1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

2: %\usepackage{showkeys}

3: \usepackage{epsf,amssymb,psfrag,amsmath}

4: %\usepackage{hyperref}

5: %\usepackage[active]{srcltx}

6: \catcode`\@=11

7: %-------------------------------------------------------------

8: \textwidth 173mm \textheight 235mm \topmargin -50pt \oddsidemargin -0.45cm \evensidemargin -0.45cm

9: %-------------------------------------------------------------

10: %\def \thesection {\arabic{section}.}

11: %\def \thesubsection {\thesection\arabic{subsection}.}

12: %\def \thesubsubsection {\thesubsection\arabic{subsubsection}.}

13: %-------------------------------------------------------------

14: \def \be  {\begin{equation}}

15: \def \ee  {\end{equation}}

16: \def \ba  {\begin{eqnarray}}

17: \def \ea  {\end{eqnarray}}

18: \def \baa {\begin{eqnarray*}}

19: \def \eaa {\end{eqnarray*}}

20: \def \bb  {\begin {thebibliography} }

21: \def \eb  {\end{thebibliography}}

22: %\def \lab #1 {\label{#1}               \mbox{\# ${#1}$}}

23: \def \lab #1 {\label{#1}}

24: \newcommand \ci [1] {\cite{#1}}

25: \newcommand \bi [1] {\bibitem{#1}}

26: \newcommand\re[1]{({\ref{#1}})}

27: \def \qqquad {\qquad\quad}

28: \def \qqqquad {\qquad\qquad}

29: %-------------------------------------------------------------

30: \def \matrix #1 {\left(\begin{array}{cc} #1 \end{array}\right)}

31: \def \Tr {\mathop{\rm Tr}\nolimits}

32: \def \tr {\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits}

33: \def \Im {\mathop{\rm Im}\nolimits}

34: \def \Re {\mathop{\rm Re}\nolimits}

35: \def \res{\mathop{\rm res}\nolimits}

36: \def \e  {\mathop{\rm e}\nolimits}

37: \newcommand\lr[1]{{\left({#1}\right)}}

38: \newcommand \widebar [1] {\overline{#1}}

39: \newcommand\bin[2]{\left({#1}\atop{#2}\right)}

40: \newcommand \vev [1] {\langle{#1}\rangle}

41: \newcommand \VEV [1] {\left\langle{#1}\right\rangle}

42: \newcommand \ket [1] {|{#1}\rangle}

43: \newcommand \bra [1] {\langle {#1}|}

44: \newcommand \partder [1] {{\partial \over\partial #1}}

45: \newcommand{\as}{\ifmmode\alpha_{\rm s}\else{$\alpha_{\rm s}$}\fi}

46: \newcommand{\asbar}{\ifmmode\bar{\alpha}_{\rm s}\else{$\bar{\alpha}_{\rm s}$}\fi}

47: \newcommand{\ft}[2]{{\textstyle\frac{#1}{#2}}}

48: \newcommand{\inclfig}[2]{\mbox{\epsfxsize=#1cm \epsfbox{#2.ps}}}

49: \newcommand{\insertfig}[2]{\mbox{\epsfxsize=#1cm \epsfbox{#2.eps}}}

50: 

51: \font\cmss=cmss12 \font\cmsss=cmss10 at 11pt

52: \def\inbar{\,\vrule height1.5ex width.4pt depth0pt}

53: \def\IC{\relax\hbox{$\inbar\kern-.3em{\rm C}$}}

54: \def\IZ{\relax{\hbox{\cmss Z\kern-.4em Z}}}

55: \def\IR{{\hbox{{\rm I}\kern-.2em\hbox{\rm R}}}}

56: \def\R{{\tiny \IR}}

57: \def\IP{{\hbox{{\rm I}\kern-.2em\hbox{\rm P}}}}

58: \def\II{\hbox{{1}\kern-.25em\hbox{l}}}

59: 

60: \def\numberbysection{\@addtoreset{equation}{section}

61:                      \def\theequation{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}}

62: \numberbysection

63: 

64: \newcommand \mybf[1] {\mbox{\boldmath$\scriptstyle {#1} $}}

65: \newcommand \Mybf[1] {\mbox{\boldmath$ {#1} $}}

66: \newbox\lett\newdimen\lheight\newdimen\lwidth

67: \def\ontop#1#2{\setbox\lett=\hbox{#2}\lheight\ht\lett

68: \multiply\lheight by 12 \divide\lheight by 10\relax%

69: \lwidth\wd\lett \multiply\lwidth by 8 \divide\lwidth by 10\relax #2\kern-\lwidth%

70: \raise\lheight\hbox{{$\scriptstyle #1$}}\kern.1ex}

71: 

72: 

73: 

74: \begin{document}

75: 

76: 

77: \begin{titlepage}

78: \begin{flushright}

79: \begin{tabular}{l}

80: LPT--Orsay--06--04 \\ %[-1mm]

81: ITEP-TH-02/06 \\

82: hep-th/0601112

83: \end{tabular}

84: \end{flushright}

85: 

86: \vskip2cm

87: 

88: \centerline{\large \bf Logarithmic scaling in gauge/string correspondence}

89: 

90: \vspace{1cm}

91: 

92: \centerline{\sc A.V. Belitsky$^a$, A.S. Gorsky$^b$, G.P. Korchemsky$^c$}

93: 

94: \vspace{10mm}

95: 

96: \centerline{\it $^a$Department of Physics and Astronomy, Arizona State

97: University} \centerline{\it Tempe, AZ 85287-1504, USA}

98: 

99: \vspace{3mm}

100: 

101: \centerline{\it $^b$Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics }

102: \centerline{\it  B. Cheremushkinskaya ul. 25, 117259 Moscow, Russia}

103: 

104: \vspace{3mm}

105: 

106: \centerline{\it $^c$Laboratoire de Physique Th\'eorique\footnote{Unit\'e

107:                     Mixte de Recherche du CNRS (UMR 8627).},

108:                     Universit\'e de Paris XI}

109: \centerline{\it 91405 Orsay C\'edex, France}

110: 

111: 

112: \def\thefootnote{\fnsymbol{footnote}}%

113: \vspace{1cm}

114: 

115: \centerline{\bf Abstract}

116: 

117: \vspace{5mm}

118: 

119: We study anomalous dimensions of (super)conformal Wilson operators at weak and strong

120: coupling making use of the integrability symmetry on both sides of the gauge/string

121: correspondence and elucidate the origin of their single-logarithmic behavior for long

122: operators/strings in the limit of large Lorentz spin. On the gauge theory side, we

123: apply the method of the Baxter $Q-$operator to identify different scaling regimes in

124: the anomalous dimensions in integrable sectors of (supersymmetric) Yang-Mills theory

125: to one-loop order and determine the values of the Lorentz spin at which the logarithmic

126: scaling sets in. We demonstrate that the conventional semiclassical approach based on

127: the analysis of the distribution of Bethe roots breaks down in this domain. We work out

128: an asymptotic expression for the anomalous dimensions which is valid throughout the

129: entire region of variation of the Lorentz spin. On the string theory side, the logarithmic

130: scaling occurs when two most distant points of the folded spinning string approach the

131: boundary of the AdS space. In terms of the spectral curve for the classical string sigma

132: model, the same configuration is described by an elliptic curve with two branching points

133: approaching values determined by the square root of the 't Hooft coupling constant. As a

134: result, the anomalous dimensions cease to obey the BMN scaling and scale logarithmically

135: with the Lorentz spin.

136: 

137: \end{titlepage}

138: 

139: \setcounter{footnote} 0

140: 

141: %\thispagestyle{empty}

142: 

143: \newpage

144: 

145: \pagestyle{plain} \setcounter{page} 1

146: 

147: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

148: \section{Introduction}

149: \label{Introduction}

150: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

151: 

152: It is well known that in four-dimensional gauge theories the anomalous dimensions

153: of composite Wilson operators carrying a large Lorentz spin scale (at most)

154: logarithmically with the spin. This result is just one of the facets of a more

155: general Sudakov phenomenon \cite{Col89} and it can be traced back to the

156: existence of massless particles of spin one in the

157: spectrum -- the gauge fields. The logarithmic scaling of anomalous dimensions is

158: a universal feature of all gauge theories ranging from QCD to the maximally

159: supersymmetric $\mathcal{N} = 4$ Yang-Mills (SYM) theory. In particular, in the

160: simplest case of twist-two Wilson operators with large Lorentz spin $N \gg 1$,

161: the anomalous dimension behaves as (in the adjoint representation of the

162: $SU(N_c)$ group)~\cite{Kor88}

163: \be\label{gamma=cusp}

164: \gamma (\lambda) = 2 \Gamma_{\rm cusp}(\lambda) \ln N + \mathcal{O} (N^0) \, ,

165: \ee

166: where $\lambda=g_{\rm \scriptscriptstyle YM}^2 N_c$ is the 't Hooft coupling

167: constant and $\Gamma_{\rm cusp}(\lambda)$ is the so-called cusp anomalous

168: dimension~\cite{Pol80}. $\Gamma_{\rm cusp}(\lambda)$ is not universal however and

169: depends on the theory under consideration. It has numerous applications in

170: phenomenology of strong interactions and its calculation both at weak and strong

171: coupling regimes is one of the long-standing problems in gauge theories. At

172: present, the cusp anomaly is known in perturbation theory to the lowest three

173: orders~\cite{MocVerVog04,BerDixSmi05} and there exists a prediction at strong

174: coupling in the $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM theory based on the gauge/string

175: correspondence~\cite{GubKlePol03,Kru02,BelGorKor03}.

176: 

177: The gauge/string correspondence \cite{Mal97} offers a powerful tool to study the

178: dynamics of four-dimen\-sional Yang-Mills theories at strong coupling. It

179: establishes a correspondence between Wilson operators in $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM

180: theory and certain string excitations on the AdS${}_5\times$S${}^5$ background

181: \cite{BerMalNas02,GubKlePol03}. For operators carrying large quantum numbers (Lorentz spin,

182: isotopic $R-$charge,...) their scaling dimension at strong coupling can be found

183: as an energy of dual (semi)classical string configurations propagating on the

184: curved space. As was shown in Ref.~\cite{GubKlePol03}, the operators of twist two

185: with large Lorentz spin $N$ are dual to a folded string rotating with the angular

186: momentum $N$ on the AdS${}_3$ part of the target space. The resulting expression

187: for the twist-two anomalous dimension takes the form \re{gamma=cusp} with the

188: cusp anomalous dimension at strong coupling given by

189: \be\label{cusp}

190: \Gamma_{\rm cusp}(\lambda) \stackrel{\lambda

191: \gg 1}{=} \frac{\sqrt{\lambda} }{2\pi} + \mathcal{O}((\sqrt{\lambda})^0)\,.

192: \ee

193: Later, the dual string picture was generalized to Wilson operators of higher

194: twist in the $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM theory carrying both large Lorentz spin and the

195: $R-$charge~\cite{FroTse03}. For operators built from holomorphic scalar fields

196: carrying a unit isotopic charge, the total $R-$charge equals the twist, $L$. For

197: such operators, in the dual picture the center-of-mass of the string rotates with

198: the angular momentum $L$ along a large circle of S${}^5$.

199: 

200: The important difference between the operators of twist two, $L=2$, and of higher

201: twist, $L\ge 3$, is that the latter are not uniquely specified by the total

202: Lorentz spin $N$. More precisely, for $L\ge 3$ there exist several

203: (superconformal) operators with the same $N$. These operators mix under

204: renormalization and the size of the mixing matrix rapidly increases with $L$ and

205: $N$. As a consequence, the anomalous dimensions of Wilson operators of high twist

206: $L\ge 3$ also depend on the integers $\ell = 1,2, \ldots$ which enumerate

207: eigenvalues of the mixing matrix (=anomalous dimensions) for a given Lorentz spin

208: $N$. For fixed $L$ and large $N$, possible values of the anomalous dimension

209: occupy a band~\cite{BelGorKor03}. The lower boundary of the band scales for

210: $N\to\infty$ as in \re{gamma=cusp} while the upper boundary scales as $\sim

211: L\,\Gamma_{\rm cusp}(\lambda) \ln N$. This implies that for operators of twist

212: $L=3,4,\ldots$ the minimal anomalous dimension has the same leading asymptotic

213: behavior for $N\to\infty$ as the twist-two anomalous dimension, Eq.~\re{gamma=cusp}.

214: This result is rather general and it holds true in a generic Yang-Mills theory

215: including QCD and $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM theory.

216: 

217: In the present paper, we study the properties of the minimal anomalous dimensions

218: on both sides of the gauge/string correspondence in the limit of large twist

219: $L$ and Lorentz spin $N$. On the string side, the corresponding single-trace

220: Wilson operators are dual to a folded string spinning with large angular momentum

221: $N$ in the AdS${}_3$ part of the anti-de Sitter space and boosted along a large

222: circle on the sphere with a large angular momentum $L$ \cite{FroTse03}. The

223: energy $E$ of this classical string configuration defines the leading asymptotics

224: of the anomalous dimension  $\gamma(\lambda) = E - L - N$ of the dual Wilson

225: operator in the $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM theory in the strong coupling regime in

226: planar approximation. The string theory provides a definite prediction for

227: $\gamma(\lambda)$ as a function of $L$ and $N$. One finds that $\gamma(\lambda)$

228: takes different forms in three regimes~\cite{GubKlePol03,FroTse03}:

229: \begin{itemize}

230: \item For $N \ll L$, in the ``short'' string limit

231: \be

232: \label{1st} \gamma (\lambda) = \lambda \frac{m^2}{2} \frac{N}{L^2} + \ldots

233: \ee

234: \item For $N \gg L$, in the ``long'' string limit

235: \be\label{3rd}

236: \gamma (\lambda) =\left \{

237: \begin{array}{l}

238: {\displaystyle \frac{\lambda}{2\pi^2} \frac{m^2}{L} \ln^2({N}/{L}) + \ldots \,

239: ,\qquad

240: \mbox{for $\xi_{\rm str} < 1$}\,,} \\[3mm]

241: {\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{\pi}m\ln ({N}/\sqrt{\lambda}) +

242: \ldots \, ,\qquad \mbox{for $\xi_{\rm str} \gg 1$}\, ,}

243: \end{array}

244: \right.

245: \ee

246: \end{itemize}

247: with the parameter $\xi_{\rm str}$ defined as $\xi_{\rm str} =

248: \lambda\ln^2(N/L)/L^2$. Here the integer $m$ counts the number of times the

249: string is folded onto itself. The minimal anomalous dimension corresponds to a

250: single-folded string, $m=1$. In that case, for $\xi_{\rm str} \gg 1$, the leading

251: asymptotic behavior of $\gamma(\lambda)$ does not depend on the twist $L$ and is

252: the same as for $L = 2$ operators, Eqs.~\re{gamma=cusp} and \re{cusp}. For

253: $\xi_{\rm str} < 1$, the role of the twist $L$ is to create the ``BMN window'',

254: i.e., a region in the parameter space in which the anomalous dimension has an

255: expansion in powers of the BMN coupling $\lambda^\prime \equiv \lambda/(\pi

256: L)^2$~\cite{BerMalNas02}. It is believed that the first few terms in the

257: expansion of $\gamma(\lambda)$ in powers of $\lambda'$ should match similar

258: expressions for the anomalous dimensions of Wilson operators of twist $L$ and

259: spin $N$ obtained in the $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM theory in the weak coupling

260: regime~\cite{Tse03}.

261: 

262: On the gauge theory side, the calculation of anomalous dimensions of higher twist

263: operators with large Lorentz spin turns out to be an extremely nontrivial task in

264: a generic Yang-Mills theory even to one-loop order due to a large size of the

265: mixing matrix. The problem can be overcome thanks to hidden integrability

266: symmetry of the dilatation operator~\cite{BraDerMan98,Bel99,DerKorMan99}, which

267: maps the one-loop mixing matrix for Wilson operators of twist $L$ belonging to

268: the so-called holomorphic $SL(2)$ sector into a Hamiltonian of the Heisenberg

269: magnet of length $L$ and spin $s$ determined by the conformal spin of the quantum

270: fields (for a review see Ref.~\cite{Bel04}). This observation allows one to

271: calculate the exact eigenspectrum of anomalous dimensions of Wilson operators of

272: arbitrary twist and Lorentz spin in integrable sectors of Yang-Mills theory by

273: means of the Quantum Inverse Scattering Method~\cite{TakFad79}. In the

274: $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM theory, the minimal anomalous dimension of Wilson operators

275: built from $L$ scalar fields and carrying the Lorentz spin $N$ can be identified

276: to one-loop accuracy as the minimal energy in the eigenspectrum of the $SL(2)$

277: Heisenberg magnet of length $L$ and the total spin $N+Ls$ with $s=\ft12$

278: \cite{BeiFroStaTse03}. The gauge/string correspondence suggests that the minimal

279: anomalous dimension defined in this way should match the relations \re{1st} and

280: \re{3rd} in the thermodynamic limit $L\to \infty$.

281: 

282: It follows from \re{1st} and \re{3rd} that the anomalous dimensions of higher

283: twist operator depend on a ``hidden'' parameter $\xi_{\rm str} = \lambda

284: \ln^2(N/L)/L^2$ and their behavior at strong coupling is different for $\xi_{\rm

285: str}< 1$ and $\xi_{\rm str} \gg 1$. For $\xi_{\rm str}\gg 1$ the anomalous

286: dimension does not have a perturbative expansion in the BMN coupling

287: $\lambda^\prime$ and scales as $\sim \ln N$. On the gauge theory side, previous

288: studies~\cite{BeiFroStaTse03} of the Bethe ansatz for the $SL(2)$ spin chain in

289: the thermodynamic limit $L \gg 1$ led to the expression for $\gamma(\lambda)$

290: which coincides with \re{1st} in the limit of short strings and with the first

291: relation in \re{3rd} in the limit of long strings. They did not reveal however

292: neither any trace of the second, logarithmic regime in \re{3rd}, nor appearance

293: of a new parameter similar to $\xi_{\rm str}$. This fact is in contradiction with

294: our expectations that the minimal anomalous dimension of higher twist operators

295: should scale logarithmically to all loops as $N\to\infty$, Eq.~\re{gamma=cusp}.

296: The goal of the present study is to unravel the logarithmic scaling of the

297: anomalous dimension both in the gauge and string theory and to understand the

298: physical meaning of the parameter $\xi_{\rm str}$ and its counter-part $\xi$ on

299: the gauge theory side.

300: 

301: We shall revisit the calculation of the energy of the $SL(2)$ Heisenberg magnet

302: of spin $s=\ft12,1,\ft32$ using the method of the Baxter $Q-$operator

303: \cite{Bax72} as a main tool and demonstrate that the one-loop anomalous dimension

304: in integrable sectors of Yang-Mills theory has the following scaling behavior in

305: the thermodynamic limit $L\to\infty$:

306: \begin{itemize}

307: \item For $N \ll L$

308: \be

309: \label{1st-g} \gamma (\lambda) = \lambda \frac{m^2}{4s} \frac{N}{L^2} + \ldots \,

310: ,

311: \ee

312: \item For $N \gg L$

313: \be\label{3rd-g}

314: \gamma (\lambda) =\left \{

315: \begin{array}{l}

316: {\displaystyle \frac{\lambda}{2\pi^2} \frac{m^2}{L} \ln^2({N}/{L}) + \ldots \,

317: ,\qquad

318: \mbox{for $\xi < 1$}\,,} \\[3mm]

319: {\displaystyle \frac{{\lambda}}{2\pi^2}\, m\ln N +

320: \ldots \, ,\qqqquad~ \mbox{for $\xi \gg 1$}\, ,}

321: \end{array}

322: \right.

323: \ee

324: \end{itemize}

325: depending on the parameter $\xi = \ln(N/L)/L$. The minimal anomalous dimension

326: corresponds to $m=1$. Here $s$ equals the conformal spin of the field entering

327: the Wilson operator, i.e., $s=\ft12, 1, \ft32$ for scalar, gaugino and gluon

328: fields, respectively. For scalar operators, Eq.~\re{1st-g} and the first relation

329: in \re{3rd-g} coincide with similar expressions in \re{1st} and \re{3rd},

330: respectively. Notice that the anomalous dimension in \re{3rd-g} does not depend

331: on the spin $s$ for $N\gg L$ which suggests that the two regimes in \re{3rd-g}

332: are universal in all gauge theories. This is indeed the case for $\xi \gg 1$ since

333: the coefficient in front of $2\ln N$ coincides with the cusp anomalous dimension

334: at weak coupling, Eq.~\re{gamma=cusp}.

335: 

336: For $N\gg L$ and $\xi < 1$, the one-loop anomalous dimension exhibits a novel

337: double logarithmic behavior \re{3rd-g}. It was first discovered from the string

338: theory considerations~\cite{FroTse03} and was later reproduced on the gauge

339: theory side~\cite{BeiFroStaTse03}. A natural question arises whether similar

340: contributions arise at higher loops and whether they can be resummed to all

341: loops. The gauge/string correspondence suggests that in the $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM

342: theory the anomalous dimension in the region $N \gg L \gg 1$ admits a BMN-like

343: expansion (with $\lambda'=\lambda/(\pi L)^2$ and $\xi = \ln(N/L)/L$)

344: \be\label{gen-exp}

345: \gamma (\lambda) = L \sum_{n=1}^\infty\lr{ \lambda^\prime \ln^2\frac{N}{L} }^n

346: c_n(\xi)+ \ldots\,,

347: \ee

348: where the coefficient functions $c_n(\xi)$ do not depend on the coupling constant

349: and have the following asymptotics for $\xi\to 0$ and $\xi\to\infty$

350: \be\label{coeff-fun}

351: c_n(\xi)=c_{0,n}+c_{1,n} \xi + \mathcal{O}(\xi^2) \,,\qquad c_n(\xi) =\mathcal{O}

352: (1/\xi^{2n-1} )

353: \ee

354: with $c_{0,n}=(-1)^n(-\ft12)_n/n!$. To one-loop order, Eq.~\re{gen-exp} matches

355: (for $m=1$) both relations in \re{3rd-g}. In addition, for $\xi\to \infty$ the

356: coefficient in front of $\lambda^n$ in the right-hand side of \re{gen-exp} scales

357: as $\sim \ln N$ and determines the $n-$loop correction to the cusp anomalous

358: dimension in the weak coupling regime, Eq.~\re{gamma=cusp}. In the strong

359: coupling regime, upon the substitution $\xi=\xi_{\rm str}^{1/2}/\sqrt{\lambda}$,

360: the perturbative series in \re{gen-exp} can be resummed to all loops into the

361: following expression (for $\lambda\to\infty$ and $\xi_{\rm str}=\lambda\ln^2(N/L)/L^2

362: =\rm fixed$)

363: \be

364: \gamma (\lambda) =  L \sum_{n=1}^\infty \lr{ \lambda^\prime \ln^2\frac{N}{L} }^n

365: c_n(0)+ \ldots = L \left[ \sqrt{1 + \lambda^\prime \ln^2\frac{N}{L}} - 1 \right] +

366: \ldots\,,

367: \ee

368: where the ellipsis stands for subleading corrections. For $N\to\infty$ this

369: relation also reproduces the leading asymptotic behavior of the anomalous

370: dimension in the last regime in \re{3rd} and, as a consequence, it leads to the

371: expression for the cusp anomalous dimension at strong coupling, Eq.~\re{cusp}.

372: 

373: As was already mentioned, the one-loop anomalous dimension \re{gen-exp} coincides

374: with the energy of the $SL(2)$ spin chain of length $L$ in the thermodynamic

375: limit $L\to\infty$. The latter can be found within the Bethe Ansatz approach by

376: systematically expanding the energy in powers of $1/L$ with a help of known

377: semiclassical methods \cite{Sut95}. To leading order of the semiclassical

378: expansion, the Bethe roots condense on two symmetric intervals on the real axis

379: $[-a,-b]\cup [b,a]$, with the boundaries $a$ and $b$ being functions of $L/N$.

380: This leads~\cite{BeiFroStaTse03} to the expression for the energy given in \re{1st}

381: for $N \ll L$ and in the first relation in \re{3rd} for $N\gg L$. It is believed

382: that subleading corrections to the energy are suppressed by powers of $1/L$ and,

383: therefore, are small. We demonstrate that this assumption is only justified for $\xi =

384: \ln(N/L)/L < 1$, while for $\xi\gg 1$ the semiclassical expansion of the energy

385: becomes divergent indicating the change of asymptotic behavior of the anomalous

386: dimension, Eq.~\re{3rd}. The reason why the semiclassical expansion fails is that

387: the two cuts $[-a,-b]$ and $[b,a]$ collide at the origin, that is $b\to 0$ for

388: $\xi\to\infty$, and the Bethe roots have a nonvanishing distribution at the

389: origin. As a consequence, for $N\gg L$ the semiclassical corrections to the

390: anomalous dimension run in powers of $\xi$. To one-loop order they are described

391: in \re{gen-exp} by the function $c_1(\xi)$. We argue that the semiclassical

392: series for $c_1(\xi)$ is divergent for $\xi>1$ and propose an approach which

393: circumvents this difficulty and allows one to determine this function for

394: arbitrary $\xi$. The resulting expression for the one-loop anomalous dimension is

395: valid in the thermodynamic limit throughout the entire interval of $N$ and

396: reproduces correct logarithmic behavior for $N \gg L$, Eq.~\re{3rd-g}.

397: 

398: On the string theory side, in the dual picture of the folded string spinning in

399: the AdS${}_3\times$S${}^1$ part of the target space, the logarithmic behavior of

400: the anomalous dimension at strong coupling is associated with the classical

401: string configuration which has two spikes approaching the boundary of the AdS

402: space. Thanks to classical integrability of the string equations of motion

403: \cite{ManSurWad02}, the same configuration is described by the spectral

404: (elliptic) symmetric curve endowed with a meromorphic differential of

405: quasimomentum possessing a double pole at $x=\pm \sqrt{\lambda'}$ and having a

406: prescribed asymptotic behavior at the origin and infinity~\cite{ZakMik78,Kri94,KazZar04}.

407: The branching points of the curve, $\pm b_{\rm str}$ and $\pm a_{\rm str}$, depend

408: on the ratio $L/N$ and the coupling constant $\lambda'$. We show that for $N \gg L$

409: and $\xi_{\rm str} < 1$ the branching points admit a regular expansion in powers

410: of $\lambda'$ and, as a consequence, the anomalous dimension exhibits the BMN scaling,

411: Eq.~\re{3rd}. For $\xi_{\rm str} \gg 1$, $b_{\rm str}$ approaches its minimal value

412: $\sqrt{\lambda'}$ so that the inner boundaries of two cuts $[-a_{\rm str},-b_{\rm

413: str}]$ and $[b_{\rm str},a_{\rm str}]$ coincide with the position of poles of the

414: momentum differential and cannot collide. This nonanalyticity manifests itself

415: through the appearance of $\sqrt{\lambda}$ prefactor in the logarithmic behavior

416: of the anomalous dimension at strong coupling, Eq.~\re{3rd}.

417: 

418: Our consequent presentation is organized as follows. In Sect.~\ref{SectAnDim}, we

419: outline a general framework for analysis of one-loop anomalous dimensions in the

420: thermodynamic limit. It is based on the semiclassical expansion of solutions to

421: the Baxter equation~\cite{PasGau92,Kor95,Smi98}. In Sect.~\ref{ThermodynamicSection},

422: we apply the semiclassical approach to determine the minimal anomalous dimension

423: in the thermodynamic limit and demonstrate that the semiclassical expansion breaks

424: down for $\ln(N/L) \gg L $ due to collision of cuts. Then, we present an approach

425: to go consistently beyond the semiclassical expansion and use it to describe the

426: minimal anomalous dimension for large Lorentz spin. In Sect.~\ref{ConclusionSection},

427: we analyze the asymptotic behavior of the anomalous dimensions at strong coupling

428: based on the string sigma model consideration. Section~\ref{StringSigmaModel}

429: contains concluding remarks. Some technical details of our calculations are

430: summarized in the Appendix.

431: 

432: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

433: \section{Anomalous dimensions in gauge theory}

434: \label{SectAnDim}

435: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

436: 

437: Let us start with the calculation of one-loop anomalous dimensions of

438: (super)conformal Wilson operators of arbitrary twist $L$ and Lorentz spin $N$

439: belonging to integrable sectors of (supersymmetric) Yang-Mills theories. For

440: quantum fields transforming in the adjoint representation of the gauge group, the

441: operators under considerations have the following generic form

442: \be\label{O-def}

443: \mathcal{O}_{N,L}(0) = \sum_{k_1+\ldots+k_L =N} c_{k_1\ldots k_L} \tr

444: \left\{D_+^{k_1} X(0)D_+^{k_2} X(0)\ldots D_+^{k_L} X(0)\right\},

445: \ee

446: where $X(0)$ stands for the so-called ``good'' component of quantum fields of a

447: definite helicity in the underlying gauge theory, $D_+=D_\mu n^\mu$ is the

448: covariant derivative projected onto the light-cone, $n_\mu^2=0$. The expansion

449: coefficients $c_{k_1\ldots k_L}$ are fixed from the condition for

450: $\mathcal{O}_{N,L}(0)$ to have an autonomous scale dependence, i.e., Eq.\

451: \re{O-def} has to be an eigenstate of the one-loop dilatation operator.

452: Integrability allows one to map the one-loop anomalous dimension of the operators

453: \re{O-def} into energy $\varepsilon$ of the noncompact $SL(2)$ Heisenberg spin

454: chain of length $L$ and the total spin $N + Ls$

455: \cite{BraDerMan98,Bel99,DerKorMan99,Bei04},

456: \be\label{gamma=energy}

457: \gamma(\lambda) = \frac{\lambda}{8\pi^2}\, \varepsilon +

458: \mathcal{O}(\lambda^2)\,.

459: \ee

460: Here the (half-)integer $s$ is given by the conformal spin \cite{Bel04} of the

461: quantum field $X(0)$, that is, $s=1/2$ for scalars, $s=1$ for gaugino fields of

462: helicity $\pm 1/2$ and $s=3/2$ for gauge fields of helicity $\pm 1$.

463: 

464: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

465: \subsection{Exact solution}

466: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

467: 

468: Let us first describe the exact solution for the energy $\varepsilon$ of the

469: $SL(2)$ magnet of length $L$ and single-particle spin $s$ in each site. We shall

470: employ the method of the Baxter $Q-$operator \cite{Bax72} which proves to be

471: convenient for analyzing various semiclassical limits of $\varepsilon

472: =\varepsilon(N,L)$ including the limit of the large spin $N$ and length

473: $L$~\cite{Kor95,Smi98}. The method relies on the existence of an operator $Q(u)$

474: which acts on the Hilbert space of the $SL(2)$ spin chain and is diagonalized by

475: all eigenstates of the magnet for arbitrary complex parameter $u$. Discussing the

476: energy spectrum it suffices to study the eigenvalues of the $Q-$operator that we

477: shall denote by $Q(u)$. The same function $Q(u)$ determines the wave function of

478: the magnet in the representation of Separated Variables \cite{Skl90}

479: \footnote{For an interpretation of the $Q-$operator in string theory see

480: Ref.~\cite{Gor03}.}. This allows one to analyze $Q(u)$ in the semiclassical limit

481: with the help of the WKB machinery well-known from quantum mechanics and, then,

482: determine $\varepsilon(N,L)$.

483: 

484: By construction, $Q(u)$ satisfies the second-order finite-difference equation

485: \be\label{Baxter-eq}

486: (u + is)^L Q (u + i) + (u - is)^L Q(u - i) = t_L(u) Q(u) \, ,

487: \ee

488: which can be thought of as a Schr\"odinger equation for a single-particle wave

489: function in the representation of Separated Variables~\cite{Skl90}. Here $t_L(u)$

490: is a polynomial in $u$ of degree $L$ with coefficients given by conserved charges

491: \be\label{t_L}

492: t_L(u) = 2 u^L + q_2 u^{L-2} + \ldots + q_L

493: \ee

494: The lowest integral of motion $q_2$ is related to the total spin of the $SL(2)$

495: chain, $N+Ls$,

496: \be\label{q2}

497: q_2 = -(N + Ls) (N + Ls - 1) + L s (s-1)

498: \ee

499: with $N=0,1,\ldots$.

500: 

501: In what follows we shall refer to Eq.\ \re{Baxter-eq} as the Baxter equation.

502: Taken alone, it does not fix the function $Q(u)$ and it has to be supplemented

503: by an additional condition that $Q(u)$ has to be polynomial in $u$ \cite{FadKor94}.

504: Examining the asymptotic behavior of both sides of \re{Baxter-eq} for $u\to\infty$,

505: it is easy to see that the degree of $Q(u)$ is fixed by the total spin $N$ and,

506: therefore, up to an overall normalization, one can write

507: \be\label{Q-polynom}

508: Q(u) = \prod_{k=1}^N (u-\lambda_k)\,.

509: \ee

510: One substitutes this ansatz into \re{Baxter-eq}, takes $u=\lambda_k$ and finds

511: that the roots $\lambda_1,\ldots,\lambda_N$ satisfy the Bethe equations

512: \be\label{Bethe-roots}

513: \lr{\frac{\lambda_k+is}{\lambda_k-is}}^L=\prod_{j=1,j\neq k}^N

514: \frac{\lambda_k-\lambda_j-i}{\lambda_k-\lambda_j+i}\,.

515: \ee

516: Solving the Baxter equation \re{Baxter-eq} supplemented by \re{Q-polynom} one

517: obtains quantized values of the charges $q_3,\ldots,q_L$ and evaluates the

518: corresponding energy and quasimomentum as \cite{FadKor94}

519: \be\label{Energy-Baxter}

520: \varepsilon = i\lr{\ln Q(is)}'-i\lr{\ln Q(-is)}'\,,\qquad \e^{i\theta} =

521: \frac{Q(is)}{Q(-is)}\,.

522: \ee

523: Replacing $Q(u)$ by its expression \re{Q-polynom} one verifies that these relations

524: coincide with those coming from the Algebraic Bethe Ansatz~\cite{TakFad79}

525: \be\label{Energy-ABA}

526: \varepsilon = \sum_{k=1}^N \frac{2s}{\lambda_k^2+s^2}

527: \, ,

528: \qquad \e^{i\theta} = \prod_{k=1}^N \frac{\lambda_k-is}{\lambda_k+is}

529: \, .

530: \ee

531: The cyclic symmetry of the single-trace operators \re{O-def} imposes an

532: additional selection rule for the eigenstates of the spin magnet,

533: $\e^{i\theta}=1$. Equations \re{Energy-Baxter} and \re{Energy-ABA} allow one to

534: calculate the energy of the spin chain and, then, obtain the one-loop anomalous

535: dimension of Wilson operators \re{O-def} with a help of \re{gamma=energy}.

536: 

537: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

538: \subsection{Quasiclassical approach}

539: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

540: 

541: Let us examine the Baxter equation \re{Baxter-eq} for $N+Ls \gg 1$. In this

542: limit, the charge $q_2$ takes large negative values and one can apply

543: semiclassical techniques~\cite{Kor95} to construct the solution to

544: \re{Baxter-eq}. To go over to the semiclassical limit, we introduce two scaling

545: parameters

546: \be\label{beta}

547: \eta=(N+Ls)^{-1}\,,\qquad \beta =  s L \eta =\frac{s L}{ N+Ls } \,.

548: \ee

549: By definition, $0\le \beta \le 1$ with the boundary values corresponding to

550: \be\label{limits}

551: \beta\stackrel{L\ll N}{\longrightarrow} 0

552: \, , \qqquad

553: \beta\stackrel{L\gg N}{\longrightarrow} 1

554: \, .

555: \ee

556: The parameter $\eta \ll 1$ will play the role of the Planck constant. One

557: rescales the spectral parameter as $u=x/\eta$ and introduces the eikonal phase

558: (the Hamilton-Jacobi ``action'' function) $S(x)$ as

559: \be\label{Q-ansatz}

560: Q(x/\eta) = \eta^{-N}\,\exp\lr{\frac1{\eta} S(x)}  \,,\qquad S(x) = \eta

561: \sum_{k=1}^N \ln (x-\eta \lambda_k)\,.

562: \ee

563: The energy and the quasimomentum in Eq.~\re{Energy-Baxter} are then given in

564: terms of the function $S(x)$ by the following expressions

565: \be\label{E-general}

566: \varepsilon = i \left[S'(i\beta/L) - S'(-i\beta/L)\right] \,,\qquad \e^{i\theta}

567: = \exp\left\{\frac1{\eta}[S(i\beta/L) - S(-i\beta/L)]\right\} \,.

568: \ee

569: It also proves convenient to introduce a notation for the ``effective potential''

570: \be\label{tau-expansion}

571: \tau(x) =(\eta/x)^{L}\,t_L(x/\eta) = 2 + \frac{\widehat q_2}{x^2} +

572: \frac{\widehat q_3}{x^3} + \ldots + \frac{\widehat q_L}{x^L}

573: \, ,

574: \ee

575: with $\widehat q_k=q_k \eta^k$.

576: 

577: In the semiclassical approach~\cite{PasGau92,Kor95} one assumes that the

578: function $S(x)$ and the integrals of motion $q_k$ (with $k=3,\ldots,L$) admit a

579: systematic expansion in powers of $\eta$

580: \be\label{WKB-ansatz}

581: S(x) = S_0(x) + \eta\, S_1(x) + \ldots\,,\qquad \widehat q_k = \widehat

582: q_k^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)} + \eta \, \widehat q_k^{\scriptscriptstyle (1)} +

583: \ldots\, .

584: \ee

585: It is tacitly assumed that the expansion of $S(x)$ is convergent and each term is

586: uniformly bounded.%

587: \footnote{As we will show in Sect.~\ref{ThermodynamicSection}, this assumption is

588: justified for $\ln(N/L) < L$ and is invalid otherwise.} This leads to the expansion

589: of the effective potential \re{tau-expansion}, $\tau(x)= \tau_0(x) + \eta \tau_1(x)

590: + \ldots$ with

591: \be\label{tau0}

592: \tau_0(x) =  2 - \frac1{x^2}+\frac{\widehat q_3^{\scriptscriptstyle

593: (0)}}{x^3}+\ldots +\frac{\widehat q_L^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}}{x^L} \,,\qquad

594: \tau_1(x) = \frac{\widehat q_3^{\scriptscriptstyle (1)}}{x^3}+\ldots

595: +\frac{\widehat{q}_L^{\scriptscriptstyle (1)}}{x^L}\,,\qquad \ldots

596: \ee

597: One substitutes \re{WKB-ansatz} into the Baxter equation \re{Baxter-eq} and

598: equates the coefficients in front of powers of $\eta$ to get to leading order

599: \be\label{p-def}

600: 2 \cos p(x) = \tau_0 (x)\,,\qquad p(x) = S_0^\prime (x) + \frac{\beta}x\,.

601: \ee

602: In the finite-gap theory, the function $p(x)$ defines the Bloch-Floquet

603: multiplier in an auxiliary linear problem for the Baker-Akhiezer function and has

604: the meaning of the (quasi)momentum \cite{NovManPitZak84,FadTak87,BabBerTal03}.

605: For the first subleading term in the semiclassical expansion one finds in a

606: similar manner

607: \ba\label{S1-Baxter}

608: S_1^\prime (x) = - \frac{p^\prime (x)}{2} \cot p (x) - \frac{1}{2 \sin p(x)}

609: \left( \tau_1(x) + \frac{\beta (1 - s)}{2 x^2} \tau_0(x) \right) \, .

610: \ea

611: It is straightforward to derive the subleading terms $S_{k\ge 2}'(x)$ but we will

612: not need them for our purposes. The obtained expressions for the action functions

613: $S'_0(x)$ and $S'_1(x)$ depend on yet unknown conserved charges $\widehat

614: q_k^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}$ and $\widehat q_k^{\scriptscriptstyle (1)}$,

615: respectively. Quantization conditions for these charges follow from the requirement

616: for $Q(x/\eta)$, Eq.~\re{Q-ansatz}, to be a single valued function of $x$.

617: 

618: According to \re{tau0}, $\tau_0(x)$ is a polynomial of degree $L$ in $1/x$.

619: Solving \re{p-def}, one finds that the momentum $p(x)$ is, in general, a

620: double-valued function on the complex $x-$plane with the square-root branching

621: points $x_j$ obeying the condition $\tau_0 (x_j)=\pm 2$. It is convenient to

622: introduce the function $y(x)=2 \sin p(x)$ and define a complex curve~\cite{Kor95}

623: \be\label{curve}

624: \Gamma_L: \qquad y^2 = 4-\tau_0^2(x)\,,\qquad \tau_0(x) = 2 - \frac1{x^2} +

625: \frac{\widehat q_3^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}}{x^3} + \ldots + \frac{\widehat

626: q_L^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}}{x^L}\,.

627: \ee

628: For arbitrary complex $x$, except the branching points $y(x_j)=0$, the relation

629: \re{curve} defines two values for $y(x)$. Then, $y(x)$ being a double-valued

630: function on the complex $x-$plane, becomes a single-valued function on the

631: hyperelliptic Riemann surface defined by the complex curve $\Gamma_L$. This

632: surface has a genus $L-2$ and is realized by gluing together two copies of the

633: complex $x-$plane along the cuts running between the branching points $x_{2j-1}$

634: and $x_{2j}$.

635: 

636: For the $SL(2)$ magnet the Bethe roots verifying Eq.\ \re{Bethe-roots} take real

637: values only, ${\rm Im} \lambda_k =0$. In the semiclassical limit, $\eta \to 0$,

638: they condense on finite intervals on the real axis where the momentum $p(x)$

639: takes purely imaginary values~\cite{Kor95}. In terms of the hyperelliptic curve

640: \re{curve}, this corresponds to $y^2 \le 0$, or

641: \be\label{cuts}

642: \tau_0^2(x) \ge 4\,,\qquad \mbox{for $x\in \mathcal{S}=[x_{2L-2},x_{2L-3}]\cup

643: \ldots \cup [x_4,x_3] \cup [x_2,x_1]  $}\,,

644: \ee

645: where $x_1>x_2> \ldots >x_{2L-2}$ and one of the intervals contains the origin.

646: The total number of intervals in \re{cuts} equals $L-1$ and the end points $x_j$

647: are just the branching points of the complex curve \re{curve}, $\tau_0^2(x_j)=4$.

648: As follows from \re{curve}, the curve can be parameterized by the set of $2L-2$

649: real branching points as

650: \be\label{y2-roots}

651: y^2 = \frac4{x^2} \prod_{j=1}^{2L-2} \lr{1-\frac{x_j}{x}}\,.

652: \ee

653: The intervals $\mathcal{S}$ have the meaning of regions where the classical

654: motion of the system occurs in the separated variables\footnote{In the

655: finite-gap theory~\cite{NovManPitZak84}, the same intervals have the meaning of

656: forbidden zones in the auxiliary linear problem for the Baker-Akhiezer function.}.

657: Later on we shall encounter the situation when, say, $j^{\rm th}$ interval shrinks

658: into a point, $x_{2j}=x_{2j-1}$, so that the motion on this interval is frozen at

659: the classical level. In what follows we shall refer to $x_{2j}=x_{2j-1}$ as a

660: double point.

661: 

662: The leading term of the semiclassical expansion, $S_0(x)$, is determined by the

663: momentum $p(x)$, Eq.~\re{p-def}. As follows from its definition \re{p-def}

664: \be\label{p-exp}

665: p(x) = 2i \ln \frac{\sqrt{\tau_0(x)+2}-\sqrt{\tau_0(x)-2}}{2}\,.

666: \ee

667: The momentum $p(x)$ takes purely imaginary values on the intervals \re{cuts} and

668: its values at the end point of the $j^{\rm th}$ interval coincide,

669: $p(x_{2j-1})=p(x_{2j})$, with $\e^{i p(x_{2j})}=\pm 1$ for $\tau_0(x_{2j})=\pm

670: 2$, respectively. Continuing $p(x)$ to the complex $x-$plane one finds that

671: $p'(x)$ is an analytical function on the complex plane with cuts running along

672: the intervals \re{cuts}. It defines a meromorphic differential on $\Gamma_L$

673: \be\label{dp}

674: dp = p'(x)\, dx = -\frac{\tau_0'(x)}{\sqrt{4-\tau_0^2(x)}}dx\,.

675: \ee

676: From \re{curve} and \re{p-exp} one finds $\tau_0(x) = 2- 1/x^2 +

677: \mathcal{O}(1/x^3)$ so that $\e^{p(\infty)}=1$ and

678: \be\label{p-infinity}

679: dp \sim\mp \frac{dx}{x^2}\,,\qquad \mbox{for $x\to\infty$}

680: \ee

681: where `$-/+$' correspond to the upper/lower sheet of $\Gamma_L$. According to the

682: definition \re{p-def}, $p(\infty)$ is defined modulo $2\pi$. Choosing the

683: normalization condition $p(\infty) = 0$, one finds that at the end points of the

684: $j^{\rm th}$ interval in \re{cuts}, the momentum takes the values $p(x_{2j})

685: =p(x_{2j-1}) = - \pi j$ for $x_{2j}>0$. As a consequence, the differential $dp$

686: satisfies the normalization conditions~\cite{SmiRes83,NovManPitZak84}

687: \be\label{p-periods}

688: 2 \int^{x_{2j-1}}_{x_{2j}} dx\, p'(x) = - \oint_{\alpha_j} dp = 0\,,\qquad 2

689: \int_{x_{2j-1}}^{\infty} dx\, p'(x) = - \int_{\gamma_j} dp = -2\pi j\,.

690: \ee

691: Here in both equations, the integration in the left-hand side goes over the upper

692: sheet of $\Gamma_L$. In the right-hand side of the first relation, the

693: differential $dp$ is integrated over the $\alpha_j-$cycle encircling the interval

694: $[x_{2j},x_{2j-1}]$ in the anticlockwise direction. The contour $\gamma_j$ in the

695: second relation starts on the upper sheet above $x = \infty$ crosses the same

696: interval and then goes to infinity on the lower sheet (see Fig.\

697: \ref{CyclesFig}).

698: 

699: The obtained expressions for $S_0'(x)$ and $S_1'(x)$, Eqs.~\re{p-def} and

700: \re{S1-Baxter}, respectively, depend on the conserved charges $\widehat q_k$, yet

701: to be determined. To work out the quantization conditions for $\widehat q_k$ one

702: examines the first derivative of the eikonal phase \re{Q-ansatz}

703: \be\label{S-prime}

704: S'(x) = \eta \sum_{k=1}^N \frac1{x-\eta \lambda_k}\,.

705: \ee

706: The discontinuity of $S'(x)$ across the cuts \re{cuts} gives the distribution

707: density of rescaled Bethe roots $\eta \lambda_k$. Assuming that the roots $\eta

708: \lambda_k$ take finite values for $\eta\to 0$, one finds the behavior of $S'(x)$

709: at infinity on the upper, physical sheet of $\Gamma_L$ as

710: \be\label{S-res-inf}

711: S'(x) \sim \frac{\eta N}{x}=\frac{1-\beta}{x}\,,\qquad {\rm for}\ x \to \infty\,,

712: \ee

713: with $\eta$ and $\beta$ defined in \re{beta}. Replacing $S(x)$ by its

714: semiclassical expansion \re{WKB-ansatz} and matching the

715: coefficients in front of powers of $\eta$ one obtains%

716: \footnote{Later on we shall consider solutions to the Baxter equation satisfying

717: $Q(u)=Q(-u)$, or equivalently $S(x)=S(-x)$. For such solutions, $S_k'(x)$ are odd

718: functions of $x$ and their asymptotics at infinity involves odd powers of $x$

719: only, that is, $S_{k \ge 1}'(x) \sim 1/{x^3}$.}

720: \be\label{as-infinity}

721: S_0'(x) \sim \frac{1-\beta}{x}\,,\qquad S_{1}'(x) \sim \frac1{x^2} \,,\qquad

722: \ldots

723: \ee

724: %

725: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

726: %            Figure

727: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

728: \begin{figure}[t]

729: \begin{center}

730: \mbox{

731: \begin{picture}(0,135)(230,0)

732: \put(0,0){\insertfig{16}{cycles}}

733: \end{picture}

734: }

735: \end{center}

736: \caption{ \label{CyclesFig} The definition of the $\alpha-$cycles and

737: $\gamma-$contours on the Riemann surface $\Gamma_L$. The dashed lines represent

738: the part of the path on the lower sheet of the surface. }

739: \end{figure}%

740: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

741: %

742: According to \re{Q-polynom}, the total number of Bethe roots equals $N$. For a

743: given energy level they are distributed on $L-1$ intervals \re{cuts}. Denoting by

744: $\ell_j$ the number of Bethe roots on the $j^{\rm th}$ interval, one has

745: \be\label{a-period}

746: \frac1{2\pi i}\oint_{\alpha_j} dx\, S'(x) = \eta \ell_j=

747: \frac{\ell_j}{N+Ls}\,,\qquad (j=1,\ldots,L-1)

748: \, .

749: \ee

750: The sum of all $\alpha-$cycles is homologous to zero and, as a consequence, the sum

751: of all $\alpha-$periods is given by the residue of $S'(x)$ at infinity. Together

752: with \re{S-res-inf} this leads to $N=\ell_1 + \ldots+\ell_{L-1}$.

753: 

754: Solving the quantization conditions \re{a-period} one can determine quantized

755: values of the conserved charges $\widehat q_k$. According to \re{a-period} they

756: depend both on the scaling parameter $\eta$ and the set of nonnegative integers

757: $\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{L-1}$. Replacing $\widehat q_k$ in \re{tau0}, \re{p-def} and

758: \re{S1-Baxter} by their quantized values, one constructs semiclassical expression

759: for $S(x)$ and, then, applies \re{E-general} to determine the energy and

760: quasimomentum,

761: \be

762: \widehat q_k = \widehat q_k(\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{L-1};\eta) \, , \qquad

763: \varepsilon = \varepsilon (\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{L-1};\eta)\,.

764: \ee

765: Explicit form of these relations for $L=3$ can be found in Refs.\

766: \cite{Kor95,BraDerMan98,Bel99,DerKorMan99}. In particular, the quantized values

767: of the energy and conserved charges exhibit remarkable regularity and form

768: trajectories. The flow parameter along each trajectory is given by the total

769: spin $\eta=(N+Ls)^{-1}$ while the integers $\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{L-1}$ enumerate

770: the trajectories and encode a nontrivial analytic structure in the eigenspectrum.

771: For given $N$, the total number of trajectories equals the number of partitions

772: of $N$ into the sum of $L-1$ nonnegative integers $\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{L-1}$.

773: This is in a perfect agreement with the number of irreducible components entering

774: the tensor product of $L$ copies of the $SL(2)$ modules~\cite{BelGorKor03}.

775: 

776: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

777: \subsection{Minimal energy trajectory}

778: \label{CollisionCuts}

779: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

780: 

781: In the semiclassical approach described in the previous section, the energy of

782: the spin magnet, or equivalently the one-loop anomalous dimension of Wilson

783: operators, is parameterized by the complex curve $\Gamma_L$, Eq.~\re{curve}. The

784: genus of the curve $g=L-2$ is defined by the length of the spin chain whereas its

785: moduli are determined by the quantized values of the conserved charges $\widehat

786: q_k$ which depend in their turn on the set of integers $\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{L-1}$.

787: Going over to different parts of the spectrum amounts to specifying the integers

788: $\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{L-1}$.

789: 

790: In this paper we are interested in the eigenstates possessing the minimal

791: possible energy for a given total spin $N$. Such eigenstates belong to a

792: particular trajectory to which we shall refer as the minimal energy trajectory

793: (see Fig.\ \ref{Fig-roots-energy10} below). To describe it one has first to

794: identify the corresponding integers $\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{L-1}$. We remind that

795: the energy \re{Energy-ABA} is determined by zeros of the function $Q(u)$, or

796: equivalently the Bethe roots. In the thermodynamical limit they condense on the

797: intervals \re{cuts}. For a given total spin $N$, the minimal energy is realized

798: when the Bethe roots are located on two symmetric cuts most distant from the

799: origin \cite{Sut95}, that is, $\ell_1 = \ell_{L-1}=N/2$ and $\ell_j=0$ for

800: $j=2,\ldots,L-2$. The corresponding $Q(u)$ should be an even function,

801: $Q(u)=Q(-u)$. According to \re{Energy-Baxter}, \re{Q-polynom} and \re{Baxter-eq},

802: such states automatically satisfy the cyclic symmetry condition $\e^{i\theta}=1$

803: and possess the following quantum numbers

804: \be\label{q-odd}

805: N = {\rm even}\,,\qquad q_{2k+1} = 0

806: \, ,

807: \ee

808: with $0 \le k \le (L-1)/2$. The fact that $\ell_j=0$ implies that $j^{\rm th}$

809: interval does not contain Bethe roots and, therefore, it shrinks into a point,

810: $x_{2j-1}=x_{2j}$. From the point of view of separated variables, this means

811: that classically all but two collective degrees of freedom are frozen and the

812: classical motion is confined to the two intervals with $\ell_1 = \ell_{L-1} =N/2$.

813: For the complex curve \re{y2-roots}, this implies that all branching points

814: except four, $x_1=-x_{2L-2}$ and $x_2=-x_{2L-3}$, become the double points,

815: $x_{2j-1}=x_{2j}$, and the curve $\Gamma_L$ reduces to the elliptic curve (see

816: Eq.~\re{curve-reduced} below).

817: 

818: Let us apply the semiclassical approach to obtain the expression for the energy

819: for $L\gg 1$ along the minimal energy trajectory as a function of $N$. To begin

820: with, we consider the ground state of the $SL(2)$ spin chain. It has the total

821: spin $N=0$ and is described by a trivial solution to the Baxter equation

822: \re{Baxter-eq}, $Q(u)=1$, or equivalently $S(x)=0$. From \re{Energy-Baxter}, the

823: corresponding energy is $\varepsilon = 0$ and the integrals of motion can be read

824: off from \re{Baxter-eq} upon substituting $Q(u)=1$. To leading order in $\eta=

825: 1/(sL)$ the transfer matrix and momentum, Eq.~\re{p-def}, look like

826: \be

827: \label{N=0-roots}

828: \tau_0(x)=2 \cos(1/x)\,,\qquad p(x) = 1/x \,.

829: \ee

830: Matching these expressions into \re{curve} and \re{y2-roots} one finds that for

831: $L\to \infty$ all branching points of the spectral curve \re{y2-roots} are double

832: points, $x_{2j-1} = x_{2j} = 1/(\pi j)$.

833: 

834: Let us now consider the minimal energy eigenstates with $N \gg 1$  and $L \gg 1$

835: and distinguish two limiting cases: (i) $N/L={\rm fixed}$ and (ii) $N/L \gg 1$,

836: corresponding to $0 < \beta < 1$ and $\beta\to 0$, respectively, Eq.~\re{beta}.

837: We recall that the function $Q(u)$ has exactly $N$ roots, Eq.~\re{Q-polynom}.

838: Assuming that the Bethe roots scale as $\lambda_k \sim 1/\eta$, one finds from

839: \re{Energy-ABA} that for $N/L={\rm fixed}$ the energy should behave as

840: $\varepsilon \sim N/L^2\sim 1/L$. Indeed, one can obtain the same scaling of

841: $\varepsilon$ by naively expanding the energy \re{E-general} in powers of $1/L$

842: \be\label{E-naive-expansion}

843: \varepsilon = -\frac{2\beta}{L} S''(0) + \mathcal{O}(\beta^3/L^3) =

844: -\frac{2\beta}{L} \left[ S_0''(0) + \eta S_1''(0)+ \mathcal{O}(\eta^2)\right]

845: \, .

846: \ee

847: Here in the second relation we replaced $S(x)$ by its semiclassical expansion

848: \re{WKB-ansatz}. In a similar manner, one obtains for the quasimomentum

849: \re{E-general}

850: \be

851: \theta = 2s \left[S_0'(0) + \eta S_1'(0) + \mathcal{O}(\eta^2)\right]=0\,,

852: \ee

853: where we took into account that $S_k(x)$ are even functions of $x$ for the

854: minimal energy states

855: \be\label{as-zero}

856: S_0'(0) = 0 \,,\qquad S_1'(0) = 0\,, \quad \ldots

857: \, .

858: \ee

859: Then, one finds from \re{p-def} the asymptotic behavior of the momentum around

860: the origin on the upper (``physical'') sheet of the Riemann surface \re{curve} as

861: \be\label{p-zero}

862: p(x) = \frac{\beta}{x} +  \mathcal{O}(x)\,,

863: \ee

864: so that the differential $dp$ has a double pole above $x=0$. It is important to

865: stress that the relations \re{E-naive-expansion} and \re{p-zero} were obtained

866: under the assumption that $S'(x)$ is regular at the origin.

867: %, or equivalently the point $x=0$ does not belong to the cuts \re{cuts}.

868: For the minimal energy eigenstates, all but two intervals in \re{cuts} shrink

869: into the double points and the Bethe roots condense on two symmetric cuts on the

870: real axis that we shall denote as $[-a,-b]$ and $[b,a]$. Then, the spectral curve

871: \re{y2-roots} reduces to

872: \be\label{curve-reduced}

873: y^2 = \tilde y^2 \left[ \frac2{x^3}\prod_j \lr{1-\frac{x^2_{2j}}{x^2}} \right]^2

874: \,,\qquad \tilde y^2 = (x^2-a^2)(x^2-b^2) \,,

875: \ee

876: where we took into account that for the minimal energy states the branching

877: points appear in pairs of opposite sign. The parameters $a$, $b$ and $x_{2j}$ are

878: determined by the condition for $S_0'(x)$, Eq.~\re{p-def}, to be an analytical

879: function on the complex $x-$plane with two symmetric cuts on the real axis and

880: prescribed asymptotic behavior at $x=0$ and $x\to\infty$, Eqs.~\re{as-zero} and

881: \re{as-infinity}, respectively \cite{SmiRes83,NovManPitZak84}. Equation

882: \re{E-naive-expansion} implies that the energy has the BMN scaling in the

883: thermodynamic limit, $\varepsilon \sim 1/L$. This relation is in an apparent

884: contradiction with the well-known fact that for $N \gg L$ the anomalous dimension

885: should scale logarithmically $\varepsilon \sim \ln N$ with the prefactor being

886: $L$ independent. To understand the reason for this discrepancy, one notices that

887: the relation \re{E-naive-expansion} is valid provided that $S'(x)$ is analytical

888: in the vicinity of $x=0$, or equivalently, there is no accumulation of the Bethe

889: roots around the origin. For $N,\, L \to \infty$ with $N/L={\rm fixed}$ this is

890: indeed the case but, as we will argue in the next section, the situation

891: drastically changes for $N\gg L$.

892: 

893: As a hint, let us consider the eigenstates with $L={\rm fixed}$, $N\to\infty$ and

894: the charges satisfying \re{q-odd}. In this case, the transfer matrix $\tau_0(x)$,

895: Eq.~\re{tau0}, is an even polynomial of degree $L$ which scales for $x\to 0$ as

896: \be\label{tau-x=0}

897: \tau_0(x) \sim \frac{\widehat q_L^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}}{x^L}

898: \ee

899: provided that $\widehat q_L^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}\neq 0$. If $\widehat

900: q_L^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}$ vanishes, the asymptotics of $\tau_0(x)$ is

901: governed by the first nonvanishing charge $\widehat q_{2k}^{\scriptscriptstyle

902: (0)} \neq 0$ with $2k < L$. Substituting \re{tau-x=0} into \re{dp} one finds the

903: leading asymptotic behavior of the momentum for $x\to 0$ on the upper sheet of

904: \re{curve} as

905: \be

906: dp \sim  i L \frac{dx}{x}\,,

907: \ee

908: yielding $p(x) \sim i L \ln x$. According to \re{beta}, $\beta\sim sL/N \to 0$

909: for $N\to\infty$ and one finds from \re{p-def} the asymptotics of $S^\prime_0(x)$

910: above $x=0$ on the physical sheet of \re{curve} as

911: \be\label{S0-log}

912: S_0'(x) \sim i L \ln x\,.

913: \ee

914: Comparing this relation with \re{as-zero}, one concludes that $S_0'(x)$ is no

915: longer analytical at the origin due to accumulation of rescaled Bethe roots at

916: $x=0$. Finally, one substitutes \re{S0-log} into \re{E-general} and obtains the

917: energy

918: \be\label{E-ln}

919: \varepsilon \sim 2 L \ln(L/\beta) \sim 2 L \ln N\,.

920: \ee

921: Notice that the coefficient in front of $\ln N$ in the right-hand side of

922: \re{E-ln} is determined by the leading asymptotic behavior of the transfer matrix

923: \re{tau-x=0} for $x\to 0$. For $\widehat q_L^{\rm (0)}\neq 0$ this coefficient

924: takes the maximal possible value. For $\widehat q_L^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}

925: =\ldots=\widehat q_{2m+2}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)} =0$, the transfer matrix

926: \re{tau0} scales as $\tau_0(x)\sim \widehat q_{2m}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}

927: /x^{2m}$ (recall that the charges with odd indices vanish, Eq.~\re{q-odd})

928: leading to

929: \be

930: \label{E-m} \varepsilon \sim 4m \ln N \,,\qquad \widehat

931: q_{2m+2}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}=\ldots=\widehat q_{L}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}

932: = 0\,.

933: \ee

934: The values of the remaining charges $\widehat q_{4}^{\scriptscriptstyle

935: (0)},\ldots,\widehat q_{2m}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}$ will be determined below

936: (see Eq.~\re{q-expression}). Throughout this paper we are interested in the

937: eigenstates with the minimal energy for given $N$. Obviously, they correspond to

938: $m=1$, that is,

939: \be\label{Emin-naive}

940: \varepsilon^{(m=1)} \sim 4 \ln N \, , \qquad \widehat q_4^{ (0)} = \ldots =

941: \widehat q_L^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}=0 \, .

942: \ee

943: Here the superscript `$\scriptstyle (0)$' refers to the leading order

944: approximation of the semiclassical expansion and $\widehat

945: q_{2k}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}=0$ does not necessarily imply that $\widehat

946: q_{2k}=0$ but rather $\widehat q_{2k}= \mathcal{O}(\eta)$, or equivalently

947: $q_{2k} \ll (-q_2)^{k}$.

948: 

949: The transfer matrix $\tau_0(x)$, Eq.~\re{tau0}, corresponding to the minimal

950: energy state \re{Emin-naive} is given by

951: \be\label{tau-min}

952: \tau^{(m=1)}_{0}(x)=2-\frac1{x^2}

953: \ee

954: and the spectral curve \re{curve} looks like

955: \be\label{Gamma-min}

956: \Gamma_L^{(m=1)}: \qquad y^2 = \lr{x^2-\frac1{4}}\frac4{x^4}\,.

957: \ee

958: It is easy to see that $\Gamma_L^{(m=1)}$ coincides with the complex curve for

959: the spin chain of length $2$, that is $\Gamma_{L=2}$, Eq.~\re{curve}. Indeed,

960: choosing $\widehat q_{2m+1}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)}=\ldots=\widehat

961: q_{L}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)} = 0$ in \re{curve} one effectively descends from

962: an infinitely long spin chain (for $L\to\infty$) to the one with finite length

963: $2m$. Comparing \re{Gamma-min} with \re{y2-roots} we conclude that for $m=1$ all

964: but two branching points condense at the origin, $b=x_{2j}=0$, and the two

965: remaining (resolved) branching points are located at $\pm 1/2$. For $m\ge 2$, one

966: can show~\cite{KorKri97} that the complex curve corresponding to \re{E-m} is

967: given by

968: \be\label{Gamma-m}

969: \Gamma_L^{(m\ge 2)}: \qquad  y^2=

970: \lr{x^2-\frac1{4m^2}}\frac4{x^4}\prod_{j=1}^{m-1}

971: \lr{1-\frac{x^2_{2j}}{x^2}}^2\,,

972: \ee

973: with $1/x_{2j}=2m\cos\lr{\frac{\pi j}{2m}}$. Comparison with \re{curve-reduced}

974: yields $a=1/(2m)$ and $b=0$, that is, the two cuts $[-a,-b]$ and $[b,a]$ collide

975: at the origin. Notice that $\Gamma_L^{(m\ge 2)}$ has exactly $2m$ double points

976: satisfying $x_{2j}^2 > 1/(2m)^2$ while the remaining double points in

977: \re{curve-reduced} belonging to the interval $[-b,b]$ condensed at $x=0$ as $b\to

978: 0$.

979: 

980: The complex curves \re{Gamma-min} and \re{Gamma-m} have genus zero and, as a

981: consequence, the momentum $p'(x)$ is expressed in terms of elementary functions.

982: Indeed, one substitutes \re{Gamma-min} and \re{Gamma-m} into \re{dp} and obtains

983: the following expression for the momentum for arbitrary $m$

984: \be\label{dp-reduced}

985: dp = -\frac{dx}{x\sqrt{x^2-\frac1{(2m)^2}}}\,,\qquad

986: p (x) = \int^x_{\infty} dp =

987: 2 m \arcsin \left( \frac{1}{2m x} \right) \, .

988: \ee

989: Together with \re{p-def} and \re{tau0} this leads to the following expressions

990: for the integrals of motion

991: \be\label{q-expression}

992: \widehat  q_{2n}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)} = \frac{2 (- 1)^{n} m^{1 - 2 n} \Gamma

993: (m + n) }{ \Gamma (2 n + 1) \Gamma (m - n + 1)} \, .

994: \ee

995: We conclude from \re{dp-reduced} that for $m=1$, for the eigenstate with the

996: minimal energy, in the limit $N\to\infty$ and $L=\rm fixed$, the momentum $p'(x)$

997: is an analytical function on the complex plane with the square root cut

998: $[-\ft12,\ft12]$ and a {\sl simple} pole at the origin. This should be compared

999: with the analytical properties of the momentum in the region $N/L={\rm fixed}$ in

1000: which case $p'(x)$ has a {\sl double} pole at $x=0$, Eq.~\re{p-zero}.

1001: 

1002: We demonstrated in this section that the analytical properties of the momentum

1003: $p(x)$ and the action function $S'(x)$ are quite different in the two limits

1004: mentioned above. For $0 < \beta < 1$, the Bethe roots condense on two symmetric

1005: intervals $[-a,-b]$ and $[b,a]$ with the end-points $a$ and $b$ depending on

1006: $\beta$. For $\beta\to 0$, one has $b\to 0$ and $a\to \ft12$ so that the two cuts

1007: collide and form a single cut $[-\ft12,\ft12]$ (see Fig.\ \ref{CollisionCutsFig}

1008: (a) and (b)). This leads to different scaling behavior of the energy in these two

1009: limits, Eqs.~\re{E-naive-expansion} and \re{Emin-naive}, respectively. The

1010: question remains what happens in the intermediate region of the parameter

1011: $\beta=Ls/(N+Ls)$, Eq.~\re{beta}, and how important the corrections $\sim \eta$

1012: to the energy \re{E-naive-expansion} are. We shall demonstrate in the next

1013: section that the semiclassical expansion of the energy \re{E-naive-expansion}

1014: becomes divergent for $\beta\to 0$ due to the collision of cuts and work out an

1015: asymptotic expression for the energy valid for small $\beta$.

1016: 

1017: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1018: %            Figure

1019: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1020: \begin{figure}[t]

1021: \begin{center}

1022: \mbox{

1023: \begin{picture}(0,70)(240,0)

1024: \put(0,0){\insertfig{17}{collision}}

1025: \end{picture}

1026: }

1027: \end{center}

1028: \caption{\label{CollisionCutsFig}%

1029: Symmetric two-cut configuration (a) resulting in the BMN scaling of the anomalous

1030: dimension in gauge theory for $\xi < 1$. For $\xi\gg 1$ the two cuts collide at

1031: the origin (b) yielding the logarithmic scaling. The same configuration in string

1032: sigma model (c) for $\xi_{\rm str}\gg 1$ -- the minimal value for the inner end

1033: of the cut is given by the BMN coupling $\sqrt{\lambda^\prime}$ which prevents

1034: the cuts to collide.}

1035: \end{figure}

1036: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1037: 

1038: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1039: \section{Symmetric two-cut solution in thermodynamic limit}

1040: \label{ThermodynamicSection}

1041: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1042: 

1043: In this section, we construct the minimal energy trajectory in the thermodynamic

1044: limit $L \gg 1$ for arbitrary values of the spin $N$. To begin with, we work out

1045: the semiclassical expansion of solutions $Q(u)$ to the Baxter equation

1046: \re{Baxter-eq} for $N/L={\rm fixed}$ and, then, extend the analysis to the region

1047: $N \gg L$.

1048: 

1049: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1050: \subsection{Semiclassical expansion at leading order}

1051: \label{WKBloSection}

1052: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1053: 

1054: To leading order of the semiclassical expansion \re{WKB-ansatz} and

1055: \re{Q-ansatz}, the function $S_0'(x)$ is determined by the momentum $p(x)$,

1056: Eq.~\re{p-def}. The latter is fixed by the condition that $dp(x)$ should be a

1057: meromorphic differential on the complex curve \re{curve-reduced} with prescribed

1058: asymptotic behavior at infinity, Eq.~\re{p-infinity}, and at the origin,

1059: Eq.~\re{p-zero}, on the upper sheet of $\Gamma_L$

1060: \be

1061: \label{p-asym}

1062: dp \stackrel{x\to\infty}{\sim} -\frac{dx}{x^2}\,,\qqqquad dp \stackrel{x\to

1063: 0}{\sim} dx \left[-\frac{\beta}{x^2} + \mathcal{O}(x^0)\right]\,,

1064: \ee

1065: with $\beta=Ls/(N+Ls)$, Eq.~\re{beta}. Being combined together, these conditions

1066: lead to the following expression~\cite{KazZar04}

1067: \be\label{dp-res}

1068: dp = \frac{-1+\frac{\beta ab}{x^{2}}}{\sqrt{(x^2-a^2)(x^2-b^2)}}\,dx\,.

1069: \ee

1070: It defines $dp$ as a meromorphic differential on the elliptic curve $\tilde y^2 =

1071: (x^2-a^2)(x^2-b^2)$, Eq.~\re{curve-reduced}, which has a pair of double poles

1072: above $x=0$ on both sheets of the corresponding Riemann surface. The values of

1073: the parameters $a$ and $b$ are fixed by the normalization conditions

1074: \re{p-periods}

1075: \be\label{cond}

1076: \int_{b}^a dp = 0\,,\qqqquad \int_a^\infty dp = - \pi m\,.

1077: \ee

1078: Here the integer $m$ defines the position of the interval $[b,a]$ inside

1079: \re{cuts}. We remind that in the limit we are interested in, the complex curve

1080: $\Gamma_L$ gets reduced to the genus one curve \re{curve-reduced}. Namely, all

1081: cuts in \re{cuts} except two, $[-a,-b]$ and $[b,a]$, shrink into points. The

1082: integer $m-1$ counts how many collapsed cuts are situated to the right from the

1083: interval $[b,a]$ on the real axis. The energy depends on $m$ and, as we will see

1084: in a moment, it takes the minimal value for $m=1$, that is, when all shrunken

1085: cuts are located inside the interval $[-b,b]$.

1086: 

1087: Solving \re{cond} one finds the positions of the cuts as a function of the parameter

1088: $\beta$, Eq.~\re{beta}

1089: \be\label{ab}

1090: a=\frac1{2m\,\mathbb{E}(\tau)}\,,\qquad b =

1091: \frac{\beta}{2m}\frac1{\mathbb{K}(\tau)} \,,\qquad

1092: \beta=\sqrt{1-\tau}\frac{\mathbb{K}(\tau)}{\mathbb{E}(\tau)}\,,

1093: \ee

1094: where $\mathbb{K}(\tau)$ and $\mathbb{E}(\tau)$ are elliptic integrals of the

1095: first and second kind, respectively, and the modular parameter is defined as (for

1096: $b \le a$)

1097: \be\label{tau}

1098: \tau = 1 -\frac{b^2}{a^2}\,.

1099: \ee

1100: From \re{dp-res} and \re{p-def} one obtains the leading term in the semiclassical

1101: expansion as

1102: \be\label{SO-zero}

1103: S_0''(x) = p'(x) + \frac{\beta}{x^2}

1104: =

1105: \frac{-1+\frac{\beta ab}{x^{2}}}{\sqrt{(x^2-a^2)(x^2-b^2)}} + \frac{\beta}{x^2}

1106: \, ,

1107: \ee

1108: with the parameters $a$ and $b$ given by \re{ab}. One verifies that $S_0''(x)$ has

1109: a regular expansion around $x=0$ which is in agreement with our expectations that

1110: the Bethe roots condense on the intervals $[-a,-b]\cup [b,a]$ and there is no

1111: accumulation of roots at the origin. The energy \re{E-naive-expansion} is determined

1112: by the leading term in the expansion of this expression~\cite{BeiFroStaTse03}

1113: \be\label{Energy-2-cut}

1114: \varepsilon

1115: =

1116: -

1117: \frac{2\beta}{L} \left[{\frac {1}{ab}} - \frac{\beta}2\lr{\frac1{a^2}+\frac1{b^2}} \right]

1118: =

1119: \frac{(2m)^2}{L}

1120: \mathbb{K}(\tau) \left[ (2-\tau) \mathbb{K}(\tau) - 2 \mathbb{E}(\tau)\right]

1121: \, .

1122: \ee

1123: The dependence of $\varepsilon$ on the total spin $N$ and conformal spin $s$

1124: enters into this expression through the parametric  dependence of the modular

1125: parameter $\tau$, Eq.~\re{ab}, on the scaling parameter $\beta=Ls/(N+Ls)$,

1126: Eq.~\re{beta}.

1127: 

1128: We observe that the minimal energy corresponds to $m=1$, that is, when all double

1129: points $x_{2j}$, Eq.~\re{curve-reduced}, are located inside the interval

1130: $[-b,b]$. It is straightforward to find their position on the real axis with the

1131: help of \re{N=0-roots} and \re{dp-res}. Since the total number of double points

1132: is infinite for $L\to \infty$ and they occupy a compact interval, $x_{2j}$ should

1133: be a smooth function of $j$. Differentiating the second relation in

1134: \re{N=0-roots} with respect to $j$, one finds

1135: \be\label{dx}

1136: \frac{dx_{2j}}{dj} = \frac{\pi} {p'(x_{2j})} = - x_{2j}^2 \frac{\pi} {\beta}

1137: \left[ 1+ \mathcal{O}(x_{2j}^2)\right]\,,

1138: \ee

1139: where we substituted the momentum by its value at the origin \re{p-asym}. It

1140: follows from \re{dx} that for large $j$ the double points $1/x_{2j}$ are

1141: equidistantly distributed on the real axis (see Fig.~\ref{Fig-semi})

1142: \be\label{equid}

1143: \frac{1}{x_{2j}} = \frac{\pi}{\beta} j + \mathcal{O}(1/j)\,.

1144: \ee

1145: We remind that the double points $x_{2j}$ verify the relation $\tau_0(x_{2j})=\pm

1146: 2$. It is instructive to compare \re{equid} with a similar relation $1/{x_{2j}} =

1147: {\pi}j$ for the momentum \re{N=0-roots} corresponding to the state with $N=0$, or

1148: equivalently $\beta=1$. Equation \re{equid} suggests that close to the origin and

1149: away from the cuts, $x^2\ll b^2$, the transfer matrix for the two-cut solution

1150: looks like $\tau_0(x) = 2 \cos p(x) \sim 2 \cos(\beta /x)$. Matching this

1151: relation into the general expression for $\tau_0(x)$, Eq.~\re{tau-expansion}, we

1152: find that the integrals of motion scale as

1153: \be\label{q-scaling}

1154: \widehat q_{2n} \sim 2\frac{(-1)^{n}}{(2n)!}\beta^{2n}\,,\qquad (n \gg 1) \, ,

1155: \ee

1156: where $\widehat q_{2n}=q_{2n}/(N+Ls)^{2n}$. For $\beta=1$, or equivalently $N=0$,

1157: this relation is exact for all $\widehat q_{2k}$. For $\beta\to 0$, or

1158: equivalently $N\to\infty$, it cannot be exact since, by definition, $\widehat q_2

1159: = -1+\mathcal{O}(\eta)$. It instead indicates that higher charges take

1160: anomalously small values $\widehat q_{2k}=\mathcal{O} (\eta^{2k})$ with $\eta\sim

1161: 1/N$. This is in agreement with our expectations that for $\beta=0$ the transfer

1162: matrix reduces to \re{tau-min}.

1163: 

1164: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1165: %            Figure

1166: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1167: \begin{figure}[t]

1168: \begin{center}

1169: \mbox{

1170: \begin{picture}(0,225)(150,0)

1171: \put(0,0){\insertfig{10}{quasi}}

1172: \end{picture}

1173: }

1174: \end{center}

1175: \caption{\label{Fig-semi} The transfer matrix $\cos p(x)=\tau_0(x)/2$ as a

1176: function of $1/x$ for the symmetric two-cut solution for $\beta=3/4$ and $m=1$.

1177: The cuts $[-a,-b] \cup [b,a]$ with $a=0.45$ and $b=0.15$ correspond to $\cos^2

1178: p(x)> 1$.  The double points $x_{2j}$ are denoted by crosses, $\cos p(x_{2j})=\pm

1179: 1$ and $1/x_{2j}^2 > 1/b^2$. The ``large'' and ``small'' roots of the transfer

1180: matrix, $\cos p (\delta_n) = 0$, are shown by full and light blobs,

1181: respectively.}

1182: \end{figure}

1183: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1184: 

1185: Let us examine the expression for the energy \re{Energy-2-cut} in two limiting

1186: cases $\beta\to 1$ and $\beta\to 0$, or equivalently $N \ll L$ and $N \gg L$,

1187: respectively, Eq.~\re{limits}. According to \re{ab}, the corresponding values of

1188: the modular parameter are $\tau\to 0$ and $\tau\to 1$. For $\tau\to 0$, one finds

1189: from \re{ab}

1190: \be\label{ab-small}

1191: a=\frac1{\pi m}\lr{1+\frac{\tau}4}+...

1192: \,,\qquad

1193: b=\frac1{\pi m}\lr{1-\frac{\tau}4}+...\,,\qquad\beta=1-\frac{\tau^2}{16}+...\,,

1194: \ee

1195: where the ellipses denote subleading terms. Since $a-b\sim \tau \to 0$, the two

1196: cuts shrink into points as $\beta\to 1$. One expands \re{Energy-2-cut} in powers

1197: of $\tau$ and obtains the energy as

1198: \be\label{E-small}

1199: \varepsilon \stackrel{L \gg N}{=} \frac{m^2}{8L} {\pi^2} \tau^2 + \ldots =

1200: \frac{N}{L^2} \frac{2 \pi^2 m^2}{s}+\ldots \,.

1201: \ee

1202: For $\tau\to 1$, one has from \re{ab}

1203: \be\label{ab-large}

1204: a=\frac1{2m}+...\,,\qquad b=\frac{\sqrt{1-\tau}}{2m}+ ... \,,\qquad

1205: \beta= \sqrt{1-\tau}\,\ln\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\tau}}+ ...

1206: \ee

1207: According to \re{beta}, the limit $\beta\to 0$ corresponds to $\beta=Ls/N$ with

1208: $N \gg L$. Then, making use of \re{Energy-2-cut} one finds for the energy

1209: \be\label{E-large}

1210: \varepsilon \stackrel{L \ll N}{=} \frac{4m^2}{L} \ln^2 \frac{\sqrt{1-\tau}}{4} +

1211: \ldots = \frac{4m^2}{L} \ln^2 \frac{N}{L}+ \ldots \, .

1212: \ee

1213: This relation matches the expression for the energy of long spinning string

1214: folded $m$ times~\cite{FroTse03} and agrees with the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz

1215: analysis \cite{BeiFroStaTse03}.

1216: 

1217: 

1218: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1219: \subsection{Breakdown of semiclassical expansion}

1220: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1221: 

1222: For $m=1$ the expressions \re{Energy-2-cut}, \re{E-small} and \re{E-large}

1223: describe the dependence of the energy on the total spin $N+Ls$ along the minimal

1224: energy trajectory at leading order of the semiclassical expansion for $L\gg 1$

1225: and arbitrary values of $N$ including the regions $N\ll L$ and $N\gg L$. {}From

1226: \re{E-naive-expansion} one expects that the contribution of the subleading terms

1227: to the energy is suppressed by powers of $\eta=1/(L+Ns)$. Let us compare these

1228: predictions with the exact expressions for the minimal energy obtained from

1229: numerical solution to the Baxter equation, Eqs.~\re{Baxter-eq} and

1230: \re{Energy-Baxter}. For $L=10$, the comparison is shown in

1231: Fig.~\ref{Fig-roots-energy10} on the right panel. We observe that the curve

1232: determined by \re{Energy-2-cut} agrees with the exact numbers for $N < L$ and

1233: deviates significantly from them for $N > L$. Most importantly, for $N \gg L$ the

1234: exact energy scales as $\sim 4\ln N$ while the semiclassical formula \re{E-large}

1235: yields a different asymptotic behavior.

1236: 

1237: To understand the reason for this discrepancy, let us revisit the calculation of

1238: the energy in the previous section and pay special attention to the position of

1239: the cuts. By construction, the cuts run along two symmetric intervals

1240: $[-a,-b]\cup[b,a]$. According to \re{ab-large}, for $\tau\to 1$ the parameter $a$

1241: approaches the value $a=1/(2m)$ while the parameter $b$ vanishes indicating that

1242: the two cuts collide at the origin. Then, one examines the expression for the

1243: momentum \re{dp-res} and finds that for $b=0$ the differential $dp$ reduces to

1244: \re{dp-reduced}. We argued in Sect.~\ref{CollisionCuts} that Eq.~\re{dp-reduced}

1245: leads to a new, logarithmic scaling of the energy \re{Emin-naive}. This suggests

1246: that the problem with recovering this regime within the semiclassical approach

1247: does not lie in the construction of the momentum $p(x)$ but rather in the expression

1248: for the energy \re{E-naive-expansion}.

1249: 

1250: The exact formula for the energy \re{Energy-Baxter} involves $S'(x_\pm)$

1251: evaluated at $x_\pm=\pm i\beta/L$. The relation \re{E-naive-expansion} was

1252: derived under the assumption that $S'(x)$ is analytical at the vicinity of these

1253: points. For the two-cut solution constructed in the previous section this

1254: assumption is justified provided that the inner boundary of the cut $b$ stays

1255: finite in the limit $L\to\infty$. For $x_\pm \to 0$ with $b={\rm fixed}$, the

1256: semiclassical analysis is applicable and one arrives at the asymptotic behavior

1257: \re{E-small} and \re{E-large} depending on the ratio $N/L$. The situation is more

1258: complex when $b$ vanishes in the scaling limit. For $b\to 0$ with $x_\pm ={\rm

1259: fixed}$, the two cuts collide and the very assumption that $S'(x)$ is analytical

1260: at the origin does not hold true anymore. In this case, one expects that the

1261: energy will develop a new asymptotic behavior and the crossover will occur for $b

1262: \sim |x_\pm|$ (see Fig.\ \ref{CollisionCutsFig} (a) and (b)).

1263: 

1264: Defining a new parameter $\xi =|x_\pm|/b= {\beta}/{(bL)}$ one anticipates that

1265: the semiclassical approach is applicable for $\xi < 1$. Indeed, for $N\ll L$ one

1266: finds from \re{ab-small} that $\xi \sim 1/L$ and the condition  $\xi < 1$ is

1267: satisfied. For $N\gg L$ one gets from \re{ab-small}

1268: \be

1269: \xi \sim \frac1{L} \ln \frac{N}{L}\,.

1270: \ee

1271: One recognizes that similar parameter $\xi_{\rm str}$ naturally arises on the

1272: string side and controls there the transition between two different regimes in

1273: \re{3rd}. For $\xi \gg 1$ one has to take into account that the two cuts collide at the

1274: origin and, as a consequence, the analytical properties of $S'(x)$ are different.

1275: The simplest way to see this is to examine the Taylor expansion of the leading

1276: term $S_0''(x)$, Eq.~\re{SO-zero}, around the origin and retain the terms most

1277: singular for $b\to 0$

1278: \be

1279: S_0''(x) \sim \frac{\beta}{x^2}\left[1 -

1280: \frac1{\sqrt{1-x^2/b^2}}\right]=-\frac{\beta}{2b^2}\left[1+\frac34\,{\frac

1281: {{x}^{2}}{{b}^{2}}}+\frac58\,{\frac {{x}^{4}}{{b}^{4}}}+\ldots

1282: \right]\,.

1283: \ee

1284: As follows from \re{tau-expansion} and \re{E-naive-expansion}, higher order terms

1285: of this expansion contribute to subleading corrections to the energy

1286: $\varepsilon=i\int_{x_-}^{x_+} dx \, S''(x)$. It is easy to see that the series

1287: for $i\int_{x_-}^{x_+} dx \, S_0''(x)$ runs in powers of $\xi=|x_\pm/b|$ and it

1288: is only convergent for $\xi < 1$.

1289: 

1290: Based on our analysis we expect that the semiclassical expansion of the energy

1291: \re{E-naive-expansion} will be divergent for $\xi \gg 1$. Let us calculate the

1292: first subleading correction to the energy \re{E-naive-expansion} defined by

1293: $S_1''(0)$. The function $S_1'(x)$ satisfies the relation \re{S1-Baxter} which

1294: involves yet unknown function $\tau_1(x)$. To determine $S_1'(x)$ one requires

1295: that it should have the same analytical properties as the leading term of the

1296: semiclassical expansion $S_0'(x)$, i.e., to be an analytical function in the

1297: complex plane with the cuts $[-a,-b]\cup [b,a]$. Discontinuity of $S_1'(x)$

1298: across the cut defines the correction to the distribution density of the Bethe

1299: roots~\cite{Kor95}. Since $\tau_0(x)$ and $\tau_1(x)$ are entire functions while

1300: $p'(x)$ and $\sin p(x)$ change sign across the cut, $\sin p(x+i0)=-\sin p(x-i0)$,

1301: the function $S_1'(x)$ satisfies the relation

1302: \be

1303: S_1'(x+i0) + S_1'(x-i0) = -p'(x+i0) \cot p(x+i0)\,,

1304: \ee

1305: with $x \in [-a,-b]\cup [b,a]$. In addition, its asymptotic behavior at the

1306: origin and infinity is fixed by Eqs.~\re{as-infinity} and \re{as-zero},

1307: \be

1308: S_1'(0)=0\,,\qqqquad S_1'(x)\stackrel{x\to\infty}{\sim} \frac1{x^3}\,.

1309: \ee

1310: The solution to the resulting Riemann-Hilbert problem looks like (c.f.

1311: \cite{GroKaz05})

1312: \be

1313: \label{S1intermediate} S_1'(x) = \frac{x}{\sqrt{(x^2-a^2)(x^2-b^2)}}\int_b^a

1314: \frac{dz}{\pi}\frac{\sqrt{(a^2-z^2)(z^2-b^2)}}{x^2-z^2} p'(z+i0) \cot p(z+i0)\,,

1315: \ee

1316: where `$+i0$' indicates that the momentum is evaluated on the upper sheet of the

1317: Riemann surface. Replacing $p'(z+i0)$ by its expression \re{dp-res}, we obtain

1318: the following representation for the first subleading correction to

1319: \re{E-naive-expansion}

1320: \be

1321: \varepsilon_1 = -\frac{2\beta}{L}S_1''(0) = \frac{2\beta}{\pi ab L}\int_b^a

1322: \frac{dz}{z^2} \left[1-\beta\frac{ab}{z^2}\right] \coth(ip(z+i0)) \,.

1323: \ee

1324: For our purposes we would like to determine the asymptotic behavior of

1325: $\varepsilon_1$ for $N \gg L$, or equivalently $a\to 1/(2m)$, $b\to 0$ and

1326: $\beta\to 0$, Eq.~\re{ab-large}. Changing the integration variable to $z\to b z$,

1327: one finds in the limit $b\to 0$

1328: \be\label{eps1}

1329: \varepsilon_1 =   \frac{2\beta}{\pi ab^2L}\int_1^\infty

1330: \frac{dz}{z^2}\left[1-\frac{\beta a}{b}\frac{1}{z^2}\right] \coth(i  p(b z+i0))=

1331: -\frac{2}{3\pi}\frac{\beta^2}{L b^3} + \ldots\, .

1332: \ee

1333: Here in the second relation we took into account that for $\beta\to 0$ the cuts

1334: collide at the origin and the momentum scales as $p(z+i0) \sim 2im \ln z$ for $z

1335: \to 0$, Eq.~\re{dp-reduced}. Comparing \re{eps1} with a similar relation for the

1336: leading term $\varepsilon_0 \sim \beta^2/(L b^2)$, Eq.~\re{Energy-2-cut}, one

1337: finds that

1338: \be

1339: \frac{\eta \varepsilon_1}{\varepsilon_0} = \mathcal{O}(\eta /b)=\mathcal{O}(\xi)

1340: \, ,

1341: \ee

1342: where $\eta/b=1/(b N)=(2m/s) \ln(N/L)/L$ in the limit $N\gg L$, Eqs.~\re{beta}

1343: and \re{ab-large}.

1344: 

1345: We conclude that for $N\gg L$ the semiclassical expansion of the energy,

1346: $\varepsilon=\varepsilon_0+\eta\varepsilon_1+\mathcal{O}(\eta^2)$,

1347: Eq.~\re{E-naive-expansion} runs in powers of $\xi$ and it is only convergent for

1348: $\xi <1$. Together with \re{gamma=energy} this leads to the expression for the

1349: one-loop anomalous dimension, Eqs.~\re{gen-exp} and \re{coeff-fun}, with

1350: $c_{1,1}=-2m/(3\pi s)$.

1351: 

1352: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1353: \subsection{Beyond semiclassical expansion}

1354: \label{BeyondSection}

1355: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1356: 

1357: We demonstrated in the previous section that the semiclassical expansion breaks

1358: down for $\xi\gg 1$. The reason for this is that the cuts collide in this limit

1359: and the semiclassical expression for $S(x)$ ceases to be analytical at $x=0$.

1360: Substituting $\beta=0$ into \re{SO-zero}, one finds (for $m=1$)

1361: \be

1362: \label{P-log}

1363: S_0''(x) = p'(x)= -\frac1{x\sqrt{x^2-\frac14}}

1364: \ee

1365: and, therefore, $S_0'(x) \sim \mp 2i \ln x$ for $x\to 0$ on the upper and lower

1366: sheets, respectively. It is easy to see that the corresponding transfer matrix

1367: $\tau_0(x)=2\cos p(x)$ is given by \re{tau-min}. We remind that $\tau_0(x)$ plays

1368: the role of the potential in the Baxter equation \re{Baxter-eq}. The fact that

1369: $\tau_0(x)$ is singular at $x=0$ implies that the semiclassical expansion

1370: \re{WKB-ansatz} breaks down at the origin. In this section, we present an

1371: approach which allows one to construct asymptotic solution to the Baxter equation

1372: \re{Baxter-eq} and evaluate the energy for $N > L$. It is complementary to the

1373: semiclassical approach and takes a full advantage of the above mentioned

1374: singularity of the transfer matrix $\tau_0(x)$ at $x=0$. A detailed account on

1375: this approach can be found in Ref.~\cite{DerKorMan99}.

1376: 

1377: To begin with, we rewrite the Baxter equation \re{Baxter-eq} as

1378: \be\label{Baxter-phi}

1379: (u+is)^L \phi(u) + \frac{(u-is)^L}{\phi(u-i)} = t_L(u)

1380: \ee

1381: where the notation was introduced for

1382: \be

1383: \phi(u)=\frac{Q(u+i)}{Q(u)}\,.

1384: \ee

1385: To evaluate the energy \re{Energy-Baxter} one has to construct solutions to

1386: \re{Baxter-phi} for $u\sim \pm is$. Notice that the dressing factors $(u\pm

1387: is)^L$ in \re{Baxter-phi} vanish for $u\to \mp is$ indicating that one of the

1388: terms in the left-hand side of \re{Baxter-phi} becomes anomalously small and can

1389: be neglected. It turns out that in the thermodynamic limit, $L \gg 1$, the same

1390: approximation can be performed not only in the vicinity of $u=\pm is$ but in the

1391: whole region $u=\mathcal{O}\left((N+Ls)^0\right)$. To see this we note that

1392: $t_L(u)$ is given by \re{t_L} with the charges that scale as $q_k \sim (N+Ls)^k$.

1393: This suggests that $|t_L(u)| \gg 1$ for $u=\mathcal{O}\left((N+Ls)^0\right)$.

1394: Indeed, in the semiclassical approach, for $u=x/\eta$, one finds from

1395: \re{tau-expansion}, \re{p-def} and \re{P-log} that the transfer matrix takes the

1396: form

1397: \be\label{t-p}

1398: t_L(x/\eta) = 2 (x/\eta)^L \cos p(x) + \mathcal{O}(\eta)\,.

1399: \ee

1400: For $u=\mathcal{O}(L^0)$, or equivalently $x\sim \eta$, the momentum can be

1401: replaced by its asymptotic behavior at the origin: $p(x) \sim\beta/x$ for

1402: $\xi\ll 1$ and $p(x)\sim 2i\ln x$ for $\xi \gg 1$ leading to $|t_L(x/\eta)|\gg

1403: 1$.

1404: 

1405: Let us return to Eq.\ \re{Baxter-phi} and take into account that $t_L(u)$ takes

1406: large values for $u=\mathcal{O}\left((N+Ls)^0\right)$ both for $\xi< 1$ and

1407: $\xi\gg 1$. Requiring the left-hand side of \re{Baxter-phi} to be as large as

1408: $t_L(u)$ one finds that either $\phi(u) \gg 1$, or $\phi(u-i) \ll 1$. In both

1409: cases, one of the terms in the left-hand side of \re{Baxter-phi} can be safely

1410: neglected and one arrives at two different equations

1411: \ba\label{Baxter-as}

1412: (u+is)^L Q_+(u+i) \!\!\!&=&\!\!\! t_L(u) Q_+(u)\,,

1413: \\ \nonumber

1414: (u-is)^L Q_-(u-i) \!\!\!&=&\!\!\! t_L(u) Q_-(u)\,.

1415: \ea

1416: Having solved this system, one can construct an asymptotic solution to the Baxter

1417: equation \re{Baxter-eq} as a linear combination of $Q_+(u)$ and $Q_-(u)$

1418: \be\label{Q-as}

1419: Q^{\rm (as)}(u) = c_+ Q_+(u) + c_- Q_-(u)\,.

1420: \ee

1421: We would like to stress that $Q^{\rm (as)}(u)$ does not satisfy the Baxter

1422: equation \re{Q-polynom}, but asymptotically approaches its solution $Q(u)$ in the

1423: region $u=\mathcal{O}\left((N+Ls)^0\right)$. Equations~\re{Baxter-as} were

1424: obtained under the assumption that $(u+is)^L Q_+(u+i)\gg (u-is)^L Q_+(u-i)$ and

1425: $(u+is)^L Q_-(u+i)\ll (u-is)^L Q_-(u-i)$, respectively. Together with

1426: \re{Baxter-as} it can be expressed as the following relation for the transfer

1427: matrix

1428: \be

1429: t_L\left(u+\ft{i}2\right) t_L\left(u-\ft{i}2\right) \gg \left[u^2 +

1430: \left(\ft12-s\right)^2\right]^L\,.

1431: \ee

1432: For $u=\mathcal{O}\left((N+Ls)^0\right)$ it is equivalent to $|t_L(u)|\gg 1$.

1433: 

1434: To solve \re{Baxter-as} one introduces into consideration the roots of the

1435: transfer matrix \re{t_L}

1436: \be\label{t-roots}

1437: t_L(u) = 2 \prod_{n=1}^L (u-\delta_n)\,.

1438: \ee

1439: It is known that for polynomial solutions to the Baxter equation,

1440: Eq.~\re{Q-polynom}, the roots take real values only, $\Im

1441: \delta_k=0$~\cite{Kor95}. Matching \re{t-roots} into \re{t_L} one finds that they

1442: satisfy the sum rules

1443: \be\label{sum_rules}

1444: \sum_{n=1}^L \delta_n = 0 \,,\qquad \sum_{n=1}^L \delta_n^2 = -\frac12q_2

1445: \,,\quad \ldots\, , \quad \prod_{n=1}^L \delta_n = \frac{(-1)^L}{2}q_L \,.

1446: \ee

1447: For even solutions to the Baxter equation, $Q(u)=Q(-u)$, the roots appear in

1448: pairs $\delta_n = -\delta_{L - n + 1}$. Making use of \re{t-roots}, it is

1449: straightforward to verify that the solutions to \re{Baxter-as} are given by

1450: \ba\label{Q+-}

1451: Q_+(u) = 2^{-iu} \prod_{n=1}^L\frac{\Gamma(-iu + i\delta_n)}{\Gamma(-iu +s )} \,

1452: , \qquad Q_-(u) = 2^{iu} \prod_{n=1}^L\frac{\Gamma(iu - i\delta_n)}{\Gamma(iu +s

1453: )} \, .

1454: \ea

1455: To fix the constants $c_\pm$ in \re{Q-as} one examines the relation for the

1456: quasimomentum in Eq.\ \re{Energy-Baxter} and substitutes $Q(u)$ by its asymptotic

1457: expression \re{Q-as}. Taking into account that (for $\varrho \to 0$)

1458: \be\label{Q-vanish}

1459: Q_+(-is + \varrho) \sim \varrho^L \,,\qquad Q_-(is - \varrho) \sim \varrho^L

1460: \ee

1461: one finds from \re{Energy-Baxter} and \re{Q-as}

1462: \be

1463: \e^{i\theta} = \frac{Q^{\rm (as)}(is)}{Q^{\rm (as)}(-is)}

1464: =\frac{c_+}{c_-}\frac{Q_+(is)}{Q_-(-is)}\,.

1465: \ee

1466: Therefore, for cyclically symmetric states $\e^{i\theta}=1$ the asymptotic

1467: solution to the Baxter equation is given up to an overall normalization factor by

1468: \be\label{Q-as-sol}

1469: Q^{\rm (as)}(u) =  Q_+(u)Q_-(-is) +  Q_-(u)Q_+(is)\,.

1470: \ee

1471: We remind that this relation is only valid in the region

1472: $u=\mathcal{O}\left((N+Ls)^0\right)$. In a similar manner, one uses

1473: \re{Q-vanish} to evaluate the energy \re{Energy-Baxter} as

1474: \be

1475: \varepsilon^{\rm (as)} = i\lr{\ln Q^{\rm (as)}(is)}'-i\lr{\ln Q^{\rm (as)}(-is)}'

1476: = i\lr{\ln Q_+(is)}'-i\lr{\ln Q_-(-is)}' \, .

1477: \ee

1478: Replacing $Q_\pm(u)$ by their expressions \re{Q+-} one finds the following

1479: remarkable expression for the energy in terms of the roots of the transfer matrix

1480: \re{t-roots}~\cite{Kor95,BraDerMan98,Bel99,DerKorMan99}

1481: \be\label{energy-as}

1482: \varepsilon^{\rm (as)} = 2 \ln 2 + \sum_{n=1}^L \left[\psi(s+

1483: i\delta_n)+\psi(s-i\delta_n) -2 \psi(2s) \right] \,,

1484: \ee

1485: where $\psi(x)=d\ln\Gamma(x)/dx$. The interpretation of \re{energy-as} in terms

1486: of classical $SL(2)$ spin magnet and properties of the Wilson operators \re{O-def}

1487: in gauge theory can be found in Ref.~\cite{BelGorKor03}.

1488: 

1489: Since the roots $\delta_n$ are functions of the conserved charges,

1490: Eq.~\re{sum_rules}, the relation \re{energy-as} establishes the dependence of the

1491: energy on $q_2,\ldots,q_L$. To check \re{energy-as}, we compared the asymptotic

1492: ``dispersion curve'' $\varepsilon^{\rm (as)}(q_2,\ldots,q_L)$ with the exact one

1493: $\varepsilon^{\rm (ex)}(q_2,\ldots,q_L)$ coming from the Bethe Ansatz solution

1494: \re{Energy-ABA}. We found that for $L=10$ and $s=1/2$ the accuracy of

1495: \re{energy-as}, $\varepsilon^{\rm (as)}/\varepsilon^{\rm (ex)}-1 $, increases

1496: from $-4.6 \times 10^{-5}$ for $N=2$, to $-2.6 \times 10^{-6}$ for $N=10$ and to

1497: $1.9 \times 10^{-10}$ for $N=100$. We conclude that Eq.~\re{energy-as} describes

1498: the exact eigenspectrum with a high accuracy throughout the whole interval of $N$

1499: including the region $N\sim L$ in which the semiclassical approach is applicable.

1500: Indeed, it is straightforward to show that the relation \re{energy-as} coincides

1501: with the semiclassical expression \re{E-naive-expansion} for $N\sim L$ (see

1502: Appendix).

1503: 

1504: The charges $q_3,\ldots,q_L$ have to satisfy quantization conditions. In the

1505: method of Baxter $Q-$operator they follow from the requirement for $Q(u)$ to be

1506: polynomial solutions to the Baxter equation, Eqs.~\re{Baxter-eq} and

1507: \re{Q-polynom}. The roots of $Q(u)$ scale in the thermodynamic limit as

1508: $u=\lambda_j \sim L$ and, therefore, they lie outside the applicability range of

1509: \re{Q-as-sol}. This does not allow us to impose the polynomiality condition for

1510: $Q^{\rm (as)}(u)$. We shall require instead that $Q^{\rm (as)}(u)$, given by

1511: \re{Q-as-sol}, should be regular on the real $u-$axis inside the region

1512: $u=\mathcal{O}\left((N+Ls)^0\right)$. This property is not warranted since both

1513: $Q_+(u)$ and $Q_-(u)$ develop poles on the real $u-$axis originating from the

1514: product of $\Gamma-$functions in the numerator in the right-hand side of

1515: Eq.~\re{Q+-}. The poles are located at zeros of the transfer matrix \re{t-roots},

1516: $u=\delta_j$ with $j=1,\ldots,L$. Requiring for $Q^{\rm (as)}(u)$ to have zero

1517: residues at $u=\delta_n$ with $\delta_n=\mathcal{O} \left((N+Ls)^0\right)$, one

1518: gets from \re{Q-as-sol} and \re{Q+-}

1519: \be\label{quant-cond}

1520: 2^{-2i\delta_n} \prod_{j=1, j\neq n}^L

1521: \frac{\Gamma(-i\delta_n+i\delta_j)}{\Gamma(i\delta_n-i\delta_j)}=

1522: \left[\frac{\Gamma(s-i\delta_n)}{\Gamma(s+i\delta_n)}\right]^L \prod_{j=1}^L

1523: \frac{\Gamma(s+i\delta_j)}{\Gamma(s-i\delta_j)}\,.

1524: \ee

1525: The total number of roots of the transfer matrix \re{t-roots} equals the length

1526: of the spin chain $L$. As we will see in a moment, in the thermodynamic limit $L

1527: \gg 1$ and $N \gg L$ all roots can be separated into two different groups

1528: depending on their scaling: ``small'' roots $\delta_n=\mathcal{O}(N^0)$ and

1529: ``large'' roots $\delta_n=\mathcal{O}(N)$. It is important to realize that the

1530: quantization conditions \re{quant-cond} should only hold for the small roots

1531: while the product over $j$ entering both sides of \re{quant-cond} involves {\sl

1532: all} roots.

1533: 

1534: The total number of small roots depends on the value of the parameter

1535: $\beta=Ls/(N+Ls)$. For $0 < \beta \le 1$, that is, within the applicability range

1536: of the semiclassical expansion, the integrals of motion scale as in

1537: Eq.~\re{q-scaling}. Together with \re{sum_rules} this implies that the roots

1538: behave as $\delta_n = \mathcal{O}(N)$ and, therefore, there are no small roots.

1539: For $\beta\to 0$ higher charges $q_L, q_{L-1}, \ldots $ take anomalously small

1540: values \re{q-scaling} indicating that the small roots are there. Let us

1541: demonstrate that their total number equals $L-2m$ with positive integer $m$

1542: entering the right-hand side of \re{cond}. One makes use of \re{t-p} to deduce

1543: that the large roots of the transfer matrix satisfy $\cos p(\delta_j\eta)=0 +

1544: \mathcal{O}(\eta)$. Recall that the momentum verifies $(\cos p(x))^2 \ge 1$ on

1545: the cuts (for $b^2 \le x^2 \le a^2$) and takes the values $\cos p(x)=\pm 1$ at

1546: the double points $x=x_{2j}$, Eq.~\re{equid}. Since $\cos p(x_{2j})=-\cos

1547: p(x_{2j-2})$, the roots of the transfer matrix \re{t-p} should lie on the real

1548: axis in between the branching points, $x_{2k} < \delta_j\eta < x_{2j-2}$, away

1549: from the cuts $[-a,-b]\cup [b,a]$ (see Fig.~\ref{Fig-semi}). Going over to the

1550: limit $\beta =Ls/(N+Ls)\to 0$, or equivalently $N \gg L$, one takes into account

1551: that the edges of the cuts scale as $a = 1/{(2m)}$ and $b=\beta/(-2m\ln\beta)\to

1552: 0$, Eq.~\re{ab-large}. As a result, all roots of the transfer matrix

1553: $\delta_j\eta\sim \delta_j/N$ ``trapped'' inside the interval $[-b,b]$ are to be

1554: small while the roots belonging to the intervals $(-\infty,-a]\cup [a,\infty)$

1555: are to be large

1556: \be

1557: \label{roots-as} |\delta^{\rm (large)}| > \frac{N}{2m} \,,\qqqquad |\delta^{\rm

1558: (small)}| < \frac{1}{4m\xi}\,,

1559: \ee

1560: with $\xi=\ln (N/L)/L$. Thus, the total number of small roots, $L-2m$, equals the

1561: number of double points on the interval $[-b,b]$ and, as a consequence, the total

1562: number of the large roots is $2m$.

1563: 

1564: Let us consider the minimal energy state with $m=1$. For $N \gg L$, the transfer

1565: matrix has two large roots $\delta_1=-\delta_{L}$ and $L-2$ small roots

1566: $\delta_k=-\delta_{L-k+1}$ with $k=2,\ldots,L-1$. It follows from \re{sum_rules}

1567: that the large root is given by

1568: \be\label{delta_1}

1569: \delta_1 = {(-q_2/2)^{1/2}} \left[ 1+ \mathcal{O}(1/L)\right]

1570: \sim

1571: \frac{N+Ls}{\sqrt{2}}

1572: \ee

1573: with $q_2$ defined in \re{q2}. The small roots satisfy the quantization

1574: conditions \re{quant-cond}. Separating in \re{quant-cond} the contribution of the

1575: large roots with $j=1$ and $j=L$, one can rewrite \re{quant-cond} in terms of the

1576: small roots only (for $n=2,\ldots,L-1$)

1577: \be\label{system}

1578: (-q_2)^{-2i\delta_n} = (-1)^{L-1}

1579: \left[\frac{\Gamma(s-i\delta_n)}{\Gamma(s+i\delta_n)}

1580: \right]^{L}\prod_{j=2}^{L-1}

1581: \frac{\Gamma(1+i\delta_n-i\delta_j)}{\Gamma(1-i\delta_n+i\delta_j)} \,.

1582: \ee

1583: Here we took into account that the product over $j$ in the right-hand side of

1584: \re{quant-cond} equals $1$ due to pairing of the roots

1585: $\delta_n=-\delta_{L-n+1}$. Taking the logarithm of both sides in \re{system},

1586: one rewrites the quantization conditions as

1587: \be\label{system-arg}

1588: \delta_n \ln(-q_2) + L \,{\rm arg}\, \Gamma(s-i\delta_n) + \sum_{j=2}^{L-1} {\rm

1589: arg}\, \Gamma(1+i\delta_n-i\delta_j) = \frac{\pi}2 k_n

1590: \ee

1591: where integers $k_2> k_3> \ldots$ count the branches of the logarithms and

1592: satisfy $k_n=-k_{L-n+1}$. In addition, they have a parity opposite to that of

1593: $L$, that is $k_n={\rm even/odd}$ for $L={\rm odd/even}$. Notice that in

1594: distinction with the Bethe ansatz equations \re{Bethe-roots}, the number of

1595: relations in \re{system-arg} does not depend on the total spin $N$ but only on

1596: the length of the spin chain $L$.

1597: 

1598: To evaluate the energy \re{energy-as} one has to solve the system \re{system-arg}

1599: and determine the set of small roots. The resulting expression for

1600: $\varepsilon^{\rm (as)}$, Eq.~\re{energy-as}, depends on integers $k_n$ and as we

1601: show below (see Eq.~\re{Ek}) it takes minimal value for the occupation numbers

1602: $k_n=L+1-2n$. A systematic analysis of the quantization conditions

1603: \re{system-arg} will be given elsewhere. The system of equations \re{system-arg}

1604: can be easily solved in two limits $\xi \gg 1$ and $\xi < 1$.

1605: 

1606: For $\xi \gg 1$ (or $\ln(N/L) \gg L $) one deduces from \re{roots-as} that

1607: solutions to \re{system-arg} have to satisfy $|\delta_n| \ll 1$. In this case,

1608: one expands the $\Gamma-$functions in \re{system-arg} in powers of $\delta$'s and

1609: one finds after some algebra

1610: \be\label{delta-fin}

1611: \delta_n = \frac{\pi k_n/2}{\ln(-q_2) + (L-2)\psi(1)-L\psi(s)}+\ldots

1612: \ee

1613: with $n=2,\ldots,L-1$. One verifies a posteriori that this relation is in

1614: agreement with \re{roots-as}.

1615: 

1616: For $\xi < 1$ (or $1 \ll \ln(N/L) <  L $), one obtains from \re{roots-as} that

1617: $|\delta_n| < 1/(2\xi)$ and, therefore, not all roots verify the relation

1618: $|\delta_n| \ll 1$. Still, the relation \re{delta-fin} is valid for the roots

1619: with small absolute value $|\delta_n| \ll 1$ (with $n\sim L/2$). For roots

1620: $|\delta_n| \sim 1/(2\xi)$ (with $n \sim L^0$) one expands the $\Gamma-$functions

1621: in \re{system-arg} in inverse powers of $\delta$'s and obtains

1622: \be\label{dev}

1623: \delta_n\ln(-q_2) -  \delta_n \ln \delta_n^2 +\ldots  =\frac{\pi}{2} k_n\,,

1624: \ee

1625: with $k_n = \mathcal{O}(L)$. From this relation one obtains the relation

1626: $\delta_n \sim \pi k_n/(4 \ln(N/k_n))$ which is in agreement with \re{roots-as}.

1627: 

1628: To test the quantization conditions \re{system-arg} we compared solutions to

1629: \re{system-arg} for $k_n=L+1-2n$ with the exact, Bethe ansatz expressions for the

1630: roots of the transfer matrix corresponding to the minimal energy state with the

1631: quantum numbers $s=\ft 12$, $L=10$ and $N=100$ and observed a good agreement (see

1632: Table \ref{tab:WKB}).

1633: %

1634: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1635: \begin{table}[t]

1636: \begin{center}

1637: \begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c||c|}

1638: \hline  & $\delta_1$ & $\delta_2$ &  $\delta_3$ &

1639:      $\delta_4$ &  $\delta_5$ &

1640:      $E$

1641: \\

1642: \hline exact & $73.897289$  & $0.5297596$ & $0.3443964$ & $0.1937491$ &

1643: $0.06253897$ & $7.3790455$

1644: \\

1645: \hline asym & $73.900271$ & $0.5297573$ & $0.3443955$ & $0.1937487$ &

1646: $0.06253886$ & $7.3791719$

1647: \\

1648: \hline

1649: \end{tabular}

1650: \end{center}

1651: \caption{Comparison of the exact roots, $\delta_n=-\delta_{L-n+1}$, and the

1652: energy, $E$, for $s=1/2$, $L=10$ and $N=100$ with the asymptotic expressions

1653: obtained from Eqs.~\re{system} and \re{energy-as}, respectively.} \label{tab:WKB}

1654: \end{table}

1655: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1656: %

1657: In agreement with \re{delta-fin} and \re{dev}, the small roots $\delta_n$ vary

1658: linearly with $n$ close to the origin and deviate from the linear behavior close

1659: to the end points. Moreover, for $\xi \gg 1$ all small roots scale linearly with

1660: $n$ in agreement with \re{delta-fin} (see Fig.~\ref{Fig-roots-energy10}).

1661: 

1662: In a similar manner, we solved quantization conditions \re{system-arg} for

1663: $s=\ft12$, $L=10$ and $0 \le N \le 100$ and compared the resulting expression for

1664: the energy \re{energy-as} with the exact expression \re{Energy-ABA} as shown in

1665: Table~\ref{Fig:energy}.

1666: %

1667: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1668: \begin{table}[t]

1669: \begin{center}

1670: \begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}

1671: \hline $N$ & $0$ & $10$ &  $20$ &

1672:      $30$ &  $40$ &

1673:      $50$ & $60$ & $70$ & $80$ & $90$

1674: \\

1675: \hline exact & $0$  & $2.2766$ & $3.5069$ & $4.3644$ & $5.0266$ & $5.5678$ &

1676: $6.0262$ & $6.4243$ & $6.7765$ & $ 7.0924$

1677: \\

1678: \hline asym & $0.0907$ & $2.2851$ & $3.5097$ & $4.3657$ & $5.0274$ & $5.5683$ &

1679: $6.0265$ & $6.4246$ & $6.7767$ & $7.0926$

1680: \\

1681: \hline

1682: \end{tabular}

1683: \end{center}

1684: \caption{Comparison of the exact energy, $\varepsilon$, with the asymptotic

1685: expression obtained from Eqs.~\re{system} and \re{energy-as} for $s=\ft12$,

1686: $L=10$ and different total spin $N$.} \label{Fig:energy}

1687: \end{table}%

1688: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1689: We found that for $N \ge L$ the asymptotic expression \re{energy-as} approximates

1690: the exact result with an accuracy better than $0.002\%$ while the semiclassical

1691: approach significantly overestimates the value of the energy (see

1692: Fig.~\ref{Fig-roots-energy10}). Remember that the minimal energy states carry

1693: even Lorentz spin only, Eq.~\re{q-odd}.

1694: 

1695: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1696: %            Figure

1697: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1698: \begin{figure}[t]

1699: \begin{center}

1700: \mbox{

1701: \begin{picture}(0,230)(230,0)

1702: \put(-10,0){\insertfig{8}{rootsL10N100-10to10}} \put(-10,116){$\delta_n$}

1703: \put(110,-5){$n$} \put(180,50){$\scriptstyle{N = 10^2}$}

1704: \put(180,100){$\scriptstyle{N = 10^{10}}$}

1705: \put(250,5){\insertfig{7.65}{energyL10N100}} \put(245,116){$\varepsilon$}

1706: \put(360,-5){$N$}

1707: \end{picture}

1708: }

1709: \end{center}

1710: \caption{ \label{Fig-roots-energy10} Left panel: ``small'' roots of the transfer

1711: matrix $\delta_n$ (with $n=2,\ldots,L-1$) for $s=\ft12$, $L=10$ and two values of

1712: the spin $N = 10^2$ and $N=10^{10}$. Crosses stand for the solutions to the

1713: quantization condition \re{system-arg} and the lines correspond to \re{delta-fin}

1714: for $k_n=L+1-2n$. The roots tend to approach the line as $\xi=\ln(N/L)/L$

1715: increases from $\xi = 0.23$ to $\xi=2.07$. Right panel: the minimal energy for

1716: $s=\ft12$, $L=10$ and the total spin $0 \le N \le 100$. Crosses denote the exact

1717: values, Eq.~\re{Energy-ABA}, while the solid line stands for the semiclassical

1718: expression \re{Energy-2-cut}. We do not display the data for the asymptotic

1719: energy \re{energy-as} with roots deduced from the quantization conditions

1720: \re{system-arg}, since they are not distinguishable from the exact spectrum.}

1721: \end{figure}

1722: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1723: 

1724: Let us examine the expression for the energy \re{energy-as} in the limit $\xi \gg

1725: 1$, or $\ln(N/L) \gg L $. We remind that the semiclassical expansion breaks down

1726: in this region. Equation~\re{energy-as} involves the sum over the roots of the

1727: transfer matrix \re{t-roots}. As before, we separate them into two groups.

1728: According to \re{roots-as}, the large and small roots scale as $\delta_j \sim N$

1729: and $\delta_j\sim 1/\xi$, respectively. This allows one to replace $\psi(s\pm

1730: i\delta_j)$ in \re{energy-as} by its asymptotic behavior at infinity and at the

1731: origin, respectively. In this way we obtain %for $\xi\gg 1$

1732: \be

1733: \varepsilon = 2\ln 2 - 2L \psi(2s)+ 2 \sum_{\rm large}  \ln |\delta_j|  +

1734: \sum_{\rm small} \left[2\psi(s) - \psi''(s)\,\delta_j^2\right] + \ldots\,,

1735: \ee

1736: where the ellipsis denotes subleading terms. The number of large roots equals $2

1737: m$, $\delta_j=-\delta_{L-j+1}$ (with $j=1,\ldots,m$) and, therefore, the leading

1738: asymptotic behavior of the energy for $\xi\gg 1$ is~\cite{BelGorKor03}

1739: \be

1740: \varepsilon = 4 \ln (\delta_1 \delta_2 \ldots \delta_m) + \mathcal{O}(N^0) = 2

1741: \ln |q_{2m}| + \mathcal{O}(N^0)\,,

1742: \ee

1743: where we took into account the relations \re{sum_rules} and $q_{2m}= \widehat

1744: q_{2m}^{\scriptscriptstyle (0)} N^{2m}$ was defined in \re{q-expression}. In this

1745: way we obtain the relation

1746: \be\label{SingleLogAsymptotics}

1747: \varepsilon = 4 m \ln N + \mathcal{O}(N^0)\,,

1748: \ee

1749: which is in an agreement with \re{E-m}. The minimal energy corresponds to $m=1$.

1750: 

1751: For $m=1$ one has just two large roots $\delta_1=-\delta_{L}$ and $L-2$ small

1752: roots $\delta_n=-\delta_{L-n+1}$ (with $n=2,\ldots,L-1$) defined in

1753: Eqs.~\re{delta_1} and \re{delta-fin}, respectively. Therefore, for $\xi \gg 1$

1754: one gets

1755: \be\label{Ek}

1756: \varepsilon = 4\ln N  + 2 L \left[ \psi(s)-\psi(2s)\right] + \frac{ (-\psi''(s))

1757: \,\pi^2 }{16\ln^2 N }\sum_{n=2}^{L-1}{k_n^2} +\ldots

1758: \ee

1759: This expression depends on the set of integers $k_2> k_3> \ldots$ (with

1760: $k_n=-k_{L-n+1}$) defined in \re{system-arg}. Since $\psi''(s)<0$ for $s>0$, the

1761: minimal value of $\varepsilon$ corresponds to $k_n=L+1-2n$

1762: \be\label{e-minimal}

1763: \varepsilon = 4\ln N  + 2 L \left[ \psi(s)-\psi(2s)\right] + \frac{L^3

1764: (-\psi''(s)) \,\pi^2}{48\ln^2 N } +\ldots

1765: \ee

1766: This relation defines the minimal energy for $\xi \gg 1$. The energy of the

1767: excited states is described by \re{Ek} with another set of $k-$integers but of

1768: the same parity. The lowest lying excited state has the same $k$'s as the minimal

1769: energy state except $k_2=-k_{L-1}=L-1$. It is separated from the latter by the

1770: distance

1771: \be

1772: \Delta \varepsilon = \frac{ \pi^2 L (-\psi''(s))}{2\ln^2 N}\sim \frac{L}{\ln^2 N}

1773: \,.

1774: \ee

1775: This relation defines the level spacing in the spectrum of anomalous dimension of

1776: the Wilson operators \re{O-def} close to the minimal anomalous dimension

1777: trajectory.

1778: 

1779: So far our discussion was limited to one loop. Remarkably enough the logarithmic

1780: behavior of the anomalous dimension \re{gamma=energy}  persists to all orders of

1781: perturbation theory. Higher order corrections to \re{gamma=energy} merely modify

1782: the coefficient in front of $\ln N$ replacing $\lambda$ by an infinite series in

1783: the coupling constant,

1784: \be

1785: \gamma(\lambda) = \frac{\lambda}{8\pi^2}\, \left[4\ln N + \mathcal{O}(N^0)\right]

1786: + \mathcal{O}(\lambda^2)= 2\Gamma_{\rm cusp} (\lambda) \ln N +

1787: \mathcal{O}(N^0)\,,

1788: \ee

1789: with $\Gamma_{\rm cusp} (\lambda)$ being the cusp anomalous dimension. This

1790: relation holds true in a generic Yang-Mills theory for arbitrary values of the

1791: coupling constant $\lambda$ including the strong coupling regime. In the latter

1792: case, one can apply the gauge/string correspondence to obtain a prediction for

1793: the cusp anomalous dimension at strong coupling in the $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM

1794: theory. In the next section, we shall trace the origin of logarithmic scaling of

1795: anomalous dimension in the dual picture of folded string rotating on the AdS

1796: space.

1797: 

1798: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1799: \section{Classical strings in AdS${}_3 \times$S$^1$}

1800: \label{StringSigmaModel}

1801: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1802: 

1803: Let us turn to the analysis of anomalous dimensions of composite operators

1804: \re{O-def} on the string side. According to the gauge/string correspondence

1805: the Wilson operators are mapped into certain string states whose energy is

1806: identified with the scaling dimensions of the former. It is known that in

1807: the $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM theory, Wilson operators with the minimal anomalous

1808: dimension discussed in the preceding sections are dual to a single-folded

1809: string rotating in the AdS$_3 \times$S$^1$ sector of the target space of the

1810: type IIB string theory \cite{GubKlePol03,FroTse03}.

1811: 

1812: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1813: \subsection{Folded rotating string}

1814: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1815: 

1816: For the folded closed string spinning both in AdS${}_3$ and S${}^1$, the

1817: relevant bosonic part of the superstring action reads

1818: \be\label{NG}

1819: S = - \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{2\pi} \int d^2 \xi \sqrt{- \det\| G_{MN}(X)\,

1820: \partial_a X^M \partial_b X^N\|} \, ,

1821: \ee

1822: where the 't Hooft coupling $\lambda=g^2 N_c$ is related to the product of the

1823: radius of anti-de Sitter space $R$ and the string tension $1/\alpha^\prime$,

1824: $\sqrt{\lambda} = R^2/\alpha^\prime$, and the metric in the target space looks

1825: like

1826: \be

1827: ds^2 \equiv G_{MN} d X^M d X^N = - \cosh^2 \rho \, dt^2 + \sinh^2 \rho\,

1828: d\theta^2 + d\rho^2 + d\varphi^2 \, .

1829: \ee

1830: Here $t$, $\rho$ are $\theta$ are the global time, the radial coordinate and

1831: the angle, respectively, on the AdS${}_3$ space and $\varphi$ is the angle on

1832: a large circle of S${}^5$. The worldsheet coordinates of the string  $\xi^a =

1833: (\xi^0,\xi^1)$ are chosen in such a way that

1834: \be\label{para}

1835: t = \xi^0 \, , \qquad \theta = \omega \xi^0 + \xi^1 \, , \qquad \varphi = \nu

1836: \xi^0 \, .

1837: \ee

1838: Here $\omega$ is the angular velocity on AdS and $\nu$ is a boost parameter of

1839: the center-of-mass of the folded string on S${}^5$. For the rigid folded string

1840: the radial variable $\rho$ does not depend on $\xi^0$ and is periodic in $\xi^1$,

1841: that is, $\rho (\xi^1 + 2 \pi) = \rho (\xi^1)$. The dependence $\rho=\rho(\xi^1)$

1842: is determined by the classical string equations of motion

1843: \cite{GubKlePol03,FroTse03,Kru05}. Their solution describes a folded string

1844: configuration which is sewed out of four segments running along the radial

1845: direction from the center of AdS space, $\rho=0$, towards its boundary by a

1846: distance $\rho_0$, which depends on the angular velocities entering \re{para}

1847: \be

1848: \coth^2 \rho_0 = \frac{\omega^2 - \nu^2}{1 - \nu^2}\ge 1\,.

1849: \ee

1850: The string has two spikes located at $\rho=\rho_0$ which are responsible for the

1851: logarithmic scaling of the anomalous dimension of Wilson operators at strong

1852: coupling~\cite{BelGorKor03,Kru05}.

1853: 

1854: Within the gauge/string correspondence, the anomalous dimension of the operators

1855: \re{O-def} is related to the energy $E$ of the classical rotating string as

1856: \be\label{E-gamma}

1857: E = N + L + \gamma(\lambda)

1858: \, ,

1859: \ee

1860: where the Lorentz spin $N$ and twist $L$ are translated into the angular momenta

1861: on the AdS$_3$ and S$^1$ spaces, respectively. From the Nambu-Goto action

1862: \re{NG}, one finds these charges as

1863: \be\label{Efolded}

1864: E = \frac{2 \sqrt{\lambda}}{\pi} \frac{\sqrt{- \chi}}{\sqrt{1 - \nu^2}}

1865: \mathbb{E} (\chi)\,,\qquad N=\frac{2 \sqrt{\lambda}}{\pi} \frac{\omega \sqrt{-

1866: \chi}}{\sqrt{1 - \nu^2}} \left[ \mathbb{E} (\chi) - \mathbb{K} (\chi) \right] \,

1867: ,\qquad L=\frac{2 \sqrt{\lambda}}{\pi} \frac{\nu \sqrt{- \chi}}{\sqrt{1 - \nu^2}}

1868: \mathbb{K} (\chi)\,,

1869: \ee

1870: where $\mathbb{K}(\chi)$ and $\mathbb{E}(\chi)$ are the elliptic functions of

1871: the first and second kind, respectively, and the auxiliary (negative valued)

1872: parameter $\chi$ is related to the distance $\rho_0$ from the center of anti-de

1873: Sitter space to the end of the string extending to its boundary,

1874: \be\label{rho0}

1875: \chi = -\sinh^2 \rho_0 \,.

1876: \ee

1877: Excluding $\omega$ and $\nu$ in favor of $\chi$, Eqs.~\re{Efolded} can be cast

1878: into the parametric form \cite{BeiFroStaTse03}

1879: \be

1880: \label{FrolovTseytlin} \left( \frac{E}{\mathbb{E} (\chi)} \right)^2 - \left(

1881: \frac{L}{\mathbb{K} (\chi)} \right)^2 = - \frac{4\lambda}{\pi^2}\chi \, , \qquad

1882: \left( \frac{N}{\mathbb{E} (\chi) - \mathbb{K} (\chi)} \right)^2 - \left(

1883: \frac{L}{\mathbb{K} (\chi)} \right)^2 = \frac{4\lambda}{\pi^2} ( 1 - \chi ) \, .

1884: \ee

1885: Using these relations, one can analyze the anomalous dimension $\gamma=E-N-L$ at

1886: strong coupling in the semiclassical limit of large angular momenta $L$, $N \to

1887: \infty$ with $N/\sqrt{\lambda}$ and $L/\sqrt{\lambda}$ kept fixed. In this way

1888: one finds from \re{FrolovTseytlin} that the two limiting cases $N \ll L$ and $N

1889: \gg L$ correspond to the short and long strings, $\rho_0\ll 1$ and $\rho_0\gg 1$,

1890: respectively.

1891: 

1892: It is well-known~\cite{GubKlePol03,FroTse03} that in the short string limit,

1893: $\rho_0\ll 1$, or equivalently $(-\chi)\ll 1$, the anomalous dimension exhibits

1894: the BMN scaling

1895: \be

1896: \label{AnomalousDimensionPertExp} \gamma (\lambda) = L\left[ \lambda'

1897: \gamma^{(0)}+ {(\lambda')}^2\gamma^{(1)}+ \ldots \right] \, ,

1898: \ee

1899: with $\gamma^{(0)}, \gamma^{(1)},\ldots$ being functions of the ratio $N/L$ and

1900: $\lambda'=\lambda/(\pi L)^2$ determining the BMN coupling constant. Substituting

1901: $\chi = \chi_0 + \lambda^\prime \chi_1 + \dots$ into \re{FrolovTseytlin} and

1902: matching the coefficients in the expansion of both sides of \re{FrolovTseytlin}

1903: in powers of $\lambda'$, one finds for $N/L \ll

1904: 1$~\cite{BerMalNas02,FroTse03,BeiFroStaTse03}

1905: \be

1906: \gamma^{(0)}=\frac{\pi^2}{2}\frac{N}{L}+\ldots \,,\qquad

1907: \gamma^{(1)}=-\frac{\pi^4}{8}\frac{N}{L}+\ldots\,.

1908: \ee

1909: The lowest order term in \re{AnomalousDimensionPertExp} matches the one-loop

1910: result on the gauge theory side, Eq.~\re{E-small}, for $s=\ft12$ and $m=1$

1911: \be\label{match}

1912: \gamma^{(0)} = \frac{L}{8} \varepsilon\,.

1913: \ee

1914: In a similar manner, in the long string limit, $\rho_0 \to \infty$, or

1915: equivalently $(-\chi)\to\infty$, assuming that $\chi$ has a regular expansion in

1916: powers of $\lambda'$, one finds from Eq.\ \re{FrolovTseytlin} that the leading

1917: order parameter $\chi_0$ scales for $N/L\gg 1$ as

1918: \be

1919: \chi_0 = - \frac{N}{2 L} \ln \frac{N}{L} \, .

1920: \ee

1921: This leads to the following expressions for the coefficients of the BMN expansion

1922: of the anomalous dimension \re{AnomalousDimensionPertExp} for $N/L\gg 1$

1923: \ba

1924: \label{AsyPertExp} \gamma^{(0)} \!\!\!&=&\!\!\! \ft12 \ln^2 (- \chi_0)+\ldots

1925: =\ft12 \ln^2 (N/L)+\ldots\, , \\ \nonumber \gamma^{(1)} \!\!\!&=&\!\!\!

1926: -\ft{1}{8} \ln^4 (-  \chi_0) +\ldots = -\ft18 \ln^4 (N/L)+\ldots\, ,

1927: \ea

1928: where ellipses denote terms subleading for $(-\chi_0)\to\infty$. In agreement

1929: with \re{match}, the relation \re{AsyPertExp} matches the one-loop expression for

1930: the anomalous dimension on the gauge theory side, Eq.~\re{E-large}. Moreover, one

1931: can show~\cite{BeiFroStaTse03} that the relation \re{match} (upon the Landen

1932: transformation defined below in Eq.\ \re{LandenGauss}) holds for an arbitrary

1933: value of $N/L$ with $\gamma^{(0)}$ given by \re{FrolovTseytlin} and

1934: \re{AnomalousDimensionPertExp} and $\varepsilon$ defined in \re{Energy-2-cut} and

1935: \re{ab}.

1936: 

1937: So far we see no trace of expected scaling of the anomalous dimension $\gamma

1938: (\lambda) \sim \ln N$ for $N\gg L$. We recall that on the gauge theory side the

1939: semiclassical expansion for the one-loop energy $\varepsilon$ was divergent for

1940: $N\gg L$ and in order to recover the logarithmic scaling $\varepsilon\sim \ln N$

1941: we had to resum the entire semiclassical series in powers of the parameter

1942: $\xi=\ln(N/L)/L$. It turns out that a similar phenomenon happens for the series

1943: \re{AnomalousDimensionPertExp} on the string side although the parameter of the

1944: semiclassical expansion is different and equals

1945: \be\label{xi-str}

1946: \xi_{\rm str}=\frac{\lambda}{L^2} \ln^2\frac{N}{L}=\lambda\, \xi^2\,.

1947: \ee

1948: It can be easily identified by comparing the contribution to

1949: \re{AnomalousDimensionPertExp} from $\gamma^{(0)}$ and $\gamma^{(1)}$,

1950: Eq.~\re{AsyPertExp}.

1951: 

1952: To sum up the infinite series in \re{AnomalousDimensionPertExp} for $\xi_{\rm

1953: str}\gg 1$ we return to \re{FrolovTseytlin} and rewrite the first relation as

1954: \be\label{gamma-sqrt}

1955: \gamma(\lambda) = L\left[\sqrt{1- {4\lambda'} {\chi}{\mathbb{K}^2(\chi)}}-1+

1956: \Delta\gamma\right]

1957: \ee

1958: with $\lambda'=\lambda/(\pi L)^2$ and

1959: \be

1960: \Delta\gamma=-

1961: \frac{{4\lambda'}\,\mathbb{K}(\chi)[\mathbb{E}(\chi)-\mathbb{K}(\chi)]}{\sqrt{1-{4\lambda'}

1962: \chi {\mathbb{K}^2(\chi)} }+ \sqrt{1-{4\lambda'} (\chi-1){\mathbb{K}^2(\chi)}

1963: }}\,.

1964: \ee

1965: In the limit of a long string, for $(-\chi)\to\infty$, the expression for

1966: $\gamma(\lambda)$ can be expanded in powers of $4\lambda' (-\chi)

1967: \mathbb{K}^2(\chi)\sim \lambda'\ln^2(-\chi)$. Examining the expression for

1968: $\Delta\gamma$ one finds that its contribution to $\gamma(\lambda)$ is suppressed

1969: by the factor $[\mathbb{E}(\chi)-\mathbb{K}(\chi)]/(-\chi\mathbb{K}(\chi))\sim

1970: 1/\ln(-\chi)$ compared to the first term in the square brackets in

1971: \re{gamma-sqrt}. This implies that in the limit $(-\chi)\to\infty$ with

1972: $\lambda'\ln^2(-\chi)= {\rm fixed}$ the leading asymptotic behavior of

1973: \re{gamma-sqrt} reads

1974: \be\label{for}

1975: \gamma(\lambda) = L\left[\sqrt{1+{\lambda'} \ln^2(-\chi)}-1\right]+\ldots\,.

1976: \ee

1977: This relation resums all double-logarithmic corrections $\sim L[{\lambda'}

1978: \ln^2(-\chi)]^n$ to the anomalous dimension $\gamma(\lambda)$ to all orders $n$

1979: at strong coupling. In particular, for $n=1$ and $n=2$ it reproduces

1980: \re{AsyPertExp}. For ${\lambda'} \ln^2(-\chi)\ll 1$ one expands the square-root

1981: in \re{for} and arrives at a BMN-like expansion \re{AnomalousDimensionPertExp}.

1982: At the same time, for ${\lambda'} \ln^2(-\chi)\gg 1$ the relation \re{for} leads

1983: to the expression

1984: \be

1985: \gamma(\lambda) = L \sqrt{\lambda'} \ln (-\chi) + \ldots =

1986: \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{\pi} \ln(-\chi) + \ldots \,.

1987: \ee

1988: For $(-\chi)\to\infty$, the dependence of $\chi$ on the ratio $N/L$ and the BMN

1989: coupling $\lambda'$ follows from the second relation in \re{FrolovTseytlin}

1990: \be\label{xi-eq}

1991: \frac{1}{4\chi^2} =\frac{L^2}{N^2} \left[ \frac{1}{\ln^2 (- \chi)} +

1992: \lambda^\prime \right]\, .

1993: \ee

1994: For $\xi_{\rm srt}< 1$ and $N\gg L$ one finds from \re{xi-eq} and \re{xi-str}

1995: that $\chi\sim\chi_0 = - \frac{N}{2 L} \ln \frac{N}{L}$ and, therefore,

1996: \be\label{gamma-str-dlog}

1997: \gamma(\lambda)= L\left[\sqrt{1+\frac{\lambda}{(\pi L)^2} \ln^2(N/L)}-1\right] +

1998: \ldots

1999: \ee

2000: For $\xi_{\rm srt}\gg 1$ one finds from \re{xi-eq} and \re{xi-str} that

2001: $(-\chi)\sim N/(2L\sqrt{\lambda'})\sim N/\sqrt{\lambda}$ and, therefore,

2002: \be\label{gamma-str-log}

2003: \gamma(\lambda)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{\pi} \ln(N/\sqrt{\lambda}) + \ldots

2004: \ee

2005: This relation reproduces the correct asymptotic behavior of the anomalous

2006: dimension in the regime \re{3rd} and it is in agreement with the results

2007: of Refs.~\cite{GubKlePol03,FroTse03,Kru05}.

2008: 

2009: The coefficient in front of $\ln N$ in \re{gamma-str-log} determines the leading

2010: asymptotics of the cusp anomalous dimension in the strong coupling regime in the

2011: $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM theory, Eqs.~\re{gamma=cusp} and \re{cusp}. It follows from

2012: the relations \re{gamma-str-dlog} and \re{gamma-str-log} that quite remarkably

2013: the cusp anomaly at strong coupling can be obtained by resumming double

2014: logarithmic terms $\sim L [\lambda\ln^2(N/L)/L^2]^k$ in the expansion of

2015: anomalous dimensions of operators of higher twist $L$ and large Lorentz spin

2016: $N\gg L$.

2017: 

2018: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2019: \subsection{Two-cut solution in string sigma model}

2020: \label{StringTwoCut}

2021: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2022: 

2023: In the previous section, we observed that for $N\gg L$ the dependence of the

2024: anomalous dimension $\gamma (\lambda)$ on the coupling constant is different for

2025: $\xi_{\rm str}< 1$ and $\xi_{\rm str}\gg 1$. In the former case, $\gamma

2026: (\lambda)$ has a BMN-like expansion in powers of $\lambda/L^2$, while in the

2027: latter case $\gamma(\lambda)$ is not analytical in $\lambda$ and scales

2028: logarithmically $\sim \sqrt{\lambda}\ln N$. The reason for this non-analyticity

2029: is that for $\xi_{\rm str}\gg 1$ the end-points of the rotating string approach

2030: the boundary of the AdS space and the dominant contribution to the energy of the

2031: string, or equivalently the anomalous dimension \re{E-gamma}, comes from the

2032: vicinity of two spikes, $\gamma(\lambda) \sim (\sqrt{\lambda}/\pi) \cdot 2

2033: \rho_0$. Here the radial coordinate of the spikes scales for $\xi_{\rm str}\gg 1$

2034: as $\rho_0\sim \ft12\ln (-\chi)\sim \ft12\ln(N/\sqrt{\lambda})$, Eqs.~\re{rho0}

2035: and \re{xi-eq}. The phenomenon is rather general~\cite{BelGorKor03,Kru05} and it

2036: holds true for classical string configurations with an arbitrary number of spikes

2037: $n$. In that case, each spike provides a logarithmic contribution to the energy

2038: and the anomalous dimension scales for $\xi_{\rm str}\gg 1$ as $\gamma(\lambda)=

2039: {n\sqrt{\lambda}}/{(2\pi)} \ln(N/\sqrt{\lambda})$. At first glance, this

2040: mechanism is rather different from the one in gauge theory. We recall that in

2041: gauge theory, to one-loop order, the logarithmic scaling of anomalous dimension

2042: for $N\gg L$ arises due to collision of cuts for the spectral curve of the spin

2043: chain, Eq.~\re{curve}. It is known that the classical equations of motion for the

2044: string on the AdS${}_5\times$S${}^5$ background are completely

2045: integrable~\cite{ZakMik78,ManSurWad02} and their solutions are parameterized by

2046: the spectral curves. Moreover, for the strings on the AdS${}_3\times$S${}^1$ part

2047: of the target space the spectral curve can be identified as a complex

2048: hyperelliptic curve~\cite{Kri94}. For the folded rotating closed string discussed

2049: in the previous section, it is given by the elliptic curve with symmetric

2050: branching points on the real axis~\cite{KazZar04}

2051: \be\label{curve-str}

2052: \Gamma_{\rm str}: \qquad y^2=(x^2-a_{\rm str}^2)(x^2-b_{\rm str}^2)\,,

2053: \ee

2054: with $a_{\rm str}$ and $b_{\rm str}$ taking positive values, $b_{\rm str}< a_{\rm

2055: str}$. In this section, we shall translate different asymptotic behavior of the

2056: anomalous dimensions for $N\gg L$, Eqs.~\re{gamma-str-dlog} and

2057: \re{gamma-str-log}, into properties of the curve \re{curve-str} and reveal the

2058: mechanism responsible for the logarithmic scaling \re{gamma-str-log}.

2059: 

2060: Similar to the classical $SL(2)$ spin chain, the classical string equations of

2061: motion admit the Lax representation and they can be solved exactly by

2062: constructing the Baker-Akhiezer function~\cite{Kri94,ZakMik78}. As before, the

2063: Bloch-Floquet multiplier for this function gives rise to the (quasi)momentum

2064: $p(x)$ which is the generating function for the conserved charge including the

2065: energy. For the folded rotating string configuration, $p'(x)$ is an analytical

2066: function in the complex plane with two symmetric cuts $[-a_{\rm str},-b_{\rm

2067: str}]\cup[b_{\rm str}, a_{\rm str}]$. It is uniquely fixed by the requirement

2068: that $dp=p'(x)dx$ should be a meromorphic differential on the complex curve

2069: \re{curve-str} satisfying the following conditions on the upper sheet of

2070: $\Gamma_{\rm str}$~\cite{KazZar04}:

2071: \begin{itemize}

2072: 

2073: \item Prescribed asymptotics at infinity and at the origin

2074: \be\label{p-as}

2075: dp \stackrel{x\to\infty}{\sim} -2\frac{dx}{x^2} \frac{E+N}{L}\,,\qquad dp

2076: \stackrel{x\to 0}{\sim} -dx\,\frac{2}{\lambda'} \frac{E-N}{L}

2077: \ee

2078: 

2079: \item Single-valuedness condition

2080: \be\label{p-periodsSigma}

2081: \int_{b_{\rm str}}^{a_{\rm str}} dp = 0\,,\qquad \int_{a_{\rm str}}^{\infty} dp =

2082: -\pi m\,,

2083: \ee

2084: 

2085: \item Double poles at $x=\pm\sqrt{\lambda}/(\pi L)\equiv \sqrt{\lambda'}$

2086: \be\label{poles}

2087: dp \sim dx

2088: \left[

2089: - \frac{1}{(x\pm \sqrt{\lambda'})^2}

2090: +

2091: \mathcal{O} ((x\pm \sqrt{\lambda'})^0) \right]

2092: \, .

2093: \ee

2094: 

2095: \end{itemize}

2096: The resulting expression for the differential $dp$ takes the form

2097: \be\label{p-ans}

2098: dp = \frac{dx}{y}

2099: \left[

2100: \frac{y_+}{(x-\sqrt{\lambda'})^2}+\frac{y_+'}{x-\sqrt{\lambda'}}

2101: +

2102: \frac{y_+}{(x+\sqrt{\lambda'})^2}-\frac{y_+'}{x+\sqrt{\lambda'}}

2103: +

2104: C

2105: \right]\,,

2106: \ee

2107: where $y=y(x)$ is defined in \re{curve-str}, $y_+ = y(\sqrt{\lambda'})$ and

2108: $y_+'=y'(\sqrt{\lambda'})$.

2109: 

2110: Equation \re{p-ans} depends on three parameters ${a_{\rm str}}$, ${b_{\rm str}}$ and

2111: $C$. They are fixed by the normalization conditions \re{p-as} and \re{p-periodsSigma}

2112: as

2113: \ba\label{b-str}

2114: b_{\rm str}

2115: \!\!\!&=&\!\!\!

2116: \frac{1}{m\mathbb{K}(\tau)} \left[

2117: \left(1-\frac{\lambda^\prime}{a_{\rm str}^2}\right)

2118: \left(1 - \frac{\lambda^\prime}{b_{\rm str}^2}\right)

2119: \right]^{-1/2}

2120: \\[3mm]

2121: C

2122: \!\!\!&=&\!\!\!

2123: -\frac{m a_{\rm str}}{2}

2124: \left[

2125: \mathbb{E}(\tau) -\frac{\lambda^\prime}{a_{\rm str}^2} \mathbb{K}(\tau) \right]

2126: \, , \nonumber

2127: \ea

2128: with the modular parameter $\tau = 1-{b_{\rm str}^2}/{a_{\rm str}^2}$. In

2129: addition, one finds from \re{p-as} the following expressions for the ratio

2130: $N/L$ and for the anomalous dimension $\gamma(\lambda)=E-N-L$

2131: \ba\label{N/L}

2132: {N}/{L} \!\!\!&=&\!\!\!

2133: \frac{m}{2}

2134: \left[

2135: \mathbb{E}(\tau)\lr{ a_{\rm str} + \frac{{\lambda'}}{b_{\rm str}} }

2136: -

2137: \mathbb{K}(\tau) \lr{ b_{\rm str} + \frac{{\lambda'}}{a_{\rm str}} }

2138: \right]

2139: \, , \\[3mm]

2140: \gamma(\lambda)/L \!\!\!&=&\!\!\!

2141: m \left[ \mathbb{K}(\tau)\, b_{\rm str} - \mathbb{E}(\tau) \frac{{\lambda'}}{b_{\rm str}} \right]

2142: - 1

2143: \, , \nonumber

2144: \ea

2145: with $b_{\rm str}$ defined in \re{b-str} and $a_{\rm str}=b_{\rm str}/\sqrt{1-\tau}$.

2146: 

2147: Let us examine the dependence of the anomalous dimension on the coupling constant

2148: $\lambda'=\lambda/(\pi L)^2$. Assuming that $b_{\rm str}$ and $\tau$ both admit a

2149: regular expansion in powers of $\lambda'$, one substitutes into \re{b-str} and

2150: \re{N/L}

2151: \be\label{b-exp}

2152: b_{\rm str} = b_{\rm str}^{(0)} + \lambda^\prime \, b_{\rm str}^{(1)} +  + \ldots

2153: \, , \qquad \tau = \tau^{(0)} + \lambda^\prime \,\tau^{(1)} + \ldots \, ,

2154: \ee

2155: and matches the coefficients in front of powers of $\lambda'$. In this way, one

2156: obtains to leading order

2157: \be\label{b0}

2158: b_{\rm str}^{(0)} = \frac{1}{m\mathbb{K}(\tau^{(0)})}

2159: \,,\qquad

2160: \frac{N}{L} =

2161: \frac12\left[\frac{\mathbb{E}(\tau^{(0)})}{\sqrt{1-\tau^{(0)}}\mathbb{K}(\tau^{(0)})}

2162: -1\right]\,,

2163: \ee

2164: and all subleading corrections to \re{b-exp} are expressed in terms of the leading

2165: terms. Then, the first few coefficients of the BMN series for anomalous dimension

2166: \re{AnomalousDimensionPertExp} are given by

2167: \ba

2168: \label{gamma1Diff} \gamma^{(0)} \!\!\!&=&\!\!\! \frac{m^2}2 \mathbb{K}

2169: (\tau^{(0)}) \left[ (2 - \tau^{(0)}) \mathbb{K} (\tau^{(0)}) - 2 \mathbb{E}

2170: (\tau^{(0)}) \right] \, ,

2171: \\

2172: \label{gamma2Diff} \gamma^{(1)} \!\!\!&=&\!\!\! \frac{m^4}{8} \mathbb{K}^{3}

2173: (\tau^{(0)}) \left[ \lr{ 4 (2 - \tau^{(0)}) \sqrt{1 - \tau^{(0)}} - (\tau^{(0)})^2}

2174: \mathbb{K} (\tau^{(0)}) - 8 \sqrt{1 - \tau^{(0)}} \mathbb{E} (\tau^{(0)}) \right]

2175: \, .

2176: \ea

2177: Together with the second relation in \re{b0}, they define the parametric dependence

2178: of the anomalous dimension \re{AnomalousDimensionPertExp} on $N/L$.

2179: 

2180: Equations \re{b0} determine perturbative corrections to the anomalous dimension of

2181: long scalar operators in the $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM theory. According to \re{match},

2182: it should match at one-loop order a similar asymptotic expression \re{Energy-2-cut}

2183: obtained on the gauge theory side within the semiclassical approach. The conformal

2184: spin of scalars equals $s=1/2$ and the scaling parameter $\beta=L/(L+2N)$, Eq.\

2185: \re{beta}, is given by $\beta = \sqrt{1 -\tau^{(0)}}\,{\mathbb{K}(\tau^{(0)})}/

2186: {\mathbb{E}(\tau^{(0)})}$ in agreement with \re{ab}. Then, one observes that

2187: $\gamma^{(0)}$ and $\varepsilon$ given by \re{gamma1Diff} and \re{Energy-2-cut},

2188: respectively, verify the relation \re{match}. The expressions for the branching

2189: points $b_{\rm str}^{(0)}$ and $b$, defined in \re{b0} and \re{ab}, respectively,

2190: are different, $b/b_{\rm str}^{(0)} = \beta/2$, but the agreement can be restored

2191: through the rescaling of the local complex parameter $x$ in the definition of the

2192: curve \re{curve-str}, $x \to x \beta/2$.

2193: 

2194: The functional form of the anomalous dimensions \re{N/L} is different compared to

2195: the ones found in the previous section, Eq.~\re{FrolovTseytlin}. The agreement is

2196: achieved by means of the Landen transformation of the modular parameters

2197: \cite{BeiFroStaTse03}

2198: \be

2199: \label{LandenGauss}

2200: \chi^{(0)} = - \frac{\left( 1 - \sqrt{1 - \tau^{(0)}} \right)^2}{4 \sqrt{1 -

2201: \tau^{(0)}}} \, ,

2202: \ee

2203: upon which the relations \re{N/L} and \re{FrolovTseytlin} coincide provided that

2204: $m=1$. Remember that $(-\chi)$ depends on the radial coordinate of the spike

2205: $\rho_0$, Eq.~\re{rho0}, so that $\sqrt{1-\tau}=\e^{-2\rho_0}$ and the  long

2206: string limit $\rho_0\to\infty$ corresponds to $\tau\to 1$. We have demonstrated

2207: in Sect.~\ref{CollisionCuts} that on the gauge theory side the limit $\tau\to 1$

2208: corresponds to $a\to 1/(2m)$ and $b\to 0$, Eq.~\re{ab-large}. As a consequence,

2209: the two cuts $[-a,-b]$ and $[b,a]$ collide at the origin yielding the logarithmic

2210: scaling of the one-loop anomalous dimension \re{E-m}. Let us examine the limit

2211: $\tau\to 1$ of the obtained stringy expressions \re{b-str} and \re{N/L}.

2212: 

2213: Since $\mathbb{K}(\tau)\sim -\ft12 \ln(1-\tau)$ for $\tau\to 1$, one would expect

2214: from \re{b-str} that $b_{\rm str}$ should vanish in this limit. Indeed, this is

2215: the case for $\lambda'=0$ while for $\lambda'\neq 0$ one deduces from \re{b-str}

2216: that the reality condition for $b_{\rm str}$ implies that its minimal value is

2217: bounded as $b_{\rm str}\ge \sqrt{\lambda'}$. Carefully examining \re{b-str} for

2218: $\tau\to 1$ one finds

2219: \be\label{barrier}

2220: b_{\rm str}=\sqrt{{\lambda'}+\frac{1}{m^2\ln^2 \sqrt{1-\tau}}}\,.

2221: \ee

2222: For $\lambda'=0$ this relation coincides with the one-loop expression

2223: $b^{(0)}_{\rm str}=2 b/\beta$, Eq.~\re{ab-large}. Matching \re{barrier} into

2224: \re{b-exp} we conclude that higher order corrections to $b_{\rm str}$ push its

2225: minimal possible value away from the origin and, therefore, prevent the two cuts

2226: $[-a_{\rm str},-b_{\rm str}]$ and $[b_{\rm str},a_{\rm str}]$ to collide. From

2227: \re{N/L} one finds in the limit $\tau\to 1$

2228: \be\label{gamma-str}

2229: \beta\approx\frac{L}{2N}

2230: =

2231: \frac{\sqrt{1-\tau}}{m\, b_{\rm str}}

2232: + \ldots

2233: \,,\qquad

2234: \gamma(\lambda) = L \left[- m \, b_{\rm str} \, \ln{\sqrt{1-\tau}} - 1\right]

2235: +

2236: \ldots

2237: \, .

2238: \ee

2239: The asymptotic behavior of these expressions depends on the value of the

2240: parameter $\xi_{\rm str}=\lambda'\ln^2(N/L)$, Eq.~\re{xi-str}.

2241: 

2242: For $\xi_{\rm str}< 1$ the expression for $b_{\rm str}$, Eq.~\re{barrier}, admits

2243: a series expansion in $\lambda'$ and leads together with \re{gamma-str} to

2244: \be\label{ab-str}

2245: b_{\rm str}=\frac{1}{m\ln\frac{N}{L}} + \ldots \,,\qquad a_{\rm

2246: str}=\frac{N}{2m{L}} + \ldots \,,\qquad \sqrt{1-\tau}=\frac{L/N}{2 \ln

2247: \frac{N}{L}} + \ldots \,.

2248: \ee

2249: Substitution of \re{barrier} into \re{gamma-str} yields an expression for the

2250: anomalous dimension $\gamma(\lambda)$ which coincides with \re{gamma-str-dlog}

2251: for $m=1$. It is instructive to compare the positions of the cuts in gauge

2252: theory, $a$ and $b$, and on the string side, $\widehat a=\beta a_{\rm str}/2$ and

2253: $\widehat b=\beta b_{\rm str}/2$. Here the additional factor $\beta/2$ appears

2254: due to a different definition of the local parameter $x$ on the spectral curves

2255: \re{curve-reduced} and \re{curve-str}. In this way we find $ \widehat a

2256: =1/{(2m)}+\ldots$ and $\widehat b={(L/N)}/{(4m\ln(N/L))}+\ldots$ which coincides

2257: with the similar relation \re{ab-large} in gauge theory to one-loop order.

2258: 

2259: For $\xi_{\rm str}\gg 1$ the expression for $b_{\rm str}$, Eq.~\re{barrier}, is

2260: not analytical in the BMN coupling $\lambda'=\lambda/(\pi L)^2$

2261: \be

2262: b_{\rm str}=\sqrt{\lambda'} + \ldots

2263: \,,\qquad

2264:  a_{\rm

2265: str}=\frac{N}{2m{L}} + \ldots \,,\qquad \sqrt{1-\tau}=\frac{Lm}{2N}

2266: \sqrt{\lambda'} + \ldots \,,

2267: \ee

2268: while the expression for $a_{\rm str}$ is the same as in \re{ab-str}. This

2269: suggests that for $\xi_{\rm str}\gg 1$ higher order corrections only modify the

2270: lower edge of the cut. One finds from \re{gamma-str} that the anomalous dimension

2271: scales as $\gamma(\lambda)\sim m\sqrt{\lambda}\ln (N/(m\sqrt{\lambda}))$ and

2272: matches \re{gamma-str-log} for $m=1$. We conclude that the logarithmic scaling of

2273: the anomalous dimension for $N\gg L$ on the string side is realized when the

2274: inner boundary of the cut $b_{\rm str}$ approaches its minimal possible value

2275: $\sqrt{\lambda'}$  (see Fig.~\ref{CollisionCutsFig}c) which coincides with the

2276: position of the double pole of the differential \re{poles}.

2277: 

2278: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2279: \section{Conclusion}

2280: \label{ConclusionSection}

2281: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2282: 

2283: In the present paper we have studied the properties of anomalous dimensions

2284: of Wilson operators of higher twist $L$ and large Lorentz spin $N$ in the

2285: weak and strong coupling regimes by making use of the remarkable integrability

2286: symmetry on both sides of the gauge/string correspondence. We concentrated on

2287: operators which have the minimal anomalous dimension for given Lorentz spin

2288: and put a special emphasis on the appearance of the single-logarithmic behavior,

2289: $\gamma(\lambda) \sim \ln N$, in the thermodynamic limit $L\to\infty$.

2290: 

2291: On the gauge theory side, we applied the method of the Baxter $Q-$operator to

2292: identify different regimes of the minimal anomalous dimension in integrable

2293: sectors of (supersymmetric) Yang-Mills theory to one-loop order. We argued that

2294: for $N \gg L$ the asymptotic behavior of $\gamma(\lambda)$ is controlled by the

2295: parameter $\xi=\ln(N/L)/L$. For $\xi < 1$ the anomalous dimension possesses the

2296: BMN scaling $\gamma(\lambda)\sim \lambda/L$, while for $\xi \gg 1$ it scales

2297: logarithmically with $N$. Transition to the second, logarithmic regime manifests

2298: itself through the divergence of the semiclassical expansion for $\gamma(\lambda)$

2299: as $\xi \sim 1$. The anomalous dimension is uniquely determined by the configuration

2300: of Bethe roots which condense in the thermodynamic limit on two symmetric cuts. We

2301: demonstrated that the semiclassical approach breaks down for $\xi\sim 1$ due to

2302: the collision of cuts at the origin and worked out an asymptotic expression for

2303: anomalous dimensions which is valid throughout the entire region of $\xi$.

2304: 

2305: On the string theory side, we used the identification of the minimal anomalous

2306: dimension of scalar operators in the $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM at strong coupling as

2307: the energy of folded string rotating on AdS${}_3\times$S${}^1$ part of the target

2308: space. Similar to the previous case, the anomalous dimension has different

2309: behavior for $N\gg L$ depending on the value of the parameter $\xi_{\rm str} =

2310: \lambda \ln^2(N/L)/L^2$. For $\xi_{\rm str}<1$ the anomalous dimension has a

2311: regular expansion in powers of the BMN coupling and its lowest term matches the

2312: one-loop expression for $\gamma(\lambda)$ at weak coupling for $\xi<1$. For

2313: $\xi_{\rm str}\gg 1$ the anomalous dimension scales logarithmically but its

2314: dependence on the 't Hooft coupling is not analytical anymore. We described the

2315: latter regime using two different (although equivalent) configurations. In terms

2316: of the folded rotating string the logarithmic scaling occurs when two most

2317: distant points of the string (two spikes) approach the boundary of the AdS space.

2318: In terms of the spectral curve for the classical string sigma model, the same

2319: configuration is described by the elliptic curve with symmetric branching points.

2320: Different regimes of $\gamma(\lambda)$ arise depending on the position of the

2321: branching points. In the logarithmic regime, the inner branching points approach

2322: the minimal possible value $\pm \sqrt{\lambda^\prime}$ so that the anomalous

2323: dimension ceases to obey the BMN scaling.

2324: 

2325: Integrability played a key role in our analysis. In generic (supersymmetric)

2326: Yang-Mills theory it holds to one-loop order for Wilson operators belonging to

2327: special, holomorphic sectors only. We would like to stress that logarithmic

2328: behavior of anomalous dimensions is not tied to integrability. In non-integrable

2329: sectors the mixing matrix for Wilson operators contains additional terms which

2330: break integrability symmetry. They do not affect however the logarithmic scaling

2331: of anomalous dimension for $N\to\infty$. The reason for this is that the

2332: logarithmic scaling of anomalous dimension can be associated with the

2333: contribution of soft gluons (i.e., gauge field quanta). Soft gluon radiation is

2334: not sensitive to the quantum numbers of Wilson operators (except of the total

2335: Lorentz spin) and, therefore, it provides the same logarithmic contribution to

2336: the anomalous dimension of Wilson operators in all sectors. Integrability allows

2337: one to identify various regimes of the asymptotic behavior of anomalous

2338: dimensions and to determine the ``critical'' value of $\ln(N/L) \sim L $ at which

2339: the logarithmic scaling sets in.

2340: 

2341: As a function of the total Lorentz spin $N$, the anomalous dimensions of

2342: twist$-L$ operators occupy a band. Our discussion was restricted to the minimal

2343: anomalous dimensions belonging to the lower edge of the band. It would be

2344: interesting to extend the above analysis to excited states

2345: \re{SingleLogAsymptotics} with $m > 1$ and describe the band structure occupied

2346: by the anomalous dimensions as it arises form the Baxter equation on the gauge

2347: theory side. In string theory, there are two different classical configurations

2348: yielding the same logarithmic asymptotics of anomalous dimensions at strong

2349: coupling --- the multiple folded string \cite{FroTse03} and the spiky string

2350: \cite{Kru05}. The coefficient in front of the logarithm, $m$, is twice the number

2351: of foldings of the string on itself, in the former case and it is the number of

2352: spikes, in the latter one. It would be interesting to construct a generic

2353: configuration which interpolates between both solutions.

2354: 

2355: \vspace{0.5cm}

2356: 

2357: \noindent {\bf Note added}: After the work has been completed we were informed by

2358: Yuji Satoh that he, in collaboration with Kazuhiro Sakai, analyzed the spectrum

2359: of anomalous dimensions with a special emphasis on the appearance of logarithmic

2360: scaling in the large spin limit. For the two-cut solution, their findings are in

2361: agreement with the analysis presented in sections \ref{WKBloSection} and

2362: \ref{StringTwoCut} of this paper. In particular, they also came to the conclusion

2363: that, in the thermodynamical limit $L\to\infty$, the semiclassical approach to

2364: the Bethe Ansatz equations is only applicable for $\ln (N/L) < L$ and one can not

2365: reproduce $\sim \ln N$ behavior of anomalous dimensions unless the finite size

2366: corrections in $1/L$ are included.

2367: 

2368: \vspace{0.5cm}

2369: 

2370: We would like to thank to thank S.~Derkachov, Yu.~Makeenko, A.~Manashov, Y.~Satoh,

2371: F.~Smirnov, E.~Sokatchev, B.~Stefanski and A.~Tseytlin for very useful discussions

2372: and correspondence. A.G.\ is grateful to Laboratoire de Physique Th\'eorique (Orsay)

2373: for hospitality extended to him during his stay which was partially supported by

2374: the Russian-French Exchange Program. This work was supported by the U.S.\ National

2375: Science Foundation under grant no.\ PHY-0456520 (A.B.), by the grant CRDF-RUP2-261-MO-04

2376: from the U.S.\ Civilian Research and Development Foundation and Russian Foundation

2377: for Basic Research under contract RFBR-04-011-00646 (A.G.).

2378: 

2379: \vspace{0.5cm}

2380: 

2381: \appendix

2382: \setcounter{section}{0}

2383: \setcounter{equation}{0}

2384: \renewcommand{\theequation}{A.\arabic{equation}}

2385: 

2386: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2387: \section*{Appendix \ \   Asymptotic expression for the energy}

2388: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2389: 

2390: The asymptotic expression for the energy \re{energy-as} involves roots of the

2391: transfer matrix and is not well suited for performing the thermodynamical limit

2392: $L \to \infty$. Let us rewrite the energy in terms of the transfer matrix itself.

2393: We notice from \re{t-roots} that

2394: \be

2395: \frac{d}{du} \ln t_L(u) = \sum_{k=1}^L \frac1{u-\delta_k}

2396: \ee

2397: and replace the $\psi-$functions in \re{energy-as} by series representation

2398: \be

2399: \psi(s+i\delta_k) + \psi(s-i\delta_k) -2 \psi(2s) = \sum_{k=0}^\infty

2400: \left[\frac{i}{i(s+k)-\delta_k}+\frac{-i}{-i(s+k)-\delta_k} -\frac{2}{2s+k}

2401: \right]\,.

2402: \ee

2403: Then, the energy \re{energy-as} can be written as an infinite sum

2404: \be\label{E-main}

2405: E = 2\ln 2-\sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{d}{dk}f(k)\,,\qquad

2406: %

2407: f(x)=\ln \left[ \frac{t_L(i(s+x))t_L(-i(s+x))}{(2s+x)^{2L}} \right]\,,

2408: \ee

2409: where $f(x)\to 2\ln 2$ for $x\to\infty$. The sum can be evaluated with a help of

2410: the Euler-Maclaurin summation formula

2411: \be\label{E-ex}

2412: E = f(0)-\frac1{2} f'(0)+\sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{B_{2k}}{(2k)!}f^{(2k)}(0) =

2413: \frac{\textrm{d}}{\e^\textrm{d}-1} f(0)

2414: \ee

2415: with $B_{2k}$ being Bernoulli numbers. Taking $u=\pm i(s+x)$ in the Baxter

2416: equation \re{Baxter-eq}, one obtains $t_L(\pm i(s+x))$ as the ratio of

2417: $Q-$functions and finds for $x\to 0$

2418: \be

2419: f(x)=\ln \left[\frac{Q(i(s+x+1))}{Q(i(s+x))}

2420: \frac{Q(-i(s+x+1))}{Q(-i(s+x))}\right] + \mathcal{O}\lr{ x^{L}}\,.

2421: \ee

2422: Then, one uses the WKB ansatz $Q(u) \sim \exp(\eta^{-1}S(u\eta))$ to get

2423: \be

2424: f(x)= \frac1{\eta}\big[S\lr{i{(s+x+1)}{\eta}}-S\lr{i{(s+x)}{\eta}}

2425: +S\lr{-i{(s+x+1)}{\eta}}-S\lr{-i{(s+x)}{\eta}} \big]+ \mathcal{O}\lr{ x^{L}}

2426: \, .

2427: \ee

2428: Substituting this expression into \re{E-ex} one finally obtains the relation

2429: \be\label{E-app}

2430: E=f(0)-\frac1{2} f'(0)+ \ldots = -{2s}{\eta} S''(0)+\ldots= -\frac{2\beta}{L}

2431: S''(0)+\ldots\,,

2432: \ee

2433: which coincides with the semiclassical expression \re{E-naive-expansion}. It is

2434: important to keep in mind that Eq.~\re{E-app} was obtained under the assumption

2435: that contribution of terms with higher derivatives is small, $f''(0) \ll f'(0)$,

2436: or equivalently $ \eta S'''(0)\ll S''(0)$. This relation is not satisfied if the

2437: distribution of Bethe roots scales at the origin as $\sim \ln x$,

2438: Eq.~\re{S0-log}. In that case, one has to rely on the formula \re{E-main} which

2439: resums all singular terms.

2440: 

2441: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2442: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

2443: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2444: %

2445: \bibitem{Col89}

2446: J.C. Collins,

2447: Adv. Ser. Direct. High Ener. Phys. 5 (1989) 573.

2448: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0312336;%%

2449: %

2450: \bibitem{Kor88}

2451: G.P. Korchemsky,

2452: Mod. Phys. Lett. A 4 (1989) 1257; \\

2453: %%CITATION = MPLAE,A4,1257;%%

2454: %

2455: G.P. Korchemsky, G. Marchesini,

2456: Nucl. Phys. B 406 (1993) 225.

2457: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9210281;%%

2458: %

2459: \bibitem{Pol80}

2460: A.M. Polyakov,

2461: Nucl. Phys. B 164 (1980) 171.

2462: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B164,171;%%

2463: %

2464: \bibitem{MocVerVog04}

2465: S. Moch, J.A.M. Vermaseren, A. Vogt,

2466: Nucl. Phys. B 688 (2004) 101.

2467: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0403192;%%

2468: %

2469: \bibitem{BerDixSmi05}

2470: Z. Bern, L.J. Dixon, V.A. Smirnov,

2471: Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 085001.

2472: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0505205;%%

2473: %

2474: \bibitem{GubKlePol03}

2475: S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov, A.M. Polyakov,

2476: Nucl. Phys. B 636 (2002) 99.

2477: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0204051;%%

2478: %

2479: \bibitem{Kru02}

2480: M. Kruczenski,

2481: J. High Ener. Phys. 0212 (2002) 024; \\

2482: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0210115;%%

2483: %

2484: Yu. Makeenko,

2485: J. High Ener. Phys. 0301 (2003) 007.

2486: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0210256;%%

2487: %

2488: \bibitem{BelGorKor03}

2489: A.V. Belitsky, A.S. Gorsky, G.P. Korchemsky,

2490: Nucl. Phys. B 667 (2003) 3.

2491: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0304028;%%

2492: %

2493: \bibitem{Mal97}

2494: J.M. Maldacena, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 231;\\

2495: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9711200;%%

2496: %

2497: S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov, A.M. Polyakov,

2498: Phys. Lett. B 428 (1998) 105;\\

2499: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9802109;%%

2500: %

2501: E. Witten, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 253.

2502: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9802150;%%

2503: %

2504: \bibitem{BerMalNas02}

2505: D. Berenstein, J.M. Maldacena, H. Nastase,

2506: J. High Ener. Phys. 0204 (2002) 013.

2507: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0202021;%%

2508: %

2509: \bibitem{FroTse03}

2510: S. Frolov, A.A. Tseytlin,

2511: J. High Ener. Phys. 0206 (2002) 007.

2512: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0204226;%%

2513: %

2514: \bibitem{Tse03}

2515: A.A. Tseytlin, in Ian Kogan Memorial Volume, {\sl From Fields to Stings:

2516: Circumnavigating Theoretical Physics}, eds.\ M. Shifman, A. Vainshtein,

2517: J. Wheater, World Scientific (Singapore, 2004) vol.\ 2, pp. 1648--1707,

2518: hep-th/0311139.

2519: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0311139;%%

2520: %

2521: \bibitem{BraDerMan98}

2522: V.M. Braun, S.E. Derkachov, A.N. Manashov,

2523: Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 2020; \\

2524: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9805225;%%

2525: %

2526: V.M. Braun, S.E. Derkachov, G.P. Korchemsky, A.N. Manashov,

2527: Nucl. Phys. B 553 (1999) 355.

2528: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9902375;%%

2529: %

2530: \bibitem{Bel99}

2531: A.V. Belitsky,

2532: Phys. Lett. B 453 (1999) 59;

2533: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9902361;%%

2534: %

2535: Nucl. Phys. B 558 (1999) 259;

2536: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9903512;%%

2537: %

2538: Nucl. Phys. B 574 (2000) 407.

2539: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9907420;%%

2540: %

2541: \bibitem{DerKorMan99}

2542: S.E. Derkachov, G.P. Korchemsky, A.N. Manashov,

2543: Nucl. Phys. B 566 (2000) 203.

2544: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9909539;%%

2545: %

2546: \bibitem{Bel04}

2547: A.V. Belitsky, V.M. Braun, A.S. Gorsky, G.P. Korchemsky,

2548: Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 19 (2004) 4715.

2549: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0407232;%%

2550: %

2551: \bibitem{TakFad79}

2552: L.A. Takhtajan, L.D. Faddeev,

2553: Russ. Math. Survey 34 (1979) 11; \\

2554: %%CITATION = RMSUA,34,11;%%

2555: %

2556: V.E. Korepin, N.M. Bogoliubov, A.G. Izergin,

2557: {\sl Quantum inverse scattering method and correlation functions},

2558: (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993); \\

2559: %

2560: L.D. Faddeev, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 10 (1995) 1845; Les Houches

2561: Lectures (1995), {\sl How algebraic Bethe ansatz works for integrable

2562: models}, hep-th/9605187.

2563: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9605187;%%

2564: %

2565: \bibitem{BeiFroStaTse03}

2566: N. Beisert, S. Frolov, M. Staudacher, A.A. Tseytlin,

2567: J. High Ener. Phys. 0310 (2003) 037.

2568: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0308117;%%

2569: %

2570: \bibitem{Bax72}

2571: R.J. Baxter,

2572: Annals Phys. 70 (1972) 193;

2573: %%CITATION = APNYA,70,193;%%

2574: %

2575: {\sl Exactly Solved Models in Statistical Mechanics},

2576: Academic Press (London, 1982).

2577: %

2578: \bibitem{Sut95}

2579: B. Sutherland,

2580: Lect. Notes Phys. 242 (1985) 1;

2581: Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 816.

2582: %

2583: \bibitem{ManSurWad02}

2584: G. Mandal, N.V. Suryanarayana, S.R. Wadia,

2585: Phys. Lett. B 543 (2002) 81; \\

2586: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0206103;%%

2587: %

2588: I. Bena, J. Polchinski, R. Roiban,

2589: Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 046002; \\

2590: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0305116;%%

2591: %

2592: A.M. Polyakov,

2593: Mod. Phys. Lett. A 19 (2004) 1649.

2594: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0405106;%%

2595: %

2596: \bibitem{ZakMik78}

2597: V.E. Zakharov, A.V. Mikhailov, Sov. Phys. JETP 47 (1978) 1017.

2598: %%CITATION = SPHJA,47,1017;%%

2599: %

2600: \bibitem{Kri94}

2601: I.M. Krichever, Funct. Anal. Appl. 28 (1994) 21.

2602: %

2603: \bibitem{KazZar04}

2604: V.A. Kazakov, K. Zarembo, J. High Ener. Phys. 0410 (2004) 060.

2605: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0410105;%%

2606: %

2607: \bibitem{PasGau92}

2608: M. Gaudin, V. Pasquier, J. Phys. A 25 (1992) 5243.

2609: %%CITATION = JPAGB,A25,5243;%%

2610: %

2611: \bibitem{Kor95}

2612: G.P. Korchemsky,

2613: Nucl. Phys. B 462 (1996) 333;

2614: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9508025;%%

2615: %

2616: Nucl. Phys. B 498 (1997) 68.

2617: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9609123;%%

2618: %

2619: \bibitem{Smi98}

2620: F.A. Smirnov,

2621: Amer. Math. Soc. Trans. 201 (2000) 283.

2622: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9802132;%%

2623: %

2624: \bibitem{Bei04}

2625: N. Beisert, Phys. Rept. 407 (2004) 1.

2626: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0407277;%%

2627: %

2628: \bibitem{Skl90}

2629: E.K. Sklyanin,

2630: Lect. Notes Phys. 226 (1985) 196;

2631: %

2632: {\sl Quantum inverse scattering method. Selected topics\/},

2633: ``Quantum Group and Quantum Integrable Systems,''

2634: ed.\ Mo-Lin Ge, World Scientific, (Singapore, 1992) pp.\ 63--97, hep-th/9211111;

2635: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9211111;%%

2636: %

2637: Progr. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 118 (1995) 35.

2638: %%CITATION = SOLV-INT 9504001;%%

2639: %

2640: \bibitem{Gor03}

2641: A.S. Gorsky,

2642: Theor. Math. Phys. 142 (2005) 153.

2643: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0308182;%%

2644: %

2645: \bibitem{FadKor94}

2646: G.P. Korchemsky,

2647: Nucl. Phys. B 443 (1995) 255.

2648: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9501232;%%

2649: %

2650: \bibitem{NovManPitZak84}

2651: S.P. Novikov, S.V. Manakov, L.P. Pitaevsky, V.E. Zakharov,

2652: {\sl Theory of soliton: the inverse scattering method},

2653: Consultants Bureau (New York, 1984).

2654: %

2655: \bibitem{FadTak87}

2656: L.D. Faddeev, L.A. Takhtajan,

2657: {\sl Hamiltonian methods in the theory of solitons},

2658: Springer-Verlag (Berlin, 1987).

2659: %

2660: \bibitem{BabBerTal03}

2661: O. Babelon, D. Bernard, M. Talon, {\sl Introduction to classical integrable

2662: systems}, (Cambridge University Press, 2003).

2663: %

2664: \bibitem{SmiRes83}

2665: N.Yu. Reshetikhin, F.A. Smirnov,

2666: Zap. Nauch. Sem. LOMI 131 (1983) 128.

2667: %

2668: \bibitem{KorKri97}

2669: G.P. Korchemsky, I.M. Krichever,

2670: Nucl. Phys. B 505 (1997) 387.

2671: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9704079;%%

2672: %

2673: \bibitem{GroKaz05}

2674: N. Gromov, V. Kazakov,

2675: Nucl. Phys. B 736 (2006) 199.

2676: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0510194;%%

2677: %

2678: \bibitem{Kru05}

2679: M. Kruczenski,

2680: J. High Ener. Phys. 0508 (2005) 014.

2681: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0410226;%%

2682: %

2683: \end{thebibliography}

2684: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2685: 

2686: \end{document}

2687: