- Editors' Suggestion
- Letter
- Open Access
Subleading conformal dimensions at the O(4) Wilson-Fisher fixed point
Phys. Rev. D 105, L031507 – Published 25 February, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.105.L031507
Abstract
In this work we focus on computing the conformal dimensions of local fields that transform in an irreducible representation of labeled with at the Wilson-Fisher fixed point using the Monte Carlo method. In the large charge expansion, among the sectors with a fixed large value of , the leading sector has and the subleading one has . Since Monte Carlo calculations at large become challenging in the traditional lattice formulation of the model, a qubit regularized lattice model was used recently to compute . Here we extend those calculations to the subleading sector. Our Monte Carlo results in the range fit well to the expected large expansion , but we have to assume that at least one of the purely quantum mechanical contributions or is nonzero. Assuming as conjectured recently, we find , , and .
Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)
Article Text
References (31)
- S. Rychkov, EPFL Lectures on Conformal Field Theory in D>=3 Dimensions, Springer Briefs in Physics (Springer, New York, 2016), 10.1007/978-3-319-43626-5.
- D. Simmons-Duffin, in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: New Frontiers in Fields and Strings (World Scientific, Singapore, 2017), pp. 1–74, 10.1142/9789813149441_0001.
- Z. Komargodski and A. Zhiboedov, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2013) 140.
- S. Hellerman, D. Orlando, S. Reffert, and M. Watanabe, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2015) 071.
- A. Kaviraj, K. Sen, and A. Sinha, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2015) 083.
- A. Kaviraj, K. Sen, and A. Sinha, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2015) 026.
- L. F. Alday, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 111601 (2017).
- R. Gopakumar, A. Kaviraj, K. Sen, and A. Sinha, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 081601 (2017).
- P. Dey, K. Ghosh, and A. Sinha, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2018) 152.
- S. Caron-Huot, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2017) 078.
- S. Hellerman and S. Maeda, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2017) 135.
- S. Hellerman, S. Maeda, and M. Watanabe, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2017) 089.
- D. Jafferis, B. Mukhametzhanov, and A. Zhiboedov, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2018) 043.
- L. Alvarez-Gaume, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2019) 142.
- D. Orlando, S. Reffert, and F. Sannino, Phys. Rev. D 101, 065018 (2020).
- D. Poland, S. Rychkov, and A. Vichi, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 015002 (2019).
- N. Dondi, I. Kalogerakis, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 035.
- A. Monin, Phys. Rev. D 94, 085013 (2016).
- A. de la Fuente, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2018) 041.
- D. Banerjee, S. Chandrasekharan, and D. Orlando, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 061603 (2018).
- D. Banerjee, S. Chandrasekharan, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 051603 (2019).
- L. A. Gaumé, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, Phys. Rep. 933, 2180 (2021).
We thank D. Orlando for pointing this out to us and helping us understand the discussion presented in this paragraph.
- L. Alvarez-Gaume, O. Loukas, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2017) 059.
- S. Hellerman, N. Kobayashi, S. Maeda, and M. Watanabe, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2019) 038.
- O. Antipin, J. Bersini, F. Sannino, Z.-W. Wang, and C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 102, 045011 (2020).
In Ref. [21] it was predicted that , based on an incorrect assumption. This error was later corrected in Ref. [22].
- D. Cecile and S. Chandrasekharan, Phys. Rev. D 77, 014506 (2008).
- H. Singh and S. Chandrasekharan, Phys. Rev. D 100, 054505 (2019).
- H. Singh, arXiv:1911.12353.
- T. Bhattacharya, A. J. Buser, S. Chandrasekharan, R. Gupta, and H. Singh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 172001 (2021).