arXiv:2101.11672v2 [math.AG] 3 Feb 2021 ok fWte [ Witten interac of and works insights geom of symplectic physics. and source mathematical algebraic and great as systems, such a integrable mathematics been of areas has various theory (GW) Witten ucint h ml hs pc pt eu .Apofo h con the of proof Takasa A by given 2. subsequently genus was to 1, genera up genus logarit all space to the to phase function of sector small tau stationary restriction the AL the to an with function of potential logarithm Gromov–Witten the primary with potential Witten the that implies conjecture anti-dia with conifold resolved the of potential Gromov–Witten dent [ also [ see in sparse, Zhang remain and examples Dubrovin explicit by given was [ equ in difference proved corresponding was a which implied numbers potential GW the for equation curve of For space moduli the gravity. of compactification Deligne–Mumford the etn rsa oe fGoo–itnter ftersle c resolved the of theory Gromov–Witten of model crystal melting a th Calabi–Yau [ in the conjectured For Brini conifold, hierarchies. resolved the integrable by and given theory string cal tde n[ in studied onie ihtelgrtmo a ucino h boizLdk(A Ablowitz–Ladik the of function tau a [ of in introduced logarithm the with coincides rvttoa ecnat)cicdswt h etito fatau space. a phase of small restriction the the to hierarchy with coincides descendants) gravitational h d nerbeheacyfrG hoyo on a u forwa put was point a of theory GW for hierarchy integrable KdV The pr organizing underlying the as structures integrable of study The eea osrcino nitgal irrh o ie Grom given a for hierarchy integrable an of construction general A n[ In NERBEHEACYFRTERSLE CONIFOLD RESOLVED THE FOR HIERARCHY INTEGRABLE Bri12 pcaiaino a ucinptfradb rdeadi h stud the in Bridgeland funct by analytic forward an invariants. put po Donaldson–Thomas as Gromov–Witten of function equation phenomena Tau the crossing difference a for the th of equation of of specialization difference representation solution a functional the integra a as express Ablowitz–Ladik use well We the as primaries. to hierarchy of conifold level resolved the the at of theory Witten Abstract. EHY95 ,Biipoie ro ftecicdneo h ecnetGrom descendent the of coincidence the of proof a provided Brini ], P AL75 1 h eaino Wter oteTd nerbeheacywas hierarchy integrable Toda the to theory GW of relation the , Wit91 epoieadrc ro facnetr fBiirltn h Grom the relating Brini of conjecture a of proof direct a provide We , EY94 ne utbeietfiaino h aibe.I atclr the particular, In variables. the of identification suitable a under ] n oteih[ Kontsevich and ] , EYY95 UA LMADAPNSAHA ARPAN AND ALIM MURAD primary Oko00 , 1. EHX97 Wptnilo h eovdcnfl i .without e. (i. conifold resolved the of potential GW Introduction ]. DZ01 , 1 Kon92 Pan00 ADK ,seas [ also see ], + ,rltn h nescinter on theory intersection the relating ], .I [ In ]. 06 Bri12 o eainbtentopologi- between relation a for ] Pan00 htteeuvratdescen- equivariant the that ] Dub14 ,acnetrddifference conjectured a ], o noeve,yet overview, an for ] Ablowitz–Ladik e o hc sa is which ion ii [ in ki ucino h AL the of function nil fGromov– of inciple o2 topological 2d to s l hierarchy ble nfl.Ti was This onifold. vWte theory ov–Witten eta.We tential. ty h td of study the etry, to o Hurwitz for ation efl geometry reefold gonal fwall- of y mo h tau the of hm in between tions etr nthe in jecture Tak13 )hierarchy L) n fthe of and C ov– di the in rd × using ] action ov– 2 MURADALIMANDARPANSAHA essentially a two-step proof: First, the descendent potential was identified with a tau function of the 2d Toda hierarchy. And then, it was shown that owing to a certain factorization property which the specific tau function in question possessed, it could be interpreted as a tau function of the relativistic Toda hierarchy, a reduction of the 2d Toda hierarchy which was known to be equivalent to the Ablowitz–Ladik hierarchy. In complementary recent developments, Bridgeland put forward in [Bri19] a Riemann– Hilbert problem associated to wall-crossing of Donaldson–Thomas invariants. This was applied in [Bri20] to the resolved conifold, putting forward a Tau function as a solution to the Riemann–Hilbert problem, which in particular provides the Gromov–Witten potential as an asymptotic expansion. In this work, we give a proof of the identification of the primary Gromov–Witten potential for both the stationary and non-stationary sectors with an AL tau function to all genera. The main ingredients of our proof are two difference equations. One of these is obtained from a certain functional representation of the AL hierarchy due to Vekslerchik [Vek98, Vek02], while the other was proved by one of us in [Ali20] by adapting ideas which appeared in the study of the exact WKB method in [IKT18]. In particular, by combining this with the results of Bridgeland in [Bri20], we are able to obtain a closed-form expression for the tau function, thus providing a new, but perhaps expected, link between integrable hierarchies of GW theory and Bridgeland’s DT Riemann–Hilbert problem. The outline of this paper is as follows: In §2, we recall notions from the Gromov– Witten theory of the resolved conifold, introduce the difference equation proved in [Ali20], and construct a solution of it using Bridgeland’s Tau function [Bri20]. In §3, we recall Vekslerchik’s functional representation of the Ablowitz–Ladik hierarchy. In §4, we show how to take the dispersionless limit of the AL hierarchy in this setting and give a version of Dubrovin’s proof of the correspondence between the equivariant genus zero Gromov–Witten potential of the resolved conifold and the dispersionless AL hierarchy adapted to our setting. Finally, in §5, we bring all the ingredients together to extend a result of Brini. Acknowledgements. We would like to thank Andrea Brini and J¨org Teschner for correspondence and comments on the draft. This work is supported through the DFG Emmy Noether grant AL 1407/2-1. 2. Gromov–Witten potential and difference equation Gromov–Witten (GW) theory of a non-singular algebraic variety X is concerned with the study of integrals over the moduli spaces of maps from Riemann surfaces into X. Let X be a Calabi–Yau threefold. The GW potential of X is the following formal power series: t 2g−2 g t 2g−2 g β F (λ, )= λ F ( )= λ Nβ q , (2.1) g≥0 g≥0 ∈ 2 Z X X β HX(X, ) where qβ := exp(2πihβ, ti) is a formal variable living in a suitable completion of the effective cone in the group ring of the small phase space H2(X, Z), λ is a formal param- g eter corresponding to the topological string coupling, and Nβ are the GW invariants. INTEGRABLE HIERARCHY FOR THE RESOLVED CONIFOLD 3

The GW potential can be written as:

F = Fβ=0 + F,˜ (2.2) where Fβ=0 denotes the contribution from constant maps (the stationary sector) and F˜ the contribution from non-constant maps (the non-stationary sector). The constant- map contributions at genus 0 and 1 are t dependent and the higher-genus constant-map contributions take the universal form [FP00]: (−1)g−1 χ(X) B B F g = 2g 2g−2 , g ≥ 2 , (2.3) β=0 4g(2g − 2)(2g − 2)! where χ(X) is the topological Euler characteristic of X and Bk denotes the k-th Bernoulli number. This note is concerned with an equivariant version of the GW potential of the CY threefold given by the total space of a rank two bundle over the projective line: O(−1) ⊕ O(−1) → P1 . (2.4) This corresponds to the resolution of the conifold singularity in C4 and is known as the resolved conifold. Its small phase space is spanned by an identity element id and the K¨ahler class ω of the base P1. The associated coordinates shall be denoted x := hid, ti and t := hω, ti respectively. The (non-equivariant) GW potential for this geometry was determined in physics [GV98, GV99], and in mathematics [FP00] with the following outcome for the non-constant maps: g−1 0 g (−1) B2g F˜ = Li (q) , F˜ = Li − (q) , g ≥ 1 , (2.5) 3 2g(2g − 2)! 3 2g where q := exp(2πit) and the polylogarithm is defined by: ∞ zn Li (z)= , s ∈ C . (2.6) s ns n=1 X There is an anti-diagonal C× action on O(−1)⊕O(−1), given by fibrewise C× action on the O(−1) with opposite characters. This C× action is especially interesting as it acts trivially on the canonical bundle, meaning that O(−1) ⊕ O(−1) is then equivariantly Calabi–Yau. With respect to this action, one can define an equivariant analogue of Gromov–Witten theory where the ordinary cohomology ring of the resolved conifold is replaced by the equivariant cohomology. The equivariant Gromov–Witten invariants of rank 2 bundles over curves were computed by Bryan and Pandharipande in [BP08]. The theory significantly simplifies in the case of the resolved conifold with anti-diagonal action: It is then just the contribution from constant maps which is affected. In particular, the genus zero Gromov–Witten potential becomes: (2π)3ix2t F 0 = + F˜0, (2.7) ad 2κ2 where the ad in the subscript denotes that it is equivariant with respect to the anti- diagonal action and κ is the equivariant parameter. The following theorem was proved in [Ali20]: 4 MURADALIMANDARPANSAHA

Theorem 1. [Ali20] The contribution of the non-constant maps F˜(λ, t) to the GW potential of the resolved conifold satisfies the following difference equation: 1 ∂ 2 λ F˜(λ, t + λˇ) − 2F˜(λ, t)+ F˜(λ, t − λˇ)= F˜0(t) , λˇ = . (2.8) 2π ∂t 2π   We proceed by determining the solution of the difference equation. The latter already appears as a building block of the Tau function determined by Bridgeland in [Bri20] as a solution to a Riemann–Hilbert problem associated to wall-crossing of DT invariants of the resolved conifold. The special functions in [Bri20] involve the multiple sine functions which are defined using the Barnes multiple Gamma functions [Bar04]. For × a variable z ∈ C and parameters ω1,...,ωr ∈ C , these are defined by: r r (−1)

sinr(z | ω1,...,ωr) := Γr(z | ω1,...,ωr) · Γr ωi − z | ω1,...,ωr . (2.9) i=1 ! X For further definitions, see e. g. [Bri20, Rui00] and references therein. We will further- more need the generalized Bernoulli polynomials, defined by the generating function: ∞ xr ezx xn r = Br,n(z | ω1, ...,ωr) . (2.10) (eωix − 1) n! i=1 n=0 X Consider now the functionQ G(z | ω1,ω2) of [Bri20, Sec. 4.2], defined by: πi G(z | ω ,ω ) := exp · B (z + ω | ω ,ω ,ω ) · sin (z + ω | ω ,ω ,ω ), (2.11) 1 2 6 3,3 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 3   and define a function1: Fnp(λ, t) = log G(t | λ,ˇ 1) . (2.12) We obtain the following:

Proposition 2. The function Fnp(λ, t) is a solution of the difference equation (2.8). Moreover, Fnp has an asymptotic expansion as λ → 0 given by: ∞ 2g−2 g Fnp(λ, t) ∼ λ F˜ (t) , (2.13) g=0 X where F˜g(t) are the non-constant parts of the conifold free energies defined in (2.5). The solution is furthermore unique given the above asymptotic expansion.

Proof. By [Bri20, Prop.4.2], the function G(t | λ,ˇ 1) is single valued for λˇ ∈ / R<0 and satisfies the difference equation: G(t + λˇ | λ,ˇ 1) = H(t + λˇ | λ,ˇ 1)−1 , (2.14) G(t | λ,ˇ 1)

1The subscript np of the function stands for non-perturbative. In [Bri20], it is suggested that the Tau function of the DT Riemann–Hilbert problem gives a non-perturbative definition of the GW theory of the resolved conifold. The non-perturbative content of this function is discussed in a companion paper. INTEGRABLE HIERARCHY FOR THE RESOLVED CONIFOLD 5 where H is denoted by F in [Bri20] and is given by: πi H(t | ω ,ω ) := exp − · B (t | ω ,ω ) · sin (z | ω ,ω ) . (2.15) 1 2 2 2,2 1 2 2 1 2   This in turn satisfies the difference equation [Bri20, Prop 4.1]: H(t + ω | ω ,ω ) 1 2πit 1 1 2 = , x = exp . (2.16) H(t | ω ,ω ) 1 − x 2 ω 1 2 2  2  From (2.14) we obtain, by taking the logarithm: log G(t + λˇ | λ,ˇ 1) + log G(t − λˇ | λ,ˇ 1) − 2 log G(t | λ,ˇ 1) (2.17) = − log H(t + λˇ | λ,ˇ 1) − log H(t | λ,ˇ 1) = log(1 − q) , q = exp(2πit) .

For the asymptotic expansion of Fnp, we use
[Bri20, Prop 4.6], which in particular proves the asymptotic expansion of G as ω2 → 0 to be: k−2 k−2 (k − 1) · Bk · ω2 2πi 2πiz log G(z | ω ,ω ) ∼ · Li − exp . (2.18) 2 1 k! ω 3 k ω ≥ 1 1 Xk 0      It follows that: ∞ g−1 1 2g−2 (−1) B2g F (λ, t) ∼ Li (q)+ λ Li − (q) , (2.19) np λ2 3 2g(2g − 2)! 3 2g g=1 X by noting that Bk = 0 for k> 1 odd. Finally, we prove the uniqueness of this solution given the asymptotic expansion (2.13). Let F1 be a solution to the difference equation (2.8) satisfying (2.13). Then the ˇ difference f(λ, t) := F1(λ, t) − log G(t | λ, 1) satisfies the following equation: f(λ, t + λˇ) − f(λ, t)= f(λ, t) − f(λ, t − λˇ) . (2.20) For any fixed value of λ, the function f(λ, t + λˇ) − f(λ, t) is periodic in t with period λˇ. Thus, it must be of the form: 2kπit f(λ, t + λˇ) − f(λ, t)= λd (λ) exp , (2.21) k ˇ ∈Z λ Xk   where dk(λ) are (possibly meromorphic) functions of λ. This can again be rewritten as: 2kπi(t + λˇ) f(λ, t + λˇ) − (t + λˇ) d (λ) exp k ˇ ∈Z λ Xk   (2.22) 2kπit = f(λ, t) − t d (λ) exp . k ˇ ∈Z λ Xk   This gives another function which is periodic in t with period λˇ. Thus, the most general f(λ, t) satisfying this equation is: 2kπit f(λ, t)= (c (λ)+ td (λ)) exp , (2.23) k k ˇ ∈Z λ Xk   6 MURADALIMANDARPANSAHA where ck(λ),dk(λ) are (possibly meromorphic) functions of λ. Since F1(λ, t) and log G(t | λ,ˇ 1) both satisfy (2.13) as λ → 0, the functions ck(λ) and dk(λ) are forced to vanish. This implies F1(λ, t) = log G(t | λ,ˇ 1) and that the solution is indeed unique.  Corollary 3. The equivariant Gromov–Witten potential of the resolved conifold with anti-diagonal action is: (2π)3ix2t Fad(λ, t)= + log G(t | λ,ˇ 1) . (2.24) 2κ2λˇ2 3. The Ablowitz–Ladik hierarchy The AL hierarchy [AL75] is a set of infinitely many non-linear differential-difference equations in two functions a, b: Z → CJz, z˜K, where z andz ˜ represent two countably infinite tuples of (complex) flow parameters zi andz ˜i respectively. The simplest non- trivial flow equation in the hierarchy is the AL system: i˙a = (Λ(a)+Λ−1(a))(1 − ab) , (3.1) ib˙ = −(Λ(b)+Λ−1(b))(1 − ab) . Here the dot denotes derivative with respect to a linear combination of the flow pa- rameters in the tuples z andz ˜, while Λ denotes the shift operator whose action on any function u on Z is given by (Λ(u))(n)= u(n + 1) . (3.2) One way of constructing the full AL hierarchy is by means of three tau functions σ, ρ, τ : Z → CJz, z˜K associated to a solution (a, b) of the AL system. These are defined by σ ρ Λ(τ)Λ−1(τ) a = , b = , 1 − ab = . (3.3) τ τ τ 2 Note that the tau functions are not independent but satisfy Λ(τ)Λ−1(τ)= τ 2 − σρ . (3.4) The AL hierarchy is then equivalent to the following system of Hirota bilinear equations (cf. Vekslerchik [Vek98, Vek02]): τ(z, z˜)τ(z + i[ζ], z˜) − ρ(z, z˜)σ(z + i[ζ], z˜)= Λ−1(τ)(z, z˜)Λ(τ)(z + i[ζ], z˜) , (3.5a) τ(z, z˜)σ(z + i[ζ], z˜) − σ(z, z˜)τ(z + i[ζ], z˜)= ζΛ−1(τ)(z, z˜)Λ(σ)(z + i[ζ], z˜) , (3.5b) ρ(z, z˜)τ(z + i[ζ], z˜) − τ(z, z˜)ρ(z + i[ζ], z˜)= ζΛ−1(ρ)(z, z˜)Λ(τ)(z + i[ζ], z˜) , (3.5c) τ(z, z˜)τ(z, z˜ + i[ζ]) − ρ(z, z˜)σ(z, z˜ + i[ζ]) = Λ(τ)(z, z˜)Λ−1(τ)(z, z˜ + i[ζ]) , (3.5d) τ(z, z˜)σ(z, z˜ + i[ζ]) − σ(z, z˜)τ(z, z˜ + i[ζ]) = ζΛ(τ)(z, z˜)Λ−1(σ)(z, z˜ + i[ζ]) , (3.5e) ρ(z, z˜)τ(z, z˜ + i[ζ]) − τ(z, z˜)ρ(z, z˜ + i[ζ]) = ζΛ(ρ)(z, z˜)Λ−1(τ)(z, z˜ + i[ζ]) . (3.5f) In the above, [ζ] denotes the tuple: ζ2 ζ3 [ζ] := ζ, , ,... . (3.6) 2 3   INTEGRABLE HIERARCHY FOR THE RESOLVED CONIFOLD 7

The flows of the hierarchy are then obtained by expanding the above set of equations order by order in ζ. In particular, the AL system is obtained by taking the flow along

∂z1 + ∂z˜1 . 4. Dispersionless limit The dispersionless limit of any integrable hierarchy is a limit in which the contri- bution of higher-derivative terms (which cause dispersion) are suppressed. This is achieved by scaling the length and times (i. e. the flow parameters) by a factor λˇ−1 inversely proportional to a dispersion parameter λ, and then taking the limit λ → 0. Expanding the relevant flow equations as Taylor series in λ about λ = 0 then gives the small-dispersion expansion of the hierarchy. The most straightforward way to do this in the case of the AL hierarchy is to work at the level of tau functions. That is to say, we introduce tau functions σλ, ρλ, τλ : C → CJz, z˜K of a continuous complex variable x, parametrised by λ. (It is not a coincidence that the spatial coordinate is denoted with the same symbol as the group ring parameter associated to the identity class in H2(X, Z); we will later see that they can be identified.) The dependence of the tau functions on λ is stipulated to take the following form: ̟λ sλ ̟λ sλ ̟λ log σλ = + + rλ , log ρλ = − + rλ , log τλ = . (4.1) λˇ2 λˇ λˇ2 λˇ λˇ2 Here, ̟λ,sλ,rλ are analytic in λ. So, they have well-defined limits ̟,s,r as λ → 0. ˇ We also introduce the operator Λλ := exp(λ∂x). The small-dispersion expansion of the AL hierarchy is then given by making the following replacements in (3.5): ˇ σ 7→ σλ , ρ 7→ ρλ , τ 7→ τλ , Λ 7→ Λλ , [ζ] 7→ λ[ζ] . (4.2) In the conjectured correspondence between GW theory and integrable hierarchies, the dispersion parameter λ plays the role of the genus expansion parameter. In partic- ular, the genus zero GW theory should correspond to the dispersionless limit of the associated hierarchy. In order to relate the dispersionless limit of the AL hierarchy to the resolved conifold, we will first identify a suitable set of dependent variables and describe the dynamical equations of the hierarchy in terms of them. Proposition 4. The dispersionless limit of the AL hierarchy is given by the following 2r system of equations in the functions v = ∂xs and u = − log(1 − e ):

v v 2 v −u ζ ∂ 1 − ζe + (1 + ζe ) − 4ζe e Dz v = i log , (4.3a) ∂x p 2 ! v v 2 v −u ζ ∂ 1+ ζe + (1 + ζe ) − 4ζe e Dz u = i log , (4.3b) ∂x p 2 ! −v −v 2 −v −u ζ ∂ 1 − ζe + (1 + ζe ) − 4ζe e Dz˜v = i log , (4.3c) ∂x p 2 ! −v −v 2 −v −u ζ ∂ 1+ ζe + (1 + ζe ) − 4ζe e Dz˜u = −i log , (4.3d) ∂x p 2 ! 8 MURADALIMANDARPANSAHA

ζ ζ where Dz and Dz˜ denote the operators: ∞ ∞ ζj ∂ ζj ∂ Dζ = ,Dζ = . (4.4) z j ∂z z˜ j ∂z˜ j=1 j j=1 j X X Proof. Making the replacements (4.2) in (3.5) and dividing equations (3.5a) and (3.5b) by the respective first terms on the left-hand side, we get: ρ σ 1 − λ (z, z˜) λ (z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) τ τ  λ   λ  Λ−1(τ ) Λ (τ ) = λ λ (z, z˜) λ λ (z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) , (4.5a) τ τ  λ   λ  −1 (σ /τ )(z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) 1 − λ λ (σ /τ )(z, z˜)  λ λ  Λ−1(τ ) Λ (τ ) Λ (σ /τ ) = ζ λ λ (z, z˜) λ λ (z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) λ λ λ (z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) . (4.5b) τ τ σ /τ  λ   λ   λ λ  Substituting (4.1) into the above then gives us:

sλ(z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) − sλ(z, z˜)) 1 − exp exp rλ(z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜)+ rλ(z, z˜) λˇ   (Λ−1 − 1)(̟ )(z, z˜)+(Λ − 1)(̟ )(z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜)
= exp λ λ λ λ , (4.6a) λˇ2   ˇ sλ(z + iλ[ζ], z˜) − sλ(z, z˜)) 1 − exp − exp −rλ(z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜)+ rλ(z, z˜)) λˇ   (Λ−1 − 1)(̟ )(z, z˜)+(Λ − 1)(̟ )(z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜)
= ζ exp λ λ λ λ λˇ2   ˇ sλ(z + iλ[ζ], z˜) ˇ × exp (Λλ − 1) + πitλ(z + iλ[ζ], z˜) . (4.6b) λˇ    For convenience, we now introduce the following notation:

s (z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) − s (z, z˜)) X(z, z˜)= λ λ , λˇ r (z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) − r (z, z˜) Y (z, z˜)= λ λ , (4.7) λˇ sλ(z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) Z(z, z˜)=(Λλ − 1) + rλ(z + iλˇ[ζ], z˜) . λˇ   X(z,z˜) Eliminating ̟λ from (4.6a) and (4.6b) gives us a quadratic equation in e :

ˇ ˇ ζeZ(z,z˜)eλY (z,z˜)e2rλ(z,z˜)e2X(z,z˜) + 1 − ζeZ(z,z˜) eX(z,z˜) − e−λY (z,z˜) =0 . (4.8)
INTEGRABLE HIERARCHY FOR THE RESOLVED CONIFOLD 9

This has two solutions but only one such that X(z, z˜) has a well-defined limit as ζ → 0:

−1+ ζeZ(z,z˜) + (1 − ζeZ(z,z˜))2 +4ζeZ(z,z˜)e2rλ(z,z˜) X(z, z˜) = log . (4.9) Z(z,z˜) λYˇ (z,z˜) 2r (z,z˜) 2ζep e e λ ! In the dispersionless limit λ → 0, this becomes:

v v 2 v 2r ζ −1+ ζe + (1 − ζe ) +4ζe e iDz s = log v 2r . (4.10) p2ζe e ! Differentiating with respect to x on both sides and substituting e2r = 1 − e−u then gives us: v v 2 v −u ζ ∂ −1+ ζe + (1 + ζe ) − 4ζe e Dz v = i log v −u . (4.11) ∂x 2ζep (1 − e ) ! Equation (4.3a) then follows from the identity: −1+ ζev + (1 + ζev)2 − 4ζeve−u 2 = . (4.12) v −u v v 2 v −u 2ζep (1 − e ) 1 − ζe + (1 + ζe ) − 4ζe e We will now use what we have established so far top prove (4.3b). First, we note that (4.6a) in the limit λ → 0 becomes: ∂2̟ ∂Dζ ̟ 1 − exp(iDζs)e2r = exp + i z . (4.13) z ∂x2 ∂x   Setting ζ = 0 then gives us: ∂2̟ u = − log(1 − e2r)= − . (4.14) ∂x2 Substituting this back into (4.13), we obtain: ∂Dζ ̟ 1 − exp(iDζs)e2r z = −i log z . (4.15) ∂x e−u   Differentiating with respect to x on both sides and substituting (4.10) and e2r =1−e−u then gives v v 2 v −u ζ ∂ 1+ ζe − (1 + ζe ) − 4ζe e Dz u = i log v −u . (4.16) ∂x p2ζe e ! Equation (4.3b) then follows from the identity: 1+ ζev − (1 + ζev)2 − 4ζeve−u 2 = . (4.17) v −u v v 2 v −u p2ζe e 1+ ζe + (1 + ζe ) − 4ζe e  A similar argument involving (3.5d) and (3.5e) leadsp to (4.3c) and (4.3d). Remark 5. By setting ζ = 0 in (4.6a) and taking the logarithm of both sides, we obtain a difference equation involving shifts in x: −1 Λλ(̟λ) − 2̟λ +Λλ (̟λ) log(1 − exp(2rλ)) = . (4.18) λˇ2 10 MURADALIMANDARPANSAHA

Remark 6. By applying ζ∂ζ to (4.3) we get the following alternative form for the dispersionless AL hierarchy:

v ζ ∂ 1+ ζe ∆zv = −i ∂x 2 (1 + ζev)2 − 4ζeve−u ! ∂2 p 1+ ζev = −i tanh−1 , (4.19a) ∂x∂u (1 + ζev)2 − 4ζeve−u ! v ζ ∂ 1 p− ζe ∆zu = i ∂x 2 (1 + ζev)2 − 4ζeve−u ! ∂2 p 1+ ζev = −i tanh−1 , (4.19b) ∂x∂v (1 + ζev)2 − 4ζeve−u ! −v ζ ∂ 1+p ζe ∆z˜v = −i ∂x 2 (1 + ζe−v)2 − 4ζe−ve−u ! ∂2 p 1+ ζe−v = −i tanh−1 , (4.19c) ∂x∂u (1 + ζe−v)2 − 4ζe−ve−u ! −v ζ ∂ 1p− ζe ∆z˜u = −i ∂x 2 (1 + ζe−v)2 − 4ζe−ve−u ! ∂2 p 1+ ζe−v = −i tanh−1 , (4.19d) ∂x∂v (1 + ζe−v)2 − 4ζe−ve−u ! ζ ζ p where ∆z and ∆z˜ denote the operators: ∞ ∞ ∂ ∂ ∆ζ = ζj , ∆ζ = ζj . (4.20) z ∂z z˜ ∂z˜ j=1 j j=1 j X X In particular, this is a dispersionless Hamiltonian hierarchy with generating functions of Hamiltonian densities: 1+ ζev h(ζ)= −i tanh−1 , (1 + ζev)2 − 4ζeve−u ! (4.21) p 1+ ζe−v h˜(ζ)= −i tanh−1 , (1 + ζe−v)2 − 4ζe−ve−u ! and the following Poisson brackets: p {u(x),u(y)} = {v(x), v(y)} =0 , {u(x), v(y)} = {v(x),u(y)} = δ′(x − y) . (4.22) There are a number of interesting aspects of the Hamiltonian formulation of the dis- persionless limit of the AL hierarchy. Firstly, the Hamiltonian densities depend only on u and v explicitly and not on their spatial derivatives. Secondly, the coefficients of INTEGRABLE HIERARCHY FOR THE RESOLVED CONIFOLD 11

δ′(x) in the Poisson brackets form a constant symmetric matrix. A Hamiltonian hier- archy that has this structure (possibly after a suitable change of dependent variables) is said to be of hydrodynamic type. Such hierarchies were first defined and studied by Dubrovin and Novikov [DN84]. A key fact concerning Hamiltonian hierarchies of hydrodynamic type is that there is a natural such hierarchy called the principal hierarchy associated to any (almost) Frobenius manifold, which conversely may be viewed as a differential-geometric struc- ture on the initial data of such a hierarchy. The small phase space H2(X, Z) of a projective variety happens to carry the structure of a(n almost) Frobenius manifold, so this gives a rather general construction of a dispersionless integrable hierarchy associ- ated to the (equivariant) genus zero GW theory of any projective variety. It was noted by Dubrovin in [Dub08] that the dispersionless limit of the AL hierarchy is contained within the principal hierarchy associated to the equivariant GW theory of the resolved conifold with anti-diagonal action (hereafter referred to as simply the principal hierar- chy of the resolved conifold). We will now present a proof of this result in our notation to ensure that the dependent variables u and v that we have introduced are indeed the variables of the principal hierarchy identified by Dubrovin. Proposition 7. The dispersionless limit of AL hierarchy with the initial conditions v = 2πix/κ and u = −2πit is contained in the principal hierarchy of the resolved conifold with the following identification on the small phase space: uv2 (2π)2̟| = − + F˜0 . (4.23) (z,z˜)=(0,0) 2   (z,z˜)=(0,0)

Proof. The principal hierarchy associated to a(n almost) Frobenius manifold V is de- fined on the formal loop space L(S1,V ), whose elements are maps from S1 = R/Z 1 2 to V . In our case, V is the small phase space H2(X, Z), while w := v and w := u can be interpreted as maps from S1 to V . (Note that the map w1 is distinguished.) Meanwhile, x is interpreted as a coordinate on the universal cover R of S1. A potential Φ on V encodes a metric η and an associative product ⋆ with identity ∂w1 on the tangent bundle TV : ∂ ∂ ∂3Φ η := η , = , µν ∂wµ ∂wν ∂w1∂wµ∂wν   (4.24) ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂3Φ η , ⋆ = . ∂wκ ∂wµ ∂wν ∂wκ∂wµ∂wν   We also have a Poisson bracket on L(S1,V ) in terms of the the inverse metric ηµν: ∂wγ {wµ(x),wν(y)} = ηµν δ′(x − y) − ηµκΓν δ(x − y) , (4.25) κγ ∂x ν where Γκγ are the Christoffel symbols of the metric η and repeated indices are summed over. Comparing this with (4.22), we immediately obtain:

η11 = η22 =0, η12 = η21 =1 . (4.26) 12 MURADALIMANDARPANSAHA

Thus, the most general form that the potential Φ can take is: uv2 Φ= + f(u) . (4.27) 2 A consequence of the associativity of the product ⋆ is the existence of a pencil of flat torsion-free connections ∇ξ parametrised by a parameter ξ ∈ C:

ξ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∇ µ = ξ ⋆ . (4.28) ∂/∂w ∂wν ∂wµ ∂wν

As these connections are flat, they admit local basis of parallel 1-forms α1(ξ) and α2(ξ) analytic in ξ. And as these connections are torsion-free, the anti-symmetric parts of ξ ξ ∇ α1 and ∇ α2 are dα1 and dα2 (where d is the exterior derivative on V ). Thus, 1-forms α1(ξ) and α2(ξ) are closed, and so by Poincar´e’s lemma, we can locally find functions g1(ξ) and g2(ξ) analytic in ξ such that we have:

α1 = dg1 , α2 = dg2 . (4.29)

More explicitly, the functions g1 and g2 are solutions to the following system of equa- tions: ∂2g ∂g ∂2g ∂g ∂2g ∂g = ξ , = ξ , = ξf ′′′(u) . (4.30) ∂v2 ∂v ∂v∂u ∂u ∂u2 ∂v The functions g1(ξ) and g2(ξ) are generating functions of Hamiltonian densities, which generate the principal hierarchy via the Poisson bracket (4.25). The generating func- tions h(ζ) and h˜(ζ) are related to these in a non-trivial way (see Remark 8). We can get around the need to obtain an explicit relationship between them by eliminating ξ from the first and third equations in (4.30). This gives us the following equation that by virtue of its linearity is valid for any generating function of Hamiltonian densities: ∂2g ∂2g = f ′′′(u) . (4.31) ∂u2 ∂v2 Substituting g = h and g = h˜ as in (4.21) into the above, we obtain: 1 f ′′′(u)= = Li (e−u) . (4.32) eu − 1 0 0 2πit This is solved by f(u) = −F˜ (t) = −Li3(e ) for u = −2πit. So the dispersionless AL hierarchy is contained in the principal hierarchy of the resolved conifold. The identification (4.23) meanwhile follows from (4.14) and the initial condition v =2πix/κ. 

The exponential eΦ of the potential Φ of the (almost) Frobenius manifold will be henceforth called the topological tau function of the principal hierarchy. Remark 8. The first two equations of (4.30) imply that any solution g necessarily has the form: g = A(ξ,u)eξv + B(ξ) , (4.33) where A is a function independent of v while B is a function independent of v and u. Since we are only interested in the flows of the Hamiltonians, we can without loss of INTEGRABLE HIERARCHY FOR THE RESOLVED CONIFOLD 13 generality set B to be identically zero. Conversely, any function g = A(ξ,u)eξv which also satisfies (4.31) is a solution of (4.30). Now consider the Mellin transforms: ∞ ∞ 1+ ζ hζ−1−ξdζ = −ieξv tanh−1 ζ−1−ξdζ 2 −u 0 0 (1 + ζ) − 4ζe Z Z ! 0 p 1+ ζ−1 dζ = ieξv tanh−1 ζ1+ξ − − − 2 ∞ (1 + ζ 1)2 − 4ζ 1e u ! ζ Z (4.34) ∞ p ζ +1 = −ieξv tanh−1 ζ−1+ξdζ , 2 −u 0 (ζ + 1) − 4ζe Z ! ∞ ∞ p 1+ ζ hζ˜ −1+ξdζ = −ieξv tanh−1 ζ−1+ξdζ . 2 −u 0 0 (1 + ζ) − 4ζe Z Z ! This is of the form A(ξ,u)eξv. Moreover,p being an integral transform of h and h˜, it −u satisfies (4.31) with f(u)= −Li3(e ) as well. Hence, it must be a solution g of (4.30). In other words, it is some constant linear combination of the Hamiltonian density generating functions g1 and g2 of the principal hierarchy of the resolved conifold.

5. Identification of the Tau function In this section, we will extend the genus zero identification of the dispersionless AL tau function with the topological tau function of the principal hierarchy of the resolved conifold to an all-genera small-phase-space identification of the tau function of the small-dispersion expansion of the AL hierarchy with Bridgeland’s Tau function. The genus 2 truncation of this identification was essentially the content of Theorem 1.4 in [Bri12] and it was proved by analyzing dispersive perturbations of the principal hierar- chy. This is a computationally challenging task, however the control over expansion in the dispersive parameter offered by the functional representation of the AL hierarchies will allow us to sidestep these difficulties. Here is the gist of our approach. The solution of Prop. 2 is used to define initial conditions for the tau function of the AL hierarchy while the other difference equation in Remark 5 is used to show that these initial conditions reduce to those of the principal hierarchy of the resolved conifold in the dispersionless limit. We now prove our main theorem, which extends Theorem 1.4 in [Bri12] to all genera. Theorem 9. There exists a solution to the small-dispersion expansion of the AL hier- archy satisfying the following conditions:

(1) The tau function τλ of the solution reduces at leading order in λ to the topological tau function of the principal hierarchy of the resolved conifold as λ → 0, (2) The restriction of the tau function τλ of the solution to the small phase space coincides with the exponential of the equivariant GW potential of the resolved conifold with anti-diagonal action, namely: 3 2 (2π) ix t ˇ exp(Fad(λ, t)) = exp G(t | λ, 1) , (5.1) 2κ2λˇ2   14 MURADALIMANDARPANSAHA

to all orders in λ.

−1 Proof. We impose the following initial conditions on vλ := λˇ (Λλ − 1)sλ and ̟λ: 2πix (2π)3ix2t v | = , (2π)2̟ | = + λˇ2 log G(t | λ,ˇ 1) . (5.2) λ (z,z˜)=(0,0) κ λ (z,z˜)=(0,0) 2κ2 This entails condition (2). Moreover, the difference equation in Remark 5 implies the following initial condition for uλ := − log(1 − exp(2rλ)):

uλ|(z,z˜)=(0,0) = −2πit . (5.3)

The initial conditions for uλ and vλ reduce to those for u and v in the principal hierarchy of the resolved conifold in the limit λ → 0. Since the full solution to the principal hierarchy is fixed by the initial conditions, condition (1) holds as well. 

References [ADK+06] Mina Aganagic, Robbert Dijkgraaf, Albrecht Klemm, Marcos Mari˜no, and Cumrun Vafa. Topological strings and integrable hierarchies. Comm. Math. Phys., 261(2):451–516, 2006. [AL75] Mark J. Ablowitz and John F. Ladik. Nonlinear differential-difference equations. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 16(3):598–603, March 1975. [Ali20] Murad Alim. Difference equation for the Gromov–Witten potential of the resolved conifold. arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.12759, 2020. [Bar04] Ernest W. Barnes. On the theory of multiple gamma function. Trans. Cambridge Phil. Soc., 19:374–425, 1904. [BP08] Jim Bryan and Rahul Pandharipande. The Local Gromov–Witten theory of curves. J. Am. Math. Soc., 21:101–136, 2008. [Bri12] Andrea Brini. The local Gromov–Witten theory of CP1 and integrable hierarchies. Comm. Math. Phys., 313(3):571–605, 2012. [Bri19] Tom Bridgeland. Riemann–Hilbert problems from Donaldson-Thomas theory. Invent. Math., 216(1):69–124, 2019. [Bri20] Tom Bridgeland. Riemann–Hilbert problems for the resolved conifold. J. Differential Geom., 115(3):395–435, 2020. [DN84] Boris A. Dubrovin and Sergei P. Novikov. On Poisson brackets of hydrodynamic type. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, pages 294–297, 1984. [Dub08] Boris A. Dubrovin. On universality of critical behaviour in Hamiltonian PDEs. arXiv e- prints, page arXiv:0804.3790, April 2008. [Dub14] Boris A. Dubrovin. Gromov–Witten invariants and integrable hierarchies of topological type. In Topology, geometry, integrable systems, and mathematical physics, volume 234 of Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2, pages 141–171. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2014. [DZ01] Boris A. Dubrovin and Youjin Zhang. Normal forms of hierarchies of integrable PDEs, Frobenius manifolds and Gromov–Witten invariants. 8 2001. [EHX97] Tohru Eguchi, Kentaro Hori, and Chuan-Sheng Xiong. Quantum cohomology and Virasoro algebra. Phys. Lett. B, 402(1-2):71–80, 1997. [EHY95] Tohru Eguchi, Kentaro Hori, and Sung-Kil Yang. Topological σ models and large-N matrix integral. Internat. J. Modern Phys. A, 10(29):4203–4224, 1995. [EY94] Tohru Eguchi and Sung-Kil Yang. The topological CP1 model and the large-N matrix integral. Modern Phys. Lett. A, 9(31):2893–2902, 1994. [EYY95] Tohru Eguchi, Yasuhiko Yamada, and Sung-Kil Yang. On the genus expansion in the topological string theory. Rev. Math. Phys., 7(3):279–309, 1995. [FP00] Carel F. Faber and Rahul Pandharipande. Hodge integrals and Gromov–Witten theory. Invent. Math., 139(1):173–199, 2000. INTEGRABLE HIERARCHY FOR THE RESOLVED CONIFOLD 15

[GV98] Rajesh Gopakumar and Cumrun Vafa. M theory and topological strings. 1. 9 1998. [GV99] Rajesh Gopakumar and Cumrun Vafa. On the gauge theory/geometry correspondence. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 3(5):1415–1443, 1999. [IKT18] Kohei Iwaki, Tatsuya Koike, and Yumiko Takei. Voros coefficients for the hypergeometric differential equations and Eynard–Orantin’s topological recursion – Part I: For the Weber equation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.10945, 2018. [Kon92] Maxim Kontsevich. Intersection theory on the moduli space of curves and the matrix Airy function. Comm. Math. Phys., 147(1):1–23, 1992. [Oko00] Andrei Okounkov. Toda equations for Hurwitz numbers. Math. Res. Lett., 7(4):447–453, 2000. [Pan00] Rahul Pandharipande. The Toda equations and the Gromov–Witten theory of the Rie- mann sphere. Lett. Math. Phys., 53(1):59–74, 2000. [Rui00] Simon N. M. Ruijsenaars. On Barnes’ multiple zeta and gamma functions. Adv. Math., 156(1):107–132, 2000. [Tak13] Kanehisa Takasaki. A modified melting crystal model and the Ablowitz–Ladik hierarchy. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 46(24):245202, May 2013. [Vek98] Vadym E. Vekslerchik. Functional representation of the Ablowitz–Ladik hierarchy. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 31(3):1087–1099, Jan 1998. [Vek02] Vadym E. Vekslerchik. Functional representation of the Ablowitz–Ladik hierarchy. II. Jour- nal of Nonlinear Mathematical Physics, 9(2):157–180, 2002. [Wit91] Edward Witten. Two-dimensional gravity and intersection theory on moduli space. In Surveys in differential geometry (Cambridge, MA, 1990), pages 243–310. Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, PA, 1991.

Fachbereich Mathematik, Universitat¨ Hamburg, Bundesstr. 55, 20146, Hamburg