SciPost logo

SciPost Submission Page

Sequential Flows by Irrelevant Operators

by Christian Ferko, Savdeep Sethi

This Submission thread is now published as

Submission summary

Authors (as registered SciPost users): Christian Ferko
Submission information
Preprint Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.04787v3  (pdf)
Date accepted: Feb. 15, 2023
Date submitted: Dec. 12, 2022, 7:25 p.m.
Submitted by: Christian Ferko
Submitted to: SciPost Physics
Ontological classification
Academic field: Physics
Specialties:
  • High-Energy Physics - Theory
Approach: Theoretical

Abstract

We explore whether one can $T \overline{T}$ deform a collection of theories that are already $T \overline{T}$-deformed. This allows us to define classes of irrelevant deformations that know about subsystems. In some basic cases, we explore the spectrum that results from this procedure and we provide numerical evidence in favor of modular invariance. We also study the flow of the classical Lagrangian for free bosons and free fermions under successive deformations. Some of the models found by sequentially flowing are likely to have interesting holographic interpretations.

Author comments upon resubmission

We are resubmitting the manuscript after making the second round of revisions suggested by the two referees.

List of changes

The discussion of the leading irrelevant operator around equation (1.7) has been clarified. The derivation arounds equations (3.7) and (3.8) has been corrected and the language now emphasizes that one must work to leading order in $\lambda_3$ in intermediate steps for the last line of equation (3.8) to be correct. The sentences before and after equation (3.24) has also been modified, since this result depended on equation (3.8), to reflect the additional assumption that $\lambda_3$ and thus $r$ are small.
Current status:
Published

Editorial decision: For Journal SciPost Physics: Publish
(status: Editorial decision fixed and (if required) accepted by authors)

Reports on this Submission

Report #2 by Anonymous (Referee 1) on 2022-12-29 (Invited Report)

Report

I thank the authors for adding the subleading term in (3.7) and (3.8). The additional terms did not end up changing the bound (3.24), which suggests that it might be substantially more difficult to obtain a sharper bound than the one derived here. That is outside the reasonable scope for this article.

Given the strengths of this paper already mentioned in the review of version 1, I recommend publication as is.
  • validity: -
  • significance: -
  • originality: -
  • clarity: -
  • formatting: -
  • grammar: -

Report #1 by Anonymous (Referee 2) on 2022-12-22 (Invited Report)

Report

The authors addressed all the points I raised in my previous reports. I recommend publication.
  • validity: -
  • significance: -
  • originality: -
  • clarity: -
  • formatting: -
  • grammar: -

Login to report or comment