text:
# Existence d’une courbe sur 𝔽₃ de genre 5 avec 13 points rationnels

## 1 Introduction

footnotetext: Univ. Paris VII, laboratoire de théorie des nombres.
E-mail : ritzenth@math.jussieu.fr

Soit $`N_q(g)`$ le nombre maximal de points rationnels sur $`𝔽_q`$ pour une courbe lisse de genre $`g`$ sur $`𝔽_q`$. Grâce aux bornes de Weil on sait que $`N_q(g)`$ est inférieur ou égal à $`q+1+2g\sqrt{q}`$. Ces bornes (même raffinées par la méthode d’Oesterlé) ne sont pas optimales et la détermination de $`N_q(g)`$ pour $`g>2`$ reste incomplète.
Le cas qui nous préoccupe ici est celui des courbes de genre $`5`$ sur $`𝔽_3`$. Les majorations explicites d’Oesterlé donne un nombre de points inférieur ou égal à $`14`$, et Kristin Lauter a montré l’inégalité stricte (cf. ). D’autre part on connaissait l’existence de courbes avec $`12`$ points rationnels construites par des revêtements successifs (cf. ). Dans la présente note nous nous proposons donc de combler la lacune existante en donnant explicitement une courbe de genre $`5`$ avec $`13`$ points rationnels comme l’intersection de $`3`$ quadriques dans $`^4`$. Cette courbe est de plus exceptionnelle pour une autre raison : elle constitue, à ma connaissance, le premier exemple d’une courbe avec un nombre de points maximum qui est revêtement non galoisien d’une courbe elliptique. Nous donnons de plus explicitement ce dernier.

## 2 Résultats

###### Proposition 1

La courbe $`C`$ définie par

$$\{\begin{array}{c}q_1=2x_1x_2+x_3x_2+x_3^2x_4^2\hfill \\ q_2=x_5x_1x_4x_2\hfill \\ q_3=x_1^2+x_1x_2x_3^2+x_5^2\hfill \end{array}$$

est une courbe de genre $`5`$ qui possède $`13`$ points sur $`𝔽_3`$.

###### Proposition 2

1. $`\text{Aut}_{\overline{𝔽}_3}(C)=<\omega >/2`$.
2. $`D=C/<\omega >`$ a pour équation

$$x_2^2(x_3x_2+x_3^2x_1x_2)+(x_1^2+x_1x_2x_3^2)x_1^2=0.$$
3. $`C`$ est revêtement non galoisien de la courbe elliptique $`E:y^2=x^3x+1`$. De plus si on prend comme modèle plan pour $`C`$

$$x^4+x^3y^3x^2xy^5+y^5+2y=0$$

le revêtement est donné par $`(x:y:1)(x^{}:y^{}:1)`$ avec

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}x^{}=\frac{x^3x^2y^3x^2y^2+x^2+xy^5+xy^4xy^3xy^2+xyy^6+y^5+y^4+y^3y^2}{(y+1)(y1)^2(y^3y^2+y+1)}\hfill & \\ y^{}=\frac{x^3yx^2y^5+x^2y^4x^2y+xy^5+xy^4+xy^3xy^2xy+y^8+y^7+y^4y^3y^2y+1}{(y+1)^2(y1)^3(y^3y^2+y+1)}\hfill & \end{array}$$

## 3 Démonstration

La courbe a été construite par une recherche exhaustive des sextiques planes de genre $`5`$ passant par les $`13`$ points rationnels du plan projectif (soit $`3^{15}`$ possibilités). Le plongement canonique permet alors d’obtenir un modèle lisse comme intersection de $`3`$ quadriques dans $`^4`$.

D’autre part le polynôme caractéristique de $`C`$ sur $`𝔽_3`$ se factorise en

$$(T^2+2T+3)(T^2+3T+3)(T^2+3)(T^4+4T^3+8T^2+12T+9).$$
(1)
De plus sur $`𝔽_{3^{24}}`$, le polynôme caractéristique se scinde en

$$(T3^{12})^4(T^2+629918T+3^{24})^3.$$

Sur $`𝔽_{3^{24}}`$ la jacobienne de la courbe $`C`$ est donc isogène à $`E^2\times F^3`$, avec $`E`$ et $`F`$ des courbes elliptiques qui sont absolument non-isogènes (par exemple parce que la première est supersingulière et pas l’autre). En particulier sur $`𝔽_3`$, $`C`$ est revêtement de trois courbes elliptiques.

Pour montrer que $`C`$ n’est revêtement galoisien d’aucune de ces courbes elliptiques, nous allons déterminer le groupe des automorphismes de $`C`$. On constate que

$$\omega :(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)$$

est un automorphisme de la courbe. De plus $`C/<\omega >`$ est une courbe de genre $`2`$ (par la formule d’Hurwitz) qu’on peut obtenir par l’élimination des variables $`x_4`$ et $`x_5`$ sous la forme :

$$2y^3x+y^3+y^2+x^4+x^3yx^2.$$

Montrons maintenant que cet automorphisme est le seul qui soit non trivial, on aura alors que $`C`$ est revêtement non galoisien d’une courbe elliptique. C’est en fait une conséquence d’un théorème plus général dù à Beauville \[1, prop. 6.9\] et qui donne exactement le groupe des automorphismes de $`C`$ en fonction de ceux de la quintique définie ci-dessous. Mais nous avons besoin de quelque chose de moins précis et on obtient la démonstration élémentaire ci-dessous.
Puisque $`C`$ est donnée sous forme canonique, tous les automorphismes de la courbe sont linéaires. Soit $`\psi `$ un automorphisme de $`^4`$. C’est un automorphisme de $`C`$ si et seulement si la matrice $`M\mathrm{PGL}_5(\overline{𝔽_3})`$ qui le représente est telle que $`q_i(Mv)=0`$ pour $`i=\mathrm{1,2,3}`$ et quelque soit $`{}_{}{}^{t}v=(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)C`$.
Mais si $`M`$ représente un automorphisme de $`C`$ alors si on note $`Q_i`$ les matrices des formes quadratiques $`q_i`$, $`{}_{}{}^{t}MQ_iM`$ est une quadrique contenant $`C`$. Elle est donc combinaison linéaire des $`Q_i`$.
On considère alors l’ensemble $`S`$ des $`(x,y,z)_2`$ tels que $`\mathrm{det}(\mathrm{x}\mathrm{Q}_1+\mathrm{y}\mathrm{Q}_2+\mathrm{z}\mathrm{Q}_3)=0`$. C’est une quintique lisse d’équation

$$x^3+y^2xy^2x^4+x+x^3y^2y^4x+y^4=0$$

qui ne possède qu’un seul automorphisme

$$\phi :(x,y,z)(x,y,z).$$

On peut définir un morphisme de groupe $`\mu `$ de $`\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{C})\mathrm{PGL}_5(\overline{𝔽_3})`$ dans $`\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{S})`$ : Si $`M`$ est un automorphisme de la courbe $`C`$ et si

$$\{\begin{array}{c}{}_{}{}^{t}MQ_1M=a_1Q_1+b_1Q_2+c_1Q_3\hfill \\ {}_{}{}^{t}MQ_2M=a_2Q_1+b_2Q_2+c_2Q_3\hfill \\ {}_{}{}^{t}MQ_3M=a_3Q_1+b_3Q_2+c_3Q_3\hfill \end{array}$$

on a alors un automorphisme de $`S`$ donnée par $`(x,y,z)(a_1x+a_2y+a_3z,b_1x+b_2y+b_3z,c_1x+c_2y+c_3z)`$. De plus ce morphisme envoie $`\omega `$ sur $`\phi `$.

Il suffit de montrer que $`\mu `$ est injectif. La quintique étant non singulière, la quadrique singulière $`xQ_1+yQ_2+zQ_3`$ associée à un point de la courbe $`(x,y,z)`$ est de rang $`4`$ et possède donc un unique point singulier. Soit $`s:S^4`$ qui associe à un point de la quintique le point singulier de la quadrique correspondante. Soit $`M`$ un automorphisme de $`C`$ qui se réduit sur l’identité de $`S`$. L’action de $`M`$ en tant qu’automorphisme de $`^4`$ sur $`s(S)`$ est la même que celle induite par $`s^{}(\mu ^{}(M))`$ qui est dans ce cas l’identité. Pour montrer qu’on a alors $`M=\mathrm{Id}`$ il suffit donc de montrer que les points de $`s(S)`$ ne sont pas contenus dans un hyperplan. C’est en fait une conséquence du lemme suivant :

###### Lemme 1

Soit $`F`$ et $`G`$ deux matrices de formes quadratiques non dégénérées d’un espace vectoriel $`E`$ sur un corps $`k`$ de caractéristique différente de $`2`$ telles que $`P(t)=\mathrm{det}(GtF)=0`$ n’ait que des racines de multiplicité $`1`$. Alors ces deux formes quadratiques sont simultanément diagonalisables.

Montrons tout d’abord comment ce lemme permet de conclure. Soit $`l`$ une droite transverse à $`S`$ et $`p_0,\mathrm{},p_4`$ les points d’intersection. On considère le pinceau de quadriques défini par $`l`$ : il est engendré par deux quadriques non singulières d’équations $`F`$ et $`G`$ telles que $`\mathrm{det}(FtG)=0`$ n’a que des racines de multiplicités $`1`$ (puisque $`l`$ est transverse). On peut alors appliquer le lemme : dans une base qui diagonalise simultanément les deux quadriques on écrit $`F=X_i^2`$ et $`G=\alpha _iX_i^2`$ $`\alpha _i\alpha _j`$. Avec ces coordonnées les images $`s(p_i)`$ sont alors tout simplement les points $`(\mathrm{1,0,0,0,0}),(\mathrm{0,1,0,0,0}),\mathrm{},(\mathrm{0,0,0,0,1})`$ qui ne sont évidemment pas dans un même hyperplan, d’où le résultat.

Démonstration : Soit $`n`$ la dimension de $`E`$. Soient $`\lambda _i,v_i`$ ($`\lambda _i0`$ et $`v_i0`$) les $`n`$ scalaires et vecteurs tels que $`Fv_i=\lambda _iG_iv_i`$. Nous allons montrer que les $`v_i`$ sont une base orthogonale pour $`F`$ et $`G`$. On a

$`{}_{}{}^{t}v_{j}^{}Fv_i`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _i^tv_jGv_i`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`{}_{}{}^{t}v_{i}^{}Fv_j\text{par symétrie de }F`$ (3)
$`=`$ $`\lambda _j^tv_iGv_j`$ (4)
$`=`$ $`\lambda _j^tv_jGv_i\text{par symétrie de}G`$ (5)
Par hypothèse, les $`\lambda _i`$ sont tous distincts on a donc par égalité de 4 et 5 que $`{}_{}{}^{t}v_{j}^{}Fv_i={}_{}{}^{t}v_{j}^{}Gv_i=0`$.

Nous allons donner explicitement un revêtement de $`C`$ sur une courbe elliptique. On a le théorème suivant

###### Théorème 1

 Soit $`C`$ une courbe sur $`𝔽_q`$ dont la jacobienne est isogène à un produit $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\times E`$ avec $`E`$ une courbe elliptique. Soit $`r`$ le résultant des polynômes minimaux de la restriction de $`F+V`$ à $`E`$ et $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$$`F`$ est l’endomorphisme de Frobenius de $`\text{Jac}(C)`$ et $`V`$ son dual. Alors il existe une courbe elliptique $`E^{}`$ isogène à $`E`$ et une application de $`C`$ dans $`E^{}`$ dont le degré divise $`r`$.

On applique ce théorème au facteur $`T^2+3T+3`$ de (1). Il existe donc un revêtement de degré $`3`$ de $`C`$ vers une courbe $`E`$ avec $`7`$ points sur $`𝔽_3`$. A isomorphisme près cette courbe est unique d’équation $`E:y^2=x^3x+1`$.
Pour expliciter le revêtement, nous procédons comme suit

* Au dessus d’au moins un point rationnel de $`E`$ il existe trois points rationnels de $`C`$ (éventuellement non distincts). Quitte à effectuer une translation on peut supposer que ce point est l’origine de la courbe elliptique.
* Pour chacune des $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{13}{1}\right)+\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{13}{2}\right)+\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{13}{3}\right)=377`$ possibilités, on considère alors le diviseur $`D`$ de degré $`3`$ au dessus de l’origine. Si $`f:CE`$ est le revêtement et si $`g:E^1`$ est l’application $`(x:y:z)(x:z)`$ alors $`gf(2D)`$. Le théorème de Clifford montre que $`l(2D)2`$ et par Riemann-Roch on a que $`l(D)=2`$.
* Soit $`\varphi (2D)`$ non constante. Pour $`\psi _x=\varphi ,\varphi +1,\varphi 1`$ on calcule $`\psi ^3\psi +1`$. Si cette fonction est le carré d’une autre fonction $`\psi _y`$ alors on a le revêtement donné par $`p(\psi _x(p):\psi _y(p):1)`$.

Grâce à MAGMA, on réalise rapidement ces calculs. Deux modèles plans paraissent particulièrement intéressants pour $`C`$ : le premier

$$x^4y^2+x^2y^4+y^6+x^2y^2+x^3+xy^2+1+xx^4=0$$

est un modèle pour lequel l’involution est $`yy`$. Le second

$$x^4+x^3y^3x^2xy^5+y^5+2y=0$$

possède $`13`$ points rationnels (tous les points de $`^2(𝔽_3)`$). Pour ce second modèle, un revêtement est donné par $`(x:y:1)(x^{}:y^{}:1)`$ avec

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}x^{}=\frac{x^3x^2y^3x^2y^2+x^2+xy^5+xy^4xy^3xy^2+xyy^6+y^5+y^4+y^3y^2}{(y+1)(y1)^2(y^3y^2+y+1)}\hfill & \\ y^{}=\frac{x^3yx^2y^5+x^2y^4x^2y+xy^5+xy^4+xy^3xy^2xy+y^8+y^7+y^4y^3y^2y+1}{(y+1)^2(y1)^3(y^3y^2+y+1)}\hfill & \end{array}$$

La figure 1 montre la ramification de $`f`$

(le nombre derrière le point est l’indice de ramification. On constate en particulier que le revêtement est sauvagement ramifié).


format: text

text:
# More on Superstrings in 𝐴𝑑𝑆₃×𝒩

## 1 Introduction

The special status of the $`AdS_3/CFT_2`$ duality in the AdS/CFT context stems from the fact that the Virasoro generators of the boundary Conformal Field Theory (CFT) can be built exactly from operators in string theory on an $`SL(2,R)\times 𝒩`$ worldsheet CFT. This building was done in , where it was also shown that an affine algebra in $`𝒩`$ can be uplifted to a similar affine algebra in the boundary, with a different level. These constructions are particularly interesting in the supersymmetric case, where an adequate field content in $`𝒩`$ allows to enlarge the boundary Virasoro symmetry to Superconformal Field Theory (SCFT) algebras with various numbers of supersymmetries. This was also shown in , where the model $`SL(2,R)_k\times SU(2)_k\times T^4`$ was used to construct a small $`N=4`$ SCFT algebra in the boundary theory111For simplicity, we discuss only the holomorphic sector of the worldsheet and the two dimensional spacetime CFT. The full theory also has a right-handed algebra whose structure depends on the type of string theory considered: IIA, IIB, heterotic, etc. (see  for a different approach).

Following that work, several backgrounds were explored yielding other amounts of boundary supersymmetry. The extended ($`N>1`$) SCFT algebras in two dimension have been classified in , and are $`N=2,3`$ and two types of $`N=4`$, small and large. Their R-symmetries are affine $`U(1)`$, $`SU(2)`$, $`SU(2)`$ and $`SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$, respectively, with levels depending on the Virasoro central charge. In the $`AdS_3\times 𝒩`$ backgrounds studied, the theory $`𝒩`$ contains these affine R-symmetries, which are then uplifted to the boundary.

$`AdS_3`$ backgrounds yielding $`N=2`$ spacetime SCFT were studied in . For the $`N=3`$ case, three different backgrounds were proposed: $`𝒩=SU(3)/U(1)`$ and $`𝒩=SO(5)/SO(3)`$ in , and $`𝒩=(SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1))/Z_2`$ in . Small $`N=4`$ was mentioned above. Finally, for large $`N=4`$ SCFT, a model was studied in  with $`𝒩=SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$, which is the minimal field content required for the boundary R-symmetries.

All these constructions provide only sufficient conditions to yield boundary extended SCFTs. The purpose of this work is to study the necessary constraints imposed on $`𝒩`$ by the existence of each of the extended SCFT algebras in the boundary theory.

Our results strengthen the relationship between $`AdS_3`$ boundary supersymmetry and worldsheet symmetries of the internal CFT $`𝒩`$. This is similar to the case of string compactified to Minkowski space, where long established results show the intimate connection between spacetime supersymmetry and the symmetries of the compact sector . In this work we will use CFT techniques similar to those in . This makes the results hold for general CFT backgrounds, not necessarily having a geometrical picture as target spaces of non-linear $`\sigma `$-models.

Superstring theory on $`AdS_3\times 𝒩`$ afford boundary SCFT algebras in the NS sector. This emerges naturally when supercharges are built from spin fields creating the Ramond sector of the worldsheet CFT, as for flat space superstrings , and is in accord with expectations from $`AdS_3`$ supergravity analysis .

For $`N=2`$ and small and large $`N=4`$, we will show that the sufficient conditions stated in , respectively, are also necessary. For $`N=3`$ we find a set of necessary conditions, which are an $`SU(2)`$-covariant version of a sufficient condition given in  to enlarge the $`N=2`$ SCFT, obtained from backgrounds of the type , to $`N=3`$.

The plan of the work is as follows. Sections 2, 3 and 4 deal with the $`N=2`$, $`N=3`$ and $`N=4`$ cases, respectively. In Section 5 we present a short discussion. Appendix A is devoted to proving some properties of the R-currents. In Appendix B, as an illustration, we show how the results are realized explicitly for $`N=3`$ in the background $`𝒩=(SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1))/Z_2`$.

## 2 Spacetime $`N=2`$ supersymmetry

In this section we will show that any critical superstring vacuum of the form $`AdS_3\times 𝒩`$ in which the spacetime theory has (at least) $`N=2`$ superconformal supersymmetry must be of the form proposed in . Namely, the internal CFT $`𝒩`$ contains an affine $`U(1)`$ symmetry, and in the CFT quotient $`𝒩/U(1)`$ the worldsheet superconformal symmetry is extended to $`N=2`$ supersymmetry.

Let us consider the global part of the $`N=2`$ spacetime superalgebra in the NS sector:

$`\{Q_r^+,Q_s^{}\}`$ $`=`$ $`2L_{r+s}+(rs)R_0,`$ (2.1)
$`[L_m,L_n]`$ $`=`$ $`(mn)L_{m+n},`$ (2.2)
$`[L_m,Q_r^\pm ]`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{m}{2}}r)Q_{m+r}^\pm ,`$ (2.3)
$`[R_0,Q_r^\pm ]`$ $`=`$ $`\pm Q_r^\pm ,`$ (2.4)
with $`r,s=\pm \frac{1}{2}`$, $`m,n=0,\pm 1`$, and all other (anti)commutators vanishing.

The above spacetime operators are given by contour integrals of dimension-1 local operators on the worldsheet. We assume that the global part $`L_{0,\pm 1}`$ of the Virasoro algebra in spacetime along with the higher modes $`L_n`$ are given by the construction presented in , so that, up to picture-changing ,

| $`L_0`$ | $`={\displaystyle J^3}={\displaystyle e^\varphi \psi ^3},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`L_{\pm 1}`$ | $`={\displaystyle (J^1\pm iJ^2)}={\displaystyle e^\varphi (\psi ^1\pm i\psi ^2)},`$ |

(2.5)
The field $`\varphi `$ is the bosonized superghost and the superfields $`\psi ^A+\theta J^A`$, $`A=1,2,3`$, are the affine currents of a supersymmetric $`SL(2,R)`$ WZW model at level $`k`$. Their OPEs are222Indices that go from 1 to 3 will be indicated with capital letters $`(A,B\mathrm{})`$. For those going from 0 to 3 later we will use lower case letters $`(i,j\mathrm{})`$.:

| $`J^A(z)J^B(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{k}{2}\eta ^{AB}}{(zw)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{iϵ^{ABC}\eta _{CD}J^D(w)}{zw}},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`J^A(z)\psi ^B(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{iϵ^{ABC}\eta _{CD}\psi ^D(w)}{zw}},`$ |
| $`\psi ^A(z)\psi ^B(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{k}{2}\eta ^{AB}}{zw}},`$ |

(2.6)
where $`\eta ^{AB}=(++)`$ and $`ϵ^{123}=1`$. As usual in supersymmetric WZW models, we can define the currents

$$j^A=J^A+\frac{i}{k}ϵ^{ABC}\eta _{BD}\eta _{CE}\psi ^D\psi ^E,$$
(2.7)
which form an $`SL(2,R)`$ affine algebra at level $`k+2`$ and have regular OPE with the free fermions $`\psi ^A`$. The central charge of the $`AdS_3`$ sector is $`c=9/2+6/k`$, so for a critical theory, $`𝒩`$ must have $`c_𝒩=21/26/k`$.

$`R_0`$ is the zero mode of the U(1) R-current of the $`N=2`$ algebra in spacetime. The higher modes $`R_n`$ can be obtained, say, from the commutators of $`R_0`$ with $`L_n`$, once the latter are introduced. Alternatively, they can be obtained by the procedure described in  to uplift an affine current from the worldsheet to the boundary spacetime theory (see below).

Let $`\psi ^0+\theta J^0`$ be the worldsheet supercurrent corresponding to $`R_0`$; we have, up to picture-changing,

$$R_0=\sqrt{2k}J^0=\sqrt{2k}e^\varphi \psi ^0,$$
(2.8)
where $`J^0`$ and $`\psi ^0`$ are orthogonal and canonically normalized (see Appendix A):

| $`J^0(z)J^0(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(zw)^2}},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\psi ^0(z)\psi ^0(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{zw}},`$ |
| $`J^0(z)\psi ^0(w)`$ | $`0.`$ |

(2.9)
To see that the choice (2.9) leads to the normalization of (2.8), recall  that the higher modes of the R-current have the form

$$R_n=aJ^0\gamma ^n,$$
(2.10)
and they satisfy

$$[R_m,R_n]=a^2pm\delta _{n+m,0},$$
(2.11)
with

$$p=\frac{_z\gamma }{\gamma },$$
(2.12)
where $`\gamma `$ is the zero-dimension field of the $`(\beta ,\gamma )`$ pair appearing in the Wakimoto free-field representation of the algebra (2.6). We want to show that $`a=\sqrt{2k}`$. Indeed, consistency of the $`N=2`$ algebra  in spacetime implies $`a^2p=c_{st}/3`$, where $`c_{st}`$ is the central charge of the Virasoro algebra in the dual boundary CFT, given by $`c_{st}=6kp`$333The reader is referred to  for details of the construction. This fixes $`a=\pm \sqrt{2k}`$444In the following we will consider only the expressions for $`a=+\sqrt{2k}`$, but everything holds for the other choice, changing signs appropriately..

As for the relation between this $`U(1)`$ current and the three $`SL(2,R)`$ currents, in Appendix A we show that the commutation relations in spacetime (2.1) – (2.4) and the fact that the worldsheet theory is supersymmetric force $`\psi ^0+\theta J^0`$ to lie entirely in the internal CFT $`𝒩`$.

### 2.1 Properties of the spacetime supercharges

Regarding the four spacetime supercharges $`Q_r^\pm `$, we will only assume that, as for superstrings in flat space , they are obtained from operators that create the worldsheet Ramond sector:

$$Q_r^\pm =b_r^\pm e^{\frac{\varphi }{2}}S_r^\pm ,r=\pm \frac{1}{2},$$
(2.13)
where $`S_r^\pm `$ are spin fields  and $`b_r^\pm `$ are constants. Since unbroken worldsheet supersymmetry requires $`G_0^2=L_0^{ws}c/24=0`$ on the Ramond ground state, we have $`\mathrm{\Delta }(S_r^\pm )=\frac{c}{24}=\frac{5}{8}`$. This is compatible with the on-shell condition $`\mathrm{\Delta }(Q)=0`$ for the $`Q`$’s in (2.13). In the presence of spin fields, the fermionic parts of the superfields become double-valued, i.e., integer modded on the plane, and the bosonic fields remain single-valued.

In our case, we have identified four free fermions $`\psi ^i`$, $`i=0,1,2,3`$, which are the lower components of superfields. Since, at the moment, we are not given further data on the field content of the worldsheet theory $`𝒩`$, we only know that the whole set of spin fields is in a representation of the algebra satisfied by the zero modes of $`\psi ^i`$. This is the four dimensional Clifford algebra:

$$\{\psi _0^i,\psi _0^j\}=g^{ij}k^i,$$
(2.14)
with $`g^{ij}=(+,+,+,)`$, $`k^0=1`$ and $`k^A=k/2`$. In particular, we can decompose the whole set of spin fields into irreducible representations (irreps) of (2.14). By a result proved in , all the irreps of (2.14) have dimension 4 and are all equivalent. Hence the OPE of the spin fields with the four fermions is :

$$\psi ^i(z)S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\lambda }(w)\frac{(\psi _0^i)_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2}^{\epsilon _1^{},\epsilon _2^{}}S_{\epsilon _1^{},\epsilon _2^{},\lambda }(z)}{(zw)^{\frac{1}{2}}},$$
(2.15)
where $`\lambda `$ is an index indicating to which particular irrep we refer, and $`\epsilon _{1,2}=\pm 1/2`$. The spacetime algebra (2.1) – (2.4) implies that $`S_r^\pm `$ in (2.13) form such an irrep (this will be described explicitely below).

By Wick rotating $`\psi ^3`$, these irreps realize (anti)spinorial representations of the level-2 $`SO(4)_2`$ affine algebra constructed out of bilinears of $`\psi ^i(z)`$. Since the $`SO(4)_2`$ currents are bosonic dimension-1 fields, their OPEs with the spin fields are single-valued. For such (anti)spinorial representations of $`SO(4)_2`$, the weights are $`\pm \frac{1}{2}`$. Choosing for the Cartan subalgebra the fields

$$H_1=\frac{2}{k}\psi ^1\psi ^2,H_2=i\sqrt{\frac{2}{k}}\psi ^0\psi ^3,$$
(2.16)
with

$$H_I(z)H_J(w)\delta _{IJ}\mathrm{log}(zw),I,J=1,2,$$
(2.17)
and $`H_1^{}=H_1`$, $`H_2^{}=H_2`$, we must have

$$iH_{1,2}(z)S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\lambda }(w)\epsilon _{1,2}\frac{S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\lambda }(w)}{zw},\epsilon _{1,2}=\pm \frac{1}{2}.$$
(2.18)
It follows that the fields $`S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\lambda }(z)`$ can be written as

$$S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\lambda }=e^{i\epsilon _1H_1+i\epsilon _2H_2}e^{i\pi \epsilon _2N_1}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda ,$$
(2.19)
where we have written explicitly the cocycle $`e^{i\pi \epsilon _2N_1}`$ , which is necessary for (2.19) to yield a good representation of (2.15). The number operator $`N_1`$ is given by

$$N_1=iH_1(z).$$
(2.20)
Equations (2.18)-(2.19) imply that

$$H_I(z)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda (w)0,$$
(2.21)
and from this we have in turn555 For example, $`\psi ^0(z)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda (w)\frac{(e^{iH_2(z)}e^{iH_2(z)})}{i\sqrt{2}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda (w)0`$, and so on.

$$\psi ^i(z)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda (w)0.$$
(2.22)
For future reference we remind that

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill e^{\pm iH_1}& =& \hfill \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}(\psi ^1& & i\psi ^2),\hfill \\ \hfill e^{\pm i\pi N_1}e^{\pm iH_2}& =& \hfill \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\psi ^0& & \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}\psi ^3.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.23)
Note that in (2.19) we have obtained for $`S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\lambda }`$ the structure usually assumed, with $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda `$ generally being a spin field for the other fermionic fields present in the theory. But the path we have taken is meant to stress that relations (2.19), (2.21) and (2.22) hold under the general property of $`S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\lambda }`$ being a representation of the algebra of the four fermions $`\psi ^i`$, regardless of the further structure of the $`𝒩`$ CFT.

According to (2.3), the charge of $`S_r^\pm (r=\pm \frac{1}{2})`$ under $`L_0`$ is $`r`$. Since $`e^{i\epsilon _1H_1}`$ and $`e^{i\epsilon _2H_2}`$ have charges $`\epsilon _1`$ and $`0`$ under $`L_0`$, respectively, we conclude that the identification $`r=\epsilon _1`$ should be made, and that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda `$ is uncharged under $`L_0`$. This is consistent with the action of $`L_{+1}`$ ($`L_1`$), which lowers (raises) the eigenvalue of $`L_0`$ by one, provided that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda `$ is untouched by $`J^\pm `$. It follows that666An $`L_0`$ charge of $`r`$ for $`S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\lambda }`$ could also have been obtained by choosing $`\epsilon _1=r`$ and letting $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda `$ carry charge $`2r`$ under $`L_0`$, but this option is inconsistent with the action of $`L_{\pm 1}`$.

$$J^A(z)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda (w)0.$$
(2.24)
Having identified the $`L_0`$-charge of $`S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\lambda }`$ as $`\epsilon _1`$, we expect $`S_r^\pm `$ to be obtained from $`S_{r,\epsilon _2,\lambda }`$. Imposing that the supercharges $`Q_r^\pm `$ of (2.13) satisfy (2.1), along with $`\{Q_r^\pm ,Q_s^\pm \}=0`$, fixes777We omit the cocycles from now on.

$$S_r^\pm =e^{ir(H_1H_2)}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^\pm ,r=\pm \frac{1}{2},$$
(2.25)
where we have relabelled $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_\lambda `$ accordingly. Consistency of the algebra (2.1) – (2.4) requires

| $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^+(z)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^{}(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(zw)^{\frac{3}{4}}}},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^\pm (z)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^\pm (w)`$ | $`O(w)(zw)^{\frac{3}{4}}.`$ |

(2.26)
Finally, the constants $`b_r^\pm `$ in (2.13) are determined to be $`(4k)^{\frac{1}{4}}`$ up to phases.

According to (2.4) and (2.8), the operators $`S_r^\pm `$ are charged under $`J^0`$ with charges $`\pm \frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}}`$. But from the results of Appendix A, we know that the operators $`e^{ir(H_1iH_2)}`$ are neutral under $`J^0`$, so the charges are in $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_r^\pm `$. Writing

$$J_0=iY,$$
(2.27)
with

$$Y(z)Y(w)\mathrm{log}(zw),$$
(2.28)
we must have

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^\pm =e^{\pm i\sqrt{\frac{1}{2k}}Y}\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm ,$$
(2.29)
and

$$Y(z)\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm (w)0.$$
(2.30)
Collecting our results until now, we have

$$S_r^\pm =e^{ir(H_1H_2)}e^{\pm i\sqrt{\frac{1}{2k}}Y}\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm ,$$
(2.31)
and from (2.22), (2.24) and (2.30) it follows that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm `$ belong entirely to $`𝒩/U(1)`$, i.e.,

$$J^i(z)\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm (w)\psi ^i(z)\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm (w)0.$$
(2.32)
Moreover,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm )\frac{\beta ^2}{2}=\frac{3}{8}\frac{1}{4k}=\frac{c_{𝒩/U(1)}}{24},$$
(2.33)
as should be for operators that create the Ramond sector ground state of $`𝒩/U(1)`$ with unbroken supersymmetry.

After the introduction of the $`e^{\pm i\sqrt{\frac{1}{2k}}Y}`$ factors in $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^\pm `$, eq. (2.26) turns into

| $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(z)\mathrm{\Sigma }^+(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(zw)^{\beta ^2}}},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm (z)\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm (w)`$ | $`(zw)^{\beta ^2}O^\pm (w),`$ |

(2.34)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }(O^\pm )=\frac{3}{2}\frac{1}{k}`$. We can now use standard techniques . Consider the four-point function

$$f(z_j)=\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(z_1)\mathrm{\Sigma }^+(z_2)\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(z_3)\mathrm{\Sigma }^+(z_4).$$
(2.35)
Using (2.33) and $`SL(2,C)`$ invariance, it can be written as

$$f(z_j)=\left(\frac{z_{13}z_{24}}{z_{12}z_{34}z_{14}z_{23}}\right)^{\beta ^2}\stackrel{~}{f}(x),$$
(2.36)
where $`z_{jk}=z_jz_k`$ and $`x\frac{z_{12}z_{34}}{z_{13}z_{24}}`$. As the points $`z_i`$ coincide pairwise, the OPEs (2.34) imply that $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is an analytic function and is bounded for $`x\mathrm{}`$, hence it is a constant. Expanding as $`z_{12}0`$, (2.36) becomes

$$f(z_j)=z_{12}^{\beta ^2}z_{34}^{\beta ^2}\left(1+\beta ^2\frac{z_{12}z_{43}}{z_{23}z_{24}}\right),$$
(2.37)
where the first term and (2.34) fix $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ to $`1`$. The presence of a second term in (2.37) implies that in the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ OPE expansion there is a dimension-$`1`$ field $`M`$,

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(z_1)\mathrm{\Sigma }^+(z_2)\frac{1}{z_{12}^{\beta ^2}}\left[1+z_{12}\frac{M(z_2)}{2}\right],$$
(2.38)
whose three-point function with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ is determined from (2.37) to be

$$M(z_2)\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}(z_3)\mathrm{\Sigma }^+(z_4)=2\beta ^2z_{34}^{1\beta ^2}z_{23}^1z_{24}^1.$$
(2.39)
Taking the limits $`z_{34},z_{23},z_{24}0`$, we obtain

$$M(z)M(w)\frac{4\beta ^2}{(zw)^2},$$
(2.40)
and

$$M(z)\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm (w)\pm \frac{2\beta ^2\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm }{zw}.$$
(2.41)
Defining888The sign choice in (2.41) is arbitrary.

$$M2i\beta Z,$$
(2.42)
with

$$Z(z)Z(w)\mathrm{log}(zw),$$
(2.43)
we have

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm =e^{\pm i\beta Z}\mathrm{\Pi }^\pm ,$$
(2.44)
with

$$Z(z)\mathrm{\Pi }^\pm (w)0.$$
(2.45)
But since $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm )=\frac{\beta ^2}{2}`$, it follows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Pi }^\pm )=0`$, hence $`\mathrm{\Pi }^\pm =1`$. Summing up, the spin fields have the form

$$S_r^\pm =e^{ir(H_1H_2)}e^{\pm i\sqrt{\frac{1}{2k}}Y}e^{\pm i\beta Z}.$$
(2.46)
### 2.2 Worldsheet symmetries

Since the spacetime theory is supersymmetric, the supercharges $`Q_r^\pm `$ take physical states into physical states, hence they should commute with the BRST operator. This means that in the OPEs between the worldsheet supercurrent $`G`$ and $`S_r^\pm `$ no $`(zw)^{\frac{3}{2}}`$ terms appear. The supercurrent is given by

$$G=G_{AdS_3}+G_{U(1)}+G_{𝒩/U(1)},$$
(2.47)
where

| $`G_{AdS_3}`$ | $`={\displaystyle \frac{2}{k}}(\psi ^Aj_A+{\displaystyle \frac{2i}{k}}\psi ^1\psi ^2\psi ^3),`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`G_{U(1)}`$ | $`=J^0\psi ^0,`$ |

(2.48)
and by definition

$$J^iG_{𝒩/U(1)}\psi ^iG_{𝒩/U(1)}0.$$
(2.49)
In the computation of the OPEs between $`G`$ and $`S_r^\pm `$, eqs. (2.32) and (2.49) imply that singular terms come only from

$$(G_{AdS_3}+G_{U(1)})(z)e^{ir(H_1H_2)}e^{\pm i\sqrt{\frac{1}{2k}}Y}(w),$$
(2.50)
and

$$G_{𝒩/U(1)}(z)e^{(\pm i\beta Z)}(w).$$
(2.51)
In the OPEs (2.50) two $`(zw)^{\frac{3}{2}}`$ terms appear which cancel each other. For the computation it is convenient to express (see (2.16), (2.23))

| $`{\displaystyle \frac{4i}{k^2}}\psi ^1\psi ^2\psi ^3`$ | $`={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{k}}}H_1(e^{iH_2}e^{iH_2}),`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`J^0\psi ^0`$ | $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}J^0(e^{iH_2}+e^{iH_2}).`$ |

(2.52)
Now, given the $`U(1)`$ current $`M`$ in (2.42), every operator $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in the theory can be decomposed into terms with definite $`M`$-charge $`q`$ as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\underset{q}{}:e^{\frac{iq}{2\beta }Z}P_q(M):\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_q,$$
(2.53)
where $`P_q(M)`$ is a polynomial in $`M(z)`$ and its derivatives, and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_qM0`$.

The absence of $`(zw)^{\frac{3}{2}}`$ terms in (2.51) and dimensional analysis imply that the only terms allowed when expressing $`G_{𝒩/U(1)}`$ as (2.53) are

| $`G_{𝒩/U(1)}`$ | $`=G_{𝒩/U(1)}^++G_{𝒩/U(1)}^{},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`G_{𝒩/U(1)}^\pm `$ | $`=\tau ^\pm e^{\pm \frac{i}{2\beta }Z},`$ |

(2.54)
with

| $`M(z)G_{𝒩/U(1)}^\pm (w)`$ | $`\pm {\displaystyle \frac{G_{𝒩/U(1)}^\pm (w)}{zw}},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`Z(z)\tau ^\pm (w)`$ | $`0.`$ |

(2.55)
From this it follows that $`𝒩/U(1)`$ has $`N=2`$ supersymmetry, with $`M`$ being the $`U(1)`$ R-current. The rest of the $`N=2`$ commutators can be obtained as in , using Jacobi identities. Note from (2.33) and (2.40) that $`M`$ has the correct normalization for the $`N=2`$ algebra, namely, $`M(z)M(w)\frac{c_{𝒩/U(1)}}{3}(zw)^2`$.

## 3 Spacetime $`N=3`$ supersymmetry

Let us consider now the case of spacetime $`N=3`$ supersymmetry in the NS sector. The global subalgebra is

$`\{Q_r^a,Q_s^b\}`$ $`=`$ $`2\delta ^{a,b},L_{r+s}+iϵ_c^{ab}(rs)T_{r+s}^c,`$ (3.1)
$`[L_m,L_n]`$ $`=`$ $`(mn)L_{m+n},`$ (3.2)
$`[T_0^a,T_0^b]`$ $`=`$ $`iϵ_c^{ab}T_0^c,`$ (3.3)
$`[L_m,Q_r^a]`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}mr\right)Q_{m+r}^a,`$ (3.4)
$`[T_0^a,Q_r^b]`$ $`=`$ $`iϵ_c^{ab}Q_r^c,`$ (3.5)
where $`m,n=0,\pm 1`$, $`a,b,c=1,2,3`$ and $`r,s=\pm \frac{1}{2}`$, and all other (anti)commutators vanish. All these spacetime operators are again obtained by contour integrals of dimension-1 local fields on the worldsheet. The three operators $`L_{0,\pm 1}`$ are given again by (2.5)-(2.6).

The three operators $`T_0^a`$ are the zero modes of the $`SU(2)`$ R-current of the $`N=3`$ algebra in spacetime. Let $`\chi ^a+\theta K^a`$ be the three dimension-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ worldsheet supercurrents corresponding to $`T_0^a`$; we have, up to picture-changing,

$$T_0^a=K^a=e^\varphi \chi ^a.$$
(3.6)
The supercurrents $`\chi ^a+\theta K^a`$ form an affine $`SU(2)`$ superalgebra in $`𝒩`$, which is uplifted to an affine $`SU(2)`$ algebra in the dual boundary CFT, according to the construction of . The worldsheet level $`k^{}`$ of this $`SU(2)`$ affine algebra is again fixed by looking at the higher modes of the spacetime $`SU(2)`$ affine currents, which are given by

$$T_n^a=K^a\gamma ^n,$$
(3.7)
and which satisfy

$$[T_m^a,T_n^b]=iϵ_c^{ab}T_{m+n}^c+\frac{k_{st}}{2}m\delta _{a,b}\delta _{n+m,0},$$
(3.8)
where the spacetime $`SU(2)`$ level is $`k_{st}=k^{}p`$ , with $`p`$ given by (2.12). Consistency of the $`N=3`$ algebra (see ) in spacetime implies $`k_{st}=\frac{2}{3}c_{st}`$, which is equivalent to $`k^{}p=\frac{2}{3}6kp`$, and hence $`k^{}=4k`$. Note that the level-dependent normalization of the $`T_0^a`$ is the same as that of the $`R_0`$ operator in the $`N=2`$ case (see eq. (2.8)). We will use these facts below.

We shall also use the purely bosonic $`\sigma `$-model and purely fermionic contributions to the total currents:

| $`k^a`$ | $`=K^ak_{su(2)_2}^a,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`k_{su(2)_2}^a`$ | $`={\displaystyle \frac{i}{4k}}ϵ_{bc}^a\chi ^b\chi ^c.`$ |

(3.9)
The currents $`k^a`$ and $`k_{su(2)_2}^a`$ are two commuting affine $`SU(2)`$ currents, at levels $`4k2`$ and $`2`$, respectively, and the bosonic $`k^a`$ commute with the fermions $`\chi ^a`$.

### 3.1 Properties of the spacetime supercharges

Again, the supercharges are given by

$$Q_r^a=b_r^ae^{\frac{\varphi }{2}}S_r^a,r=\pm \frac{1}{2}.$$
(3.10)
In the Ramond sector, the algebra of the fermionic zero modes is now

| $`\{\psi _0^A,\psi _0^B\}`$ | $`=\eta ^{AB}k/2,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\{\chi _0^a,\chi _0^b\}`$ | $`=\delta ^{a,b}2k,`$ |
| $`\{\psi _0^A,\chi _0^a\}`$ | $`=0.`$ |

(3.11)
For the $`SO(6)_2`$ affine algebra obtained by Wick rotating $`\psi ^3`$, we choose the Cartan subalgebra given by

$$H_1=\frac{2}{k}\psi ^1\psi ^2,H_2=\frac{i}{k}\chi ^3\psi ^3,H_3=\frac{1}{2k}\chi ^1\chi ^2,$$
(3.12)
with

$$H_I(z)H_J(w)\delta _{IJ}\mathrm{log}(zw),I,J=1,2,3,$$
(3.13)
and $`H_{1,3}^{}=H_{1,3}`$, $`H_2^{}=H_2`$.

As in the $`N=2`$ case, there is a basis for the spin fields of the form

$$S_{\epsilon _1,\epsilon _2,\epsilon _3,\lambda }=e^{i\epsilon _1H_1+i\epsilon _2(H_2+\pi N_1)+i\epsilon _3(H_3+\pi N_2+\pi N_1)}\mathrm{\Lambda }_\lambda ,$$
(3.14)
with

$$\psi ^A(z)\mathrm{\Lambda }_\lambda (w)0,\chi ^a(z)\mathrm{\Lambda }_\lambda (w)0,$$
(3.15)
and

$$N_{1,2}=iH_{1,2}(z).$$
(3.16)
The fields (3.14) provide a representation of (3.11) (as in (2.15)), with any other representation given by a linear change of basis of the spin fields. For future reference we remind that

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill e^{\pm iH_1}& =& \hfill \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}(\psi ^1& & i\psi ^2),\hfill \\ \hfill e^{\pm i(H_2+\pi N_1)}& =& \hfill \frac{1}{2\sqrt{k}}\chi ^3& & \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}\psi ^3,\hfill \\ \hfill e^{\pm i(H_3+\pi N_2+\pi N_1)}& =& \hfill \frac{1}{2\sqrt{k}}(\chi ^1& & i\chi ^2),\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.17)
and from (3.9), we have

| $`k_{su(2)_2}^3`$ | $`=iH_3,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`k_{su(2)_2}^\pm `$ | $`=k_{su(2)_2}^1\pm ik_{su(2)_2}^2=\pm (e^{iH_2}+e^{+iH_2})e^{iH_3}.`$ |

(3.18)
Now, the algebra (3.1) – (3.5) has three $`N=2`$ subalgebras, given by, say,

| $`Q_r^\pm `$ | $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(Q_r^1\pm iQ_r^2),`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`R_0`$ | $`=T_0^3.`$ |

(3.19)
The other two $`N=2`$ subalgebras are obtained by cyclic permutations. From the result of the previous section we know that for the representation (3.14), the spin fields corresponding to the supercharges $`Q_r^\pm `$ in (3.19) must be those obtained from identifying $`\epsilon _1=r`$ and $`\epsilon _2=\pm r`$ in (3.14), and that

$$J^A(z)\mathrm{\Lambda }_\lambda (w)0.$$
(3.20)
The operators $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^\pm `$ of (2.25), having charge $`\pm 1`$ under $`T_0^3`$ and satisfying (2.26), must be obtained from $`e^{i\epsilon _3H_3}\mathrm{\Lambda }_\lambda `$. Since $`e^{i\epsilon _3H_3}`$ has charge $`\epsilon _3=\pm \frac{1}{2}`$ under $`T_0^3`$, the other $`\pm \frac{1}{2}`$ charge must be carried by999The possibility that $`e^{i\epsilon _3H_3}`$ carries charge $`\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\lambda `$ carries charge $`\pm \frac{3}{2}`$ must be discarded because it is inconsistent with the action of $`T_0^\pm `$. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\lambda `$. We conclude that there are two fields $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^\pm `$, which from (3.15) are charged under $`k^3`$ (see (3.9)) as

$$k^3(z)\mathrm{\Lambda }^\pm (w)\frac{\pm \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }^\pm (w)}{zw},$$
(3.21)
and that we should make the following identification (we omit the cocycles from now on):

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}^\pm =e^{\frac{i}{2}H_3}\mathrm{\Lambda }^\pm .$$
(3.22)
Then from (2.26) we obtain

| $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^+(z)\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(zw)^{\frac{1}{2}}}},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^\pm (z)\mathrm{\Lambda }^\pm (w)`$ | $`O(w)(zw)^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ |

(3.23)
A similar analysis to the one following (2.34), shows that in the first OPE (3.23) there exists a dimension-1 field $`iX^3`$:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }^+(z)\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}(w)\frac{1}{(zw)^{\frac{1}{2}}}\left[1(zw)\frac{iX^3(w)}{\sqrt{2}}\right],$$
(3.24)
with

$$X^3(z)X^3(w)\mathrm{log}(zw),$$
(3.25)
such that

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }^\pm =e^{\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}X^3}.$$
(3.26)
From (3.21) and (3.23) we find the three-point function

$$k^3(z_1)\mathrm{\Lambda }^+(z_2)\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}(z_3)=\frac{1}{2}z_{12}^1z_{13}^1z_{23}^{\frac{1}{2}},$$
(3.27)
and taking $`z_{23}0`$, from (3.24) we have

$$k^3(z)iX^3(w)\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}(zw)^2}.$$
(3.28)
The above expression allows to write $`K^a`$ as (see (3.9))

| $`K^3`$ | $`=\widehat{k}^3+k_{su(2)_1}^3+k_{su(2)_2}^3,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`K^\pm `$ | $`=K^1\pm iK^2=\widehat{k}^\pm +k_{su(2)_1}^\pm +k_{su(2)_2}^\pm ,`$ |

(3.29)
where

$$k_{su(2)_1}^3\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}X^3,k_{su(2)_1}^\pm k_{su(2)_1}^1\pm ik_{su(2)_1}^2=e^{i\sqrt{2}X^3}.$$
(3.30)
Note that the $`SU(2)_{4k}`$ currents $`K^a`$ are decomposed into three affine $`SU(2)`$ currents $`\widehat{k}^a`$, $`k_{su(2)_1}^a`$ and $`k_{su(2)_2}^a`$, with levels $`4k3`$, $`1`$ and $`2`$, respectively. The $`SU(2)_1`$ is the theory of a single compact scalar $`X^3`$, and the $`SU(2)_2`$ is the theory of three free fermions whose currents are given in (3.9), (3.18). The three sets of $`SU(2)`$ currents commute among themselves because

$$\widehat{k}^a(z)\chi ^b(w)\widehat{k}^a(z)X^3(w)X^3(z)\chi ^a(w)0.$$
(3.31)
Summing up, from (3.22) and (3.26) we find that the spin fields corresponding to the supercharges in (3.19) are

$$S_r^\pm =e^{ir(H_1H_2)\frac{i}{2}H_3}e^{\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}X^3},$$
(3.32)
and using the decomposition (3.29), the operators $`S_r^3`$ can now be obtained by applying $`K^\pm `$ to $`S_r^\pm `$. Defining

$$S_{[\pm ,\pm ,\pm ,\pm ]}=e^{\frac{i}{2}(\pm H_1\pm H_2\pm H_3)\pm \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}X^3},$$
(3.33)
the whole algebra is then generated by the following spin fields:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}S_{\frac{1}{2}}^{}\hfill & =& S_{[,,+,+]},\hfill \\ S_{\frac{1}{2}}^3\hfill & =& \frac{1}{2}(S_{[,,+,]}+iS_{[,+,,+]}),\hfill \\ S_{\frac{1}{2}}^+\hfill & =& iS_{[,+,,]},\hfill \\ S_{\frac{1}{2}}^{}\hfill & =& S_{[+,+,+,+]},\hfill \\ S_{\frac{1}{2}}^3\hfill & =& \frac{1}{2}(S_{[+,+,+,]}+iS_{[+,,,+]}),\hfill \\ S_{\frac{1}{2}}^+\hfill & =& iS_{[+,,,]}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.34)
Note that the $`e^{\frac{i}{2}(\pm H_1\pm H_2\pm H_3)}`$ fields provide (several) spin-$`\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}`$ representations of the $`SU(2)_2`$ algebra of the $`\chi ^a`$. The fields $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^\pm `$ in (3.26) are in turn two primaries of a spin-$`\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}`$ representation of the $`SU(2)_1`$ made out of $`X^3`$. The spin-$`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ representation $`S_r^a`$ emerges then as the symmetric part of the $`\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}`$ product of these two spin-$`\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}`$ representations.

### 3.2 Worldsheet symmetries

Let us explore now the consequences induced by the structure of the spin fields on the properties of the worldsheet theory. The BRST condition again implies that no $`(zw)^{\frac{3}{2}}`$ singularities appear in the OPEs between $`G`$ and the spin fields (3.34). The worldsheet supercurrent $`G`$ is

$$G=G_{AdS_3}+G_{SU(2)}+G_{𝒩/SU(2)},$$
(3.35)
with $`G_{AdS_3}`$ given by (2.48) and

$$G_{SU(2)}=\frac{1}{2k}\left(\chi ^ak_a\frac{i}{2k}\chi ^1\chi ^2\chi ^3\right).$$
(3.36)
The terms whose OPE with the spin fields might give a $`(zw)^{\frac{3}{2}}`$ singularity can be written as

| $`G=\mathrm{}`$ | $`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{k}}}H_1\left(e^{iH_2}e^{+iH_2}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{k}}}\left(e^{i\sqrt{2}X^3+iH_3}+e^{i\sqrt{2}X^3iH_3}\right)`$ |
| --- | --- |
|  | $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{k}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}}X^3+iH_3\right)\left(e^{iH_2}+e^{+iH_2}\right)+G_{𝒩/SU(2)},`$ |

(3.37)
where the “dots” stand for terms that manifestly do not contribute $`(zw)^{\frac{3}{2}}`$ singularities. It can be checked that all the $`(zw)^{\frac{3}{2}}`$ terms in the OPEs cancel among themselves for the first three terms in (3.37). We find then that in the OPE between $`e^{\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}X^3}`$ and $`G_{𝒩/SU(2)}`$ the highest singularity must be101010Note that from this fact we cannot deduce, as in Section 2.2, the existence of an $`N=2`$ structure in $`𝒩/SU(2)`$, with R-current $`i\sqrt{2}X^3`$. $`(zw)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. This result will be used in the next subsection.

The identification (3.22), which can be stated more explicitly as

$$e^{\pm i\sqrt{\frac{1}{2k}}Y\pm i\beta Z}=e^{\frac{i}{2}H_3\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}X^3},$$
(3.38)
has some consequences. From (2.8), (2.27), (3.6) and (3.19) we have

$$K^3=i\sqrt{2k}Y.$$
(3.39)
Let $`M^3`$ be the $`U(1)`$ R-current of the worldsheet $`N=2`$ structure obtained in the quotient $`𝒩/U(1)`$, where the $`U(1)`$ is generated by the supercurrent $`\chi ^3+\theta K^3`$. We have

$$M^3=2i\beta Z,$$
(3.40)
where $`\beta `$ and $`Z`$ are defined in (2.33), (2.42), (2.43). Equating the exponents in (3.38) and using (3.18) and (3.30) it follows that

$$M^3=\frac{1}{k}K^3+k_{su(2)_2}^3+2k_{su(2)_1}^3.$$
(3.41)
It was shown in  that if $`𝒩`$ contains a supersymmetric $`SU(2)_{4k}`$ affine symmetry and has the properties required to yield spacetime $`N=2`$ supersymmetry, then a sufficient condition to extend spacetime supersymmetry to $`N=3`$ is that $`𝒩`$ contains a dimension-1 field $`k_{su(2)_1}^3=\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}X^3`$, which commutes with $`\chi ^a`$, and such that (3.41) holds. Here we see that the existence of the field $`X^3`$ with these properties is also necessary.

Moreover, eq. (3.41) was obtained by looking at the $`N=2`$ subalgebra (3.19), but it must also hold for the other two $`N=2`$ subalgebras of (3.1) – (3.5). The general relation is then

$$M^a=\frac{1}{k}K^a+k_{su(2)_2}^a+2k_{su(2)_1}^a,$$
(3.42)
where $`M^a`$ is the $`U(1)`$ R-current of the $`N=2`$ structure obtained in the quotient $`𝒩/U(1)`$ (with the $`U(1)`$ generated by $`\chi ^a+\theta K^a`$), and $`k_{su(2)_{1,2}}^a`$ were defined in (3.9) and (3.30). Of course, for $`a=1,2`$, in order to obtain (3.42) explicitly in the same way (3.41) was obtained from (3.38), different basis for the spin fields must be chosen.

An important consequence of (3.42) is that

| $`K^a(z)M^b(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{iϵ_c^{ab}M^c(w)}{zw}},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`M^d(z)\chi ^e(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{1}{k})iϵ_f^{de}\chi ^f}{zw}}.`$ |

(3.43)
Summing up, we have seen that the existence of $`N=3`$ superconformal symmetry in the two dimensional theory dual to $`AdS_3\times 𝒩`$ implies that:

1. $`𝒩`$ contains an affine $`SU(2)`$ symmetry at level $`4k`$.
2. In the quotient of $`𝒩`$ by each one of the three $`SU(2)`$ supercurrents $`\chi ^a+\theta K^a`$, the worldsheet supersymmetry is extended to $`N=2`$, and the corresponding three $`U(1)`$ R-currents $`M^a`$ satisfy (3.43).

Moreover, it is easy to see that these two conditions are also sufficient to yield $`N=3`$ spacetime supersymmetry, and are equivalent to the conditions formulated in .

Note that the fact that the $`SU(2)`$ currents $`K^a`$ rotate the three $`U(1)`$ R-currents $`M^a`$ implies that the $`SU(2)`$ part is embedded in $`𝒩`$ as a nontrivial fibration over $`𝒩/SU(2)`$. Namely, if $`𝒩`$ is a direct product – $`𝒩=SU(2)\times \frac{𝒩}{SU(2)}`$ – then $`K^a`$ commute with the contributions to $`M^a`$ coming from $`\frac{𝒩}{SU(2)}`$, and thus cannot satisfy (3.43). The only exception to this is when $`\frac{𝒩}{SU(2)}`$ is trivial, namely, $`𝒩=SU(2)`$. This holds for $`k=3/4`$ $`(k^{}=3)`$, and the conditions (3.43) are indeed satisfied in this case. This is a special case of a series of solutions $`𝒩=SU(3)_k^{}/U(1)`$ , because $`SU(2)_3SU(3)_3/U(1)`$ as SCFTs.

### 3.3 Spacetime $`N=1`$ supersymmetry

An interesting consequence of the structure found above is that in every background which allows spacetime $`N=3`$ supersymmetry, there is also a different GSO projection leading to precisely $`N=1`$ boundary supersymmetry111111Indeed, this was shown to be the case for the examples studied in ; here we argue that this is general.. This algebra is constructed from the singlet of the $`\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}`$ (discussed after eq. (3.34)), and is generated by

$$\begin{array}{ccc}S_{\frac{1}{2}}\hfill & =& \frac{1}{2}(S_{[,+,+,]}iS_{[,,,+]}),\hfill \\ S_{\frac{1}{2}}\hfill & =& \frac{1}{2}(S_{[+,,+,]}iS_{[+,+,,+]}).\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.44)
Note that the difference between these two operators and $`S_{\pm \frac{1}{2}}^3`$ in (3.34) is that the sign of $`H_2`$ is changed (different GSO projection) and the relative sign between the terms is now negative for the singlet. Using the fact that in the OPE between $`e^{\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}X^3}`$ and $`G_{𝒩/SU(2)}`$, the highest singularity is $`(zw)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ (see the discussion after eq. (3.37)), the operators (3.44) can be checked to be BRST invariant. Finally, they have regular OPEs with $`K^a`$, as expected for the singlet.

## 4 Spacetime small and large $`N=4`$ supersymmetry

The analysis for these two cases is similar, mutatis mutandi, to that of $`N=2,3`$, and we will only indicate the general arguments.

Small $`N=4`$ has an affine $`SU(2)`$ R-symmetry whose level is fixed to be $`k`$ (the same as the $`AdS_3`$ level) by the spacetime algebra. The central charge of $`𝒩/SU(2)_k`$ is then

$$c_{𝒩/SU(2)_k}=c_𝒩\frac{3(k2)}{k}\frac{3}{2}=6,$$
(4.45)
and the construction of the spin fields leads to the same supercharges constructed in . As in Section 2, the BRST condition shows that the worldsheet supersymmetry in $`𝒩/SU(2)_k`$ is extended to $`N=2`$, and from (4.45) this actually means that there is a small $`N=4`$ supersymmetry in the worldsheet121212A $`c=6`$, $`N=2`$ SCFT has necessarily small $`N=4`$ .. The latter was realized in  by means of $`𝒩/SU(2)_k=T^4`$.

The analysis of the large $`N=4`$ case leads necessarily to $`𝒩=SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$ . The reason is that the spacetime R-symmetry requires the presence of affine $`SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$ in the worldsheet theory, and consistency of the spacetime algebra requires the levels $`k^{},k^{\prime \prime }`$ of the two $`SU(2)`$ models to satisfy $`1/k=1/k^{}+1/k^{\prime \prime }`$. This implies that the $`(AdS_3)_k\times SU(2)_k^{}\times SU(2)_{k^{\prime \prime }}\times U(1)`$ background is critical, and thus the unique one allowing large $`N=4`$ boundary supersymmetry. This is compatible with the fact that the spin fields generating the Ramond sector of the 10 free worldsheet fermions already have $`\mathrm{\Delta }=5/8`$, and hence the spacetime supercurrents must be constructed from them. This is indeed the construction in . This model was also studied in ,.

## 5 Discussion

In this work the necessary conditions have been found for the internal CFT $`𝒩`$, imposed by the existence of $`N=2,3,4`$ SCFT in the boundary dual of string theory on $`AdS_3\times 𝒩`$. Our results are summarized in Table 1.

The case of precisely $`N=1`$ supersymmetry in the boundary two dimensional CFT seems to be non-trivial. Of course, it can be realized as a byproduct of theories having higher amounts of boundary supersymmetries. Examples of this are the other GSO projection of theories with boundary $`N=3`$ (see Section 3.3), or a particular $`Z_2`$ orbifold of theories with $`N=2`$ . Recently, the work in ref.  implies that if the SCFT $`𝒩`$ contains a tri-critical Ising model, then $`N=1`$ supersymmetry can be constructed in the boundary dual of $`AdS_3`$. A new family of examples of this sort is $`𝒩=SO(7)_k^{}/(G_2)_{k^{}+1}`$, which leads to precisely $`N=1`$ two dimensional supersymmetry in spacetime131313We thank Satoshi Yamaguchi for pointing out this result..

Finally, general properties of the spectrum of superstrings in $`AdS_3\times 𝒩`$, with extended supersymmetry, can be studied along the lines of .

## Acknowledgements

We thank Jan de Boer, Shmuel Elitzur, Gastón Giribet, Carmen Nuñez and Yaron Oz for discussions and Assaf Shomer for a critical reading of an earlier draft of this work. A.P. is grateful to Instituto de Física de La Plata (Argentina) for hospitality during part of this work. This work is supported in part by BSF – American-Israel Bi-National Science Foundation, the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities – Centers of Excellence Program, the German-Israel Bi-National Science Foundation, and the European RTN network HPRN-CT-2000-00122.

## Appendix A Properties of the affine currents

In this appendix we shall prove three properties of the affine currents which we have used throughout the paper. Let $`\chi +\theta K`$ be a generic worldsheet supercurrent corresponding to the affine symmetries uplifted to the boundary theory, then it holds for $`\chi `$ and $`K`$ that:

1. They are orthogonal.
2. They have the same normalization.
3. They commute with the three $`SL(2,R)`$ currents, so they lie entirely in $`𝒩`$.

Given the worldsheet supercurrent $`G`$, remember that for any dimension-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ superfield $`\chi +\theta K`$, we have

| $`[G_s,K_m]`$ | $`=m\chi _{s+m},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\{G_s,\chi _n\}`$ | $`=K_{s+n}.`$ |

(A.1)
Property $`1`$ can be seen by considering the Jacobi identity

| $`\{G_s,[\chi _t,K_q]\}\{\chi _t,[K_q,G_s]\}+[K_q,\{G_s,\chi _t\}]`$ | $`=0,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\{G_s,[\chi _t,K_q]\}q\{\chi _t,\chi _{q+s}\}+[K_q,K_{s+t}]`$ | $`=0,`$ |
| $`\{G_s,[\chi _t,K_q]\}q\delta _{t+q+s,0}+q\delta _{t+q+s,0}`$ | $`=0,`$ |

(A.2)
for every set of $`s,t,q`$, and it follows that

$$K(z)\chi (w)0.$$
(A.3)
Property 2 follows from

| $`\{G_{mn},[\chi _n,K_m]\}\{\chi _n,[K_m,G_{mn}]\}+[K_m,\{G_{mn},\chi _n\}]`$ | $`=0,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`0m\{\chi _n,\chi _n\}+[K_m,K_m]`$ | $`=0,`$ |

(A.4)
for every $`m`$,$`n`$.

As for Property 3, the commutators $`[L_{0,\pm 1},R_0]=0`$, where $`L_{0,\pm 1}`$ are given in (2.5) and $`R_0K`$, show that there are no simple poles in the OPEs between $`J^A`$ and $`K`$. A possible double pole is forbidden by Jacobi identities such as

| $`[K_n,[J_{n+1}^A,J_1^B]]+[J_{n+1}^A,[J_1^B,K_n]]+[J_1^B,[K_n,J_{n+1}^A]]`$ | $`=0,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\epsilon ^{ABC}\eta _{CD}[K_n,J_n^D]+0+0`$ | $`=0,`$ |

(A.5)
and from this we find that

$$J^A(z)K(w)0.$$
(A.6)
Consider now the Jacobi identity,

| $`[G_s,[J_m^A,K_n]]+[J_m^A,[K_n,G_s]]+[K_n,[G_s,J_m^A]]`$ | $`=0,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`0+n[J_m^A,\chi _{n+s}]m[K_n,\psi _{m+s}^A]]`$ | $`=0,`$ |

(A.7)
where the first term is zero because of (A.6). Choosing $`n=0`$ or $`m=0`$ in (A.7), we have then

$$[K_0,\psi _t^A]=[J_0^A,\chi _t]=0,$$
(A.8)
for every $`t`$. On the other hand, in the OPE, say, between $`K`$ and $`\psi ^A`$, the only terms that can appear are

$$K(z)\psi ^A(w)\frac{\eta (w)}{zw},$$
(A.9)
with $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\eta )=\frac{1}{2}`$, but from (A.8),

$$\eta (w)=[K_0,\psi ^A(w)]=0.$$
(A.10)
In the same way we see that

| $`J^A(z)\chi (w)`$ | $`0,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\psi ^A(z)K(w)`$ | $`0.`$ |

(A.11)
Consider finally Jacobi identities such as

| $`\{G_{n+1},[\chi _n,J_1^A]\}\{\chi _n,[J_1^A,G_{n+1}]\}+[J_1^A,\{G_{n+1},\chi _n\}]`$ | $`=0,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`0+\{\chi _n,\psi _n^A\}+[J_1^A,K_1]`$ | $`=0,`$ |
| $`0+\{\chi _n,\psi _n^A\}+0`$ | $`=0,`$ |

(A.12)
where we have used (A.6) and (A.11). We conclude then that

$$\psi ^A(z)\chi (w)0,$$
(A.13)
and it follows from (A.6), (A.11) and (A.13) that $`\chi +\theta K`$ commutes with the $`SL(2,R)`$ sector of the worldsheet, and hence it lies entirely in $`𝒩`$.

## Appendix B Realization of the symmetries for $`N=3`$

In  it was shown that eq. (3.41) holds in case $`𝒩=SU(3)/U(1)`$ and $`𝒩=SO(5)/SO(3)`$. These backgrounds, as shown there explicitly, yield spacetime $`N=3`$ (or $`N=1`$) supersymmetry.

In this appendix we will illustrate our results by seeing how the geometric structure obtained in Section 3.2 is explicitly realized in another background which was also shown to have $`N=3`$ spacetime supersymmetry.

The background is $`𝒩=\left(SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)\right)/Z_2`$, and was studied in , where the explicit form of the spin fields is given. The two supersymmetric $`SU(2)`$ WZW models have level $`2k`$. Let $`\chi _{1,2}^a+\theta K_{1,2}^a`$ be the $`SU(2)`$ currents and $`\lambda +\theta iY`$ be the affine $`U(1)`$ current. The $`Z_2`$ orbifold acts as

| $`(K_1^a,K_2^a,Y)`$ | $`(K_2^a,K_1^a,Y),`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`(\chi _1^a,\chi _2^a,\lambda )`$ | $`(\chi _2^a,\chi _1^a,\lambda ).`$ |

(B.1)
Define

| $`K_+^a`$ | $`=K_1^a+K_2^a\chi _+^a=\chi _1^a+\chi _2^a,`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`K_{}^a`$ | $`=K_1^aK_2^a\chi _{}^a=\chi _1^a\chi _2^a.`$ |

(B.2)
The currents $`\chi _+^a+\theta K_+^a`$ form a supersymmetric $`SU(2)`$ WZW model at level $`4k`$ which survives the orbifold and is uplifted to the $`SU(2)`$ affine R-current of the $`N=3`$ superconformal algebra in spacetime.

The supercurrent is

$$G_𝒩=\frac{1}{k}(\chi _1^ak_{1a}\frac{i}{k}\chi _1^1\chi _1^2\chi _1^3)+\frac{1}{k}(\chi _2^ak_{2a}\frac{i}{k}\chi _2^1\chi _2^2\chi _2^3)+i\lambda Y.$$
(B.3)
Each superfield $`\chi _+^a+\theta K_+^a`$ constitutes a supersymmetric $`U(1)`$ affine model with supercurrent

$$G_{U^a(1)}=\frac{1}{2k}\chi _+^aK_+^a.$$
(B.4)
The coset of $`𝒩`$ by each of these $`U(1)`$ currents gives a theory whose supercurrent can be written as

| $`G_{𝒩/U^3(1)}=G_𝒩G_{U^3(1)}=`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2k}}\chi _+^1k_+^1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2k}}\chi _+^2k_+^2+`$ |
| --- | --- |
|  | $`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2k}}\chi _{}^1k_{}^1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2k}}\chi _{}^2k_{}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2k}}\chi _{}^3K_{}^3+i\lambda Y,`$ |

(B.5)
with the $`a=1,2`$ cases given by cyclic permutations. For each $`a`$ there is an $`N=2`$ structure which survives the orbifold, whose $`U(1)`$ R-current is

$$M^a=\frac{1}{k}K_+^a\frac{i}{4k}ϵ_{bc}^a\chi _+^b\chi _+^c\frac{i}{4k}ϵ_{bc}^a\chi _{}^b\chi _{}^c\frac{i}{\sqrt{2k}}\chi _{}^a\lambda ,$$
(B.6)
and from (3.42) we can identify

$$2k_{su(2)_1}^a=\frac{i}{4k}ϵ_{bc}^a\chi _{}^b\chi _{}^c\frac{i}{\sqrt{2k}}\chi _{}^a\lambda .$$
(B.7)
The currents (B.6) clearly satisfy

| $`K_+^a(z)M^b(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{iϵ_c^{ab}M^c(w)}{zw}},`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`M^d(z)\chi _+^e(w)`$ | $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{1}{k})iϵ_f^{de}\chi _+^f}{zw}},`$ |

(B.8)
as expected from (3.43).


text:
# Field Theoretical Description of Quantum Hall Edge Reconstruction

\[

## Abstract

We propose a generalization of the chiral Luttinger liquid theory to allow for a unified description of quantum Hall edges with or without edge reconstruction. Within this description edge reconstruction is found to be a quantum phase transition in the universality class of one-dimensional dilute Bose gas transition, whose critical behavior can be obtained exactly. At principal filling factors $`\nu =1/m`$, we show the additional edge modes due to edge reconstruction modifies the point contact tunneling exponent in the low energy limit, by a small and non-universal amount.

\]

Recently there has been considerable interest in the physics at the edge of a quantum Hall liquid. Our theoretical understanding of the edge physics is mostly based on the chiral Luttinger liquid (CLL) theory advanced by Wen. The CLL theory is a long-wave length, low-energy effective field theory which is closely tied to the fundamental topological features of the bulk quantum Hall liquid, and describes the most robust physical properties of the edges states, including the quantization of Hall conductance. It also makes a number of remarkable prediction about single-particle properties at the edge; for example it predicts that in point contact tunneling between a Fermi liquid metal and a quantum Hall edge, the current-voltage relation follows a power-law $`IV^\alpha `$, which is characteristic of a Luttinger liquid, and for a whole sequence of bulk filling factors, the exponent $`\alpha `$ is universal and independent of the details of the edge confining potential and electron-electron interaction. Such power law behavior has been observed in recent tunneling experiments, and at principal filling factors like $`\nu =1/3`$, the exponent $`\alpha `$ was found to be close to but noticeably different from the CLL prediction. Away from $`\nu =1/3`$ however, more significant discrepancy between theory and experiment has been found.

In the meantime, microscopic theoretical studies have suggested that the interplay between electron-electron interaction and confining potential at the edge at shorter distance (typically of order magnetic length $`\mathrm{}`$ or slightly above that) can give rise to nontrivial low-energy physics. In particular, it was found that the competition between the two can lead to edge reconstruction, both at integer and fractional bulk filling. In particular, it was argued recently that for realistic sample parameters, edge reconstruction is essentially always present for fractional bulk filling, despite the presence of a sharp potential barrier in the samples grown by the cleaved edge overgrowth technique used in the recent tunneling experiments. Edge reconstruction gives rise to additional low-energy edge modes that are not described by the original CLL theory; these additional modes can profoundly affect the low-energy physics at the edge.

In this paper we propose a generalization of the CLL theory to accommodate the short-distance physics. In our generalized theory the edge with and without reconstruction can be described on equal footing; in particular, the edge reconstruction transition between these two different phases can be studied. For simplicity and clarity we will focus on principal filling factors $`\nu =1/m`$ with $`m`$ being an odd integer; generalization to other filling factors is conceptually straightforward. We find that the edge reconstruction is a quantum phase transition in the universality class of one-dimensional dilute Bose gas transition, whose critical behavior can be obtained exactly. We also show that the additional edge modes due to edge reconstruction modifies the power-law exponent of the single electron Green’s function, and thus the point contact tunneling exponent in a non-universal way, although the modification is likely to be quantitatively rather small. We will also make contact with recent experiments and existing theories on edge tunneling.

For principal bulk filling $`\nu =1/m`$, there is one chiral edge mode described by the following Hamiltonian within the CLL theory:

$$H=2\pi mv\underset{k>0}{}\rho _k\rho _k=\pi mv𝑑x\rho ^2(x),$$
(1)
where $`v`$ is the velocity for edge excitations, $`\rho _k`$ is the momentum space edge electron density operator which satisfies the Kac-Moody algebra: $`[\rho _k,\rho _k^{}]=\frac{k}{2\pi m}\delta _{k+k^{}}`$, and $`\rho (x)`$ is the corresponding edge electron density operator in real space. Eq. (1) describes a single branch of chiral bosons with linear dispersion: $`ϵ_k=vk`$, i.e., the bosons propagate with a fixed velocity $`v`$. In real space Eq. (1) describes a density-density coupling that is completely local. While it is appropriate to neglect the non-locality of the electron-electron interaction in the long-wave length limit, we must also keep in mind that what drives edge reconstruction is the interplay between electron-electron interaction and confining potential at shorter distances; the typical length scale associated with edge reconstruction is the magnetic length $`\mathrm{}`$. We thus generalize Eq. (1) to incorporate the non-local nature of the electron-electron interaction:

$`H`$ $`={\displaystyle 𝑑x𝑑x^{}\rho (x)V(xx^{})\rho (x^{})}`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`\pi mv{\displaystyle 𝑑x\{\rho ^2(x)a[_x\rho (x)]^2+b[_x^2\rho (x)]^2+\mathrm{}\}}.`$ (3)
In (3) we have performed a gradient expansion, and $`a`$ and $`b`$ are phenomenological constants that depend on details of the electron-electron interaction; for a generic short-range repulsive interaction we have $`a>0`$ and $`b>0`$, thus we can truncate the gradient expansion to the corresponding order without losing stability of the model.

Once the gradient terms are included, the chiral boson dispersion is no longer perfectly linear and has a downward curvature for small $`k`$:

$$ϵ_k=v(kak^3+bk^5+\mathrm{}),$$
(4)
as illustrated in Fig. (1) for different values of $`a`$; such non-linear dispersion has been seen in our numerical studies. In particular, there exist a critical point $`a_c=2\sqrt{b}`$; at this point there is a momentum $`k_0=b^{1/4}`$ at which $`ϵ_{k_0}=0`$. For $`a>a_c`$ we have $`ϵ_k<0`$ for $`kk_0`$; i.e., the ground state of the system is no longer the vacuum of the chiral bosons, and the chiral bosons will condense into states with $`kk_0`$! This instability is precisely the instability toward edge reconstruction, as it leads to an increase of the momentum of the ground state, and edge density oscillation. In this case we must include a repulsive interaction among the chiral bosons to maintain the stability of the model:

$$H_{int}=𝑑x[u_3\rho ^3(x)+u_4\rho ^4(x)+\mathrm{}].$$
(5)
By stopping at the quartic order we are assuming that $`u_4>0`$. Combining Eqs. (3) and (5), we propose the following field theory to describe the edge of a $`\nu =1/m`$ quantum Hall liquid:

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle 𝑑t𝑑x\{_t\varphi _x\varphi v[(_x\varphi )^2a(_x^2\varphi )^2+b(_x^3\varphi )^2]\}}`$ (6)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑t𝑑x[u_3(_x\varphi )^3+u_4(_x\varphi )^4]}.`$ (7)
Here $`S`$ is the action, and the real bosonic field $`\varphi (x)`$ is related to the edge electron density through $`\rho (x)=_x\varphi (x)/(2\pi )`$; in the special case $`a=b=u_3=u_4=0`$ it reduces to the action of the original CLL theory. This model supports two phases; for $`a<a_c`$ the ground state is the vacuum state of the bosons, which properly describes the edge without reconstruction; the low-energy excitations are the chiral bosonic modes at small $`k`$. For $`a>a_c`$ there is a finite density of bosons in the ground state, mostly occupying modes with $`kk_0`$. This is the phase with edge reconstruction. These 1D bosons with repulsive interaction form an ordinary (or non-chiral) Luttinger liquid which in turn can be mapped onto non-chiral free bosons; thus in addition to the chiral branch of bosons, there is also a non-chiral branch of low-energy bosonic excitations in this case, which we have seen in our numerical studies.

To study the critical behavior of this transition, we formally integrate out the high energy modes in Eq. (7), and focus on the low-energy modes near $`k0`$ and $`kk_0`$. These low-energy modes are conveniently described in terms of the following slowly-varying (in space) bosonic fields (time dependence is implicit here):

$`\varphi _1(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{L}}}{\displaystyle \underset{|k|<\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}\varphi _ke^{ikx};`$ (8)
$`\varphi _2(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{L}}}{\displaystyle \underset{|k|<\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}\varphi _{k_0+k}e^{ikx}.`$ (9)
Here $`L`$ is the length of the edge, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a cutoff in momentum space. We note that while $`\varphi _1(x)`$ is a real field, $`\varphi _2(x)`$ is actually a complex field. In terms of $`\varphi _1(x)`$ and $`\varphi _2(x)`$, the original action in Eq. (7) takes the form:

$$S=S_1+S_2+S_{12},$$
(10)
where

$`S_1`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{m}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle 𝑑t𝑑x[_t\varphi _1_x\varphi _1v(_x\varphi _1)^2]};`$ (11)
$`S_2`$ $`={\displaystyle 𝑑t𝑑x(i\overline{\psi }_2_t\psi _2\frac{|_x\psi _2|^2}{2m^{}}+\mu |\psi _2|^2\stackrel{~}{u}|\psi _2|^4)};`$ (12)
$`S_{12}`$ $`={\displaystyle 𝑑t𝑑x[\stackrel{~}{u}_3(_x\varphi _1)|\psi _2|^2+\stackrel{~}{u}_4(_x\varphi _1)^2|\psi _2|^2]}.`$ (13)
Here $`\psi _2=\sqrt{mk_0/2\pi }\varphi _2^{}`$, $`\mu aa_c`$, $`1/m^{}8vb^{1/4}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{u}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{u}_3`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{u}_4`$ are proportional to $`u,u_3`$ and $`u_4`$ at tree level but receive loop renormalization from integrating out higher energy modes, and we have neglected terms that scale to zero in the long-wave length limit (like $`(_t\psi _2)(_x\overline{\psi }_2)`$, $`(_x\varphi _1)^3`$, and $`(_x\varphi _1)^4`$ etc). We see $`S_1`$ takes exactly the same form as the original CLL action (but with a much reduced momentum cutoff), while $`S_2`$ is identical to the action of 1D non-relativistic bosons with repulsive interaction. If we neglect $`S_{12}`$ that describes interaction between $`\varphi _1(x)`$ and $`\psi _2(x)`$ for the moment, it is known that the system undergoes a second order phase transition from the vacuum of bosons (corresponding to edge without reconstruction), to a new ground state with a finite bosons density in it (corresponding to reconstructed edge), at the critical point $`\mu =0`$ (or $`a=a_c`$). The effect of $`S_{12}`$ may be taken into account by integrating out $`\varphi _1`$ in $`S`$, which results in finite renormalization of $`\stackrel{~}{u}`$ in $`S_2`$. Assuming that the renormalized value of $`\stackrel{~}{u}`$ to be positive (i.e., the effective interaction of the bosons described by $`\varphi _2`$ remains repulsive), neither the position of the critical point $`\mu =0`$ (or $`a=a_c`$), nor the critical property of the transition is changed by the coupling between $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ as described by $`S_{12}`$. The critical exponents of this transition are known exactly: $`\nu =1/2`$ and $`z=2`$, from which all other exponents can be deduced. In particular, the boson density or the change of ground state momentum per unit length scales as: $`n\delta k(dd^{})^{1/2}`$, where $`d`$ is a controlling parameter (say, the distance between the dopant layer and the 2D electron gas layer) that tunes the system through the transition, and $`d^{}`$ is the critical point.

On the other hand, if the renormalized quartic coupling turns out to be negative, then the effective interaction between the bosons is attractive. In this case higher order couplings need to be kept, and the transition between the two phases may become first-order. Whether this is the case or not depends on the details of edge confining potential and electron-electron interaction. Hartree-Fock study of edge reconstruction at bulk filling $`\nu =1`$ appears to suggest the transition is indeed first order in that case, for the type of confining potential that was used.

No matter the transition is first-order or second-order, the condensed non-chiral bosons described by $`\psi _2`$ in the reconstructed phase form an ordinary or non-chiral Luttinger liquid. Perhaps the easiest way to obtain the Gaussian field theory (or Luttinger liquid) description of these non-chiral bosons from Eqs. (9-11) is to write $`\psi _2`$ as $`\psi _2(x,t)=\sqrt{n(x,t)}\mathrm{exp}[i\phi (x,t)]`$, and then integrate out the fluctuation of the boson density $`n`$ about its mean value $`\overline{n}\mu /2\stackrel{~}{u}`$ in $`S`$, after which one obtains

$$S=S_1+S_\phi +S_{int},$$
(14)
where $`S_1`$ takes the same form as in Eq. (9) with renormalized velocity $`v`$, and

$$S_\phi =𝑑t𝑑x\frac{\overline{n}}{2m^{}}\left[\frac{1}{v_\phi ^2}(_t\phi )^2(_x\phi )^2\right],$$
(15)
and $`v_\phi \sqrt{2\stackrel{~}{u}\overline{n}/m^{}}\sqrt{\mu /m^{}}`$. Physically $`_t\phi `$ and $`_x\phi `$ are proportional to the density and current of the (non-chiral) bosons described by $`\psi _2`$, through the Josephson relation. $`S_{int}`$ describes the interaction between the chiral and non-chiral bosons through density-density coupling:

$$S_{int}=g𝑑t𝑑x(_t\phi )(_x\varphi _1),$$
(16)
where $`g\stackrel{~}{u}_3/2\stackrel{~}{u}`$. Thus edge reconstruction adds two more propagating edge modes in the edge spectrum, one propagating in the forward direction and another in the backward direction; these new modes are coupled to the original long wave-length chiral boson modes. Mathematically, the action of Eq. (14) is equivalent to that of a single CLL mode coupled to one-dimensional acoustic phonons, a model that has been considered before in very different contexts.

Obviously, multiple edge reconstruction transitions can occur, if there are multiple local minima in the chiral boson spectrum Eq. (4) that go through zero. The critical behavior of these additional transitions will be the same, and each transition will introduce two more edge modes, propagating in opposite directions.

We now turn our discussion to the effect of edge reconstruction on single electron Green’s function. Within the CLL theory, the charge and statistics of the electron operator uniquely determines its form in terms of the edge density field $`\varphi (x)`$ to be $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x)e^{im\varphi (x)}.`$ We are interested in the long-time or low-energy/frequency behavior of the electron Green’s function, which is dominated by the low-energy modes of $`\varphi (x)`$. For edges without reconstruction they are the long-wave length modes of $`\varphi (x)`$ with $`k0`$, while in the presence of edge reconstruction they are modes with $`k0`$ and $`k\pm k_0`$. Thus in the latter case we write the electron operator as

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(x)`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\{im[\varphi _1(x)+\varphi _2(x)e^{ik_0x}+\varphi _2^{}(x)e^{ik_0x}]\}`$ (17)
$``$ $`\mathrm{exp}\{im[\varphi _1(x)+ce^{i(k_0x\phi (x))}+ce^{i(\phi (x)k_0x)}]\}`$ (18)
$`=`$ $`e^{im\varphi _1(x)}{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(2imc)^l\mathrm{cos}^l[\phi (x)k_0x].`$ (19)
Here the constant $`c\sqrt{2\pi \overline{n}/mk_0}`$. We have thus expressed the electron operator in terms of the Gaussian variables $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\phi `$, whose correlation functions are controlled by the quadratic low-energy effective action $`S`$ in Eq. (14). Thus the long-time behavior of the electron Green’s function can be determined straightforwardly:

$$G(x=0,t)=\mathrm{\Psi }(0,t)\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(0,t=0)=\underset{l=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}A_lt^{\gamma _l},$$
(20)
where $`A_l`$’s are some constants, and $`\gamma _l`$ is twice the scaling dimension of the operator $`O_l=e^{im\varphi _1+il\phi }`$: $`O_l(0,t)O_l(0,0)t^{\gamma _l}`$. The minimum value of $`\gamma _l`$ controls Green’s function in the long time limit, and thus the $`IV`$ characteristics of point contact tunneling between the edge and a Fermi liquid metal is $`IV^\alpha `$ with $`\alpha =\gamma ^{min}`$. Using a generalized Bogliubov transformation to obtain the eigen modes of the action Eq. (14) and express $`O_l`$ as combination of the eigen modes, one can easily show that all $`\gamma _l`$’s are non-universal and satisfy $`\gamma _l>m`$. Thus the tunneling exponent $`\gamma ^{min}`$ is non-universal. This is a consequence of the lack of maximum chirality due to edge reconstruction, and in sharp contrast with the case without edge reconstruction, where the tunneling exponent $`\alpha =m`$ and is thus universal.

In real samples, one expects $`v`$, the chiral charge mode velocity, to be much larger than all other velocity scales, especially the non-chiral mode velocity $`v_\phi `$. This is because $`v`$ is controlled by the long-range Coulomb interaction and thus diverges as $`\mathrm{log}k`$ in the long-wave length limit; this divergence may be cut off by metallic gates placed near the sample, but only at very long length scales. On the other hand $`v_\phi \sqrt{\mu /m^{}}`$ is a neutral mode velocity, and expected to be low since there is no reason for the chiral boson mode near the instabilities to develop very deep minima and have large curvature. In the limit of large $`v`$, we find

$$\alpha =\gamma _0=m[1+v_{coup}v_\phi /v^2+O(1/v^4)],$$
(21)
where $`v_{coup}m\stackrel{~}{u}_3^2/\pi \stackrel{~}{u}`$ is a positive velocity scale that parametrizes the strength of coupling between charge and neutral modes. We thus find that the tunneling exponent is increased by a small and non-universal amount due to edge reconstruction. While consistent with experimental findings that $`\alpha m`$ for $`m=3`$, we note that in all experiments $`\alpha `$ is slight below 3 (typically by about $`10\%`$). This, however, may be due to the fact that electrostatic forces provided by nearby gates tend increase the electron density by $`2030\%`$ over several hundred nanometers in the edge region; thus the the actual value of $`\alpha `$ that correspond to $`\nu =1/3`$ in the edge region may very well be slightly above 3, consistent with our result.

Recent edge tunneling experiments motivated a considerable amount of theoretical work. One of the main focuses of these studies is the apparent inverse relation between the tunneling exponent $`\alpha `$ and bulk filling factor $`\nu `$ observed in at least one of the experiments: $`\alpha 1/\nu `$. In one of the proposals put forward to explain this approximate dependence, Lee and Wen made a key assumption that there exist neutral mode(s) in the system whose velocity is extremely low. As discussed above, edge reconstruction can naturally lead to neutral modes with low velocities. Thus edge reconstruction can not only explain the lack of universality in $`\alpha `$ near principle filling factors, but may also be a key ingredient in the understanding of its general dependence on filling factor.

The author benefited greatly from collaboration with Xin Wan and Ed Rezayi on numerical studies of edge reconstruction. He also thanks Claudio Chamon, Matthew Fisher, Bertrand Halperin, Chetan Nayak, Leo Radzihovsky, Shivaji Sondhi, and Xiao-Gang Wen for stimulating discussions, and Aspen Center for Physics for hospitality where part of this work was performed. This work was supported by NSF grants No. DMR-9971541 and No. DMR-0225698, and the A. P. Sloan Foundation.