Cluster-like coordinates in supersymmetric quantum field theory.

On 2nd-stage quantization of quantum cluster algebras

Methods and results from the representation theory of finite di- mensional algebras have led to many interactions with other areas of mathe- matics. Such areas include the theory of Lie algebras and quantum groups, commutative algebra, algebraic geometry and topology, and in particular the new theory of cluster algebras. The aim of this workshop was to further de- velop such interactions and to stimulate progress in the representation theory of algebras.

Of the three organizers of the conference N. Hitchin is a mathematician, A. Kapustin and W. Nahm are physicists. Ideas from physics, in particular from string theory and related areas had a profound influence on algebraic and differential geometry. Conversely, many developments in string theory use very recent mathematical results. There were 19 talks at the workshop, 12 by mathematicians and 7 by physicists, but in many cases an outside observer would have had difficulties to sort them out. Quantum field theory often allows continuous interpolations between geometrical structures of topologically different manifolds. A particularly important example is mirror symmetry, where the complexified Kähler cone of one manifold corresponds to the moduli space of complex structures of the mirror manifold. Several talks explored geometrical and number theoretical aspects of this connection. Mirror symmetry can be understood in terms of torus fibrations and an isomorphism between the quantum field theories given by maps to a torus and to its dual (T-duality). The B-field of string theory can be described in terms of non-commutative geometry on the tori, and its effect on T-duality has been investigated. The quantum field theories which provide these dualities are supersymmetric conformally invariant quantum field theories in two dimensions. In mathematics, large parts of their structures have been axiomatised in the language of vertex operator algebras, but much remains to be done. A promising mathematical approach is provided by the chiral de Rham complex. This cohomology of this complex seems to be invariant under mirror symmetry, but its physical meaning is not yet clear. This led to many discussions between mathematicians and physicists. Indeed, the free time for discussions was at least as important as the lectures for learning the language of researchers with a different background and for making use of their ideas. An area in which the common understanding is well advance is topological field theory. Here one has good axioms and many of the analytic problems of conformally invariant quantum field theories can be ignored. One can solve rather complex problems and one can make contact with new geometrical ideas, in particular generalised complex structures. The latter allow to interpolate between complex and symplectic geometry, which should become important for both physics and mathematics. To understand all of conformal field theory at a similar mathematical depth will take more time, but already now relations to mixed Hodge structures have given much insight. Eventually many so far intractable problems should be solvable by the use of quantum field theoretical ideas, for example the construction of the non-singular Ricci flat metrics on K3. Perturbative string theory can be described in terms of conformal field theory, but the complete theory has more excitations than strings. Among them the best understood are the D-branes, many features of which can be understood in terms of boundary states in conformal field theory. Some of these branes are related to complex submanifolds, others to certain Lagrangian submanifolds, and their description involves twisted K-theory and derived categories. The development of a common language between mathematicians and physicists is well under way, and the workshop has made a contribution which all participants found very stimulating. In Europe such meetings between mathematicians and string theorists are rare, so the workshop was particularly useful. Much of the time was reserved for informal discussions. On one evening there was a discussion on the relation between classical and quantum geometry. Weather predictions for the free afternoon had been bad, but finally the weather was splendid and the supply of Black Forest cake matched the demand.

Cluster algebras were conceived by Fomin and Zelevinsky (1) in the spring of 2000 as a tool for studying dual canonical bases and total positivity in semisimple Lie groups. However, the theory of cluster algebras has since taken on a life of its own, as connections and applications have been discovered in diverse areas of mathematics, including representation theory of quivers and finite dimensional algebras, cf., for example, refs. 2⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–15; Poisson geometry (16⇓⇓–19); Teichmuller theory (20⇓⇓⇓–24); string theory (25⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–31); discrete dynamical systems and integrability (6, 32⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–38); and combinatorics (39⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–47). Quite remarkably, cluster algebras provide a unifying algebraic and combinatorial framework for a wide variety of phenomena in these and other settings. We refer the reader to the survey papers (36, 48⇓⇓⇓⇓–53) and to the cluster algebras portal (www.math.lsa.umich.edu/~fomin/cluster.html) for various introductions to cluster algebras and their links with other subjects in mathematics (and physics). In brief, a cluster algebra A of rank k is a subring of an ambient field ℱ of rational functions in k variables, say x 1, …, x k . Unlike most commutative rings, a cluster algebra is not presented at the outset via a complete set of generators and relations. Instead, from the data of the initial seed — which includes the k initial cluster variables x 1, …, x k , plus an exchange matrix — one uses an iterative procedure called “mutation” to produce the rest of the cluster variables. In particular, each new cluster … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: williams{at}math.berkeley.edu. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1

This is an introductory survey on cluster algebras and their (additive) categorification using derived categories of Ginzburg algebras. After a gentle introduction to cluster combinatorics, we review important examples of coordinate rings admitting a cluster algebra structure. We then present the general definition of a cluster algebra and describe the interplay between cluster variables, coefficients, c-vectors and g-vectors. We show how c-vectors appear in the study of quantum cluster algebras and their links to the quantum dilogarithm. We then present the framework of additive categorification of cluster algebras based on the notion of quiver with potential and on the derived category of the associated Ginzburg algebra. We show how the combinatorics introduced previously lift to the categorical level and how this leads to proofs, for cluster algebras associated with quivers, of some of Fomin-Zelevinsky's fundamental conjectures.

Let \(S(n)\) be the category of invariant subspaces of nilpotent operators with nilpotency index at most \(n\). Such submodule categories have been studied already in 1934 by Birkhoff, they have attracted a lot of attention in recent years, for example in connection with some weighted projective lines (Kussin, Lenzing, Meltzer). On the other hand, we consider the preprojective algebra \(\Pi _n\) of type \(\mathbb {A}_n\); the preprojective algebras were introduced by Gelfand and Ponomarev, they are now of great interest, for example they form an important tool to study quantum groups (Lusztig) or cluster algebras (Geiss, Leclerc, Schroer). We are going to discuss the connection between the submodule category \(\mathcal {S}(n)\) and the module category \(\hbox {mod}\;\Pi _{n-1}\) of the preprojective algebra \(\Pi _{n-1}\). Dense functors \(\mathcal {S}(n) \rightarrow \hbox {mod}\;\Pi _{n-1}\) are known to exist: one has been constructed quite a long time ago by Auslander and Reiten, recently another one by Li and Zhang. We will show that these two functors are full, dense, objective functors with index \(2n\), thus \(\hbox {mod}\;\Pi _{n-1}\) is obtained from \(\mathcal {S}(n)\) by factoring out an ideal which is generated by \(2n\) indecomposable objects. As a byproduct we also obtain new examples of ideals in triangulated categories, namely ideals \(\mathcal {I}\) in a triangulated category \(\mathcal {T}\) which are generated by an idempotent such that the factor category \(\mathcal {T}/\mathcal {I}\) is an abelian category.

$Q$-systems are recursion relations satisfied by the characters of the restrictions of special finite-dimensional modules of quantum affine algebras. They can also be viewed as mutations in certain cluster algebras, which have a natural quantum deformation. In this paper, we explain the relation in the simply-laced case between the resulting quantum $Q$-systems and the graded tensor product of Feigin and Loktev. We prove the graded version of the $M=N$ identities, and write expressions for these as non-commuting evaluated multi-residues of suitable products of solutions of the quantum $Q$-system. This leads to a simple reformulation of Feigin and Loktev's fusion coefficients as matrix elements in a representation of the quantum $Q$-system algebra.

In this paper we study consequences of the results of Kang et al. [ Monoidal categorification of cluster algebras , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 31 (2018), 349–426] on a monoidal categorification of the unipotent quantum coordinate ring $A_{q}(\mathfrak{n}(w))$ together with the Laurent phenomenon of cluster algebras. We show that if a simple module $S$ in the category ${\mathcal{C}}_{w}$ strongly commutes with all the cluster variables in a cluster $[\mathscr{C}]$ , then $[S]$ is a cluster monomial in $[\mathscr{C}]$ . If $S$ strongly commutes with cluster variables except for exactly one cluster variable $[M_{k}]$ , then $[S]$ is either a cluster monomial in $[\mathscr{C}]$ or a cluster monomial in $\unicode[STIX]{x1D707}_{k}([\mathscr{C}])$ . We give a new proof of the fact that the upper global basis is a common triangular basis (in the sense of Qin [ Triangular bases in quantum cluster algebras and monoidal categorification conjectures , Duke Math. 166 (2017), 2337–2442]) of the localization $\widetilde{A}_{q}(\mathfrak{n}(w))$ of $A_{q}(\mathfrak{n}(w))$ at the frozen variables. A characterization on the commutativity of a simple module $S$ with cluster variables in a cluster $[\mathscr{C}]$ is given in terms of the denominator vector of $[S]$ with respect to the cluster $[\mathscr{C}]$ .

This is a call for contributions to a special issue of Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical dedicated to cluster algebras in mathematical physics. Over the ten years since their introduction by Fomin and Zelevinsky, the theory of cluster algebras has witnessed a spectacular growth, first and foremost due to the many links that have been discovered with a wide range of subjects in mathematics and, increasingly, theoretical and mathematical physics. The main motivation of this special issue is to gather together reviews, recent developments and open problems, mainly from a mathematical physics viewpoint, into a single comprehensive issue. We expect that such a special issue will become a valuable reference for the broad scientific community working in mathematical and theoretical physics. The issue will consist of invited review articles and contributed papers containing new results on the interplays of cluster algebras with mathematical physics.Editorial policyThe Guest Editors for this issue are Philippe Di Francesco, Michael Gekhtman, Atsuo Kuniba and Masahito Yamazaki.The areas and topics for this issue include, but are not limited to: discrete integrable systems arising from cluster mutationscluster structure on Poisson varietiescluster algebras and soliton interactionscluster positivity conjectureY-systems in the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz and Zamolodchikov's periodicity conjectureT-system of transfer matrices of integrable lattice modelsdilogarithm identities in conformal field theorywall crossing in 4d N = 2 supersymmetric gauge theories4d N = 1 quiver gauge theories described by networksscattering amplitudes of 4d N = 4 theories3d N = 2 gauge theories described by flat connections on 3-manifoldsintegrability of dimer/Ising models on graphs.All contributions will be refereed and processed according to the usual procedure of the journal.Guidelines for preparation of contributions The deadline for contributed papers is 31 March 2014. This deadline will allow the special issue to appear at the end of 2014.There is no strict regulation on article size, but as a guide the preferable size is 15–30 pages for contributed papers and 40–60 pages for reviews. Further advice on publishing your work in Journal of Physics A may be found at iopscience.iop.org/jphysa.Contributions to the special issue should be submitted by web upload via ScholarOne Manuscripts, quoting ‘JPhysA special issue on cluster algebras in mathematical physics’. Submissions should ideally be in standard LaTeX form. Please see the website for further information on electronic submissions.All contributions should be accompanied by a read-me file or covering letter giving the postal and e-mail addresses for correspondence. The Publishing Office should be notified of any subsequent change of address.The special issue will be published in the print and online versions of the journal.

This is a call for contributions to a special issue of Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical dedicated to cluster algebras in mathematical physics. Over the ten years since their introduction by Fomin and Zelevinsky, the theory of cluster algebras has witnessed a spectacular growth, first and foremost due to the many links that have been discovered with a wide range of subjects in mathematics and, increasingly, theoretical and mathematical physics. The main motivation of this special issue is to gather together reviews, recent developments and open problems, mainly from a mathematical physics viewpoint, into a single comprehensive issue. We expect that such a special issue will become a valuable reference for the broad scientific community working in mathematical and theoretical physics. The issue will consist of invited review articles and contributed papers containing new results on the interplays of cluster algebras with mathematical physics.Editorial policyThe Guest Editors for this issue are Philippe Di Francesco, Michael Gekhtman, Atsuo Kuniba and Masahito Yamazaki.The areas and topics for this issue include, but are not limited to: discrete integrable systems arising from cluster mutationscluster structure on Poisson varietiescluster algebras and soliton interactionscluster positivity conjectureY-systems in the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz and Zamolodchikov's periodicity conjectureT-system of transfer matrices of integrable lattice modelsdilogarithm identities in conformal field theorywall crossing in 4d N = 2 supersymmetric gauge theories4d N = 1 quiver gauge theories described by networksscattering amplitudes of 4d N = 4 theories3d N = 2 gauge theories described by flat connections on 3-manifoldsintegrability of dimer/Ising models on graphs.All contributions will be refereed and processed according to the usual procedure of the journal.Guidelines for preparation of contributions The deadline for contributed papers is 31 March 2014. This deadline will allow the special issue to appear at the end of 2014.There is no strict regulation on article size, but as a guide the preferable size is 15–30 pages for contributed papers and 40–60 pages for reviews. Further advice on publishing your work in Journal of Physics A may be found at iopscience.iop.org/jphysa.Contributions to the special issue should be submitted by web upload via ScholarOne Manuscripts, quoting ‘JPhysA special issue on cluster algebras in mathematical physics’. Submissions should ideally be in standard LaTeX form. Please see the website for further information on electronic submissions.All contributions should be accompanied by a read-me file or covering letter giving the postal and e-mail addresses for correspondence. The Publishing Office should be notified of any subsequent change of address.The special issue will be published in the print and online versions of the journal.

We establish a combinatorial realization of continued fractions as quotients of cardinalities of sets. These sets are sets of perfect matchings of certain graphs, the snake graphs, that appear naturally in the theory of cluster algebras. To a continued fraction $[a_{1},a_{2},\ldots ,a_{n}]$ we associate a snake graph ${\mathcal{G}}[a_{1},a_{2},\ldots ,a_{n}]$ such that the continued fraction is the quotient of the number of perfect matchings of ${\mathcal{G}}[a_{1},a_{2},\ldots ,a_{n}]$ and ${\mathcal{G}}[a_{2},\ldots ,a_{n}]$. We also show that snake graphs are in bijection with continued fractions. We then apply this connection between cluster algebras and continued fractions in two directions. First we use results from snake graph calculus to obtain new identities for the continuants of continued fractions. Then we apply the machinery of continued fractions to cluster algebras and obtain explicit direct formulas for quotients of elements of the cluster algebra as continued fractions of Laurent polynomials in the initial variables. Building on this formula, and using classical methods for infinite periodic continued fractions, we also study the asymptotic behavior of quotients of elements of the cluster algebra.

We give an algebraic proof of the independence of Coxeter moves involved in the construction of positive representations of split-real quantum groups, thus completing a gap in the original construction. To do this, we propose a new quantized version of Lusztig’s Injectivity Lemma in the language of quantum cluster algebra, the proof of which by Tits’ Lemma reduces to calculations involving sequences of Coxeter moves forming rank 3 cycles. We give a new, constructive proof of Tits’ Lemma, and provide the required explicit computation of the quantum cluster mutations under these rank 3 cycles using certain cluster algebraic tricks via universally Laurent polynomials.

Despite quantum theory’s remarkable success at predicting the statistical results of experiments, many philosophers worry that it nonetheless lacks some crucial connection between theory and experiment. Such worries constitute the Quantum Measurement Problems. One can broadly identify two kinds of worries: (1) pragmatic: it is unclear how to model our measurement processes in order to extract experimental predictions, and (2) realist: we lack a satisfying metaphysical account of measurement processes. While both issues deserve attention, the pragmatic worries have worse consequences if left unanswered: If our pragmatic theory-to-experiment linkage is unsatisfactory, then quantum theory is at risk of losing both its evidential support and its physical salience. Avoiding these risks is at the core of what I will call the Pragmatic Measurement Problem. Fortunately, the pragmatic measurement problem is not too difficult to solve. For non-relativistic quantum theory, the story goes roughly as follows: One can model each of quantum theory’s key experimental successes on a case-by-case basis by using a measurement chain. In modeling this measurement chain, it is pragmatically necessary to switch from using a quantum model to a classical model at some point. That is, it is pragmatically necessary to invoke a Heisenberg cut at some point along the measurement chain. Past this case-by-case measurement framework, one can then strive for a wide-scoping measurement theory capable of modeling all (or nearly all) possible measurement processes. For non-relativistic quantum theory, this leads us to our usual projective measurement theory. As a bonus, proceeding this way also gives us an empirically meaningful characterization of the theory’s observables as (positive) self-adjoint operators. But how does this story have to change when we move into the context of quantum field theory (QFT)? It is well known that in QFT almost all localized projective measurements violate causality, allowing for faster-than-light signaling; These are Sorkin’s impossible measurements. Thus, the story of measurement in QFT cannot end as it did before with a projective measurement theory. But does this then mean that we need to radically rethink the way we model measurement processes in QFT? Are our current experimental practices somehow misguided? Fortunately not. I will argue that (once properly understood) our old approach to modeling quantum measurements is still applicable in QFT contexts. We ought to first use measurement chains to build up a case-by-case measurement framework for QFT. Modeling these measurement chains will require us to invoke what I will call a QFT-cut. That is, at some point along the measurement chain we must switch from using a QFT model to a non-QFT model. Past this case-by-case measurement framework, we can then strive for both a new wide-scoping measurement theory for QFT and an empirically meaningful characterization of its observables. It is at this point that significantly more theoretical work is needed. This paper ends by briefly reviewing the state of the art in the physics literature regarding the modeling of measurement processes involving quantum fields.

Self-consistent hartree description of finite nuclei in a relativistic quantum field theory

In this paper we explore the possibility of giving a justification of the “semantic information” content and measure, in the framework of the recent coalgebraic approach to quantum systems and quantum computation, extended to QFT systems. In QFT, indeed, any quantum system has to be considered as an “open” system, because it is always interacting with the background fluctuations of the quantum vacuum. Namely, the Hamiltonian in QFT always includes the quantum system and its inseparable thermal bath, formally “entangled” like an algebra with its coalgebra, according to the principle of the “doubling” of the degrees of freedom (DDF) between them. This is the core of the representation theory of cognitive neuroscience based on QFT. Moreover, in QFT, the probabilities of the quantum states follow a Wigner distribution, based on the notion and measure of quasiprobability, where regions integrated under given expectation values do not represent mutually exclusive states. This means that a computing agent, either natural or artificial, in QFT, against the quantum Turing machine paradigm, is able to change dynamically the representation space of its computations. This depends on the possibility of interpreting QFT system computations within the framework of category theory logic and its principle of duality between opposed categories, such as the algebra and coalgebra categories of QFT. This allows us to justify and not only to suppose, like in the “theory of strong semantic information” of L. Floridi, the definition of modal “local truth” and the notion of semantic information as a measure of it, despite both measures being defined on quasiprobability distributions.