. [68]

    Alcock-Zeilinger,The Special Unitary Group, Birdtracks, and Applications in QCD

    J.M. Alcock-Zeilinger,The Special Unitary Group, Birdtracks, and Applications in QCD

  68. [69]

    Alcock-Zeilinger,The Symmetric Group, its Representations, and Combinatorics

    J.M. Alcock-Zeilinger,The Symmetric Group, its Representations, and Combinatorics

  69. [70]

    Grinberg,An introduction to the symmetric group algebra, July, 2025,2507.20706

    D. Grinberg,An introduction to the symmetric group algebra, July, 2025,2507.20706

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  70. [71]

    Brown, P.J

    T.W. Brown, P.J. Heslop and S. Ramgoolam,Diagonal multi-matrix correlators and BPS operators inN= 4 SYM,Journal of High Energy Physics2008(2008) 030

    2008

  71. [72]

    Assem, A

    I. Assem, A. Skowro´ nski and D. Simson,Elements of the Representation Theory of Associative Algebras: Volume 1: Techniques of Representation Theory, no. 65 in London Mathematical Society Student Texts, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge New York (2006)

    2006

  72. [73]

    SageMath

    T.S. Developers, “SageMath.” Zenodo, Jan., 2025, 10.5281/ZENODO.14600115

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14600115 2025

  73. [74]

    Bossion and P

    D. Bossion and P. Huo,General Formulas of the Structure Constants in thesu(N)Lie Algebra, Aug., 2021,2108.07219. – 59 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021