Longitudinal dynamics and chiral symmetry breaking in holographic -front QCD

Guy F. de T´eramond1, ∗ and Stanley J. Brodsky2, † 1Laboratorio de F´ısica Te´orica y Computacional, Universidad de Costa Rica, 11501 San Jos´e,Costa Rica 2SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94309, USA (Dated: April 20, 2021) The breaking of chiral symmetry in holographic light-front QCD is encoded in its longitudinal dynamics with its chiral limit protected by the superconformal algebraic structure which governs its transverse dynamics. The scale in the longitudinal light-front Hamiltonian determines the confine- ment strength in this direction: It is also responsible for most of the light ground state mass consistent with the Gell-Mann-Oakes-Renner constraint. Longitudinal confinement and the break- ing of chiral symmetry are found to be different manifestations of the same underlying dynamics like in ’t Hooft large NC QCD(1 + 1) model.

Introduction.–In spite of the important progress of Eu- A simple ansatz to account for masses in holo- clidean lattice , a basic understanding of the graphic LF QCD was introduced in [26] based on the mechanism of color confinement and its relation to chi- off-shell dependence of the LF on the in- ral symmetry breaking in QCD, two fundamental phe- variant mass which controls the . For a two- 2 k⊥ nomena of strong interactions, has remained an unsolved parton state this amounts to the substitution x(1−x) → problem. Recent developments based on superconfor- k2 m2 m2 ⊥ + 1 + 2 in the ground-state Gaussian wave mal quantum mechanics [1,2] in light-front quantiza- x(1−x) x 1−x function to include the expression for the LF kinetic en- tion [3] and its holographic embedding on a higher dimen- ergy with quark masses: It is also the invariant mass sional theory [4] (gauge/gravity correspondence) squared s = (p + p )2 of the qq¯ pair. This substitution have led to new analytic insights into the structure of q q¯ leads to the longitudinal wave function [26] and their dynamics [5–10]. This new approach

m2 m2 to nonperturbative QCD dynamics, holographic light- − 1 1 + 2  front QCD, leads to effective semi-classical relativistic χ(x) = N e 2λ x 1−x , (1) bound-state equations for arbitrary spin [11], and it in- with N a normalization factor [32]. The variable x is the corporates fundamental properties which are not appar- + + LF longitudinal momentum fraction x = k /P and k⊥ ent from the QCD Lagrangian, such as the emergence of is the relative transverse momentum. The partonic mass the mass scale, the prediction of a massless pion shift contribution to hadron masses [33], in the chiral limit, and the remarkable connections be- Z 1 2 2 tween meson, and tetraquark spectroscopy across 2 hmq mq¯ i the full hadron spectrum [12–15]. Phenomenological ex- ∆M = dx χ(x) + χ(x), (2) 0 x 1 − x tensions of the holographic QCD approach also describe 2 the running of the QCD coupling αs(Q ) in the nonper- used in [26, 28] does not account for the explicit contri- turbative domain [16, 17] and provide nontrivial connec- bution from a longitudinal potential to hadron masses. tions between the dynamics of form factors and polarized As we shall show in this letter, we can extend our holo- and unpolarized quark distributions with pre-QCD non- graphic framework by combining the longitudinal dy- perturbative approaches such as Regge theory and the namics with the transverse superconformal results in a Veneziano model [18–20]. semiclassical approximation consistent with our previous holographic results [9, 10]. arXiv:2103.10950v2 [hep-ph] 18 Apr 2021 In this letter we examine the effect of longitudi- Longitudinal dynamics in HLFQCD.–We start from nal light-front dynamics for the computation of hadron the semiclassical LF transverse [5,9] and longitudi- masses, confinement, and chiral symmetry breaking mo- nal [27, 30] Hamiltonian wave equations for tivated by the previous work in Refs. [21–30]. Although  d2 1 − 4L2  light-front holography, based on the Maldacena conjec- 2 − 2 − 2 + U⊥(ζ) φ(ζ) = M⊥φ(ζ), (3) ture [4] and the superconformal algebraic structure in [2], dζ 4ζ ! determines the confinement potential in the light-front m2 m2 q + q¯ + U (x) χ(x) = M 2 χ(x), (4) (LF) transverse coordinates in the zero quark mass chi- x 1 − x k k ral limit [10], an extension is required to incorporate color-confining LF longitudinal dynamics for non-zero in the approximation where transverse and longitudinal quark masses [31]. This extension of holographic LF dynamics are separated. The variable ζ in (3) is the 2 2 QCD (HLFQCD) should preserve its successful predic- invariant transverse variable, ζ = x(1 − x)b⊥, with tions while restoring 3-dimensional rotational invariance b⊥ the transverse impact distance conjugate to the rel- in the heavy-quark limit. ative transverse momentum k⊥, and L is the relative 2

z LF orbital angular momentum L ≡ |L |max. As dis- in [30] to generate a convenient orthonormal basis func- cussed by Chabysheva and Hiller [27], it is natural to tions in the LF longitudinal momentum variable x. It is identify the potential for longitudinal dynamics with the given by potential which underlies the t’Hooft model for large-NC 2 QCD (1+1) [27]. It has the same form as the instanta- Uk(x) = −σ ∂x (x(1 − x) ∂x) , (9) neous LF potential which appears from exchange 2 2 in the A+ = 0 LF gauge in QCD (3+1). As noted in and contains the term σ x(1 − x)˜z required to form an Refs. [27, 30], the resulting longitudinal eigenvalue equa- oscillator potential in the LF longitudinal as well as in the 2 transverse directions. The longitudinal spatial variable tion for the longitudinal mass Mk can be combined with 2 z˜ conjugate to the longitudinal momentum-x,z ˜ ∼ i∂x, the holographic LF transverse equation (3) for M⊥ to incorporate massive . is the frame-independent Ioffe coordinate of Miller and We write the meson LF wave function ψ as Brodsky [36]. The potential (9) was introduced in the context of basis light-front quantization [37, 38] and was s x(1 − x) further used in [39–42]. ψ(x, ζ, ϕ) = eiLϕχ(x)φ(ζ), (5) The scale σ in (9) is the longitudinal confinement 2πζ scale and has units of mass. In contrast, the trans- 1 ∞ verse confinement scale λ in (6) has dimensions of mass normalized to R dx χ2(x) = 1 and R dζ φ2(ζ) = 1, 0 0 squared, but both scales are connected in the heavy where we have factored out the longitudinal, trans- quark mass limit. To show this, consider the limit verse and orbital dependence since the total effective m , m → m , m ¯  k , k , λ → λ . In the non- LF Hamiltonian is written as the sum of longitudinal q q¯ Q Q ⊥ z Q m +k m −kz and transverse components. The longitudinal mass M 2 relativistic limit we find x = Q z , x = Q . It k mQ+mQ mQ+mQ thus appears as a separation constant in the transverse leads to the non-relativistic rotationally-invariant poten- 2 2 2 U(r) 1 2 2 equation (3), namely M⊥ → M − Mk [27]. As a re- tial U(r) → V (r) = = µ ω r , and the con- mQ+mQ 2 sult, the structure of the superconformal equation in the straint transverse direction is not modified, even by heavy quark masses, as long as transverse and longitudinal dynamics λQ ω = σ = , (10) can be separated. We have included in (5) the normal- mQ + mQ ization factor px(1 − x) which arises from the precise mapping of AdS form factors to light-front physics in the mQmQ¯ 2 2 2 where µ = m +m and r = b⊥ + bz, with bz the canon- limit of zero quark masses [34]. Q Q ical conjugate to kz, bz = i∂kz . The transverse LF equation (3) has a similar structure In order to compute the longitudinal meson mass con- as the wave equations derived in five-dimensional AdS tribution for an arbitrary LF wave function χ(x), it is provided that one identifies ζ = z [5], the holographic convenient to perform an expansion in terms of the com- fifth-dimensional coordinate of AdS. This precise map- plete basis of orthonormal functions generated by the lon- ping allows us to relate the LF confinement potential U⊥ gitudinal LF Hamiltonian equation (4) for the specific to the dilaton profile which modifies AdS space [9]. The potential (9) assumption of superconformal algebra then uniquely de- termines the form of the transverse confining potential α,β α/2 β/2 (α,β) χκ (x) = Nx (1 − x) Pκ (1 − 2x). (11) for both mesons and nucleons [7,8]: For mesons it is given by [8, 35] Thus,

2 2 U⊥(ζ) = λ ζ + 2λ(J − 1). (6) Z 1 2 2  Mk = σ dx χ(x) − ∂x (x(1 − x)∂x) In the factorized approximation, the radial and orbital 0 excitations are determined by the transverse potential 1hα2 β2 i X + + χ(x) = σ2 C2 ν2(κ, α, β), (12) (6) with eigenvalues [9] 4 x 1 − x κ κ   2 J + L M⊥(n, J, L) = 4λ n + , (7) 2 1 2 where ν (κ, α, β) = 4 (α + β + 2κ)(2 + α + β + 2κ), with α = 2mq/σ and β = 2mq¯/σ as shown in the Appendix. and eigenfunctions For the invariant mass ansatz Eq. (1) s  2  2 2  (1+L)/2 2n! 1/2+L −λζ2/2 L 2 σ α β X φn,L(ζ) = λ ζ e L (λζ ). N exp − + = C χ (x), (13) (n+L)! n 8λ x 1 − x κ κ κ (8) For the longitudinal component we will adopt the ef- a very rapid convergence is found [27, 30] for the basis fective potential introduced by Li, Maris, Zhao and Vary function (11). 3

Chiral symmetry breaking.–The chiral limit follows di- at all scales, we can determine the effective light quark rectly from (12) since all the coefficients Cκ vanish for masses mu and md from the measured pion mass and the κ 6= 0 in this limit. From (12) we obtain strange quark mass, ms, from the kaon mass using (12): The value of the φ(1020) mass is then a prediction. No- M 2 = σ(m + m ) + O(m + m )2 , (14) π u d u d tice that the φ(1020) vector√ meson also has the transverse mass component M⊥ = 2λ from the spin-spin interac- in the limit mu, md → 0. It has the same linear depen- √tion in supersymmetric LF holographic QCD [9, 35] with dence in the quark mass as the Gell-Mann-Oakes-Renner λ = 0.523 GeV. (GMOR) relation [43]

2 2 1 ¯ 2 Mπfπ = − 2 (mu+md)huu¯ +ddi+O (mu + md) , (15) TABLE I. Lowest expansion coefficients Cκ in (13). 1 ¯ where the vacuum condensate hψψi ≡ 2 huu¯ + ddi plays the role of a chiral order parameter. The same linear de- κ = 0 κ = 1 κ = 2 κ = 3 κ = 4 κ = 5 κ = 6 pendence in (14) arises for the (3 + 1) effective LF Hamil- C(ud¯) 0.998 0 0.055 0 0.010 0 -0.003 tonian, since the constraints from the superconformal al- C(us¯) 0.967 -0.231 0.100 -0.006 -0.009 0.013 -0.016 gebra require that the contribution to the pion mass from C(ss¯) 0.998 0 0.038 0 -0.045 0 -0.024 C(uc¯) 0.958 -0.267 0.097 -0.012 -0.003 0 -0.007 the transverse LF dynamics is identically zero [8]. C(cc¯) 0.999 0 0.016 0 -0.020 0 -0.003 The lowest mode eigenfunction in (11) has identi- cal form as the approximate analytic solution obtained in [21, 22], χ(x) ∼ xβ1 (1 − x)β2 , where the exponents We show in TableI the values of the lowest expansion βi are determined by quark masses and the longitudinal coupling g, which in QCD(1+1) has units of mass. In the coefficients. The results for the light meson masses in ’t Hooft model [21] the longitudinal equation (4) becomes Fig.1 correspond to the values mu = md = 28 MeV and the non-linear equation ms = 326 MeV. Meson masses are determined from the stability plateau in Fig.1. For light quark masses con- ! tributions above κ ' 20 introduce large uncertainties m2 m2 g2N Z 1 χ(x) − χ(x0) max q q¯ C 0 from highly oscillatory integrands. In Fig.2 we show the + χ(x) + P dx 0 2 x 1 − x π 0 (x − x ) effect of the strong oscillations from the large κ behavior 2 of the Jacobi Polynomials [46] by examining the variation = Mk χ(x), (16) of the results for quark masses in the interval mq = 28 2 2 −8 with πmq/g NC −1+πβ1 cot(πβ1) = 0 from the x-power MeV to mq = 28 × 10 MeV. expansion of (16) at x =  and a similar expression from the upper bound x = 1−. Spontaneous chiral symmetry 5 ηc breaking occurs in the limit NC → ∞, followed by the 2 2 1/2 D limit mq → 0 with the result βi = (3m /πg NC ) from i ) ϕ the expansion of the transcendental equation above and 1 GeV

2 p 2 ( K Mπ = g πNC /3 (mu + md) + O (mu + md) , (17) 0.5 M from integrating (16)[21, 23]. Comparison with (14) π p leads to√σ = g πNC /3 = const, since g scales as 0.1 g ∼ 1 NC and chiral logarithms are suppressed at 0 5 10 15 20 25 NC → ∞. We notice that both (14) and (17) receive identical contributions from the potential and kinetic en- κ+ 1 ergy terms in agreement with the virial theorem. Numerical results.–In practice, we need to know the FIG. 1. Numerical evaluation of ground state meson masses value of the scale σ and the quark masses to compute from the stability plateau in the figure using (12). The hori- 2 Mk . In the heavy quark limit Eq. (10) coincides with the zontal grey lines in the figure are the observed masses [45]. heavy-quark effective theory (HQET) result [44], which requires that the confining scale is proportional to the √ p The distribution amplitude (DA) [47], X(x) ≡ mass of the heavy meson: λQ = C MQ [13, 28]. The px(1 − x χ(x), for the pion, kaon and J/Ψ mesons are 1/2 value is C = 0.49 ± 0.02 GeV for MQ ≥ 1.8 GeV [15], shown in Fig. (3). Due to the rapid convergence of the namely σ ' C2 = 0.24 GeV. We assume that this value exponential wave function in the basis expansion (13), of the longitudinal confinement scale to remain constant, very few modes are required to reproduce the invari- a result supported by the large NC QCD(1 + 1) ’t Hooft ant mass ansatz. The DAs predicted by holographic LF model discussed above. Thus, fixing C ' 0.5 GeV1/2 QCD at the initial nonperturbative scale should then 4

1 (12) and compute, for example, the mass of the D meson as a prediction. We find for M a value within 14% of its 0.100 D

) measured value for mc ' 1.4 GeV. Our result does not 0.010 include the contribution from one-gluon exchange, which GeV ( 0.001 becomes relevant for heavy quark masses. M -4 Conclusions and Outlook.–The light-front semiclassi- 10 cal approximation described in this article determines the 10-5 confinement strength in the longitudinal direction as well 0 5 10 15 20 25 as the effective scale of chiral symmetry breaking. As such, it accounts for most of the meson mass, consistent κ+ 1 with the GMOR relation and the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry. Following [27] we have separated LF longitudinal and transverse dynamics and adopted FIG. 2. Numerical evaluation of the pion mass for quark from [30] a potential which generates a convenient ba- masses in the range mq = 28 MeV (upper blue dotted line) −8 sis function in the longitudinal direction. In practice, to mq = 28 × 10 MeV (lower mauve dotted line) manifest the spurious divergence of the numerical results from highly it allows us to reduce the highly complex and non-local oscillatory integrands at large κ, in sharp contrast with the four-dimensional LF QCD Hamiltonian to a set of two exact chiral result (14). independent second order differential equations, consis- tent with the local structure of semiclassical AdS equa- tions [51, 52]. be evolved to the relevant scale using the ERBL equa- The origin and physical interpretation of the longitu- tion [47–49]. The Dyson-Schwinger results for the pion dinal scale σ, which has the role of a condensate hψψ¯ i, DA [50] are very similar to the chiral result X(x) = remains to be explored, but as we have shown here, it p x(1 − x) from LF holographic mapping [34]. is related to the dimensionful constant g in QCD(1 + 1) at large NC . In lattice QCD the structure of the vac- 0.6 κ  0 uum is sampled in the Euclidean region where non- κ  0 π 0.6 K 0.5 trivial gauge field configurations provide a mechanism 0.4 0.4

) for symmetry breaking through the Banks-Casher rela- ) 0.3 x x ( ( X

X ¯ 0.2 0.2 κ  1 tion, hψψi = −πρ(0), with ρ(0) the density or Dirac-zero 0.1 modes [53, 54]. However, the relation between chiral sym- κ  2 0.0 0.0 κ  2 metry breaking and confinement has remained elusive. In -0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 this context, it has been argued that the chiral conden- x x sate, usually viewed as a constant mass scale which fills 1.0 0.6 D J /Ψ all , is instead contained within hadrons, there- 0.8 0.4 fore a property of hadron dynamics [50, 55]. ) )

x κ 0 x 0.6 ( (

X X The fact that the nonzero pion mass is a consequence of 0.2 0.4 κ  1 longitudinal LF confinement is a remarkable result. One 0.2 0.0 κ  2 would expect, for example, from the two-dimensional 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 ’t Hooft [21] or Schwinger [22] models in light-front coor- x x dinates, that the pion mass from the mechanism of chiral symmetry breaking originates in the longitudinal compo- nent of the wave function [23], since the kinetic quark FIG. 3. Light-front distribution amplitudes X(x) for the π, mass terms only depend on the longitudinal variable. K, D and J/Ψ mesons: the red curve is the invariant mass result, dot dashed black curves are individual modes in the However, this would not be the case if the transverse ki- expansion (13), dashed blue curve represent the sum of modes netic and of the pion would not exactly in the figure. Notice that the J/Ψ result is well described by cancel as required by the superconformal structure of the the zero mode alone. transverse LF Hamiltonian. The pion plays a special role since it is the unique hadronic state of zero mass. Since We can extend our analysis to the heavy quark sector it does not have a baryonic partner, the pion breaks the provided that longitudinal and transverse dynamics can meson-baryon hadronic supersymmetry [8]. In contrast, be separated to a good approximation. In contrast with the mass (as well as the mass of radial and or- light quark masses, mq, mq¯  σ, most of the hadron mass bital hadron excited states) is generated by the addition in the heavy sector, mQ, mQ¯  σ, comes from quark of the transverse kinetic and transverse potential energy masses. The expansion coefficients for the wave function with a small contribution from the longitudinal dynam- (13) for the uc and cc mesons are shown in TableI. We de- ics, in agreement with the Regge phenomenology of the termine the effective charm quark mass from the ηc using hadron mass spectrum. 5

We thank Yang Li and James Vary for their collabo- [5] G. F. de T´eramondand S. J. Brodsky, Light-front holog- ration in the early stages of this work and for reading raphy: A first approximation to QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. our manuscript. We also thank Hans Guenter Dosch for 102, 081601 (2009)[ arXiv:0809.4899 [hep-ph]]. critical remarks and Valery Lyubovitsky for useful com- [6] S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de T´eramondand H. G. Dosch, Threefold complementary approach to holographic QCD, ments. The work of SJB is supported in part by the Phys. Lett. B 729, 3 (2014)[ arXiv:1302.4105 Department of Energy, Contract DE–AC02–76SF00515, [hep-th]]. SLAC-PUB-17593. [7] G. F. de T´eramond, H. G. Dosch and S. J. Brodsky, Appendix: Jacobi polynomials and solution to the lon- Baryon spectrum from superconformal quantum mechan- ics and its light-front holographic embedding, Phys. Rev. gitudinal Hamiltonian equation.– The Jacobi polynomials D 91, 045040 (2015)[ arXiv:1411.5243 [hep-ph]]. (α,β) Pn (z) are solution of the differential equation [8] H. G. Dosch, G. F. de T´eramond and S. J. Brod- sky, Superconformal baryon-meson symmetry and light- −α −β α+1 β+1  (1 − z) (1 + z) ∂z (1 − z) (1 + z) ∂z u(z) front holographic QCD, Phys. Rev. D 91, 085016 (2015) [ ]. + κ(κ + a + b + 1)u(z) = 0, (18) arXiv:1501.00959 [hep-th] [9] S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de T´eramond,H. G. Dosch and J. Er- which is orthogonal in the interval [−1, 1] with weight lich, Light-front holographic QCD and emerging confine- ment, Phys. Rept. 584, 1-105 (2015)[ arXiv:1407.8131 (1 − z)α(1 − z)β. Performing the change of variable z = [hep-ph]]. 1 − 2x we find [10] S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de T´eramondand H. G. Dosch, Light-front holography and supersymmetric conformal −α −β α+1 β+1  x (1 − x) ∂x x (1 − x) ∂x u(x) algebra: A novel approach to hadron spectroscopy, struc- + κ(κ + a + b + 1)u(x) = 0, (19) ture, and dynamics, [arXiv:2004.07756 [hep-ph]]. [11] G. F. de T´eramond, H. G. Dosch and S. J. Brodsky, (α,β) Kinematical and dynamical aspects of higher-spin bound- with the solution Pκ (1−2x) orthogonal in the interval α β state equations in holographic QCD, Phys. Rev. D 87, [0, 1] with weight x (1 − x) . 075005 (2013)[ arXiv:1301.1651 [hep-ph]]. Consider now the eigenvalue equation [12] H. G. Dosch, G. F. de T´eramond and S. J. Brod-   2 2  sky, Supersymmetry across the light and heavy-light 1 α β 2 hadronic spectrum, Phys. Rev. D 92, 074010 (2015) −∂x (x(1 − x)∂x) + + v(x) = ν v(x). 4 x 1 − x [arXiv:1504.05112 [hep-ph]]. (20) [13] H. G. Dosch, G. F. de T´eramond and S. J. Brod- Writing v(x) = xα/2(1 − x)xβ/2w(x) and substituting in sky, Supersymmetry across the light and heavy-light (20) we find that w(x) = P (α,β)(1 − 2x). Therefore the hadronic spectrum II, Phys. Rev. D 95, 034016 (2017) κ [arXiv:1612.02370 [hep-ph]]. normalized solution to (20) [14] M. Nielsen and S. J. Brodsky, Hadronic superpart- χα,β(x) = Nxα/2(1 − x)β/2P (α,β)(1 − 2x), (21) ners from a superconformal and supersymmetric alge- κ κ bra, Phys. Rev. D 97, 114001 (2018)[ arXiv:1802.09652 with eigenvalues [hep-ph]]. [15] M. Nielsen, S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de T´eramond, ν2 = 1 (α + β + 2κ)(2 + α + β + 2κ), (22) H. G. Dosch, F. S. Navarra and L. Zou, Supersymme- 4 try in the double-heavy hadronic spectrum, Phys. Rev. and normalization D 98, 034002 (2018)[ arXiv:1805.11567 [hep-ph]]. [16] S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de T´eramondand A. Deur, Non- s Γ(1 + κ)Γ(1 + α + β + κ) perturbative QCD coupling and its β function from N = p1 + α + β + 2κ . Γ(1 + α + κ)Γ(1 + β + κ) light-front holography, Phys. Rev. D 81, 096010 (2010) [arXiv:1002.3948 [hep-ph]]. (23) [17] A. Deur, S. J. Brodsky and G. F. de T´eramond,Connect- ing the hadron mass scale to the fundamental mass scale of , Phys. Lett. B 750, 528 (2015)[ arXiv:1409.5488 [hep-ph]]; On the interface between perturbative and nonperturbative QCD, Phys. ∗ [email protected] Lett. B 757, 275 (2016)[ arXiv:1601.06568 [hep-ph]]. † [email protected] [18] R. S. Sufian, G. F. de T´eramond, S. J. Brodsky, [1] V. de Alfaro, S. Fubini and G. Furlan, Conformal in- A. Deur and H. G. Dosch, Analysis of nucleon electro- variance in quantum mechanics, Nuovo Cim. A 34, 569 magnetic form factors from light-front holographic QCD: (1976). The spacelike region, Phys. Rev. D 95, 014011 (2017) [2] S. Fubini and E. Rabinovici, Superconformal quantum [arXiv:1609.06688 [hep-ph]]. mechanics, Nucl. Phys. B 245, 17 (1984). [19] G. F. de T´eramond,T. Liu, R. S. Sufian, H. G. Dosch, [3] P. A. M. Dirac, Forms of relativistic dynamics, Rev. Mod. S. J. Brodsky and A. Deur, Universality of general- Phys. 21, 392 (1949). ized parton distributions in light-front holographic QCD, [4] J. M. Maldacena, The large-N limit of superconformal Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 182001 (2018)[ arXiv:1801.09154 field theories and supergravity, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, [hep-ph]]. 1113 (1999)[ arXiv:hep-th/9711200]. [20] T. Liu, R. S. Sufian, G. F. de T´eramond,H. G. Dosch, 6

S. J. Brodsky and A. Deur, Unified description of polar- [37] J. P. Vary, H. Honkanen, J. Li, P. Maris, S. J. Brod- ized and unpolarized quark distributions in the proton, sky, A. Harindranath, G. F. de T´eramond,P. Sternberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 082003 (2020)[ arXiv:1909.13818 E. G. Ng and C. Yang, Hamiltonian light-front field the- [hep-ph]]. ory in a basis function approach, Phys. Rev. C 81, 035205 [21] G. ’t Hooft, A two-dimensional model for mesons, Nucl. (2010)[ arXiv:0905.1411 [nucl-th]]. Phys. B 75, 461 (1974). [38] Y. Li, P. W. Wiecki, X. Zhao, P. Maris and J. P. Vary, [22] H. Bergknoff, Physical particles of the massive Schwinger Introduction to basis light-front quantization approach model, Nucl. Phys. B 122, 215 (1977). to QCD bound state problems, [arXiv:1311.2980 [23] A. R. Zhitnitsky, On chiral symmetry breaking in QCD [nucl-th]]. in two-dimensions (Nc → ∞), Phys. Lett. B 165, 405 [39] Y. Li, P. Maris and J. P. Vary, Quarkonium as a rela- (1985). tivistic bound state on the light front, Phys. Rev. D 96, [24] K. Hornbostel, S. J. Brodsky and H. C. Pauli, Light cone 016022 (2017)[ arXiv:1704.06968 [hep-ph]]. quantized QCD in (1+1)-Dimensions, Phys. Rev. D 41, [40] C. Mondal, S. Xu, J. Lan, X. Zhao, Y. Li, D. Chakrabarti 3814 (1990). and J. P. Vary, Proton structure from a light- [25] Y. Mo and R. J. Perry, Basis function calculations for front Hamiltonian, Phys. Rev. D 102, 016008 (2020) the massive Schwinger model in the light-front Tamm- [arXiv:1911.10913 [hep-ph]]. Dancoff approximation, J. Comput. Phys. 108, 159-174 [41] W. Qian, S. Jia, Y. Li and J. P. Vary, Light mesons within (1993). the basis light-front quantization framework, Phys. Rev. [26] S. J. Brodsky and G. F. de T´eramond, AdS/CFT C 102, 055207 (2020)[ arXiv:2005.13806 [nucl-th]]. and light-front QCD, Subnucl. Ser. 45, 139-183 (2009) [42] A. B. Sheckler and G. A. Miller, The mystery of Bloom- [arXiv:0802.0514 [hep-ph]]. Gilman duality: A light-front holographic QCD perspec- [27] S. S. Chabysheva and J. R. Hiller, Dynamical model tive, [arXiv:2101.00100 [hep-ph]]. for longitudinal wave functions in light-front holographic [43] M. Gell-Mann, R. J. Oakes and B. Renner, Behavior of QCD, Annals Phys. 337, 143 (2013)[ arXiv:1207.7128 current divergences under SU(3) × SU(3), Phys. Rev. [hep-ph]]. 175, 2195 (1968). [28] T. Gutsche, V. E. Lyubovitskij, I. Schmidt and A. Vega, [44] N. Isgur and M. B. Wise, Spectroscopy with heavy quark Chiral symmetry breaking and meson wave functions in symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 1130 (1991). soft-wall AdS/QCD, Phys. Rev. D 87, 056001 (2013) [45] P. A. Zyla et al. [Particle Data Group], Review of Particle [arXiv:1212.5196 [hep-ph]]. Physics, PTEP 2020, 083C01 (2020). [29] A. P. Trawi´nski,S. D. Glazek, S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de [46] G´abor Szeg˝o,Orthogonal Polynomials, American Math- T´eramond and H. G. Dosch, Effective confining po- ematical Society, 4th edition (1975). tentials for QCD, Phys. Rev. D 90, 074017 (2014) [47] G. P. Lepage and S. J. Brodsky, Exclusive processes [arXiv:1403.5651 [hep-ph]]. in quantum chromodynamics: Evolution equations for [30] Y. Li, P. Maris, X. Zhao and J. P. Vary, Heavy quarko- hadronic wave functions and the form-factors of mesons, nium in a holographic basis, Phys. Lett. B 758, 118-124 Phys. Lett. B 87, 359-365 (1979). (2016)[ arXiv:1509.07212 [hep-ph]]. [48] A. V. Efremov and A. V. Radyushkin, Factorization and [31] In the usual formulation of bottom-up holographic mod- asymptotical behavior of pion form-factor in QCD, Phys. els one identifies quark mass and chiral condensates as co- Lett. B 94, 245-250 (1980). efficients of a scalar background field X0(z) in AdS space. [49] S. J. Brodsky, F. G. Cao and G. F. de T´eramond, See: J. Erlich, E. Katz, D. T. Son and M. A. Stephanov, Evolved QCD predictions for the meson-photon tran- QCD and a holographic model of hadrons, Phys. Rev. sition form factors, Phys. Rev. D 84, 033001 (2011) Lett. 95, 261602 (2005)[ arXiv:hep-ph/0501128]; L. Da [arXiv:1104.3364 [hep-ph]]. Rold and A. Pomarol, Chiral symmetry breaking from [50] C. D. Roberts, D. G. Richards, T. Horn and L. Chang, five dimensional spaces, Nucl. Phys. B 721, 79 (2005) Insights into the emergence of mass from studies of pion [arXiv:hep-ph/0501218]. and kaon structure, [arXiv:2102.01765 [hep-ph]], and [32] For a recent overview see, R. Sandapen, An overview references therein. of light-front holography, PoS LC2019, 011 (2020) [51] R. Narayanan and H. Neuberger, The quark mass depen- [arXiv:2001.03479 [hep-ph]], and references therein. dence of the pion mass at infinite N, Phys. Lett. B 616, [33] W. I. Weisberger, Partons, electromagnetic mass shifts, 76 (2005)[ arXiv:hep-lat/0503033 [hep-lat]]. and the approach to scaling, Phys. Rev. D 5, 2600 (1972). [52] E. Katz and T. Okui, The ’t Hooft model as a hologram, [34] S. J. Brodsky and G. F. de T´eramond, Hadronic spectra JHEP 01, 013 (2009)[ arXiv:0710.3402 [hep-th]]. and light-front wave functions in holographic QCD, Phys. [53] T. Banks and A. Casher, Chiral symmetry breaking in Rev. Lett. 96, 201601 (2006)[ arXiv:hep-ph/0602252 confining theories, Nucl. Phys. B 169, 103 (1980). [hep-ph]]. [54] See, for example, C. McNeile, A. Bazavov, [35] S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de T´eramond, H. G. Dosch and C. T. H. Davies, R. J. Dowdall, K. Hornbostel, C. Lorc´e,Universal effective hadron dynamics from su- G. P. Lepage and H. D. Trottier, Direct determination of perconformal algebra, Phys. Lett. B 759, 171 (2016) the strange and light quark condensates from full lattice [arXiv:1604.06746 [hep-ph]]. QCD, Phys. Rev. D 87, 034503 (2013)[ arXiv:1211.6577 [36] G. A. Miller and S. J. Brodsky, Frame-independent spa- [hep-lat]], and references therein. tial coordinatez ˜: Implications for light-front wave func- [55] S. J. Brodsky, C. D. Roberts, R. Shrock and P. C. Tandy, tions, deep inelastic scattering, light-front holography, Confinement contains condensates, Phys. Rev. C 85, and lattice QCD calculations, Phys. Rev. C 102, 022201 065202 (2012)[ arXiv:1202.2376 [nucl-th]]. (2020)[ arXiv:1912.08911 [hep-ph]].