Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 78 references

Melonic Dominance in Subchromatic Sextic Tensor Models

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Only three subchromatic sextic maximally-single-trace tensor interactions exist (prism, wheel, octahedron), and each defines a large-N limit dominated by melonic diagrams, so all three theories are explicitly summable.

desk verdict A solid classification of the three subchromatic sextic vertices and a genuinely new octahedron result, but the prism proof leans on an unshown maximality equivalence in Figure 36 that must be filled before the generalized-melonic claim is airtight. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07178 v3 pith:6C75LKJQ submitted 2019-08-20 hep-th math-phmath.COmath.MP

Shiroman Prakash , Ritam Sinha This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thmath-phmath.COmath.MP
keywords tensormodelslargeNlimitmelonicdiagramsmaximallysingle-tracesubchromaticsexticinteractionsvertexexpansionoctahedroninteraction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper targets the large-N behavior of tensor models with O(N)^r symmetry and order-q interaction vertices, focusing on the subchromatic sextic case r<5. It shows that only three maximally-single-trace sextic interaction vertices exist: the r=3 prism, the r=3 wheel (K3,3), and the r=4 octahedron. For each of these, the paper argues that the free energy in the large-N limit is dominated by a recursively generated set of diagrams that can be explicitly summed, with the prism requiring a slightly generalized notion of melonic diagrams. This matters because it maps the region between the planar r=2 limit and the fully melonic r=q-1 limit, identifying the full set of solvable sextic tensor models.

What carries the argument

The central object is the maximally-single-trace (MST) interaction graph: a rank-r, order-q tensor interaction drawn as a graph whose two-colour subgraphs are each single cyclic graphs. Subchromatic means r<q-1, so fewer colours than the maximally melonic rank. The argument works by proving that any maximal free-energy diagram must contain a loop passing through one or two vertices, then classifying all inequivalent 1-cycles and 2-cycles modulo colour permutation and automorphism symmetries. For each cycle, planarity of every two-colour fat graph splits the diagram into smaller pieces that can be cut and sewn, yielding recursive melonic moves: replacing a propagator by an elementary snail, replacing a propagator by an elementary melon, and, for the prism only, vertex expansion.

What would settle it

Enumerate all maximal prismatic free-energy diagrams with, say, six interaction vertices; if any diagram containing the non-splitting 2-cycle (⟨1L,1R⟩,⟨2L,2R⟩) cannot be reduced by the inverse of the vertex-expansion move to a smaller maximal diagram, the claim of generalized melonic dominance for the prism fails. A computer search over Wick contractions could in principle find such a counterexample.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that for sextic (q=6) theories with maximally-single-trace interaction vertices, the subchromatic condition r<5 leaves exactly three interaction graphs: the triangular prism, the wheel (also K3,3), and the octahedron. Using a four-stage argument that classifies inequivalent 1-cycles and 2-cycles, imposes planarity of all two-colour fat graphs, and applies cutting-and-sewing reductions, it proves that every maximal free-energy diagram in the octahedron and wheel theories is generated by conventional melonic moves, while the prism theory requires one additional move, vertex expansion, which replaces one interaction vertex by two contracted vertices. The conclusion is that all three theories are solvable in the large-N limit: the octahedron and wheel reduce to standard melonic Schwinger-Dyson equations, and the prism reproduces the auxiliary-field solution of earlier work.

Load-bearing premise

The recursive enumeration for the prism rests on the claim that the diagram in Figure 36 with one added prism vertex is maximal if and only if the diagram with that vertex removed is maximal, a step justified only by 'carefully following the index contractions'.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The octahedron (r=4) theory is conventionally melonic: every surviving free-energy diagram is generated by replacing propagators with a single elementary melon, with no elementary snail.
  • The wheel (r=3) theory is conventionally melonic with an additional elementary snail, a tadpole that does not affect the propagator Schwinger-Dyson equation under dimensional regularization.
  • The prism (r=3) theory is not conventionally melonic but is solvable via a third move, vertex expansion, replacing one vertex by two contracted vertices; the resulting diagrams reproduce the auxiliary-field solution.
  • A theory with both prism and wheel interactions has no new mixed elementary melon; its maximal diagrams are generated by the union of the two models' melonic moves.
  • Consequently all rank-3 sextic tensor models and the rank-4 octahedron model are solvable in the large-N limit, and their free energies can be explicitly summed.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The recursive colour-adding construction used to enumerate r=3 and r=4 vertices could be rerun for q=8 and higher; the paper sketches the recursion but does not carry it out, leaving higher-order subchromatic solvable vertices as a concrete open search.
  • Because the octahedron theory has no elementary snail, its gap equation is identical to the standard q=6 bosonic melonic model; a finite-N exact-diagonalization study of the rank-4 fermionic version could test the paper's large-N prediction against the rank-5 melonic model.
  • The prism's vertex-expansion move, if it is the only non-conventional move, suggests that the prismatic and wheel-plus-prism theories have the same leading large-N free energy as the auxiliary-field quartic formulation, an equivalence the paper checks but does not prove directly from the move alone.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies O(N)^r tensor models with order-six interactions and maximally-single-trace (MST) vertices, focusing on the subchromatic case r < q-1 = 5. It claims a complete classification of subchromatic sextic MST vertices: exactly two rank-3 vertices (the prism and the wheel/K_{3,3}) and one rank-4 vertex (the octahedron). For each of these interactions, the paper analyzes the large-N limit of the free energy, showing that the surviving diagrams are generated by a small set of 'melonic moves.' In the wheel and octahedron cases the diagrams are conventionally melonic (with an elementary snail for the wheel), while the prism requires a new move, 'vertex expansion,' which is introduced in §5.5. The paper also treats the mixed prism+wheel theory and discusses implications for bosonic and fermionic tensor models. The central claims are the classification theorem, the diagrammatic characterization of maximal free-energy diagrams for the three vertices, and the solvability (explicit summability) of the corresponding large-N limits.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a substantive contribution to the tensor-model literature. The classification of subchromatic sextic MST vertices is new and appears to be correct, and the identification of the octahedron as a conventionally melonic r=4 theory and of the prism as a generalized-melonic theory with a vertex-expansion move are interesting and potentially useful for constructing solvable large-N models. The paper also demonstrates a clear general strategy (Euler counting, 1-cycle/2-cycle reduction, fat-graph planarity, cutting and sewing) that extends and systematizes earlier work of Ferrari–Rivasseau–Valette and Klebanov–Pallegar–Popov. The symmetry analysis in Section 3.2 and the group-theoretic enumeration of inequivalent 2-cycles in the appendix are clean and well-executed. The main limitation is that several load-bearing diagrammatic enumerations are asserted with 'one can check' rather than shown in detail; these gaps are fixable and do not appear to indicate that the conclusions are wrong, but they need to be filled before the arguments are fully convincing.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.5, Figure 36] The claim that the graph on the left of Figure 36 is maximal if and only if the graph on the right is maximal is the load-bearing step for the recursive enumeration of maximal prismatic diagrams. The text justifies this by saying 'By carefully following the index contractions, one can check' but no such check is shown, and the figure does not display the labelled colour-specific index routes. Without this equivalence, the vertex-expansion move of Figure 37 is not established, and the paper's proof that the prism theory is generalized-melonic does not go through. Please provide the full index-tracing argument: for each of the three O(N) symmetries, list which external legs of the six-legged subgraph connect to which legs of the right-hand graph, and show explicitly that the 'if and only if' holds. Alternatively, provide a verification that can be checked by the reader (e.g., a table of all possible connections and the resulting f_total).
  2. [§3.1] The classification of subchromatic sextic MST vertices is one of the paper's central claims, but the proof is condensed into statements such as 'There are not very many possibilities to consider' and 'One can explicitly check all possibilities'. Since the paper claims that exactly three vertices exist (prism, wheel, octahedron), the reader needs to see the finite enumeration: for r=3, list all possible placements of the third-colour edges on the r=2 cycle and show why every placement except the prism and the wheel violates the MST condition; for r=4, do the same for adding the fourth colour to the prism and to the wheel. This can be done as a table or a short appendix. Without this, the classification claim is an assertion rather than a demonstrated result.
  3. [§5.3–§5.5] Several additional load-bearing exclusions are asserted with 'one can check' without showing the fat-graph traces: in §5.4 the statement that the 2-cycles (⟨1L,2R⟩,⟨2L,1R⟩) and (⟨1L,5R⟩,⟨5L,1R⟩) 'give rise to at least one non-planar fat graph'; in §5.5 the statements that the 2-cycles (⟨1L,2R⟩,⟨5L,6R⟩) and (⟨1L,2R⟩,⟨2L,1R⟩) 'always give rise to a non-planar fat graph'; and in §5.5 the assertion that the ⟨1L,1R⟩,⟨6L,6R⟩ 2-cycle produces only a conventional melon or a double-snail. These exclusions determine the complete set of melonic moves, so they are not peripheral. Please present the planar/Non-planar fat-graph analysis for these cases (or provide an appendix containing the traces). This would make the proof of melonic dominance auditable.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract first says the free-energy diagrams 'are melonic' and then adds that the prism requires a generalization. This is slightly confusing; consider rephrasing the first sentence to say 'melonic in a generalized sense' for the prism from the outset.
  2. [§5.5] The text says the ⟨1L,1R⟩,⟨6L,6R⟩ case is 'not pictured' but then uses the resulting diagrams to define a melonic move. Since an explicit figure would substantially help the reader verify the claim, please include the corresponding figure.
  3. [§5.4] When the octahedron 2-cycles are enumerated, the text states that 'Drawing all fat-graphs for each 2-cycle as we did for the wheel, we obtain the following results' but the figures for the ruled-out cases are not shown. Adding at least one representative excluded case with its non-planar fat graph would make the method clearer.
  4. [§6.1] The value n_melon = 6 for the octahedron is stated without a counting argument or a figure. Since the gap equation depends on this number, please indicate how this count is obtained (e.g., by listing the six Wick contractions).
  5. [Throughout] There are several grammatical slips, for example 'an theory with complex fields', 'a the natural large-N 't Hooft limit', and 'we consider the large N limit of tensor models constructed out of rank-r tensors' (missing 'with'). A careful proofreading pass is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's large-N and melonic-dominance arguments are self-contained combinatorial derivations, with prior work cited only for context.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The enumeration of the prism, wheel, and octahedron interactions in Section 3 is a direct classification by colour-subgraph constraints, not an assumption of the result. The large-N scaling in Section 4 follows from Euler-characteristic counting and defines maximal diagrams independently of any fitted parameter. Sections 5.3-5.5 then prove melonic or generalized-melonic dominance by enumerating inequivalent 1-cycles and 2-cycles, imposing fat-graph planarity, and applying local cutting-and-sewing reductions; no quantity used as an input is later relabelled as a prediction. The prism case does rely on the Figure 36 assertion that two diagrams are maximal iff, justified by an index-contraction check. That assertion is the paper's weakest proof step and could be a correctness gap, but it is not circular: maximality is defined by the independent N-counting bound (4.6), and the asserted equivalence is a local combinatorial fact rather than an identification of the conclusion with an input. Cited prior work, including [43] which has an overlapping author, is used for context and for the auxiliary-field solution of the prism, but the paper's own vertex-expansion argument is checked directly and does not borrow its central conclusion from that citation. No fitted input is renamed as a prediction, and no self-citation carries the load of the new claims.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted parameters or new physical entities. It relies on the MST restriction, the standard 't Hooft scaling, and two ad hoc combinatorial assumptions: the exhaustiveness of the finite vertex classification and the Figure 36 equivalence for the prismatic recursion.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Restriction to maximally-single-trace (MST) interactions captures the most interesting large N dynamics; non-MST sextic interactions reduce to quartic pillow and double-trace interactions via auxiliary fields.
    Sections 1 and 7 argue this, and the paper's classification and proofs are restricted to MST vertices.
  • domain assumption The large N limit is the natural 't Hooft limit with λ = g N^{r(q−2)/4} fixed; only diagrams saturating ftot = r(q−2)v/4 + r (all fat graphs planar) survive.
    Section 4.1 derives the bound from Euler equations and MST connectivity; the dominance of maximal diagrams is assumed as the definition of the large N limit.
  • ad hoc to paper The finite case checks in Section 3.1 exhaustively enumerate all sextic MST vertices: exactly two r=3 vertices (prism, wheel) and one r=4 vertex (octahedron).
    Section 3.1 states 'One can explicitly check all possibilities' without a formal proof or computer output.
  • ad hoc to paper For each inequivalent 1-cycle or 2-cycle, fat-graph planarity splits the subgraph as in Figure 18, or, for the prism (1,1)(2,2) cycle, the Figure 36 equivalence holds.
    Sections 5.1 and 5.5: this is the structural assumption that makes the recursive enumeration work; the prism case is checked by tracing index contractions rather than a general proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Melonic Dominance in Subchromatic Sextic Tensor Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6C75LKJQ

@misc{pith2026190807178,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Melonic Dominance in Subchromatic Sextic Tensor Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6C75LKJQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07178}
}
abstract

We study tensor models based on $O(N)^r$ symmetry groups constructed out of rank-$r$ tensors with order-$q$ interaction vertices. We refer to those tensor models for which $r<q-1$ as \textit{subchromatic}. We focus most of our attention on sextic ($q=6$) models with maximally-single-trace interactions. We show that only three subchromatic sextic maximally-single-trace interaction vertices exist: these are the $r=3$ prism, the $r=3$ wheel (or $K_{3,3}$) and the $r=4$ octahedron. For theories based on these interactions we demonstrate that the set of Feynman diagrams that contribute to the free energy in the large $N$ limit are melonic (or closely related to melonic diagrams, in the case of the prism) and thus can be explicitly summed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07178 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A maximal Feynman diagram in a theory with prism interactions that is not a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Feynman diagrams in rank-3 tensor models, can be represented by an 3-line nota [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. An order g 2 wheel correction to the propagator in triple-line notation. This diagram is also an elementary melon and is proportional to g 2 wheelN6 = λ 2 wheel. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (38 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The wheel (or K3,3) interaction vertex is represented by the above labelled interac￾tion graph. nient to represent interactions by an interaction graph, as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The elementary melon of Figure 3 represented as a Feynman diagram in single-line [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: If we “forget” the green edges in the 3-colour interaction graph on the left, we [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Representatives of all r = 3, q = 4 interaction vertices are pictured above. The first interaction on the left is not single-trace, as it is disconnected. The second interaction, the pillow, is single-trace but not maximally-single-trace, because forgetting the blue ed…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The unique maximally-single-trace interaction vertex for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The prism interaction vertex, (above-right) is a maximally-single-trace r = 3 interaction that can be obtained from combining the red-green cycle of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The wheel or K3,3 interaction vertex, shown on the above right, is a maximally￾single-trace r = 3 interaction that can be obtained from combining the red-green cycle of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The octahedron interaction vertex (above-right) is the unique maximally-single￾trace r = 4 interaction. It can be obtained from combining the r = 3 prism interaction of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Two ways of drawing the prism interaction graph that make its colour permutation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Two ways of drawing the wheel (or K33) interaction graph. Reflection through the dashed line corresponds to an exchange of two colours [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Three ways of drawing the interaction graph for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Any maximal Feynman diagram contributing to the free energy must be of one of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: A 2-cycle which contains an odd number of twists and is therefore non-planar. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: We require each two-colour fat graph to be planar. For a given choice of two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: If, for all possible 1-cycles and 2-cycles, the requirement that all two-colour fat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: The above two Figures illustrate a cutting and sewing argument that can be used [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: The diagrams recursively enumerated via the argument in the text can also [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_20.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: For each of the interaction vertices shown in Figure 15, we must consider [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_15.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: The melonic moves give rise to the above schematic equation for the exact prop [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: The wheel interaction and its three two-colour fat-vertices are shown above. For [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: The fat graphs for the 2-cycle (h1L, 1Ri,h2L, 2Ri) involving two wheel interaction vertices. From the blue-red fat-graph, we see that 4L can be connected (via a subgraph) to one of 4R, 5R or 5L. If 4L is connected to 4R or 5R, then we see from the red-green fat graph …
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: For the 2-cycle (h1L, 1Ri,h2L, 2Ri), the constraint that all fat graphs are planar means the interaction vertices must be connected in one of the two above ways. The second possibility is a “double-snail” that originates from the insertion two elementary snails. Let u…
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: For the 2-cycle (h1L, 1Ri,h2L, 4Ri) connecting two wheel interaction vertices, the constraint that all fat graphs are planar means the interaction vertices must be connected as shown above [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_25.png]
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: For the 2-cycle (h1L, 1Ri,h3L, 3Ri) connecting two wheel interaction vertices, the constraint that all fat graphs (shown above) are planar means the interaction vertices must be connected as shown below. For the 2-cycle (h1L, 1Ri,h3L, 5Ri), we find there is no way to …
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: Any Feynman diagram containing a 1-cycle involving one wheel vertex must be [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_27.png]
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: The maximal diagrams arising from the wheel interaction can also be generated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_28.png]
Figure 29
Figure 29. Figure 29: The octahedron interaction and its three two-colour fat-vertices are shown above. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_29.png]
Figure 30
Figure 30. Figure 30: Requiring the 2-cycle (h1L, 1Ri,h5L, 5Ri) to be maximal means it must take the above traditionally-melonic form. A similar result holds for (h1L, 1Ri,h2L, 2Ri) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_30.png]
Figure 31
Figure 31. Figure 31: The theory based on the octahedron is traditionally melonic, with the above [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_31.png]
Figure 32
Figure 32. Figure 32: The prism interaction and its three two-colour fat-vertices are shown above. Note [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_32.png]
Figure 33
Figure 33. Figure 33: Any maximal Feynman diagram containing a 1-cycle passing through one prism [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_33.png]
Figure 34
Figure 34. Figure 34: The fat graphs for the 2-cycle (h1L, 1Ri,h4L, 4Ri) involving two prism interaction vertices are shown above. We see that this gives rise to a conventional melonic structure shown below. New melonic move In order to obtain a recursive enumeration of diagrams in this ca…
Figure 36
Figure 36. Figure 36: We have thus formally obtained a recursive procedure for generating all free [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_36.png]
Figure 35
Figure 35. Figure 35: The three fat graphs for the 2-cycle (h1L, 1Ri,h2L, 2Ri) involving two prism in￾teraction vertices are shown above. From the blue-red fat-graph, we see that the subgraph gets split into two parts. However, there are not enough constraints to separate the sub￾graph int…
Figure 36
Figure 36. Figure 36: The graph on the left, which originates from the Figure 35, is maximal if and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_36.png]
Figure 37
Figure 37. Figure 37: A new melonic move, vertex expansion, is present in the prismatic model. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_37.png]
Figure 38
Figure 38. Figure 38: The integration kernel for the four-point function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_38.png]
Figure 39
Figure 39. Figure 39: This is a non-MST rank-4 interaction whose large [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_39.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A Planar Diagram Theory for Strong Interactions,

    G. ’t Hooft, “A Planar Diagram Theory for Strong Interactions,” Nucl.Phys. B72 (1974) 461

    work page 1974

  2. [2]

    Quantum field theory in the large N limit: A Review,

    M. Moshe and J. Zinn-Justin, “Quantum field theory in the large N limit: A Review,” Phys. Rept. 385 (2003) 69–228, hep-th/0306133

    arXiv 2003

  3. [3]

    Colored Group Field Theory,

    R. Gurau, “Colored Group Field Theory,” Commun. Math. Phys. 304 (2011) 69–93, 0907.2582

    arXiv 2011

  4. [4]

    The 1/N expansion of colored tensor models in arbitrary dimension,

    R. Gurau and V. Rivasseau, “The 1/N expansion of colored tensor models in arbitrary dimension,” Europhys. Lett. 95 (2011) 50004, 1101.4182

    arXiv 2011

  5. [5]

    The complete 1/N expansion of colored tensor models in arbitrary dimension,

    R. Gurau, “The complete 1/N expansion of colored tensor models in arbitrary dimension,” Annales Henri Poincare 13 (2012) 399–423, 1102.5759. 42

    arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    Critical behavior of colored tensor models in the large N limit,

    V. Bonzom, R. Gurau, A. Riello, and V. Rivasseau, “Critical behavior of colored tensor models in the large N limit,” Nucl. Phys. B853 (2011) 174–195, 1105.3122

    arXiv 2011

  7. [7]

    Multi-orientable Group Field Theory

    A. Tanasa, “Multi-orientable Group Field Theory,” J. Phys. A45 (2012) 165401, 1109.0694

    work page Pith review arXiv 2012

  8. [8]

    Random tensor models in the large N limit: Uncoloring the colored tensor models,

    V. Bonzom, R. Gurau, and V. Rivasseau, “Random tensor models in the large N limit: Uncoloring the colored tensor models,” Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 084037, 1202.3637

    arXiv 2012

Show all 78 references
  1. [9]

    O(N) Random Tensor Models,

    S. Carrozza and A. Tanasa, “ O(N) Random Tensor Models,” Lett. Math. Phys. 106 (2016), no. 11 1531–1559, 1512.06718

    2016 arXiv

  2. [10]

    An SYK-Like Model Without Disorder,

    E. Witten, “An SYK-Like Model Without Disorder,” 1610.09758

    arXiv

  3. [11]

    Uncolored random tensors, melon diagrams, and the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev models,

    I. R. Klebanov and G. Tarnopolsky, “Uncolored random tensors, melon diagrams, and the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev models,” Phys. Rev. D95 (2017), no. 4 046004, 1611.08915

    2017 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Invitation to Random Tensors,

    R. Gurau, “Invitation to Random Tensors,” SIGMA 12 (2016) 094, 1609.06439

    2016 arXiv

  5. [13]

    The Tensor Track V: Holographic Tensors,

    N. Delporte and V. Rivasseau, “The Tensor Track V: Holographic Tensors,” 2018. 1804.11101

    2018 arXiv

  6. [14]

    TASI Lectures on Large N Tensor Models,

    I. R. Klebanov, F. Popov, and G. Tarnopolsky, “TASI Lectures on Large N Tensor Models,” PoS TASI2017 (2018) 004, 1808.09434

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Notes on Tensor Models and Tensor Field Theories,

    R. Gurau, “Notes on Tensor Models and Tensor Field Theories,” 1907.03531

    1907 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Gapless spin fluid ground state in a random, quantum Heisenberg magnet,

    S. Sachdev and J. Ye, “Gapless spin fluid ground state in a random, quantum Heisenberg magnet,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 3339, cond-mat/9212030

    1993 arXiv

  9. [17]

    A simple model of quantum holography,

    A. Kitaev, “A simple model of quantum holography,” http://online.kitp.ucsb.edu/online/entangled15/kitaev/, http://online.kitp.ucsb.edu/online/entangled15/kitaev2/ Talks at KITP, April 7 and May 27, 2015

    2015

  10. [18]

    Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,

    J. Maldacena and D. Stanford, “Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,” Phys. Rev. D94 (2016), no. 10 106002, 1604.07818

    2016 arXiv

  11. [19]

    The Spectrum in the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model,

    J. Polchinski and V. Rosenhaus, “The Spectrum in the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model,” JHEP 04 (2016) 001, 1601.06768

    2016 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Conformal symmetry and its breaking in two dimensional Nearly Anti-de-Sitter space,

    J. Maldacena, D. Stanford, and Z. Yang, “Conformal symmetry and its breaking in two dimensional Nearly Anti-de-Sitter space,” PTEP 2016 (2016), no. 12 12C104, 1606.01857

    2016 arXiv

  13. [21]

    An investigation of AdS2 backreaction and holography,

    J. Engels¨ oy, T. G. Mertens, and H. Verlinde, “An investigation of AdS2 backreaction and holography,” JHEP 07 (2016) 139, 1606.03438

    2016 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Chaos in AdS 2 Holography,

    K. Jensen, “Chaos in AdS 2 Holography,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016), no. 11 111601, 1605.06098

    2016 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Bi-Local Holography in the SYK Model,

    A. Jevicki, K. Suzuki, and J. Yoon, “Bi-Local Holography in the SYK Model,” JHEP 07 (2016) 007, 1603.06246. 43

    2016 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Spectral and thermodynamic properties of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,

    A. M. Garcia-Garcia and J. J. M. Verbaarschot, “Spectral and thermodynamic properties of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,” Phys. Rev. D94 (2016), no. 12 126010, 1610.03816

    2016 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Black Holes and Random Matrices,

    J. S. Cotler, G. Gur-Ari, M. Hanada, J. Polchinski, P. Saad, S. H. Shenker, D. Stanford, A. Streicher, and M. Tezuka, “Black Holes and Random Matrices,” JHEP 05 (2017) 118, 1611.04650

    2017 arXiv

  18. [26]

    A Note on Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Like Model without Random Coupling,

    T. Nishinaka and S. Terashima, “A Note on Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Like Model without Random Coupling,” 1611.10290

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    SYK-like Tensor Models on the Lattice,

    P. Narayan and J. Yoon, “SYK-like Tensor Models on the Lattice,” 1705.01554

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Analytical Spectral Density of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model at finite N,

    A. M. Garcia-Garcia and J. J. M. Verbaarschot, “Analytical Spectral Density of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model at finite N,” Phys. Rev. D96 (2017), no. 6 066012, 1701.06593

    2017 arXiv

  21. [29]

    The Bulk Dual of SYK: Cubic Couplings,

    D. J. Gross and V. Rosenhaus, “The Bulk Dual of SYK: Cubic Couplings,” JHEP 05 (2017) 092, 1702.08016

    2017 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Three Dimensional View of the SYK/AdS Duality,

    S. R. Das, A. Jevicki, and K. Suzuki, “Three Dimensional View of the SYK/AdS Duality,” JHEP 09 (2017) 017, 1704.07208

    2017 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Space-Time in the SYK Model,

    S. R. Das, A. Ghosh, A. Jevicki, and K. Suzuki, “Space-Time in the SYK Model,” JHEP 07 (2018) 184, 1712.02725

    2018 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Three Dimensional View of Arbitrary q SYK models,

    S. R. Das, A. Ghosh, A. Jevicki, and K. Suzuki, “Three Dimensional View of Arbitrary q SYK models,” JHEP 02 (2018) 162, 1711.09839

    2018 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Coadjoint orbit action of Virasoro group and two-dimensional quantum gravity dual to SYK/tensor models,

    G. Mandal, P. Nayak, and S. R. Wadia, “Coadjoint orbit action of Virasoro group and two-dimensional quantum gravity dual to SYK/tensor models,” 1702.04266

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    Traversable Wormholes via a Double Trace Deformation,

    P. Gao, D. L. Jafferis, and A. Wall, “Traversable Wormholes via a Double Trace Deformation,” JHEP 12 (2017) 151, 1608.05687

    2017 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Diving into traversable wormholes,

    J. Maldacena, D. Stanford, and Z. Yang, “Diving into traversable wormholes,” Fortsch. Phys. 65 (2017), no. 5 1700034, 1704.05333

    2017 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Eternal traversable wormhole,

    J. Maldacena and X.-L. Qi, “Eternal traversable wormhole,” 1804.00491

    arXiv

  29. [37]

    Symmetry Breaking in Coupled SYK or Tensor Models,

    J. Kim, I. R. Klebanov, G. Tarnopolsky, and W. Zhao, “Symmetry Breaking in Coupled SYK or Tensor Models,” Phys. Rev. X9 (2019), no. 2 021043, 1902.02287

    2019 arXiv

  30. [38]

    An introduction to the SYK model,

    V. Rosenhaus, “An introduction to the SYK model,” J. Phys. A52 (2019), no. 32 323001

    2019

  31. [39]

    Notes on Melonic O(N)q−1 Tensor Models,

    S. Choudhury, A. Dey, I. Halder, L. Janagal, S. Minwalla, and R. Poojary, “Notes on Melonic O(N)q−1 Tensor Models,” 1707.09352

    arXiv

  32. [40]

    Spectra of Operators in Large N Tensor Models,

    K. Bulycheva, I. R. Klebanov, A. Milekhin, and G. Tarnopolsky, “Spectra of Operators in Large N Tensor Models,” 1707.09347

    arXiv

  33. [41]

    A New Large N Expansion for General Matrix-Tensor Models,

    F. Ferrari, V. Rivasseau, and G. Valette, “A New Large N Expansion for General Matrix-Tensor Models,” 1709.07366. 44

    arXiv

  34. [42]

    Higher melonic theories,

    S. S. Gubser, C. Jepsen, Z. Ji, and B. Trundy, “Higher melonic theories,” JHEP 09 (2018) 049, 1806.04800

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Prismatic Large N Models for Bosonic Tensors,

    S. Giombi, I. R. Klebanov, F. Popov, S. Prakash, and G. Tarnopolsky, “Prismatic Large N Models for Bosonic Tensors,” Phys. Rev. D98 (2018), no. 10 105005, 1808.04344

    2018 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Majorana Fermion Quantum Mechanics for Higher Rank Tensors,

    I. R. Klebanov, P. N. Pallegar, and F. K. Popov, “Majorana Fermion Quantum Mechanics for Higher Rank Tensors,” 1905.06264

    1905 arXiv

  37. [45]

    N=6 superconformal Chern-Simons-matter theories, M2-branes and their gravity duals,

    O. Aharony, O. Bergman, D. L. Jafferis, and J. Maldacena, “N=6 superconformal Chern-Simons-matter theories, M2-branes and their gravity duals,” JHEP 0810 (2008) 091, 0806.1218

    2008 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Anomalous dimensions in non-supersymmetric bifundamental Chern-Simons theories,

    V. Gurucharan and S. Prakash, “Anomalous dimensions in non-supersymmetric bifundamental Chern-Simons theories,” JHEP 09 (2014) 009, 1404.7849. [Erratum: JHEP11,045(2017)]

    2014 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Large N limit of irreducible tensor models: O(N) rank-3 tensors with mixed permutation symmetry,

    S. Carrozza, “Large N limit of irreducible tensor models: O(N) rank-3 tensors with mixed permutation symmetry,” JHEP 06 (2018) 039, 1803.02496

    2018 arXiv

  40. [48]

    More on Supersymmetric and 2d Analogs of the SYK Model,

    J. Murugan, D. Stanford, and E. Witten, “More on Supersymmetric and 2d Analogs of the SYK Model,” 1706.05362

    arXiv

  41. [49]

    More on the New Large D Limit of Matrix Models,

    T. Azeyanagi, F. Ferrari, P. Gregori, L. Leduc, and G. Valette, “More on the New Large D Limit of Matrix Models,” Annals Phys. 393 (2018) 308–326, 1710.07263

    2018 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Multi-critical behaviour of 4-dimensional tensor models up to order 6,

    L. Lionni and J. Th¨ urigen, “Multi-critical behaviour of 4-dimensional tensor models up to order 6,” Nucl. Phys. B941 (2019) 600–635, 1707.08931

    2019 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Colored triangulations of arbitrary dimensions are stuffed Walsh maps,

    V. Bonzom, L. Lionni, and V. Rivasseau, “Colored triangulations of arbitrary dimensions are stuffed Walsh maps,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.03805 (2015)

    2015 arXiv

  44. [52]

    On Large N Limit of Symmetric Traceless Tensor Models,

    I. R. Klebanov and G. Tarnopolsky, “On Large N Limit of Symmetric Traceless Tensor Models,” JHEP 10 (2017) 037, 1706.00839

    2017 arXiv

  45. [53]

    The 1 /N expansion of the symmetric traceless and the antisymmetric tensor models in rank three,

    D. Benedetti, S. Carrozza, R. Gurau, and M. Kolanowski, “The 1 /N expansion of the symmetric traceless and the antisymmetric tensor models in rank three,” 1712.00249

    arXiv

  46. [54]

    Bosonic Tensor Models at Large N and Small ϵ,

    S. Giombi, I. R. Klebanov, and G. Tarnopolsky, “Bosonic Tensor Models at Large N and Small ϵ,” 1707.03866

    arXiv

  47. [55]

    A Complex Fermionic Tensor Model in d Dimensions,

    S. Prakash and R. Sinha, “A Complex Fermionic Tensor Model in d Dimensions,” JHEP 02 (2018) 086, 1710.09357

    2018 arXiv

  48. [56]

    A Renormalizable SYK-type Tensor Field Theory,

    J. Ben Geloun and V. Rivasseau, “A Renormalizable SYK-type Tensor Field Theory,” Annales Henri Poincare 19 (2018), no. 11 3357–3395, 1711.05967

    2018 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Tensorial Gross-Neveu models,

    D. Benedetti, S. Carrozza, R. Gurau, and A. Sfondrini, “Tensorial Gross-Neveu models,” JHEP 01 (2018) 003, 1710.10253

    2018 arXiv

  50. [58]

    A Supersymmetric SYK-like Tensor Model,

    C. Peng, M. Spradlin, and A. Volovich, “A Supersymmetric SYK-like Tensor Model,” JHEP 05 (2017) 062, 1612.03851

    2017 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Correlators in the N = 2 Supersymmetric SYK Model,

    C. Peng, M. Spradlin, and A. Volovich, “Correlators in the N = 2 Supersymmetric SYK Model,” JHEP 10 (2017) 202, 1706.06078. 45

    2017 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Correlators in tensor models from character calculus,

    A. Mironov and A. Morozov, “Correlators in tensor models from character calculus,” Phys. Lett. B774 (2017) 210–216, 1706.03667

    2017 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Ward identities and combinatorics of rainbow tensor models,

    H. Itoyama, A. Mironov, and A. Morozov, “Ward identities and combinatorics of rainbow tensor models,” JHEP 06 (2017) 115, 1704.08648

    2017 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Cut and join operator ring in tensor models,

    H. Itoyama, A. Mironov, and A. Morozov, “Cut and join operator ring in tensor models,” Nucl. Phys. B932 (2018) 52–118, 1710.10027

    2018 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Phase diagram and fixed points of tensorial Gross-Neveu models in three dimensions,

    D. Benedetti and N. Delporte, “Phase diagram and fixed points of tensorial Gross-Neveu models in three dimensions,” JHEP 01 (2019) 218, 1810.04583

    2019 arXiv

  56. [64]

    2PI effective action for the SYK model and tensor field theories,

    D. Benedetti and R. Gurau, “2PI effective action for the SYK model and tensor field theories,” JHEP 05 (2018) 156, 1802.05500

    2018 arXiv

  57. [65]

    On Melonic Supertensor Models,

    C.-M. Chang, S. Colin-Ellerin, and M. Rangamani, “On Melonic Supertensor Models,” JHEP 10 (2018) 157, 1806.09903

    2018 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Line of fixed points in a bosonic tensor model,

    D. Benedetti, R. Gurau, and S. Harribey, “Line of fixed points in a bosonic tensor model,” JHEP 06 (2019) 053, 1903.03578

    2019 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Supersymmetric Landau-Ginzburg Tensor Models,

    C.-M. Chang, S. Colin-Ellerin, and M. Rangamani, “Supersymmetric Landau-Ginzburg Tensor Models,” 1906.02163

    1906 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Supersymmetric Tensor Model at Large N and Small ϵ,

    F. K. Popov, “Supersymmetric Tensor Model at Large N and Small ϵ,” 1907.02440

    1907 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Phases Of Melonic Quantum Mechanics,

    F. Ferrari and F. I. Schaposnik Massolo, “Phases Of Melonic Quantum Mechanics,” Phys. Rev. D100 (2019), no. 2 026007, 1903.06633

    2019 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Seeking fixed points in multiple coupling scalar theories in the ϵ expansion,

    H. Osborn and A. Stergiou, “Seeking fixed points in multiple coupling scalar theories in the ϵ expansion,” JHEP 05 (2018) 051, 1707.06165

    2018 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Diagrammatic proof of the large N melonic dominance in the SYK model,

    V. Bonzom, V. Nador, and A. Tanasa, “Diagrammatic proof of the large N melonic dominance in the SYK model,” 1808.10314

    arXiv

  64. [72]

    Chern-Simons Theory with Vector Fermion Matter,

    S. Giombi, S. Minwalla, S. Prakash, S. P. Trivedi, S. R. Wadia, et. al., “Chern-Simons Theory with Vector Fermion Matter,” Eur.Phys.J. C72 (2012) 2112, 1110.4386

    2012 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Random Matrices and Holographic Tensor Models,

    C. Krishnan, K. V. P. Kumar, and S. Sanyal, “Random Matrices and Holographic Tensor Models,” JHEP 06 (2017) 036, 1703.08155

    2017 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Towards a Finite- N Hologram,

    C. Krishnan and K. V. P. Kumar, “Towards a Finite- N Hologram,” JHEP 10 (2017) 099, 1706.05364

    2017 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Exact Solution of a Strongly Coupled Gauge Theory in 0+1 Dimensions,

    C. Krishnan and K. V. Pavan Kumar, “Exact Solution of a Strongly Coupled Gauge Theory in 0+1 Dimensions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018), no. 20 201603, 1802.02502

    2018 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Spectra of eigenstates in fermionic tensor quantum mechanics,

    I. R. Klebanov, A. Milekhin, F. Popov, and G. Tarnopolsky, “Spectra of eigenstates in fermionic tensor quantum mechanics,” Phys. Rev. D97 (2018), no. 10 106023, 1802.10263

    2018 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Complete Solution of a Gauged Tensor Model,

    C. Krishnan and K. V. Pavan Kumar, “Complete Solution of a Gauged Tensor Model,” 1804.10103

    arXiv

  70. [78]

    Spectrum of Majorana Quantum Mechanics with O(4)3 Symmetry,

    K. Pakrouski, I. R. Klebanov, F. Popov, and G. Tarnopolsky, “Spectrum of Majorana Quantum Mechanics with O(4)3 Symmetry,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019), no. 1 011601, 1808.07455. 46

    2019 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.