Real and p-Adic Physics Brian Raymond Trundy A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of Princeton University in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Recommended for Acceptance by The Department of Physics Adviser: Steven S. Gubser November 2021 Copyright by Brian Trundy, 2021. All rights reserved.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
The p-adic norms are defined as follows. By fiat, |0|p = 0. Given any nonzero
rational number x, consider the exponents vp(x) in its prime decomposition 1:
x = ±∏
primes p
pvp(x). (1.6)
One can check that vp(xy) = vp(x) + vp(y) and vp(x + y) ≥ min(vp(x), vp(y)). vp(x)
is known as the p-adic valuation of x, and we can use it to define the p-adic norm for
non-zero2 x:
|x|p = p−vp(x). (1.7)
It is conventional to identify the reals with p = ∞, and we will sometimes write the
real absolute value as | · |∞ to distinguish it from its p-adic counterparts. Just as
1This infinite product is well defined because co-finitely many vp(x) vanish.2One usually uses the conventions p−∞ = 0 and vp(0) = +∞ so that this formula holds for all
x ∈ Q.
5
we can complete Q using the real absolute value to form the real numbers, we can
complete Q using the p-adic norm to form what is known as the p-adic numbers Qp.
And just as | · | extends to a norm defined on all real numbers, | · |p extends to a
norm defined on all p-adic numbers. Note that |pk|p = p−k, so 1, p, p2, . . . , pk, . . .
represents a sequence of exponentially smaller numbers with respect to the p-adic
norm. For this reason, we can make sense of p-adic series:
x = a0 + a1p+ a2p2 + a3p
3 + · · · . (1.8)
In fact, all elements x ∈ Qp have a unique representation as such a series [33]:
x = pvp(x)
∞∑n=0
anpn, (1.9)
where a0 6= 0 and an ∈ 0, . . . , p − 1. Note again the characteristic property of a
non-Archimedean absolute value: all integers N ∈ Z have |N |p ≤ 1. In fact, the
p-adic unit ball is known as the ring of p-adic integers
Zp = x ∈ Qp||x| ≤ 1. (1.10)
Any p-adic number x =∑∞
n=νp(x) anpn has a unique decomposition into an integer
part [x] =∑∞
n=0 anpn ∈ Zp and a fractional part x = x− [x]. The unit group of Zp
is identical to the unit sphere in Qp and is denoted by Up = x ∈ Qp||x| = 1.
The group of nonzero p-adic numbers (Q×p ,×) is isomorphic to the group Z× Up
via the correspondence:
Z× Up → Q×p (1.11)
(n, u) 7→ p−nu. (1.12)
6
The related decomposition
Q×p =⊔n∈Z
p−nUp (1.13)
is sometimes useful. The collection of balls B = B(x, n)|x ∈ Qp, n ∈ Z where
B(x, n) = |x− y| ≤ pn (1.14)
= x+ p−nZp (1.15)
form a basis for the topology on Qp. Note that the balls defined above are usually what
are known as closed balls (as opposed to open balls), but |x−u| < pn = B(x, n−1)
so this distinction is a matter of convention. By definition B(x, n) are all open sets.
Since Up = tp−1i=1 (i+ pZp) is open and
Qp \ Zp =∞⊔n=1
p−nUp, (1.16)
we find that any B(x, n) is also closed. An interesting consequence of the ultrametric
inequality is that if |x− y| = r then B(x, s) = B(y, s) whenever s ≥ r.
1.2 The Bruhat-Tits Tree and its symmetry group
The uniqueness of the p-adic series expansion (1.9) gives rise to the geometric inter-
pretation of the p-adic numbers (plus infinity) as the boundary of a regular p+1-valent
tree - the Bruhat-Tits tree Tp. To see precisely how this identification comes about,
pick some vertex c ∈ Tp to serve as the tree’s center and fix a path 3 ` that is dou-
bly infinite. These assignments are shown in figure 1.1. We can identify the tree’s
boundary ∂Tp with the collection of infinite paths (or rays) that start at c. Given a
3We require that all edges in a path are distinct, so that there is no backtracking.
7
∞· · · · · · 0······
···
· · ·
······
···
· · ·
······
···
· · ·
······
···
· · ·
······
···
· · ·
p−2Up
p−2
p−1Up
p−1
p0Up
p0
p1Up
p1
p2Up
p2c `
Figure 1.1: The Bruhat-Tits Tree.
ray r starting at c, we can construct the following p-adic expansion:
x(r) = pν(r)
∞∑n=0
xn(r)pn, (1.17)
where ν(r) is the (directed) number of steps the ray takes before leaving ` and
xn(r) ∈ 0, . . . , p− 1 denotes the n’th choice of edge (starting at 0) that the ray
takes as it makes its way up the tree. One can see by construction that we actu-
ally only have p − 1 choices at the n = 0’th step, consistent with the requirement
x0(r) = 0. There are two rays of special interest that never leave `, the one going in
the positive ν direction converges to 0 and the one in the negative −ν direction to
∞. Indeed, the correspondence x : ∂Tp → P1(Qp) is one to one.
In the context of the p-adic AdS/CFT correspondence, we will be interested in the
possible symmetries of theories defined on the tree Tp as this will give us insight into
the analogue of the conformal group on Qp. The isometry group of Tp is enormous, and
it will be helpful to have a way of expressing distances between points on the tree in
terms of boundary points. Remarkably, one can write [39] the distance d(a, b) between
two points a, b ∈ Tp in terms of the cross ratio of boundary points x, y, z, w ∈ P1(Qp),
where the intersection of the (undirected) paths x→ y and w → z is exactly a→ b:
We find good evidence that the estimates α2−adic(N, s), αpower(N, s) for the local
momentum space exponents and the estimates α2−adic(N, s), αpower(N, s) for the local
position space exponents all have finite large N limits. Our numerical results are
shown in figure 2.5 and are well described by the following piecewise linear functions:
For s < −1, αpower = αpower = 1.
For −1 < s < 0, αpower = −s and αpower = −2s− 1.
For 0 < s, α2−adic = s and α2−adic = 2s− 1.
The following caveats apply to these estimates:
For |s| > 1 it becomes difficult to obtain high quality numerical results, partic-
ularly for αpower and αpower. In this regime, the Green’s functions become very
smooth and one has to compute very small differences with high accuracy. Even
50
2-adicfield theory
real field theory
• α2-adic
• αpower
-2 -1 1 2s
-1
1
2
3
α
2-adicfieldtheory
real field theory
• α2-adic
• αpower
-2 -1 1 2s
-0.5
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
α
Figure 2.5: α versus s and α versus s in the 2-adic and Archimedean settings.
Field theory bounds derived in section 2.6 are shown in dashed black
and dashed blue. Dotted black and dotted blue show the naive ex-
trapolations of these bounds to negative α and α. Red and green
dots are numerical evaluations of α and α as defined in sections 2.10
and 2.11, respectively, with N = 20. Solid red and green lines show
the obvious piecewise linear trends which approximately match the
numerical evaluations. Open circles denote evaluations in which we
restricted 7L16 ≤ h <
9L16 ; otherwise we use half the available points as
explained in the main text. For s ≤ −2, convergence of the sparse
model to the nearest neighbor model implies that α = α = 1, but our
numerical scheme for picking out α and α becomes less reliable in this
region due to difficulty normalizing Gsparse and Gpower in a mutually
consistent way.
51
without the numerical challenges, it becomes a difficult to distinguish between
rapid smooth variation and the non-smooth behavior that characterizes Holder
exponents.
Numerical calculations diverge a bit from our piecewise linear description at
s = 0 and s = −1. This isn’t too surprising since the pre-factors K(s) in
the Holder inequalities diverge at these values. See [references to divergences].
More extensive numerical investigations are needed to establish reliable results
at these values of s. It’s possible that we need logarithmic corrections to the
Holder conditions at these values, or that the exponents are only approximately
described by piecewise linear functions.
2.12 The liminal region −1/2 < s < 1/2
Of special interest is the regime −1/2 < s < 1/2. In momentum space, our numerics
are consistent with there being a single exponent on the 2-adic side, α2−adic = s, which
describes both the global Holder continuity condition over all k and the local continu-
ity at each possible value of k. In other words, as far as we can tell, the function G(k)
is equally ragged everywhere. A similarly uniform story applies on the Archimedean
side, with αpower = −s. Numerical results are fully in accord with expectations from
field theory, where we were able to compute α2−adic and αpower analytically. The up-
shot is that the transition from Archimedean to ultrametric continuity happens rather
simply, with ordinary continuity failing just as 2-adic continuity emerges: i.e. αpower
becomes negative just as α2−adic becomes positive, at s = 0.
The numerically estimated position space exponents behave differently. Both the
2-adic and Archimedean exponents become negative in the region s ∈ (−1/2, 1/2),
indicated a loss of local Holder continuity. Indeed, the piecewise linear description
found in section 2.11 suggests that Gsparseh loses Archimedean continuity at s = −1/2
52
s = 0.3
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0(h)/L
-1.0
-0.5
0.5
1.0
1.5
Ghsparse
/Gh2-adic
s = 0.3
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0(κ)/L
0.5
1.0
1.5
G˜κsparse
/G˜κ2-adic
s = -0.3
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0(h)/L
-60
-40
-20
20
Ghsparse
/Gh2-adic
s = -0.3
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0(κ)/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
G˜κsparse
/G˜κ2-adic
Figure 2.6: Plots of Gsparseh /G2−adic
h and Gsparseκ /G2−adic
κ over the Monna map of
the odd integers. As s becomes more positive, the numerical data is
closer to a 2-adically continuous curve when N is large. Blue points
are for N = 6, while the red curves are for N = 10.
53
s = 0.3
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7h/L
-1500
-1000
-500
Ghsparse
/Ghpower
s = 0.3
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7κ/L
2
4
6
8
10
12
G˜κsparse
/G˜κpower
s = -0.3
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7h/L
-8
-6
-4
-2
2
4
Ghsparse
/Ghpower
s = -0.3
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7κ/L
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
G˜κsparse
/G˜κpower
Figure 2.7: Plots of Gsparseh /Gpower
h and Gsparseκ /Gpower
κ over the middle half of
points. As s becomes more negative, the numerical data is closer to
a continuous curve when N is large. Blue points are for N = 6, while
the red curves are for N = 10.
54
and does not gain 2-adic continuity until s = +1/2.
Based on these figures and related studies, the scenario we regard as most likely is
that for −1/2 < s < 0, the continuum limit of Gpowerh defines an absolutely continuous
measure, G(x)dx, with respect to ordinary Lebesgue measure dx, but for s > 0 any
such continuum limit would necessarily have a singular term in its Radon-Nikodym
decomposition. Similarly, we suggest that for 0 < s < 1/2, the continuum limit of
G2−adich defines an absolutely continuous measure with respect to the standard Haar
measure on Q2 while for s < 0 any such continuum limit would have a singular term
(with respect to the Haar measure on Q2) in its Radon-Nikodym decomposition. We
find support for the claim of absolutely continuous measures in the above-mentioned
regimes when we study the scaling of the height of the spikes in figures 2.6 and 2.7
as a function of N : the weight of each spike (meaning the integral over a small region
including the spike) distinctly appears to tend to zero with increasing N . When
singular terms in Radon-Nikodym decompositions do exist, we conjecture that they
have as their support sets which are dense in position space.
One way in which singular terms in Radon-Nikodym decompositions could arise
is for the continuum limit G(x) to include delta functions. Inspection of figure 2.6 is
consistent with there being a dense set of delta function spikes in G(x) as a function
of 2-adic x when s = −0.3, but none when s = 0.3. Similarly, figure 2.7 is consistent
with there being a dense set of delta function spikes in G(x) as a function of real x
when s = 0.3, but none with s = −0.3. The discerning reader may note, however,
that the spikes on the Archimedean side are stronger at s = 0.3 than the ones on the
2-adic side at s = −0.3. This asymmetry manifests itself in the scaling of the height of
these spikes with N , for the weight of each spike grows with N on the Archimedean
side for s = 0.3, but may be trending very slowly toward 0 on the 2-adic side at
s = −0.3. A related effect appears in figure 2.5: α2−adic ≈ −1 for s < 0, while
αpower ≈ −1− s for s > 0.
55
Inspection of figures 2.6 and 2.7 reveals some self-similarity in the Green’s func-
tions both before and after the Monna map is applied. We have not investigated
this fractal behavior in detail; however, we note that similar behavior has been found
independently in band structure calculations in connection with proposed cold atom
experiments [47].
2.13 Outlook
For decades, p-adic numbers have been considered as an alternative to real numbers
as a notion of continuum which could underlie fundamental physics at a microscopic
scale; see for example [35]. This chapter has shown how the large system size limit
of an underlying discrete system naturally interpolates between a one-dimensional
Archimedean continuum and a 2-adic continuum as we vary a spectral exponent. By
focusing on a free field example, we are able to solve the model through essentially
trivial Fourier space manipulations. The correlators of the theories we study are all
determined in terms of the two-point function through application of Wick’s theorem.
The two-point function is continuous in an Archimedean sense when s is sufficiently
negative, and in a 2-adic sense when s is sufficiently positive. The transition from
these two incompatible notions of continuity can be precisely characterized in terms of
Holder exponents characterizing the smoothness of the two-point function. We have
found the dependence of these exponents on s through a combination of analytical
field theory arguments and numerics on finite but large systems.
Quite a wide range of generalizations of our basic construction can be contem-
plated:
1. We can generalize to primes p > 2. One significant subtlety arises when doing so,
namely the structure within Z/pZ of sparse couplings. The simplest alternative
is for spin 0 to couple to spins ±θpn with a strength pns, where θ runs over all
56
elements of 1, 2, 3, . . . , p−1. This coupling pattern is featureless within Z/pZ
because it treats all values of θ the same. One can however contemplate other
possibilities. For example, if p = 5, an interesting alternative is to introduce
couplings only for θ = 1 and θ = 4 (the quadratic residues). More generally,
one could expand the dependence of couplings on θ in a sum of multiplicative
characters over Z/pZ.
2. This chapter has focused entirely on bosonic spins φi, but there is no reason
not to consider fermions ci instead. Then the coupling matrix Jij would have to
be anti-symmetric, and likewise the two-point Green’s function would be odd.
Within this framework one could consider a variety of sparse coupling patterns.
3. Higher-dimensional examples are not hard to come by. Consider real bosonic
spins φ~ı labeled by a two-dimensional vector ~ı = i11 + i22, where i1 and i2 are
in Z/3NZ. Suppose we establish a coupling matrix J~ı~ = J~ı−~ where
J~h =
3minn1,n2s if h1 = ±3n1 and h2 = ±3n2
3n1s if h1 = 0 and h2 = ±3n2
3n2s if h2 = 0 and h1 = ±3n1 ,
(2.87)
with all other entries vanishing except J0, whose value we choose in order to
have the Fourier coefficient J~κ vanish when ~κ = 0. Then for sufficiently negative
s we have effectively a nearest neighbor model which approximates the massless
field theory S =∫d2x 1
2(∇φ)2. For s sufficiently positive, one obtains instead a
continuum theory over Z3×Z3, which can be understood as the ring of integers
in the unramified quadratic extension of Q3, see section 1.5.
All the examples above remain within the paradigm of free field theory. Still easy to
formulate, but obviously much harder to solve, are interacting theories with sparse
57
s = 0 112
23
−1 −12
−23
φ4re
leva
ntφ
6re
leva
nt
φ 4relevant
φ 6relevant No relevant deformations
ULTRAMETRICARCHIMEDEAN
Gaussian Gaussians
Figure 2.8: Conjectured pattern of fixed points of the renormalization group for
interacting field theories of a single bosonic scalar field with φ→ −φsymmetry.
couplings. For example, one could start with any of the models introduced in sec-
tions 2.2-2.5 and add a term∑
i V (φi) to the Hamiltonian describing arbitrary on-site
interactions. To get some first hints of what to expect these interactions to do, recall
in 2-adic field theory that G(x) ≈ |x|s−12 at small x. Comparing this to the standard
expectation G(x) ≈ |x|2∆φ
2 , we arrive at ∆φ = (1− s)/2 as the ultraviolet dimension
of φ. When describing perturbations of the Gaussian theory, we can use normal UV
power counting: [φn] = n∆φ. Thus φn is relevant when s > 1− 2/n. If we impose Z2
symmetry, φ→ −φ, then in the region s < 1/2, the Gaussian theory has no relevant
local perturbations, but as s increases from 1/2 to 1, first φ4 and then higher powers
of φ2 become relevant. It is reasonable to expect some analog of Wilson-Fisher fixed
points to appear. Possibly as s → 1 these fixed points extrapolate to analogs of
minimal models. An analogous story presumably applies on the Archimedean side to
power-law field theories controlled by s in the range (−1, 0), with G(x) ≈ |x|−s−1∞ and
therefore ∆φ = (1 + s)/2. See figure 2.8.
The sparse coupling theories are sufficiently similar to 2-adic field theories for
s > 0 and to power-law field theories for s < 0 that it is reasonable to conjecture that
the same pattern of renormalization group fixed points arises. However, this line of
reasoning is incomplete. In particular, one would require an understanding of how
58
the improved local Holder smoothness arises and how it might affect renormalization
group flows. A Monte Carlo study of the phases of the sparsely coupling Ising model
might help shed light on the renormalization group flows available to interacting
models, particularly in the range −2/3 < s < 2/3 where no powers of φ higher than
φ4 are relevant—according at least to naive power counting.
59
3
Higher Melonic Field Theories
This chapter is based on [3] coauthored with Steven S. Gubser, Christian Jepsen, and
Ziming Ji. We thank Igor Klebanov for useful discussions and suggestions.
In the last chapter, we developed a sparsely coupled statistical model that interpo-
lated between Archimedean and p-adic continuity. In this chapter we will explore the
diversity that arises when we consider field theory over R and Qp in tandem. In this
context, we will classify a large collection of melonic theories with q-fold interactions,
demonstrating that the interaction vertices exhibit a range of symmetries of the form
Zn2 for some n ∈ 0, 1, . . .. The number of different theories (over both Archimedean
and non-Archimedean spaces) proliferates quickly as q increases above 8 and is related
to the problem of counting one-factorizations of complete graphs. The symmetries
of the interaction vertex lead to an effective interaction strength that enters into the
Schwinger-Dyson equation for the two-point function as well as the kernel used for
constructing higher-point functions.
Melonic theories [48, 49, 50, 51, 52] are an interesting class of quantum field the-
ories whose essential property is that in an appropriate large N limit, the dominant
Feynman diagrams can be generated by iterating on the replacement of a propagator
by a melonic insertion, as shown in figure 3.1 for a melonic version of scalar φ4 theory.
Melonic theories are interesting for two related reasons: 1) The melonic large N limit
60
is relatively tractable because its Green’s functions can be determined through func-
tional techniques including Schwinger-Dyson equations; and 2) The simplest Green’s
functions are the same as for the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev (SYK) model [53, 54], widely
studied because of its proposed relationship to AdS2.
It is well recognized that melonic theories exist not just with quartic interactions,
but also higher order interactions [55, 56, 57, 58]. The aim of this chapter is to take
some steps toward an understanding of what sorts of higher order interactions are
possible. We focus on the Klebanov-Tarnopolsky model [52] where the interaction is of
order q—meaning that q propagators meet at each interaction vertex. Inquiries in this
direction were initiated in [59]. Starting at q = 8, the number of different interaction
vertices proliferates quickly. Some of them are symmetrical under a subgroup of
permutations of the propagators leading into them; others have no such symmetry.
Interaction vertices do not mix with one another in the leading melonic limit: The
diagrams that would permit this are subleading. We are therefore content to restrict
to theories with only one type of interaction vertex—and each different interaction
vertex gives a different theory. An interaction vertex of order q can be constructed
starting from a coloring of the complete graph with q vertices such that each of
q − 1 colors is incident once on each vertex. The questions addressed in this chapter
regarding these interaction vertices are:
1. What are the possible symmetry groups of these interaction vertices?
2. How does the number of distinct interaction vertices grow with q?
We claim in sections 3.2 and 3.3 to completely settle question #1: The possible
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
S4
φ4
tr Φ4
Z4
Z2 Z2
ψa0a1a2ψa0b1b2ψb0a1b2ψb0b1a2
1
Figure 3.1: A melonic insertion.
61
symmetry groups are Zn2 , where 0 ≤ n ≤ v if q = 2v and 0 ≤ n < v if q = u2v
where u is odd and larger than 1. (It is easy to show that q must be even.) This
demonstration will be constructive, in that we produce vertices with each possible
symmetry. Question #2 turns out to be difficult, and it is essentially the problem
of counting so-called one-factorizations of complete graphs, where results are gen-
erally available up to q = 14 [60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66]: results spanning over a
century! In section 3.4, we summarize how these results can be combined and mod-
estly extended to give complete results on the number of distinct interaction vertices
up to q = 14. The symmetry analysis undertaken in this chapter suggests a new
twist on the counting problem: In addition to counting all one-factorizations, one
can count one-factorizations with a given symmetry group. An explicit example of
this symmetry-constrained counting is presented in section 3.5, and some additional
conceptual points are discussed in section 3.6.
The symmetry group of the interaction vertex leads to an effective coupling that
enters into the Schwinger-Dyson equation for the two-point function and the ladder
operator used for computing the four-point function, which will be exhibited explicitly
in all cases in sections 3.7 and 3.8. We note here that we assume every interaction
vertex we construct leads to a theory with a melonic limit, and all indications are
consistent with this. This being said, one will not find a fully rigorous proof of this
claim here. Over the p-adic numbers Qp it has already been shown in [27] that there
is quite a variety of melonic theories, depending on what sign function one chooses
over Qp. For approximately half of these melonic theories over Qp, the Schwinger-
Dyson equation can be solved exactly, not just in the infrared, but at all scales, in
terms of the solution to a q-th order polynomial equation. Remarkably, as shown in
section 3.8.1, there is an adelic product formula relating the eigenvalues of the ladder
operator integral equation across real and p-adic theories.
62
3.1 Structure of higher melonic theories
The action of the simplest Klebanov-Tarnopolsky model [52] is
S =
∫dt
(i
2ψa0a1a2∂tψ
a0a1a2 +g
4ψa0a1a2ψa0b1b2ψc0a1b2ψc0b1a2
), (3.1)
where each index, which we think of as a color index, runs independently from 1 to
N and each ψa0a1a2 is a Majorana fermion. Each index is separately O(N) invariant
and ψa0a2a3 transforms under O(N)3 as a triple tensor product of the fundamental
representation of O(N). We seek to understand the color structure of higher rank
models with higher degree interactions. We will simultaneously generalize to models
defined over p-adic numbers and to models with either O(N) or Sp(N) indices. The
models we consider will take the form
S =σψ2
∫K
dωψA(−ω)ΩAB|ω|s sgn(ω)ψB(ω) (3.2)
+ (σψ)q4g
|G|
∫K
dtΩA(0)A(1)...A(q−1) , (3.3)
where K is either R or Qp, G is the automorphism group of the interaction vertex, to
be discussed further in section 3.2. The spectral parameter s would usually be chosen
to be 1 for fermionic theories over R or 2 for bosonic theories over R, but for theories
over Qp it is more natural to let it vary continuously over positive real values. We
set σψ = −1 for fermionic theories, and σψ = +1 for bosonic theories. By sgnω we
mean a sign character, which is to say a multiplicative homomorphism of non-zero
elements of K to 1,−1. Capital indices are really groups of q− 1 lowercase indices,
each N -valued. For example, to recover (3.1) as a special case, we would set q = 4,
63
so that A = a0a1a2; we would set ΩAB = δa0b0δa1b1δa2b2 ; we would set
ΩABCD = δa0b0δa1c1δa2d2δb1d1δb2c2δc0d0 ; (3.4)
and of course we would set K = R and s = 1. It is well recognized (see e.g. [49,
51, 52]) that the structure ΩABCD in (3.4) corresponds to a coloring of the edges of
the tetrahedron so that only three colors are used, and opposite edges have the same
color.1
When considering theories over Qp, as explained in section 1.7 and in [27], we
must allow ΩAB to be symmetric (σΩ = 1) or anti-symmetric (σΩ = −1); and we
must choose sgnω to be one of the several multiplicative sign characters over Qp,
which are in one-to-one correspondence with the quadratic extensions of Qp. To get
a real, non-vanishing kinetic term, ΩAB must be Hermitian, and we must have
σψσΩ = sgn(−1) . (3.5)
(Surprisingly, non-trivial sign characters over Qp can have either sgn(−1) = −1 or
+1.)
For q = 4, still following [27], the obvious adaptation of the Klebanov-Tarnopolsky
model to a theory over Qp is to set ΩAB = Ωa0b0Ωa1b1Ωa2b2 where
Ωab =
1N×N for σΩ = 1
σ2 ⊗ 1N2×N
2for σΩ = −1 ,
(3.6)
1It is useful to clarify here one point of terminology: We use the terms “vertex” and “edge” todescribe the inner structure of an interaction vertex like ψa0a1a2ψa0b1b2ψc0a1b2ψc0b1a2 . From thispoint of view, an interaction vertex is a graph unto itself, with q vertices when the interaction termhas q powers of ψ. A full Feynman diagram consists of propagators connecting interaction vertices,and as is familiar from earlier work including [49], the inner structure of a propagator is q−1 threadswhich flow into the edges inside an interaction vertex.
64
and to set
ΩABCD = Ωa0b0Ωa1c1Ωa2d2Ωb1d1Ωb2c2Ωc0d0 . (3.7)
(Note that if σΩ = −1, then because of (3.6), N must be even.) If indeed Ωab is
antisymmetric, then one needs a direction on all the edges of the tetrahedral graph in
order to decide the order of the indices in each factor on the right hand side of (3.7).
However, flipping the direction on any one edge flips the sign of ΩABCD, and so can
be compensated for by changing the sign of g.
Generalizing the kinetic term to q > 4 is easy: We need only set
ΩAB =
q−2∏i=0
Ωaibi . (3.8)
Generalizing the interaction tensor turns out to be more subtle, and laying the ground-
work for finding suitable generalizations is the focus of the rest of this section.
Up to the minor issue of directedness, constructing a rank q interaction tensor
ΩA(0)A(1)...A(q−1) as a product of q(q − 1)/2 factors Ωa
(i)r a
(j)r
corresponds to a coloring
problem on the complete graph of q points (and therefore q(q−1)/2 edges), where we
use q − 1 colors (each one labeled by a value of r) and require that each of the q − 1
links incident on a given vertex (each one labeled by a value of i) must be a different
color. A special case of Baranyai’s theorem guarantees that this can always be done
provided q is even. It is impossible when q is odd. One can map the problem onto the
scheduling of a round-robin tournament, where each link is one game, each vertex is a
contestant, and each color is a round, during which each contestant plays exactly one
game. This phrasing makes it obvious that no coloring is possible for q odd, because
in a given round one must pair up all q contestants in two-person games. For q even,
65
there is a canonical solution, which is
rij ≡ i+ jmod q − 1 if 0 ≤ i < q − 1, 0 ≤ j < q − 1, and i 6= j
ri,q−1 ≡ 2imod q − 1 for 0 ≤ i < q − 1 .
(3.9)
Here, rij is the color of the edge from vertex i to vertex j. Vertex labels i and j take
values from 0 to q − 1, while color labels r run from 0 to q − 2. The corresponding
interaction tensor is
ΩA(0)A(1)...A(q−1) =∏
0≤i<j≤q−1
Ωa
(i)rija
(j)rij
. (3.10)
In (3.10), we took care of the directedness issue by requiring i < j, which is the same
as alphabetizing the lowercase indices in (3.7).
For q = 2, 4, and 6, the canonical solution (3.9) is the only solution. Starting at
q = 8, there are multiple solutions: That is, rij can be chosen differently from (3.9)
but still consistent with the requirement that we use only q − 1 colors and have one
edge of each color coming together at each vertex. For any such rij, we can still use
(3.10) to construct the interaction tensor. We exhibit the six different solutions for
q = 8 in figure 3.2. By “different,” we mean that there is no way to relabel the colors
and/or the vertices to map any of the six rij into one another. A striking point is
that the solutions have different symmetry groups, composed of up to three factors
of Z2.2
For q = 10, there are (we claim) 396 different interaction vertices, and none of
them have any symmetry. To justify this claim, and to proceed to larger q, we need to
give a more conceptually organized presentation. We do so in the next three sections,
starting with constraints on the symmetry groups in section 3.2, continuing with an
explicit construction in section 3.3, and concluding with a summary of the problem
2By Z2 we mean the integers modulo 2, or equivalently the multiplicative group 1,−1—notthe 2-adic integers.
66
canonical asymmteric, 960
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
fully symmteric, 30
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
asymmteric, 1680
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z2, 2520
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
1
(a) G = Z 32
30 one-factorizations
Order of Aut(F) is 1344
asymmteric, 1680
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z2, 2520
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z22, 420
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z22, 420
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
1
(b) G = Z 22
630 one-factorizations
Order of Aut(F) is 64
asymmteric, 1680
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z2, 2520
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z22, 420
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z22, 420
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
1
(c) G = Z 22
420 one-factorizations
Order of Aut(F) is 96
asymmteric, 1680
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z2, 2520
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z22, 420
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z22, 420
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
1
(d) G = Z2
2520 one-factorizations
Order of Aut(F) is 16
canonical asymmteric, 960
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
fully symmteric, 30
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
asymmteric, 1680
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z2, 2520
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
1
(e) G = 1
1680 one-factorizations
Order of Aut(F) is 24
canonical asymmteric, 960
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
fully symmteric, 30
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
asymmteric, 1680
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
Z2, 2520
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
1
(f) G = 1
960 one-factorizations
Order of Aut(F) is 42
Figure 3.2: The six inequivalent melonic interactions and their symmetry fac-
tors for q = 8. Each interaction can be identified with an isomor-
phism class of one-factorizations, and we also list the number of one-
factorizations in each class as well as |Aut(F)|, the number of permu-
tations in S8 that preserve the one-factorizations in a given isomor-
phism class (see section 3.4 for an explanation of this notation). The
canonical coloring is the bottom right.
67
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
S4
φ4
tr Φ4
Z4
Z2 Z2
ψa0a1a2ψa0b1b2ψb0a1b2ψb0b1a2
1
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
S4
φ4
tr Φ4
Z4
Z2 Z2
ψa0a1a2ψa0b1b2ψb0a1b2ψb0b1a2
1
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
3 1
5 7
2
6
4 0
S4
φ4
tr Φ4
Z4
Z2 Z2
ψa0a1a2ψa0b1b2ψb0a1b2ψb0b1a2
1
Figure 3.3: Left: The symmetry group of φ4 theory is the symmetric group S4.
Middle: The symmetry group of tr Φ4 theory is the cyclic group Z4.
Right: The symmetry group of the quartic tensor interaction is the
Klein group Z22.
of counting distinct interaction vertices in section 3.4.
3.2 Symmetry groups of interaction vertices
In ordinary scalar field theory where the scalar φ is real-valued, the symmetry group
of a q-fold interaction vertex φq is the permutation group Sq, with order q!, because
all propagators leading into the interaction vertex are equivalent and can be per-
muted arbitrarily without changing the structure of the interaction. In a matrix field
theory based on a Hermitian N × N matrix Φ, the symmetry group of a tr Φq in-
teraction vertex is the group Zq of cyclic permutations of the propagators. In the
q = 4 Klebanov-Tarnopolsky model, the symmetry group is Z2 × Z2 (not Z4), gen-
erated by the permutations (12)(34), and (13)(24) and sometimes referred to as the
Klein group. As should be clear from figure 3.3, a permutation in the Klein group
reorders propagators leading into the interaction vertex in such a way that we get
back to exactly the same diagram that we started with. This sort of permutation is
what we will call a coloring automorphism. If we look at the inner structure of the
interaction vertex, we see that a coloring automorphism permutes the vertices (each
one corresponding to an incoming propagator) in such a way as to preserve the colors
of each edge.
68
To be precise: When we say that rij is a coloring of the complete graph Kq with
q vertices, what we mean is that ij labels an edge (so i 6= j), and each rij is chosen
from the set of “colors” 0, 1, . . . , q − 2, with the constraints that rij = rji and that
for fixed i, rij is a bijection from the q − 1 vertices that remain after i is omitted to
the set of colors. In other words, each edge leading into a given vertex is a different
color. A coloring automorphism is defined as a map i→ π(i) such that rπ(i)π(j) = rij
for all i and j. Let the group of coloring automorphisms be G. The main purpose of
the rest of this section is to limit the possibilities for G. Then in section 3.3 we will
show that all groups G not ruled out by the arguments of this section actually can
be realized.
Our first claim is that any coloring automorphism is an involution. Denote the
coloring automorphism by π. Assume that π is not the identity, since otherwise the
claim is trivial. For some vertex i, we have j ≡ π(i) 6= i. Then rij = rπ(i)π(j) = rjπ(j),
where in the first equality we remembered that π is a coloring automorphism. From
rji = rjπ(j) we can conclude that i = π(j) because, as noted previously, the coloring
r must be a bijection, for fixed j, from vertices i 6= j to colors.
Next we remember an elementary result of group theory: Any finite group G
consisting only of involutions is isomorphic to Zn2 for some n. First let’s show that
the group is abelian. Therefore let g and h be group elements. Because g and h are
involutions, we have (gh)−1 = h−1g−1 = hg. But because gh is also an involution,
(gh)−1 = gh. So gh = hg as required. Now the fundamental theorem of finite abelian
groups tells us that G must be a direct product of cyclic subgroups of prime-power
order. Because all elements of G are involutions, any cyclic subgroup must be a copy
of Z2, and the result is proven.
Another elementary point to note is that if a coloring automorphism preserves
any vertex, then it is necessarily the trivial automorphism that maps all vertices to
themselves. To see this, suppose π(i) = i for some vertex i, and consider any other
69
G = Z2
1 0
G = Z 22
1 0
2 3
G = Z 32
5
6
4
7
1 0
2 3
1
G = Z2
1 0
G = Z 22
1 0
2 3
G = Z 32
5
6
4
7
1 0
2 3
1
G = Z2
1 0
G = Z 22
1 0
2 3
G = Z 32
5
6
4
7
1 0
2 3
1
Figure 3.4: The first three instances of maximally symmetrical interaction ver-
tices, with q = 2v and G = Zv2. We omitted one color from the q = 8
case, namely a seventh color with edges running from each corner to
the diametrically opposite corner, for example from 0 to 6.
vertex j. We have rij = rπ(i)π(j) = riπ(j), and because r is a bijection, for fixed i, from
vertices j 6= i to colors, we can conclude π(j) = j. It follows that any permutation
that gives a coloring automorphism consists of q/2 two-cycles.
We also note that color automorphisms that have a two-cycle in common must
be identical. For suppose there are color automorphisms π and π and a vertex i such
that π(i) = π(i). Then for any j we have that rij = rπ(i)π(j) = rπ(i)π(j) but also
rij = rπ(i)π(j). Since r is a bijection, it follows that π(j) = π(j) for all j.
It helps our imagination to think of the group G = Zn2 of coloring automorphisms
as reflections through n orthogonal planes which do not pass through any vertices. If
q = 2v and n = v, this line of thinking suggests that we can produce a coloring of Kq
whose automorphism group is Zv2: See figure 3.4 for the first few instances.
With these preliminaries in hand, we now come to the main result of this section:
If q = u2v where u is odd, then the largest that G can be is Zv2 if u = 1, or Zv−12
if u > 1. The arguments in the remainder of this section do not demonstrate the
existence of interaction vertices with any particular symmetry group G; rather, they
rule out larger symmetry groups.
The proof of our main result relies on the orbit-stabilizer theorem, which we
summarize here for the purposes of a self-contained presentation. If a group G acts
70
on a set X, then the stabilizer stab i of an element i ∈ X is the subgroup of G of
elements which preserve i. Meanwhile, the orbit orb i is the subset of X consisting of
all images of i under the action of elements of G. The theorem says
| orb i|| stab i| = |G| . (3.11)
As a first application, let X be the set of q vertices, assume that G = Zn2 . The
stabilizer of a vertex i is the trivial group: This is because any π ∈ G that maps i
to itself must also map all other vertices to themselves. Invoking (3.11) we see that
each orbit contains 2n points. The union of all vertex orbits is all of X, and so there
must be
q ≡ u2v−n (3.12)
distinct vertex orbits. Already, (3.12) shows that G cannot be larger than Zv2, because
if n > v, q is not an integer.
To finish proving the main result, all we need to do is to exclude the possibility
that G = Zv2 when u > 1. This turns out to require somewhat more subtle reasoning
than we have used so far, but the essential idea is to consider the quotient of the
interaction vertex by G and show that, as a graph with q = u vertices, it leads to
an impossible coloring problem. Clearly, we could just set v = n throughout the
following paragraphs, but we refrain from doing so because keeping n ≤ v general
allows us to see some first hints on how to actually construct graphs with any allowed
symmetry.
Let’s start with a second application of the orbit-stabilizer theorem. Consider the
set of all edges of a fixed color. For any fixed color, there are q/2 such edges. Edges
of a fixed color are permuted among themselves by coloring automorphisms, and for
each edge we have
| orb e|| stab e| = |G| . (3.13)
71
Following a standard trick, we divide both sides of (3.13) by | stab e| and then sum
over all distinct orbits to get
q
2=∑orbits
|G|| stab e|
. (3.14)
This can be written more usefully as
u = 2n−v+1∑orbits
1
| stab e|. (3.15)
To get proper mileage out of (3.15), we need some knowledge of the values of | stab e|—
which need not be unity! Consider however the following division of edges (still of
any fixed color) into two classes. There are edges which join two vertices which are
in the same vertex orbit; we will call these “internal” edges. All other edges we
will refer to as “external” edges. We observe that stab e is the trivial group for any
external edge, because if it weren’t, then there would be some coloring automorphism
that exchanges the edge’s two ends, and that would make the edge internal. So
| stab e| = 1 for external edges.
Next we want a count of external edges of a fixed color. It’s easier to start by
considering external edges of any color, i.e. the disjoint union of external edges of
each fixed color. There are(q2
)·22n such edges, because to specify one we must choose
a pair of vertex orbits, and then from each of those two vertex orbits we must choose
one vertex. Because the stabilizer of an external edge is trivial, its orbit must have
2n elements. So the count of external edge orbits of any color is
Ne =
(q
2
)· 2n = q
(u2v−n−1 − 1
2
). (3.16)
Suppose now 0 ≤ n < v. Then 2v−n−1 is a whole number, and because we have only
q− 1 colors to work with, there must be at least one color—call it red—with at least
72
u2v−n−1 external edge orbits. Restricting to red edges only, we recall that | stab e| = 1
for each external edge, and so at least u2v−n−1 terms in the sum on the right hand side
of (3.15) must be unity. Comparing to (3.15), we see that—for red edges—the sum
over orbits works out perfectly with only external edges, implying that there can’t be
any red internal edges. This is informative and useful for constructing examples.
Now suppose n = v. If also u = 1, then from (3.16) we see that Ne = 0: There are
no external edges at all! This makes sense because there is only one vertex orbit, and
indeed the cubical vertex illustrated in figure 3.4 shows that it is entirely consistent
to have n = v and u = 1. Where things get dangerous is if n = v and u > 1. Then,
from (3.16), Ne = q(u − 1)/2. Since we have only q − 1 colors to work with, there
must be at least one color—again call it red—with at least (u + 1)/2 external edge
orbits. Considering only red edges the sum on the right hand side of (3.15) restricted
to external edges gives u + 1. This is disastrous, because adding in the contribution
of internal edges (if any) results in the absurd inequality u ≥ u+ 1. Another way to
put it is that if n = v and u is odd and greater than 1, then we can’t color even the
external edges consistently with only q − 1 colors—let alone the internal edges. See
figure 3.5.
3.3 Construction of interaction vertices
Since for any q we can construct an interaction vertex with the canonical ordering,
which has no coloring automorphisms, what remains to be shown is that for q equal
to twice times an even number, it is always possible to construct an interaction vertex
with any allowed non-trivial symmetry group. Figure 3.2 explicitly shows that this
is true for q = 8. We now prove inductively that it is also true for q > 8.
Let q′ = q/2 and assume that rij is a coloring of Kq′ with symmetry group G′
(which may be the trivial group). Split the q vertices into two sets of q′ vertices;
73
3
4
1
0
2
5
q = 6
Z2
25 34
01
q = 3
1
Figure 3.5: A partial coloring for q = 6 which illustrates what goes wrong when
one demands too much symmetry. Here we propose Z2 symmetry,
which according to our general result is too much. On the left we
show a partial coloring with Z2 symmetry. On the right, we show
the same coloring modded out by the Z2 symmetry. The dots on the
right are vertex orbits, and the double lines of each color are edge
orbits. The problem is that we need two edge orbits between each
pair of vertex orbits, and all of them (in this simple case) must have
different colors. That means we need six colors just for the external
edges, and we only have five to work with—leaving us without a
second color to use in connecting the 01 and 34 orbits. Internal edges
would run within a vertex orbit, for example from 0 to 1.
74
342
051
9
108
117
6
342
051
9
108
117
6
342
051
9
108
117
6
1
(a)
342
051
9
108
117
6
342
051
9
108
117
6
342
051
9
108
117
6
1
(b)
342
051
9
108
117
6
342
051
9
108
117
6
342
051
9
108
117
6
1
(c)
Figure 3.6: Constructing an interaction vertex with q = 12 and G = Z2 in three
steps. (a) Separate the vertices into two groups of 6, shown here as
inner and outer rings. We’ve connected each group only cyclically in
order to avoid clutter, but in the full construction, we start with two
copies of the complete graph K6, one colored according to rij and the
other according to rij = rij + q′ − 1. (b) Reconnect the 12 vertices
according to the prescription shown in the first two lines of (3.17).
(c) Add the last color according to the third line of (3.17). In the
parlance of section 3.2, these last edges are the internal edges, while
the ones colored in the previous step are the external edges.
notationally this can be done by identifying a vertex first by indicating which set it’s
in, say with a Greek index α = 0 or 1, and then which vertex within the set it is, say
with a Roman index i ∈ 0, 1, . . . , q′ − 1. Let rij ≡ rij + q′ − 1. We now claim that
the coloring rαi,βj of Kq defined by
r0i,0j = r1i,1j = rij ,
r0i,1j = r1i,0j = rij ,
r0i,1i = r1i,0i = q − 1 ,
(3.17)
has symmetry group G = G′ × Z2. See figure 3.6 for a diagrammatic illustration of
how this coloring is generated. That the coloring (3.17) inherits the G′ symmetry is
clear from the fact that, for any π ∈ G′, we have that
rαπ(i),βπ(j) = rαi,βj . (3.18)
75
But by construction the coloring (3.17) is also invariant under the permutation τ that
acts on the Greek indices as
α→ α + 1 mod 2 , β → β + 1 mod 2 , (3.19)
while leaving the Roman indices unchanged. Furthermore, the coloring (3.17) has no
other symmetries. For coloring automorphisms that only swap around Roman indices
are in one-to-one correspondence with the coloring automorphisms of rij. And if a
coloring automorphism σ changes the Greek index of any index pair αi such that
σ(0i) = 1i′, then for any j
rσ(0i),σ(0j) = r1i′,σ(0j) . (3.20)
But since r0j,0k 6= r1j′,0k′ for all j, j′, k, k′, it follows that σ must change the Greek
index of all index pairs and so must be of the form σ = π τ for some π ∈ G′. This
completes the inductive proof.
In general, for a given symmetry, there are multiple interaction vertices different
from the one generated by the prescription (3.17). An exception, however, occurs
for the maximally symmetric vertex when q = 2v. In this case there is only one
vertex with G = Z v2 . For G consists of the identity element and q − 1 permutations
that commute amongst each other and each consists of q/2 two-cycles. And amongst
permutations in Sq consisting of q/2 two-cycles, one can at most form a set of q − 1
elements that commute amongst each other but don’t share a two-cycle; and any two
such sets are equivalent by conjugation. But if we consider the edges of a given color,
say red, in a maximally symmetric colored graph, then this sub-graph is invariant
under the permutation π that swaps vertices connected by a red edge. But π must
commute with all permutations in G, and so it follows that π ∈ G. Moreover, if we
explicitly write π = (a0a1)(a2a3) . . . (aq−1aq), then we recognize that each two-cycle in
π corresponds to a red edge; in other words, each non-trivial element of G is precisely
76
associated with a one-factor. Since there are q− 1 non-trivial elements of G, the one-
factors are all specified once G is specified. And we have argued that G is essentially
unique.
3.4 One-factorizations and equivalent interaction
terms
In this section we determine the conditions under which two theories with actions
of the form (3.2) are equivalent. As discussed briefly in section 3.1, the choice of an
interaction tensor ΩA(0)A(1)···A(q−1) corresponds to a coloring problem on the complete
graph Kq on q vertices.
More precisely, these interaction tensors are in one-to-one correspondence with
ordered one-factorizations of Kq. A one-factor of Kq is a set F of edges such that each
vertex of Kq belongs to a unique edge in F . A one-factorization of Kq is a partition
of the edge-set of Kq into q − 1 one-factors Fi. We denote a one-factorization as
F = F0, . . . , Fq−2, and when speaking of one-factorizations we do not distinguish
between different orderings of the Fi. An ordered one-factorization is a (q − 1)-tuple
F = (F0, . . . , Fq−2), i.e. we have imposed a particular order on a one-factorization.
To see that ordered one-factorizations correspond to interaction vertices, recall that
the fields ψa0...aq−2 don’t have any built-in symmetry under interchange of indices ai.
Each such index is associated with a definite color: For example, we could say that
red is associated with the first index a0, then green with a1, blue with a2, and so
forth. And each color is associated with a one-factor: red for F0, green for F1, blue
for F2, etc.
One can check that any graph automorphism π : Kq → Kq carries (ordered) one-
factorizations into other (ordered) one-factorizations via the actions πF = (π(F0), . . . , π(Fq−2))
and πF ≡ πF , respectively. Two ordered one-factorizations F and G are said to be
77
isomorphic if there exists a graph automorphism π such that F = πG. Similarly,
F ' G means there exists π so that F = πG. We can also consider the natural action
of any τ ∈ Sq−1 on ordered one-factorizations τF = (Fτ(0), . . . , Fτ(q−2)). This action
simply permutes the colors associated to each one-factor. In this language, F ' G if
and only if there exists a graph automorphism π and a permutation of colors τ such
that πF = τG.
Given an ordered one-factorization F , we can form the following interaction tensor:
ΩFA(0)...A(q−1) ≡q−2∏r=0
∏〈ij〉∈Fr
Ωa
(i)r a
(j)r, (3.21)
where 〈ij〉 is the edge in Kq running between the vertices i and j and ar is the color
index associated to the one-factor Fr. In writing 〈ij〉, we implicitly assume i < j.
Conversely, any degree q interaction term in which each constituent ψA has a single
color index contracted with each other ψA arises from an interaction tensor of the
form (3.21).
Note that for distinct ordered one-factorizations F and G we end up with distinct
interaction tensors ΩF 6= ΩG. We will however show that if their underlying one-
factorizations F and G are isomorphic then ΩF and ΩG give rise to equivalent theories.
Our argument proceeds in two parts: First we discuss equivalence under the action of
τ ∈ Sq−1 permuting colors, and then we consider the action of a permutation π ∈ Sq
of vertices.
Suppose we make the following field redefinition: φA = ψτ−1A, where τ−1 ∈ Sq−1
and τA ≡ aτ−1(0) . . . aτ−1(q−2). Then:
ΩFA(0)...A(q−1)φA(0) · · ·φA(q−1)
= ΩτFA(0)...A(q−1)ψ
A(0) · · ·ψA(q−1)
. (3.22)
So, modulo a linear field redefinition implemented by a permutation matrix, the
interaction term only depends on the underlying one-factorization F .
78
Gq 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
1 0 0 1 2 396 526,910,769 ∼ 1.13× 1018
Z2 1 0 0 1 0 4851 0Z2
2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0Z3
2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Table 3.1: The number of isomorphism classes of one-factorizations of Kq with
given symmetry group G = Aut(F). The values for q = 12 and 14
were determined using [65] and [66], respectively; the exact count for
q = 14 is quoted in the main text.
Now view a graph automorphism as a permutation on q vertices, π ∈ Sq. With
the change of indices B(i) = Aπ(i) one can show:
(σψ)πΩFA(0)...A(q−1)ψA(0) · · ·ψA(q−1)
= ΩFA(0)...A(q−1)ψAπ−1(0) · · ·ψAπ
−1(q−1)
= ΩπFB(0)...B(q−1)ψ
B(0) · · ·ψB(q−1)
.
(3.23)
So any two isomorphic ordered one-factorizations give the same interaction term, up
to a sign.3 We can get rid of this sign by sending g → −g.4
We should point out here that isomorphic one-factorizations give equivalent inter-
actions to all orders in N . As we will show in sections 3.7 and 3.8, even non-isomorphic
one-factorizations lead to the same two-point and four-point functions in the melonic
limit, up to a rescaling of g by a power of the order of the coloring automorphism
group G.
For future reference, we note that by Aut(F) we mean all graph automorphisms π
such that πF = F . Aut(F) is the exactly the vertex automorphism group described
in section 3.2. In contrast, Aut(F) consists of all graph automorphisms π such that
πF = F , that is all π that can be undone by a permutation τ ∈ Sq−1 of the colors
3In the presence of multiple interaction terms in the lagrangian, this argument that a permutationof vertices does not lead to a new theory continues to hold true. But it will no longer be true thatan interaction term only depends on the underlying one-factorization F , see section 3.6.
4See [67] and [68] for a careful discussion, in the context of the q = 4 fermionic tensor model,of how the Hamiltonian even at the quantum level transforms in the degree 1 sign representationunder permutations of indices and of how this affects the spectrum of the theory.
79
πF = τF . Clearly Aut(F) ≤ Aut(F). In general Aut(F) has a much richer group
structure than Aut(F). See for instance table 3.2 in section 3.5 where, for q = 12, we
list the ten possible values for |Aut(F)| when |Aut(F)| = 2.
In the case q = 12, the vast majority of isomorphism classes of one-factorizations
have trivial Aut(F). It is known in the literature [65] that there are a total of
526,915,620 non-isomorphic one-factorizations (the sum of the two entries in the q =
12 column in figure 3.1) and exactly 252,282,619,805,368,320 distinct one-factorizations
of K12. Implementing the orderly algorithm used in [64] and [65] on the set of one-
factors invariant under a given involution π ∈ S12, we find that there are 1,008,649,635,840
one-factorizations of K12 with Aut(F) = Z2 and that they fall into 4851 isomorphism
classes under permutations of vertices, see section 3.5.
For q = 14, Aut(F) can only be trivial and there are 1,132,835,421,602,062,347
nonisomorphic one-factorizations of K14 [66].
For q ≤ 14, a summary of the number of isomorphism classes of one-factorizations
and therefore the number of inequivalent interaction terms is given in table 3.1. It is
known that for sufficiently large q, the number of non-isomorphic one-factorizations
N(q) satisfies logN(q) ∼ 12q2 log q [69].
3.5 Finding the number of isomorphism classes of
one-factorizations for q = 12 using the orderly
algorithm
In this section we discuss in detail how to find the numbers of melonic interactions
with trivial and non-trivial automorphism groups for q = 12.
We have seen that melonic interaction vertices can be identified with isomorphism
classes of one-factorizations of complete graphs. For q = 12 the total number of
80
isomorphism classes was found in [65]. To classify melonic theories it is desirable to
also know how many of these isomorphism classes correspond to melonic interactions
with a non-trivial automorphism group. A one-factorization corresponds to such an
interaction if there exists a vertex permutation π ∈ S verticesq that leaves all one-factors
invariant. We will now show, for q = 12, how to employ the orderly algorithm of [64]
and [65] to find the total number of isomorphism classes of one-factorizations as well
as the number of isomorphism classes corresponding to melonic interactions with
non-trivial automorphisms.
A one-factor Fi can be represented by a set of six pairs
The absence of a factor of σΩ in (3.61) owes directly to the choice of contraction with
matrices ΩA1A2ΩA3A4 rather than say ΩA1A2ΩA4A3 in (3.57), and so is ultimately the
result of a convention. The important question to ask is whether the insertion of
each new set of rungs in a ladder diagram leads to a factor of σΩ. Consider therefore,
as in figure 3.12, the diagram obtained by appending an extra set of rungs to some
oriented ladder diagram.
The propagator that forms part of the top rail of the ladder immediately to the
left of the newly appended set of rungs may be incident to any vertex i of the top
interaction vertex. The propagator that forms part of the top rail immediately to the
right of the appended sets of rungs may be incident to any other vertex j 6= i of the
99
A1
A2
A3
A4
A1
A2
A3
A4
A1
A2
A3
A4
A1
A2
A3
A4
A1
A2
A3
A4
A3
A4
...
...
A1
A2
i j
σ(i) σ(j)
k
l
σ(k)
σ(l)
1
Figure 3.12: Insertion of an extra set of rungs in an oriented ladder. Not all
internal threads in the interactions nor all rungs have been drawn
so as to not clutter up the figure.
topmost interaction vertex. But for a given choice of i and j, in order to get a ladder
diagram that is not suppressed in the melonic limit, the two propagators of the bottom
rail immediately to the left and right of the bottom interaction vertex must be given,
respectively, by σ(i) and σ(j) for some σ ∈ G. And similarly the appended rungs
must connect vertex l of the top interaction vertex to vertex σ(l) of the bottom one for
all l 6= i, j. These facts follow immediately from the above discussion of the two-point
function once we note that 1) the threads of the propagators incident to vertices i
and σ(i) all partake of the same index loops; and 2) from the point of view of index
contraction we may look upon the propagators incident to vertices i and σ(i), the
arrows running to and between A3 and A4, and the two appended interaction vertices
and the rungs running between them as all forming part of a melonic insertion into
one single propagator. Since there are q choices of vertex i, (q − 1) choices of vertex
j, and |G| choices of permutation σ, the total number of melonic Feynman diagrams
that contribute to the ladder diagram in question is q(q − 1)|G|.
As in our consideration of the two-point function, we can assume that the orien-
100
tation of an arrow between any two vertices i′ and j′ of the top interaction vertex is
the same as the orientation of the arrow between σ(i′) and σ(j′) since automorphisms
induce an even number of arrow flips. As to the q−2 arrows that make up the rungs,
these all have the same orientation prior to flipping any arrows, as one can find by
computing the four-point function via functional differentiation. As in figure 3.12 we
will take these arrows to point downwards rather than upwards, but this is an arbi-
trary choice that does not affect the parity of arrow flips needed to make all index
loops have a uniform orientation of arrows.
To determine whether appending an extra set of rungs gives rise to an overall
factor of σΩ, we need to consider all the index loops involved. These fall into four
types:
1. The index loops running from i through one of the rungs of the ladder and
through σ(i) without passing through A3 and A4, as illustrated in blue on
figure 3.12. Because there are q − 2 such loops and they all require the same
number of arrow flips to obtain uniform orientation, no net factor of σΩ is
introduced on account of these index loops.
2. The index loops running from j through A3 and A4 and back to j through one
of the rungs in the ladder, illustrated in red on figure 3.12. Again these q − 2
loops are even in number and require the same number of arrow flips for uniform
orientation, so again no net factor of σΩ is introduced.
3. The index loops that run between the two interaction vertices and consist of
four threads each, two in two rungs and two within the two interaction vertices.
There are (q − 2)(q − 3)/2 such loops, an example of which is illustrated in
yellow on figure 3.12. Each of these index loops consists of two threads with
one orientation and two index loops with the opposite orientation, so once again
no net factor of σΩ is introduced in bringing about uniform orientation.
101
4. Lastly, there is the index loop that runs between i and j and σ(i) and σ(j),
illustrated in green on figure 3.12. Since we are assuming that the index loops
of the original ladder diagram, prior to insertion of an extra set of rungs, each
had a uniform orientation of arrows, two arrows must be flipped in order to give
this index loop a uniform orientation (the arrow between σ(i) and σ(j) and the
arrow between σ(j) and A4 on figure 3.12) and again we do not pick up any net
factor of σΩ.
In summary, there are no relative sign differences in ladder diagrams between SO(N)
and Sp(N) symmetric tensor models.
Having worked out the subtleties relating to Sp(N) symmetry and the automor-
phism group of the interaction vertex, we are ready to write down the recursive
relation describing ladder diagrams:
Γn+1(t1, t2, t3, t4) =
∫dt dt′K(t1, t2, t, t
′)Γn(t, t′, t3, t4) (3.62)
where the integration kernel is given as
K(t1, t2, t, t′) = σψq(q − 1)|G|
(g
|G|
)2
N(q−1)(q−2)
2 G(t1 − t)G(t2 − t′)G(t− t′)q−2
= σψ(q − 1)g2G(t1 − t)G(t2 − t′)G(t− t′)q−2 .
(3.63)
In the IR, we can plug in the expression for the dressed propagator derived in
section 3.7.1 to obtain
K(t1, t2, t3, t4) =− σψσΩ(q − 1)
Γ(π q−2q,sgn)Γ(π 2−q
q,sgn)
π− 2q,sgn(t13) π− 2
q,sgn(t24) π 2(2−q)
q,sgn
(t34) .
(3.64)
Following [71] and [52] and defining
v(t1, t2) ≡ πh− 2q,sgn(t12), (3.65)
102
the integral eigenvalue-equation to solve in order to find the scaling dimensions of
two-particle operators is given by
v(t1, t2) =1
g(h, q)
∫dt3 dt4K(t1, t2, t3, t4) v(t3, t4) . (3.66)
Changing variables to
u ≡ t13 , v ≡ t42 , (3.67)
makes it manifest that the integral in the eigenvalue equation is a convolution since
∫dt3 dt4 π− 2
q,sgn(t13)π− 2
q,sgn(t24) π
h+2(1−q)q−h,sgn
(t34) =
sgn(−1)
∫du dv π− 2
q,sgn(u) π− 2
q,sgn(v) π
h+2(1−q)q
,sgn(t12 − u− v) .
(3.68)
Invoking the sign constraint (3.5), the eigenvalue equation can therefore be written
as
πh− 2q,sgn = − (q − 1)
g(h, q)Γ(π q−2q,sgn)Γ(π 2−q
q,sgn)
π− 2q,sgn ∗ π− 2
q,sgn ∗ πh+
2(1−q)q
,sgn. (3.69)
Fourier-transforming this equation using (3.46), the multiplicative characters cancel,
as do two of the gamma functions, and we find that
g(h, q) = −(q − 1)Γ(π q−2
q,sgn)Γ(πh+ 2−q
q,sgn)
Γ(π 2−qq,sgn)Γ(πh+ q−2
q,sgn)
. (3.70)
This formula is valid for real as well as p-adic numbers, and for an action (3.2) with
a kinetic term with any sign function.
On the real numbers, selecting the usual sign function in the action (3.2), the
above equation reproduces the fermionic result of the SYK and melonic tensor models,
equations (3.73) in [71] and (6.8) in [55]. Selecting the trivial sign on the reals, the
above equation reproduces the bosonic result, equation (4.14) in [52] with d = 1.
103
On the p-adic numbers, there are multiple inequivalent sign functions, each of
which can be labeled by a p-adic number τ as explained in section 1.6. For the sign
functions characterized by τ = p or τ = εp, g(h, q) reduces to 1− q. For τ = ε, g(h, q)
is a non-constant function in h, but the equation g(h, q) = 1 never has a solution for
the p-adic theories.
3.8.1 Adelic product formula for the integral eigenvalues
In [30] it is demonstrated how, by invoking the functional equations of suitably cho-
sen Dirichlet L-functions, one can derive an adelic product formula for the signed
Gel’fand-Graev gamma functions. By selecting a fixed rational number τ , one picks
out a sign function for each of the number fields R and Qp. For each of these fields
with associated sign function sgnτ (x) there is a signed character πs,sgn(x) and an asso-
ciated gamma function Γ(πs,sgn). Taking the product over all these gamma functions
for any fixed complex number s, one gets the usual sign function of τ :
∏K=R,Qp∀p
Γ(πs,sgn) =
1 for τ > 0
−1 for τ < 0 .
(3.71)
Note that for any choice of τ there will be many fields K for which sgnτ (x) is
the trivial sign character, ie. unity, so that πs,sgn reduces to πs. For example, this
happens for K = R when τ is positive.
As an immediate consequence of (3.71), we find that for fixed rational τ , complex
h, and even number q, the integral eigenvalues g(h, q) satisfy the adelic product
formula
∏K=R,Qp∀p
g(h, q)
1− q= 1 . (3.72)
For most choices of τ , this product mixes bosonic and fermionic, and O(N) and Sp(N)
104
symmetric theories.
3.9 Outlook
Given the relative uniqueness and simplicity of melonic theories with quartic and sex-
tic vertices, it is surprising that melonic theories proliferate and diversify for larger
orders q of the interaction vertex. Already at q = 8, there are six different types of
vertices, with up to Z32 symmetry. The situation can be compared with matrix mod-
els, where if we restrict to quartic vertices, the most commonly studied interactions
are tr Φ4 and (tr Φ2)2. The first of these has Z4 symmetry, and the second has Z32
symmetry. If we restrict to only one of these two vertices, then we get remarkably
different behavior in the large N limit: tr Φ4 leads to a planar limit, while (tr Φ2)2
leads to bubble diagrams. Mixing the two gives some interesting modifications of
scaling exponents of the pure tr Φ4 theory [72, 73, 74, 75]. In contrast, for melonic
theories the treatment of the two-point and four-point functions proceeds almost iden-
tically for the myriad theories we can construct. The one salient difference among
the theories considered here is that the effective coupling constant that enters into
the self-consistent treatment of two- and four-point functions includes the inverse half
power of the order of the symmetry group of the interaction vertex. An interesting
question for future work is to see whether combining different interaction vertices
could significantly alter the analysis, for example through some cancellations or mod-
ified infrared scaling. Another interesting question for future work is to examine the
extent to which the operator counting of [67] generalizes to higher melonic theories.
The construction of q-fold interaction vertices in this chapter is, by necessity,
somewhat detailed, amounting to a coloring of the complete graph of q vertices with
q − 1 colors so that all edges meeting at a vertex have different colors. The combi-
natorial problem of counting all such colorings is formidable, and it is related to the
105
problem of one-factorizations of the complete graph, for which results are available
only for modest values of q. However, as demonstrated in section 3.3 one can con-
firm the existence of colorings with all possible symmetries groups, namely Zn2 with n
bounded above by v if q = 2v and by v−1 if q = u2v with odd u greater than 1. While
this construction of interaction vertices is rooted in the natural generalizations of the
Klebanov-Tarnopolsky model [52], we cannot claim to have exhausted all possible
generalizations with melonic limits. Here is a useful way to frame the question: If we
restrict the field content to a single real field ψa0a1...aq−2 with q − 1 N -valued indices
all of which must be contracted amongst each other, is the most general interaction
vertex with a melonic limit a linear combination of the interaction vertices that can
be described in terms of colorings of a complete graph of q vertices?
106
4
Holographic Duals of Nontrivial Characters in
p-adic AdS/CFT
This chapter is based on [4] coauthored with Steven S. Gubser and Christian Jepsen.
The paper was dedicated to the memory of Peter G. O. Freund, whose discoveries
are foundational to much of this thesis. We thank M. Heydeman for substantial
input in early phases of this work, in particular for identifying the U(1) gauge field
configurations as related to Paley graphs.
Of Peter Freund’s many ideas in theoretical physics, it was clear that p-adic
string theory [7, 6, 9], also studied by Volovich in [8], was one of his favorites. The
strangeness of the p-adic numbers, the unexpectedness of Freund and Olson’s idea
to replace the reals with the p-adics on the boundary of the open string worldsheet,
and the simplicity of the resulting scattering amplitudes, all contribute to the charm
of the subject. The deep question of why the reciprocal of the Veneziano amplitude
factorizes into a product of its p-adic relatives remains mysterious. It causes one to
wonder whether, even now, we have fully plumbed the depths of perturbative string
dynamics.
In p-adic AdS/CFT [10, 11], one looks at some of the surprising features of p-
adic string theory in a new light. Recall that (see section 1.8) that in an important
107
precursor to p-adic AdS/CFT [42], Zabrodin defined a free massless scalar action over
the Bruhat-Tits tree Tp, whose boundary is the projective line P1(Qp). Integrating out
the bulk scalar was shown to result in the correlators that Freund and Olson needed to
obtain the analog of the Veneziano amplitude for p-adic strings. An updated version
of this integrating out process is the computation of holographic Green’s functions in
p-adic AdS/CFT, with the Bruhat-Tits tree playing the role of the bulk geometry.1
Free massless scalars in the bulk are just the beginning: In p-adic AdS/CFT one
wants to consider mass terms and their relation to boundary conformal dimension,
and also non-linear bulk dynamics dual to n-point boundary Green’s functions with
more interesting structure than can be obtained from Wick contractions.
In [42] as well as later works, attention focused on scalar fields in the bulk ge-
ometry, dual to scalar operators on the boundary. Likewise on the field theory side,
the study of the operator product expansion [41] focused on scalar operators. Even
the gravitational dynamics of [25] is a scalar theory, because the bulk variable is edge
length on Tp. The dual boundary operator is found to be a scalar whose scaling di-
mension equals the dimension of the boundary as a vector space over Qp. Boundary
theory correlators involving sign characters were considered in [9, 29, 28, 30, 31] in
connection with p-adic string amplitudes and supersymmetry. Work on fermionic
p-adic field theories continued in [32] with a study of a relative of the Gross-Neveu
model, and the recent work [27] investigates both fermionic and bosonic melonic the-
ories over Qp. General comments on higher spin can be found in [11]. But no bulk
dual of non-scalar operators was suggested in any of these works. Another precursor
of p-adic AdS/CFT is the stochastic cellular model eternal inflation studied in [77];
but there too the treatment was restricted to scalar operators on the boundary (best
understood as an analog of future infinity in de Sitter space). The aim of this chapter
is to present first steps in a larger project of finding bulk duals to known non-scalar
1See however [76] for a recent study of holography involving p-adic numbers in the context of acontinuous bulk geometry.
108
boundary theories on P1(Qp).
As suggested in [42, 30, 27], we consider boundary Green’s functions of the form
G(x) =C sgnx
|x|2∆p
, (4.1)
where C is a constant, | · | denotes the p-adic norm, and sgnx is a multiplicative sign
character on Qp, as defined in section 1.6. We want to inquire, when and how can we
extract a Green’s function like (4.1) from a bulk construction?
To further motivate the study of Green’s function of the type (4.1), consider the
corresponding Fourier space expression
G(k) = C(sgn k)|k|2∆−1p . (4.2)
For comparison, fermionic correlators in ordinary AdSd+1/CFTd take the form G(k) =
Cγµkµ|k|2∆−d−1 (where now | · | is the norm on Rd instead of the p-adic norm); see for
example [78]. Our assertion is that the factor sgn k is in rough analogy to the the factor
γµkµ/|k| that appears in the Archimedean case. The first point of similarity is that
(sgn k)2 = 1, just as (γµkµ/|k|)2 = 1. Furthermore, in analogy to the transformations
of γµkµ/|k| under rotations, sgn k is a representation of the rotation group on Qp,
which comes from multiplication by p-adic numbers with norm 1. This is an abelian
group, so the only finite dimensional irreducible representations are one-dimensional.
There are certainly more complicated representations than just sign characters, so
this chapter should be considered only a first foray into the potentially large subject
of p-adic AdS/CFT with spin.
In section 1.6 we claimed that for odd p, there were four distinct sign characters
on Q×p . It will be useful to us to have explicit formulas for each of them.2 First
2Sign characters over Q2 are also well known, but their relation to holographic constructions ismore intricate.
109
express any x ∈ Q×p as
x = pvx(x0 + x1p+ x2p2 + . . . ) , (4.3)
where vx ∈ Z, x0 ∈ F×p , and all other xi ∈ Fp. Here Fp is the finite field of p
elements, namely Z/pZ, which we identify with the set 0, 1, 2, . . . , p− 1. And F×p is
the non-zero elements of Fp, which form a multiplicative group. There are two sign
characters on F×p : the trivial one which maps all elements to 1, and the quadratic
residue character n→ (n|p) where (n|p), also denoted(np
), is the Legendre symbol.
It is defined so that (n|p) = 1 if n is a square in F×p and −1 otherwise.3 On Q×p , there
are four choices of sign character:
1. We can map all x ∈ Q×p to 1. This is the trivial character.
2. We can map x→ (x0|p).
3. We can map x→ (−1)vx . This means we assign p itself a sign of −1.
4. We can map x→ (−1)vx(x0|p).
This list exhausts all the sign characters on Q×p . Until we get to section 4.6, we are
going to focus exclusively on the second case: That is, we will hereafter define
sgnx =
(x0
p
). (4.4)
We will narrow our field of inquiry in two other ways. First, we will restrict attention
to nearest neighbor interactions in the bulk, expressible in terms of a classical action
either on Tp or on its line graph L(Tp). This is analogous to restricting to the lowest
non-trivial order in derivatives in Archimedean anti-de Sitter space. Second, the
boundary for us will always be Qp rather than an extension of Qp.
3The definition of the Legendre symbol is traditionally extended to all of Fp by defining (0|p) = 0,and to all integers by first reducing them modulo p. Then (n|p) = 0 or 1 precisely when n is aquadratic residue modulo p.
110
The organization of the rest of the chapter is as follows. In section 4.1, we de-
scribe the nearest neighbor actions on Tp and L(Tp) that we will need, both for bosons
and fermions. In order to obtain a factor of sgnx in the final holographic two-point
functions, we need to introduce a non-dynamical U(1) gauge field. Indeed, the factor
of sgn x in (4.1) can be thought of as a Wilson line obtained by integrating the U(1)
gauge field along the shortest path on L(Tp) between the boundary points 0 and x.
The particular gauge field configurations that we need are described in section 4.2.
The main technical steps in extracting the holographic two-point functions are out-
lined in section 4.3, which deals with bulk-to-boundary propagators, and section 4.4,
which recounts the holographic prescription. We detour briefly in section 4.5 into an
account of dynamical gauge fields in the bulk, and then in section 4.6 we summarize
how to modify the gauge fields so as to get any sign character one wants in the final
two-point function (4.1) (for p 6= 2).
4.1 Nearest neighbor actions
In this section we will formulate nearest neighbor actions, first for bosons in sec-
tion 4.1.1 and then for fermions in section 4.1.2. A key ingredient will be a non-
dynamical U(1) gauge field.
4.1.1 Bosonic actions
Starting with a complex-valued function φa on vertices a of a directed graph, we can
define the gradient of φ as the following complex-valued function on edges of the
graph:4
dφe = φt(e) − φs(e) . (4.5)
4Nothing so far privileges complex numbers: φa and dφe could be valued in any linear space V ,and then ωe as used in (4.6)-(4.7) would need to be valued in linear functions on V . For the mostpart we do not need such a general viewpoint.
111
a
b
φa
φb
e eiθe Dφe = eiθeφb − φa
Figure 4.1: The gauge covariant derivative Dφe on a small section of a directed
graph.
Here e is an oriented edge with starting point s(e) and terminus t(e).
If we start from a function ωe on directed edges, then we define
dTωa =∑t(e)=a
ωe −∑s(e)=a
ωe , (4.6)
so that ∑e
ωedφe =∑a
(dTωa)φa , (4.7)
possibly up to issues of boundary terms and/or convergence. The equality (4.7)
is an analog of integration by parts. It can be useful to think of d = dea as a
rectangular matrix with one edge-valued index e and one vertex-valued index a. Then,
for example, dφe =∑
a deaφa, and dTωa =∑
e deaωe.
A crucial ingredient in our constructions is a non-dynamical U(1) gauge field.
Because the graph is discrete, instead of a gauge-covariant derivative Dµ = ∂µ + iAµ,
we are going to consider modifying (4.5) to
Dφe = eiθeφt(e) − φs(e) , (4.8)
where θe is essentially∫Aµdx
µ across the edge e. See figure 4.1. Upon gauge trans-
formations
φa → eiλaφa θe → θe − dλe , (4.9)
112
we see that
Dφe → eiλs(e)Dφe . (4.10)
Evidently, in the absence of loops, we can use (4.9) with λe = −θe to remove the
phase from (4.8), so that D = d. On L(Tp), there are loops, so non-trivial gauge field
configurations exist.
We now consider the action
Sφ =∑e
|Dφe|2 +∑a
m2|φa|2 . (4.11)
Here and below, | · | acting on a target space field is the norm on C. Varying (4.11)
with respect to φ∗a gives
D†Dφa +m2φa = 0 , (4.12)
where D† is the adjoint of D. (Explicitly, we can write D = Dea as a rectangular
matrix, and then D∗, DT , and D† all have obvious definitions.) A helpful result for
calculations to come is
D†Dφa = oaφa −∑t(e)=a
e−iθeφs(e) −∑s(e)=a
eiθeφt(e) , (4.13)
where oa is the number of edges incident upon a. (On Tp, oa = p+ 1 for all vertices,
while on L(Tp), oa = 2p for all vertices.)
The definition (4.8) might seem asymmetrical, and one might prefer instead eiθe/2φt(e)−
e−iθe/2φs(e) on the right hand side. But for purposes of forming the action (4.11), the
overall phase of Dφe doesn’t matter because only |Dφe|2 enters. In other words, there
is U(1) gauge freedom on edges which we fix in (4.8) by locking the phase of Dφe to
φs(e).
113
4.1.2 Fermionic actions
On a graph, the natural notion of a Dirac operator has to do with the exterior deriva-
tive. See for example [79], where the Dirac operator on a graph D is essentially the
signed adjacency matrix on the clique graph of G. We will consider a simplifica-
tion of this general development, in which the only operator we need is the gradi-
ent, rendered gauge covariant as in the previous section. Explicitly, we introduce a
Grassmann-complex-valued function ψa on vertices of a directed graph, and another
such function χe on edges. We define
Dψe = eiθeψt(e) − ψs(e) (4.14)
and introduce the action
Sψ =∑e
[iχ∗eDψe + iχeD∗ψ∗e +mχ∗eχe]−
∑a
Mψ∗aψa . (4.15)
The kinetic terms in (4.15) are constructed in the spirit of b∂c lagrangians, where b
is replaced by an edge field χe and c is replaced by a vertex field ψa. The action is
real once we assume that conjugation exchanges the order of factors. We need ψa and
χe to be complex in order to make the mass terms possible. It appears that the two
mass coefficients are independently meaningful, but in fact there is a global scaling
symmetry ψa → λψa and χe → (λ∗)−1χe, where λ ∈ C is a constant, which preserves
the kinetic terms while rescaling m→ |λ|2m and M → |λ|−2M .
The action (4.15) is invariant under the gauge transformation
ψa → eiλaψa χe → eiλs(e)χe θe → θe − dλe , (4.16)
114
and the equations of motion are
iDψe +mχe = 0 iD†χa +Mψa = 0 (4.17)
(and the complex conjugates of these equations).5 From the two equations (4.17) it
follows that
d†dψa +mMψa = 0 . (4.18)
The equivalence of (4.18) and (4.12) is comparable to the way the massive Dirac
equation implies the massive Klein-Gordon equation.
4.2 The background geometries
The non-dynamical U(1) gauge fields on L(Tp) that we are going to study encode the
Legendre symbol (α|p). Consider first the case p ≡ 1 mod 4. Label the vertices of the
complete graph Kp with elements of Fp. Pick a directed structure on Kp, and define
a map
e→ α(e) = t(e)− s(e) (4.19)
from directed edges to F×p . Set eiθe = (α(e)|p) on each edge. Because (α|p) is an
even function of α ∈ F×p , the choice of eiθe doesn’t depend on the directed structure
we picked. Because eiθe is always real, the operator D†D also doesn’t depend on the
directed structure.
Now consider the case p ≡ 3 mod 4. Again label the vertices of Kp with elements
of Fp. Introduce a directed structure on Kp such that an edge runs from a vertex a
to another vertex b iff b − a is a square in F×p . This prescription uniquely specifies
the direction of every edge in Kp because for any α ∈ F×p , either (α|p) = 1 or else
5As in the scalar case, the overall phase of Dψe doesn’t matter because in (4.15) we form theproduct iχ∗eDψe, and we can adjust the phase of χe to keep the overall prefactor equal to i.
115
(−α|p) = 1, due to the fact that (α|p) is an odd function of p. Set eiθe = i on all
edges.
We will refer to the directed structures and gauge fields on Kp as Paley construc-
tions, since for p ≡ 1 mod 4 the edges with eiθe = 1 form a Paley graph (without
reference to the directed structure), while for p ≡ 3 mod 4, the directed structure that
we picked forms a Paley digraph.
There are p+1 edges incident upon each vertex A of Tp, of which one edge is below
located below A (that is, one edge lies on the path from A to the boundary point at
infinity), while p edges are located above A. The vertices in L(Tp) corresponding to
the above-lying edges we think of as forming a copy of Kp, and each of these vertices
is also connected to the vertex corresponding to the edge below A. We parametrize
A using a pair (xA, zA) as in section 1.8. Recall that xA ∈ Qp and zA is an integer
power of p, with (xA, zA) identified with (x′A, z′A) iff zA = z′A and |xA − x′A|p ≤ |zA|p.
We will parametrize elements of L(Tp) by using the same coordinates (xA, zA) to label
the vertex of L(Tp) immediately below A; usually we will write instead (xa, za) since
we use lowercase letters to label vertices of L(Tp). To fix a directed structure and
non-dynamical gauge field on L(Tp), we adopt the same Paley construction on each
Kp, and the rest of the edges are directed downward, from (x, z) to (x, z/p), with
eiθe = 1 for p ≡ 1 mod 4 and eiθe = i for p ≡ 3 mod 4. We will refer to edges inside a
copy of Kp as horizontal, and the others as vertical.
If we use a → b to denote a directed edge, then for p ≡ 1 mod 4, our choice of
gauge field is
vertical edges: θ(x,z)→(x, zp)= 0
horizontal edges: θ(x,z)→(x+α zp,z) =
π
2
[1−
(α
p
)]for α ∈ F×p .
(4.20)
In the second line of (4.20), we bear in mind that the directed edge (x, z)→(x+ α z
p, z)
116
Figure 4.2: Left: L(T5) in blue and red with T5 shown in dashed green. The blue
edges have θe = 0, while the red edges have θe = π. The pentagram
figures are the Paley constructions, and edges within them are called
horizontal. Their orientation doesn’t matter. The vertical edges are
the ones connecting each pentagram with a vertex of the pentagram
below it, and our convention is for all of them to be directed down-
ward.
Right: L(T3) in black, with T3 shown in dashed green. All the edges
have θe = π/2.
exists only for half the elements of F×p ; but which half doesn’t matter. For p ≡ 3 mod 4,
our choice of gauge field is
vertical edges: θ(x,z)→(x, zp)=π
2
horizontal edges: θ(x,z)→(x+α zp,z) =
π
2for α ∈ F×p with
(αp
)= 1 .
(4.21)
See figure 4.2 for a depiction of small subgraphs of L(Tp) showing also the choice of
gauge fields (4.20) and (4.21) for p = 5 and 3, respectively.
The assignments of eiθe in (4.20) and (4.21) are preserved under the maps (x, z)→
(rx+b, z/|r|p) for all b ∈ Qp and r ∈ (Q×p )2. This is fortunate because the correspond-
ing boundary maps, x→ rx+b, applied to two distinct points x1 and x2 in Qp, are the
ones that preserve the desired two-point function, G(x1, x2) = sgn(x1−x2)/|x1−x2|2∆p ,
up to some power of the scale factor |r|p.
117
4.3 Bulk-to-boundary propagators
In order to compute holographic two-point functions, a key ingredient is the bulk-to-
boundary propagator in momentum space. In section 4.3.1 we review the calculation
of this propagator in the case of complex scalars on Tp. Then in section 4.3.2 we work
it out for scalars and fermions on L(Tp).
4.3.1 Scalars on Tp
Consider complex scalars on Tp with action
S =∑E
|dφE|2 +∑A
m2|φA|2 , (4.22)
where vertices are labeled A = (xA, zA) and edges are labeled E. For brevity, let’s
write zA = pv. Then, as recounted in [10], a useful solution of the equations of motion
following from (4.22) is
φA(k) = fvγp(kzA)χ(−kxA) where fv = |zA|1−∆p +Q|k|2∆−1
p |zA|∆p (4.23)
where k ∈ Q×p and
Q = −p1−2∆ . (4.24)
Here χ(ξ) is the additive character on Qp, given explicitly by χ(ξ) = e2πiξ where
ξ is the fractional part of ξ ∈ Qp. Here we have used the p-adic Gaussian γp as
defined in section 1.4. The dimension ∆ is related to the mass by
m2 = − 1
ζp(∆− 1)ζp(−∆). (4.25)
118
The solution φA(k) in (4.23) can be thought of as a bulk to boundary propagator
because it is the disturbance of φA in the bulk that corresponds to deforming the
boundary field theory by a term∫dxχ(kx)O(x), where O is the operator dual to
φ.6 From the form of φA(k) given in (4.23) we can pick out the k-dependence of the
Fourier space holographic two-point function for O: G(k) ∝ |k|2∆−1.
4.3.2 Scalars and fermions on the line graph
We would now like to find solutions analogous to (4.23) on L(Tp) with the directed
structures and gauge fields as outlined in section 4.2. The invariance of the back-
ground geometry under translations xa → xa + b indicates that we should be able to
require that fields should depend on xa through a factor χ(−kxa). We immediately
encounter the need to multiply in a factor of γp(kza), because by itself, χ(−kxa) is
not single valued on L(Tp), whereas γp(kza)χ(−kxa) is (and the same logic dictated
that (4.23) must include a factor of γp(kzA)). In short, we are lead to essentially the
same ansatz as (4.23):
φa(k) = uvfvγp(kza)χ(−kxa) where fv = |za|1−∆p +Q|k|2∆−1
p |za|∆p (4.26)
and we have written za = pv. For later convenience, we have introduced the prefactor
uv where
u =
1 for p ≡ 1 mod 4
i for p ≡ 3 mod 4 .
(4.27)
The coefficient Q in (4.26) may depend on k, but we don’t expect it to depend on |k|p
since the explicit factor of |k|2∆−1p already is the dependence we expect for the k-th
Fourier mode of a holographic two-point function with dimension ∆. The aims of
6The field φa, the operator O and the deformation of the conformal field theory action, shouldin the end be real. This can be accomplished by always considering superpositions of Fourier modeswith equal and opposite k.
119
the following calculation are to verify that the ansatz (4.26) does solve (4.12) and to
determine ∆ and Q. The strategy is to plug (4.26) into (4.12) and extract a difference
equation for fv. We can handle the fermionic case by replacing φa by ψa in (4.26)
and plugging into (4.18). In the fermionic case, we assume m 6= 0 so that χe can be
determined by the first equation in (4.17).
The factor γp(kza) means that the equation of motion (4.12) is trivially satisfied
for vertices a such that vk + v < −1, where vk ∈ Z is the valuation of k: that is
k = pvk(k0 + k1p+ k2p2 + . . . ) with k0 ∈ F×p . (4.28)
Let’s first show that the equation of motion is also trivially satisfied when v = −vk−1.
In this case, the only non-zero terms in the equation of motion (4.12) are the ones
corresponding to zb = pza, i.e. in the Paley construction above the point a. Explicitly,
the equation of motion reads
−f−vk∑α∈Fp
χ(−k[xa + zaα]) = 0 , (4.29)
where we are using the fact that the p vertices in L(Tp) above (xa, za) are (xa+zaα, pza)
where α runs over Fp. Recalling that v = −vk − 1, we see that the sum in (4.29) is
proportional to ∑α∈Fp
χ(−k0α/p) = 0 . (4.30)
So (4.29) is indeed satisfied trivially and gives us no information about fv.
Let’s move on to the case v > −vk. The factor χ(−kxb) now has the same value
for all vertices b neighboring a, as well as for b = a. Also, γp(kzb) = 1 at all these
vertices. Thus we may discard the factor γp(kza)χ(−kxa) from the ansatz (4.26) and
120
work directly with φa = fv. By plugging in to (4.12) we find
(2p+m2)fv − pfv+1 − fv−1 = 0 . (4.31)
The form of (4.31) is the same for p ≡ 1 mod 4 and p ≡ 3 mod 4 because of the
overall prefactor uv in (4.26). One can view this factor as a change of gauge in
the p ≡ 3 mod 4 case which removes the factors of i from the covariant derivatives
along vertical edges while leaving them unchanged within the Paley constructions.
The only property of the Paley constructions we need in order to get (4.31) is that
contributions to D†Dφa from the p − 1 vertices connected to a by a horizontal edge
cancel out. The second order difference equation (4.31) is solved by fv = p−∆v = |za|∆p
and fv = p(∆−1)v = |za|1−∆p where
2p+m2 = p1−∆ + p∆ . (4.32)
We assume that ∆ is real, and the standard prescription is to choose it as the larger
of the two roots of (4.32), so that ∆ > 1/2. Note that 2(√p − p) < m2 < 0 when
∆ ∈ (1/2, logp(p+√p(p− 1))), and it is positive otherwise.7
In the case of fermions, the discussion up to this point proceeds unchanged, except
that m2 is replaced by mM .
To summarize progress so far: We have shown that the ansatz (4.26) trivially
satisfies the equations of motion for v < −vk, while for v > −vk we have shown that
it is consistent with the equations of motion provided we impose the mass-dimension
relation (4.32). But we have no information yet about Q. This information comes
from a boundary condition at v = −vk, and it turns out that it encodes the sign
character that we need in order to obtain two-point functions of the desired form
7Note that ∆ = 12 + is gives m2 real but violating the lower bound m2 > 2(
√p − p). A similar
result was already noted in [11] for scalars on Tp. It is tempting to think that these complex valuesof ∆ correspond to unstable actions, but they may nevertheless have some interesting role to play.
121
(4.4). The equation of motion (4.12) for v = −vk reads
(2p+m2)f−vkχ(−kxa)− f−vk+1
∑α∈Fp
χ(−k[xa + zaα])
− uf−vk∑α∈F×p
(α
p
)χ
(−k[xa + za
α
p
])= 0 .
(4.33)
There is no f−vk−1 term in (4.33) because the factor of γp(kzb) vanishes when zb =
p−vk−1, so (4.33) is only first order in differences rather than second order. Hence
it can indeed be thought of as a boundary condition for the second order equation
(4.31). In the last term of (4.33), we are using the fact that the p− 1 vertices in the
same Paley construction as xa are(xa + za
αp, za
). This last term is proportional to
the Gauss sum: ∑α∈Fp
(α
p
)χ
(−k0α
p
)=
√p
u
(k0
p
). (4.34)
(In (4.34), the α = 0 term in the sum vanishes, so including it is optional. The form
(4.34) makes it clear that we are taking a Fourier transform of the Legendre symbol
over Fp.) Simplifying, and using (4.32), we obtain
[p1−∆ + p∆ −√p
(k0
p
)]f−vk − pf−vk+1 = 0 . (4.35)
Plugging the ansatz for fv in (4.26) into (4.35), one arrives at
[p1−∆ + p∆ −√p
(k0
p
)](1 +Q)− p(p∆−1 + p−∆Q) = 0 , (4.36)
which reduces to
Q = p12−∆
(k0
p
)= p
12−∆ sgn k . (4.37)
122
4.4 Two-point functions
With the bulk-to-boundary propagators in hand, we now turn to the computation of
the holographic two-point functions, first in section 4.4.1 for real scalars on Tp and
then in section 4.4.2 for complex scalars on L(Tp), and finally in section 4.4.3 for
fermions on L(Tp).
4.4.1 Scalars on Tp
As a warmup, consider a complex scalar φA on Tp, as in (4.22)-(4.25). Implement a
cutoff by fixing the values of φA for all vertices (xA, zA) with |zA|p = |ε|p, where ε = pvε
and vε is an integer. Let Σε denote the set of vertices with |zA|p > |ε|p, together with
the edges with at least one vertex having |zA|p > |ε|p. Let ∂Σε be the edges with only
one vertex in Σε. We orient edges downward (away from the Qp boundary), so that
when E ∈ ∂Σε, t(E) ∈ Σε and s(E) 6∈ Σε. The vertices in Σε are allowed to fluctuate,
while vertices with |zA|p < |ε|p are ignored. The cutoff action is
Sε =∑E∈Σε
|dφE|2 +∑A∈Σε
m2|φA|2 . (4.38)
We now need an improvement of the partial integration formula (4.7) to include
boundary terms:8
∑E∈Σε
ωEdφE =∑A∈Σε
(dTωA)φA −∑E∈∂Σε
ωEφs(E) . (4.39)
8If ∂Σε included edges for which s(E) ∈ Σε while t(E) 6∈ Σε, then in place of (4.39) we wouldneed
∑E∈Σε
ωEdφE =∑A∈Σε
(dTωA)φA +∑
E∈∂Σεt(E)6∈Σε
ωEφt(E) −∑
E∈∂Σεs(E)6∈Σε
ωEφs(E).
123
Using (4.39) we see that
Sε =1
2
∑A∈Σε
[φ∗A(d†dφA +m2φA) + (dTd∗φ∗A +m2φ∗A)φA
]− 1
2
∑E∈∂Σε
[φ∗s(E)dφE + (dφ∗E)φs(E)
].
(4.40)
The first line of (4.40) vanishes on-shell, leaving only the boundary terms. Recalling
that −Son-shellε is the generating function of connected Green’s functions and following
the logic of [78], we see that a cutoff version of the Green’s function can be computed
as
Gε(k) =dφE(k)
φs(E)(k)for any E ∈ ∂Σε , (4.41)
where, crucially, we have plugged in the solution φA = φA(k) from (4.23). We have
to choose |kε|p < 1 in order to avoid having a vanishing denominator in (4.41). As
long as we work at fixed k, this is not a problem, since our eventual aim is to take
ε→ 0 p-adically. Straightforward calculation of the right hand side of (4.41) gives
Gε(k) =fvε−1 − fvε
fvε= − 1
ζp(∆− 1)+ |k|2∆−1
p |ε|2∆−1p
Qp∆
ζp(2∆− 1)+ . . . , (4.42)
where to obtain the first equality we used (4.23), and to obtain the second we ex-
panded in p-adically small ε. The omitted terms go to 0 more quickly than the ones
shown provided ∆ > 1/2, which is true of the larger of the two roots of the relation
(4.25). The first term in (4.42) is k-independent, so in position space it gives rise to a
pure contact term. Dropping this term, we define the Fourier space Green’s function
as
G(k) = limε→0
Gε(k)
|ε|2∆−1p
=Qp∆
ζp(2∆− 1)|k|2∆−1
p . (4.43)
124
Plugging in Q = −p1−2∆ from (4.24) and recalling the Fourier transform9
∫Qpdk χ(kx)|k|s =
ζp(1 + s)/ζp(−s)|x|1+s
p
, (4.44)
we obtain
G(x) =p∆ζp(2∆)
ζp(2∆− 1)2
1
|x|2∆p
. (4.45)
A somewhat more involved derivation of (4.45) in [10] makes it clear that the overall
normalization of G(x) is a subtle issue. Changing the location of the cutoff by one
lattice spacing results in changing G(x) by an O(1) multiplicative factor. We should
in short view (4.43) as a reasonable but non-unique prescription for normalizing the
two-point function.
4.4.2 Scalars on the line graph
For complex scalars φa on L(Tp), the extraction of a Green’s function from the bulk
to boundary propagator (4.26) proceeds almost exactly as in the warmup exercise
outlined in the previous section. Formally, in (4.38)-(4.43), one replaces d → D,
A → a, and E → e. Let’s inquire a little more closely why this works. The set
Σε comprises vertices with |za|p > |ε|p and edges with at least one vertex having
|za|p > |ε|p. The boundary ∂Σε consists of vertical edges only, and these edges all
have s(e) 6∈ Σε. Thus the partial integration formula (4.39) can indeed be carried
over to scalars on L(Tp) just by replacing d → D, A → a, and E → e. Likewise,
the subsequent manipulation of the action in (4.40) and the formula (4.41) for the
Green’s function carry over with the same alterations. The calculation (4.42) carries
over unaltered because of our careful inclusion of a factor of uv in the scalar ansatz
(4.26); a more conceptual way to say it is that this factor brings us to a gauge where
D = d on vertical edges. The result (4.43) carries over unaltered, and if we plug in
9An exposition of of Fourier integrals including (4.44) can be found in [27].
125
Q = p12−∆ sgn k, as given in (4.37), we obtain
G(k) =
√p sgn k
ζp(2∆− 1)|k|2∆−1
p . (4.46)
Using the Fourier integral
∫Qpdk χ(kx)|k|s sgn k = ups+
12
sgnx
|x|s+1p
, (4.47)
we arrive at
G(x) =up2∆
ζp(2∆− 1)
sgnx
|x|2∆p
. (4.48)
In terms of the boundary field theory, G(x) = 〈Oφ(x)Oφ(0)†〉 whereOφ is the operator
dual to φ. If we assume that translation by x is implemented in the boundary theory
by a unitary operator U(x), then Oψ(x) = U(x)†Oψ(0)U(x), and
The last term comes from the horizontal edges. The equation (4.79) is different from
all previous difference equations we’ve encountered in that it does not have constant
coefficients, but instead coefficients that are periodic modulo 2 in v.11 Up to an overall
multiplicative scaling, the general solution to (4.79) is
fv = (1 + q(−1)v)(|za|1−∆
p +Q|k|2∆−1p |za|∆p
), (4.80)
where Q is a coefficient which at this stage is undetermined. Plugging (4.80) into
(4.79), one finds
(2p+m2)2 = (1 + p2∆)(1 + p2−2∆)
q =p∆ + p1−∆ − 2p−m2
p− 1,
(4.81)
and we assume as usual that ∆ > 1/2 is real.
For v < −vk, the equation of motion (4.12) is satisfied trivially, so the boundary
condition that determines Q comes from v = −vk, where (4.12) reads
(2p+m2)f−vk − pf−vk+1 + (−1)vkf−vk∑α∈F×p
χ
(−kza
α
p
)= 0 . (4.82)
Using the obvious identity
∑α∈F×p
χ
(−kza
α
p
)= −1 , (4.83)
11For the sign characters (−1)vx(x0|p), the difference equation obtained for v > −vk has constantcoefficients because the terms from horizontal edges cancel out.
137
We arrive at [2p+m2 − (−1)vk
]f−vk − pf−vk+1 = 0 . (4.84)
Plugging in (4.80) and using (4.81), we obtain
Q = (−1)vk+1p1−2∆ 1 + p2∆ − 2p−m2
1 + p2−2∆ − 2p−m2. (4.85)
To compute the holographic Green’s function, if we start with (4.42), we obtain
Gε(k) =1− q(−1)vε
1 + q(−1)vε
[p1−∆ + |k|2∆−1|ε|2∆−1 Qp∆
ζp(2∆− 1)+ . . .
]− 1 , (4.86)
where the omitted terms scale to 0 more quickly than the ones shown as ε→ 0 in the
p-adic norm. We now define
G(k) = limε→0
(1− q(−1)vε
1 + q(−1)vεGε(k)
|ε|2∆−1p
)=
Qp∆
ζp(2∆− 1)|k|2∆−1
p , (4.87)
where we dropped a k-independent term from Gε(k) before taking the limit. As
compared to (4.43), the definition (4.87) may seem a bit contrived. However, the extra
prefactor 1−q(−1)vε
1+q(−1)vεin (4.87) has no k-dependence, and its geometric mean between
even and odd vε is 1. So we maintain that (4.87) is the most sensible way to normalize
the Green’s function. Passing through a Fourier transform, we wind up with
G(x) = − 1 + p2∆ − 2p−m2
1 + p2−2∆ − 2p−m2
p∆ζp(4∆)
ζp(2∆)ζp(4∆− 2)
sgnε x
|x|2∆p
. (4.88)
4.7 Outlook
The main results of this chapter are summarized in (4.75)-(4.77): With a suitably
chosen configuration of a non-dynamical U(1) gauge field on the line graph L(Tp) of
the Bruhat-Tits tree, one may recover from a bulk complex scalar action on L(Tp) a
138
holographic boundary two-point function proportional to any sign character one wants
over Qp (for any odd prime p). Equally, one can work with a bulk complex fermion.
The key is not the statistics of the gauge field (or the boundary operator), but rather
the bulk gauge field, which gives rise to the desired sign character essentially as a
Wilson line between two boundary points.
While technical in nature, the results of this chapter open up many further ques-
tions. To begin with, one could try to tackle the case p = 2. There are seven
non-trivial sign characters sgnτ x over Q2 (besides the trivial one), and they depend
not only on the 2-adic norm of x, but also on its second and third non-trivial 2-adic
digits. Preliminary indications are that one can engineer elaborations of T2, including
non-dynamical gauge fields, that allow one to recover these sign characters; however,
nearest neighbor interactions are not enough. This is not too surprising given that the
second and third 2-adic digits relate to paths on the tree with at least two or three
links. Perhaps this is a hint for how to go on to more complicated multiplicative
characters over Qp, which can depend on finitely many p-adic digits and will wind up
involving finite range interactions on Tp.
It is a bit unsatisfying that we have placed so few limitations on the types of
fields that are allowed on Tp. In particular, if on L(Tp) we give each horizontal edge a
phase θe = π and leave all vertical edges with phases θe = 0, then one winds up with a
correlator of the form (4.76) with the trivial sign character, and the only effect of the
phases is to switch the sign of C. One naturally asks if there is a positivity constraint
that can fix this sign. One could observe that the choice of phases just described fails
to satisfied the complexified equation of motion (4.68); however, the same critique
can be made of the choice we made to capture the character sgnε x = (−1)vx . A more
fundamental point of view is called for explaining why particular choices of the U(1)
gauge field are natural constructions on L(Tp), perhaps analogous to the way that
the spin connection is natural on a smooth manifold.
139
Perhaps a related point is that we seem to have broken a lot of the symmetry of
Tp by introducing the distinction between horizontal and vertical edges on L(Tp). At
one level, this is not so disturbing, because the invariance we should require is dual
to the maps x → rx + b for all b ∈ Qp and r ∈ (Q×p )2. From a boundary theory
point of view, the operators Oφ and their two-point Green’s function transform with
non-trivial Jacobians under other elements of the p-adic conformal group PGL(2,Qp).
It would be very satisfying to give a full account in the bulk of how the corresponding
isometries of Tp (and L(Tp)) act on the U(1) gauge fields so as produce holographic
Green’s functions which are suitably covariant under the p-adic conformal group.
Having introduced the possibility of gauge field dynamics on L(Tp), another nat-
ural direction to explore is what the corresponding boundary operators are. If some
notion of conserved currents on the boundary is understood, perhaps the gravitational
dynamics of [25] could be refined or extended. We also hope that an enriched under-
standing of the geometry dual to p-adic conformal field theories will eventually impact
back on p-adic string theory, perhaps providing a better first-principles understanding
of Freund and Olson’s adaptation of the Veneziano amplitude and suggesting some
interesting generalizations.
140
References
[1] S. S. Gubser, C. Jepsen, Z. Ji, and B. Trundy, “Continuum limits of sparse