arXiv:hep-th/9906036v2 7 Jun 2001 oe ftefil aevle ntemanifold the in values take field the of modes au nain ne oesubgroup some under invariant value n ne oesmer group symmetry transform- some field a under When ing interactions. ex- their Goldstone and describe citations to physics condensed-matter and u ffcsrsoeteoiia ymtygroup symmetry original the quan- restore where effects dimensions, two tum in Even modes. low-energy G/H nte“ the in exact Some development. of line Ising the the at being over model theory single field solved famous most been the have decade, last models can ex- of one the hierarchies is, example infinite for it find if to such but techniques act any of not) Not variety are a (most known. apply integrable not of is is action the theory model if field theory even theory, conformal some the perturbation the defines adding in This by orders all theory action. to the field to massive One operator a relevant known. define are conformal de- thus operators many relevant is can In the which all theory. point, theories, field critical field conformal its a at by One model scribed [1]. the theories with field conformal could starts perturbed theories) mod- as previously-unknown written known more be many even that (and realization els the was theory field pow- applicable. the which methods of theoretical in because erful and dimension renormalizable, highest naively the are they is this because systems, can condensed-matter they they experimentally-realizable because in because arise theories, study often gauge for of models amount been toy interesting huge have be a models of sigma subject the Two-dimensional are models useful. sigma very massive, are excitations low-energy the ecmue 45,btfrhrpors a enslow. been has progress further can but models these [4,5], in in computed energy temperature The zero be at time. field some magnetic quite a for known been have [3]) im oesaeue rqetyi atcephysics particle in frequently used are models Sigma im oeshv to oehtaatfo this from apart somewhat stood have models Sigma two-dimensional in breakthroughs great the of One S im oe stefil hoydsrbn these describing theory field the is model sigma arxadtefe nry ieal oesof dozens Literally energy. free the and matrix O ( n ”mdl[]adtepicplcia model chiral principal the and [2] model )” subgroup lorslsi e praht the to approach new a in results also oe ( model hntefilsi h im oe aevle naspace a in values take model sigma the in fields the When eso httodmninlsgamdl r eae ocer to related are models sigma two-dimensional that show We otiuin otesgamdlfe nryaeperturbati are energy free model sigma the to contributions ofidtefe nryfrte“ the for energy free the find to T = T G/H c H namgei ed[1]. field magnetic a in im oesa etre ofra edtheories field conformal perturbed as models Sigma eageta h orsodn ofra edter sth is theory field conformal corresponding the that argue we , ) k hsc eatet nvriyo igna Charlottesvi Virginia, of University Department, Physics n h etraini eae otecret of currents the to related is perturbation the and , S G arcs(o example, (for matrices a nexpectation an has H h low-energy the , O ( n G/H ”(= )” CP G Otbr4 1999) 4, (October The . n O alFendley Paul and model. ( n ) /O 1 ( n ofra edter [11]. theory field conformal r nerbewhen integrable are ilstersl htthe this that example, For result present. remains the is This term yields theta a not parameter. when even is perturbing true which the contribution, in instanton polynomial the into turns tion k order at energy o xml,i h prpit etraino h coset the ( of when perturbation models appropriate perturbative the in are example, energy For contributions free instanton the non-perturbative to that is lation fal tucvr iegnrlsrcueof structure general nice a uncovers it all, of atclrprubto ftecstcnomlfil the- field conformal ( coset ory the of perturbation particular fti ae st xli h eea rnil behind principle further. general it extend the to explain and to results, is these certain purpose paper of The this limits [10,7–9]. of as theories expressed field be conformal all perturbed can they similarity: ain a rvne h optto ftefe energy “ free the the of of compli- computation technical the prevented example, had For be cations can models. results sigma these to about therefore applied and known more models), is (much sigma in deal theory than field great conformal a perturbed Finally, integrable theory field models. conformal power- sigma the rational on use perturbed to of possible methods it ful makes it Moreover, models. ric “ SU the “ com- [6,7], the the the deformation where for possible: cases step is few necessary a putation are a solutions There equations, the ansatz categorize thermodynamics. to Bethe how the known not of is it ansatz, often Bethe but thermodynamic the using an model in integrable properties finite-temperature computes one Usually hscntuto nbe hscmuainfrany for computation this enables construction this im oesaeeuvln othe to equivalent are models sigma 1)sgamdla o-eotmeaue It temperature. non-zero at model sigma –1)) ∞ → n fteitrsigcneune fti reformu- this of consequences interesting the of One ewl aeagnrlcnetr htthese that conjecture general a make will We CP 2 rnia hrlmdl 8 n h supersymmet- the and [8] model) chiral principal (2) G/H ewhen ve n ooti h “ the obtain to O anprubdcnomlfil theories. field conformal perturbed tain O oes[] l hs oeshv nintriguing an have models these All [9]. models G/H ( ) (3) n k ”sgamdl iety ewl hwhow show will We directly. models sigma )” h tlt fti euti hefl.First threefold. is result this of utility The . /O k G o group a for (2)) o-etraieinstanton Non-perturbative . sfiie eueti mapping this use We finite. is k l A22901 VA lle ie n nee.We n takes one When integer. any times e k θ k hr sacnrbto otefree the to contribution a is there , = O ∞ → O 3”sgamdl hscontribu- this model, sigma (3)” π n hyflwt the to flow they and , 4”mdl(qiaett the to (equivalent model (4)” SU G O ii ftecoset the of limit 3”mdladissausage its and model (3)” n maximal a and ( N ) /SO k ( N ∞ → im models sigma ) k sfiie[7]. finite is G/H ii fa of limit SU sigma n G/H ( N . ) 1 We study symmetric spaces G/H, where G and H are the resulting fields in the coset model form a real irre- a Lie groups, and H is a maximal subgroup of G. The ducible representation of Hl, which we denote as J , for G/H sigma model has action a =1 ..., (dim G − dim H). Obviously, the G/H sigma model cannot be equivalent 2 i µ j S = d z gij (X)∂µX (z, z)∂ X (z, z), (1) to a coset theory (G/H)k, because the latter is massless Z while the former is not. A massive field theory is defined where z andz ¯ are coordinates for two-dimensional space- by perturbing (G/H)k by a relevant operator. We can i time, and X and gij (X) are the coordinates and met- now state our conjecture precisely. ric for the manifold G/H. Symmetric spaces have non- vanishing curvature, so (1) defines an asymptotically-free Conjecture The sigma model for the symmetric space massive field theory. When G = H × H and H is a sim- G/H is equivalent to the k → ∞ limit of the (G/H)k ple Lie group diagonally embedded in G, the resulting coset conformal field theory perturbed by the operator sigma model is called the principal chiral model. An- other example is the “O(n)” model, where G = O(n) dim G−dim H O ≡ J a J a and H = O(n − 1). This space is an n − 1 dimensional σ (z) (z). (4) X sphere: O(n) is the rotational symmetry of the sphere, a=1 while O(n−1) is the subgroup leaving a given point fixed. Because the J a form a real irreducible representation of A coset conformal field theory utilizes the affine Kac- Hl, their dimension is independent of a. Moody algebra Gk defined by the operator product This perturbed coset has the general properties of a ABC C A B k f J (w) sigma model. In the ultraviolet limit, the perturbation of J (z)J (w)= 2 + + ..., (2) (z − w) z − w (G/H)k goes away, and its central charge when k → ∞ is dimG−dimH. In the ultraviolet limit of the sigma model, ABC where the f are the structure constants of the ordi- asymptotic freedom means that the manifold G/H be- nary Lie algebra for G and k is called the level; k is a pos- comes flat (e.g. in the O(n)/O(n–1) model, the radius itive integer for a compact Lie group. A conformal field of the sphere goes to infinity). The action (1) reduces theory with current algebra Gk is called a Wess-Zumino- to dimG−dimH free bosons, which also have the central Witten model, and is equivalent to the principal chiral charge dimG−dimH. Moreover, when J A is decomposed model for G plus an extra piece called the Wess-Zumino a into representations of Hl, the resulting field φH has di- term [12]. The central charge (coefficient of the confor- mension going to zero as k → ∞. Thus the field J a ˜ mal anomaly) of the Gk WZW model is k dimG/(k + h), has dimension 1 in this limit, so the perturbation O is ACD BCD ˜ ˜ σ where f f = hδAB/2. For G = SU(n), h = n, of dimension 2 and so is naively marginal. It is not ex- ˜ while for G = SO(n), h = n–2 (for n ≥ 4). The pri- actly marginal – this is the phenomenon of dimensional mary fields of the WZW model have scaling dimensions transmutation common to sigma models. ˜ xj = 2Cj/(k + h), where Cj is the quadratic Casimir For principal chiral models, the conjecture is already A A A defined by T T = Cj I, with the T the generators of known to be true [15], and is reminiscent of an earlier de- the Lie algebra of G in the jth representation and I the scription in terms of an infinite number of fermion flavors identity matrix. All the other scaling fields arise from the [10]. Since dimG − dimH = dim H here, the perturba- operator product of the J A(z) with the primary fields; it tion Oσ of the coset Hk × Hk/H2k is in the adjoint of follows from (2) that J has dimension 1 and all fields H2k. The usual coset notation for such an operator is have dimensions x plus an integer. j (1, 1; adjoint). This means that the corresponding φG Given a subgroup H of G, a (G/H) coset conformal k is a descendant of the identity primary field in the Hk field theory is defined from the generators of Gk not in conformal field theories (i.e. J A operating on the vac- the subalgebra H (l/k is the index of the embedding of l uum), and the φH in its decomposition are in the adjoint H into G) [13]. The central charge of this new conformal of H2k. Such an operator is often called the “thermal” field theory is c − c . The energy-momentum tensor G H operator (because when k = 1 and H = SU(2), Oσ is obeys the orthogonal decomposition TG = TH + TG/H , the thermal operator in the Ising model). The particles so a field φG (some representation of Gk) decomposes in the perturbed coset models are kinks whose exact S a into representations φH of Hl as matrices were conjectured in [15–17]. For finite k, the a a kinks form representations of the quantum-group alge- φG = ⊕a φG/H ⊗ φH . (3) bra Uq(H) with q = − exp(iπ/(k + h)). As k → ∞, a → − The coefficients φG/H are the fields of the coset model q 1 and the quantum-group algebra reverts to the (G/H)k. A consequence of G/H being a symmetric space ordinary Lie algebra of H. For example, for SU(4), this is that the generators of G not in H form a real irre- means that particles are in the 4, the 6 and the 4 rep- ducible representation of H [14]. Thus when the cur- resentations, giving 14 particles all together. Once an A rents J (z) are decomposed into representations of Hl, “intertwiner” is used to change basis, the S matrices in

2 the k → ∞ limit are those conjectured for the H × H/H solvable in closed form, but if one can find all the differ- sigma models in [3]. The exact free energy for the coset ent types of solutions (called “strings”) in the continuum models was found in [18], using results of [19,20]. limit, the free energy can be computed by calculating the In the “O(3)” sigma model, the fields take values on densities of each of these different types. For an S matrix the sphere, which is the symmetric space O(3)/O(2) ≈ with particles in the vector of O(n), the Bethe equations SU(2)/U(1). The curvature (or equivalently, the radius) are known [25]. The types of solutions are known for of the sphere determines the mass scale of the model. the more general quantum-group algebra Uq(O(n)), de- In this case, the conjecture above was put forth in [7]. scribed in the language of a lattice “RSOS” model [19,20]. There it was phrased as taking the k → ∞ limit of The Boltzmann weights of the RSOS model are precisely the Zk parafermion theories perturbed by the operator the S matrix of the perturbed O(n)k/O(n–1)k coset (up † ψ1ψ1+h.c.. Parafermions are a generalization of fermions to an overall function which makes S S = 1; this factor which instead pick up Zk phases when taken around one was worked out in [23]), and the problem of finding the another; ψi(z) and ψi(¯z) are the parafermions, where i free energy is closely related (an analogous computation runs from 1 to k − 1. The Zk parafermion models can be and references are in [9]). We then can take the k → ∞ described by the coset SU(2)k/U(1), and the operator limit to obtain the free energy of the sigma model. 1 2 † J here is indeed the parafermion ψ1, while J = ψ1 We first discuss n even, where O(n) is simply laced. [21]. As opposed to the principal chiral models, the par- The function ǫ0(θ) is defined so that the filling frac- ticles here are in the vector representation of O(3). Thus tion of particles at rapidity θ and temperature T is our result provides a natural explanation and generaliza- 1/(1 + exp(ǫ0(θ))) (the filling fraction is the density of tion of the conjecture of [7]. One interesting thing about particles divided by the density of states). Equivalently, this model is that a topological theta term can be added Tǫ0(θ) is the energy it takes to create a particle of en- to the action. Putting θ = π corresponds to adding the ergy m cosh θ over the Fermi sea; the mass m of a parti- operator iOσ to the action of the coset model [7]. The cle is related to the sigma model coupling (the radius of partition function is still real, because only even powers the n–1 dimensional sphere) in [5]. We also define a set (a) of the perturbation appear in the expansion. of “magnon energies” ǫr (θ), where r = 1 ...k − 1 and (a) We now turn to the general “O(n)” model, which our a =1 ...n/2. The functionals Ar (θ) are defined as conjecture says should be described by a perturbation ∞ ′ of the O(n) /O(n–1) sigma model. The n–1 fields J a dθ n − 2 a ′ k k (a) ≡ ǫr (θ ) Ar (θ) ′ ln(1+e ) are in the vector representation of O(n–1), which has Z−∞ 2π 2 cosh[(n − 2)(θ − θ )/2] quadratic Casimir (n–2)/2 for n > 4. Thefore the oper- O − − (a) ator σ is of dimension 2 (n–2)/(k + n 3)). To pro- while Ar (θ) is defined with ǫ →−ǫ. The matrix Iab is ceed further, we make use of a level-rank duality which 2 − Cab, where Cab is the Cartan matrix for O(n), while shows that O(n) /O(n–1) coset model is equivalent to e k k the matrix Irs = δr,s−1 + δr,s+1. Finally, with Mab(x)= O(k) × O(k) /O(k) [22]. In this dual coset model, −1 n−1 1 n 2 cosh(πx/(n − 2))δab − Iab and M its matrix inverse, the operator O is (vector,vector; 1). This is precisely e σ the function fa(θ) is defined as the Fourier transform the “electric”-type perturbation discussed in [23]. There ∞ it is shown that this model remains integrable under this dx ixθ −1 fa(θ)= e (M )1a(x) perturbation, and that it follows from the non-local sym- Z−∞ 2π metries that the kinks are in the vector representation of Uq(O(n)). (In the thermal perturbation of these coset Then an extension of the results of [19] yields the follow- models, the particles are in the spinor representations ing integral equations, valid for even n> 4 and k ≥ 2: [17].) If we take k → ∞ to reach the sigma model, the n/2 ∞ a ′ quantum group turns into the ordinary algebra O(n) with m ′ ′ −ǫ( )(θ ) − − 1 the particles in the vector representation. This agrees ǫ0(θ)= cosh θ dθ fa(θ θ ) ln(1 + e ) T X Z−∞ with the classic sigma-model result of [2]. The S matri- a=1 ces must of course be the same. k−1 n/2 (a) − − (a) (b) Even though the exact S matrix for these integrable ǫr = A0 δr,1δa,1 IrsAs + IabAr (5) X X sigma models has been known for 20 years, the free en- e s=1 e e b=1 ergy at non-zero temperature has not been computed. The free energy per unit length is then given by One usually can calculate the free energy of an integrable model by using the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz [24]. mT ∞ F = − dθ cosh θ ln(1 + e−ǫ0(θ)). (6) This works by deriving the Bethe equations, which are 2π Z−∞ coupled polynomial equations (of number of particles in the system). The energy levels are given by particular When n is odd so O(n) is not simply laced, the struc- sums over the solutions. The Bethe equations are not ture is more complicated. Nevertheless, the conjecture still is valid and the free energy follows from [20]. The

3 function Mab is given by their equation (B.10), while the and A. Hegedus for pointing out several typos in the TBA second equation in (5) is replaced by their (B.4a) with equations appearing in v1 and in the published version. its left-hand side replaced by −A0δr,1δa,1 (note also that This work was supported by a DOE OJI Award, a Sloan the range of r depends on the value of (a)). Foundation Fellowship, and by NSF grant DMR-9802813. These equations are straightforward to solve numeri- cally. The free energy as m → 0 gives the correct value, proportional to the central charge c = k(n − 1)(2k + n − 4)/(2(k + n − 3)(k + n − 2)) of the O(n)k/O(n–1)k con- formal field theory. The equations remain well-defined as k → ∞; an infinite number of magnons is a generic [1] A. Zamolodchikov, Adv. Stud. Pure Math. 19 (1989) 1. characteristic of models with Lie algebra symmetries (as [2] A. Zamolodchikov, Al. Zamolodchikov, Ann. Phys. 120 opposed to quantum-group structure). (1979) 253 We think the above arguments are convincing for in- [3] E. Ogievetsky, N. Reshetikhin, P. Wiegmann, Nucl. Phys. tegrable models, but other cases remain mostly unex- B280 (1987) 45. n−1 plored. The CP sigma model, which has G = SU(n) [4] G. Japaridze, A. Nersesian, P. Wiegmann, Nucl. Phys. and H = SU(n–1) × U(1), is particularly interesting. B230 (1984) 511; J. Evans, T. Hollowood, Nucl. Phys. This is believed to be not integrable except for n=2, B493 (1997) 517, hep-th/ 9603190 and references therein where SU(2)/U(1) ≈ O(3)/O(2). The (not conclusive) [5] P. Hasenfratz, F. Niedermayer, Phys. Lett. B245 (1990) evidence against integrability is that no local conserved 529 66 charges have been found [26], and that anomalies appear [6] A.M. Tsvelik, Sov. Phys. JETP (1987) 221 in the non-local conservation laws [27]. Our conjecture [7] V. Fateev, Al. Zamolodchikov, Phys.Lett. B271 (1991) 91; V. Fateev, E. Onofri, Al. Zamolodchikov, Nucl. Phys. may provide a useful way of exploring the model’s proper- B406 (1993) 521 ties. The SU(n)k/SU(n–1)k×U(1) coset model is dual to (k) [8] V. Fateev, Nucl. Phys. B473 (1996) 509 the “W minimal model” SU(k)n−1 ×SU(k)1/SU(k)n. [9] P. Fendley, K. Intriligator, hep-th/9202011, Nucl. Phys. In the latter, the perturbing operator Oσ is denoted B380 (1992) 265 ¯ ¯ (k, k;1)+(k, k;1). For k=2, this model is the Φ21 per- [10] A. Polyakov, P. Wiegmann, Phys. Lett. 131B (1983) 121 turbation of the nth minimal model. Both this [1] and [11] P. Fendley, cond-mat/0008372 the k=3 case [23] are integrable, but the counting argu- [12] E. Witten, Comm. Math. Phys. 92 (1994) 455; V. Knizh- ment used to prove integrability for k=2, 3 does not yield nik, A. Zamolodchikov, Nucl. Phys. B247 (1984) 83 a conserved current for k> 3. However, (at least to first [13] P. Goddard, A. Kent, D. Olive, Comm. Math. Phys. 103 order in perturbation theory), all these models have a (1986) 105 nonlocal symmetry generated by the chiral part of the [14] J. Zinn-Justin, Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phe- (k) nomena, (Oxford, 1989) W−1 (1, 1; adjoint) operator (Φ15 for k = 2). [15] C. Ahn, D. Bernard, A. LeClair, Nucl. Phys. B346 (1990) There are a number of prospective uses of our conjec- 409 n−1 ture in the CP model. One could use the truncated [16] H. deVega, V. Fateev, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A6 (1991) 3221 conformal scaling approach [28] to find the low-lying en- [17] D. Gepner, hep-th/9302115, Phys. Lett. B313 (1993) 45 ergy levels of the theory; a signal of integrability is that [18] T. Hollowood, hep-th/9308147, Phys. Lett. B320, 43 the levels can cross as the strength of the perturbation is (1994); R. Tateo, hep-th/9405197, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A10 varied. Also, the conjecture implies the existence of non- (1995) 1357 local conserved quantities in the sigma model, by taking [19] V. Bazhanov, N. Reshetikhin, J. Phys. A23 (1990) 1447; the k → ∞ limit of those in the perturbed coset model. Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 102 (1990) 301 These do not seem to be anomalous like the ones dis- [20] A. Kuniba, T. Nakanishi, J. Suzuki, hep-th/9309137, hep-th/9310060, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A9 (1994) 5215, 5267 cussed in [27], so even if CP n−1 is not integrable, it still [21] A. Zamolodchikov, V. Fateev, Sov. Phys. JETP 62 (1985) should have an interesting symmetry structure. 215 We have found a broadly-applicable and useful feature [22] D. Altschuler, Nucl. Phys. B313 (1989) 293 of G/H sigma models, a feature which we have conjec- [23] I. Vaysburd, hep-th/9503070, Nucl. Phys. B446 (1995) tured to be completely general. In fact, we believe it is 387; hep-th/9402061, Phys. Lett. B335 (1994) 161 even true when G/H is not a symmetric space; the com- [24] C.N. Yang, C.P. Yang, J. Math. Phys. 10 (1969) 1115; plication is that there are multiple coupling constants in Al. Zamolodchikov, Nucl. Phys. B342 (1991) 695 the sigma model, and multiple perturbations of the coset [25] N. Reshetikhin, P. Wiegmann, Phys. Lett. B189 (1987) model. Moreover, simple extensions of this conjecture 125 allow for topological or Wess-Zumino terms in the sigma [26] Y. Goldschmidt, E. Witten, Phys. Lett. B91 (1980) 392 model action, and also to supersymmetric sigma models. [27] E. Abdalla, M.C.B. Abdalla, M. Gomes, Phys. Rev. D23 (1981) 1800 [28] V. Yurov, Al. Zamolodchikov, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A5 I thank P. Arnold, K. Intriligator, Z. Maassarani and (1990) 3221 H. Saleur for helpful conversations. I also thank J. Ba log

4