Two-loop test of the N = 6 Chern-Simons theory S-matrix arxiv: v2 [hep-th] 28 Jan 2009

Transcription

1 UMTG 6 Two-loop test of the N = 6 Chern-Simons theory S-matrix arxiv: v [hep-th] 8 Jan 009 Changrim Ahn 1 and Rafael I. Nepomechie Abstract Starting from the integrable two-loop spin-chain Hamiltonian describing the anomalous dimensions of scalar operators in the planar N = 6 superconformal Chern-Simons theory of ABJM, we perform a direct coordinate Bethe ansatz computation of the corresponding two-loop S-matrix. The result matches with the weak-coupling limit of the scalar sector of the all-loop S-matrix which we have recently proposed. In particular, we confirm that the scattering of A and B particles is reflectionless. As a warm up, we first review the analogous computation of the one-loop S-matrix from the one-loop dilatation operator for the scalar sector of planar N = 4 superconformal Yang-Mills theory, and compare the result with the all-loop SU( ) S-matrix. 1 Department of Physics, Ewha Womans University, Seoul , South Korea Physics Department, P.O. Box 48046, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 3314 USA

2 1 Introduction Exact factorized S-matrices [1] play a key role in the understanding of integrable models. Planar four-dimensional N = 4 superconformal Yang-Mills (YM) theory (and therefore, according to the AdS 5 /CFT 4 correspondence [], a certain type IIB superstring theory on AdS 5 S 5 ) is believed to be integrable (see [3]-[6] and references therein). A corresponding exact factorized S-matrix with SU( ) symmetry has been proposed (see [7]-[14] and references therein), which leads [8, 15, 16] to the all-loop Bethe ansatz equations (BAEs) [17]. Aharony, Bergman, Jafferis and Maldacena (ABJM) [18] recently proposed an analogous AdS 4 /CFT 3 correspondencerelatingplanarthree-dimensionaln = 6superconformalChern- Simons (CS) theory to type IIA superstring theory on AdS 4 CP 3. Minahan and Zarembo [19] subsequently found that the scalar sector of N = 6 CS is integrable at the leading two-loop order, and proposed two-loop BAEs for the full theory (see also [0]). Moreover, evidence for classical integrability of the dual string sigma model (large-coupling limit) was discovered in [1,, 3]. On the basis of these results, and assuming integrability to all orders, Gromov and Vieira then conjectured all-loop BAEs [4]. Based on the symmetries and the spectrum of elementary excitations [19, 5, 6], we proposed an exact factorized AdS 4 /CFT 3 S-matrix [8]. As a check, we verified that this S-matrix leads to the all-loop BAEs in [4]. An unusual feature of this S-matrix is that the scattering of A and B particles is reflectionless. (A similar S-matrix which is not reflectionless is not consistent with the known two-loop BAEs [9].) For further related developments of the AdS 4 /CFT 3 correspondence, see [30] and references therein. Considerable guesswork has entered into the above-mentioned all-loop results. While thereissubstantialevidencefortheall-loopbaesands-matrixinthewell-studiedads 5 /CFT 4 case, the same cannot be said for the rapidly-evolving AdS 4 /CFT 3 case. In an effort to further check our proposed S-matrix, we perform here a direct coordinate Bethe ansatz computation of the two-loop S-matrix, starting from the integrable two-loop spin-chain Hamiltonian describing the anomalous dimensions of scalar operators in planar N = 6 CS [19]. The result matches with the weak-coupling limit of the scalar sector of our all-loop S-matrix [8]. In particular, we confirm that the scattering of A and B particles is reflectionless. As a warm up, we first review the analogous computation by Berenstein and Vázquez [5] of the one-loop S-matrix from the one-loop dilatation operator for the scalar sector of planar N = 4 YM [3], and compare the result with the all-loop SU( ) S-matrix. The outline of this paper is as follows. In Sec. we review the simpler case of N = 4 YM. In Sec. 3 we analyze the N = 6 CS case, relegating most of the details of A B scattering 1

3 to an appendix. We briefly discuss our results in Sec. 4. One-loop S-matrix in the scalar sector of N = 4 YM As is well known, N = 4 YM has six scalar fields Φ i (x) (i = 1,...,6) in the adjoint representation of SU(N). It is convenient to associate single-trace gauge-invariant scalar operators with states of an SO(6) quantum spin chain with L sites, trφ i1 (x) Φ il (x) Φ i1 Φ il, (.1) where Φ i on the RHS are 6-dimensional elementary vectors with components (Φ i ) j = δ i,j. The one-loop anomalous dimensions of these operators are described by the integrable SO(6) quantum spin-chain Hamiltonian [3] Γ = λ 8π H, H = L l=1 ( 1 P l,l ) K l,l+1, (.) where λ = gym N is the t Hooft coupling, P is the permutation operator, and the projector K acts as P Φ i Φ j = Φ j Φ i, (.3) K Φ i Φ j = δ ij ( 6 k=1 Φ k Φ k ). (.4) It is convenient to define the complex combinations X = Φ 1 +iφ, Y = Φ 3 +iφ 4, Z = Φ 5 +iφ 6, (.5) and to denote the corresponding complex conjugates with a bar, X = Φ1 iφ, etc. For φ 1,φ {X, X,Y,Ȳ and K φ 1 φ = {,Z, Z}, P φ 1 φ = φ φ 1, (.6) 0 if φ 1 φ X X + X X +Y Ȳ +Ȳ Y +Z Z + Z Z if φ 1 = φ. (.7)

4 .1 Coordinate Bethe ansatz We take Z L as the vacuum state, which evidently is an eigenstate of H with zero energy. One-particle excited states ( magnons ) with momentum p are given by ψ(p) φ = L e ipx x φ, (.8) x=1 where x φ = 1 Z Z x φ Z L Z (.9) is the state obtained from the vacuum by replacing a single Z at site x with an impurity φ, which can be either X, X,Y,Ȳ (but not Z, which can be regarded as a two-particle bound state). Indeed, one can easily check that (.8) is an eigenstate of H with eigenvalue E = ǫ(p), where ǫ(p) = 4sin (p/). (.10) In order to compute the two-particle S-matrix, we must construct all possible two-particle eigenstates. Let x 1,x φ1 φ = 1 Z x 1 φ 1 x φ L Z (.11) denote the state obtained from the vacuum by replacing the Z s at sites x 1 and x with impurities φ 1 and φ, respectively, where x 1 < x. Following Berenstein and Vázquez [5], we distinguish the following three cases: φ 1 = φ : Thecase oftwo particles ofthesame type(i.e., φ 1 = φ φ {X, X,Y,Ȳ})is equivalent to the well-known case originally considered by Bethe in his seminal investigation of the Heisenberg model. (See, e.g., the review by Plefka in [6].) The two-particle eigenstates are given by ψ = f(x 1,x ) x 1,x φφ (.1) x 1 <x where f(x 1,x ) = e i(p 1x 1 +p x ) +S(p,p 1 )e i(p x 1 +p 1 x ). (.13) 3

5 Indeed, these states satisfy H ψ = E ψ (.14) with φ 1 φ : E = ǫ(p 1 )+ǫ(p ), (.15) where ǫ(p) is given by (.10). It also follows from (.14) that the S-matrix for φ φ scattering is given by where u j = u(p j ) and S(p,p 1 ) = u u 1 +i u u 1 i, (.16) u(p) = 1 cot(p/). (.17) If the two particles are not of the same type, but φ 1 φ, then the two-particle eigenstates are of the form ψ = where x 1 <x {f φ1 φ (x 1,x ) x 1,x φ1 φ +f φ φ 1 (x 1,x ) x 1,x φ φ 1 }, (.18) f φi φ j (x 1,x ) = A φi φ j (1)e i(p 1x 1 +p x ) +A φi φ j (1)e i(p x 1 +p 1 x ). (.19) One finds [5] ( A φ1 φ (1) A φ φ 1 (1) ) = ( R(p,p 1 ) T(p,p 1 ) T(p,p 1 ) R(p,p 1 ) )( A φ1 φ (1) A φ φ 1 (1) ), (.0) φ 1 = φ : where the transmission and reflection amplitudes are given by respectively. T(p,p 1 ) = u u 1 u u 1 i, R(p,p 1 ) = i u u 1 i, (.1) In the case φ 1 = φ {X, X,Y,Ȳ}, the two-particle eigenstates are given by ψ = { } fφ φ(x 1,x ) x 1,x φ φ +f φφ (x 1,x ) x 1,x φφ x 1 <x φ=x,y + x 1 f Z(x 1 ) x 1 Z, (.) 4

6 where f φi φ j (x 1,x ) are again given by (.19), and f Z(x 1 ) = A Z e i(p 1+p )x 1. (.3) One finds [5] A X X(1) A XX(1) A Y Ȳ(1) = A ȲY (1) R(p,p 1 ) T(p,p 1 ) S(p,p 1 ) S(p,p 1 ) T(p,p 1 ) R(p,p 1 ) S(p,p 1 ) S(p,p 1 ) S(p,p 1 ) S(p,p 1 ) R(p,p 1 ) T(p,p 1 ) S(p,p 1 ) S(p,p 1 ) T(p,p 1 ) R(p,p 1 ) A X X(1) A XX(1) A Y Ȳ(1) A ȲY (1),(.4) where T(p,p 1 ) = R(p,p 1 ) = S(p,p 1 ) = (u u 1 ) (u u 1 i)(u u 1 +i), 1 (u u 1 i)(u u 1 +i), i(u u 1 ) (u u 1 i)(u u 1 +i). (.5). Comparison with the all-loop S-matrix We now wish to compare the above scattering amplitudes with the weak-coupling limit of the all-loop SU( ) SU( ) S-matrix[8]-[14]. This check has not (to our knowledge) been presented elsewhere, and will serve as a useful guide for the N = 6 CS case. It is convenient to express the latter in terms of two mutually commuting sets of Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators A i (p),ã i (p) (i = 1,...,4), A i (p 1)A j (p ) = i,j S 0 (p 1,p )Ŝi j ij (p 1,p )A j (p )A i (p 1 ), Ã i (p 1)Ã j (p ) = i,j S 0 (p 1,p )Ŝi j ij (p 1,p )Ã j (p )Ã i (p 1 ), A i (p 1)Ã j (p ) = Ã j (p )A i (p 1). (.6) We identify the scalar one-particle states as follows, X(p) = A 1 (p)ã (p), X(p) = A (p)ã 1 (p), Y(p) = A (p)ã (p), Ȳ(p) = A 1 (p)ã 1 (p). (.7) The only non-vanishing amplitudes in the scalar sector are Ŝaa aa (p 1,p ) = A, Ŝab ab (p 1,p ) = 1 (A B), Ŝba ab (p 1,p ) = 1 (A+B), (.8) 5

7 where a,b {1,} with a b. Here A = x x + 1 x + x, 1 [ x B = x + 1 x + x 1 + (x 1 x+ 1 )(x x+ )(x +x+ 1 ) ] (x 1 x+ )(x 1 x x+ 1 x+ ), (.9) where x ± i = x(p i ) ± with x + x = eip, x x + x 1 x = i g, (.30) and g = λ/(4π). Moreover, the scalar factor is given by S 0 (p 1,p ) = x 1 x + x + 1 x 1 1 x + 1 x 1 1 x 1 x+ σ(p 1,p ), (.31) where σ(p 1,p ) is the BES dressing factor [1, 14]. In the weak-coupling (g 0) limit, x ± 1 ( u± i ). (.3) g Therefore and since σ(p 1,p ) 1. A u 1 u +i, B 1, (.33) u 1 u i S 0 u 1 u i u 1 u +i, (.34) For two particles of the same type, the scattering amplitude is evidently given by ( ) S(p 1,p ) S 0 (p 1,p )Ŝaa (p 1,p ) = S 0 A u 1 u +i u 1 u i, (.35) in agreement with (.16). We now consider the case φ 1 φ, e.g., X(p 1 )Y(p ) = T(p 1,p )Y(p )X(p 1 )+R(p 1,p )X(p )Y(p 1 ). (.36) It follows from (.6)-(.8) and (.33), (.34) that T(p 1,p ) = 1 S 0 A(A B) u 1 u u 1 u i, R(p 1,p ) = 1 S 0A(A+B) 6 i u 1 u i, (.37)

8 in agreement with (.1). Finally, we consider the case φ 1 = φ, e.g., X(p 1 ) X(p ) = T(p 1,p ) X(p )X(p 1 )+R(p 1,p )X(p ) X(p 1 ) + S(p 1,p )Y(p )Ȳ(p 1)+S(p 1,p )Ȳ(p )Y(p 1 ). (.38) It follows from (.6)-(.8) and (.33), (.34) that T(p 1,p ) = 1 4 S 0(A B) R(p 1,p ) = 1 4 S 0 (A+B) in agreement with (.5). 1 (u 1 u ) (u 1 u i)(u 1 u +i), 1 (u 1 u i)(u 1 u +i), S(p 1,p ) = 1 4 S 0 (A B)(A+B) i(u 1 u ) (u 1 u i)(u 1 u +i), (.39) In short, the all-loop AdS 5 /CFT 4 S-matrix correctly reproduces the N = 4 YM one-loop scalar-sector scattering amplitudes, as expected. In the next section, we perform a similar check of the AdS 4 /CFT 3 S-matrix. 3 Two-loop S-matrix in the scalar sector of N = 6 CS The N = 6 CS theory [18] has a pair of scalar fields A i (x) (i = 1,) in the bifundamental representation (N, N) of the SU(N) SU(N) gauge group, and another pair of scalar fields B i (x) (i = 1,) in the conjugate representation ( N,N). These fields can be grouped into SU(4) multiplets Y A (x), Y A = (A 1,A,B 1,B ), Y A = (A 1,A,B 1,B ). (3.1) Following [19], we associate single-trace gauge-invariant scalar operators with states of an alternating SU(4) quantum spin chain with L sites, try A 1 (x)y B 1 (x) Y A L (x)y B L (x) Y A 1 Y B 1 Y A L Y B L, (3.) where Y A on the RHS are 4-dimensional elementary vectors with components (Y A ) j = δ A,j. The two-loop anomalous dimensions of these operators are described by the integrable 1 There is a sign discrepancy in S(p 1,p ) which perhaps can be reconciled by a gauge transformation in (.38), e.g., Y Y while leaving others unchanged. 7

9 alternating SU(4) quantum spin-chain Hamiltonian [19] L ( Γ = λ H, H = 1 P l,l+ + 1 ) {K l,l+1,p l,l+ }, (3.3) l=1 where λ = N/k is the t Hooft coupling, P is the permutation operator, and the projector K acts as That is, K Y A Y B = δa B 4 Y C Y C, C=1 KA i A j = KB i B j = δ ij KA i A j = KB i B j = δ ij K Y B YA = δ A B k=1 k=1 4 Y C YC. (3.4) C=1 ( ) A k A k +B k B k, ( ) A k A k +B k B k, KA i B j = KB i A j = KA i B j = KB i A j = 0. (3.5) 3.1 Coordinate Bethe ansatz Following [5, 6], we take the state with L pairs of (A 1 B 1 ), i.e., (A 1 B 1 ) L (3.6) as the vacuum state, which evidently is an eigenstate of H with zero energy. It is convenient to label the (A 1 B 1 ) pairs by x {1,...,L}. There are two types of one-particle excited states with momentum p, called A-particles and B-particles. The former are given by where x A φ = L ψ(p) A φ = e ipx x A φ, (3.7) x=1 1 (A 1 B 1 ) x (φb 1 ) L (A 1 B 1 ) (3.8) is the state obtained from the vacuum by replacing the A 1 from pair x with an impurity φ, which can be either A or B (but not B 1, which can be regarded as a two-particle bound state). Similarly, the B-particles are given by L ψ(p) B φ = e ipx x B φ, (3.9) The action has two SU(N) Chern-Simons terms with integer levels k and k, respectively. x=1 8

10 where x B φ = 1 (A 1 B 1 ) x (A 1 φ) L (A 1 B 1 ) (3.10) is the state obtained from the vacuum by replacing the B 1 from pair x with an impurity φ, which can be either A or B (but not A 1, which can be regarded as a two-particle bound state). Indeed, both (3.7) and (3.9) are eigenstates of H with eigenvalue E = ǫ(p), where ǫ(p) is given by (.10). In order to compute the two-particle S-matrix, we must construct all possible two-particle eigenstates A A scattering Let x 1,x AA φ 1 φ = 1 (A 1 B 1 ) x 1 (φ 1 B 1 ) x (φ B 1 ) L (A 1 B 1 ) (3.11) denote the state obtained from the vacuum by replacing the A 1 s from pairs x 1 and x with impurities φ 1 and φ, respectively, where x 1 < x and φ i {A,B }. We distinguish two cases: φ 1 = φ : φ 1 φ : The case of two A-particles of the same type (i.e., φ 1 = φ φ {A,B }) is again the same as in the Heisenberg model. The two-particle eigenstates are given by ψ = f(x 1,x ) x 1,x AA φφ (3.1) x 1 <x where f(x 1,x ) is given by (.13). These states have energy (.15), and the S-matrix is again given by (.16), S(p,p 1 ) = u u 1 +i u u 1 i. (3.13) If the two A-particles are not of the same type (e.g., φ 1 = A,φ = B ), then the two-particle eigenstates are of the form ψ = x 1 <x { fφ1 φ (x 1,x ) x 1,x AA φ 1 φ +f φ φ 1 (x 1,x ) x 1,x AA φ φ 1 }, (3.14) where f φi φ j (x 1,x ) is again given by (.19). Since K on these states is zero, the S- matrix is again given by (.1), T(p,p 1 ) = u u 1 u u 1 i, R(p,p 1 ) = 9 i u u 1 i. (3.15)

11 3.1. B B scattering Let x 1,x BB φ 1 φ = 1 (A 1 B 1 ) x 1 (A 1 φ 1 ) x (A 1 φ ) L (A 1 B 1 ) (3.16) denote the state obtained from the vacuum by replacing the B 1 s from pairs x 1 and x with impurities φ 1 and φ, respectively, where x 1 < x and φ i {A,B }. The eigenstates with two B-particle are given by expressions similar to those with two A-particles (namely, (3.1) and (3.14) with x 1,x AA φ i φ j x 1,x BB φ i φ j ), and we obtain the same results (3.13), (3.15) for the scattering amplitudes A B scattering In order to analyze A B scattering, we define the states x 1,x AB φ 1 φ = x 1,x AB φ φ 1 = 1 (A 1 B 1 ) 1 (A 1 B 1 ) x 1 (φ 1 B 1 ) x 1 (A 1 φ ) x (A 1 φ ) x (φ 1 B 1 ) L (A 1 B 1 ), where x 1 < x and φ 1 {A,B }, φ {A,B }. We distinguish two cases: L (A 1 B 1 ), (3.17) φ 1 φ : φ 1 = φ : If φ 1 φ (e.g., φ 1 = A,φ = B ), then K on the states (3.17) is zero. As noted in [19], we are left with two decoupled SU() chains on the even and odd sites. Hence, there is trivial scattering between A and B particles. If φ 1 = φ (e.g., φ 1 = A,φ = A ), then the eigenstates are given by ψ = { } f φφ (x 1,x ) x 1,x AB +f φφ φ φ(x 1,x ) x 1,x AB φ φ where x 1 <x φ=a,b + x 1 k=1 x φi φ j = { } f Ak A (x 1 ) x 1 k Ak A +f k B k B (x 1) x k 1 B k B, (3.18) k 1 (A 1 B 1 ) 10 x (φ i φ j ) L (A 1 B 1 ) (3.19)

12 is the state obtained from the vacuum by replacing the (A 1 B 1 ) pair at x with (φ i φ j ). We assume that f φi φ j (x 1,x ) are again given by (.19), and f φi φ j (x 1 ) = A φi φ j e i(p 1+p )x 1. (3.0) After a lengthy computation (see the Appendix for further details), we find A A A (1) 0 T(p,p 1 ) 0 S(p,p 1 ) A A A A A A (1) A B B (1) = T(p,p 1 ) 0 S(p,p 1 ) 0 (1) A A 0 S(p,p 1 ) 0 T(p,p 1 ) A (1) A B B (1) (3.1) A B S(p B (1),p 1 ) 0 T(p,p 1 ) 0 A B B (1) where T(p,p 1 ) = u 1 u u 1 u i, S(p,p 1 ) = Note that the scattering is reflectionless. Similar results can be obtained for B A scattering. i u 1 u i. (3.) 3. Comparison with the all-loop S-matrix We now wish to compare the above scattering amplitudes with the weak-coupling limit of the all-loop SU( ) S-matrix [8]. It is convenient to express the latter in terms of two sets of Zamolodchikov-Faddeev operators A i (p), B i (p) (i = 1,...,4) corresponding to the A, B particles, respectively, A i (p 1) A j (p ) = i,j S 0 (p 1,p )Ŝi j ij (p 1,p ) A j (p ) A i (p 1 ), (3.3) B i (p 1) B j (p ) = i,j S 0 (p 1,p )Ŝi j ij (p 1,p ) B j (p ) B i (p 1 ), (3.4) A i (p 1) B j (p ) = i,j S0 (p 1,p )Ŝi j ij (p 1,p ) B j (p ) A i (p 1 ), (3.5) B i (p 1) A j (p ) = i,j S0 (p 1,p )Ŝi j ij (p 1,p ) A j (p ) B i (p 1 ). (3.6) The absence of A j (p ) B i (p 1 ) terms on the RHS of (3.5) (and similarly, of B j (p ) A i (p 1 ) terms on the RHS of (3.6)) means that the scattering is reflectionless. We identify the scalar one-particle states as follows, A 1 (p) 0 = x e ipx x A A, A (p) 0 = x e ipx x A, B B 1 (p) 0 = x e ipx x B B, B (p) 0 = x e ipx x B. (3.7) A 11

13 The SU( ) S-matrix elements Ŝi j ij (p 1,p ) are the same as before (.8), (.9), where x ± satisfy (.30) and [5, 6, 7] g = h(λ), (3.8) with h(λ) λ for small λ, and h(λ) λ/ for large λ. The scalar factors are given by (cf. (.31)) S 0 (p 1,p ) = 1 1 x + 1 x 1 1 x 1 x+ In the weak-coupling (g 0) limit, σ(p 1,p ), S0 (p 1,p ) = x 1 x + x + 1 x σ(p 1,p ). (3.9) S 0 1, S0 u 1 u i u 1 u +i. (3.30) 3..1 A A scattering For two A particles of the same type (i.e., both Aa with a {1,}), the scattering amplitude is evidently given by S(p 1,p ) S 0 (p 1,p )Ŝaa aa (p 1,p ) = S 0 A u 1 u +i u 1 u i, (3.31) in agreement with (3.13). Although the same expression also appears in the N = 4 YM case (.35), note that the latter follows from the all-loop S-matrix (.6) in a rather different way. For two A particles of different type (i.e., Aa and Ab with a,b {1,} and a b), it follows from (3.3), (.8), (.33) that where A a (p 1) A b (p ) = T(p 1,p ) A b (p ) A a (p 1)+R(p 1,p ) A a (p ) A b (p 1), (3.3) T(p 1,p ) = 1 S 0(A B) u 1 u u 1 u i, R(p 1,p ) = 1 S 0(A+B) i u 1 u i, (3.33) in agreement with (3.15). Again, the same expressions arise in the N = 4 YM case (.37) in a different way. 3.. B B scattering According to (3.4), the B B and A A scattering amplitudes are equal, in agreement with the results from Sec

14 3..3 A B scattering According to (3.5), the Aa Ba scattering amplitude is S 0 (p 1,p )Ŝaa aa (p 1,p ) = S 0 A 1, (3.34) in agreement with the results from Sec for the case φ 1 φ. Note that the scalar factor S 0 (3.9) is essential for obtaining this result. where For Aa Bb scattering (with a,b {1,} and a b), it follows from (3.5) that A a(p 1 ) B b (p ) = T(p 1,p ) B b (p ) A a(p 1 )+S(p 1,p ) B a(p ) A b (p 1), (3.35) which agrees with (3.). 3 T(p 1,p ) = 1 S 0 (A B) u 1 u u 1 u +i, S(p 1,p ) = 1 S 0 (A+B) i u 1 u +i, (3.36) 4 Discussion We have found that the all-loop AdS 4 /CFT 3 S-matrix (3.3) - (3.6) correctly reproduces the N = 6 CS two-loop scalar-sector scattering amplitudes. The scalar factors (3.9), which differ from the AdS 5 /CFT 4 scalar factor (.31), play a crucial role. In particular, we have confirmed that the scattering of A and B particles is reflectionless. This gives greater confidence in the correctness of the all-loop S-matrix, and in the corresponding all-loop BAEs [4]. We have restricted our analysis to the scalar sector of N = 6 CS, since this is the only sector for which an explicit Hamiltonian has been available [19]. Very recently, the Hamiltonian for the full two-loop OSp(6 4) spin chain has been found [31, 3]. Hence, it should now be possible to extend the present analysis to other sectors, and thereby further check the all-loop S-matrix. It would also be interesting to extend the present analysis beyond two loops. This could provide further information about the important function h(λ) (3.8) and the dressing phase in the S-matrix. However, such an analysis must wait until the higher-loop Hamiltonian becomes available. 3 There is a sign discrepancy in S(p 1,p ). However, the sign of S(p 1,p ) in (3.35) can be changed by a gauge transformation, e.g. by changing A1 A1 and leaving A,B1,B unchanged. 13

15 Acknowledgments C.A. thanks the University of Miami for hospitality during the course of this work. This work was supported in part by KRF C00150 and WCU grant R (C.A.), and by the National Science Foundation under Grants PHY and PHY (R.N.). A Details of A B scattering In order to determine the A B scattering amplitudes, it is necessary to act with the Hamiltonian H (3.3) on the state (3.18). We catalog here the action of H on the various terms: H x 1,x AB φ i,φ j = 4 x 1,x AB φ i,φ j x 1 1,x AB φ i,φ j x 1 +1,x AB φ i,φ j x 1,x 1 AB φ i,φ j x 1,x +1 AB φ i,φ j for x 1 < x 1, (A.1) H x 1,x 1 +1 AB A,A = 4 x 1,x 1 +1 AB A,A x 1 A A x 1 +1 A A x 1 1,x 1 +1 AB x A,A 1,x 1 + AB, (A.) A,A H x 1,x 1 +1 AB B,B = 4 x 1,x 1 +1 AB x B,B 1 B B x 1 +1 B B x 1 1,x 1 +1 AB x B,B 1,x 1 + AB, (A.3) B,B H x 1,x 1 +1 AB A,A = 4 x 1,x 1 +1 AB 1 A,A x 1 A A 1 x 1 +1 A A + 1 x 1 A1 A x 1 +1 A1 A x 1 B 1 B x 1 +1 B 1 B x 1 B B + 1 x 1 +1 B B x 1 1,x 1 +1 AB x A,A 1,x 1 + AB, (A.4) A,A H x 1,x 1 +1 AB B,B = 4 x 1,x 1 +1 AB 1 B,B x 1 B B 1 x 1 +1 B B + 1 x 1 B 1 B x 1 +1 B 1 B x 1 A1 A x 1 +1 A1 A x 1 A A + 1 x 1 +1 A A x 1 1,x 1 +1 AB x B,B 1,x 1 + AB, (A.5) B,B 14

16 H x 1 A1 A 1 = 3 x 1 A1 A 1 1 x 1 1 A1 A 1 1 x 1 +1 A1 A x 1 A A + 1 x 1 +1 A A + x 1 B 1 B 1 + x 1 +1 B 1 B x 1 B B + 1 x 1 +1 B B + 1 x 1 1,x 1 AB A,A + 1 x 1,x 1 +1 AB + 1 A,A x 1 1,x 1 AB + 1 B,B x 1,x 1 +1 AB, (A.6) B,B H x 1 A A = 4 x 1 A A + 1 x 1 1 A1 A x 1 A1 A x 1 B 1 B x 1 +1 B 1 B x 1 1,x 1 1 AB x A,A 1,x 1 +1 AB A,A 1 x 1 1,x 1 AB 1 A,A x 1,x 1 +1 AB A,A + 1 x 1 1,x 1 AB + 1 B,B x 1,x 1 +1 AB, (A.7) B,B H x 1 B 1 B 1 = 3 x 1 B 1 B 1 1 x 1 1 B 1 B 1 1 x 1 +1 B 1 B x 1 1 B B + 1 x 1 B B + x 1 1 A1 A 1 + x 1 A1 A x 1 1 A A + 1 x 1 A A + 1 x 1 1,x 1 AB A,A + 1 x 1,x 1 +1 AB + 1 A,A x 1 1,x 1 AB + 1 B,B x 1,x 1 +1 AB, (A.8) B,B H x 1 B B = 4 x 1 B B + 1 x 1 B 1 B x 1 +1 B 1 B x 1 1 A1 A x 1 A1 A x 1 1,x 1 AB A,A + 1 x 1,x 1 +1 AB x A,A 1 1,x 1 AB x B,B 1,x 1 +1 AB B,B 1 x 1 1,x 1 AB 1 B,B x 1,x 1 +1 AB. (A.9) B,B Theappearanceoftermsoftheform x Ak A and x k B k B (k = 1,)ontheRHSof(A.)-(A.5) k explains the need for such terms in the eigenstate (3.18). With the help of the above results, the eigenvalue equation H ψ = E ψ (A.10) 15

17 with ψ and E given by (3.18) and (.15), respectively, leads to the following equations for the amplitudes: 0 = [ 3 1 ] (ei(p 1+p ) +e i(p 1+p ) ) E A A1 A 1 ( + (1+e i(p 1+p 1 ) ) A A A + 1 (eip +e ip 1 ) +A B 1 B A B B [ A A A (1)+A B B (1) + 1 [ (eip 1 +e ip ) A A A (1)+A B B (1) ] ) ], (A.11) +(4 E)A A A + 1 (1+ei(p 1+p ) )A B 1 B 1 0 = 1 (1+e i(p 1+p ) )A A1 A 1 [ + (e ip +e ip 1 ) A A A (1) 1 A A A (1)+ 1 ] A B B (1) [ + (e ip 1 +e ip ) A A A (1) 1 A A A (1)+ 1 ] A B B, (A.1) (1) [ 0 = (1+e i(p 1+p ) ) A A1 A A A A + 1 ] A B B [ ] (ei(p 1+p ) +e i(p 1+p ) ) E A B 1 B [ ] (eip +e ip 1 ) A A A (1)+A B B (1) + 1 [ ] (eip 1 +e ip ) A A A (1)+A B B (1), (A.13) 0 = 1 (1+e i(p 1+p ) )A A1 A (1+ei(p 1+p ) )A B 1 B +(4 E)A 1 B B ] [ + (e ip +e ip 1 ) A B B (1)+ 1 A A A (1) 1 A B B (1) [ + (e ip 1 +e ip ) A B B (1)+ 1 A A A (1) 1 A B B (1) ], (A.14) 0 = e ip (4 e ip 1 e ip E)A A A (1)+e ip 1 (4 e ip e ip 1 E)A A A (1) (1+e i(p 1+p ) )A A A, (A.15) 16

18 0 = e ip (4 e ip 1 e ip E)A B B (1)+eip 1 (4 e ip e ip 1 E)A B B (1) (1+e i(p 1+p ) )A B B, (A.16) 0 = e ip (4 e ip 1 e ip E)A A A (1)+eip 1 (4 e ip e ip 1 E)A A A (1) + 1 ( ) (1+ei(p 1+p ) ) A A1 A A 1 A A +A B 1 B +A 1 B B, (A.17) 0 = e ip (4 e ip 1 e ip E)A B B (1)+e ip 1 (4 e ip e ip 1 E)A B B (1) + 1 ( ) (1+ei(p 1+p ) ) A A1 A +A 1 A A +A B 1 B A 1 B B. (A.18) Eliminating A Ak A A k, B k B (k = 1,), and then solving for the (1) amplitudes in terms of k the (1) amplitudes, we arrive at the results (3.1), (3.). References [1] A. B. Zamolodchikov and Al. B. Zamolodchikov, Factorized S matrices in twodimensions as the exact solutions of certain relativistic quantum field models, Ann. Phys. 10, 53 (1979). [] J. M. Maldacena, The large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 31 (1998) [arxiv:hep-th/971100]. S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov and A. M. Polyakov, Gauge theory correlators from non-critical string theory, Phys. Lett. B48, 105(1998)[arXiv:hep-th/980109]. E. Witten, Anti-de Sitter space and holography, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 53 (1998) [arxiv:hep-th/980150]. [3] J. A. Minahan and K. Zarembo, The Bethe-Ansatz for N = 4 Super Yang-Mills, JHEP 0303, 013 (003) [arxiv:hep-th/0108]. [4] N. Beisert and M. Staudacher, The N = 4 SYM Integrable Super Spin Chain, Nucl. Phys. B670, 439 (003) [arxiv:hep-th/030704]. [5] D. Berenstein and S. E. Vázquez, Integrable open spin chains from giant gravitons, JHEP 0506, 059 (005) [arxiv:hep-th/ ]. [6] A. A. Tseytlin, Spinning strings and AdS/CFT duality, in Ian Kogan Memorial Volume, From Fields to Strings: Circumnavigating Theoretical Physics, M. Shifman, A. Vainshtein, and J. Wheater, eds. (World Scientific, 004) [arxiv:hep-th/ ]. N. 17

19 Beisert, The dilatation operator of N = 4 super Yang-Mills theory and integrability, Phys. Rept. 405, 1 (005) [arxiv:hep-th/040777]. K. Zarembo, Semiclassical Bethe ansatz and AdS/CFT, Comptes Rendus Physique 5, 1081 (004) [Fortsch. Phys. 53, 647 (005)] [arxiv:hep-th/ ]. J. Plefka, Spinning strings and integrable spin chains in the AdS/CFT correspondence, Living Rev. Rel. 8, 9 (005) [arxiv:hepth/ ]. J. A. Minahan, A brief introduction to the Bethe ansatz in N = 4 super-yang-mills, J. Phys. A39, 1657 (006). K. Okamura, Aspects of Integrability in AdS/CFT Duality, [arxiv: ]. [7] M. Staudacher, The factorized S-matrix of CFT/AdS, JHEP 0505, 054 (005) [arxiv:hep-th/041188]. [8] N. Beisert, The su( ) dynamic S-matrix, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 1, 945 (008) [arxiv:hep-th/051108]. N. Beisert, The Analytic Bethe Ansatz for a Chain with Centrally Extended su( ) Symmetry, J. Stat. Mech. 0701, P017 (007) [arxiv:nlin/ ]. [9] R. A. Janik, The AdS 5 S 5 superstring worldsheet S-matrix and crossing symmetry, Phys. Rev. D73, (006) [arxiv:hep-th/ ]. [10] G. Arutyunov and S. Frolov, On AdS 5 S 5 string S-matrix, Phys. Lett. B639, 378 (006) [arxiv:hep-th/ ]. [11] N. Beisert, R. Hernandez and E. Lopez, A crossing-symmetric phase for AdS 5 S 5 strings, JHEP 0611, 070 (006) [arxiv:hep-th/ ]. [1] N. Beisert, B. Eden and M. Staudacher, Transcendentality and crossing, J. Stat. Mech. 0701, P01 (007) [arxiv:hep-th/061051]. [13] G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov and M. Zamaklar, The Zamolodchikov-Faddeev algebra for AdS 5 S 5 superstring, JHEP 0704, 00 (007) [arxiv:hep-th/0619]. [14] N. Dorey, D.M. Hofman and J.M. Maldacena, On the singularities of the magnon S-matrix, Phys. Rev. D76, (007) [arxiv:hep-th/ ]. [15] M. J. Martins and C.S. Melo, The Bethe ansatz approach for factorizable centrally extended S-matrices, Nucl. Phys. B785, 46 (007) [arxiv:hep-th/ ]. [16] M. de Leeuw, Coordinate Bethe Ansatz for the String S-Matrix, J. Phys. A40, (007) [arxiv: ]. [17] N. Beisert and M. Staudacher, Long-range P SU(, 4) Bethe ansaetze for gauge theory and strings, Nucl. Phys. B77, 1 (005) [arxiv:hep-th/ ]. 18

20 [18] O. Aharony, O. Bergman, D. L. Jafferis and J. Maldacena, N = 6 superconformal Chern-Simons-matter theories, M-branes and their gravity duals, JHEP 0810, 091 (008) [arxiv: ]. [19] J. A. Minahan and K. Zarembo, The Bethe ansatz for superconformal Chern-Simons, JHEP 0809, 040 (008) [arxiv: ] [0] D. Bak and S. J. Rey, Integrable Spin Chain in Superconformal Chern-Simons Theory, JHEP 0810, 053 (008) [arxiv: ] [1] G. Arutyunov and S. Frolov, Superstrings on AdS 4 CP 3 as a Coset Sigma-model, JHEP 0809, 19 (008) [arxiv: ]. [] B. J. Stefanski, Green-Schwarz action for Type IIA strings on AdS 4 CP 3, [arxiv: ]. [3] N. Gromov and P. Vieira, The AdS4/CFT3 algebraic curve, [arxiv: ]. [4] N. Gromov and P. Vieira, The all loop AdS4/CFT3 Bethe ansatz, JHEP 0901, 016 (009) [arxiv: ]. [5] T. Nishioka and T. Takayanagi, On Type IIA Penrose Limit and N = 6 Chern-Simons Theories, JHEP 0808, 001 (008) [arxiv: ]. [6] D. Gaiotto, S. Giombi and X. Yin, Spin Chains in N = 6 Superconformal Chern- Simons-Matter Theory, [arxiv: ]. [7] G. Grignani, T. Harmark and M. Orselli, The SU() SU() sector in the string dual of N = 6 superconformal Chern-Simons theory, [arxiv: ]. [8] C. Ahn and R. I. Nepomechie, N = 6 super Chern-Simons theory S-matrix and all-loop Bethe ansatz equations, JHEP 0809, 010 (008) [arxiv: ]. [9] C. Ahn and R. I. Nepomechie, An alternative S-matrix for N = 6 Chern-Simons theory? [arxiv: ]. [30] M. Benna, I. Klebanov, T. Klose and M. Smedback, Superconformal Chern-Simons Theories and AdS 4 /CFT 3 Correspondence, JHEP 0809, 07 (008) [arxiv: ]. K. Hanaki and H. Lin, M-M5 Systems in N = 6 Chern-Simons Theory, JHEP 0809, 067 (008) [arxiv: ]. I. Shenderovich, Giant magnons in AdS 4 /CFT 3 : dispersion, quantization and finite size corrections, [arxiv: ]. C. Ahn, P. Bozhilov and R. C. Rashkov, Neumann-Rosochatius integrable system for strings on AdS 4 CP 3, JHEP 0809, 017 (008) [arxiv: ]. Y. Honma, S. Iso, 19

21 Y. Sumitomo, H. Umetsu and S. Zhang, Generalized Conformal Symmetry and Recovery of SO(8) in Multiple M and D Branes, [arxiv: ]. T. McLoughlin and R. Roiban, Spinning strings at one-loop in AdS 4 P 3, JHEP 081, 101 (008) [arxiv: ]. J. Kluson, D to M Procedure for D-Brane DBI Effective Action, Nucl. Phys. B808, 60(009)[arXiv: ]. L. F. Alday, G. Arutyunov and D.Bykov, Semiclassical QuantizationofSpinning StringsinAdS 4 CP 3, JHEP0811, 089 (008) [arxiv: ]. C. Krishnan, AdS4/CFT3 at One Loop, JHEP 0809, 09(008)[arXiv: ]. N. Gromov and V. Mikhaylov, Comment on the Scaling Function in AdS4 CP3, [arxiv: ]. O. Aharony, O. Bergman and D. L. Jafferis, Fractional M-branes, JHEP 0811, 043 (008) [arxiv: ]. G. Bonelli, A. Tanzini and M. Zabzine, Topological branes, p-algebras and generalized Nahm equations, [arxiv: ]. M. R. Garousi and A. Ghodsi, Hydrodynamics of N = 6 Superconformal Chern-Simons Theories at Strong Coupling, [arxiv: ]. R. D Auria, P. Fre, P. A. Grassi and M. Trigiante, Superstrings on AdS 4 CP 3 from Supergravity, [arxiv: ]. D. Fioravanti, P. Grinza and M. Rossi, The generalised scaling function: a systematic study, [arxiv: ]. D. Berenstein and D. Trancanelli, Three-dimensional N = 6 SCFT s and their membrane dynamics, [arxiv: ]. R. C. Rashkov, A note on the reduction of the AdS4 CP3 string sigma model, Phys. Rev. D78, 10601(008) [arxiv: ]. K. Hosomichi, K. M. Lee, S. Lee, S. Lee, J. Park and P. Yi, ANonperturbative Test ofm-branetheory, JHEP 0811, 058 (008) [arxiv: ]. J. Kluson and K. L. Panigrahi, Defects and Wilson Loops in 3d QFT from D-branes in AdS(4) CP 3, [arxiv: ]. C.-h. Ahn, Squashing Gravity Dual of N = 6 Superconformal Chern-Simons Gauge Theory, [arxiv: ]. T. McLoughlin, R. Roiban and A. A. Tseytlin, Quantum spinning strings in AdS 4 CP 3 : testing the Bethe Ansatz proposal, JHEP 0811, 069 (008) [arxiv: ]. S. Ryang, Giant Magnon and Spike Solutions with Two Spins in AdS4 CP 3, JHEP 0811, 084 (008) [arxiv: ]. D. Bombardelli and D. Fioravanti, Finite-Size Corrections of the CP 3 Giant Magnons: the Lúscher terms, [arxiv: ]. T. Lukowski and O. O. Sax, Finite size giant magnons in the SU() SU() sector of AdS 4 CP 3, JHEP 081, 073 (008) [arxiv: ]. M. Kreuzer, R. C. Rashkov and M. Schimpf, Near Flat Space limit of strings on AdS 4 CP 3, [arxiv: ]. C.AhnandP.Bozhilov, Finite-sizeEffectoftheDyonic Giant Magnons in N = 6 super Chern-Simons Theory, [arxiv: ]. C. Ahn and P. Bozhilov, M-brane Perspective on N = 6 Super Chern-Simons Theory at Level k, JHEP 081, 049 (008) [arxiv: ]. F. Spill, Weakly coupled N = 4 Super Yang-Mills and N = 6 Chern-Simons theories from u( ) Yangian symmetry, [arxiv: ]. J. Gomis, D. Sorokin and L. Wulff, The complete AdS(4) CP(3) 0

22 superspace for the type IIA superstring and D-branes, [arxiv: ]. C. Kristjansen, M. Orselli and K. Zoubos, Non-planar ABJM Theory and Integrability, [arxiv: ]. P. Sundin, The AdS(4) CP(3) string and its Bethe equations in the near plane wave limit, [arxiv: ]. J. H. Baek, S. Hyun, W. Jang and S. H. Yi, Membrane Dynamics in Three dimensional N = 6 Supersymmetric Chern- Simons Theory, [arxiv: ]. D. Bak, Zero Modes for the Boundary Giant Magnons, [arxiv: ]. A. Agarwal, N. Beisert and T. McLoughlin, Scattering in Mass-Deformed N 4 Chern-Simons Models, [arxiv: ]. [31] B. I. Zwiebel, Two-loop Integrability of Planar N = 6 Superconformal Chern-Simons Theory, [arxiv: ]. [3] J. A. Minahan, W. Schulgin and K. Zarembo, Two loop integrability for Chern-Simons theories with N = 6 supersymmetry, [arxiv: ]. 1