Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Editors' Suggestion
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Subleading conformal dimensions at the O(4) Wilson-Fisher fixed point

Debasish Banerjee1 and Shailesh Chandrasekharan2

  • 1Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata, West Bengal 700064, India
  • 2Department of Physics, Duke University, Box 90305, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA

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 D(jL,jR) of local fields that transform in an irreducible representation of SU(2)×SU(2) labeled with (jL,jR) at the O(4) Wilson-Fisher fixed point using the Monte Carlo method. In the large charge expansion, among the sectors with a fixed large value of j=max(jL,jR), the leading sector has |jL−jR|=0 and the subleading one has |jL−jR|=1. Since Monte Carlo calculations at large j become challenging in the traditional lattice formulation of the O(4) model, a qubit regularized O(4) lattice model was used recently to compute D(j,j). Here we extend those calculations to the subleading sector. Our Monte Carlo results in the range 2≤j≤20 fit well to the expected large j expansion D(j,j−1)−D(j,j)∼λ0+λ1/2/j+λ1/j+λ3/2/j3/2, but we have to assume that at least one of the purely quantum mechanical contributions λ0 or λ1 is nonzero. Assuming λ0=0 as conjectured recently, we find λ1/2≈2.1(1), λ1≈2.3(2), and λ3/2≈1.2(2).

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (31)

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. Z. Komargodski and A. Zhiboedov, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2013) 140.
  4. S. Hellerman, D. Orlando, S. Reffert, and M. Watanabe, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2015) 071.
  5. A. Kaviraj, K. Sen, and A. Sinha, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2015) 083.
  6. A. Kaviraj, K. Sen, and A. Sinha, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2015) 026.
  7. L. F. Alday, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 111601 (2017).
  8. R. Gopakumar, A. Kaviraj, K. Sen, and A. Sinha, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 081601 (2017).
  9. P. Dey, K. Ghosh, and A. Sinha, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2018) 152.
  10. S. Caron-Huot, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2017) 078.
  11. S. Hellerman and S. Maeda, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2017) 135.
  12. S. Hellerman, S. Maeda, and M. Watanabe, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2017) 089.
  13. D. Jafferis, B. Mukhametzhanov, and A. Zhiboedov, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2018) 043.
  14. L. Alvarez-Gaume, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2019) 142.
  15. D. Orlando, S. Reffert, and F. Sannino, Phys. Rev. D 101, 065018 (2020).
  16. D. Poland, S. Rychkov, and A. Vichi, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 015002 (2019).
  17. N. Dondi, I. Kalogerakis, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 035.
  18. A. Monin, Phys. Rev. D 94, 085013 (2016).
  19. A. de la Fuente, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2018) 041.
  20. D. Banerjee, S. Chandrasekharan, and D. Orlando, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 061603 (2018).
  21. D. Banerjee, S. Chandrasekharan, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 051603 (2019).
  22. L. A. Gaumé, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, Phys. Rep. 933, 2180 (2021).
  23. We thank D. Orlando for pointing this out to us and helping us understand the discussion presented in this paragraph.

  24. L. Alvarez-Gaume, O. Loukas, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2017) 059.
  25. S. Hellerman, N. Kobayashi, S. Maeda, and M. Watanabe, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2019) 038.
  26. O. Antipin, J. Bersini, F. Sannino, Z.-W. Wang, and C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 102, 045011 (2020).
  27. In Ref. [21] it was predicted that λ0≠0, based on an incorrect assumption. This error was later corrected in Ref. [22].

  28. D. Cecile and S. Chandrasekharan, Phys. Rev. D 77, 014506 (2008).
  29. H. Singh and S. Chandrasekharan, Phys. Rev. D 100, 054505 (2019).
  30. H. Singh, arXiv:1911.12353.
  31. T. Bhattacharya, A. J. Buser, S. Chandrasekharan, R. Gupta, and H. Singh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 172001 (2021).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation