• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,047 questions , 2,200 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,709 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
816 active unimported users
More ...

  Motivation for the Deformed Nekrasov Partition Function

+ 6 like - 0 dislike

I have recently been doing research on the AGT Correspondence between the Nekrasov Instanton Partition Function and Louiville Conformal Blocks (http://arxiv.org/abs/0906.3219). When looking at the Nekrasov Partition Function one defines a deformed metric in terms of the "deformation parameters" $\epsilon_1, \epsilon_2$ which seem to define a $SO(4)$ action on a standard Euclidean Metric, breaking translational symmetry. Much of the literature on these functions seems to be in the math department, defining the functions categorically in terms of sheaves and what-not (http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0311058) and even the original paper (http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0206161) approaches the subject from a cohomological perspective.

Is there any obvious physical motivation for looking at partition functions in this strange deformed spacetime? Or should I view it as simply a mathematical manipulation?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-23 04:59 (UCT), posted by SE-user Benjamin Horowitz
asked Apr 21, 2013 in Theoretical Physics by Benjamin Horowitz (195 points) [ no revision ]
mitchell.physics.tamu.edu/Conference/string2010/documents/… ... I think its chief utility lies somewhere in the space between M-theory and SQCD.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-23 04:59 (UCT), posted by SE-user Mitchell Porter
The deformation parameters have a meaning in topological string theory, see for example arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1302.6993 by Antoniadis et al. for a recent perspective.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-23 04:59 (UCT), posted by SE-user Vibert
I think the paper by Nekrasov and Witten gives a nice picture. I don't understand it well enough myself to give an answer but you could take a look at it. arxiv.org/abs/1002.0888

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-23 04:59 (UCT), posted by SE-user Siva

1 Answer

+ 5 like - 0 dislike

The most physical and understandable definition of Nekrasov's partition function to me uses five-dimensional gauge theories. Namely, any 4d N=2 susy gauge theory has a 5d version with the same matter content, so that compactifying it on a small $S^1$ brings it back to the original 4d theory.

Then we put the theory on the so-called Omega background: it is $\mathbb{R}^4 \times [0,\beta]$, but $(\vec{x},0)$ and $(\vec{x'},\beta)$ are identified by a rotation $$ \vec x'=\begin{pmatrix} \cos \beta\epsilon_1 & \sin\beta\epsilon_1 & 0 & 0\\ -\sin \beta\epsilon_1 & \cos\beta\epsilon_1 & 0 & 0\\ 0& 0 &\cos \beta\epsilon_2 & \sin\beta\epsilon_2\\ 0& 0 &-\sin \beta\epsilon_2 & \cos\beta\epsilon_2 \end{pmatrix}\vec x. $$

Then we take the limit $\beta\to 0$, keeping $\epsilon_{1,2}$ fixed. (Strictly speaking we also need to add a background $SU(2)_R$ symmetry gauge field, so that some of the susy is preserved.)

Most of what Nekrasov did using his cohomological framework can be seen directly in this higher-dimensional setup. See e.g. Sec. 3.2 of my review article in preparation, available here.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-23 04:59 (UCT), posted by SE-user Yuji
answered May 12, 2013 by Yuji (1,395 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights