Abstract
Let \(F_g(t)\) be the generating function of intersection numbers of \(\psi \)-classes on the moduli spaces \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{g,n}\) of stable complex curves of genus g. As by-product of a complete solution of all non-planar correlation functions of the renormalised \(\Phi ^3\)-matrical QFT model, we explicitly construct a Laplacian \(\Delta _t\) on a space of formal parameters \(t_i\) which satisfies \(\exp (\sum _{g\ge 2} N^{2-2g}F_g(t))=\exp ((-\Delta _t+F_2(t))/N^2)1\) as formal power series in \(1/N^2\). The result is achieved via Dyson-Schwinger equations from noncommutative quantum field theory combined with residue techniques from topological recursion. The genus-g correlation functions of the \(\Phi ^3\)-matricial QFT model are obtained by repeated application of another differential operator to \(F_g(t)\) and taking for \(t_i\) the renormalised moments of a measure constructed from the covariance of the model.
We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.
Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Advertisement
This paper completes the reverse engineering of a special quantum field theory on noncommutative geometries. The final step could be of interest in other areas of mathematics:
Theorem 1.1
Let
be the generating function of intersection numbers of \(\psi \)-classesFootnote 1 on the moduli spaces \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{g,n}\) of stable complex curves of genus g [1, 2]. The stable partition function satisfies, as a formal power series in \(N^{-2}\),
where \(\displaystyle F_2(t)= \frac{7}{240} \cdot \frac{t_2^3}{3! T_0^5} + \frac{29}{5760} \frac{t_2 t_3}{T_0^4} + \frac{1}{1152} \frac{t_4}{T_0^3}\) generates the intersection numbers of genus 2, \(T_0:=(1-t_0)\) and \(\Delta _t=-\sum _{i,j}{\hat{g}}^{ij}\partial _i\partial _j- \sum _{i}{\hat{\Gamma }}^{i}\partial _i\) is a Laplacian on the formal parameters \(t_0,t_2,t_3,\dots \) given by
with \({{\mathcal {R}}}_m(t):= \displaystyle \frac{2}{3} \sum _{k=1}^m \frac{(2m{-}1)!! \,kt_{k+1}}{(2k{+}3)!! T_0} \sum _{l=0}^{m-k} \frac{l!}{(m{-}k)!} B_{m-k,l} \Big (\Big \{\frac{j!t_{j+1}}{(2j{+}1)!!T_0}\Big \}_{j=1}^{m-l+1}\Big )\).
The \(F_g(t)\) are recursively extracted from \({{\mathcal {Z}}}_g(t):=\frac{1}{(g-1)!} (-\Delta _t+F_2(t))^{g-1} 1\) via
Here and in Theorem 1.1, \(B_{m,k}(\{x\})\) are the Bell polynomials (see Definition 4.10). These equations are easily implemented in any computer algebra system.
Theorem 1.1 seems to be closely related with \(\exp (\sum _{g\ge 0} F_g)= \exp ({\hat{W}})1\) proved by Alexandrov [3],Footnote 2 where \({\hat{W}}:=\frac{2}{3}\sum _{k=1}^\infty (k+\frac{1}{2}) t_k {\hat{L}}_{k-1}\) involves the generators \({\hat{L}}_n\) of the Virasoro algebra. Including N and moving \(\exp (N^2 F_0+F_1)\) to the other side, our \(\Delta _t\) is in principle obtained via Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula from Alexandrov’s equation. Of course, evaluating the necessary commutators is not viable.
Theorem 1.1 suggests several fascinating questions:
-
Is \({\hat{\Gamma }}^i\) a Levi-Civita connection for \({\hat{g}}^{ij}\), i.e. \({\hat{\Gamma }}^i= \sum _j {\hat{g}}^{ij}\sqrt{\det {\hat{g}}^{-1}} \partial _j (\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det {\hat{g}}^{-1}}})\)? Here \(\det {\hat{g}}^{-1}\) would be the determinant of \(( {\hat{g}}^{ij})\), whatever this means.
-
Is there a reasonable definition of a volume \(\int dt \frac{1}{\sqrt{\det {\hat{g}}^{-1}(t)}}\)?
-
Is it possible to prove that \(\sum _{g=2}^\infty N^{2-2g} F_g(t)\) is Borel summable for \(t_l<0\)?
Theorem 1.1 is a by-product of our effort to construct the non-planar sector of the renormalised \(\Phi ^3_D\)-matricial quantum field theory in any dimension \(D\in \{0,2,4,6\}\). These models are closely related to the Kontsevich model [2] so that a link to intersection numbers is not surprising.
2 Introduction
Matrix models have a huge scope of applications [4, 5], ranging from combinatorics over 2D quantum gravity [6, 7] up to quantum field theory on noncommutative spaces [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. Of particular interest is the Kontsevich model [2], which was designed to prove Witten’s conjecture [1] that the generating function of intersection numbers of \(\psi \)-classes on the moduli space \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{g,n}\) of stable complex curves satisfies the KdV equations. See also [16,17,18].
More recent investigations of matrix models led to the discovery of a universal structure called topological recursion [19, 20]. Topological recursion was subsequently identified in many different areas of mathematics and theoretical physics [18, 21]. The Kontsevich model is, next to the Hermitian 1-matrix model (to which it is related via Miwa transformation; see e.g. [22]), the most basic example for topological recursion.
On the other hand, renormalisation of quantum field theories on noncommutative geometries generically leads to matrix models similar to the Kontsevich model. The crucial difference is that convergence of the (usually) formal series in the coupling constant is addressed, and achieved by renormalisation [11,12,13]. Renormalisation is sensitive to the dimension encoded in the covariance of the matrix model. For historical reasons, namely the perturbative renormalisation [10] of the \(\Phi ^4\)-model on Moyal space and its vanishing \(\beta \)-function [14], also the quartic analogue of the Kontsevich model was intensely studied. In [15] the simplest topological sector was reduced to a closed equation for the 2-point function. This equation was recently solved in [23] after understanding the pattern behind the solution for the 2D-Moyal space [24]. On the 4D-Moyal space, the solution for the 2-point function was derived in [25], which has resolved the triviality problem for this specific noncommutative \(\Phi ^4_4\)-model. All correlation functions with simplest topology (genus \(g=0\) and one boundary) can be explicitly described by a nested Catalan problem [26].
In [27, 28] these methods developed for the \(\Phi ^4\)-model were reapplied to the cubic (Kontsevich-type) model. The new tools, together with the Makeenko-Semenoff solution [29] of a non-linear integral equation, permitted an exact solution of all planar (i.e. genus-0) renormalised correlation functions in dimension \(D\in \{2,4,6\}\). In particular, exact (and surprisingly compact) formulae for planar correlation functions with \(B\ge 2\) boundary components were obtained. The simplicity of the formulae [27] for \(B\ge 2\) suggests an underlying pattern. It is traced back to the universality phenomena captured by topological recursion.Footnote 3 We refer to the book [18].
In this article we give the complete description of the non-planar sector of the renormalised \(\Phi _D^3\)-model. The notation defined in [28] will be used and recalled in Sect. 3. We borrow from topological recursion the notational simplification to complex variables z for the previous \(\sqrt{X+c}\) and the vision that the correlation functions are holomorphic in \(z \in {{\mathbb {C}}}\setminus \{0\}\) (see Sect. 4.1). Knowing this, we proceed however in a different way. In Sect. 4.2 we introduce our main tool, a boundary creation operator \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1,\dots ,z_B}\) which, when applied to a genus-g correlation function \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|\dots |z_{B-1})\) with \(B-1\) boundaries labelled \(z_1,\dots ,z_{B-1}\), creates a \(B^{\text {th}}\) boundary labelled \(z_B\). The existence of such an operator is suggested by the ‘loop insertion operator’ in topological recursion [18].
We rely on the sequence \(\{\varrho _l\}_{l\in {{\mathbb {N}}}}\) of moments of a measure arising from the renormalised planar 1-point function [27, 28]. This sequence is uniquely defined by the renormalised covariance of the model, the renormalised coupling constant and the dimension \(D\in \{0,2,4,6\}\). The boundary creation operator acts on Laurent polynomials in the \(z_i\) with coefficients in rational functions of the \(\varrho _l\). The heart of this paper is a combinatorial proof, independent of topological recursion, that the boundary creation operator does what it should (Theorem 4.6, portioned into Lemmas proved in an appendix). It is then (to our taste) considerably easier compared with topological recursion to derive in Sect. 4.3 structural results about the \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|\dots |z_{B})\) such as the degree of the Laurent polynomials, the maximal number of occurring \(\{\varrho _l\}\) and the weight of the rational function.
The main part of Sect. 4.3 is devoted to the solution of \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) for \(g\ge 1\). We find \({{\mathcal {G}}}_1(z)\) by a simple ansatz and \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) for \(g \ge 2\) from a Dyson-Schwinger type equation (4.3),
where \({\hat{K}}_z\) an integral operator. Thus, all \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) can be recursively evaluated if \({\hat{K}}_z\) can be inverted. Topological recursion tells us that the inverse is a residue combined with a special kernel operator. We give a direct combinatorial proof that the same method works in our case.
We show in Sect. 5.1 that the \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) arise for \(g\ge 1\) by application of the boundary creation operator to a uniquely defined ‘free energy’ \(F_g(\varrho )\). These \(F_g(\varrho )\) are characterised by ’only’ \(p(3g-3)\) rational numbers, where p(n) is the number of partitions of n. We show in Sect. 5.2 that (2.1) can be written as a second-order differential operator acting on \(\exp (\sum _{g\ge 1} N^{2-2g} F_g)\) in which it is convenient to eliminate \(F_1\). The result is Theorem 1.1 expressed in terms of \(\varrho _0=1-t_0\) and \(\varrho _l =-\frac{t_l+1}{(2l+1)!!}\). In other words, to construct the non-planar sector of the \(\Phi ^3_D\)-matricial QFT model one has to replace the formal parameters \(t_l\) in the generating function \(F_g(t)\) of intersection numbers by precisely determined moments \(\{\varrho _l\}\) resulting from the renormalisation of the planar sector of the model. We finish with a discussion of the (deformed) Virasoro algebra in Sect. 5.3 and a short summary (Sect. 6).
In the meantime an analogue of the boundary creation operator \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z}\) was found for the matricial \(\Phi ^4\)-model [30]. In this setting, two of us with J. Branahl introduced generalised correlation functions which satisfy an interwoven system of Dyson-Schwinger equations [31]. The solution for low \(|\chi |\) provided strong evidence for the conjecture that the matricial \(\Phi ^4\)-model (in that paper called quartic analogue of the Kontsevich model) satisfies blobbed topological recursion [32], a generalisation of topological recursion. The proof that the genus \(g=0\) sector satisfies blobbed topologcal recusion was achieved by two of us in [33], based on a functional relation related to the x-y-symmetry in topological recursion [34, 35]. Some geometrical aspects of these generalised correlation functions were analysed in [36]. Furthermore, the free energies \(F_0\) and \(F_1\) are computed in [37]. All these results are reviewed in [38]. It is also worth to mention that the complex \(\Phi ^4\)-model with complex instead of Hermitian matrix (also known as the LSZ-model [9] from noncommutative geometry perspective) was proved by one of us with J. Branahl to be governed by topological recusion [39].
3 Summary of Previous Results
3.1 Setup
We follow [28] to introduce tuples \(\underline{n}=(n_1,n_2,\ldots ,n_{\frac{D}{2}})\) of non-negative integers. The number of tuples \(\underline{n}\) of given \(|\underline{n}|=n_1+n_2+\cdots +n_{\frac{D}{2}}\) is \(\left( {\begin{array}{c}|\underline{n}|+\frac{D}{2}-1\\ \frac{D}{2}-1\end{array}}\right) \). Let \({{\mathbb {N}}}_{{\mathcal {N}}}^{D/2}:=\{ \underline{m}\in {{\mathbb {N}}}^{D/2}: |\underline{m}|\le {{\mathcal {N}}}\}\). The action of the \(\Phi ^3_D\)-model is then defined by
where \(H_{\underline{n}\underline{m}}:= E_{\underline{n}}+E_{\underline{m}}\). The constant V is first of all a formal parameter; for a noncommutative quantum field theory model, \(V=(\frac{\theta }{4})^{D/2}\) will be related to the deformation parameter of the Moyal plane. The parameters \(\lambda _{bare},\kappa ,\nu ,\zeta ,Z\) and soon \(\mu _{bare}\) are \({{\mathcal {N}}}\)-dependent renormalisation parameters. They are determined by normalisation conditions parametrised by physical mass \(\mu \) and coupling constant \(\lambda \). The matrices \((\Phi _{\underline{n}\underline{m}})\) are multi-indexed Hermitian matrices, \(\Phi _{\underline{n}\underline{m}} =\overline{\Phi _{\underline{m}\underline{n}}}\). The external matrix \(E=(E_{\underline{m}}\delta _{\underline{n},\underline{m}})\) can be assumed to be diagonal and has the eigenvalues \(E_{\underline{n}}=\frac{\mu _{bare}^2}{2} +e\big (\frac{|\underline{n}|}{\mu ^2 V^{2/D}}\big )\), where e(x) is a monotonously increasing differentiable function with \(e(0)=0\) (on the noncommutative Moyal plane, \(e(x)=x\)).
The next step is to define (and rearrange) the partition function
where source \((J_{\underline{n}\underline{m}})\) is a multi-indexed Hermitian matrix of rapidly decaying entries.
The correlation functions are defined as moments of the partition function. It turns out by earlier work [15] that the correlation functions expand into multi-cyclic contributions. It is therefore convenient to work with \({{\mathbb {J}}}_{\underline{p}_1\ldots \underline{p}_{N_\beta }} :=\prod _{j=1}^{N_\beta } J_{\underline{p}_j\underline{p}_{j+1}}\) with \(\underline{p}_{N_\beta +1}\equiv \underline{p}_{1}\). Taking into account that genus-g correlation functions scale with \(V^{-2g}\) [4, 15], the following expansion of the partition function is obtained:
where \(\nu _i=\# \{\beta \in \{1,\ldots ,B\}\;:~N_\beta =i\}\). We call the cumulant \(G^{(g)}_{|\underline{p}_1^1\ldots \underline{p}^1_{N_1}|\ldots |\underline{p}_1^B\ldots \underline{p}^B_{N_B}|}\) an \((N_1+\cdots +N_B)\)-point function of genus g; when the \(N_\beta \) do not matter, a correlation function of genus g with B boundary components. hese \((N_1+\cdots +N_B)\)-point functions have a perturbative expansion into ribbon graphs drawn on genus-g Riemann surfaces with B boundary components. These ribbon graphs are dual to maps and as such can also be studied from a point of view of enumerative geometry.
Finally, we recall from [28] the Ward-Takahashi identity for \(|\underline{q}|\ne |\underline{p}|\)
It arises from invariance of the partition function under unitary transformation \(\Phi \mapsto U^\dagger \Phi U\) of the integration variable [14], or directly from the structure of \({{\mathcal {Z}}}[J]\) [40].
3.2 Dyson–Schwinger equation for \(B=1\)
The Dyson-Schwinger equations are determined in [27, 28] for \(g=0\) and solved for all planar correlation functions. Inserting there the formal genus expansion \( G_{|\underline{p}_1^1\ldots \underline{p}^1_{N_1}|\ldots |\underline{p}_1^B\ldots \underline{p}^B_{N_B}|} :=\sum _{g=0}^\infty V^{-2g} G^{(g)}_{|\underline{p}_1^1\ldots \underline{p}^1_{N_1}|\ldots | \underline{p}_1^B\ldots \underline{p}^B_{N_B}|}\) it is straightforward to extract from [27, 28] Dyson-Schwinger equations for the cumulants \(G^{(g)}_{|\underline{p}_1^1\ldots \underline{p}^1_{N_1}|\ldots | \underline{p}_1^B\ldots \underline{p}^B_{N_B}|}\). It turns out that the planar 1-point function plays a special rôle; we shift it to
Three relations between renormalisation parameters are immediate [28]: \(\lambda =Z^{1/2}\lambda _{bare}\), \(\frac{\lambda \zeta }{Z}=1-\frac{1}{Z}\) and \(\mu _{bare}^2=\mu ^2 + \lambda \nu \). Now we can use all the Dyson-Schwinger equations evaluated in [28]. The planar 1-point function satisfies [28, eq. (3.12)]
where \(C:=-\frac{\lambda ^2\nu ^2(1+Z)+4 \kappa \lambda }{Z}\), whereas for \(g\ge 1\) we get
3.3 Integral equations
Introducing the measure
we can rewrite (3.7) as an integral equation. The measure has support in \([4 F_{\underline{0}}^2,\Lambda _{{{\mathcal {N}}}}^2]\) where \(\Lambda _{{{\mathcal {N}}}}^2=\max (4F_{\underline{n}}^2\;:~ |\underline{n}|={{\mathcal {N}}})\). For quantum field theory it is necessary to take a large-\({{\mathcal {N}}}\) limit. In general this produces divergences which need renormalisation. Optionally the large-\({{\mathcal {N}}}\) limit can be entangled with a limit \(V\rightarrow \infty \) which, supposing the \(F_{\underline{n}}\) scale down with V (as e.g. in (3.5)), can be designed to let \(\varrho (X)\) converge to a continuous function. We also pass to mass-dimensionless quantities via multiplication by specified powers of \(\mu \) [28]. This amounts to choose the mass scale as \(\mu =1\).
To keep maximal flexibility we consider a measure \(\varrho \) with support in \([1,\Lambda ^2]\) of which a limit \(\Lambda \rightarrow \infty \) has to be taken for quantum field theory. As already observed in [29], equation (3.6) extends to the closed equation
for a sectionally holomorphic function \(W_0(X)\) from which one extracts \(W^{(0)}_{|\underline{p}|}=W_0(4F_{\underline{p}}^2)\). The corresponding relation
for \(2g+B>1\) extends (3.7) to
Using techniques for boundary values of sectionally holomorphic functions [29], easily adapted to include \(Z-1,\nu ,C\ne 0\) [28], one obtains the following solution of (3.9):
Here, the finite parameter c and the (for \(\Lambda ^2\rightarrow \infty \)) possibly divergent \(Z,\nu \) are determined by renormalisation conditions depending on the dimension:
together with the convention \(Z=1\) for \(D\in \{2,4\}\) and \(\nu =0\) for \(D=2\). For given coupling constant \(\lambda \) as the only remaining parameter, these equations can be solved for c:
By the implicit function theorem, (3.13) has a smooth solution in an inverval \(-\lambda _c<\lambda <\lambda _c\), in any dimension \(D\in \{0,2,4,6\}\). The Lagrange inversion theorem gives the expansion of c in \(\lambda ^2\):
After that renormalisation procedure the limit \(\Lambda ^2\rightarrow \infty \) is safe in all correlation function and any dimension \(D\in \{2,4,6\}\).
3.4 Dyson–Schwinger equation for \(B>1\)
An \((N_1+\cdots +N_B)\)-point function of genus g can be obtained from the \((1+1+\cdots +1)\)-point function of genus g with B boundary components through the explicit formula [28, Prop. 4.1]
For \(g=0\) one has to write \(\frac{W_0(X_{k_1}^1)}{2\lambda }\) instead of \(G_0(X_{k_1}^1)\). Furthermore, a \((1+1+\dots +1)\)-point function \(G_{g}(X_1|X\triangleleft _J)\) with \(B>1\) boundary components and genus g fulfils the linear integral equation [28, eq. (4.5)]
where \(J=\{2,3,..,B\}\). Here and throughout the paper (for z instead of X) we abbreviate \(G_g(X_0|X\triangleleft _I):=G_g(X_0|X_{i_1}|X_{i_2}|\ldots |X_{i_p})\) and \(G_g(X\triangleleft _I):=G_g(X_{i_1}|X_{i_2}|\ldots |X_{i_p})\) if \(I=\{i_1,\ldots ,i_p\}\). We let \(G_g(X_0|X\triangleleft _\emptyset )=G_g(X_0)\). In the sum, \(I\uplus I'=J\) indicates summation over all possibly empty subsets \(I\subset J\), with \(I':=J\setminus I\). The difference to the planar sector \((g=0)\) is the last term indexed \(g-1\) which only contributes if \(g\ge 1\). Furthermore, the entire sector of genus \(h<g\) contributes to the genus-g sector.
The equations (3.15) for \(g=0\) have been solved in [27]:
for \(B\ge 3\), where
Note that multiple t-derivatives of R(t) at \(t=0\) produce renormalised moments of the measure (3.8):
In fact the proof of (3.16) consists in a resummation of an ansatz which involves Bell polynomials (see Definition 4.10) in the \(\{\varrho _l\}\).
The next goal is to find solutions for (3.11) and (3.15) at any genus by employing techniques of complex analysis. The moments (3.17) will be of paramount importance for that. We will find that all solutions are universal in terms of \(\{\varrho _l\}\). The concrete model characterised by the sequence \(E_{\underline{n}}\), coupling constant \(\lambda \) and the dimension D only affects the values of \(\{\varrho _l\}\) via the measure (3.8) and the D-dependent solution c of (3.13).
4 Solution of the Non-planar Sector
4.1 Change of variables
As already mentioned, the equation for \(W_0\) and its solution holomorphically extend to (certain parts of) the complex plane. The corresponding techniques have been brought to perfection by Eynard. We draw a lot of inspiration from the exposition given in [18]. Starting point is another change of variables:
for \(2g+B>1\). In the beginning, z is defined to be positive; nevertheless all correlation functions have an analytic continuation. We define them by the complexification of the equations (3.11) and (3.15), where we assume that the complex variables fulfil the equations if they lie on the interval \([\sqrt{1+c},\sqrt{1+\Lambda ^2}]\). By recursion hypothesis each correlation function is analytic for non-vanishing imaginary part of the complex variables \(z_i\), possibly with the exception of diagonals \(z_i=\pm z_j\).
We rephrase some of the earlier results in this setup. The solutions (3.11), (3.16) and the formula for the (\(1+1+1\))-point function given in [27] are easily translated into
Note that \(\tilde{\varrho }(y)\) has support in \([\sqrt{1+c},\sqrt{\Lambda ^2+c}]\subset {{\mathbb {R}}}_+\) because of \(c>-1\) [28]. Furthermore, \({{\mathcal {W}}}_0(z)\) extends to a sectionally holomorphic function with branch cut along \([-\sqrt{1+\Lambda ^2}, -\sqrt{1+c}]\), the \((1+1)\)-point function of genus zero is holomorphic outside \(z_i=0\) and the diagonals \(z_1=-z_2\), whereas the \((1+1+1)\)-point function (and all higher-B functions) at genus 0 are meromorphic with only pole at \(z_i=0\).
Definition 4.1
Let \({\hat{K}}_z\) be the integral operator of the linear integral equation,
where \({{\mathcal {W}}}_0(z)\) is given by (4.2).
In this notation, (3.11) takes the form
We will heavily rely on:
Lemma 4.2
The operator \({\hat{K}}_z\) defined in Definition 4.1 satisfies
Proof
This is a reformulation of [27, Lemma 5.5]. \(\quad \square \)
The first step beyond [27] is to determine the 1-point function at genus 1:
Proposition 4.3
The solution of (4.3) for \(g=1\) is
where the \(\varrho _l\) are given in (3.17).
Proof
From (4.2) we have \(\lambda {{\mathcal {G}}}_0(z|z)=\frac{\lambda ^3}{z^4}\). Lemma 4.2 suggests the ansatz \({{\mathcal {G}}}_1(z)=\frac{\beta }{z^3}+\frac{\gamma }{z^5}\) with \({\hat{K}}_z {{\mathcal {G}}}_1(z)=\frac{\beta \varrho _0 }{z^2} +\frac{\gamma \varrho _0}{z^4}+\frac{\gamma \varrho _1}{z^2}\). Comparison of coefficients yields the assertion.
\(\square \)
From (3.14) we get the N-point function of genus 1 which in complex variables reads
Next we express equation (3.15) in the new variables. To find more convenient results we use (3.14) to write with \(J=\{2,..,B\}\)
and \({{\mathcal {G}}}_0(z_1,z_2,z_2)=8\lambda \frac{\partial }{2z_2\partial z_2 }\frac{{{\mathcal {W}}}_0(z_1)-{{\mathcal {W}}}_0(z_2)}{z_1^2-z_2^2}\).
Inserting (4.4) into (3.15) gives with Definition 4.1 the following formula for \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z\triangleleft _J)\), for \(2g+|J| \ge 2\):
Note that this covers also (4.3) as \(J=\emptyset \).
4.2 Boundary creation operator
We are going to construct an operator which plays the rôle of the formal \(T_{\underline{n}}:= \frac{1}{E_{\underline{n}}} \frac{\partial }{\partial E_{\underline{n}}}\) applied to the logarithm of the partition function \({{\mathcal {Z}}}[0]\) given in (3.2). In dimension \(D=0\) where \(Z-1=\kappa =\nu =\zeta =0\) and \(\mu _{bare}=\mu \), \(\lambda _{bare}=\lambda \) we formally have
By repeated application of \(T_{\underline{n}_i}\) we formally produce an \((1+\dots +1)\)-point function. Of course, these operations are not legitimate: in dimensions \(D\in \{2,4,6\}\) we have to include for renormalisation the \(\Phi \)-linear terms in (3.1), and the partition function has no chance to exist for real \(\lambda \).
Nevertheless, we are able to show that \(T_{\underline{n}_i}\) admits a rigorous replacement which we call the boundary creation operator. It will be our main device:
Definition 4.4
For \(J=\{1,\dots ,p\}\) let \(|J|:=p\) and \(z_J:=(z_1,\dots ,z_{p})\). Then
Note that the last variable z in \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z}\) plays a very different rôle than the \(z_J\)!
Lemma 4.5
The differential operators \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z}\) commute,
Proof
Being a derivative, it is enough to verify \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_p,z_q} \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_p}(\varrho _k) =\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_q,z_p} \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_q}(\varrho _k)\) for any k and \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_p,z_q} \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_p}(z_i) =\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_q,z_p} \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_q}(z_i)\) for any \(i\in J\). This is guaranteed by
\(\quad \square \)
This shows that boundary components labelled by \(z_i\) behave like bosonic particles at position \(z_i\). The creation operator \((2\lambda )^3 \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z}\) adds to a |J|-particle state another particle at position z. The |J|-particle state is precisely given by \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z\triangleleft _J)\):
Theorem 4.6
Assume that \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) is, for \(g\ge 1\), an odd function of \(z\ne 0\) and a rational function of \(\varrho _0,\dots ,\varrho _{3g-2}\) (true for \(g=1\)). Then the \((1+1+\cdots +1)\)-point function of genus \(g\ge 1\) and B boundary components of the renormalised \(\Phi ^3_D\)-matricial QFT model in dimension \(D\in \{0,2,4,6\}\) has the solution
where \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1)\) is the 1-point function of genus \(g\ge 1\) and the boundary creation operator \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J}\) is defined in Definition 4.4. For \(g=0\) the boundary creation operators act on the \((1+1)\)-point function
Proof
We rely on several Lemmas proved in Appendix A. Regarding (4.8) as a definition, we prove in Lemma A.6 an equivalent formula for the linear integral equation (4.5). This expression is satisfied because Lemmas A.3 and A.5 add up to 0. Consequently, the family of functions (4.8) satisfies (4.5). This solution is unique because of uniqueness of the perturbative expansion. \(\quad \square \)
Remark 4.7
The assumption that \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) is an odd function of z and rational in \(\varrho _0,\ldots ,\varrho _{3g-2}\) will inductively follow from Theorem 4.12 and Proposition 4.14 for genus \(h\le g\). On the other hand, to prove Theorem 4.12 and Proposition 4.14 for genus h, we need to apply Theorem 4.6 for genus \(h'<h\). In this way, Theorems 4.6, 4.12 and Proposition 4.14 are all inductively proved step by step when increasing the genus in each Theorem/Proposition.
Corollary 4.8
Let \(J=\{2,\ldots ,B\}\). Assume that \(z\mapsto {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) is holomorphic in \({{\mathbb {C}}}\setminus \{0\}\) with \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)=-{{\mathcal {G}}}_g(-z)\) for all \(z\in {{\mathbb {C}}}\setminus \{0\}\) and \(g\ge 1\). Then all \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z\triangleleft _J)\) with \(2-2g-B<0\)
-
1.
are holomorphic in every \(z_i \in {{\mathbb {C}}}\setminus \{0\}\)
-
2.
are odd functions in every \(z_i\), i.e. \( {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(-z_1|z\triangleleft _J)=-{{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z\triangleleft _J)\) for all \(z_1,z_i\in {{\mathbb {C}}}\setminus \{0\}\).
Proof
The boundary creation operator \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z}\) of Definition 4.4 preserves holomorphicity in \({{\mathbb {C}}}\setminus \{0\}\) and maps odd functions into odd functions. Thus only the initial conditions need to be checked. They are fulfilled for \({{\mathcal {G}}}_0(z_1|z_2|z_3)\) and \({{\mathcal {G}}}_1(z_1)\) according to (4.2); for \(g\ge 2\) by assumption. \(\quad \square \)
The assumption will be verified later in Proposition 4.14.
Corollary 4.9
The boundary creation operator \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_1}\) acting on an \((N_1+\cdots +N_B)\)-point function of genus g gives the following \((1+N_1+\cdots +N_B)\)-point function of genus g
Proof
This follows from the change to complex variables in equation (3.14) and \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_1} (\frac{1}{z_i^2-z_j^2})=0\) for \(1\ne i\ne j\ne 1\). \(\quad \square \)
4.3 Solution of the 1-point function for \(g\ge 1\)
It remains to check that the 1-point function \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) at genus \(g\ge 1\) satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 4.6 and Corollary 4.8, namely:
-
1.
\({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) depends only on the moments \(\varrho _0,\dots ,\varrho _{3g-2}\) of the measure,
-
2.
\(z\mapsto {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) is holomorphic on \({{\mathbb {C}}}\setminus \{0\}\) and an odd function of z.
We establish these properties by solving (4.3) via a formula for the inverse of \({\hat{K}}_z\). This formula is inspired by topological recursion, see e.g. [18]. We give a few details in Sect. 4.4.
Definition 4.10
The Bell polynomials are defined by
for \(n\ge 1\), where the sum is over non-negative integers \(j_1,\ldots ,j_{n-k+1}\) with \(j_1+\cdots +j_{n-k+1}=k\) and \(1j_1+2j_2+\cdots +(n-k+1)j_{n-k+1}=n\). Moreover, one defines \(B_{0,0}=1\) and \(B_{n,0}=B_{0,k}=0\) for \(n,k>0\).
An important application is Faà di Bruno’s formula, the n-th order chain rule:
Proposition 4.11
Let \(f(z)=\sum _{k=0}^\infty \frac{a_{2k}}{z^{2k}}\) be an even Laurent series about \(z=0\) bounded at \(\infty \). Then the inverse of the integral operator \({\hat{K}}_z\) of Definition 4.1This suggests to introd is given by the residue formula
Proof
The formulae (4.2) give rise to the series expansion
where the \(\varrho _l\) are given in (3.17) (either take \(\lim _{\Lambda \rightarrow \infty }{{\mathcal {W}}}_0(z)\) in (4.2) or leave out the limit in (3.17)). The series of its reciprocal is found using (4.9):
Multiplication by the geometric series gives
The residue of a monomial in \(f(z')=\sum _{k=0}^\infty \frac{a_{2k}}{(z')^{2k}}\) is then
In the next step we apply the operator \(z^2{\hat{K}}\frac{1}{z}\) to (4.13), where Lemma 4.2 is used:
The last sum over j is treated as follows, where the Bell polynomials are inserted for \(S_m\):
We have used \(B_{n,0}=0\) and \(B_{0,n}=0\) for \(n>0\) to eliminate some terms, changed the order of sums, and used the following identity for the Bell polynomials [27, Lemma 5.9]
Inserted back we find that (4.14) reduces to the (\(j=k\))-term of the first sum in the last line of (4.14), i.e.
This finishes the proof. \(\quad \square \)
Theorem 4.12
For any \(g\ge 1\) and \(z\in {{\mathbb {C}}}\setminus \{0\}\) one has
Proof
The formula arises when applying Proposition 4.11 to (4.3) and holds if the function in \(\{~\}\) is an even Laurent polynomial in \(z'\) bounded in \(\infty \). This is the case for \(g=1\) where only \({{\mathcal {G}}}_0(z'|z') =\frac{\lambda ^2}{(z')^4}\) contributes. Evaluation of the residue reconfirms Proposition 4.3. We proceed by induction in \(g\ge 2\), assuming that all \({{\mathcal {G}}}_h(z')\) with \(1\le h<g\) on the rhs of (4.16) are odd Laurent polynomials bounded in \(\infty \); their product is even. The induction hypothesis also verifies the assumption of Theorem 4.6 so that \({{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-1}({-}z'|{-}z')=-{{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-1}(z'|{-}z')={{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-1}(z'|z')\) is even and, because of \({{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-1}(z'|z'')=(2\lambda )^3 \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g-1}_{z'',z'} {{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-1}(z'')\), inductively a Laurent polynomial bounded in \(\infty \). Thus, equation (4.16) holds for genus \(g\ge 2\) and, as consequence of (4.13), \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) is again an odd Laurent polynomial bounded in \(\infty \). Equation (4.16) is thus proved for all \(g\ge 1\), and the assumption of Theorem 4.6 is verified. \(\quad \square \)
A more precise characterisation can be given. It relies on
Definition 4.13
A polynomial \(P(x_1,x_2,\dots )\) is called n -weighted in \((x_1,x_2,\ldots )\) if \(\sum _{k=1}^\infty k x_k \frac{\partial }{\partial x_k} P(x_1,x_2,\dots ) =nP(x_1,x_2,\dots )\).
The Bell polynomials \(B_{n,k}(x_1,\dots ,x_{n-k+1})\) are n-weighted. The number of monomials in an n-weighted polynomial is p(n), the number of partitions of n. The product of an n-weighted by an m-weighted polynomial is \((m+n)\)-weighted.
In the following we let \(P^{decoration}_j(\varrho )\) be some j-weighted polynomial in \((\frac{\varrho _1}{\varrho _0},\dots ,\frac{\varrho _j}{\varrho _0})\) with rational coefficients. A decoration (empty or primes) distinguishes several such polynomials, but is of no relevance.
Proposition 4.14
For \(g\ge 1\) one has
where \(P_0\in {{\mathbb {Q}}}\) and the \(P_j(\varrho )\) for \(j\ge 1\) are some j-weighted polynomials in \((\frac{\varrho _1}{\varrho _0},\dots ,\frac{\varrho _j}{\varrho _0})\) with rational coefficients.
Proof
The case \(g=1\) is directly checked. We proceed by induction in g for both terms in \(\{~\}\) in (4.16). The hypothesis gives \({{\mathcal {G}}}_h(z'){{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-h}(z')= (2\lambda )^{4g-2} \sum _{k=0}^{3g-4} \frac{P'_{3g-4-k}(\varrho )}{\varrho _0^{2g-2} (z')^{2k+6}}\). In the second term in \(\{~\}\), \({{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-1}(z'|z')=(2\lambda )^3 \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag \,g{-}1}_{z',z'} {{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-1}(z')\), the three types of contributions in the boundary creation operator act as follows:
which are all of the same structure \((2\lambda )^{4g-2} \sum _{k=0}^{3g-4} \frac{P''_{3g-4-k}(\varrho )}{\varrho _0^{2g-2} (z')^{2k+6}}\)
because \(S_j(\varrho )\) is also a j-weighted polynomial by (4.11). \(\quad \square \)
In particular, this proves the assumption of Theorem 4.6, namely that \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) depends only on \(\{\varrho _0,\dots , \varrho _{3g-2}\}\). To be precise, we reciprocally increase the genus in Theorem 4.6 and Proposition 4.14 as described in Remark 4.7.
4.4 Remarks on topological recursion
We return to equation (4.5) for \(g>0\) or \(|J|\ge 3\) in case of \(g=0\). In the first term, \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z \triangleleft _J)\) is given by Theorem 4.6 so that \(z_1{{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z \triangleleft _J)\) is by Proposition 4.14 and Definition 4.4 of \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z_1}\) an even Laurent polynomial about \(z_1=0\) bounded at \(\infty \). Therefore, Proposition 4.11 applies and gives the representation
The last term \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_\beta |z\triangleleft _{J\setminus \beta })\) does not contribute to the residue. The other term \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z'|z\triangleleft _{J\setminus \beta })\) also arises for \((h,I)=(g,\{\beta \})\) and \((h',I')=(0,\{\beta \})\) in the sum, where it has the prefactor \({{\mathcal {G}}}_0(z'|z_\beta )\) given in the second line of (4.2). The total contribution of this term inside [ ] is
This suggests to introduce
By Theorem 4.6 and Proposition 4.14 together with Definition 4.4, each \(\omega _{g,B}(z_1,\ldots ,z_B)\) with \(2g+B>2\) is an even Laurent-polynomial in every \(z_i\) so that we can replace \(z'\mapsto -z'\) in one of the arguments. The structure then matches the combination \(\omega _{0,2}(z',z_\beta )+\omega _{0,2}(z',-z_\beta )\) needed as prefactor of \(\omega _{g,B-1}(z',z_2,{\mathop {\check{\dots }}\limits ^{\beta }},z_B)\). Multiplying (4.17) by \(\prod _{i\in J}z_i\) and taking the previous discussion into account, we have proved (after a shift \(B\mapsto B+1\)):
Theorem 4.15
(cf. [18, Thm. 6.4.4]). The functions \(\omega _{g,B+1}(z_0,\ldots ,z_B)\) given via (4.18) in terms of the complexification (3.10) and (4.1) of the cumulants \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_0|z\triangleleft _{\{1,\ldots ,B\}})\) in (3.3) satisfy for \(2g+B\ge 2\) the recursive equation
where \(\omega _{g,|I|+1}(z_0,z\triangleleft _I)= \omega _{g,n+1}(z_0,z_{i_1},\ldots .,z_{i_n})\) if \(I=\{{i_1},\ldots .,{i_n}\}\) and the the kernel K is given in Proposition 4.11.
The case (\(g=0\), \(B=3\)) was excluded in the above discussion, but can be checked directly.
After rescaling \(\omega _{g,B}(z_1,..,z_B)= (2\lambda )^{4g+3B-4}\omega ^{TR}_{g,B}(z_1,..,z_B)\) we have reproved the known result [18, Thm. 6.4.4] of topological recursion when taking a factor 2 out of K and writing
In fact, [18, Thm. 6.4.4] motivated our ansatz for an inverse of \({\hat{K}}_z\) as the residue involving \(K(z,z')\). Our proof of Theorem 4.15 is of comparable difficulty and length as [18, Thm. 6.4.4].
For the \(\omega _{g,|J|}(z\triangleleft _J)\) with \(J\ge 2\) we have the alternative representation of Proposition 4.6. There is, however, one property where (4.19) is really needed: for the proof of the symmetry \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z_2)={{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_2|z_1)\) for \(g\ge 1\). The complete symmetry of \(\omega _{g,B}(z_1,\ldots ,z_B)\) or equivalently \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|\ldots |z_B)\) in all arguments then follows from Proposition 4.6. For \(g=0\) the symmetry of the starting point \({{\mathcal {G}}}_0(z_1|z_2|z_3)\) is manifest in (4.2). The proof of \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z_2)={{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_2|z_1)\) is the same as [20, Thm. 4.6] (which uses a slightly different notation). There is no need to repeat it in this paper.
5 A Laplacian to Compute Intersection Numbers
5.1 Free energy and boundary annihilation operator
Definition 5.1
We introduce the operators
and the free energies
We call \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}_{{\check{z}}}\) a boundary annihilation operator acting on Laurent polynomials f.
Proposition 5.2
The \(F_g\) have for \(g>1\) a presentation as
where \(P_{3g-3}(\varrho )\) is some \((3g-3)\)-weighted polynomial in \((\frac{\varrho _1}{\varrho _0},\dots , \frac{\varrho _{3g-3}}{\varrho _0})\). They satisfy
Proof
From Proposition 4.14 we conclude for \(g\ge 2\)
which confirms the structure (5.2).
Equation (5.3) is straightforward to check for \(g=1\). Equation (5.3) for \(g\ge 2\) is equivalent to \((2g-2){{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z) = A^\dag _z A_{{\check{w}}} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(\bullet )\). Inserting the definitions we have
where we have completed \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag }_{z}\) to \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{w,z}\) and used that the residue of a total differential vanishes. With Proposition 4.14 it is easy to see that \(\mathop {{{\,\textrm{Res}\,}}}\limits _{w\rightarrow 0} \Big [ \frac{w^{2}dw}{z(z^2-w^2)} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(w)\Big ]={{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\). Since \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z|w)={{\mathcal {G}}}_g(w|z)\) is symmetric for \(g\ge 2\) according to the discussion at the end of Sect. 4.4, we have \((2\lambda )^{-3}{{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z|w) =\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{w,z} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(w) =\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z,w} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) by Theorem 4.6. We have \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}_{{\check{w}}} \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z,\bullet } =\hat{{\textrm{N}}}\), and since \(\hat{{\textrm{N}}} P_j(\varrho )\equiv 0\) for any j-weighted polynomial \(P_j(\varrho )\) in \((\frac{\varrho _1}{\varrho _0},\ldots \frac{\varrho _j}{\varrho _0})\), we have \(\hat{{\textrm{N}}} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)=(2g-1){{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) by Proposition 4.14. Altogether we have proved \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag }_z \hat{{\textrm{A}}}_{{\check{w}}} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(\bullet ) =-{{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z) + \hat{{\textrm{N}}} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z) =(2g-2){{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\). \(\quad \square \)
Remark 5.3
Proposition 5.2 shows that the \(F_g\) provide the most condensed way to describe the non-planar sector of the \(\Phi ^3\)-matricial QFT model. All information about the genus-g sector is encoded in the \(p(3g-3)\) rational numbers which form the coefficients in the \((3g-3)\)-weighted polynomial in \((\frac{\varrho _1}{\varrho _0}, \frac{\varrho _2}{\varrho _0},\dots )\). From these polynomials we obtain the \((1+\dots +1)\)-point function with B boundary components via \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)=(2\lambda )^3 \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag }_z F_g\) followed by Theorem 4.6.
Lemma 5.4
Whenever \((2g+B-2)>0\), the operator \(\hat{{\textrm{N}}}\) measures the Euler characteristics,
Proof
Both cases with \((2g+B-2)=1\) are directly checked. The general case follows by induction from \([\hat{{\textrm{N}}},\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z}]=\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z}\) in combination with Theorem 4.6 and \(\hat{{\textrm{N}}} F_g=(2g-2)F_g\) for \(g\ge 2\). \(\quad \square \)
Corollary 5.5
whenever \((2g+B-3)>0\).
Hence, up to a rescaling, \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}_{{\check{z}}}\) indeed removes the boundary component previously located at z. We also have \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}_{{\check{z}}} F_g=0\) for all \(g\ge 1\) so that the \(F_g\) play the rôle of a vacuum. Note that \({{\mathcal {W}}}_0(z)\) cannot be produced by whatever \(F_0\).
5.2 The Laplacian
Let \({{\mathcal {Z}}}_V^{np} := \exp \big (\sum _{g=1}^\infty V^{2-2g} F_g\big )\) be the non-planar part of the partition function, understood as formal power series in \(\frac{1}{V^2}\). Consider the following operation with \({{\mathcal {Z}}}_V^{np}\):
Its coefficients are
because of \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^\dag _z F_1=\frac{{{\mathcal {G}}}_1(z)}{(2\lambda )^3}\) and \({\hat{K}}_z{{\mathcal {G}}}_1(z)+\frac{\lambda ^3}{z^4}=0\) by (4.3) and (4.2) and
for \(g\ge 2\). Inserting \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag }_z F_h =\frac{1}{(2\lambda )^3} {{\mathcal {G}}}_h\) and \(\big (\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag }_z +\frac{1}{\varrho _0 z^4} \frac{\partial }{\partial z}\big ) {{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-1}(z)=\frac{1}{(2\lambda )^3} {{\mathcal {G}}}_{g-1}(z|z)\) we see that \([V^{4-2g}] O_V\) equals \(\frac{1}{\lambda (2\lambda )^6}\) times the rhs of (4.3), hence vanishes. This means that \(O_V\equiv 0={{\mathcal {Z}}}^{np}_V O_V\).
We invert \({\hat{K}}_z\) via Proposition 4.11, divide by z and apply \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}_{{\check{z}}}\) given by the residue in Definition 5.1:
We insert \(K(z,z')=\frac{2}{({{\mathcal {W}}}_0(z') -{{\mathcal {W}}}_0(-z')) ({z'}^2-z^2)}\) from Proposition 4.11 and commute the integration contours from \(|z'|<|z|\) to \(|z|<|z'|\). This procedure picks up the poles of \(K(z,z')\) at \(z=z'\) and \(z=-z'\), i.e.
There is no pole at \(z=0\); the other two poles give the same contribution. Abbreviating \(f(z',\varrho )= \big (\big (\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^\dag _{z'} {+}\frac{1}{\varrho _0 (z')^4} \frac{\partial }{\partial z'} \big ) \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^\dag _{z'} +\frac{V^2}{64 \lambda ^4 (z')^4} \big ) {{\mathcal {Z}}}_V^{np}\), we thus have
Inserting (4.10) and renaming \(z'\rightarrow z\) we get
where
The inverse of the denominator is given by (4.11), without the \(\frac{1}{z'}\) prefactor and in variables \(z'\mapsto z\). Its product with the numerator is
where we have used (4.15) for the first \(S_m(\varrho )\) to achieve better control of signs.
The residue of \(\frac{V^2}{64 \lambda ^4 z^4}\) is immediate and can be moved to the lhs:
Next we separate the \(\varrho _0\)-derivatives:
We isolate \(F_1\), i.e. \({{\mathcal {Z}}}_V^{np}=\varrho _0^{-\frac{1}{24}} {{\mathcal {Z}}}_V^{stable}\), where \({{\mathcal {Z}}}_V^{stable} := \exp \big (\sum _{g=2}^\infty V^{2-2g} F_g\big )\) is the stable partition function. We commute the factor \(\varrho _0^{-\frac{1}{24}}\) in front of [ ] and move it to the other side:
Expanding \({{\mathcal {Z}}}_V^{stable} =:1+\sum _{g=2}^\infty V^{2-2g}{{\mathcal {Z}}}_g\), we have
Consequently, we obtain a parabolic differential equation in \(V^{-2}\) which is easily solved. Inserting
we have:
Theorem 5.6
When expressed in terms of the moments of the measure \(\varrho \), the stable partition function is given as a formal power series in \(V^{-2}\) by
where
and \(\tilde{{{\mathcal {R}}}}_m(\varrho )\) given by (5.6).
Because we are essentially treating the Kontsevich model [2], our \(F_g\) are nothing else than the generators of intersection numbers of tautological characteristic classesFootnote 4 on the moduli space of stable complex curves [1, 2, 18, 41]. The free energies \(F_g\) are listed in different conventions in the literature. The translation to e.g. [18, 41] is as follows:
It is clear that Theorem 5.6 translates into the same statement for the generating function of intersection numbers. We have given this formulation in the very beginning in Theorem 1.1. There we adopt the conventions in [41] but rename \(I_k\equiv t_k=-(2k-1)!!\varrho _{k-1}\) and \(T_0\equiv (1-I_1)\). We also redefined \({{\mathcal {R}}}_m(t)=(2m-1)!!\tilde{{{\mathcal {R}}}}_m(\varrho )\) as well as \(N=\frac{V}{(2\lambda )^2}\). The formula can easily be implemented in computer algebraFootnote 5 and quickly computes the free energies \(F_g(t)\) to moderately large g. Several other implementations exist, for instance the powerful Sage programme [42] which performs many more natural operations in the tautological ring. An early implementation in Maple (up to \(g=10\)) can be found in [43]. These implementations were an important consistency check for us. Algorithms to compute \(\kappa ,\delta ,\lambda \)-classes from \(\psi \)-classes are given in [44].
Example 5.7
For convenience we list
(already given in [41, eq. (5.30)]) and
The first line agrees with [41, Table II]. The notation is such that the intersection numbers are easily identified, e.g. \(\langle \tau _2\tau _3^4\rangle \equiv \int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{4,5}} \psi _1^2 \psi _2^3 \psi _3^3\psi _4^3\psi _5^3= \frac{134233}{331776}\) or \(\langle \tau _2^2\tau _4\tau _5\rangle \equiv \int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{4,4}} \psi _1^2 \psi _2^2 \psi _3^4\psi _4^5=\frac{7597}{691200}\). The very last number is \(\langle \tau _{3g-2}\rangle \equiv \int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{g,1}} \psi _1^{3g-2} =\frac{1}{24^{g}\cdot g!}\) for \(g=4\), in agreement with [41, eq. (5.31)]. The arXiv version v1 of this paper also gave \(F_5\) and \(F_6\) in an appendix, but there is not really a need for them.
Remark 5.8
As explained in [18, sec. 6.7.3.1], it is more appropriate to view \(F_g\), after (inverse) Schur transform of the \(\varrho _l\),
as generating function of intersection numbers of \(\kappa \)-classes on \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{g,0}\). When passing to \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|\dots |z_n)\) by application of the boundary creation operator, equivalently to the \(\omega _{g,n}(z_1,\dots ,z_n)\) of topological recursion, all mixed intersection numbers of \(\psi \)- and \(\kappa \)-classes are generated. A factor \(\frac{-(2l+1)!!}{z_i^{2l+3}}\) translates to \(\psi _i^l\) and differentiation with respect to \(s_l\) gives a factor \(\kappa _l\) under the \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}} }_{g,n}\)-integral. In particular, the subfamily of intersection numbers only of \(\psi \)-classes and with power \(\ge 2\) arises by multiple application of \(\prod _{i=1}^n \frac{2+3l_i}{z_i^{5+2l_i}} \frac{\partial }{ \partial \varrho _{l_i}}\Big |_{l_i\ge 1}\) on \(F_g\) and projecting to the part without \(\varrho _{l\ge 1}\). Every term in \(F_g\) with n factors of \(t_{i\ge 2}\) thus gives a unique intersection number of \(\psi \)-classes on \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{g,n}\). This justifies to view \(F_g\) as intersection numbers of \(\psi \)-classes.
Example 5.9
Consider \(g=2\) and \(F_2\) given by (5.7). Inserting \((-7!!) \frac{\varrho _3}{\varrho _0}=s_3-s_2s_1+\frac{s_1^3}{6}\), \((-5!!) \frac{\varrho _2}{\varrho _0}=s_2-\frac{s_1^2}{2}\) and \((-3!!) \frac{\varrho _1}{\varrho _0}=s_1\) from (5.9) we get
from which one extracts \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,0}} \kappa _3=\frac{1}{1152}\), \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,0}} \kappa _2\kappa _1=\frac{1}{240}\) and \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,0}} (\kappa _1)^3=\frac{43}{2880}\).
Applying \({\hat{A}}^{\dag }_{z_1}\) directly to (5.7) gives
The very last term encodes the intersection number \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,1}} \psi _1^4=\frac{1}{1152}\). All other involve \(\kappa \)-classes. To extract them we have to pass via (5.9) to the \(s_l\)-variables:
We extract e.g. \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,1}} \kappa _2(\kappa _1)^2=\frac{259}{5760}\), \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,1}} \kappa _2\kappa _1 \psi _1=\frac{101}{5760}\), \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,1}} (\kappa _1)^2 (\psi _1)^2=\frac{139}{5760}\) and so on. These intersection numbers agree with the implementation in admcycles [42].
On the other hand we can apply \({\hat{A}}_{z_1,z_2}\) to (5.10) in order to extract intersection numbers on \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}_{2,2}}\). We only give the part without \(\varrho _{l\ge 1}\) which encodes intersection numbers of \(\psi \)-classes:
This gives the intersection numbers \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,2}} \psi _1^0\psi _2^5=\frac{1}{1152}\), \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,2}} \psi _1\psi _2^4=\frac{1}{384}\) and \(\int _{\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,2}} \psi _1^2\psi _2^3=\frac{29}{5760}\) as well as the symmetric copies \(\psi _1\leftrightarrow \psi _2\). The last case arises by application of \(\prod _{i=1}^2(2\lambda )^3\frac{2+3l_i}{z_i^{5+2l_i}} \frac{\partial }{ \partial \varrho _{l_i}}\Big |_{l_1=1,l_2=2}\) to the term \((2\lambda )^4\frac{29}{128} \frac{\varrho _1\varrho _2}{\varrho _0^4}\) of \(F_2\). In this sense \(F_2\) itself can be viewed as generating function of the subset of intersection numbers of \(\psi \)-classes on \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{2,n}\) where the power of every \(\psi _i\) is \(\ge 2\).
5.3 A deformed Virasoro algebra
We return to (5.4) with \(O_V\equiv 0\), but instead of applying the inverse of \({\hat{K}}_z\) we directly take the residue to define a family of operators on rational functions \(f(\varrho )\) of \(\varrho _l\):
By construction, \({\tilde{L}}_n {{\mathcal {Z}}}^{np}_V=0\). Recall that in the Kontsevich model one has \(L_n{{\mathcal {Z}}}\) for the full partition function and generators \(L_n\) of a Virasoro algebra (or rather a Witt algebra). As explained below, these \({\tilde{L}}_n\) do not satisfy the commutation relations of the Virasoro algebra exactly. An explicit expression is obtained from
Evaluating the residues and defining \(A=\frac{(2\lambda )^4}{4V^2}\) and rescaling \(L_n:=A {\tilde{L}}_n\) gives
To write it in a more compact way, it is convenient to introduce the differential operator
Note that \(\frac{\partial }{\partial \varrho _{l}} {\hat{D}}\ne {\hat{D}}\frac{\partial }{\partial \varrho _{l}}\). The result is:
Lemma 5.10
The nonplanar partition \({{\mathcal {Z}}}_V^{np} := \exp \Big (\sum _{g=1}^\infty V^{2-2g} F_g\Big )\) satisfies the constraints \(L_n{{\mathcal {Z}}}^{np}_V=0\) for all \(n\in {{\mathbb {N}}}\), where
where \({\hat{D}}\) is the differential operator defined by (5.13) and \(A=\frac{(2\lambda )^4}{4V^2}\).
With the commutation rules
we end up after long but straightforward computation:
Lemma 5.11
The generators \(L_n\) of Lemma 5.10 obey the commutation relation
and for any \(m,n\ge 1\),
where
Remark 5.12
The differential operator \({\hat{D}}\) has its origin in the implicit definition of the constant c (3.13) and the dependence of \(\varrho _l\) on c. Since the expression
diverges for any \(D>0\) in the limit \(\Lambda \rightarrow \infty \), it is necessary to reconstruct the analogue of the derivative \(\frac{\partial }{\partial c}\) through the differential operator \({\hat{D}}\). Replacing the differential operator by \({\hat{D}}\mapsto \frac{\partial }{\partial \varrho _{-1}}\) and the generators by
recovers the original undeformed Virasoro algebra. As explained above, \(\varrho _{-1}\) and consequently the standard Virasoro generators do not exist in dimension \(D>0\). The renormalisation necessary for \(D>0\) alters the definition of c and prevents the construction of \(L_{-1}\) and \(F_0\) which in \(D=0\) depend on \(\varrho _{-1}\). Higher topologies (\(\chi \le 0\)) are not affected because any explicit \(\varrho _{-1}\)-dependence drops out.
6 Summary
The construction of the renormalised \(\Phi ^3_D\)-QFT model on noncommutative geometries of dimension \(D\le 6\) is now complete. After the previous solution of the planar sector in [27, 28] we established in this paper an algorithm to compute any correlation function \( G^{(g)}_{|\underline{p}_1^1\ldots \underline{p}^1_{N_1}|\cdots | \underline{p}_1^B\cdots \underline{p}^B_{N_B}|}\) of genus \(g\ge 1\):
-
1.
Compute the free energy \(F_g(t)\) via Theorem 1.1 and the note thereafter. It encodes the \(p(3g-3)\) intersection numbers of \(\psi \)-classes (all with a power \(\ge 2\)) on the moduli spaces \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{g,n}\) of stable complex curves of genus g. Take \(F_1=-\frac{1}{24} \log T_0\) for \(g=1\). Alternatively, start from intersection numbers obtained by other methods (e.g. [42]).
-
2.
Change variables to \(\varrho _0=1-t_0\) and \(\varrho _l =-\frac{t_{l+1}}{(2l+1)!!}\), where \(\varrho _l\) are given by (3.17) for the measure (3.8) and with c implicitly defined by (3.13).
-
3.
Apply to the resulting \(F_g(\varrho )\) according to Proposition 5.2 and Theorem 4.6 the boundary creation operators \( \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1,\dots ,z_B}\circ \dots \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1,z_2} \circ \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1}\) defined in Definition 4.4. Multiply by \((2\lambda )^{4g+3B-4}\) to obtain \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|\cdots |z_B)\).
-
4.
Pass to \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1^1\cdots z^1_{N_1}|\cdots |z_1^B\cdots z^B_{N_B})\) via difference quotients (3.14), where \(X^\beta _{k_\beta }=(z^\beta _{k_\beta })^2-c\).
-
5.
Specify to \(z^\beta _{k_\beta }\mapsto ( 4F_{\underline{p}^\beta _{k_\beta }}^2+c)^{1/2}\) to obtain \(G^{(g)}_{|\underline{p}_1^1\cdots \underline{p}^1_{N_1}|\cdots | \underline{p}_1^B\cdots \underline{p}^B_{N_B}|}\), where \(F_{\underline{p}}\) arises by mass-renormalisation from the \(E_{\underline{p}}\) in the initial action (3.1) of the model.
Our work was essentially a reverse engineering in opposite order. The last step 6. was given to us by the formal partition function of the model. From there we had to climb up to the formula for the intersection numbers.
We remark that, in spite of the relation to the integrable Kontsevich model [2], this \(\Phi ^3_D\)-model provides a fascinating toy model for a quantum field theory which shows many facets of renormalisation. Our exact formulae can be expanded about \(\lambda =0\) via (3.13) and agree with the usual perturbative renormalisation which in \(D=6\) needs Zimmermann’s forest formula [45] (see [28]). Also note that at fixed genus g one expects \({{\mathcal {O}}}(n!)\) graphs with n vertices so that a convergent summation at fixed g cannot be expected a priori. Moreover, in \(D=6\) the \(\beta \)-function of the coupling constant is positive for real \(\lambda \), which in this particular case poses not the slightest problem for summation.
What remains to understand is the resummation in the genus, i.e. \(\sum _{g=1}^\infty V^{2-2g} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) or \(\sum _{g=2}^\infty N^{2-2g} F_g(t)\). All intersection numbers are positive for \(t_l>0\), which corresponds to \(\varrho _l<0\) for \(l\ge 1\). Because of the \(\lambda ^2\)-prefactor in front of (3.8) and the definition (3.17) of the \(\varrho _l\), we have \(t_l>0\) for real \(\lambda \). Therefore, the sum over the genus must diverge for \(\lambda \in {{\mathbb {R}}}\), which is not surprising because in this case the action (3.1) is unbounded from below. In contrast, it was observed in [28] that for the planar sector it is better to take \(\lambda \in {{\mathbb {R}}}\). The final challenge of this model is to establish that \(\sum _{g=2}^\infty N^{2-2g} F_g(t)\) is Borel summable for \(t_l<0\), which would achieve convergence of the genus expansion in two disks in the complex \(\lambda \)-plane tangent from above and below the real axis at \(\lambda =0\). Important progress in this direction was recently achieved in [46] with the proof of factorial bounds \(|F_g| \le r^{-g}\Gamma (\beta g) \) for some \(r>0\) and \(\beta \le 5\).
Notes
Strictly speaking, \(F_g\) generates intersection numbers of \(\kappa \)-classes on \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{g,0}\), but these are in one-to-one correspondence with a subset of intersection numbers of \(\psi \)-classes. See Remark 5.8.
We thank Gaëtan Borot for bringing this reference to our attention.
We thank Roland Speicher for the hint that there might be a relation between our work and topological recursion.
We will point out in Remark 5.8 that \(F_g\) should be understood as generating function of intersection numbers of \(\kappa \)-classes, which however translate into a subset of intersection numbers of \(\psi \)-classes.
A first implementation in Mathematica is provided via the arXiv page of this paper or via http://wwwmath.uni-muenster.de/u/raimar/files/IntersectionNumbers.nb It takes less than 35 seconds on an office desktop to compute all intersection numbers up to \(g=10\).
References
Witten, E.: Two-dimensional gravity and intersection theory on moduli space. Surv. Differ. Geom. 1, 243–310 (1991). https://doi.org/10.4310/SDG.1990.v1.n1.a5
Kontsevich, M.: Intersection theory on the moduli space of curves and the matrix Airy function. Commun. Math. Phys. 147, 1–23 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02099526
Alexandrov, A.: Cut-and-Join operator representation for Kontsewich–Witten tau-function. Mod. Phys. Lett. A 26, 2193–2199 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732311036607. arXiv:1009.4887 [hep-th]
Brezin, E., Itzykson, C., Parisi, G., Zuber, J.B.: Planar diagrams. Commun. Math. Phys. 59, 35 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01614153
Di Francesco, P.: 2D quantum gravity, matrix models and graph combinatorics. In: Application of Random Matrices in Physics. Proc. Les Houches, pp. 33–88 (2004)
Gross, D.J., Migdal, A.A.: Nonperturbative two-dimensional quantum gravity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 127 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.64.127
Di Francesco, P., Ginsparg, P.H., Zinn-Justin, J.: 2-D Gravity and random matrices. Phys. Rept. 254, 1–133 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-1573(94)00084-G. arXiv:hep-th/9306153 [hep-th]
Langmann, E., Szabo, R.J.: Duality in scalar field theory on noncommutative phase spaces. Phys. Lett. B 533, 168–177 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(02)01650-7. arXiv:hep-th/0202039 [hep-th]
Langmann, E., Szabo, R.J., Zarembo, K.: Exact solution of quantum field theory on noncommutative phase spaces. JHEP 01, 017 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2004/01/017. arXiv:hep-th/0308043 [hep-th]
Grosse, H., Wulkenhaar, R.: Renormalisation of \(\phi ^4\)-theory on noncommutative \({{\mathbb{R} }}^4\) in the matrix base. Commun. Math. Phys. 256, 305–374 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-004-1285-2. arXiv:hep-th/0401128 [hep-th]
Grosse, H., Steinacker, H.: Renormalization of the noncommutative \(\phi ^3\)-model through the Kontsevich model. Nucl. Phys. B 746, 202–226 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.04.007. arXiv:hep-th/0512203 [hep-th]
Grosse, H., Steinacker, H.: A Nontrivial solvable noncommutative \(\phi ^3\)-model in 4 dimensions. JHEP 08, 008 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2006/08/008. arXiv:hep-th/0603052 [hep-th]
Grosse, H., Steinacker, H.: Exact renormalization of a noncommutative \(\phi ^3\)-model in 6 dimensions. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 12(3), 605–639 (2008). https://doi.org/10.4310/ATMP.2008.v12.n3.a4. arXiv:hep-th/0607235 [hep-th]
Disertori, M., Gurau, R., Magnen, J., Rivasseau, V.: Vanishing of beta function of non commutative \(\Phi ^4_4\) theory to all orders. Phys. Lett. B 649, 95–102 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2007.04.007. arXiv:hep-th/0612251 [hep-th]
Grosse, H., Wulkenhaar, R.: Self-dual noncommutative \(\phi ^4\)-theory in four dimensions is a non-perturbatively solvable and non-trivial quantum field theory. Commun. Math. Phys. 329, 1069–1130 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-014-1906-3. arXiv:1205.0465 [math-ph]
Witten, E.: On the Kontsevich model and other models of two-dimensional gravity. In: Proceedings. 20th International Conference on Differential Geometric Methods in Theoretical Physics, New York, 1991, pp. 176–216. World Sci. Publ., River Edge, NJ (1992)
Lando, S.K., Zvonkin, A.K.: Graphs on Surfaces and Their Applications. Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences, vol. 141, p. 455. Springer, Berlin (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-38361-1. With an appendix by Don B. Zagier, Low-Dimensional Topology, II
Eynard, B.: Counting Surfaces. Progress in Mathematical Physics, vol. 70. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7643-8797-6
Chekhov, L., Eynard, B., Orantin, N.: Free energy topological expansion for the 2-matrix model. JHEP 12, 053 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2006/12/053. arXiv:math-ph/0603003 [math-ph]
Eynard, B., Orantin, N.: Invariants of algebraic curves and topological expansion. Commun. Numer. Theor. Phys. 1, 347–452 (2007). https://doi.org/10.4310/CNTP.2007.v1.n2.a4. arXiv:math-ph/0702045 [math-ph]
Eynard, B.: A short overview of the ”Topological recursion” (2014) arXiv:1412.3286 [math-ph]
Ambjørn, J., Chekhov, L., Kristjansen, C.F., Makeenko, Yu.: Matrix model calculations beyond the spherical limit. Nucl. Phys. B404, 127–172 (1993) arXiv:hep-th/9302014 [hep-th]. https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(93)90476-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(95)00391-5. [Erratum: Nucl. Phys. B 449, 681(1995)]
Grosse, H., Hock, A., Wulkenhaar, R.: Solution of all quartic matrix models (2019) arXiv:1906.04600 [math-ph]
Panzer, E., Wulkenhaar, R.: Lambert-W Solves the Noncommutative \(\Phi ^4\)-Model. Commun. Math. Phys. 374(3), 1935–1961 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-019-03592-4. arXiv:1807.02945 [math-ph]
Grosse, H., Hock, A., Wulkenhaar, R.: Solution of the self-dual \(\Phi ^4\) QFT-model on four-dimensional Moyal space. JHEP 01, 081 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2020)081. arXiv:1908.04543 [math-ph]
de Jong, J., Hock, A., Wulkenhaar, R.: Nested Catalan tables and a recurrence relation in noncommutative quantum field theory. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré D Comb. Phys. Interact. 9, 47–72 (2022) arXiv:1904.11231 [math-ph]. https://doi.org/10.4171/AIHPD/113
Grosse, H., Sako, A., Wulkenhaar, R.: Exact solution of matricial \(\Phi ^3_2\) quantum field theory. Nucl. Phys. B 925, 319–347 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2017.10.010. arXiv:1610.00526 [math-ph]
Grosse, H., Sako, A., Wulkenhaar, R.: The \(\Phi ^3_4\) and \(\Phi ^3_6\) matricial QFT models have reflection positive two-point function. Nucl. Phys. B 926, 20–48 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2017.10.022. arXiv:1612.07584 [math-ph]
Makeenko, Yu., Semenoff, G.W.: Properties of Hermitean matrix models in an external field. Mod. Phys. Lett. A 6, 3455–3466 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732391003985
Hock, A.: Matrix Field Theory (2020) arXiv:2005.07525 [math-ph]. Ph.D. thesis, WWU Münster
Branahl, J., Hock, A., Wulkenhaar, R.: Blobbed topological recursion of the quartic Kontsevich model I: loop equations and conjectures. Commun. Math. Phys. 393(3), 1529–1582 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-022-04392-z. arXiv:2008.12201 [math-ph]
Borot, G., Shadrin, S.: Blobbed topological recursion: properties and applications. Math. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 162(1), 39–87 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305004116000323. arXiv:1502.00981 [math-ph]
Hock, A., Wulkenhaar, R.: Blobbed topological recursion of the quartic Kontsevich model II: Genus=0 (2021) arXiv:2103.13271 [math-ph]
Eynard, B., Orantin, N.: About the x-y symmetry of the \(F_g\) algebraic invariants (2013) arXiv:1311.4993 [math-ph]
Hock, A.: On the \(x\)-\(y\) symmetry of correlators in topological recursion via loop insertion operator (2022) arXiv:2201.05357 [math-ph]
Branahl, J., Hock, A., Wulkenhaar, R.: Perturbative and geometric analysis of the quartic Kontsevich model. SIGMA 17, 085 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2021.085. arXiv:2012.02622 [math-ph]
Branahl, J., Hock, A.: Genus one free energy contribution to the quartic Kontsevich model (2021) arXiv:2111.05411 [math-ph]
Branahl, J., Hock, A., Grosse, H., Wulkenhaar, R.: From scalar fields on quantum spaces to blobbed topological recursion. J. Phys. A 55(42), 423001 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ac9260. arXiv:2110.11789 [hep-th]
Branahl, J., Hock, A.: Complete solution of the LSZ model via topological recursion (2022) arXiv:2205.12166 [math-ph]
Hock, A., Wulkenhaar, R.: Noncommutative 3-colour scalar quantum field theory model in 2D. Eur. Phys. J. C 78(7), 580 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6042-3. arXiv:1804.06075 [math-ph]
Itzykson, C., Zuber, J.B.: Combinatorics of the modular group. 2. The Kontsevich integrals. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 7, 5661–5705 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X92002581. arXiv:hep-th/9201001 [hep-th]
Delecroix, V., Schmitt, J., van Zelm, J.: Admcycles: a sage package for calculations in the tautological ring of the moduli space of stable curves. J. Soft. Algebr. Geom. 89–112 (2021) arXiv:2002.01709. https://doi.org/10.2140/jsag.2021.11.89
Xu, H.: \(\mathtt{psrecursion.mw}\): a Maple program to compute intersection indices http://www.cms.zju.edu.cn/news.asp?id=1275 &ColumnName=pdfbook &Version=english (2007)
Faber, C.: Algorithms for computing intersection numbers on moduli spaces of curves, with an application to the class of the locus of Jacobians. In: New Trends in Algebraic Geometry. London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., vol. 264, pp. 93–109. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge (1999). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511721540.006
Zimmermann, W.: Convergence of Bogolyubov’s method of renormalization in momentum space. Commun. Math. Phys. 15, 208–234 (1969). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01645676
Eynard, B.: Large genus behavior of topological recursion (2019) arXiv:1905.11270 [math-ph]
Acknowledgements
We thank Gaëtan Borot, Johannes Schmitt and Alexander Alexandrov for valuable feedback. We are grateful to an anonymous referee for a thorough verification and numerous helpful comments. This feedback allowed us to eliminate many typos and to fill a larger gap in the previous proof of Proposition 5.2. Our work was partially supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) under the coordinated programmes SFB 878 and RTG 2149 and the Cluster of Excellence (“Gefördert durch die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) im Rahmen der Exzellenzstrategie des Bundes und der Länder EXC 2044 -390685587, Mathematik Münster: Dynamik–Geometrie–Struktur”) “Mathematics Münster”, as well as by the Erwin Schrödinger Institute in Vienna. A.H. is greatful to Akifumi Sako for fruitful discussions and for the hospitality at the Tokyo University of Science, where a major part of this work was developed.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Additional information
Communicated by P-D. Francesco.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Lemmas Relevant for Theorem 4.6
Lemmas Relevant for Theorem 4.6
Assumption A.1
We assume that \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z)\) is, for \(g\ge 1\), a function of z and of \(\varrho _0,\dots ,\varrho _{3g-2}\) (true for \(g=1\)). We take Eq. (4.8) and in particular \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z|z\triangleleft _J):=(2\lambda )^3 \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z\triangleleft _J)\) as a definition of a family of functions \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_{1}|z_J)\) and derive equations for that family.
Lemma A.2
Let \(J=\{2,\cdots ,B\}\). Then under Assumption A.1 and with Definition 4.1 of the operator \({\hat{K}}_{z_1}\) one has
Proof
Take Definition 4.4 for \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_J,z} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z\triangleleft _J)\) and apply Lemma 4.2. \(\quad \square \)
Lemma A.3
Let \(J=\{2,\cdots ,B\}\). Then under Assumption A.1 one has
Proof
Definition 4.4 gives with \(\frac{\frac{1}{z_1^{3+2j}}-\frac{1}{y^{3+2j}}}{z_1^2-y^2}= -\sum _{l=0}^{2j+2}\frac{z_1^ly^{2j+2-l}}{z_1^{3+2j}y^{3+2j}(z_1+y)}\) for the first term
The second term (after dividing by \((2\lambda )^3\)) reads
The denominator \((z_1+z_\beta )\) cancels in the combination of interest:
The remaining \(z_\beta \)-derivative confirms the assertion. \(\quad \square \)
Lemma A.4
Let \(J=\{2,\cdots ,B\}\). Then under Assumption A.1 one has
Proof
Apply \((2\lambda )^{3B-3}\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1,\dots ,z_B}\cdots \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1,z_2}\) to equation (4.3), use the Leibniz rule and take (4.8) (as definition) into account. \(\quad \square \)
Lemma A.5
Let \(J=\{2,\cdots ,B\}\). Then under Assumption A.1 one has
Proof
The first term of the lhs, \({\hat{K}}_{z_1}\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1,\dots ,z_B} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z\triangleleft _{J\backslash B})\), gives by Lemma A.2 and \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z\triangleleft _J)=(2\lambda )^3\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_2,\dots ,z_B} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z\triangleleft _{J\backslash \{B\}})\) the following
We have used that \({{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z\triangleleft _{J\backslash \{B\}})\) can only depend on \(\varrho _l\) for \(l\le 3g-4+|J|\). For the second term of the lhs, \(\hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1,\dots ,z_B}{\hat{K}}_{z_1}{{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z\triangleleft _{J\backslash B})\), Lemma A.2 can also be used with \(B-1\) instead of B:
Subtracting the second from the first expression proves the Lemma. \(\quad \square \)
Lemma A.6
Let \(J=\{2,\cdots ,B\}\).The linear integral equation (4.5) is under Assumption A.1 and with Definition 4.4 equivalent to the expression
Proof
With Lemma A.4 we can rewrite the linear integral equation (4.5) in the form
By using this formula for \( \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1,\dots ,z_{B-1}} \dots \hat{{\textrm{A}}}^{\dag g}_{z_1,z_2} {\hat{K}}_{z_1} {{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1)\) and inserting it back into (A.1) gives
The second and third line break down to \(2\lambda {{\mathcal {G}}}_0(z_1|z_B){{\mathcal {G}}}_g(z_1|z\triangleleft _{J\backslash \{B\}}).\) Therefore, the assertion follows if we can show that, in the fourth line, the part of the sum which excludes \(\beta =B\) cancels with the fifth line. This is true because of
Consequently, the linear integral equation can be written by operators of the form given in this Lemma.
\(\square \)
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Hock, A., Grosse, H. & Wulkenhaar, R. A Laplacian to Compute Intersection Numbers on \(\overline{{{\mathcal {M}}}}_{g,n}\) and Correlation Functions in NCQFT. Commun. Math. Phys. 399, 481–517 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-022-04557-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-022-04557-w