# Regular and Irregular Boundary Conditions in the AdS/CFT Correspondence

## 1 Introduction

The celebrated AdS/CFT correspondence relates field theories on anti-de Sitter (AdS) space with conformal field theories (CFTs) living on the AdS horizon. The main prediction of this duality is that CFT correlation functions of conformal operators can be calculated by evaluating the AdS action on-shell as a functional of prescribed boundary values.

For example, using a scalar field theory on AdS space, CFT correlators of conformal fields of scaling dimensions $`\mathrm{\Delta }d/2`$ have been calculated \[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and references therein\]. Until recently, no prescription was known to include operators with scaling dimension $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`d/21<\mathrm{\Delta }<d/2`$. Here, $`d/21`$ is the unitary bound on the conformal dimension of scalar operators. Recently, Klebanov and Witten  proposed a method to do just that. They used the fact that a scalar field on AdS space can obey two types of boundary conditions . The regular one, which can always be imposed, leads to the CFT correlators with $`\mathrm{\Delta }d/2`$, whereas the irregular one would lead to $`d/21<\mathrm{\Delta }d/2`$. They realized that the respective boundary fields are conjugate to each other and proposed to use a Legendre transform of the action, expressed as a functional of the irregular boundary value, as the generating functional. They also demonstrated the correctness of this proposal for CFT two point functions.

In this article, we would like to expand on their proposal and demonstrate its correctness to all orders in perturbation theory. A second result of our analysis is that a different Green’s function must be used for internal lines in second or higher order graphs.

The outline of the article shall be as follows. In the remainder of this section motivating arguments about the origin of the irregular boundary conditions will be given. In section 2 we will for completeness repeat the formalism using regular boundary conditions. Then, in section 3 Klebanov and Witten’s proposal to include irregular boundary conditions shall be analyzed and shown to be correct to any order in perturbation theory.

To start, consider an interacting scalar field, whose action is given by

$$I=\frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{\Omega }𝐝𝐱\left(𝐃_\mu \varphi 𝐃^\mu \varphi +𝐦^\mathrm{𝟐}\varphi ^\mathrm{𝟐}\right)+𝐈_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐧𝐭}},$$
(1)   
where $`I_{int}`$ denotes the interaction terms and $`𝐝𝐱=𝐝^{𝐝+\mathrm{𝟏}}𝐱\sqrt{𝐠(𝐱)}`$ is the invariant volume integral measure. The equation of motion following from the action (1) is given by

$$\left(D_\mu D^\mu m^2\right)\varphi (x)=B(x),$$
(2)   
where<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1The functional variation is done covariantly, cf. .

$$B(x)=\frac{\delta I_{int}}{\delta \varphi (x)}.$$

Using as AdS representation the conventional upper half space $`𝐱^𝐝`$, $`x_0>0`$ with the metric

$$ds^2=(x_0)^2dx^\mu dx^\mu ,$$
(3)   
the solution to equation (2) can be written in the form

$$\varphi (x)=d^dy\left[\frac{x_0}{(x𝐲)^\mathrm{𝟐}}\right]^{\frac{d}{2}\pm \alpha }f_{}(𝐲)+_𝛀𝐝𝐲𝐆(𝐱,𝐲)𝐁(𝐲),$$
(4)   
where $`\alpha =\sqrt{d^2/4+m^2}`$ and $`G(x,y)`$ is a standard Green’s function satisfying

$$\left(D_\mu D^\mu m^2\right)G(x,y)=\frac{\delta (xy)}{\sqrt{g(x)}}.$$
(5)   
The free field solution with the lower sign exists classically for $`\alpha <d/2`$, but the unitary bound restricts it further to $`\alpha <1`$ . The functions $`f_{}`$ and $`f_+`$ are called regular and irregular boundary values and are conformal fields of scaling dimensions $`d/2\alpha `$ and $`d/2+\alpha `$, respectively.

In the AdS/CFT correspondence the fields obeying regular boundary conditions give rise to CFT correlation functions of operators with conformal dimensions $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ restricted by $`\mathrm{\Delta }d/2`$. Hence, the use of irregular boundary conditions enables one to obtain correlation functions for operators with scaling dimensions $`d/21<\mathrm{\Delta }<d/2`$.

## 2 Regular Boundary Conditions

Let us start by rewriting the expression (4) as

$$\varphi (x)=\varphi ^{(0)}(x)+_\mathrm{\Omega }𝐝𝐱𝐆(𝐱,𝐲)𝐁(𝐲),$$
(6)   
where the Green’s function $`G(x)`$ is given by 

$`G(x,y)`$ $`=(x_0y_0)^{\frac{d}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\mathrm{e}^{i𝐤(𝐱𝐲)}\{\begin{array}{cc}I_\alpha (kx_0)K_\alpha (ky_0)\hfill & \text{for }x_0<y_0,\hfill \\ I_\alpha (ky_0)K_\alpha (kx_0)\hfill & \text{for }x_0>y_0,\hfill \end{array}}`$ (7)   
$`={\displaystyle \frac{c_\alpha }{2}}\xi ^{\left(\frac{d}{2}+\alpha \right)}F(d/2,d/2+\alpha ;1+\alpha ;\xi ^2),`$ (8)   
where $`F`$ is the hypergeometric function,

$$\xi =\frac{1}{2x_0y_0}\left\{\frac{1}{2}\left[(xy)^2+(xy^{})^2\right]+\sqrt{(xy)^2(xy^{})^2}\right\}$$

($`y^{}`$ denotes the vector $`(y_0,𝐲)`$), and

$$c_\alpha =\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(d/2+\alpha )}{\pi ^{d/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\alpha )}.$$
(9)   
Moreover, the free field solution $`\varphi ^{(0)}`$ shall be written as

$$\varphi ^{(0)}(x)=d^dy𝒦_\alpha (x,𝐲)\varphi _{}^{(\mathrm{𝟎})}(𝐲)=𝐝^𝐝𝐲𝒦_\alpha (𝐱,𝐲)\varphi _+^{(\mathrm{𝟎})}(𝐲).$$
(10)   
The bulk-boundary propagators occuring in equation (10) are given by

$$𝒦_{\pm \alpha }(x,𝐲)=\pm \alpha 𝐜_{\pm \alpha }\left[\frac{𝐱_\mathrm{𝟎}}{(𝐱𝐲)^\mathrm{𝟐}}\right]^{\frac{𝐝}{\mathrm{𝟐}}\pm \alpha },$$
(11)   
where $`c_{\pm \alpha }`$ is given by equation (9), and their Fourier transforms read

$$𝒦_{\pm \alpha }(x,𝐤)=\frac{\pm \mathrm{𝟐}\alpha }{𝚪(\mathrm{𝟏}\pm \alpha )}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{𝐢𝐤}𝐱}\left(\frac{𝐤}{\mathrm{𝟐}}\right)^{\pm \alpha }𝐱_\mathrm{𝟎}^{\frac{𝐝}{\mathrm{𝟐}}}𝐊_\alpha (\mathrm{𝐤𝐱}_\mathrm{𝟎}).$$
(12)   
Equations (12) and (10) imply that the boundary functions $`\varphi _+^{(0)}`$ and $`\varphi _{}^{(0)}`$ are related by

$$\varphi _+^{(0)}(𝐤)=\frac{𝚪(\mathrm{𝟏}\alpha )}{𝚪(\mathrm{𝟏}+\alpha )}\left(\frac{𝐤}{\mathrm{𝟐}}\right)^{\mathrm{𝟐}\alpha }\varphi _{}^{(\mathrm{𝟎})}(𝐤).$$
(13)   
Obviously, the free field $`\varphi ^{(0)}`$ can be written as a sum of two series, whose leading powers are $`x_0^{d/2\alpha }`$ and $`x_0^{d/2+\alpha }`$, respectively. Thus, one finds by direct comparison with equations (10) and (12) that the small $`x_0`$ behaviour of $`\varphi ^{(0)}`$ is

$$\varphi ^{(0)}(x)\stackrel{x_00}{}x_0^{\frac{d}{2}\alpha }\varphi _{}^{(0)}(𝐱)+𝐱_\mathrm{𝟎}^{\frac{𝐝}{\mathrm{𝟐}}+\alpha }\varphi _+^{(\mathrm{𝟎})}(𝐱),$$
(14)   
where subleading terms have been dropped. Moreover, the Green’s function (8) goes like

$$G(x,y)\stackrel{x_00}{}\frac{1}{2\alpha }x_0^{\frac{d}{2}+\alpha }𝒦_\alpha (𝐱,𝐲).$$
(15)   
Hence, the interaction contributes only to the $`\varphi _+`$ part of the asymptotic boundary behaviour, i.e. one can write

$`\varphi (x)`$ $`\stackrel{x_00}{}x_0^{\frac{d}{2}\alpha }\varphi _{}(𝐱)+𝐱_\mathrm{𝟎}^{\frac{𝐝}{\mathrm{𝟐}}+\alpha }\varphi _+(𝐱),`$ (16)   
where  
$`\varphi _{}(𝐱)`$ $`=\varphi _{}^{(0)}(𝐱),`$ (17)   
$`\varphi _+(𝐱)`$ $`=\varphi _+^{(0)}(𝐱){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}\alpha }}{\displaystyle _𝛀}𝐝𝐲𝒦_\alpha (𝐱,𝐲)𝐁(𝐲).`$ (18)   
Identical relations hold for the Fourier transformed expressions.

Now consider the on-shell action, treated as a functional of the regular boundary values $`\varphi _{}`$. Integrating equation (1) by parts yields

$$I=\frac{1}{2}d^dxx_0^dn^\mu \varphi _\mu \varphi \frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{\Omega }𝐝𝐱\varphi (𝐱)𝐁(𝐱)+𝐈_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐧𝐭}}.$$

The first term must be regularized, which is done by writing

$`x_0^dn^\mu \varphi _\mu \varphi `$ $`=x_0^d\varphi \left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{2}}\alpha \right)x_0^{\frac{d}{2}\alpha }\varphi _{}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{2}}+\alpha \right)x_0^{\frac{d}{2}+\alpha }\varphi _++\mathrm{}\right]`$   
$`=x_0^d\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{2}}\alpha \right)\varphi ^22\alpha \varphi _{}\varphi _++\mathrm{},`$   
where the ellipses indicate contributions from subleading terms and other terms which vanish for $`x_0=0`$. The first term in the last line is cancelled by a covariant counterterm. Hence, the renormalized on-shell action is

$`I[\varphi _{}]`$ $`=\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\varphi _{}(𝐤)\varphi _+(𝐤)}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}}{\displaystyle _𝛀}𝐝𝐱\varphi (𝐱)𝐁(𝐱)+𝐈_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐧𝐭}}`$   
$`=I^{(0)}[\varphi _{}]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Omega }}𝐝𝐱𝐝𝐲𝐁(𝐱)𝐆(𝐱,𝐲)𝐁(𝐲)+𝐈_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐧𝐭}},`$ (19)   
where equations (18), (17), (13), (6) and (10) have been used. The term $`I^{(0)}`$ in equation (19) is given by

$`I^{(0)}[\varphi _{}]`$ $`=\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\alpha )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\left(\frac{k}{2}\right)^{2\alpha }\varphi _{}(𝐤)\varphi _{}(𝐤)}`$   
$`=\alpha ^2c_\alpha {\displaystyle d^dxd^dy\frac{\varphi _{}(𝐱)\varphi _{}(𝐲)}{|𝐱𝐲|^{𝐝+\mathrm{𝟐}\alpha }}}`$ (20)   
and thus yields the correct two point function of scalar operators of conformal dimension $`\mathrm{\Delta }=d/2+\alpha `$, if one uses the AdS/CFT correspondence formula

$$\mathrm{e}^{I[\varphi _{}]}=\mathrm{exp}\left[\alpha d^dx𝒪(𝐱)\varphi _{}(𝐱)\right].$$
(21)   
The other two terms have to be expressed as a perturbative series in terms of $`\varphi ^{(0)}`$. However, by virtue of equations (10) and (17) this naturally yields a perturbative series in terms of the boundary function $`\varphi _{}`$.

## 3 Irregular Boundary Conditions

The treatment of irregular boundary conditions follows an idea by Klebanov and Witten . Consider the expression

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta I[\varphi _{}]}{\delta \varphi _{}(𝐤)}}`$ $`=2\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\alpha )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\alpha )}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k}{2}}\right)^{2\alpha }\varphi _{}(𝐤)+{\displaystyle _𝛀}𝐝𝐱𝐁(𝐱){\displaystyle \frac{\delta \varphi (𝐱)}{\delta \varphi _{}(𝐤)}}`$   
$`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Omega }}𝐝𝐱𝐝𝐲𝐝𝐳{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^\mathrm{𝟐}𝐈_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐧𝐭}}}{\delta \varphi (𝐱)\delta \varphi (𝐳)}}𝐆(𝐱,𝐲)𝐁(𝐲){\displaystyle \frac{\delta \varphi (𝐳)}{\delta \varphi _{}(𝐤)}}.`$   
Using equation (13) and the formula  
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \varphi (x)}{\delta \varphi _{}(𝐤)}}`$ $`=𝒦_\alpha (x,𝐤)+{\displaystyle _𝛀}𝐝𝐲𝐝𝐳𝐆(𝐱,𝐲){\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^\mathrm{𝟐}𝐈_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐧𝐭}}}{\delta \varphi (𝐲)\delta \varphi (𝐳)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \varphi (𝐳)}{\delta \varphi _{}(𝐤)}},`$   
one finds

$$\frac{\delta I[\varphi _{}]}{\delta \varphi _{}(𝐤)}=2\alpha \varphi _+^{(0)}(𝐤)+_𝛀𝐝𝐱𝒦_\alpha (𝐱,𝐤)𝐁(𝐱)=\mathrm{𝟐}\alpha \varphi _+(𝐤),$$

or, after an inverse Fourier transformation,

$$\frac{\delta I[\varphi _{}]}{\delta \varphi _{}(𝐱)}=2\alpha \varphi _+(𝐱)$$
(22)   
This expression holds to any order in perturbation theory. This fact was obtained in  using graph arguments. Furthermore, it shows first that $`\varphi _+`$ can be regarded as the conjugate field of $`\varphi _{}`$ and secondly that the functional

$$J[\varphi _{},\varphi _+]=I[\varphi _{}]+2\alpha d^dx\varphi _{}(𝐱)\varphi _+(𝐱)$$
(23)   
has a minimum with respect to a variation of $`\varphi _{}`$.

Klebanov and Witten’s idea  is to formulate the AdS/CFT correspondence by the formula

$$\mathrm{e}^{J[\varphi _+]}=\mathrm{exp}\left[\alpha d^dx𝒪(𝐱)\varphi _+(𝐱)\right].$$
(24)   
Here, the functional $`J[\varphi _+]`$ is a Legendre transform of the action $`I`$, i.e. it is the minimum value of the expression (23), expressed in terms of $`\varphi _+`$.

In the following, Klebanov and Witten’s result about the correctness of the two point function  shall be confirmed and interactions included. The minimum of $`J`$ is easiest found from equations (19) and (23), giving

$`J[\varphi _+]`$ $`=\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\varphi _{}(𝐤)\varphi _+(𝐤)}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}}{\displaystyle _𝛀}𝐝𝐱\varphi (𝐱)𝐁(𝐱)+𝐈_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐧𝐭}}`$   
$`=\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\alpha )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\left(\frac{k}{2}\right)^{2\alpha }\varphi _+(𝐤)\varphi _+(𝐤)}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}}{\displaystyle _𝛀}𝐝𝐱\varphi (𝐱)𝐁(𝐱)+𝐈_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐧𝐭}}`$   
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d^dx_\mathrm{\Omega }𝐝𝐲𝒦_\alpha (𝐲,𝐱)\varphi _+(𝐱)𝐁(𝐲)}`$   
$`=\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\alpha )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\left(\frac{k}{2}\right)^{2\alpha }\varphi _+(𝐤)\varphi _+(𝐤)}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}}{\displaystyle _𝛀}𝐝𝐱𝐝𝐲𝐁(𝐱)𝐆(𝐱,𝐲)𝐁(𝐲)`$   
$`+I_{int}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\alpha }}{\displaystyle d^dz_\mathrm{\Omega }𝐝𝐱𝐝𝐲𝒦_\alpha (𝐱,𝐳)𝒦_\alpha (𝐲,𝐳)𝐁(𝐱)𝐁(𝐲)}.`$ (25)   
Here equations (17), (13), (18), (12) and (6) have been used. The first term in equation (25) can be inversely Fourier transformed, which yields

$$J^{(0)}=\alpha ^2c_\alpha d^dxd^dy\frac{\varphi _+(𝐱)\varphi _+(𝐲)}{|𝐱𝐲|^{𝐝\mathrm{𝟐}\alpha }}.$$
(26)   
According to the correspondence formula (24), this yields the correct two point function of conformal operators $`𝒪`$ of scaling dimension $`\mathrm{\Delta }=d/2\alpha `$.

Then, the second and fourth term in equation (25) can be combined by defining the Green’s function

$$\stackrel{~}{G}(x,y)=G(x,y)+\frac{1}{2\alpha }d^dz𝒦_\alpha (x,𝐳)𝒦_\alpha (𝐲,𝐳).$$
(27)   
This modified Green’s function $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ also satisfies equation (5), because the second term in equation (27) does not contribute to the discontinuity. Moreover, using equations (7) and (12) one finds

$`\stackrel{~}{G}(x,y)`$ $`=(x_0y_0)^{\frac{d}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\mathrm{e}^{i𝐤(𝐱𝐲)}}`$   
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle \frac{2K_\alpha (kx_0)K_\alpha (ky_0)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\alpha )}}+\{\begin{array}{cc}K_\alpha (ky_0)I_\alpha (kx_0)\hfill & \text{for }x_0<y_0,\hfill \\ K_\alpha (kx_0)I_\alpha (ky_0)\hfill & \text{for }x_0>y_0,\hfill \end{array}\right]`$   
$`=(x_0y_0)^{\frac{d}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\mathrm{e}^{i𝐤(𝐱𝐲)}\{\begin{array}{cc}K_\alpha (ky_0)I_\alpha (kx_0)\hfill & \text{for }x_0<y_0,\hfill \\ K_\alpha (kx_0)I_\alpha (ky_0)\hfill & \text{for }x_0>y_0,\hfill \end{array}}`$   
which differs from equation (7) only by interchanging $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha `$. Hence, the result (8) can be taken over, yielding

$$\stackrel{~}{G}(x,y)=\frac{c_\alpha }{2}\xi ^{\left(\frac{d}{2}\alpha \right)}F(d/2,d/2\alpha ;1\alpha ;\xi ^2).$$
(28)   
Thus, inserting equation (27) into equation (25) yields

$$J[\varphi _+]=J^{(0)}[\varphi _+]\frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{\Omega }𝐝𝐱𝐝𝐲𝐁(𝐱)\stackrel{~}{𝐆}(𝐱,𝐲)𝐁(𝐲)+𝐈_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐧𝐭}}.$$
(29)   
Moreover, one can see from equation (28) that for small $`x_0`$ $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ behaves as

$$\stackrel{~}{G}(x,y)\stackrel{x_00}{}\frac{1}{2\alpha }x_0^{\frac{d}{2}\alpha }𝒦_\alpha (𝐱,𝐲).$$
(30)   
Hence, writing

$$\varphi (x)=d^dy𝒦_\alpha (x,𝐲)\varphi _+(𝐲)+_𝛀𝐝𝐲\stackrel{~}{𝐆}(𝐱,𝐲)𝐁(𝐲),$$
(31)   
the interaction contributes only to $`\varphi _{}`$. This in turn means that, expressing $`I_{int}`$ and $`B`$ as a perturbative series and using equation (31), the functional $`J`$ is naturally expressed in terms of the irregular boundary value $`\varphi _+`$. Moreover, it has the expected form, in that it is obtained from equation (19) by replacing $`\alpha `$ with $`\alpha `$ and $`\varphi _{}`$ with $`\varphi _+`$. An important point is that the Green’s function $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ must be used for the calculation of internal lines.

Finally, by a calculation similar to that of the derivation of equation (22) one finds

$$\frac{\delta J[\varphi _+]}{\delta \varphi _+(𝐱)}=2\alpha \varphi _{}(𝐱).$$
(32)   
This is a final confirmation of the fact that the fields $`\varphi _{}`$ and $`\varphi _+`$ are conjugate to each other.

In conclusion, we have expanded on Klebanov and Witten’s recent idea for formulating the AdS/CFT correspondence using irregular boundary conditions, showing it to give the expected answers to any order in perturbation theory.

## Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by a grant from NSERC. W. M. is very grateful to Simon Fraser University for financial support.