# References

NDA-FP-58

April 1999

Running gauge coupling and quark-antiquark potential from dilatonic gravity 

Shin’ichi NOJIRI<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1e-mail: nojiri@cc.nda.ac.jp, snojiri@yukawa.kyoto-u.ac.jp and Sergei D. ODINTSOV<sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2e-mail: odintsov@mail.tomsknet.ru, odintsov@itp.uni-leipzig.de

Department of Mathematics and Physics   
National Defence Academy, Hashirimizu Yokosuka 239, JAPAN

$`\mathrm{}`$ Tomsk Pedagogical University, 634041 Tomsk, RUSSIA   
and NTZ, Inst.Theor.Phys., University of Leipzig, Augustusplatz 10/11, 04109 Leipzig, Germany   

abstract

The running gauge coupling and quark-antiquark potential in $`d`$-dimensions are calculated from the explicit solution of $`d+1`$-dimensional dilatonic gravity. This background interpolates between usual AdS in UV and flat space with singular dilaton in IR and it realizes two-boundaries AdS/CFT correspondence. The behaviour of running coupling and potential is consistent with results following from IIB supergravity.

AdS/CFT correspondence  predicts some properties of quantum gauge theory from higher-dimensional classical (super)gravity. In the more complicated versions of AdS/CFT correspondence there are two boundaries: UV and IR boundaries .

In the recent paper , we presented two-boundaries AdS/CFT correspondence in dilatonic gravity (in the presence not only of metric tensor but also dilaton). The corresponding background  interpolates between standard AdS at $`y=\mathrm{}`$ (UV) and flat background with singular dilaton at $`y=0`$ (IR). The properties (in particular, conformal dimensions) for minimal or dilaton coupled scalar around such background have been investigated. Very similar background has been lately found in refs. (see also related refs.) for IIB supergravity. In these refs. the behaviour of running coupling in gauge theory and quark-antiquark potential  (with possible confinement due to dilatonic effects) has been studied. In particular, the modification of these quantities due to dilaton effects is explicitly found. Note that first example of running gauge coupling via bulk/boundary correspondence has been presented for Type 0 strings in refs.. Background with singular dilaton under discussion gives another example of this beatiful phenomenon.

In the present note we calculate the running gauge coupling and quark-antiquark potential in $`d`$-dimensions working with our background  realizing two-boundaries AdS/CFT correspondence in dilatonic gravity. We show that for some cases it may be similar to result of refs. . Some clarifying remarks on interpretation of CFTs on two boundaries as IR/UV duality are also given.

We start with the following action in $`d+1`$ dimensions:

$$S=\frac{1}{16\pi G}d^{d+1}x\sqrt{g}\left(R\mathrm{\Lambda }\alpha g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi \right).$$
(1)   
In the following, we assume $`\lambda ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\alpha `$ to be positive. In AdS/CFT correspondence dilatonic gravity with above action describes $`𝒩=4`$ super Yang-Mills theory superconformally interacting with $`𝒩=4`$ conformal supergravity. The corresponding conformal anomaly with non-trivial dilaton contribution has been found in ref. via AdS/CFT correspondence.

The equations of motion can be solved and the solution is given by 

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu ,\nu =0}{\overset{d}{}}}g_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu =f(y)dy^2+y{\displaystyle \underset{i,j=0}{\overset{d1}{}}}\eta _{ij}dx^idx^j`$ (2)   
$`f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d(d1)}{4y^2\left(\lambda ^2+\frac{\alpha c^2}{y^d}\right)}}`$ (3)   
$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`c{\displaystyle 𝑑y\sqrt{\frac{d(d1)}{4y^{d+2}\left(\lambda ^2+\frac{\alpha c^2}{y^d}\right)}}}`$ (4)   
$`=`$ $`\varphi _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(d1)}{d\alpha }}}\mathrm{ln}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha c^2}{\lambda ^2y^d}}+1\pm \sqrt{\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha c^2}{\lambda ^2y^d}}+1\right)^21}\right\}.`$   
Here $`\eta _{ij}`$ is the metric in the flat (Lorentzian) background and $`c`$ is a constant of the integration. The boundary discussed in AdS/CFT correspondence lies at $`y=\mathrm{}`$.

In the string theory, the coupling on the boundary manifold, which would be the coupling in $`𝒩=4`$ $`SU(N)`$ super-Yang-Mills when $`d=4`$, is proportional to an exponential of the dilaton field $`\varphi `$. Although the relation of the present model with the string theory is not always clear (the model under discussion may be considered as low-energy string effective action), we assume the gauge coupling has the following form (by the analogy with refs.)

$$g=g^{}\mathrm{e}^{2\beta \sqrt{\frac{\alpha }{d(d1)}}\left(\varphi \varphi _0\right)}.$$
(5)   
Since the relation with the string theory is not clear, we put the constant coefficient $`\beta `$ in the exponent to be undetermined. The factor $`\sqrt{\frac{\alpha }{d(d1)}}`$ and the shift of a constant $`\varphi _0`$ are given for convenience and they may be always absorbed into the redefinition of $`\beta `$ and $`g^{}`$, respectively.

The coupling $`g`$ is monotonically decreasing function and vanishes at $`y=0`$ when $`\beta >0`$ ($`\beta <0`$) and $`+`$ ($``$) in the sign in (4) are chosen. On the other hand, the coupling is increasing one and diverges to $`+\mathrm{}`$ at $`y=0`$ for $`\beta >0`$ ($`\beta <0`$) and $``$ ($`+`$) sign. Therefore the $`\pm `$ sign would correspond to strong/weak coupling duality. When $`y`$ is large, which corresponds to asymptotically anti de Sitter space, $`g`$ behaves as

$$g=g^{}\left(1\pm \frac{2\beta c\sqrt{\alpha }}{d\lambda y^{\frac{d}{2}}}+\left(\frac{2\beta }{d}1\right)\frac{2\beta c^2\alpha }{d\lambda ^2y^d}+\mathrm{}\right).$$
(6)   
If we define a new coordinate $`U`$ by

$$y=U^2,$$
(7)   
$`U`$ expresses the scale on the (boundary) $`d`$ dimensional Minkowski space, which can be found from (2). Following the correspondence between long-distances/high-energy in the AdS/CFT scheme, $`U`$ can be regarded as the energy scale of the boundary field theory. Then from (6), we obtain the following renormalization group equation

$$\beta (U)U\frac{dg}{dU}=d(gg^{})\left(d\frac{d^2}{2\beta }\right)\frac{(gg^{})^2}{g^{}}+\mathrm{}.$$
(8)   
The leading behaviour is identical with that in  for $`d=4`$ and the next to leading behavior of $`𝒪\left((gg^{})^2\right)`$ becomes also identical with theirs if we choose $`\beta =4`$. It maybe also noted that Type 0 strings on AdS background lead to running gauge coupling as well .

We now consider the static potential between “quark” and “anti-quark”. We evaluate the following Nambu-Goto action

$$S=\frac{1}{2\pi }𝑑\tau 𝑑\sigma \sqrt{\mathrm{det}\left(g_{\mu \nu }^s_\alpha x^\mu _\beta x^\nu \right)}.$$
(9)   
with the “string” metric $`g_{\mu \nu }^s`$, which could be given by multiplying a dilaton function $`h(\varphi )`$ to the metric tensor in (2). Especially we choose $`h(\varphi )`$ by

$$h(\varphi )=\mathrm{e}^{2\gamma \sqrt{\frac{\alpha }{d(d1)}}\left(\varphi \varphi _0\right)}=1\pm \frac{2\gamma c\sqrt{\alpha }}{d\lambda y^{\frac{d}{2}}}+\mathrm{}.$$
(10)   
Here $`\gamma `$ is an undetermined constant as $`\beta `$ in (5). In order to treat general case, we assume $`\gamma \beta `$ in general. We consider the static configuration $`x^0=\tau `$, $`x^1x=\sigma `$, $`x^2=x^3=\mathrm{}=x^{d1}=0`$ and $`y=y(x)`$. Substituting the configuration into (9), we find

$$S=\frac{T}{2\pi }𝑑xh\left(\varphi (y)\right)y\sqrt{\frac{f(y)}{y}\left(_xy\right)^2+1}.$$
(11)   
Here $`T`$ is the length of the region of the definition of $`\tau `$. The orbit of $`y`$ can be obtained by minimizing the action $`S`$ or solving the Euler-Lagrange equation $`\frac{\delta S}{\delta y}_x\left(\frac{\delta S}{\delta \left(_xy\right)}\right)=0`$. The Euler-Lagrange equation tells that

$$E_0=\frac{h\left(\varphi (y)\right)y}{\sqrt{\frac{f(y)}{y}\left(_xy\right)^2+1}}$$
(12)   
is a constant. If we assume $`y`$ has a finite minimum $`y_0`$, where $`_xy|_{y=y_0}=0`$, $`E_0`$ is given by

$$E_0=h\left(\varphi (y_0)\right)y_0.$$
(13)   
Introducing a parameter $`t`$, we parametrize $`y`$ by

$$y=y_0\mathrm{cosh}t.$$
(14)   
Then using (3), (10), (12) and (14), we find

$`x`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{y_0^{\frac{1}{2}}}{A}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^t}𝑑t\mathrm{cosh}^{\frac{3}{2}}t\left\{1\pm B\mathrm{sinh}^2t\left(\mathrm{cosh}^2t\mathrm{cosh}^{2\frac{d}{2}}t\right)+𝒪(y_0^d)\right\}`$ (15)   
$`A{\displaystyle \frac{2\lambda }{\sqrt{d(d1)}}},B{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma c\sqrt{\alpha }}{d\lambda }}.`$   
Taking $`t+\mathrm{}`$, we find the distance $`L`$ between ”quark” and ”anti-quark” is given by

$`L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Cy_0^{\frac{1}{2}}}{A}}\pm {\displaystyle \frac{BS_dy_0^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}{A}}+𝒪(y_0^{\frac{2d+1}{2}})`$ (16)   
$`C`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑t\mathrm{cosh}^{\frac{3}{2}}t={\displaystyle \frac{2^{\frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{3}{4}\right)^2}{\sqrt{\pi }}}`$   
$`S_d`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑t\mathrm{cosh}^{\frac{1}{2}}t\mathrm{sinh}^2t\left(1\mathrm{cosh}^{\frac{d}{2}}t\right).`$   
Especially $`S_4=C`$. Eq.(16) can be solved with respect to $`y_0`$ and we find

$$y_0=\left(\frac{C}{AL}\right)^2\left\{1\pm \frac{BS_d}{C}\left(\frac{AL}{C}\right)^d+𝒪\left(L^{2d}\right)\right\}.$$
(17)   
Using (12), (14) and (16), we find the following expression for the action $`S`$

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{T}{2\pi }}E(L)`$   
$`E(L)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑t{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{dt}}{\displaystyle \frac{h\left(\varphi (y(t))\right)^2y(t)^2}{h\left(\varphi (y_0)\right)^2y_0}}.`$ (18)   
Here $`E(L)`$ expresses the total energy of the “quark”-“anti-quark” system. The energy $`E(L)`$ in (S0.Ex5), however, contains the divergence due to the self energies of the infinitely heavy “quark” and “anti-quark”. The sum of their self energies can be estimated by considering the configuration $`x^0=\tau `$, $`x^1=x^2=x^3=\mathrm{}=x^{d1}=0`$ and $`y=y(\sigma )`$ (note that $`x_1`$ vanishes here) and the minimum of $`y`$ is $`y_0`$. Using the parametrization of (14) and identifying $`t`$ with $`\sigma `$ ($`t=\sigma `$), we find the following expression of the sum of self energies:

$`E_{\mathrm{self}}={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑th\left(\varphi (y(t))\right)y(t)\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{f\left(y(t)\right)\left(_ty(t)\right)^2}{y}}}.`$ (19)   
Then the finite potential between “quark” and “anti-quark” is given by

$`E_{q\overline{q}}(L)`$ $``$ $`E(L)E_{\mathrm{self}}`$   
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{C}{AL}}\right)\left\{D_0\pm B\left(D_d+F_d+{\displaystyle \frac{S_dD_0}{C}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{AL}{C}}\right)^d+𝒪(L^{2d})\right\}`$   
$`D_d`$ $``$ $`2{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑t\mathrm{cosh}^{\frac{d+1}{2}}t\mathrm{e}^t`$   
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2^{d\frac{5}{2}}}{(d3)!!\sqrt{\pi }}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{d1}{4}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{4}{d1}}`$   
$`F_d`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑t\mathrm{sinh}^2t\mathrm{cosh}^{\frac{1}{2}}t\left(1\mathrm{cosh}^{\frac{d}{2}}t\right).`$   
Especially since $`F_4=D_4=C`$, we obtain for $`d=4`$

$$E_{q\overline{q}}=\stackrel{~}{L}^1\left\{\frac{2^{\frac{3}{2}}}{\sqrt{\pi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{3}{4}\right)^2+4\pm B\left(\frac{2^{\frac{1}{2}}}{\sqrt{\pi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{3}{4}\right)^2+\frac{8}{3}\right)\stackrel{~}{L}^4+𝒪(\stackrel{~}{L}^8)\right\}.$$
(21)   
Here

$$\stackrel{~}{L}\frac{AL}{C}.$$
(22)   
The behavior in (21) is essentially identical with the results in  but there are some differences. The coefficient in the leading term is different by an adding constant $`4`$, which comes from the ambiguity when subtracting the self energy<sup>3</sup><sup>3</sup>3Since $`y_0`$, the minimum of $`y`$, depends on the distance $`L`$ between “quark” and “anti-quark” as in (17), the self-energy (19) should depend on the distance $`L`$, which gives the ambiguity in the coefficient in the potential energy in (S0.Ex7). . In the second term, there would be an ambiguity coming from the finite renormalization but by properly choosing the undetermined parameter $`\gamma `$ and the constant of the integration $`c`$ in (3), we can reproduce the result in (21).

Let us try to understand better the background under consideration in relation with AdS/CFT correspondence. We have two boundaries at $`y=0`$ and $`y=\mathrm{}`$. Then the renormalization flow would connect two conformal field theories. To be specific, we only consider $`d=2`$ case in the following. We also choose $``$ sign in $`\pm `$ in (4) and $`\varphi _0=0`$ since $`\varphi _0`$ can be absorbed into the redefinition of $`G`$. We rescale the metric tensor by

$$g_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{g}_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{e}^{2\sqrt{2\alpha }\varphi }g_{\mu \nu }.$$
(23)   
The redefined metric behaves when $`y\mathrm{}`$ as

$$d\stackrel{~}{s}^2\stackrel{~}{g}_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu =\frac{1}{2\lambda ^2y^2}dy^2+y\underset{i,j=0}{\overset{d1}{}}\eta _{ij}dx^idx^j.$$
(24)   
If we change the coordinate by $`y=w^1`$, we obtain the standard metric on anti de Sitter space. On the other hand, the redefined metric behaves when $`y0`$ as

$$d\stackrel{~}{s}^2=\frac{4\alpha c^2}{\lambda ^2}\left\{\frac{1}{2\alpha c^2y^2}dy^2+y^1\underset{i,j=0}{\overset{d1}{}}\eta _{ij}dx^idx^j\right\}.$$
(25)   
which is the metric of anti de Sitter space again. In the redefinition of (23), the action in (1) is rewritten as follows:

$$S=\frac{1}{16\pi G}d^{d+1}x\sqrt{g}\mathrm{e}^{\sqrt{2\alpha }\varphi }\left(R\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{e}^{2\sqrt{2\alpha }\varphi }+3\alpha g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi \right).$$
(26)   
Therefore the effective Newton constant $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ and the effective cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are given by

$$\stackrel{~}{G}=\mathrm{e}^{\sqrt{2\alpha }\varphi }G,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\mathrm{e}^{2\sqrt{2\alpha }\varphi }\mathrm{\Lambda }.$$
(27)   
In the usual AdS/CFT correspondence, where the dilaton is constant, the central charge $`c`$ of the conformal field theory on the boundary is given by

$$c=\frac{3l}{2G}.$$
(28)   
here the length scale $`l`$ is defined by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{d(d1)}{l^2}`$. Similarly defining $`\stackrel{~}{l}`$ by $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\frac{d(d1)}{\stackrel{~}{l}^2}`$, we can define the effective central charge by

$$\stackrel{~}{c}\frac{3\stackrel{~}{l}}{2\stackrel{~}{G}}=\frac{3l}{2G}.$$
(29)   
Note that $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ is a constant everywhere, which would tell that the renormalization flow connects conformal field theories with same central charges. Therefore the conformal field theories on two boundaries would correspond to IR/UV duality (for a recent related discussion of RG flow see ref.).

Finally let us note that one can easily generalize the present study for more general background containing other fields like gauge fields , antisymmetric tensor fields, etc.

Acknoweledgements The work by SDO has been partially supported by RFBR project N99-02-16617 and by Graduate College Quantum Field Theory at Leipzig University and by Saxonian Ministry of Science and Arts.