On the Supergravity Gauge theory Correspondence and the Matrix Model

S. P. de Alwis

RECORD

On the Supergravity Gauge theory Correspondence and the Matrix Model

S. P. de Alwis

High Energy Physics - Theory · Submitted 21 Jun 1998

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim In particular the compactification of the Matrix model on $T_3$ is compared to the $AdS_5\times S_5$ ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills duality, and the different role of the branes in the two cases is pointed out.

how it is stated · asserted 0.99 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. 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.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,631 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.02 · states limitation 0.49 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.08 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.02 · compares with prior results 0.77 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We review the assumptions and the logic underlying the derivation of DLCQ Matrix models. In particular we try to clarify what remains valid at finite $N$, the role of the non-renormalization theorems and higher order terms in the supergravity expansion. The relation to Maldacena's conjecture is also discussed. In particular the compactification of the Matrix model on $T_3$ is compared to the $AdS_5\times S_5$ ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills duality, and the different role of the branes in the two cases is pointed out.

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 review the assumptions and the logic underlying the derivation of DLCQ Matrix models.	contribution 0.96	0.61	0.07	asserted 0.84
s1	In particular we try to clarify what remains valid at finite $N$, the role of the non-renormalization theorems and higher order terms in the supergravity expansion.	contribution 0.98	0.70	0.09	unclear 0.52
s2	The relation to Maldacena's conjecture is also discussed.	contribution 0.74	0.51	0.05	asserted 0.76
s3	In particular the compactification of the Matrix model on $T_3$ is compared to the $AdS_5\times S_5$ ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills duality, and the different role of the branes in the two cases is pointed out.	contribution 0.86	0.70	0.17	asserted 0.99

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: review 1.00 · evidence from argument 0.65.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

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

The paper

Original abstract

We review the assumptions and the logic underlying the derivation of DLCQ Matrix models. In particular we try to clarify what remains valid at finite $N$, the role of the non-renormalization theorems and higher order terms in the supergravity expansion. The relation to Maldacena's conjecture is also discussed. In particular the compactification of the Matrix model on $T_3$ is compared to the $AdS_5\times S_5$ ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills duality, and the different role of the branes in the two cases is pointed out.

Human review

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

References

How the literature uses it

2 arXiv papers cite this in 2 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

Cites it as background 2 papers

And indeed, the fact that the same MSYM theories played a certain role in Matrix theory and a somewhat similar role in holography gave rise to various attempts to clarify the relation between the Matrix theory and AdS/CFT conjectures— see, e.g., [ref] .

On the Underlying Nonrelativistic Nature of Relativistic Holography · Antecedents · 0.94
For a variety of other complementary contemporaneous discussions, see [ref] (for some more recent discussion see [ref] ).

Matrix Theory Reloaded: A BPS Road to Holography · To Holography... · 0.97

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.