4.8 Article

Cluster Expansion and Resurgence in the Polyakov Model

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
卷 128, 期 15, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.151601

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Nuclear Physics [DE-FG02-03ER41260]
  2. TUBITAK [2214A]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the Polyakov model, a nonperturbative mass gap is formed at leading-order semiclassics by instanton effects. However, a third-order effect in semiclassics introduces an imaginary ambiguous contribution to the mass gap, which is troublesome for the original analysis. By compactifying the Polyakov model to quantum mechanics using a background ???t Hooft flux, the ambiguity in three-instanton sector is proven to cancel against the ambiguity in the Borel resummation of the perturbation theory, providing a large-order asymptotics.
In the Polyakov model, a nonperturbative mass gap is formed at leading-order semiclassics by instanton effects. By using the notions of critical points at infinity, cluster expansion, and Lefschetz thimbles, we show that a third-order effect in semiclassics gives an imaginary ambiguous contribution to the mass gap, which is supposed to be real and unambiguous. This is troublesome for the original analysis, and it is difficult to resolve this issue directly in quantum field theory (QFT). However, we find a new compactification of the Polyakov model to quantum mechanics, by using a background ???t Hooft flux. The compactification has the merit of remembering the monopole instantons of the full QFT within Born Oppenheimer approximation, while the periodic compactification does not. In the quantum mechanical limit, we prove the resurgent cancellation of the ambiguity in three-instanton sector against ambiguity in the Borel resummation of the perturbation theory around one instanton. Assuming that this result holds in QFT, we provide a large-order asymptotics of perturbation theory around perturbative vacuum and instanton.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据