Giant magnons meet giant

gravitons
Diego Hofman
Princeton University
based on work with
Juan Maldacena12 (IAS) and Nick Dorey2 (DAMTP)

Buenos Aires, 10 years of AdS/CFT

version date: December 18, 2007

1
hep-th/0604135, arXiv:0708.2272
2
hep-th/0703104
ptContents
1 Introduction 4
1.1 String Theory, Gauge Theories AdS/CFT correspondence . . . . . . 4
1.2 Topics for this talk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 The road to integrability: BMN, Spin Chains and Closed Strings . . 5

2 Giant Magnons in Semiclassical String Theory 8

2.1 Localized excitations in a string . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 Giant Magnons in the large J limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3 LLM coordinates, BPS states and SUSY algebra . . . . . . . . . . 12

3 Giants meet 13
3.1 Open strings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2 Strong coupling description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3 Weak coupling description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

4 Exact results 17
4.1 The symmetries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.2 The Y=0 brane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.2.1 Yang Baxter Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
 4.2.2 Crossing Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.3 The Z=0 brane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.3.1 Boundary bound states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

5 Weak coupling results 26

5.1 Two Loop Hamiltonian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5.2 Phases and tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.3 Integrability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

6 Strong coupling results 29

6.1 Bulk results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.2 Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

7 Summary and Conclusions 31

8 Extensions 32

9 Open Problems 32
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 4 1.1 String Theory, Gauge Theories AdS/CFT correspondence

1. Introduction
1.1. String Theory, Gauge Theories AdS/CFT correspondence
• Gauge Theory/String Theory duality. Can we build a strong coupling description
of QCD out of gravity? This is difficult, but there has been recent progress.
• String Theory on AdS5 × S 5 ←→ N = 4 SYM
• Several limits in which N = 4 is not that different from QCD: Quark-gluon
plasma, transcendentality hypothesis [Lipatov; Beisert, Eden, Staudacher], etc.
• In the very beginning, important objects were BPS objects.
• Weak/Strong duality. Problems and Solutions.
• Can we go beyond BPS objects? Can we go beyond perturbative regime? Inte-
grability might takes us there.
• What is integrability? What do we mean by solving a theory exactly?
Anomalous dimensions ↔ Spectrum → S-matrix → Bethe Ansatz → multi-
particle states → Finite Size effects?
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 5 1.2 Topics for this talk

1.2. Topics for this talk

• Review of closed string sector of AdS5 × S 5/ Single trace operators of N =
4 SYM.
• Study the open string sector of AdS5 × S 5/ (Excitations of) determinant opera-
tors in N = 4 SYM.
• Extend the results from the closed string sector, study the symmetries of the
problem and calculate the S-matrix (up to a phase) for cases corresponding to
different orientation of D3-branes (giant gravitons).
• Describe the spectrum of these theories and find new boundary degrees of free-
dom.
• Discuss integrability.
• Compare with weak and strong coupling results. Phase.

1.3. The road to integrability: BMN, Spin Chains and Closed Strings
• Idea that got it all started: consider near BPS operators. [Berenstein, Maldacena,
Nastase]
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 1.36 The road to integrability: BMN, Spin Chains and Closed Strings

• We consider the BPS state T r[Z J ]. This corresponds to a massless mode of 10d
SUGRA propagating on the sphere. ∆ − J = 0.
• What to do next? Smart idea: Consider T r[W Z J ] = J1+i2,5+i6T r[Z J ]. This
is the state with lowest energy and charge J 0 = 1 over the vacuum. Thus, it is
BPS.
• Now we are getting somewhere. We have an impurity on a chain of letters. Let
us just do what we always do: Let’s construct a Bloch State.
X
Op ∼ eilp(· · · ZZZW ZZZ · · · ) (1)
l

• There’s a catch! An honest string state should contain, at least, two excitations
with opposite momenta to be non vanishing because of the trace. These states
are not BPS. They are the next best thing to BPS states: Impurities running in
the chain. This problem can now be mapped to a Spin Chain with ∆ → H
where our fundamental blocks are the magnons we just described. [ Minahan
and Zarembo; Beisert, ...].
• To one loop this is the Heisenberg Spin Chain. We obtain different spin chains
to higher order. All these Spin Chains are integrable!
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 1.37 The road to integrability: BMN, Spin Chains and Closed Strings

• It turns out that in the J → ∞ limit, the energy of these states can be calculated
in perturbation theory with the effective coupling λ0 = Jλ2 . Using symmetry
arguments it is possible to obtain the exact formula:
r
λ 2 p
E−J = 1+ sin (2)
π2 2
[Beisert]
This result uses the su(2|2) × su(2|2) symmetry algebra extended by central
charges that make the chain dynamic. Closed string states are neutral under these
charges. Symmetries do not constrain f (λ) → f (λ) = πλ2 experimental result!
• Because the system is integrable we are tempted to forget about the trace an
consider single excitation states (magnons) at infinite J . Then we can scatter
these and calculate an S-matrix. Are magnons BPS?
• What happens in the string theory side of the story? Classically, the model is
integrable [Bena, Polchinski, Roiban]
• In the Plane Wave (BMN) limit, an exact quantization at J, λ → ∞ and pJ =
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 8 2.1 Localized excitations in a string

fixed is possible [Berenstein, Maldacena, Nastase]. λ0 = λ

J2
expansion.
r
λn2 2πn
E−J = 1+ 2 p= (3)
J J

• In the full geometry the dual states to the spin chain magnons are called giant
magnons [DH, Maldacena].

2. Giant Magnons in Semiclassical String Theory

2.1. Localized excitations in a string
Strings in Flat Space

• Strings of finite worldsheet length.

Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 9 2.1 Localized excitations in a string

+
X
(a)

−p

(c) X−
(b)

X1
(d)

• Strings of infinite worldsheet length.

+
X

(a)

−
(b) X
X1

(c)
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 10 2.2 Giant Magnons in the large J limit

2.2. Giant Magnons in the large J limit

• Solution obtained by minimizing the string action.

cos θ0 sin p2
cos θ = h i= h i (4)
x−sin θ0 t x−cos p2 t
cosh cos θ0 cosh sin p
2

x − cos p2 t
   
x − sin θ0t p
tan(ϕ − t) = cot θ0 tanh = tan tanh (5)
cos θ0 2 sin p2
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 11 2.2 Giant Magnons in the large J limit

• Coordinates and momentum identified by

√ √
dJ λ λ
= or dl = dx (6)
dx 2π 2π
√
dl d(p) λ p
vgauge = = = cos , for p > 0 (7)
dt dp 2π 2
dx ∆ϕ
vstring = = sin θ0 = cos (8)
dt 2

• Note that we allowed for an open string solution. This is equivalent to relaxing
the zero mode of the Virasoro constraints (or the trace in the gauge theory). We
can do this for an infinite string.
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 12 2.3 LLM coordinates, BPS states and SUSY algebra

2.3. LLM coordinates, BPS states and SUSY algebra

ip
e

p
1

x2

x1
(a) (b)

• This coordinates are just a projection of the sphere onto the plane.
• The SUSY algebra in 10d SUGRA contains gauge transformation of the B field
under which the string is charged [Schwarz]. Therefore, open stretched strings
can carry winding charges associated. It is these charges that make the state
BPS. Analogous to strings stretched between branes.
• This charges are proportional to the string length. Therefore:

2
√
R λ i p2 p
k 1 + ik 2 = (e ip
− 1) = i e sin (9)
2πα0 π 2
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 13 3.1 Open strings

r
p λ 2 p
E − J = k0 = 1 + |k1 + ik2|2 = 1+ sin (10)
π2 2

• This algebra looks like the usual 2+1 Poincare algebra. Notice, however, that
boosts are not a symmetry but an outer automorphism of the algebra.
• Finally: Closed string states are neutral. (therefore, not BPS in general).

3. Giants meet
3.1. Open strings
• Consider a D3-brane wrapping a maximal S 3 inside S 5. We can attach strings
to this D-brane.
• Gauge theory operators
B
OY = ji11ij22...i
...jN −1 A i1 i2
N −1 B
Yj1 Yj2 . . . YjiNN−1−1 (ZZZ . . . ZZZ)A (11)
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 14 3.2 Strong coupling description

• One loop results consistent with integrable open spin chain with dirichlet bound-
ary conditions [Berenstein, Vazquez]
• Two loop results in conflict with integrability. [Agarwal]
• At strong coupling, the classical sigma model is integrable [Mann, Vazquez]

3.2. Strong coupling description

• We consider strings with angular momentum mostly in the Z plane.

• There are two inequivalent configurations for a giant graviton attached to these
strings.
• The string interpolates between the giant and the BMN vacuum.
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 15 3.2 Strong coupling description

• Finite J strings do not reach the rim of the circle.

• Novel degree of freedom? Energy:
p λ
B = 1 + 4g 2 , g2 = (12)
16π 2

√
• Zero mode quantization must yield B (n) = n2 + 4g 2.
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 16 3.3 Weak coupling description

3.3. Weak coupling description

• Y brane

B
OY (χ) = ij11ij22...i
...jN −1 A i1 i2
N −1 B Yj 1
Yj 2
. . . Yj
iN −1
N −1
(. . . ZZZχZZZ . . .)A (13)

• Z brane

B
OZ (χ, χ0, χ00) = ji11ij22...i
...jN −1 A i1 i2
N −1 B Zj 1
Z j2
. . . Zj
iN −1
N −1
(χZZ . . . ZZZχ0ZZZ . . . ZZχ00)A
(14)

• Can we fill the vacuum?

B
O0 = ji11ij22...i
...jN −1 A i1 i2
N −1 B
Z Z
j1 j2 . . . Z iN −1
jN −1 (Y Y Y . . . Y Y Y )A (15)
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 17 4.1 The symmetries

4. Exact results
4.1. The symmetries
• AdS5 × S 5 / N = 4 SYM has a P SU (2, 2|4) symmetry group.
• Choice of BMN vacuum breaks this to SU (2|2)2 × R
• Maximal central extension of this algebra is equivalent to consider gauge de-
pendent operators in SY M [Beisert] or strings with winding charge in String
Theory [DH, Maldacena]

αβ k k∗
{Qαa, Qβb} = ab , {Saα , Sbβ } ab
=  αβ (16)
2 2

• Magnons transform in the fundamental (BPS) representation of each SU (2|2)

Qαa|φbi = aδab |ψ α i , Qαa|ψ β i = bαβ ab|φbi
Saα |φbi = cαβ ab|ψ β i , Saα |ψ β i = dδαβ |φai
√ √ √ √
g x+

giη g
with a = gη b = η f 1 − x− c = f x+ d = iη (x+ − x−)

k k∗ x+
and ad − cb = 1 2
= ab 2
= cd x−
= eip
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 18 4.2 The Y=0 brane

• If we demand that the S-matrix (2 → 2 operator) commutes with symmetry

generators we can determine it up to a phase [Beisert]. Notice that quantum
numbers change after scattering in a non local way.
• The S-matrix satisfies the Yang Baxter equation.
• Scattering a singlet we can obtain an equation for this phase [Janik,Beisert]

4.2. The Y=0 brane

• The subgroup that leaves Y invariant is SU (1|2)2. This algebra cannot be cen-
trally extended → the complex charge k is not conserved.
 + −  
− +  −̇
χ χ −χ χ φ
ϕϕ   φ+̇ 

• Magnon multiplet transforms as  =  =

ϕχ− + χ−ϕ   ψ − 

ϕχ+ + χ+ϕ ψ+
where  = (ϕ, χ± )
• This representation breaks into a singlet and a fundamental for states that do not
carry central charges.
• The reflection matrix R is a 1 → 1 operator.
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 19 4.2 The Y=0 brane

r− 0 0 0
 
 0 r+ 0 0 
• Commutation with the symmetry generators impliy R = 
0 0 r 0
0 0 0 r
ar − a0r+ = 0 − c b0
r = r = r
br− − b0r = 0 c0 b
with −→
cr − c0r− = 0 + a d0
+ 0
dr − d r = 0 r = a0
r = d
r
• Quantum numbers change because of reflection. Energy must be conserved.
−eip 0 0 0
 
 0 1 0 0
• The reflection matrix is RL = R0L(p) 
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 20 4.2 The Y=0 brane
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 21 4.2 The Y=0 brane

4.2.1. Yang Baxter Equation

• There are three intermediate representations. Each one carries a state that scat-
ters diagonally → parity invariance of the bulk implies YBE.

• The Yang Baxter Equation is obeyed for the full SU (1|2)2 theory! → integra-
bility
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 22 4.2 The Y=0 brane

4.2.2. Crossing Equation

• We build an identity state: particle/hole pair with no energy. Scattering should

− − − α β
be trivial. 1(p,p̄) = fp eip/2 (φ+
p φp̄ − φp φp̄ ) + αβ ψp ψp̄ .

• The crossing equation is obtained from

 demanding that the scattering phase is 1. 
β
1(p,p̄) = hbS0(p, −p̄)R0R (p)R0R (p̄) f−peip/2(φ+−p̄φ−−p − φ−−p̄φ−−p) + αβ ψ−p̄
α
ψ−p
1
x−
+x−
= hbS0(p, −p̄)R0R (p)R0R (p̄)1(−p̄,−p) with hb ≡ 1
+x+
x+
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 23 4.3 The Z=0 brane

4.3. The Z=0 brane

• The boundary now preserves the same symmetries as the vacuum. We have the
full SU (2|2)2 symmetry.
• The boundary transform in the fundamental representation of the group with
quantum numbers
√
aB = √ gηB
gf
bB = η B B
√
giη
cB = xB fBB
√
gx
dB = iηBB
i
√
g

1

• This implies xB = 2g
1+ 1 + 4g 2 and  = ad + bc = i
xB − xB
=
√
1 + 4g 2.
• The reflection matrix is a Bp → Bp operator. It is again fixed by the symme-
tries to be:
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 24 4.3 The Z=0 brane
{a b} [a b] β
R|φaB φbpi = A|φB φ−pi + B|φB φ−pi + 21 Cabαβ |ψbα ψ−p i
{α β} [α β]
R|ψBα ψpβ i = D|ψB ψ−pi + E|ψB ψ−pi + 12 F αβ ab|φaB φb−pi
R|φaB ψpα i = G|ψBα φa−pi + H|φaB ψ−p
α
i
α a α a a α
R|ψB φp i = K|ψB φ−pi + L|φB ψ−pi
+ +
A = R0 xx−(x +xB )
(x− −xB )
+ − + + 2 − 2 + −
B = R0 2x x xB +(x −x B )[−2(x ) +2(x ) +x x ]
(x− )2 (x− −xB )
(x − +x+ )(x− x −x+ x −x− x+ )
C = R0 2ηηf B B B
xB x− (x+ )2 (x− −xB )
D = R0
+ 2 − 2 + − − + +x− (x+ )2 )]−x (x+ x− )2 (x −x− )
E = R0 2[(x ) −(x ) ][−x x +x(xB−(xx+)−x 2 x (x− −x )
B B
B B

2f (x+ −x− )(x+ +x− )(xB x+ −xB x− +x+ x− )

F = R0 ηηB (x− )3 (x− −xB )
(x + −x− )(x+ +x− )
G = R0 ηηB (x−−xB )x−
+ 2 −
H = R0 (xx−(x) −−x−xBBx)
+ − )2 ]
K = R0 [xxB−x(x−+(x
−xB )
η (x+ +x− )xB
L = R0 ηB x−(x−−xB )
• This form can be tested perturbatively.
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 25 4.3 The Z=0 brane

4.3.1. Boundary bound states

• This matrix contain poles at x− = xB . This is similar to what happens in the

bulk S-matrix.
• In the bulk, the analytic porperties of S-matrix can be related to the spectrum via
Landau diagrams. They can provide non trivial tests of the overall phase [Dorey,
DH, Maldacena]. Not all poles are bound states.
• This particular pole is associated with a bound state. Other singularities might
also be present (crossing demands this).

√
• The energy of the intermediate state is B = 1 + 4g 2.
• Notice that, by changing the initial representation of the boundary degree of
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 26 5.1 Two Loop Hamiltonian

freedom (cf. Bootstrap) we obtain more bound states with energies B (n) =
√
n2 + 4g 2.
• YBE and a crossing equation can be obtained in the same fashion as in the
previous case.

5. Weak coupling results

5.1. Two Loop Hamiltonian
• We can use the dilatation operator of SY M [Beisert, Kristjansen, Staudacher]
to obtain a two loop Hamiltonian for the spin chain in the SU (2) subsector.
2 4
D = −2 gN : Tr[Y, Z][Y̆ , Z̆] : −2 Ng 2 : Tr[[Y, Z], Z̆][[Y̆ , Z̆], Z] :
4 4
−2 Ng 2 : Tr[[Y, Z], Y̆ ][[Y̆ , Z̆], Y ] : +4 gN : Tr[Y, Z][Y̆ , Z̆] :
bulk hamiltonian is well known to be Hbulk = i (2g 2 − 8g 4 )(I − Pi,i+1 ) +
P
• The P
2g 4 (I − Pi,i+2). By truncating this operator we can obtain the boundary
contribution Hnaive = (2g 2 − 8g 4 )q1XB + 2g 4 q2XB . This is related to the fact that
operators can’t have a field of the same flavor of the determinant next to it to
leading order in N1 .
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 27 5.2 Phases and tests

XBN −1| |{z}

X0 |{z}
X1 |{z}
X2 . . .
0 1 2
• There is, however, one more contribution coming from the dilatation operator
acting on the determinant. Each term is suppressed by N1 but there are N − 1
such terms. This corrects the previous hamiltonian by Hdet = 4g 4 q1B [DH,
Maldacena]

5.2. Phases and tests

• Using these results (and one loop results for the SU(3) sector) we can check the
exact reflection matrix. This agrees with previous result at one loop by [Beren-
stein, Vazquez]
• We check the exsitence of a boundary degree of freedom for SU (2|2)2.
• Also, we can calculate the overall phase at two loops in perturbation theory.
• For the SU (1|2)2 theory this is R20L = −e−2ip
ip
• For the SU (2|2)2 theory the result is more complicated R0 = − 1−2e 1−2e
−ip +
−ip ip 3 ip ip i2p
2g 2 e (e −1) (e(eip+1)(1−4e
−2)2
+e )
. At two loops this is equivaent to
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 28 5.3 Integrability

x− 2 (x− −xB ) (x + xB ) (x− +xB ) (x + xB )

+ 1 − 1
R0


R20L = A2
=− x+ (x+ −xB ) (x+ − 1 ) (x+ +xB ) (x− − 1 )
xB xB

• This expression could be correct to higher loops (the equivalent calculation in

the bulk is correct to four loops).
• Here we see an interesting pole structure that could be analized by Bootstrap
methods.

5.3. Integrability
• Once we have the S-matrices we can construct multiparticle states using the
Bethe Ansatz technique.
• This was carried out in [Agarwal] and a problem was found. Extra restriction
had to be imposed.
P∞
• When we consider the improved Hamiltonian H = (2g 2 − 8g 4 ) i=1 (I −
4
P∞ 2 4 XB 4 XB
Pi,i+1) + 2g i=1 (I − Pi,i+2 ) + (2g − 4g )q1 + 2g q2 , this construction
can be carried out explicitly [DH, Maldacena]. This matches nicely with the
strong coupling results of [Mann, Vazquez].
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 29 6.1 Bulk results

6. Strong coupling results

6.1. Bulk results
• Classical correspondence between Sine-Gordon and strings on R × S 2.
• Sine-Gordon solitons ←→ String Theory Magnons.
√
λ 1
• Nontrivial energy relation  = π Esg
.
• Lorentz symmetry in Sine-Gordon responsible for one parameter solutions in
string theory. Again, this is not a symmetry of the theory.
• Scattering solutions in sine-gordon map to scattering of magnons.
• x and t are the same −→ time delays are the same (S-matrices are not though).
∂δ12 (1 ,2 )
• WKB approximation gives phase as ∂1
= ∆T12 [Jackiw, Woo]. This
agrees (modulo length redefinition) with the AFS formula, derived in an indirect
way.

2
∆T12 = log vcm (17)
γ1v1
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 30 6.2 Boundaries

√ h p1 −p2 
√
1 − cos 2

λ p1 p2 i λ p2
δ= − cos + cos log − p 1 sin (18)
π 2 2 1 − cos p1+p
2
2
π 2

• Length redefinition. Far away from the excitation E and J have constant den-
sities. But inside the excitation, our gauge says the have just constant E . To
compare with gauge theory we should go to coordinates where J is constant.
The mismatch will be given in the phase as eip∆Length . (Compare with BA equa-
tions).
Z Z
dJ dE dE dJ 2π
∆l = dx = dx −( − ) = √ ∆x −  (19)
dx dx dx dx λ

6.2. Boundaries
• Boundaries can be incorporated by the methof of images.
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 31 6.2 Boundaries

• Different giant magnons orientations correspond to different boundary condi-

tions. In our cases
Z = 0 ↔ Dirichlet φ = π2 → Boundary bound state.
Y = 0 ↔ Dirichlet φ = 0 or Neumann, depending on the polarization. Results
are the same, as matrix structure is subleading at strong coupling.
• Zero
p mode quantization
√ yields the right energy for boundary bound states B =
1
2
(2n)2 + 16g 2 = n2 + 4g 2
• The crossing equation is satisfied in the classical limit δB,R (p) + δB,R (p̄) =
−δ(p, −p̄) + O(1)

7. Summary and Conclusions

• We have extended the techniques from the bulk theory to boundary theories and
were able to obtain exact results for the reflection matrices. These results were
checked perturbatively.
• Crossing equations were developed for the overall phase factor.
• Two different theories appear, depending on the relative orientations of giant
gravitons and the BMN vacuum.
Giant magnons meet giant gravitons 32 6.2 Boundaries

• An interesting boundary bound state structure was found for one of these cases.
• Issues with integrability were resolved at two loops.
• We are closer to solving exactly (different sectors of) String Theory on AdS5 ×
S 5 ←→ N = 4 SYM.
• Do not underestimate what integrable theories can teach us!

8. Extensions
• Theories with flavors and defects.
• Wilson loops (in progress).
• Non maximal giants. Integrability?

9. Open Problems
• Fill the vacuum and connect reflection matrices. Lessons to be learned here.
• Finite Size. Wrapping interactions
• Deformations and other theories. Confinement? QCD!?