- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Letters

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
  • Open Access

High-Precision Bootstrap of Multimatrix Quantum Mechanics

Henry W. Lin1,2,* and Zechuan Zheng3,4,†

  • *Contact author: hwlin@princeton.edu
  • †Contact author: zechuan.zheng.phy@gmail.com
PDF

Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 181603 – Published 7 May, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/cyq8-4sd7

Abstract

We consider matrix quantum mechanics with multiple bosonic matrices, including those obtained from dimensional reduction of Yang-Mills theories. Using the matrix bootstrap, we study simple observables like ⟨tr X2⟩ in the confining phase of the theory in the infinite N limit. Exploiting the symmetries of these models and applying nonlinear relaxation, we impose constraints that include traces of words of length up to 14. Our results yield rigorous bounds on the large-N ground-state dynamics, along with estimates of selected low-order observables to eight significant digits.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (67)

  1. P. D. Anderson and M. Kruczenski, Loop equations and bootstrap methods in the lattice, Nucl. Phys. B921, 702 (2017).
  2. H. W. Lin, Bootstraps to strings: Solving random matrix models with positivity, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2020) 090.
  3. X. Han, S. A. Hartnoll, and J. Kruthoff, Bootstrapping matrix quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 041601 (2020).
  4. V. Kazakov and Z. Zheng, Analytic and numerical bootstrap for one-matrix model and “unsolvable” two-matrix model, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2022) 030.

  5. Alternatively, at finite N, one may impose trace relations [6].

  6. V. Kazakov and Z. Zheng, Bootstrap for finite N lattice Yang-Mills theory, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2025) 099.
  7. O. Aharony, J. Marsano, S. Minwalla, K. Papadodimas, and M. Van Raamsdonk, The Hagedorn—deconfinement phase transition in weakly coupled large N gauge theories, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 8, 603 (2004).
  8. D. J. Gross and E. Witten, Possible third order phase transition in the large N lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. D 21, 446 (1980).
  9. S. R. Wadia, N= infinity phase transition in a class of exactly soluble model lattice gauge theories, Phys. Lett. 93B, 403 (1980).
  10. O. Aharony, J. Marsano, S. Minwalla, and T. Wiseman, Black hole-black string phase transitions in thermal 1+1 dimensional supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory on a circle, Classical Quantum Gravity 21, 5169 (2004).
  11. N. Kawahara, J. Nishimura, and S. Takeuchi, Phase structure of matrix quantum mechanics at finite temperature, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2007) 097.
  12. G. Mandal, M. Mahato, and T. Morita, Phases of one dimensional large N gauge theory in a 1/D expansion, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2010) 034.
  13. V. Kazakov and Z. Zheng, Bootstrap for lattice Yang-Mills theory, Phys. Rev. D 107, L051501 (2023).
  14. H. W. Lin and Z. Zheng, Bootstrapping ground state correlators in matrix theory. Part I, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2025) 190.
  15. H. Lin and Z. Zheng, Bootstrapping BFSS, part II (to be published).
  16. D. N. Kabat, G. Lifschytz, and D. A. Lowe, Black hole thermodynamics from calculations in strongly coupled gauge theory, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 16, 856 (2001).
  17. K. N. Anagnostopoulos, M. Hanada, J. Nishimura, and S. Takeuchi, Monte Carlo studies of supersymmetric matrix quantum mechanics with sixteen supercharges at finite temperature, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 021601 (2008).
  18. M. Hanada, Y. Hyakutake, J. Nishimura, and S. Takeuchi, Higher derivative corrections to black hole thermodynamics from supersymmetric matrix quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 191602 (2009).
  19. S. Catterall and T. Wiseman, Black hole thermodynamics from simulations of lattice Yang-Mills theory, Phys. Rev. D 78, 041502 (2008).
  20. V. G. Filev and D. O’Connor, The BFSS model on the lattice, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2016) 167.
  21. D. Kadoh and S. Kamata, Gauge/gravity duality and lattice simulations of one dimensional SYM with sixteen supercharges, arXiv:1503.08499.
  22. E. Berkowitz, E. Rinaldi, M. Hanada, G. Ishiki, S. Shimasaki, and P. Vranas, Precision lattice test of the gauge/gravity duality at large-N, Phys. Rev. D 94, 094501 (2016).
  23. E. Berkowitz, M. Hanada, E. Rinaldi, and P. Vranas, Gauged and ungauged: A nonperturbative test, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2018) 124.
  24. S. Pateloudis, G. Bergner, M. Hanada, E. Rinaldi, A. Schäfer, P. Vranas, H. Watanabe, and N. Bodendorfer (Monte Carlo String/M-theory (MCSMC) Collaboration), Precision test of gauge/gravity duality in D0-brane matrix model at low temperature, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2023) 071.
  25. J. Hoppe, V. Kazakov, and I. K. Kostov, Dimensionally reduced SYM(4) as solvable matrix quantum mechanics, Nucl. Phys. B571, 479 (2000).
  26. B. Lucini and M. Panero, SU(N) gauge theories at large N, Phys. Rep. 526, 93 (2013).
  27. M. Caselle, N. Magnoli, A. Nada, M. Panero, D. Panfalone, and L. Verzichelli, Confining strings in three-dimensional gauge theories beyond the Nambu-Gotō approximation, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2024) 198.
  28. A. Athenodorou, S. Dubovsky, C. Luo, and M. Teper, Confining strings and the worldsheet axion from the lattice, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 40, 2540003 (2025).
  29. J. B. Kogut and L. Susskind, Hamiltonian formulation of Wilson’s lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 11, 395 (1975).

  30. See Refs. [1, 6, 13, 31, 32] for some bootstrap approaches to the Euclidean path integral approach to pure Yang-Mills theory.

  31. Z. Li and S. Zhou, Bootstrapping the Abelian lattice gauge theories, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2024) 154.
  32. Y. Guo, Z. Li, G. Yang, and G. Zhu, Bootstrapping SU(3) lattice Yang-Mills theory, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2025) 033.
  33. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/cyq8-4sd7 for additional details on the numerical implementation, the relaxation procedure, the large-D analysis, and a pedagogical example illustrating the bootstrap framework.

  34. This is equivalent to introducing a formal ℏ=1/N so that [Xij,Pkl]∝iℏ.

  35. Here Oi are single letters, e.g., an XI or a PJ.

  36. H. Araki and G. L. Sewell, KMS conditions and local thermodynamical stability of quantum lattice systems, Commun. Math. Phys. 52, 103 (1977).
  37. H. Fawzi, O. Fawzi, and S. O. Scalet, Certified algorithms for equilibrium states of local quantum Hamiltonians, Nat. Commun. 15, 7394 (2024).
  38. M. Cho, B. Gabai, J. Sandor, and X. Yin, Thermal bootstrap of matrix quantum mechanics, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2025) 186.
  39. M. Cho, B. Gabai, H. W. Lin, J. Yeh, and Z. Zheng, Bootstrapping euclidean two-point correlators, arXiv:2511.08560.
  40. P. Cvitanovic, Group Theory: Birdtracks, Lie’s, and Exceptional Groups (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2020).

  41. In principle, one can also consider other methods like the navigator function [42].

  42. M. Reehorst, S. Rychkov, D. Simmons-Duffin, B. Sirois, N. Su, and B. van Rees, Navigator function for the conformal bootstrap, SciPost Phys. 11, 072 (2021).

  43. Although, in principle, we could relax all quadratic variables, we found it best to scan over ⟨trXIXI⟩ while relaxing the remaining quadratic variables.

  44. N. Bodendorfer, O. Oktay, V. Gautam, M. Hanada, and E. Rinaldi, Variational Monte Carlo with neural network quantum states for Yang-Mills matrix model, Phys. Rev. D 112, 046010 (2025).
  45. K. Mathaba, M. Mulokwe, and J. P. Rodrigues, Large N master field optimization: the quantum mechanics of two Yang-Mills coupled matrices, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2024) 054.
  46. E. Rinaldi, X. Han, M. Hassan, Y. Feng, F. Nori, M. McGuigan, and M. Hanada, Matrix-model simulations using quantum computing, deep learning, and lattice Monte Carlo, PRX Quantum 3, 010324 (2022).

  47. Our λeff=1 becomes m=2, g=2 in the conventions of [45], after a canonical transformation.

  48. A. Jevicki, O. Karim, J. P. Rodrigues, and H. Levine, Loop space Hamiltonians and numerical methods for large N gauge theories, Nucl. Phys. B213, 169 (1983).
  49. A. Jevicki, O. Karim, J. P. Rodrigues, and H. Levine, Loop space Hamiltonians and numerical methods for large N gauge theories. 2., Nucl. Phys. B230, 299 (1984).
  50. J. P. Rodrigues, Numerical solution of lattice Schwinger-dyson equations in the large N limit, Nucl. Phys. B260, 350 (1985).
  51. R. d. M. Koch, A. Jevicki, X. Liu, K. Mathaba, and J. P. Rodrigues, Large N optimization for multi-matrix systems, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2022) 168.

  52. See Refs. [53] and [14] for similar bounds in the BFSS case.

  53. H. W. Lin, Bootstrap bounds on D0-brane quantum mechanics, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2023) 038.
  54. M. Dodelson, Ringdown in the SYK model, SciPost Phys. 19, 081 (2025).
  55. M. Dodelson, Black holes from chaos, arXiv:2501.06170.
  56. N. Kim and J.-H. Park, Massive super Yang-Mills quantum mechanics: Classification and the relation to supermembrane, Nucl. Phys. B759, 249 (2006).
  57. T. Banks, W. Fischler, S. H. Shenker, and L. Susskind, M theory as a matrix model: A conjecture, Phys. Rev. D 55, 5112 (1997).
  58. N. Itzhaki, J. M. Maldacena, J. Sonnenschein, and S. Yankielowicz, Supergravity and the large N limit of theories with sixteen supercharges, Phys. Rev. D 58, 046004 (1998).
  59. J. Hoppe, On the construction of zero energy states in supersymmetric matrix models, arXiv:hep-th/9709132.
  60. J. Hoppe and S.-T. Yau, Absence of zero energy states in reduced SU(N) 3-d supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, arXiv:hep-th/9711169.
  61. M. Nakata, A numerical evaluation of highly accurate multiple-precision arithmetic version of semidefinite programming solver: sdpa-gmp, -QD and -DD., in Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Aided Control System Design (2010), pp. 29–34.
  62. F. Permenter and P. Parrilo, Partial facial reduction: Simplified, equivalent SDPS via approximations of the PSD cone, Math. Program. 171, 1 (2017).
  63. T. Hotta, J. Nishimura, and A. Tsuchiya, Dynamical aspects of large N reduced models, Nucl. Phys. B545, 543 (1999).
  64. T. Anegawa, N. Iizuka, and D. Kabat, Dissipation in the 1/D expansion for planar matrix models, Phys. Rev. D 111, 025003 (2025).
  65. J. P. Rodrigues, “Glueballs” in the quantum mechanics of three large massless Yang-Mills coupled matrices, Phys. Lett. B 868, 139768 (2025).
  66. J. Maldacena and A. Milekhin, To gauge or not to gauge?, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2018) 084.
  67. R. Lanzette and Z. Zheng, Upper bound on the gap of quantum system (to be published).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 181603– Published 7 May, 2026
  • Received 15 December 2025
  • Revised 22 February 2026
  • Accepted 31 March 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation