considering the possibility of a different value of ω for each f$_{n}$ . Pragmati- cally, tuning each radial excitation is both time consuming, and means that we are introducing so many free parameters that we have lost all powers of prediction. However it is interesting to see how much the anomalous dimensions may contribute. The results for our best fit of Λ = 194 MeV is shown in table 7.1(a). All corrections are less than 10%, which in AdS-QCD terms, is negligible. The second cause for concern when introducing a finite UV cutoff in the strong coupling regime is the contribution of irrelevant operators. As we pointed out in section 7.1, there are an infinite number of such operators, and it is not known how to encode the majority into the gravity dual. However, one might hope the couplings of lower dimension operators would grow fastest as one moved into the non-perturbative regime. We know how to encode one simply [144,149–151], so we investigate its effect. Let us rewrite the metric (5.1) of model [2] as with H equal to r − 4 in 5.1. We can deform the AdS space by allowing it to return to flat space asymptotically: The parameter α is a symmetry singlet and has energy dimension minus 103 7.5 Coupling of Higher Dimension Opera- tors ds 2 = H 1 / $^{2}$dr2 + $_{H}$− 1 / $^{2}$η$_{µν}$ dx $^{µ}$dxν (7.7) H ( r ) → $_{r}$− 4 + α = $_{r}$− 4 ( 1 + $_{αr}$− 4 ) (7.8)