Dressing the Giant Magnon

Anastasia Volovich; Marcus Spradlin

REVIEW

Dressing the Giant Magnon

Marcus Spradlin, Anastasia Volovich

High Energy Physics - Theory · Submitted 3 Jul 2006 · 40 references

Pith's verdict: A clean, honest methods paper: the dressing method is applied correctly and yields explicit new multi-soliton giant magnon formulas, with the physical payoff (the scattering phase) explicitly deferred.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on November 11, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 8 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-th/0607009 (version 3)

Pith IDX7XPWA73, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationAnastasia Volovich, Marcus Spradlin. "Dressing the Giant Magnon." arXiv:hep-th/0607009 (2006). https://pith.science/paper/X7XPWA73

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Bottom line: this is a solid methods paper, and the reader's ACCEPT is right. The new content is real — the two-soliton scattering solution (4.18), the three-charge giant magnon (5.19), and the negative result in Section 4.4 where the attempted bound state of two two-charge solitons turns out to be a scattering state. That last one is the most interesting thing in the paper and it is reported straight, without dressing it up. The one-soliton solutions are rederivations, and the paper says so; they serve as checks on the machinery, which is the right way to use them. The derivations are explicit, the solutions are checked against the equations of motion (2.1), the Virasoro constraints (2.2), and the boundary conditions (2.4), and the dispersion relations follow from the charge integrals (2.6). Nothing is fitted; nothing is circular. The only borrowed ingredient is the class II dressing factor from Harnad–Saint Aubin–Shnider [30], which is a published theorem quoted where it belongs. The stress-test note is correct that there is no load-bearing concern about the central construction, and I agree with it. Where the reader's report is slightly off: the minor gap flagged in Section 5.5 does not really land. The charges (5.21)–(5.22) are given explicitly, and the stress test checked them against the single-soliton dispersion relation (4.17) and found them consistent. That is not a soft spot. The genuine soft spots are the ones the authors themselves flag. Section 1 states plainly that the scattering phase is not computed here, and that is the quantity that would turn this catalogue into a test of the correspondence; the paper is honest about it, but it does cap the physical payoff. Footnote [31] discloses that (5.10) and (5.14) were also obtained by Maldacena and Mikhailov via the Bäcklund transformation, and that source is private communication, so priority for those two is not independently verifiable. That is disclosed, not hidden, and it does not affect the correctness of the formulas. Who should read it: anyone working on giant magnons, semiclassical strings, or the SO(N) vector model as an integrable system. It is a reference paper, not a result that changes a program. It deserves a serious referee — the construction is checkable and the new formulas are worth having in the literature. I would cite it, and I would bring it to a reading group on integrability methods, though probably not as the main event.

Referee report

Significance

The paper supplies closed-form classical string solutions that were previously known only implicitly through the sine-Gordon correspondence, and it does so by a construction that is manifestly extendable to arbitrary soliton number. The explicit formulas matter: as the authors note in §1, the map to the generalized sine-Gordon models breaks down at the quantum level, so the calculation of quantum corrections to the magnon scattering phase requires precisely expressions of the type given in (4.18), (5.10) and (5.19). The dispersion relations (4.17), (5.12), (5.16) and (5.23) are derived rather than fitted, and the three-charge solution (5.19) with its additive dispersion relation (5.23) is a genuinely new entry in the catalogue. The paper is also candid about what it does not do: the scattering phase is explicitly deferred in §1, the overlap of (5.10) and (5.14) with the Bäcklund-transformation work of Maldacena and Mikhailov is disclosed in footnote [31], and the interpretive identification of soliton number with magnon content is flagged in footnote 1. Those disclosures are appropriate and are part of the assessment.

Minor objections (8)

[§3.1 and Eqs. (4.16), (5.7), (5.16)] The symbol λ is used both for the 't Hooft coupling in (2.6) and for the spectral parameter in (3.3) and throughout §4–§5, so that expressions such as √λ/π in (4.16) and λ1 in (4.10) sit in the same equation with two different meanings. The authors flag this once in §3.1, but a distinct symbol for the spectral parameter (ζ, say) would remove a persistent reading hazard at essentially no cost.
[§4.2, text below Eq. (4.7)] It is asserted that the parameter w can be absorbed by shifting Z(λ̄1) → Z(λ̄1) + i log w and that, by (4.5), such a shift 'amounts to some particular translation in the x and t coordinates'. Since (4.5) gives Z(λ) = z/(λ−1) + z̄/(λ+1), a shift at the single point λ = λ̄1 is not manifestly a translation; exhibiting the two real translation parameters that produce the required complex shift would make the argument verifiable in one line.
[§5.2, text below Eq. (5.4)] The analogous statement that w in (5.4) 'is an essentially irrelevant parameter and may be absorbed into a translation of x or t' is explicitly flagged as 'not quite as simple' than the U(2) case, but no demonstration is given. Either supply the short check or state plainly that the irrelevance of w is verified by inspection of the resulting solution.
[§5.5, Eq. (5.19)] As the paper notes, (5.19) has total momentum p = 0, so both endpoints of the open string sit at the same point of the equator and the configuration is a degenerate giant magnon in the sense of the definition given in §1. Likewise the two constituent solitons, with p = +π and p = −π, both have vanishing velocity cos(p/2) = 0, so 'scattering state' is a loose description of what is really a static superposition. Qualifying both points would sharpen the physical reading of (5.19).
[§4.3, §5.3, §5.4, §5.5] For the one-soliton solution (4.10) the paper states explicitly that it solves the equations of motion (2.1), the Virasoro constraints (2.2) and the boundary conditions (2.4). No comparable statement is made for (4.18), (5.10), (5.14) or (5.19). Since the Virasoro constraints are an additional condition not implied by the principal-chiral equations alone, a single sentence confirming that each of these solutions has been checked against (2.1)–(2.2) would materially help the reader, particularly for (5.19), which is not obtained by a single dressing step.
[Abstract and §1] The abstract states that the solutions 'correspond to multi-soliton configurations in the generalized sine-Gordon models', but the map to the sine-Gordon variables is exhibited only for the R × S^3 case, via (4.23). For the SO(N) solutions (5.10), (5.14) and (5.19) the correspondence is asserted by analogy with the R × S^3 results. A qualifier in the abstract or a sentence in §5 would keep the claim proportionate to what is shown.
[§5.5, Eqs. (5.21)–(5.22)] The charges J2 and J3 and the energy (5.22) for the three-charge solution are quoted without intermediate steps. A brief indication that they follow from (2.6) by direct substitution of (5.19), or the display of one of the integrals, would let the reader verify the dispersion relation (5.23) independently.
[Eq. (4.10)] The typesetting of (4.10) should be checked: in the version under review the bracketing of the numerator and denominator of Z1 is ambiguous, with the two exponential factors appearing to run together. This is presumably a production issue rather than a substantive one, but the equation is central to §4 and should be unambiguous.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

The dressing method is applied directly to the sigma models for strings on spheres, producing explicit closed-form solutions for magnons that scatter, magnons that bind, and a magnon carrying three charges.

The reading

The paper sets out to show that the dressing method — the inverse-scattering construction of Zakharov and Mikhailov for integrable equations — can be applied directly to the sigma models describing strings on $R$ times a sphere, without passing through the nonlinear map to generalized sine-Gordon variables. Starting from the point-like string that runs around the equator at the speed of light, the authors add poles in an auxiliary spectral parameter one at a time and read off, in closed form, the embedding coordinates of strings that look like two magnons passing through one another, two magnons locked into a bound state, and a single magnon carrying three charges. Each solution comes with its conserved charges and a dispersion relation, and each is checked against the equations of motion, the Virasoro constraints, and the giant-magnon boundary conditions. The value of having such formulas is that the states whose scattering matrix and bound-state spectrum are otherwise known only indirectly now have explicit classical descriptions, which is what a calculation going beyond the leading semiclassical correspondence would need.

What carries the argument

The engine is the dressing factor $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below, a meromorphic function of a spectral parameter with a single pole at $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below, built from a rank-one hermitian projector $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below whose image is spanned by the auxiliary wavefunction evaluated at the conjugate pole. Because the vector-model reduction requires the extra symmetries $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below, a single pole is not allowed and the minimal solitons come in two classes: two poles at conjugate points on the unit circle, and four poles at a point, its conjugate, and their inverses. The second ingredient is the embedding $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below of the sphere into $SO(N)$, which lets the principal-chiral dressing be read back as a solution for the embedding coordinates $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below. Iterating the dressing and choosing where the poles sit is what produces scattering states, bound states, and the three-charge configuration.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the dressing method, taken directly on the $SO(N)$ vector model and on the $SU(2)$ principal chiral model, reproduces the previously known giant magnons and generates new ones in closed form. The authors rederive the Hofman–Maldacena magnon on $R$ times $S^2$, equation (5.5), with dispersion relation $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below, and the two-charge dyonic magnon on $R$ times $S^3$, equation (4.15), with $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below, and then construct the genuinely new solutions: a two-soliton scattering state on $R$ times $S^3$ (4.18) with charges adding as $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below, a two-magnon scattering state on $R$ times $S^{N-1}$ (5.10) with $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below, a two-magnon bound state from four poles in the complex plane (5.14) with $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below, and a three-charge magnon on $R$ times $S^5$ (5.19) whose dispersion relation is $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below. A notable negative result sits in section 4.4: the analytic continuation that turns two scattering solitons into a breather fails for the two-charge solitons of the chiral model, giving back a scattering state rather than a bound state, so a true two-soliton bound state is exhibited only for the elementary singly charged magnons in (5.14).

Load-bearing premise

The physical reading of these classical configurations as magnon scattering and bound states depends on the strict infinite-$J$, strong-coupling limit and on the interpretive identification of soliton number with magnon content, an identification the paper adopts rather than derives.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every scattering or bound state of magnons on $R$ times $S^{N-1}$ has an explicit closed-form classical description, obtained by placing poles in the spectral parameter rather than by solving the sigma-model equations from scratch.
The dispersion relations of the constructed states follow directly from the pole positions: $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below for the elementary magnon, $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below for the two-magnon bound state, and $E - J = (E-J) = 0$ replaced below for the three-charge state.
The method generalizes algebraically to any number of solitons, so arbitrary $n$-soliton scattering configurations and mixtures of elementary magnons with bound states are in principle constructible without new techniques.
Because the formulas are explicit in the string embedding coordinates, they supply the input needed for a future calculation of quantum corrections to the magnon scattering phase, where the correspondence with the sine-Gordon model breaks down.

Reading between the lines

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

If the classical multi-soliton solutions here are the correct strong-coupling images of Bethe-ansatz multi-magnon states, then the pole positions in the spectral parameter should map onto the rapidities that label magnon excitations in the spin chain, giving a geometric reading of the Bethe rapidity plane.
The failure to build a two-charge breather in section 4.4 suggests that the bound-state spectrum in the two-charge sector is not simply the naive continuation of the one-charge spectrum, which is the kind of structural statement the exact S-matrix's pole structure would have to reproduce.
The three-charge solution (5.19) has total momentum zero and two independent charges, so it is a natural testing ground for comparing the dressing construction against the Neumann-model spinning-string solutions, and a mismatch there would be informative about which classical configurations survive as the correct strong-coupling description.

Original abstract

We apply the dressing method to construct new classical string solutions describing various scattering and bound states of magnons. These solutions carry one, two or three SO(6) charges and correspond to multi-soliton configurations in the generalized sine-Gordon models.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,230 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.05 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.01 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.30 · compares with prior results 0.08 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v3. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We apply the dressing method to construct new classical string solutions describing various scattering and bound states of magnons. These solutions carry one, two or three SO(6) charges and correspond to multi-soliton configurations in the generalized sine-Gordon models.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	We apply the dressing method to construct new classical string solutions describing various scattering and bound states of magnons.	contribution 0.91	0.95	0.43	asserted 1.00
s1	These solutions carry one, two or three SO(6) charges and correspond to multi-soliton configurations in the generalized sine-Gordon models.	result 0.66	0.80	0.24	asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.95 · evidence from proof or derivation 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v3

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

References

Works cited (40)

[30]

J. P. Harnad, Y. Saint Aubin and S. Shnider, “Backlund Tr ansformations For Nonlin- ear Sigma Models With Values In Riemannian Symmetric Spaces ,” Commun. Math. Phys. 92, 329 (1984)

View on Pith 1984
[31]

Equivalent solutions have also been obtained by J. Mald acena and A. Mikhailov from the B¨ acklund transformation [18] (private communication)

View on Pith
[1]

G. Mandal, N. V. Suryanarayana and S. R. Wadia, “Aspects o f semiclassical strings in AdS5,” Phys. Lett. B 543, 81 (2002) [arXiv:hep-th/0206103]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[2]

I. Bena, J. Polchinski and R. Roiban, “Hidden symmetries of the AdS 5 × S5 super- string,” Phys. Rev. D 69, 046002 (2004) [arXiv:hep-th/0305116]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[3]

L. Dolan, C. R. Nappi and E. Witten, “Yangian symmetry in D = 4 superconformal Yang-Mills theory,” arXiv:hep-th/0401243

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[4]

J. A. Minahan and K. Zarembo, “The Bethe-ansatz for N = 4 su per Yang-Mills,” JHEP 0303, 013 (2003) [arXiv:hep-th/0212208]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[5]

N. Beisert and M. Staudacher, “The N = 4 SYM integrable sup er spin chain,” Nucl. Phys. B 670, 439 (2003) [arXiv:hep-th/0307042]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[6]

A. A. Tseytlin, “Spinning strings and AdS/CFT duality,” arXiv:hep-th/0311139

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[7]

N. Beisert, “The dilatation operator of N = 4 super Yang-M ills theory and integra- bility,” Phys. Rept. 405, 1 (2005) [arXiv:hep-th/0407277]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[8]

A. A. Tseytlin, “Semiclassical strings and AdS/CFT,” ar Xiv:hep-th/0409296

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[9]

K. Zarembo, “Semiclassical Bethe ansatz and AdS/CFT,” C omptes Rendus Physique 5, 1081 (2004) [Fortsch. Phys. 53, 647 (2005)] [arXiv:hep-th/0411191]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[10]

J. Plefka, “Spinning strings and integrable spin chain s in the AdS/CFT correspon- dence,” arXiv:hep-th/0507136

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[11]

D. M. Hofman and J. M. Maldacena, “Giant magnons,” J. Phy s. A 39, 13095 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0604135]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[12]

D. Berenstein, J. M. Maldacena and H. Nastase, “Strings in ﬂat space and pp waves from N = 4 super Yang Mills,” JHEP 0204, 013 (2002) [arXiv:hep-th/0202021]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[13]

N. Mann and J. Polchinski, “Finite density states in int egrable conformal ﬁeld theo- ries,” arXiv:hep-th/0408162

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[14]

N. Mann and J. Polchinski, “Bethe ansatz for a quantum su percoset sigma model,” Phys. Rev. D 72, 086002 (2005) [arXiv:hep-th/0508232]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[15]

M. Staudacher, “The factorized S-matrix of CFT/AdS,” J HEP 0505, 054 (2005) [arXiv:hep-th/0412188]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[16]

K. Pohlmeyer, “Integrable Hamiltonian Systems And Int eractions Through Quadratic Constraints,” Commun. Math. Phys. 46, 207 (1976)

View on Pith 1976
[17]

A. Mikhailov, “An action variable of the sine-Gordon mo del,” arXiv:hep-th/0504035

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[18]

A. Mikhailov, “B¨ acklund transformations, energy shi ft and the plane wave limit,” arXiv:hep-th/0507261

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[19]

A. Mikhailov, “A nonlocal Poisson bracket of the sine-G ordon model,” arXiv:hep- th/0511069

View on Pith
[20]

G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov and M. Staudacher, “Bethe ansat z for quantum strings,” JHEP 0410, 016 (2004) [arXiv:hep-th/0406256]. 20

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[21]

H. Y. Chen, N. Dorey and K. Okamura, “Dyonic giant magnon s,” JHEP 0609, 024 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0605155]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[22]

N. Dorey, “Magnon bound states and the AdS/CFT correspo ndence,” J. Phys. A 39, 13119 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0604175]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[23]

G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov and M. Zamaklar, “Finite-size e ﬀects from giant magnons,” arXiv:hep-th/0606126

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[24]

J. A. Minahan, A. Tirziu and A. A. Tseytlin, “Inﬁnite spi n limit of semiclassical string states,” JHEP 0608, 049 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0606145]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[25]

C. S. Chu, G. Georgiou and V. V. Khoze, “Magnons, classic al strings and beta- deformations,” JHEP 0611, 093 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0606220]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[26]

K. Pohlmeyer and K. H. Rehren, “Reduction Of The Two-Dim ensional O(N) Nonlin- ear Sigma Model,” J. Math. Phys. 20, 2628 (1979)

View on Pith 1979
[27]

I. Bakas, Q. H. Park and H. J. Shin, “Lagrangian Formulat ion of Symmetric Space sine-Gordon Models,” Phys. Lett. B 372, 45 (1996) [arXiv:hep-th/9512030]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[28]

V. E. Zakharov and A. V. Mikhailov, “Relativistically I nvariant Two-Dimensional Models In Field Theory Integrable By The Inverse Problem Tec hnique. (In Russian),” Sov. Phys. JETP 47, 1017 (1978) [Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 74, 1953 (1978)]

View on Pith 1978
[29]

V. E. Zakharov and A. V. Mikhailov, “On The Integrabilit y Of Classical Spinor Models In Two-Dimensional Space-Time,” Commun. Math. Phys. 74, 21 (1980)

View on Pith 1980
[32]

N. Beisert, “The su(2 |2) dynamic S-matrix,” arXiv:hep-th/0511082

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[33]

R. A. Janik, “The AdS 5 ×S5 superstring worldsheet S-matrix and crossing symmetry,” Phys. Rev. D 73, 086006 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0603038]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[34]

Y. Saint Aubin, “B¨ acklund Transformations And Solito n Type Solutions For Sigma Models With Values In Real Grassmannian Spaces,” Lett. Math . Phys. 6, 441 (1982)

View on Pith 1982
[35]

H. Eichenherr and M. Forger, “More About Nonlinear Sigm a Models On Symmetric Spaces,” Nucl. Phys. B 164, 528 (1980) [Erratum-ibid. B 282, 745 (1987)]

View on Pith 1980
[36]

A. T. Ogielski, M. K. Prasad, A. Sinha and L. L. Wang, “Bac klund Transformations And Local Conservation Laws For Principal Chiral Fields,” P hys. Lett. B 91, 387 (1980)

View on Pith 1980
[37]

N. Dorey, D. M. Hofman and J. Maldacena, “On the singular ities of the magnon S-matrix,” arXiv:hep-th/0703104

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[38]

A. Santambrogio and D. Zanon, “Exact anomalous dimensi ons of N = 4 Yang-Mills operators with large R charge,” Phys. Lett. B 545, 425 (2002) [arXiv:hep-th/0206079]. 21

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[39]

D. Berenstein, D. H. Correa and S. E. Vazquez, “All loop B MN state energies from matrices,” JHEP 0602, 048 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0509015]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[40]

G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, J. Russo and A. A. Tseytlin, “Sp inning strings in AdS 5 × S5 and integrable systems,” Nucl. Phys. B 671, 3 (2003) [arXiv:hep-th/0307191]. 22

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

Forward citations

Cited by 10 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

On integrability of the Yang-Baxter $\si$-model
hep-th 2008-02 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

The Yang-Baxter sigma model is integrable: the paper constructs its Lax pair for any compact simple group and an explicit Iwasawa-map bijection from principal chiral model solutions.
Reflecting magnons
hep-th 2007-08 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

Symmetry fixes the boundary reflection matrix of magnons off maximal giant gravitons up to a phase, verified at two loops in weak coupling and computed at strong coupling from classical string solutions.
One-point Functions in Defect CFT and Integrability
hep-th 2015-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

One-point functions of non-protected operators in the D3-D5 defect CFT are expressed as overlaps of Bethe eigenstates with a matrix product state, yielding a determinant formula for k=2.
HHL correlators, orbit averaging and form factors
hep-th 2014-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Averaging the light vertex operator over the moduli space of classical heavy-state solutions reproduces finite-volume diagonal form-factor volume dependence for a two-magnon dilaton correlator, motivating an all-coupl...
Integrability of the bi-Yang-Baxter sigma-model
math-ph 2014-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The bi-Yang-Baxter sigma-model, a two-parameter doubly Poisson-Lie deformation of the principal chiral model, admits a Lax pair with spectral parameter, establishing its classical integrability.

Show 5 more citing papers

Magnons, their Solitonic Avatars and the Pohlmeyer Reduction
hep-th 2009-02 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The dressing transformation applied to the vacuum of a symmetric-space sigma model produces the giant magnon and its symmetric-space sine-Gordon soliton simultaneously, yielding a new magnon solution in CP^3.
On the Singularities of the Magnon S-matrix
hep-th 2007-03 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The double poles in the magnon S-matrix are pair-exchange singularities of BPS magnons, located where the BES conjecture puts them, and the non-BPS breather is just two BPS magnons.
Spiky strings and giant magnons on S5
hep-th 2006-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

A generalized Neumann-Rosochatius ansatz in conformal gauge accommodates spiky strings and giant magnons on S5, yielding a three-spin giant magnon interpreted as two equal-velocity magnons and matched to a two-bound-s...
Generating AdS String Solutions
hep-th 2007-12 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

A Pohlmeyer reduction plus inverse scattering turns sinh-Gordon solitons, antisolitons, and breathers into explicit classical string solutions in AdS3.
Single spike solutions for strings on S2 and S3
hep-th 2007-05 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

A new classical string solution on S² and S³, the single spike, has energy and angular momentum related by Δ = (√λ/π)(θ̄ - sin θ̄), generalizing to J₁ = √(J₂² + (λ/π²) sin² θ̄) when a second angular momentum is added.

How later papers used it

47 later papers cite it

Evidence: substantial. 43 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 11 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 22 of the 82 citing sentences, choosing only those whose citation markers point at this paper alone, and wrote the paraphrases from them. The summary, the counts, the evidence level, the links and the quotes come from code; the summary counts the papers listed below. A later paper is listed under a label when Pith's citation classifier gives one of its sentences that label at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), Pith's reading finds that the citing paper itself did it, and a second check confirms the paraphrase against the sentence. This section lists uses only. It does not list criticism or disagreement, so their absence here says nothing about how the paper has been received. Papers that share an author with this one are listed apart, under "By the same authors". A quote is the citing authors' own sentence, shown when their paper's licence is CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC0. JSON

3 later papers by other authors are listed below: 2 used its method or tool and 1 compared its own results with it. 1 more paper by the same authors is listed: 1 used its method or tool.

Uses its method or tool 3 of 12 papers with this label · 1 by the same authors

Followed this paper by working in static gauge, reducing the worldsheet theory in this sector to a bosonic sigma-model on a flat two-dimensional worldsheet with the coset SU(4)/Sp(2) as target space.

Quantum Scattering of Giant Magnons (2007) · 0.90 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Adapted notation from this paper to better suit recursion, dressing consecutively from the vacuum to obtain a dressing factor at the N-th step.

Giant Magnons in Symmetric Spaces: Explicit N-soliton solutions for CP^n, SU(n) and S^n (2010) · 0.94 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

By the same authors

Showed that this solution follows from the infinitely wrapped string by using the same dressing method that this paper used for giant magnons.

Scattering of single spikes (2007) (same authors) · 0.94 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

Compares with it 1 of 2 papers with this label

Found that, setting R=e^q/2, its own dispersion relation agrees with the dispersion relation this paper obtained by the dressing method.

Singularities of the Magnon Boundstate S-Matrix (2007) · 0.99 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

How the literature uses it

46 arXiv papers cite this in 81 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 56 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 12 papers

Both can be obtained by constructing multi-soliton scattering solutions using the dressing method [ref] .

String theory in AdS_3 x S^3 x T^4 with mixed flux: semiclassical and 1-loop phase in the S-matrix · Introduction · 1.00
The equations of motion of the $AdS_5×S^5$ $σ$-model are integrable and it is possible to construct the required two soliton scattering solution explicitly using the dressing method [ref] .

The Force Between Giant Magnons · The Force and Torque between Giant Magnons · 0.94
Now we show that this solution follows from the infinitely wrapped string by using the same dressing method that in [ref] was used for giant magnons.

Scattering of single spikes · Single spikes on $S^3$ and scattering solutions via dressing · 0.94

Compares with it 2 papers

Equation ([ref]) is precisely the single magnon solution on $ℝ×S^3$ [ref] , up to a pure phase and a shift in $u_k$, which reflects the additional freedom of the solution.

Exact solutions for N-magnon scattering · Asymptotic behavior · 0.94
If we set $R=e^q/2$ , it agrees with the dispersion relation obtained in [ref] by the dressing method.

Singularities of the Magnon Boundstate S-Matrix · “Minimal” oscillating solutions from CsG solitons ... · 0.99

Cites it as background 6 papers

These solutions are known as “Dyonic Giant Magnons” (DGMs) [ref] (see also [ref] ) and we will refer to the corresponding limit as the “DGM limit”.

Quantum Scattering of Giant Magnons · The asymptotic spectrum and its semiclassical limits · 0.89
There have been various investigations such as the multi-spin giant magnons [ref] , the S-matrix of giant magnons [ref] , the finite size corrections to the giant magnon dispersion relations [ref] and the semiclassical quantization of giant magnons [ref] .

Conformal SO(2,4) Transformations for the Helical AdS String Solution · Introduction · 0.97
As nicely reviewed in Ref. [ref] , various semiclassical solutions in AdS were then constructed and studied by using the integrability technique [ref] .

Spiky strings in de Sitter space · Introduction · 0.89

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [30]

J. P. Harnad, Y. Saint Aubin and S. Shnider, “Backlund Tr ansformations For Nonlin- ear Sigma Models With Values In Riemannian Symmetric Spaces ,” Commun. Math. Phys. 92, 329 (1984)

View on Pith 1984

[2] [31]

Equivalent solutions have also been obtained by J. Mald acena and A. Mikhailov from the B¨ acklund transformation [18] (private communication)

View on Pith

[3] [1]

G. Mandal, N. V. Suryanarayana and S. R. Wadia, “Aspects o f semiclassical strings in AdS5,” Phys. Lett. B 543, 81 (2002) [arXiv:hep-th/0206103]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[4] [2]

I. Bena, J. Polchinski and R. Roiban, “Hidden symmetries of the AdS 5 × S5 super- string,” Phys. Rev. D 69, 046002 (2004) [arXiv:hep-th/0305116]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[5] [3]

L. Dolan, C. R. Nappi and E. Witten, “Yangian symmetry in D = 4 superconformal Yang-Mills theory,” arXiv:hep-th/0401243

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[6] [4]

J. A. Minahan and K. Zarembo, “The Bethe-ansatz for N = 4 su per Yang-Mills,” JHEP 0303, 013 (2003) [arXiv:hep-th/0212208]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[7] [5]

N. Beisert and M. Staudacher, “The N = 4 SYM integrable sup er spin chain,” Nucl. Phys. B 670, 439 (2003) [arXiv:hep-th/0307042]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[8] [6]

A. A. Tseytlin, “Spinning strings and AdS/CFT duality,” arXiv:hep-th/0311139

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[9] [7]

N. Beisert, “The dilatation operator of N = 4 super Yang-M ills theory and integra- bility,” Phys. Rept. 405, 1 (2005) [arXiv:hep-th/0407277]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[10] [8]

A. A. Tseytlin, “Semiclassical strings and AdS/CFT,” ar Xiv:hep-th/0409296

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[11] [9]

K. Zarembo, “Semiclassical Bethe ansatz and AdS/CFT,” C omptes Rendus Physique 5, 1081 (2004) [Fortsch. Phys. 53, 647 (2005)] [arXiv:hep-th/0411191]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[12] [10]

J. Plefka, “Spinning strings and integrable spin chain s in the AdS/CFT correspon- dence,” arXiv:hep-th/0507136

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[13] [11]

D. M. Hofman and J. M. Maldacena, “Giant magnons,” J. Phy s. A 39, 13095 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0604135]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[14] [12]

D. Berenstein, J. M. Maldacena and H. Nastase, “Strings in ﬂat space and pp waves from N = 4 super Yang Mills,” JHEP 0204, 013 (2002) [arXiv:hep-th/0202021]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[15] [13]

N. Mann and J. Polchinski, “Finite density states in int egrable conformal ﬁeld theo- ries,” arXiv:hep-th/0408162

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[16] [14]

N. Mann and J. Polchinski, “Bethe ansatz for a quantum su percoset sigma model,” Phys. Rev. D 72, 086002 (2005) [arXiv:hep-th/0508232]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[17] [15]

M. Staudacher, “The factorized S-matrix of CFT/AdS,” J HEP 0505, 054 (2005) [arXiv:hep-th/0412188]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[18] [16]

K. Pohlmeyer, “Integrable Hamiltonian Systems And Int eractions Through Quadratic Constraints,” Commun. Math. Phys. 46, 207 (1976)

View on Pith 1976

[19] [17]

A. Mikhailov, “An action variable of the sine-Gordon mo del,” arXiv:hep-th/0504035

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[20] [18]

A. Mikhailov, “B¨ acklund transformations, energy shi ft and the plane wave limit,” arXiv:hep-th/0507261

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[21] [19]

A. Mikhailov, “A nonlocal Poisson bracket of the sine-G ordon model,” arXiv:hep- th/0511069

View on Pith

[22] [20]

G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov and M. Staudacher, “Bethe ansat z for quantum strings,” JHEP 0410, 016 (2004) [arXiv:hep-th/0406256]. 20

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[23] [21]

H. Y. Chen, N. Dorey and K. Okamura, “Dyonic giant magnon s,” JHEP 0609, 024 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0605155]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[24] [22]

N. Dorey, “Magnon bound states and the AdS/CFT correspo ndence,” J. Phys. A 39, 13119 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0604175]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[25] [23]

G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov and M. Zamaklar, “Finite-size e ﬀects from giant magnons,” arXiv:hep-th/0606126

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[26] [24]

J. A. Minahan, A. Tirziu and A. A. Tseytlin, “Inﬁnite spi n limit of semiclassical string states,” JHEP 0608, 049 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0606145]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[27] [25]

C. S. Chu, G. Georgiou and V. V. Khoze, “Magnons, classic al strings and beta- deformations,” JHEP 0611, 093 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0606220]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[28] [26]

K. Pohlmeyer and K. H. Rehren, “Reduction Of The Two-Dim ensional O(N) Nonlin- ear Sigma Model,” J. Math. Phys. 20, 2628 (1979)

View on Pith 1979

[29] [27]

I. Bakas, Q. H. Park and H. J. Shin, “Lagrangian Formulat ion of Symmetric Space sine-Gordon Models,” Phys. Lett. B 372, 45 (1996) [arXiv:hep-th/9512030]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[30] [28]

V. E. Zakharov and A. V. Mikhailov, “Relativistically I nvariant Two-Dimensional Models In Field Theory Integrable By The Inverse Problem Tec hnique. (In Russian),” Sov. Phys. JETP 47, 1017 (1978) [Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 74, 1953 (1978)]

View on Pith 1978

[31] [29]

V. E. Zakharov and A. V. Mikhailov, “On The Integrabilit y Of Classical Spinor Models In Two-Dimensional Space-Time,” Commun. Math. Phys. 74, 21 (1980)

View on Pith 1980

[32] [32]

N. Beisert, “The su(2 |2) dynamic S-matrix,” arXiv:hep-th/0511082

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[33] [33]

R. A. Janik, “The AdS 5 ×S5 superstring worldsheet S-matrix and crossing symmetry,” Phys. Rev. D 73, 086006 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0603038]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[34] [34]

Y. Saint Aubin, “B¨ acklund Transformations And Solito n Type Solutions For Sigma Models With Values In Real Grassmannian Spaces,” Lett. Math . Phys. 6, 441 (1982)

View on Pith 1982

[35] [35]

H. Eichenherr and M. Forger, “More About Nonlinear Sigm a Models On Symmetric Spaces,” Nucl. Phys. B 164, 528 (1980) [Erratum-ibid. B 282, 745 (1987)]

View on Pith 1980

[36] [36]

A. T. Ogielski, M. K. Prasad, A. Sinha and L. L. Wang, “Bac klund Transformations And Local Conservation Laws For Principal Chiral Fields,” P hys. Lett. B 91, 387 (1980)

View on Pith 1980

[37] [37]

N. Dorey, D. M. Hofman and J. Maldacena, “On the singular ities of the magnon S-matrix,” arXiv:hep-th/0703104

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[38] [38]

A. Santambrogio and D. Zanon, “Exact anomalous dimensi ons of N = 4 Yang-Mills operators with large R charge,” Phys. Lett. B 545, 425 (2002) [arXiv:hep-th/0206079]. 21

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[39] [39]

D. Berenstein, D. H. Correa and S. E. Vazquez, “All loop B MN state energies from matrices,” JHEP 0602, 048 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0509015]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[40] [40]

G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, J. Russo and A. A. Tseytlin, “Sp inning strings in AdS 5 × S5 and integrable systems,” Nucl. Phys. B 671, 3 (2003) [arXiv:hep-th/0307191]. 22

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003