Hsinchu 30013, Taiwan
Free energy and defect -theorem in free fermion
Abstract
We describe a -dimensional conformal defect of a free Dirac fermion on a -dimensional flat space as boundary conditions on a conformally equivalent space . We classify allowed boundary conditions and find that the Dirichlet type of boundary conditions always exists while the Neumann type of boundary condition exists only for a two-codimensional defect. For the two-codimensional defect, a double trace deformation triggers a renormalization group flow from the Neumann boundary condition to the Dirichlet boundary condition, and the free energy at UV fixed point is always larger than that at IR fixed point. This provides us with further support of a conjectured -theorem in DCFT.
1 Introduction
A renormalization group (RG) is a fundamental concept in quantum field theory (QFT). By a deformation by a relevant operator ,
(1) |
a conformal field theory (CFT) at a UV fixed point flows to a CFT at an IR fixed point. The RG flow is not reversible, and this irreversibility implies the existence of a monotonic function, known as a -function. A -theorem which states the existence of the -function is pioneered by Zamolodchikov Zamolodchikov:1986gt in two-dimensional QFTs and is extended to higher dimensions Cardy:1988cwa ; Komargodski:2011vj ; Jafferis:2011zi ; Klebanov:2011gs ; Myers:2010xs ; Myers:2010tj . Combining -theorem Cardy:1988cwa ; Komargodski:2011vj which is a -theorem in and -theorem Jafferis:2011zi ; Klebanov:2011gs which is a -theorem in , a generalised -theorem is conjectured Giombi:2014xxa : A free energy on a sphere ,
(2) |
is a -function and satisfies the monotonic relation
(3) |
The generalised -theorem states monotonicity of an anomaly coefficient in the free energy for even , while monotonicity of a finite part in the free energy for odd . The -theorem can also be proved by using an information theoretical method for Casini:2004bw ; Casini:2012ei ; Casini:2017vbe .
For QFTs with -dimensional defect, it is possible to consider an RG flow triggered by a relevant operator localising on the defect,
(4) |
In Kobayashi:2018lil , we conjectured that the defect free energy on a sphere, which is an increment of the free energy due to the defect,
(5) |
decreases under the defect RG flow. More precisely, the universal part of the defect free energy,
(6) |
is a -function, and it decreases under the defect RG flow,
(7) |
For BCFTs with , a slight modification is needed since BCFTs is defined on a hemisphere (a half space of the original CFTs), and the boundary free energy is introduced as111It is pointed out that the boundary free energy does not decrease monotonically under the bulk RG flow Green:2007wr ; Sato:2020upl .
(8) |
For BCFT, our conjecture reproduces a proved -theorem in BCFT2, known as -theorem Affleck:1991tk ; Friedan:2003yc ; Casini:2016fgb , and a -theorem in higher dimensional BCFT Jensen:2015swa ; Nozaki:2012qd ; Gaiotto:2014gha ; Wang:2021mdq . In particular, the -theorem in BCFT3 is proved in Jensen:2015swa by extending Komargodski:2011vj and in Casini:2018nym by extending Casini:2016fgb . In the context of holography, a -theorem in BCFT is investigated in Yamaguchi:2002pa ; Takayanagi:2011zk ; Fujita:2011fp ; Estes:2014hka ; Miao:2017gyt .222In Estes:2014hka , it is argued that the defect entropy, which is an increment of the entanglement entropy of the spherical region where the defect sits at the centre due to the presence of the defect, is a candidate of a -function in DCFT. The defect entropy is not a -function for as pointed out Kobayashi:2018lil . See also related works Kumar:2016jxy ; Kumar:2017vjv . For DCFT with , our conjecture however has passed only several checks in field theory Jensen:2015swa ; Beccaria:2017rbe ; Kobayashi:2018lil ; Jensen:2018rxu ; Wang:2020xkc ; Wang:2021mdq and holography Kumar:2016jxy ; Kumar:2017vjv ; Rodgers:2018mvq .
Recently, we provide further evidence of our conjecture in a simple model, a conformally coupled scalar field Nishioka:2021uef (See also related works Rodriguez-Gomez:2017kxf ; Rodriguez-Gomez:2017aca ; Gustavsson:2019zwm ). Instead of putting the conformally coupled scalar field on the sphere, we put it on , where is a codimension of the defect, and impose boundary conditions at the boundary of . The idea of mapping BCFTs on a flat space to has appeared in Herzog:2019bom ; Giombi:2020rmc , and the similar idea for DCFTs has appeared in Kapustin:2005py ; Chester:2015wao ; Rodriguez-Gomez:2017kxf . It enables us to classify allowed boundary conditions which are consistent with a recent classification Lauria:2020emq . The Dirichlet type boundary condition is always allowed while the Neumann type boundary condition is allowed only in . An RG flow from the Neumann boundary condition to the Dirichlet boundary condition realised by a double trace deformation as is familiar with the AdS/CFT setup Witten:2001ua ; Berkooz:2002ug ; Gubser:2002zh ; Gubser:2002vv ; Hartman:2006dy ; Diaz:2007an ; Giombi:2013yva , and the defect free energy with the Neumann boundary condition is always larger than that of the Dirichlet boundary condition.
In this paper, we extend our analysis Nishioka:2021uef to a free fermion to provide a further check of our conjecture. To compare with a scalar field, a defect free energy of a free fermion in higher dimensions has been studied only in BCFT Rodriguez-Gomez:2017aca ; Herzog:2019bom and DCFT with a two-codimensional defect in the context of entanglement entropy Klebanov:2011uf ; Beccaria:2017dmw . In particular, the existence of a nontrivial boundary condition is unclear in a free fermion since a unique boundary condition is allowed in Dowker:1995sw ; Rodriguez-Gomez:2017aca .
The organisation of this paper is as follows. In the next section, we summarise coordinate systems and Weyl transformations among the coordinate systems. Furthermore, we classify boundary conditions of a massive fermion on and a massless fermion on . In particular, for a massless fermion on , we show that a boundary condition of a Dirichlet type always exists while a boundary condition of a Neumann type exists only in . In section 3, we compute free energies of a massless fermion on and a hemisphere using a zeta-function regularisation for a warm-up of the next section. In section 4, we compute free energies of a massive fermion on and free energies of a massless fermion with Dirichlet boundary condition by using a zeta-function regularisation. In section 5, we obtain free energies with Neumann boundary condition by analytical continuation and confirm the validity of our conjecture. The final section is devoted to discussion. Appendix A contains the list of anomaly parts and finite parts of free energies on , , and with Dirichlet boundary condition, and appendix B is a technical details of a computation.
2 Classification of boundary conditions
2.1 Coordinate system
In this section, we summarise coordinate systems for a sphere , a hemisphere , a hyperbolic space and and conformal maps among a flat space and them.
Let us consider DCFTd on ,
(9) |
where a -dimensional defect sits at . For later convenience, we introduce a codimension of the defect,
(10) |
By using the polar coordinate for the -coordinate,
(11) |
the metric of the flat space becomes
(12) |
After a Weyl rescaling, the metric (12) reduces to a geometry with radius ,
(13) |
Now the defect sits at the boundary of . We can also use the global coordinate for ,
(14) |
where the defect sits at . Introducing a new variable , , the metric (14) becomes
(15) |
After a Weyl rescaling, the metric (15) can be mapped to the sphere metric with radius
(16) |
where and the defect sits at . The hemisphere has the same metric of the sphere (16). A different point is that the range of is and the boundary sits at .
2.2 Boundary condition of fermion on
In this section, we classify allowed boundary conditions of a massless fermion on . A free fermion on a curved background which is conformally equivalent to is studied in e.g. Camporesi:1992tm ; Camporesi:1995fb ; Lewkowycz:2012qr ; Herzog:2019bom ; Klebanov:2011uf . See Chester:2015wao for the notation of a fermion on . The action of a massive Dirac fermion is given by333The massive fermion is not conformal. However, we introduce a mass term for later convenience.
(17) |
where we assume . The rank of the gamma matrix for is
(18) |
and the gamma matrix satisfies the anti-commutation relation,
(19) |
The covariant derivative and the spin connection are defined as
(20) |
using a frame field , which satisfies
(21) |
The covariant derivative satisfies a relation,
(22) |
where is a Ricci scalar.
For , a solution of the equation of motion for the massive fermion behaves
(23) |
near the boundary at , where is given by
(24) |
Then, become degenerate in the massless limit, and the allowed asymptotic behaviour is unique for a massless fermion.
For the product space , we consider a massless fermion from the beginning. We first decompose the fermionic field as
(25) |
and the gamma matrices are also decomposed similarly. For even and even , the decomposition of the fermion (25) has an additional as is clear from that the rank of the spinor representation are different in both sides of (25).444We are indebted to D. Rodriguez-Gomez and J. G. Russo for the decomposition of the fermion. Mathematically, this is equivalent to a decomposition of a representation of to that of . The spherical part satisfies the equation,
(26) |
where we decomposed the covariant derivative on into the covariant derivatives on and appropriately. Then, the equation of motion reduces to
(27) |
The solution of this equation of motion behaves as
(28) |
near the boundary, , and is given by
(29) |
The parameter can be understood as the conformal dimensions of operators localising on a -dimensional conformal defect at the boundary of . Then not all the operators with conformal dimensions (29) are allowed to exist due to the unitarity bound in dimensions Minwalla:1997ka :
(30) |
is always above the unitarity bound, while is not necessary to satisfy the unitarity bound unless
(31) |
Hence the mode with for is allowed to have the boundary conditions corresponding to .
The allowed boundary conditions for the massless fermion are classified as follows and are listed in table 1.
case:
In this case, the geometry is the hyperbolic space , and the allowed asymptotic behaviour is unique,
(32) |
This boundary condition is called a mixed boundary condition.
case:
Only the mode is allowed, resulting in a nontrivial boundary condition with for . Note that saturates the unitarity bound. Then, two different boundary conditions are allowed,
(33) |
In particular, vanishes for case, and this implies that the defect operator is the identity operator. Thus, we exclude case of a nontrivial boundary condition.
case:
Only the Dirichlet type boundary condition is allowed,
(34) |
3 Free energy on and
In this section, we compute free energies of a free massless Dirac fermion on and using a zeta-function regularisation for a warm-up of the next section.
3.1 Free energy on
For a massless fermion on , the free energy is given by555As noted in Nishioka:2021uef ; Monin:2016bwf , there is an ambiguity to decompose the logarithmic function into two parts. We require two conditions to remove the ambiguity: the free energy in the Schwinger representation should be convergent and the resulting zeta function does not depend on the cutoff scale . In (35), the two decomposed logarithmic functions are the same and the free energy in the Schwinger representation (40) is convergent in the limit.
(35) |
where we use the equation,
(36) |
with the eigenvalues,
(37) |
The degeneracy for each sign is given by
(38) |
where (18) is the rank of the gamma matrix as before. For later convenience, we introduce a notation
(39) |
We write the free energy (35) in the Schwinger representation,
(40) |
and we introduce the regularised free energy Vassilevich:2003xt to remove the divergence in the integral,
(41) |
where the zeta function is defined by
(42) |
Then the (unregularised) free energy is obtained in the limit:
(43) |
which is divergent due to the pole at . Here is the Euler constant. By removing the pole, the remaining part becomes the renormalized free energy
(44) |
where .
To compute the zeta function, we expand the gamma functions in the degeneracy (39),
(45) |
where we used the awkward suffix for and to use the same notation in the scalar case Nishioka:2021uef . Since , we can omit the term in the summation for even whenever we want. Using the asymptotic expansion ((5.11.14) in NIST:DLMF )
(46) |
where is the generalized Bernoulli polynomial, and comparing both sides, we find
(47) | ||||
(48) |
3.1.1 Odd
When is odd, the zeta function reduces to
(49) |
where we use the identity
(50) |
and the expansion (45) with the replacement . Since the zeta function at vanishes,
(51) |
due to the fact , there is no conformal anomaly, and the finite part remains in the free energy:
(52) |
This formula correctly reproduces the known results Marino:2011nm ; Klebanov:2011gs . The finite parts of the free energy for are listed in table 3 in appendix A.
3.1.2 Even
When is even the zeta function is given by
(53) |
where we use the identity
(54) |
and the expansion (45) with the replacement . The renormalized free energy is given by
(55) |
with the anomaly coefficient
(56) |
where is the Bernoulli number, and the finite part
(57) |
There is a logarithmic divergent term associated with the conformal anomaly in the free energy. The free energy (55) with (56) correctly reproduces the known conformal anomaly Giombi:2014xxa . The anomaly coefficients and the finite parts of the free energy for are listed in tables 2 and 3 in appendix A.
3.1.3 Interpolating and
The finite part of the free energy (52) and the anomaly coefficient of the free energy (56) do not depend on the choice of the cutoff scale and are universal in this sense. Thus, we introduce the “universal” free energy:
(58) |
where is used for the cutoff instead of . In Giombi:2014xxa , it is pointed out that the universal free energy has an integral representation:
(59) |
For odd , the prefactor of the universal free energy (59) is finite. However, for even , the prefactor in (59) is divergent due to the sine function. This divergence may be replaced with the logarithmic divergence by introducing a small cutoff ,
(60) |
Using the replacement (60), the universal free energy in the integral representation (59) has the same behaviour of (58). A proof of the equivalence of the two expressions (58) and (59) is presented in Dowker:2017cqe .
3.2 Free energy on
Next, let us consider the free energy on the hemisphere. At the boundary of , a mixed boundary condition is imposed Dowker:1995sw ,
(61) |
Here is a projection operator,
(62) |
with a chirality matrix and an incoming normal vector . See appendix A in Dowker:1995sw for the detail of a construction of the chirality matrix . The mixed boundary condition preserves a conformal symmetry.
A degeneracy with the mixed boundary condition is given by (38) which is just a half of the degeneracy of (39). Then, the free energy on is nothing but half of that on ,
(63) |
This formula correctly reproduces the known results Rodriguez-Gomez:2017aca .666In Rodriguez-Gomez:2017aca , anomaly coefficients of a ball which is conformally equivalent to , is obtained.
4 Free energy on with Dirichlet boundary condition
In this section, we first compute a free energy of a massive fermion on , although we are interested in a massless (conformal) fermion. This is because the angular momentum along can be regarded as a mass on due to a Kaluza-Klein mechanism when we compute the free energy on . After that, we compute a free energy of a massless fermion on .
4.1 Free energy on
In this section, we extend a computation of the zeta function for a massive fermion on for in Bytsenko:1994bc to general dimensions.
The free energy of the massive Dirac fermion with mass is given by
(64) |
where is the UV cutoff scale introduced to make the integral dimensionless. The parameter is an eigenvalue of the equation,
(65) |
and the Plancherel measure of a fermion on of unit radius takes the form Camporesi:1995fb
(66) |
with the coefficient
(67) |
and the rank of the gamma matrix (18). The regularised volume of the hyperbolic space is given by
(68) |
The hyperbolic volume is finite for even but divergent for odd due to the pole of the sine function. By introducing a small cutoff parameter , the sine function can be replaced by the logarithmic divergence,
(69) |
Then, the coefficient becomes
(70) |
Since the Plancherel measure (66) needs to satisfy the square integrability condition, the free energy is defined for . That is, equation (64) represents a free energy with a boundary condition, . We add a mass term in the free energy (64) for the regularisation of the zero mode, and we take a massless limit to obtain free energies of the conformal fermion.
By using the Schwinger representation, the free energy can be written as
(71) |
To remove the divergence in the integral, we introduce the regularised free energy
(72) |
where the zeta function is defined as
(73) |
Then, the (unregularised) free energy is obtained in the limit,
(74) |
By removing the pole at , we obtain the renormalized free energy
(75) |
where .
In the following, we will compute the renormalized free energy by evaluating the zeta function based on the method used in Camporesi:1994ga ; Bytsenko:1995ak .
4.1.1 Odd
Using the expansion of the Plancherel measure (66)
(76) |
the zeta function is convergent for ,
(77) |
We immediately obtain
(78) | ||||
(79) |
For the massive fermion, the renormalized free energy is given by
(80) |
In the massless limit, the renormalized free energy vanishes,
(81) |
Here and hereafter, we omit in free energies for the massless fermion. Equation (81) implies that the boundary anomaly does not exist.
4.1.2 Even
Using the expansion of the Plancherel (66)
(82) |
and the identity
(83) |
the zeta function can be decomposed into two parts,
(84) | ||||
(85) | ||||
(86) |
The first term of the zeta function can be calculated as
(87) |
and we can easily read off
(88) | ||||
(89) |
where is a harmonic number.
On the other hand, it is difficult to perform the integral in , hence we compute and instead. is independent on the mass term,
(90) |
and the derivative can be computed as
(91) |
with
(92) |
where is a Bernoulli polynomial. See appendix B for the detailed derivation of (92).
We obtain the renormalized free energy for the massive fermion,
(93) |
with the coefficient of the logarithmic divergent part
(94) |
and the finite part
(95) |
In the massless limit, , the renormalized free energy has a simple expression
(96) |
with the anomaly coefficient and the finite part
(97) | ||||
(98) |
To see the massless limit of the finite term, it is convenient to use (152) instead of (92). The free energy on is just the half of that on ,
(99) |
and this reproduces the known anomaly coefficients in literature Rodriguez-Gomez:2017aca .
4.2 Free energy on
The free energy on for the massless Dirac fermion except for even and even is expressed as
(100) |
with the Plancherel measure (66) and the degeneracy (39). For even and even , there are two fermions of opposite charge as the additional appeared in (25). Then, the free energy on with even and even becomes
(101) |
To treat these two cases simultaneously, we introduce a notation,
(102) |
In the following, we compute the free energy using the zeta-function regularisation divided into two cases: even case and odd case. An important notice is that we use different decompositions for the logarithmic function depending on the evenness of .
4.2.1 Even
Performing similar computations in section 4.1.1, the renormalized free energy is given by
(103) |
with the zeta function
(104) |
Here is the zeta function of with mass (77). By using the expansion of the degeneracy (45) with the replacement , the zeta function becomes
(105) |
We immediately find
(106) |
and
(107) |
For even , we find the following:
-
•
For odd , the renormalized free energy vanishes,
(108) This implies that both bulk and defect anomalies vanish.
-
•
For even , the renormalized free energy has a defect anomaly which comes from the volume of ,
(109) with
(110) -
•
For , the defect anomaly is proportional to the bulk anomaly on ,
(111) as in the scalar case Rodriguez-Gomez:2017kxf ; Nishioka:2021uef and the holographic case Rodriguez-Gomez:2017kxf . It is expected that the holographic result should be the same as the free fermion result because the anomaly coefficient does not depend on the strength of a coupling constant and the holography can be applied if the number of fermions is large.
For , our result correctly reproduces the free energy obtained in Klebanov:2011uf ; Beccaria:2017dmw (with an appropriate dimension of the spinor).
4.2.2 Odd
In this section, we do not omit all equations in order to derive our main results of this section, (126) and (129). If the reader is not interested in the detail of the derivations, the reader can skip until (126).
For odd , the Plancherel measure (82) is decomposed into two parts using the identity (83), and the free energy consists of two parts,
(112) |
In contrast to section 4.1.2, we decompose the logarithmic function differently for each term, and the ordering of the summation over and the integral over is important.
The Schwinger representation of the free energy (112) is given by
(113) |
For the first term, we first perform the integral over , and hence the first term is convergent in the limit in the Schwinger representation. On the other hand, for the second term, we first perform the summation over , and hence the second term is convergent in the limit in the Schwinger representation.
The renormalized free energy is given by
(114) |
where the zeta function is a sum of two parts,
(115) |
with
(116) | |||
(117) |
The first term in the zeta function is convergent for ,
(118) |
It follows that
(119) |
and
(120) |
Using the expansion of the gamma functions in the degeneracy,
(121) |
and its complex conjugate, we obtain
(122) |
Although it is difficult to perform the integral over analytically, it is possible to simplify and its derivative at furthermore. After a bit of calculation, we obtain
(123) |
In addition, the derivative of the zeta function at can be computed as
(124) |
For even , the combination of the Hurwitz zeta functions can be simplified using a formula
(125) |
See e.g. (B.19) in Nishioka:2021uef for the derivation. Unfortunately, it is difficult to simplify the equations anymore, so we perform the integral (124) numerically.
For odd , we find the following:
-
•
For odd , we numerically find the relation among free energies
(126) for . That is, the anomaly coefficients and the finite parts satisfy the relations,
(127) (128) -
•
For even , the anomaly parts vanish since the bulk dimension is odd. We numerically find the relation between the universal parts of the free energy
(129) for .
The equivalence of the anomaly coefficients between and follows from a relation of Euler characteristic as pointed out Rodriguez-Gomez:2017kxf ; Nishioka:2021uef because the bulk anomaly is related to the Euler characteristic.
5 Free energy for Neumann boundary condition
In section 4, we computed the free energy on with Dirichlet boundary condition. In this section, we compute the free energy with Neumann boundary condition. Neumann boundary condition exists only when as we saw in section 2.
5.1 Analytical continuation
We decompose the free energy into a sum of ,
(130) |
where is the free energy for the -th mode on ,
(131) |
Since the integral is performed before the summation over , the logarithmic function is decomposed in this way.
From now on, we concentrate on because Neumann boundary condition is allowed only when . The difference of free energies between the two boundary conditions comes from the mode. The Dirichlet boundary condition has a positive value
(132) |
while the Neumann boundary condition has a negative value
(133) |
In section 4.1, we obtained the zeta functions as analytical functions of positive . It is possible to analytically continue the zeta functions to a region.
Even
From (80) the free energy of the mode is given by
(134) |
Then, the difference of the free energies becomes
(135) |
By using
(136) |
(45) with the replacement , and the reflection formula of the gamma function
(137) |
with , the coefficient of the logarithmic divergent part becomes
(138) |
We find a relation
(139) |
where the universal free energy on is given by (58).
Odd
From (94) and (95) with (152), the difference of the free energies is given by
(140) |
By using the identity
(141) |
(45) with the replacement and the reflection formula of the gamma function with , we find
(142) |
where the universal free energy on is given by (58).
Independent of the evenness of , the difference of the free energies between the two boundary conditions is proportional to the universal free energy of the fermion on ,
(143) |
This fact implies that the Neumann boundary condition for is trivial in the sense that the defect operator saturates the unitarity bound (31) and becomes a free field.
5.2 Evidence for defect -theorem
We are now in a position to compare the result in section 5.1 with our proposed conjecture in Kobayashi:2018lil . The defect free energy (5) may not be invariant under the Weyl transformation, while we expect that the difference of the defect free energies is invariant. An RG flow from the Neumann boundary condition to the Dirichlet boundary condition is triggered by a double trace deformation as is familiar in the AdS/CFT setup Witten:2001ua ; Berkooz:2002ug ; Gubser:2002zh ; Gubser:2002vv ; Hartman:2006dy ; Diaz:2007an ; Giombi:2013yva , and the difference of the universal part of the defect free energies is given by
(144) |
where
(145) |
is positive for any . The positivity of the sphere free energy leads to the positivity of the difference of the free energies between at UV fixed point and at IR fixed point. In this case, our proposed defect -theorem holds.
6 Summary and Discussion
In this paper, we studied a free Dirac fermion on as a DCFT. In section 2, we classified the allowed boundary conditions, and we found that a nontrivial boundary condition is allowed only in . In sections 3 and 4, we computed the free energy on , , and with the Dirichlet boundary condition using the zeta-function regularisation. In particular, we obtained relations of free energies, which hold also in a conformally coupled scalar field Rodriguez-Gomez:2017kxf ; Nishioka:2021uef in section 4.2. In section 5, we computed the difference of the free energies between the Dirichlet boundary condition and the Neumann boundary condition in and confirmed the validity of our proposed defect -theorem.
We obtained various results similar to a conformally coupled scalar case Rodriguez-Gomez:2017kxf ; Nishioka:2021uef . However, there are several differences between the fermion case and the scalar case. The first difference comes from the codimension of the defect which allows nontrivial boundary conditions. Nontrivial boundary conditions in the conformally coupled scalar are allowed in Nishioka:2021uef , but the nontrivial boundary condition in the free fermion occurs in . The second difference is that we rigorously derive the equivalence of the free energies between and for arbitrary . However, for the conformally coupled scalar Nishioka:2021uef , the equivalence of the free energies between and is checked only numerically because a nontrivial identity among Bernoulli polynomials are required for a proof of the equivalence for arbitrary .
In section 2.2, we gave a classification of boundary conditions in a free fermion, and this means that we constructed a concrete model of a DCFT. A task to derive the same classification (or defect operator) of boundary conditions by using the method in Lauria:2020emq remains. The concrete model would be useful for a study of DCFTs. In this paper we discussed the non-monodromy defect where the fermion does not receive any phase around the defect. For , there exits a monodromy defect where the fermion receives a phase around the defect in addition to the non-monodromy defect.
Acknowledgements.
The author thanks T. Nishioka for the collaboration of the related work, useful discussion and various comments on the draft of this paper. The author thanks D. Rodriguez-Gomez and J. G. Russo for comments on the draft of this paper and useful discussions. The author also thanks Y. Abe, Y. Okuyama and M. Watanabe for useful communication. The work is supported by the National Center of Theoretical Sciences (NCTS).Appendix A List of tables
Odd | |
---|---|
Even | |
Odd | |
Even | |
Even | |
Odd | for |
Appendix B Detail derivation of (92)
In this appendix, we give a detailed derivation of (92).
To perform the integral
(146) |
we first take the derivative respect to ,
(147) | ||||
(148) |
Since satisfies the recursion relation
(149) |
with the initial condition
(150) |
the solution is given by
(151) |
By integrating from to , can be evaluated as
(152) |
where we use
(153) |
The remaining integral is performed using a formula in adamchik1998polygamma ; espinosa2001some
(154) |
References
- (1) A.B. Zamolodchikov, Irreversibility of the Flux of the Renormalization Group in a 2D Field Theory, JETP Lett. 43 (1986) 730.
- (2) J.L. Cardy, Is There a c Theorem in Four-Dimensions?, Phys. Lett. B215 (1988) 749.
- (3) Z. Komargodski and A. Schwimmer, On Renormalization Group Flows in Four Dimensions, JHEP 12 (2011) 099 [1107.3987].
- (4) D.L. Jafferis, I.R. Klebanov, S.S. Pufu and B.R. Safdi, Towards the -Theorem: =2 Field Theories on the Three-Sphere, JHEP 06 (2011) 102 [1103.1181].
- (5) I.R. Klebanov, S.S. Pufu and B.R. Safdi, -Theorem without Supersymmetry, JHEP 10 (2011) 038 [1105.4598].
- (6) R.C. Myers and A. Sinha, Seeing a c-theorem with holography, Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 046006 [1006.1263].
- (7) R.C. Myers and A. Sinha, Holographic c-theorems in arbitrary dimensions, JHEP 01 (2011) 125 [1011.5819].
- (8) S. Giombi and I.R. Klebanov, Interpolating between and , JHEP 03 (2015) 117 [1409.1937].
- (9) H. Casini and M. Huerta, A Finite entanglement entropy and the c-theorem, Phys. Lett. B600 (2004) 142 [hep-th/0405111].
- (10) H. Casini and M. Huerta, On the RG running of the entanglement entropy of a circle, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 125016 [1202.5650].
- (11) H. Casini, E. Testé and G. Torroba, Markov Property of the Conformal Field Theory Vacuum and the a Theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 261602 [1704.01870].
- (12) N. Kobayashi, T. Nishioka, Y. Sato and K. Watanabe, Towards a -theorem in defect CFT, JHEP 01 (2019) 039 [1810.06995].
- (13) D.R. Green, M. Mulligan and D. Starr, Boundary Entropy Can Increase Under Bulk RG Flow, Nucl. Phys. B 798 (2008) 491 [0710.4348].
- (14) Y. Sato, Boundary entropy under ambient RG flow in the AdS/BCFT model, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 126004 [2004.04929].
- (15) I. Affleck and A.W.W. Ludwig, Universal noninteger ‘ground state degeneracy’ in critical quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 (1991) 161.
- (16) D. Friedan and A. Konechny, On the boundary entropy of one-dimensional quantum systems at low temperature, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 030402 [hep-th/0312197].
- (17) H. Casini, I.S. Landea and G. Torroba, The g-theorem and quantum information theory, JHEP 10 (2016) 140 [1607.00390].
- (18) K. Jensen and A. O’Bannon, Constraint on Defect and Boundary Renormalization Group Flows, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 091601 [1509.02160].
- (19) M. Nozaki, T. Takayanagi and T. Ugajin, Central Charges for BCFTs and Holography, JHEP 06 (2012) 066 [1205.1573].
- (20) D. Gaiotto, Boundary F-maximization, 1403.8052.
- (21) Y. Wang, Defect -Theorem and -Maximization, 2101.12648.
- (22) H. Casini, I. Salazar Landea and G. Torroba, Irreversibility in quantum field theories with boundaries, JHEP 04 (2019) 166 [1812.08183].
- (23) S. Yamaguchi, Holographic RG flow on the defect and g theorem, JHEP 10 (2002) 002 [hep-th/0207171].
- (24) T. Takayanagi, Holographic Dual of BCFT, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 101602 [1105.5165].
- (25) M. Fujita, T. Takayanagi and E. Tonni, Aspects of AdS/BCFT, JHEP 11 (2011) 043 [1108.5152].
- (26) J. Estes, K. Jensen, A. O’Bannon, E. Tsatis and T. Wrase, On Holographic Defect Entropy, JHEP 05 (2014) 084 [1403.6475].
- (27) R.-X. Miao, C.-S. Chu and W.-Z. Guo, New proposal for a holographic boundary conformal field theory, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 046005 [1701.04275].
- (28) S.P. Kumar and D. Silvani, Holographic flows and thermodynamics of Polyakov loop impurities, JHEP 03 (2017) 107 [1611.06033].
- (29) S.P. Kumar and D. Silvani, Entanglement of heavy quark impurities and generalized gravitational entropy, JHEP 01 (2018) 052 [1711.01554].
- (30) M. Beccaria, S. Giombi and A. Tseytlin, Non-supersymmetric Wilson loop in = 4 SYM and defect 1d CFT, JHEP 03 (2018) 131 [1712.06874].
- (31) K. Jensen, A. O’Bannon, B. Robinson and R. Rodgers, From the Weyl Anomaly to Entropy of Two-Dimensional Boundaries and Defects, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 241602 [1812.08745].
- (32) Y. Wang, Surface Defect, Anomalies and -Extremization, 2012.06574.
- (33) R. Rodgers, Holographic entanglement entropy from probe M-theory branes, JHEP 03 (2019) 092 [1811.12375].
- (34) T. Nishioka and Y. Sato, Free energy and defect -theorem in free scalar theory, JHEP 05 (2021) 074 [2101.02399].
- (35) D. Rodriguez-Gomez and J.G. Russo, Free energy and boundary anomalies on spaces, JHEP 10 (2017) 084 [1708.00305].
- (36) D. Rodriguez-Gomez and J.G. Russo, Boundary Conformal Anomalies on Hyperbolic Spaces and Euclidean Balls, JHEP 12 (2017) 066 [1710.09327].
- (37) A. Gustavsson, Renormalization of the Einstein-Hilbert action, JHEP 05 (2020) 064 [1911.04178].
- (38) C.P. Herzog and I. Shamir, On Marginal Operators in Boundary Conformal Field Theory, JHEP 10 (2019) 088 [1906.11281].
- (39) S. Giombi and H. Khanchandani, CFT in AdS and boundary RG flows, JHEP 11 (2020) 118 [2007.04955].
- (40) A. Kapustin, Wilson-’t Hooft operators in four-dimensional gauge theories and S-duality, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 025005 [hep-th/0501015].
- (41) S.M. Chester, M. Mezei, S.S. Pufu and I. Yaakov, Monopole operators from the expansion, JHEP 12 (2016) 015 [1511.07108].
- (42) E. Lauria, P. Liendo, B.C. Van Rees and X. Zhao, Line and surface defects for the free scalar field, JHEP 01 (2021) 060 [2005.02413].
- (43) E. Witten, Multitrace operators, boundary conditions, and AdS/CFT correspondence, hep-th/0112258.
- (44) M. Berkooz, A. Sever and A. Shomer, ‘Double trace’ deformations, boundary conditions and space-time singularities, JHEP 05 (2002) 034 [hep-th/0112264].
- (45) S.S. Gubser and I. Mitra, Double trace operators and one loop vacuum energy in AdS/CFT, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 064018 [hep-th/0210093].
- (46) S.S. Gubser and I.R. Klebanov, A universal result on central charges in the presence of double trace deformations, Nucl. Phys. B 656 (2003) 23 [hep-th/0212138].
- (47) T. Hartman and L. Rastelli, Double-trace deformations, mixed boundary conditions and functional determinants in AdS/CFT, JHEP 01 (2008) 019 [hep-th/0602106].
- (48) D.E. Diaz and H. Dorn, Partition functions and double-trace deformations in AdS/CFT, JHEP 05 (2007) 046 [hep-th/0702163].
- (49) S. Giombi, I.R. Klebanov, S.S. Pufu, B.R. Safdi and G. Tarnopolsky, AdS Description of Induced Higher-Spin Gauge Theory, JHEP 10 (2013) 016 [1306.5242].
- (50) I.R. Klebanov, S.S. Pufu, S. Sachdev and B.R. Safdi, Renyi Entropies for Free Field Theories, JHEP 04 (2012) 074 [1111.6290].
- (51) M. Beccaria and A. Tseytlin, CT for higher derivative conformal fields and anomalies of (1, 0) superconformal 6d theories, JHEP 06 (2017) 002 [1705.00305].
- (52) J.S. Dowker, J.S. Apps, K. Kirsten and M. Bordag, Spectral invariants for the Dirac equation on the d ball with various boundary conditions, Class. Quant. Grav. 13 (1996) 2911 [hep-th/9511060].
- (53) R. Camporesi, The Spinor heat kernel in maximally symmetric spaces, Commun. Math. Phys. 148 (1992) 283.
- (54) R. Camporesi and A. Higuchi, On the Eigen functions of the Dirac operator on spheres and real hyperbolic spaces, J. Geom. Phys. 20 (1996) 1 [gr-qc/9505009].
- (55) A. Lewkowycz, R.C. Myers and M. Smolkin, Observations on entanglement entropy in massive QFT’s, JHEP 04 (2013) 017 [1210.6858].
- (56) S. Minwalla, Restrictions imposed by superconformal invariance on quantum field theories, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 783 [hep-th/9712074].
- (57) A. Monin, Partition function on spheres: How to use zeta function regularization, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 085013 [1607.06493].
- (58) D. Vassilevich, Heat kernel expansion: User’s manual, Phys. Rept. 388 (2003) 279 [hep-th/0306138].
- (59) “NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions.” http://dlmf.nist.gov/, Release 1.1.0 of 2020-12-15.
- (60) M. Marino, Lectures on localization and matrix models in supersymmetric Chern-Simons-matter theories, J. Phys. A 44 (2011) 463001 [1104.0783].
- (61) J. Dowker, On - dimensional interpolation, 1708.07094.
- (62) A.A. Bytsenko, G. Cognola, L. Vanzo and S. Zerbini, Quantum fields and extended objects in space-times with constant curvature spatial section, Phys. Rept. 266 (1996) 1 [hep-th/9505061].
- (63) R. Camporesi and A. Higuchi, Spectral functions and zeta functions in hyperbolic spaces, J. Math. Phys. 35 (1994) 4217.
- (64) A. Bytsenko, E. Elizalde and S. Odintsov, The Conformal anomaly in N-dimensional spaces having a hyperbolic spatial section, J. Math. Phys. 36 (1995) 5084 [gr-qc/9505047].
- (65) V.S. Adamchik, Polygamma functions of negative order, Journal of computational and applied mathematics 100 (1998) 191.
- (66) O.R. Espinosa and V.H. Moll, On some integrals involving the hurwitz zeta function: Part 2, The Ramanujan Journal 6 (2002) 449 [math/0107082].