Imperial-TP-FS-2023-01

S-matrix on effective string

and compactified membrane

Fiona K. Seibolda and Arkady A. Tseytlinb

arXiv:2308.12189v3 [hep-th] 15 Apr 2024

Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, U.K.

April 16, 2024

Abstract

Expanding Nambu-Goto action near infinitely long string vacuum one can compute scattering
amplitudes of 2d massless fields representing transverse string coordinates. As was shown in
arXiv:1203.1054, the resulting S-matrix is integrable (provided appropriate local counterterms
are added), in agreement with known free string spectrum and also with an interpretation of
the static-gauge NG action as a T T̄ deformation of a free massless theory. We consider a
generalization of this computation to the case of a membrane, expanding its 3d action near an
infinite membrane vacuum that has cylindrical R × S 1 shape (we refer to such membrane as
“compactified”). Representing 3d fields as Fourier series in S 1 coordinate we get an effective
2d model in which the massless string modes are coupled to an infinite KK tower of massive
2d modes. We find that the resulting 2d S-matrix is not integrable already at the tree level.
We also compute 1-loop scattering amplitude of massless string modes with all compactified
membrane modes propagating in the loop. The result is UV finite and is a non-trivial function
of the kinematic variables. In the large momentum limit or when the radius of S 1 is taken
to infinity we recover the expression for the 1-loop scattering amplitude of the uncompactified
R2 membrane. We also consider a 2d model which is the T T̄ deformation to the free theory
with the same massless plus infinite massive tower of modes. The corresponding 2d S-matrix is
found, as expected, to be integrable.

contribution to the special issue of Journal of Physics A:

“Fields, Gravity, Strings and Beyond: In Memory of Stanley Deser”

a
[email protected]
b
Also at the Institute for Theoretical and Mathematical Physics (ITMP) of MSU and Lebedev Institute.

1
Contents
1 Introduction 2

2 S-matrix on Nambu-Goto string and its integrability 4

2.1 Tree-level 4-point amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 One-loop contribution to the 4-point amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 S-matrix as a pure phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3 S-matrix on compactified membrane 11

3.1 Compactified membrane as effective string coupled to a massive tower . . . . . . . . 11
3.2 Tree-level 4-point amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.3 1-loop contribution to the massless 4-point amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3.1 Finite expression for the amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.3.2 Tadpole diagram contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.3.3 R → ∞ and R → 0 limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.4 Scattering amplitudes on uncompactified membrane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

4 Integrable T T̄ deformation of infinite tower of 2d fields 21

4.1 T T̄ deformation of free massless 2d field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.2 T T̄ deformation of a tower of massless and massive 2d fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.2.1 Tree-level 4-point amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.2.2 1-loop scattering amplitude for massless fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

5 Concluding remarks 25

A Notation and basic relations 27

B Some useful integrals 28

C Tree-level 6-point amplitude 30

D Details of 1-loop computation in section 3.3 30

1
1 Introduction
The critical first-quantized string is described, in an appropriate gauge, by an effectively Gaussian
path integral. This is not so for a membrane which has a highly non-linear and formally non-
renormalizable 3d action. While the existence of a consistent quantum theory of bosonic membranes
may be in doubt, this may not be so for the 11d supermembrane or M2 brane [1, 2, 3].
This may be true, in particular, for the supermembrane in the maximally supersymmetric
AdS4 × S 7 (or AdS7 × S 4 ) background [4] and its orbifold AdS4 × S 7 /Zk . M-theory in AdS4 ×
S 7 /Zk should be dual to the N = 6 supersymmetric 3d Uk (N ) × U−k (N ) Chern-Simons matter
(ABJM) theory [5]. Recent work [6] provided a remarkable evidence that direct semiclassical
quantization of the M2 brane in AdS4 × S 7 /Zk background reproduces the results of large N
localization computations [7] of the 21 -BPS Wilson loop and instanton contributions to free energy
in the ABJM gauge theory.
While the M2 brane action is highly non-linear, expanded near a classical solution with non-
degenerate induced 3d metric it can be quantized in a static gauge with the 1-loop result being UV
finite (containing no logarithmic divergences) [8, 2, 9, 6]. As the 1/N expansion of the localization
results on the gauge
√ √
theory side have the form of an expansion in the inverse of the effective M2 brane
2k
tension T2 = π N , this suggests that the matching with the 1-loop M2 brane computations [6]
should, in fact, extend also to 2-loop and higher orders.
This requires the corresponding quantum M2 brane theory to be UV finite despite its apparent
non-renormalizability. This may somehow happen due to high degree of underlying supersymmetry
and possibly to other hidden symmetries of the M2 brane theory in AdS4 × S 7 background that
remain to be uncovered.
The M2 brane action in 11d background is formally related to the type IIA string in the
corresponding 10d background by a double dimensional reduction [10]. Considering M2 brane
world volume of topology Σ2 × S 1 and expanding 3d fields in Fourier modes in S 1 coordinate one
gets an effective 2d string action on Σ2 coupled to an infinite tower of massive 2d fields. Choosing
a static gauge in the M2 brane action one gets a static gauge Nambu-Goto action for the massless
transverse string modes coupled to a tower of the massive “Kaluza-Klein” 2d modes. This “effective
string” 2d action is essentially equivalent to the original M2 brane action and thus may inherit its
hidden symmetries.

With this motivation in mind, here we address the question about possible hidden symmetries
in the simplest context of a bosonic membrane in flat R1,D−1 space-time expanded near a R × S 1
cylindrical vacuum which is the analog of the infinite straight string in the bosonic string theory.
We will focus on the resulting 2d S-matrix comparing it with the one found in the string theory
limit which corresponds to the case when the radius R of S 1 is sent to zero, i.e. when all massive
KK 2d states decouple. In the opposite limit R → ∞ we should recover the S-matrix on plane R2
membrane.
Let us first recall some results of past work on 2d S-matrix in the infinite bosonic string vacuum.
2
The tree-level and 1-loop contributions to the scattering of four massless modes representing the
D̂ ≡ D − 2 transverse string coordinates of the NG string in the static gauge was computed in
[11]. The S-matrix was found to be given simply by a scalar (CDD) phase factor thus representing
an integrable theory. It was shown in [12] that using this S-matrix in the thermodynamic Bethe
Ansatz one reproduces the expected free bosonic string spectrum. This S-matrix was studied at
higher loop orders [13] where particular counterterms are required to cancel UV divergences and
also to preserve the integrability. The reason why this S-matrix is given simply by a pure phase
factor was further elucidated in [14] by observing that the NG action in a static gauge can be
viewed as the T T̄ deformation [15] of a theory of free massless bosons.
One may wonder if the integrability property of the NG string may generalize to a 2d theory
containing a special infinite set of massive 2d modes. Our aim will be to address this question for the
theory obtained from the bosonic membrane action in the static gauge with SR 1 compact direction

n 2
viewed as an effective 2d theory with a tower of states with masses m2n = R 2 , n = 0, ±1, .... As

mentioned above, this spectrum corresponds to the expansion near the cylindrical R×S 1 membrane
vacuum.
We will discuss the corresponding tree-level scattering amplitudes and conclude that this model
involving massive fields in addition to massless ones is no longer integrable. We will also compute
the 1-loop correction to the scattering amplitude of 4 massless particles with all massless and
massive modes running in the loop. We will find that as in the examples considered in [6] this
1-loop amplitude is UV finite in analytic regularization as appropriate for a 3d theory. It is also IR
finite as all massless modes have only derivative couplings like in the NG string case. The 1-loop
amplitude has a non-trivial dependence on the kinematic variables (and the mass scale or the radius
R), characteristic of a non-integrable theory.
For comparison, we will also consider a 2d model with the same free massless plus massive
tower spectrum but with interactions defined by the T T̄ deformation. At the massless n = 0 level
the resulting action will be given by the same NG action but interaction vertices involving massive
fields will be different from those in the compactified membrane action (and, in fact, will not follow
from any local 3d action compactified on S 1 ). As this is a T T̄ deformation of a free theory, it should
be integrable, and we shall verify this by computing tree-level and 1-loop scattering amplitudes.

This paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we shall review in detail the tree-level and 1-
loop computations in the NG model near infinitely long string vacuum, verifying that the S-matrix
admits a pure-phase representation.
Section 3 will be dedicated to a similar analysis in the compactified membrane theory. We shall
compute 1-loop amplitudes for scattering of 4 massless modes using dimensional regularization
near d = 2 and Riemann ζ-function regularization to sum over KK modes. We will also present (in
section 3.4) the expression for the 1-loop amplitude in the uncompactified membrane model found
by starting directly from the 3d action.
The 2d model obtained by T T̄ deformation of the same free massless plus massive spectrum
3
will be studied in Section 4. Some open problems will be mentioned in section 5. Appendices will
contain some basic definitions, useful 1-loop integrals, comments on 6-point tree-level amplitudes
and details of computations in section 3.3.

2 S-matrix on Nambu-Goto string and its integrability

Let us start with a review of the perturbative S-matrix of the Nambu-Goto string action in the
long string vacuum [11]. Fixing static gauge one may study scattering of the 2d massless fields
representing the transverse string coordinates. One finds that there is no particle production or
annihilation at tree-level, which is compatible with the classical integrability of this 2d model. The
loop-corrected S-matrix is given by a pure phase provided appropriate counterterms are added,
which is consistent with known free string spectrum [12].1
Below we shall describe the computation of the 1-loop NG string S-matrix in some detail to
prepare for the analysis of the membrane case in the next section.
Let us start with a brane with 1 time and d − 1 space world-volume directions moving in a
D-dimensional target space-time. We will be interested in the cases of the string with d = 2 and
the membrane with d = 3. The corresponding Dirac [18] or Nambu-Goto action is
Z
S = −Td−1 dd σ −detγαβ , γαβ = ηµν ∂α X µ ∂β X ν ,
p
(2.1)

where α, β = 0, 1, . . . d − 1 and µ, ν = 0, 1, . . . , D − 1. We shall consider the expansion of (2.1) near

an infinite flat string or membrane vacuum so that we can fix the static gauge X α = σ α . We shall
label the remaining transverse coordinates as X j so that the induced metric is

γαβ = ηαβ + ∂α X j ∂β X j , j = 1, ..., D̂ , D̂ ≡ D − d . (2.2)

Then expanded in derivatives of X j the action (2.1) takes the form

1
Z  
S = −Td−1 dd σ 1 + ∂α X j ∂ α X j + L4 + L6 + . . . , (2.3)
2
1  1
L4 = c2 ∂α X j ∂ α X j ∂β X k ∂ β X k + c3 ∂α X j ∂ α X k ∂β X j ∂ β X k , c2 = , c3 = −1 . (2.4)
4 2
Let us define
Xαβ ≡ ∂α X j ∂β X j , Jk ≡ Tr[X k ], (2.5)
so that
1 1 2  1 3 
L2 = J1 , L4 = c2 J1 + c3 J2 , L6 = c4 J1 + c5 J1 J2 + c6 J3 , ... (2.6)
2 4 6
1 3
c4 = , c5 = − , c6 = 1 . (2.7)
8 4
1
Also, the NG string action in the static gauge can be obtained from the T T̄ deformation of the free action for a
set of D − 2 massless fields [14, 16] and therefore the S-matrix should be given simply by a CDD factor, dressing the
trivial S-matrix of free massless scalars. Note that certain counterterms are to be added to the classical Lagrangian
to maintain integrability at loop level and thus to match with the expected CDD factor. Such counterterms were
explicitly worked out for the T T̄ deformation of a single massive scalar field in [17].

4
Notice that in the string case when d = 2 only J1 and J2 are independent invariants; for example,
J3 = − 21 J31 + 32 J1 J2 . Below we shall sometimes keep the values of the coefficients cn in (2.4),(2.7)
arbitrary to emphasize simplifications that happen when they take their “Nambu-Goto” values.

2.1 Tree-level 4-point amplitude

Starting with (2.3) one can compute the scattering amplitudes of the massless fields X j . From the
expression of L4 in (2.4) we deduce that there are two types of Feynman diagrams contributing to
the four-point amplitude,

∼ c2 ∼ c3

The solid line here represents contraction of momenta, while the dashed lines correspond to a
contraction of indices of the fields. Let us label the two incoming particles with indices i, j and
momenta p1 , p2 and the two outgoing particles with indices k, l and momenta p3 , p4 . The amplitude
takes the following schematic form (we omit the standard momentum conservation delta-function,
(A.6),(A.7))
Mij,kl = Aδij δkl + Bδik δjl + Cδil δjk , (2.8)
where A is the annihilation, B the transmission and C the reflection parts. Their tree-level expres-
sions following from (2.4) are2
A(0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] = 2c2 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p4 ) + c3 (p1 · p4 )(p2 · p3 ) + c3 (p1 · p3 )(p2 · p4 ) ,
B (0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] = 2c2 (p1 · p3 )(p2 · p4 ) + c3 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p4 ) + c3 (p1 · p4 )(p2 · p3 ) , (2.9)
C (0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] = 2c2 (p1 · p4 )(p2 · p3 ) + c3 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p4 ) + c3 (p1 · p3 )(p2 · p4 ) .
Writing these in terms of the Mandelstam variables (see Appendix A) taking into account that here
all particles are massless, i.e. s + t + u = 0, we get
1 1 1 1 1 1
A(0) = (2c2 + c3 )s2 − c3 tu , B (0) = (2c2 + c3 )t2 − c3 su , C (0) = (2c2 + c3 )u2 − c3 st .
4 2 4 2 4 2
(2.10)
For the values of the coefficients in (2.4) this becomes
1 1 1
A(0) = tu , B (0) = su , C (0) = st . (2.11)
2 2 2
Specifying to d = 2 we may use that in this case the kinematical constraints imply that for massless
particles stu = 0 or tu = 0 if we assume that s 6= 0 (see (A.2))3
stu = 0 → tu = 0 , s 6= 0 . (2.12)
2 i √1 i −1
After rescaling X → T
X in (2.3) where T ≡ T1 is the string tension the factors of T or effective ~ appear
in the quartic, etc., interaction vertices and thus in the corresponding scattering amplitudes. We will not always
explicitly include them below as they can be restored in the final expressions.
3
For example, we may use a Lorentz transformation to go to the center of mass frame where p ~1 = −~ p2 6= 0, i.e.
choosing to keep s 6= 0 (here p ~ is spatial component of momentum, see Appendix (A) for notation). Then by the
momentum conservation p ~3 = −~p4 and the energy conservation gives |~
p1 | = |~
p3 | or tu = 0.

5
 (p1 , i) (p3 , k) (p1 , i) (p3 , k) (p1 , i) (p3 , k)
(p, a)
(p, a) (q, b) (p, a) (q, b)
(q, b)
(p2 , j) (p4 , l) (p2 , j) (p4 , l) (p2 , j) (p4 , l)
s-channel t-channel u-channel

Figure 1: The three “bubble” diagrams contributing to the 1-loop 4-point amplitude. The arrows denote
the flow of momentum: the particles p1 and p2 are incoming, while the particles p3 and p4 are outgoing. By
momentum conservation we have q = p1 + p2 − p for the first diagram (s-channel), q = p1 − p3 − p for the
second diagram (t-channel) and q = p1 − p4 − p for the third diagram (u-channel).

With this choice of the kinematics we get A(0) = 0 in (2.11). Also, B (0) = 0 for u = 0 and C (0) = 0
for t = 0. For the latter case the tree-level S-matrix (2.8) contains only the B (0) δik δjl term which
is proportional to the unit operator in the S-matrix (cf. (A.4),(A.5)). Being proportional to the
identity, the tree-level S-matrix automatically satisfies the Yang-Baxter equation (A.9),(A.10).

2.2 One-loop contribution to the 4-point amplitude

Using the 4-vertex in (2.4) we can build three 1-loop “bubble” diagrams in Figure 1. The total
1-loop amplitude, given by the sum of these three contributions, takes the same form as (2.8) (cf.
footnote 2)

(1)
Mij,kl = A(1) δij δkl + B (1) δik δjl + C (1) δil δjk . (2.13)

Each amplitude A(1) , B (1) and C (1) have a contribution coming from the s-channel, t-channel and
u-channel diagrams, i.e.

(1)
A(1) = A(1) (1)
s + At + Au , B (1) = A(1) , C (1) = A(1) . (2.14)
s↔t s↔u

The corresponding loop integrals diverge for d = 2. To define them we will use dimensional
regularisation setting d = 2 − 2ǫ, ǫ → 0 (see Appendix B for some standard momentum integrals).
(1)
Using Feynman parametrization, the s-channel amplitude As in (2.14) may be written as4

1
1 dd p Ns 1 dd l Ns
Z Z Z
A(1)
s = d 2 2
= dx , (2.15)
2i (2π) (p − iε)[(p1 + p2 − p) − iε] 2i 0 (2π) (l + ∆s )2
d 2

l = p − x(p1 + p2 ), ∆s = −x(1 − x)s − iε, (2.16)

4
Note that ε → 0 in the Feynman propagator should not be confused with ǫ of the dimensional regularisation.
The −iε term in ∆s translates into s → s + iε. We shall not explicitly indicate this shift below (same will apply also
for t and u).

6
 1
where 2 is the symmetry factor of the diagram (exchange of two legs in the loop) and

Ns = D̂A(0) [p1 , p2 , p, q]A(0) [p, q, p3 , p4 ] + A(0) [p1 , p2 , p, q] B (0) [p, q, p3 , p4 ] + C (0) [p, q, p3 , p4 ]

+ B (0) [p1 , p2 , p, q] + C (0) [p1 , p2 , p, q] A(0) [p, q, p3 , p4 ] ,

q = p1 + p2 − p . (2.17)

Here the factor D̂ = D − 2 of the number of transverse fields comes from a diagram with a sum
over the target space indices in the loop and A(0) , B (0) , C (0) were defined in (2.9). To simplify the
expressions below we will assume that the coefficients c2 and c3 take their NG values in (2.4).
It is useful to formally expand Ns (2.17) in powers of loop momentum l as

Ns = N0 + N2 l2 + Nµν lµ lν + N4 (l2 )2 + Nµνρσ lµ lν lρ lσ + Mµν l2 lµ lν , (2.18)

1
N0 = 0 , N2 = −s3 x(1 − x) , N4 = (D̂ − 4)s2 , Nµν = −2s2 x(1 − x)(p1,µ p2,ν + p3,µ p4,ν ),
4


Mµν = (D̂ − 2)s p1,µ p2,ν + p3,µ p4,ν , Nµνρσ = 4D̂p1,µ p2,ν p3,ρ p4,σ . (2.19)

Performing the integral over l in (2.15) we get (cf. Appendix B)

Z 1 h
1 1 d d d
i
A(1)
s = dx β0 Γ(2 − d
2 ) (∆ s ) 2
−2
+ β2 Γ(1 − d
2 ) (∆ s ) 2
−1
+ β4 Γ(− d
2 ) (∆ s ) 2 , (2.20)
2 (4π) d2 0

where
d 1
β0 = N0 , β2 = N2 + Nµν η µν ,
2 2 (2.21)
d d 1   1 d
β4 = 1+ N4 + Nµνρσ η µν η ρσ + η µρ η νσ + η µσ η νρ + 1+ Mµν η µν .
2 2 4 2 2
Using standard Γ-function relations implying, e.g., that
d d d
2 −2
d d d d
− 2∆s Γ(1 − d2 ) (∆s ) 2 −1 ,


2 1 + 2 Γ(− 2 ) (∆s ) = (∆s ) Γ(2 − 2 ) (∆s ) (2.22)
2 2

we can rewrite (2.20) as

Z 1 h
(1) 1 1 d d
−2 d d
−1 d d
i
As = dx γ0 Γ(2 − 2 ) (∆ s ) 2 + γ 2 Γ(1 − 2 ) (∆ s ) 2 + γ4 Γ(− 2 ) (∆ s ) 2 , (2.23)
2 (4π) d2 0
1 1
γ0 = N0 − ∆s N2 + ∆2s N4 , γ2 = N2 + Nµν η µν − 2∆s N4 − ∆s Mµν η µν , (2.24)
2 2
1 
µν ρσ µρ νσ µσ νρ
 1
µν
γ4 = Nµνρδ η η + η η + η η + Mµν η . (2.25)
4 2
The values of the coefficient functions γ0 , γ2 , γ4 are found from (2.19) not to depend on d (cf. (2.16))
1 1
γ0 = (D̂ − 8) s2 ∆2s , γ2 = s2 ∆s , γ4 = s2 − D̂ tu . (2.26)
4 2
Setting d = 2 − 2ǫ it is then straightforward to isolate the divergent and finite part of the amplitude
in the ǫ → 0 limit:
Z 1 
(1) 1 1 

As = dx − γ + ln 4π γ2 − ∆s γ4
8π 0 ǫ
Z 1 h
1
i
+ dx γ0 ∆−1
s − γ 2 ln ∆ s + γ 4 ∆ s ln ∆ s − 1 . (2.27)
8π 0

7
Similar expressions are found in the t and u channels, where, e.g.,

1 dd p Nt 1 1 dd l Nt
Z Z Z
(1)
At = = dx , (2.28)
2i (2π)d (p2 − iε)[(p1 − p3 − p)2 − iε] 2i 0 (2π)d (l2 + ∆t )2
l = p − (p1 − p3 ), ∆t = −x(1 − x)t − iε ,
 
Nt = A(0) [p1 , −p, p3 , q] A(0) [p, p2 , −q, p4 ] + C (0) [p1 , −p, p3 , q] C (0) [p, p2 , −q, p4 ] ,
q=p1 −p3 −p

and thus we get (2.27) where now γ0 = 2t2 ∆2t , γ2 = −3t2 ∆t + 21 st2 , γ4 = 0. Performing the
integrals over the Feynman parameter x gives
1 1  1 h 16 i
A(1)
s =− − γ + ln 4π D̂stu − (D̂ − 12)s3 + D̂ stu − 2D̂ ln(−s) stu , (2.29)
96π ǫ 192π 3
(1) 1 1  1 h 1
i
At =− − γ + ln 4π t2 u + 12t3 + 24t2 s − 12t2 u ln , (2.30)
16π ǫ 192π −t
1 1
  1 h 1
i
A(1)
u =− − γ + ln 4π tu2 + 12u3 + 24u2 s − 12u2 t ln . (2.31)
16π ǫ 192π −u

Adding (2.29),(2.30) and (2.31) together we get for the divergent and finite parts of A(1)

D̂ − 6  1 
A(1)
ǫ = − − γ + ln 4π stu , (2.32)
96π ǫ
(1) 1 h  16 −s   s s i
Af =− (D̂ − 24)s3 + D̂ + 12 − 2(D̂ − 6) log 2 stu + 12 t log + u log tu .
192π 3 µ t u

Taking into account that in the string case D̂ = D −2 this is the same expression as found originally
in [11]. The divergent part in (2.32) is proportional to stu and thus vanishes in d = 2 due to (2.12)
(thus the dependence on renormalization scale µ drops out). The same applies to the B (1) and C (1)
amplitudes related to A(1) as in (2.14).5
Let us note that there is also another 1-loop diagram that could contribute to the 4-point
amplitude – the tadpole with 6-vertex from L6 in (2.6)

(p1 , i) (p3 , k)

(p2 , j) (p4 , l)

but it vanishes in dimensional regularization (the vertex contains powers of momenta and the
propagator here is massless).6
(1)
The finite part of the 1-loop amplitude is thus given by Af in (2.32) and similar expressions
(1) (1) (1)
for Bf and Cf obtained by interchanging s ↔ t and s ↔ u as in (2.14). The first term in Af is
5
As stu = O(d − 2) there may be an “evanescent” finite contribution but it can be cancelled by a local counterterm
(cf. footnote 8 and ref. [11]).

1−ǫ  1
6
Explicitly, the tadpole contribution found from L6 in (2.6) is Γ(−1+ǫ) (4c4 + 3c5 + c6 )s2 − (c5 + c6 )tu .,

16π
−iε 2
Here the 1ǫ pole is proportional to the effective “mass” term −iε in the propagator (cf. (2.15)) and thus vanishes for
ε → 0.

8
proportional to D̂ − 24 = D − 26 and hence vanishes in the critical dimension of the bosonic string.
The second term is proportional to stu and hence vanishes in d = 2. Thus for s 6= 0, i.e. tu = 0

(1) D̂ − 24 3
Af = − s , (2.33)
192π
(1) 1 h  t t i
Bf =− (D̂ − 24)t3 + 12 s log + u log su , (2.34)
192π s u
(1) 1 h  u u  i
Cf =− (D̂ − 24)u3 + 12 t log + s log st . (2.35)
192π t s
Assuming that the kinematical constraint tu = 0 is solved by t = 0 and thus u = −s we get7

(1) D̂ − 24 3 (1) i 3 (1) D̂ − 24 3

Af = − s , Bf = s , Cf = s . (2.36)
192π 16 192π
When D̂ = 24, i.e. D = 26, the 1-loop amplitude (2.13) thus contains only the B (1) term, i.e. like
the tree-level amplitude (2.8),(2.11) it is proportional to the identity and satisfies the Yang-Baxter
equation.
The same is true also when D̂ = 1 or D = 3, i.e. when there is just one “transverse” scattering
field, so that the amplitude in (2.13) is proportional to
(1) (1) (1) i 3
Af + Bf + Cf = s . (2.37)
16
For generic dimension D̂ = D − 2 the 1-loop S-matrix (2.36) does not have a CDD phase factor
form. However, as expected from the relation of the static-gauge NG action to a T T̄ deformation
of a theory of free D̂ scalar fields mentioned above, it should be possible to restore this pure phase
structure and consistency with the Yang-Baxter equation by adding contributions of appropriate
local counterterms. At quartic order in the fields X i there exist two linearly independent local
terms invariant under ISO(1, 1) × SO(D̂) which are of 6-th order in derivatives

Lc.t. β j γ k k α j j β j 2
4 = b1 ∂ X ∂ X ∂α ∂β X ∂ ∂γ X + b2 (∂α ∂β X ∂ X ) . (2.38)

The corresponding tree-level amplitude is given by (2.8) with

Ac.t = − 12 (b1 stu + b2 s3 ), B c.t. = − 12 (b1 stu + b2 t3 ), C c.t. = − 21 (b1 stu + b2 u3 ) . (2.39)

The b1 term does not contribute due to the kinematical constraint (2.12).8 Choosing

D̂ − 24
b2 = − , (2.40)
96π
7
We use that log(−s − iε) = log s − iπ + O(ε).  
8 1
If we relax this constraint and choose b1 = − D̂−6
48π ǫ
− γ + ln 4π we may cancel the divergent term in (2.32) for
any value of stu, including the “evanescent” finite part. Let us note also that the b1 term in (2.38) may be interpreted
√
as originating from the curvature integral dd σ −γR = dd σ ∂ β X j ∂ γ X k (∂α ∂β X j ∂ α ∂γ X k − ∂β ∂γ X j ✷X k ) + . . .
R R

evaluated on the induced metric in the long-string vacuum (2.2). It becomes trivial (integral of a total derivative) in
d = 2. At the same time, the b2 term in (2.38) is the so called Polchinski-Strominger term [19] originating from the
√
Polyakov term d2 σ −γ R∇−2 R evaluated on (2.2) and expanded in derivatives of transverse coordinates (see also
R

[11, 20]).

9
we then get, assuming t = 0, u = −s as in (2.36),

(1) i 3
Â(1) ≡ A(1) + Ac.t. = 0 , Ĉ (1) ≡ C (1) + C c.t. = 0 , B̂ (1) ≡ B (1) + B c.t. = Bf = s . (2.41)
16

Let us note that in general, the unitarity S† S = 1 of the S-matrix S = 1 + iT implies that
2 ImT = T † T . In the present case this leads to the following relations between the coefficients in
(2.8),(2.9) and (2.13)

1h i
Im A(1) = D̂|A(0) |2 + A(0) B (0)∗ + C (0)∗ ) + A(0)∗ B (0) + C (0) ) ,
4s (2.42)
1  (0) 2  1  (0)∗ (0) 
Im B (1) = |B | + |C (0) |2 , Im C (1) = B |C | + C (0)∗ |B (0) | ,
4s 4s

which are indeed satisfied.

2.3 S-matrix as a pure phase

We conclude that for any D̂ the tree-level (2.11) plus 1-loop (2.41) scattering amplitude is given by
1
(2.8) where (we restore the dependence on the string tension T1 ≡ T = 2πα ′ and assume the d = 2

kinematics with t = 0)

A = A(0) + Â(1) = 0 , C = C (0) + Ĉ (1) = 0 ,

1 2 i
B = B (0) + B̂ (1) = − s + s3 . (2.43)
2T 16 T 2

Thus to 1-loop level there is no particle creation or annihilation, i.e. the scattering is purely elastic.
The S-matrix is related to the amplitude M by (A.6),(A.7). Using (A.8) in the case of a 2d
integrable theory with A = C = 0 we conclude that the S is expressed in terms of the transmission
amplitude B as
i
S(~
p1 , p~2 ) = 1 + B[~
p1 , p~2 , p~1 , p~2 ] . (2.44)
p1 ω2 − p~2 ω1 |
4|~

For massless particle scattering this reduces to

i
S=1+ B. (2.45)
2s

In the present case of (2.43) we thus get at the tree and 1-loop level

i 1
S =1− s− s2 + O(T −3 s3 ) . (2.46)
4T 32 T 2

These are the first terms in the expansion of the pure-phase (unitary) S-matrix [11] (2.47)

i
S = e− 4T s . (2.47)
10
3 S-matrix on compactified membrane
Having reviewed the computation of the world-sheet S-matrix in the NG string theory, let us
perform a similar analysis for the bosonic membrane theory.
We shall start with the Lagrangian (2.3) with d = 3. In the case of the infinite R2 membrane
in the static gauge the resulting tree-level scattering amplitudes for massless 3d fields will be again
given by (2.8), (2.9) where now s, t and u depend on 3d massless momenta so that s + t + u = 0
but there is no extra 2d condition (2.12).
In 3d there is no notion of S-matrix integrability. However, if we assume that the membrane has
one compact direction, i.e. its vacuum configuration has topology of R × S 1 , then we may represent
the corresponding 3d world-volume theory as an effective string with 2d world sheet coupled to an
infinite tower of massive “Kaluza-Klein” 2d modes. We may then ask if the resulting 2d model has
an integrable S-matrix once the contribution of the KK modes is included.
As we shall discuss below, allowing massive modes on the external lines one does not get an
integrable S-matrix already at the tree level. We will also compute the 1-loop S-matrix of scattering
of 4 massless modes generalizing the discussion in the previous section to the case when also an
infinite set of the massive KK modes are propagating in the loop. The resulting amplitude will
be free of log UV divergences and its finite part will have a rather complicated “non-integrable”
dependence on 2d momenta different from the pure-phase structure (2.47) found in the NG string
case.

3.1 Compactified membrane as effective string coupled to a massive tower

Let us assume that the classical membrane solution has topology of R1,1 × S 1 . We shall denote the
world-volume membrane coordinates as (σ 0 , σ 1 , σ 2 ) and assume that σ 2 is a circle of radius R, i.e.
σ 2 ∈ [−πR, +πR). We shall choose a static gauge as (cf. (2.1),(2.2))

X 0 = σ0 , X D−2 = σ 1 , X D−1 = σ 2 , (3.1)

with X j (σ 0 , σ 1 , σ 2 ), j = 1, ..., D − 3, being the transverse fluctuation fields. Expanding them in

Fourier modes in σ 2 gives
∞
X in 2 j
X j (σ 0 , σ 1 , σ 2 ) = Xnj (σ 0 , σ 1 ) e R σ , j = 1, . . . , D̂ ≡ D − 3 , X−n = (Xnj )∗ , (3.2)
n=−∞

we thus get an infinite set of 2d fields Xnj (σ 0 , σ 1 ). Integrating over σ 2 in the membrane action
R +πR k
(2.1),(2.3) (using −πR dσ2 ei R σ2 = 2πRδk,0 ) one gets an effective 2d theory (now σ α = (σ 0 , σ 1 )
and α, β = 0, 1)
Z  
S = −T̂ d2 σ 1 + L̂2 + L̂4 + . . . , T̂ ≡ 2πRT2 , (3.3)
∞ ∞ 
1 X  j 2 2 j 2

j 2
X  n
L̂2 = 1
|∂α Xn | + mn |Xn | = 2 (∂α X0 ) + |∂α Xnj |2 + m2n |Xnj |2 , mn = , (3.4)
2 n=−∞ R
n=1

11
Thus there are D̂ = D − 3 real massless modes X0j and an infinite tower of complex massive modes
Xnj . T̂ is the “effective string” tension. The quartic interaction term L̂4 may be written as (cf.
(2.4))
∞
X 1 
L̂4 = c2 Vnj,j
,n V k,k
n ,n + c3 Vn
j,k
,n V j,k
n ,n δn1 +...+n4,0 , (3.5)
n1 ,...,n4 =−∞
4 1 2 3 4 1 4 2 3

n1 n2 j k
Vnj,k
1 ,n2
≡ ∂α Xnj 1 ∂ α Xnk2 − X X , (3.6)
R2 n 1 n 2
1
where c2 = 2 and c3 = −1 are the same as in (2.4). Explicitly,
∞
X 1
L̂4 = c2 ∂α Xnj 1 ∂ α Xnj 2 ∂β Xnk3 ∂ β Xnk4 + c3 ∂α Xnj 1 ∂ β Xnj 2 ∂β Xnk3 ∂ α Xnk4
n1 ,...,n4 =−∞
4
n3 n4 n2 n4 (3.7)
− 2c2 2
∂α Xnj 1 ∂ α Xnj 2 Xnk3 Xnk4 − 2c3 2 ∂α Xnj 1 Xnj 2 ∂ α Xnk3 Xnk4
R R
n1 n2 n3 n4 j j k k 
+ (c2 + c3 ) Xn1 Xn2 Xn3 Xn4 δn1 +...+n4,0 .
R4
The massless X0j part here is in the first line and is the same as in the NG action in (2.4).
The necessary condition for the integrability of 2d S-matrix is that there cannot be particle
production or annihilation, meaning, in particular, that in any process the number of incoming
particles should be the same as the number of outgoing particles. Also, there cannot be any
particle transmutation. If the two fields X1 and X2 have different masses then the processes of the
form X1 + X1 → X2 + X2 or X1 + X2 → X2 + X2 are forbidden. This is because such processes
violate macro-causality (see, e.g., [21]).
Let us now show that for the interaction Lagrangian (3.7) amplitudes for such processes are, in
fact, non-vanishing already at the tree-level. Thus the theory (3.3) is not classically integrable.

3.2 Tree-level 4-point amplitude

Let us consider the scattering of four particles (1 and 2 ingoing and 3 and 4 outgoing) with momenta
pr and mode numbers nr . We shall set the compactification radius to one, R = 1, as dependence
on it is easy to restore on dimensional grounds. The scattering amplitude will be a generalization
of the massless one in (2.8), i.e.
 
M̂ij,kl = Âδij δkl + B̂δik δjl + Ĉδil δjk δn1 +n2 ,n3 +n4 , (3.8)

which is multiplied by δ(2) (p1 + p2 − p3 − p4 ) in the S-matrix. As in the massless case, the factor
T̂ −1 of inverse effective tension in (3.3) is implicit here. It follows from (3.7) that there are now
five distinct Feynman diagrams, depending on the types of particles on external lines and index
contractions (cf. section 2.1)9
9
Here the solid lines represent again propagators with contracted momenta, while dashed lines represent contrac-
tions of target space indices. Since the action (3.3) including massive modes contains also coupling terms with less
numbers of derivatives, there are propagators with no contracted momenta. The dotted lines are used just to indicate
the form of the scattering diagram.

12
 ∼ c2 ∼ c3 ∼ c2 ∼ c3 ∼ c2 + c3

We thus get for the tree-level A-amplitude (cf. (2.9))

Â(0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] = 2c2 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p4 ) + c3 (p1 · p4 )(p2 · p3 ) + c3 (p1 · p3 )(p2 · p4 )
+ c3 n1 n3 (p2 · p4 ) + c3 n1 n4 (p2 · p3 ) + c3 n2 n3 (p1 · p4 ) + c3 n2 n4 (p1 · p3 ) (3.9)
+ 2c2 n1 n2 (p3 · p4 ) + 2c2 n3 n4 (p1 · p2 ) + 2(c2 + c3 )n1 n2 n3 n4 .
Using that n1 + n2 = n3 + n4 and writing this in terms of the Mandelstam variables (A.1) we get
1 2 1 
Â(0) = (2c2 + c3 ) s − (n1 + n2 )2 − c3 t − (n1 − n3 )2 u − (n1 − n4 )2 .
  
(3.10)
4 2
The amplitudes B and C can be obtained using the crossing relations
B=A , C=A , (3.11)
s↔t, n2 ↔−n3 s↔u, n2 ↔−n4
so that
1 2 1 
B̂ (0) = (2c2 + c3 ) t − (n1 − n3 )2 − c3 s − (n1 + n2 )2 u − (n1 − n4 )2 ,
  
4 2 (3.12)
(0) 1 2 1 
= (2c2 + c3 ) u − (n1 − n4 )2 − c3 t − (n1 − n3 )2 s − (n1 + n2 )2 .
   
Ĉ
4 2
When all the external particles are massless we recover the result in (2.9), i.e. Â(0) vanishes for the
NG choice of coefficients c2 and c3 in (2.4) and tu = 0,
(Â(0) )0,0→0,0 = 0. (3.13)
The scattering of 3 massless and 1 massive particle is not allowed by conservation of nr . For 2
massless and 2 massive particles we distinguish two cases. If there is massless + massive incoming
and massless + massive outgoing states then the kinematic constraint is t = 0 for n3 = n1 = n,
n2 = n4 = 0 or n4 = n2 = n, n1 = n3 = 0, which leads to
(Â(0) )n,0→n,0 = (Â(0) )0,n→0,n = 0. (3.14)
The following amplitudes are, however, non-zero:
n2 (s − n2 )3
(Â(0) )n,0→0,n = (Â(0) )0,n→n,0 = . (3.15)
2s2
The second case is when both incoming (or both outgoing) particles are massless. Then n1 = n2 = 0
and n3 = −n4 = n and the relation between the Mandelstam variables in (A.2) implies that tu = n4 .
Consequently, for the NG values of c2 and c3 in (2.4)
n2
(Â(0) )0,0→n,−n =
s. (3.16)
2
The non-zero value of this amplitude indicates that the theory is not integrable: this is an example
of particle transmutation when 2 massless particles scatter into 2 massive ones. The non-zero result
for Â(0) is found (using again (A.2)) also for amplitudes with 3 and 4 massive particles. Thus the
resulting tree-level S-matrix is not integrable for all processes with massive particles on external
lines.
13
3.3 1-loop contribution to the massless 4-point amplitude
Let us now compute the 1-loop contribution to the scattering of 4 massless (nr = 0) modes.
Similarly to the string case in section 2.2 this amplitude is given by the contributions of the 3
bubble diagrams in Figure 1 but now all (massless and massive) modes appear in internal lines.
The amplitude takes the same form as in (2.13)
(1)
M̂ij,kl = Â(1) δij δkl + B̂ (1) δik δjl + Ĉ (1) δil δjk , (3.17)

entering the S-matrix together with a δ(2) (p1 + p2 − p3 − p4 ) factor.

From the properties of the 4-vertex, both legs in the loop have opposite mode numbers (and
therefore the same mass). The total s-channel amplitude is given by the sum of contributions of
modes with fixed mode number propagating in the loop,
∞
X
Â(1)
s = Â(1)
n,s , (3.18)
n=−∞

where the mode n amplitude has the form (cf. (2.15))

1 dd p N̂s 1 1 dd l N̂s
Z Z Z
Â(1)
n,s = = dx , (3.19)
2i d 2 2 2 2
(2π) (p + n )[(p1 + p2 − p) + n ] 2i 0 d ˆ s )2
(2π) (l2 + ∆
l = p − (p1 + p2 )x, ˆ s = n 2 + ∆s ,
∆ ∆s = −x(1 − x)s . (3.20)

Here we again use dimensional regularization with d = 2 − 2ǫ and implicitly assume the presence of
the −iε shift as in (2.15),(2.16) and also the overall tension (coupling) factor of T̂ −2 from (3.3). As
in the tree-level amplitude (3.9),(3.10) we also set R = 1 in (3.4),(3.7). As the S 1 radius R enters
the Lagrangian (3.3)–(3.7) via nRi , it can be restored by rescaling the mode number
n
n → , (3.21)
R
or equivalently by rescaling (s, t, u) → R2 (s, t, u) (implying in particular ∆s → R2 ∆s ) and adding
an overall factor in the amplitude.
The numerator N̂s in (3.19) has the same form as in (2.17), but the tree-level amplitudes
A , B (0) , C (0) there should be now replaced with their “massive” counterparts Â(0) , B̂ (0) , Ĉ (0) , as
(0)

given in (3.9). The expansion of N̂s in powers of l has the same form as in (2.18) where now (cf.
(2.19))
1 1 1
N0 = −s3 x(1 − x)n2 + (D̂ − 4)s2 n4 , N2 = −s3 x(1 − x) + (D̂ − 4)s2 n2 , N4 = (D̂ − 4)s2 ,
4 2 4
2 2
 

Nµν = − 2s x(1 − x) + s(D̂ − 2)n p1,µ p2,ν + p3,µ p4,ν , (3.22)


Mµν = (D̂ − 2)s p1,µ p2,ν + p3,µ p4,ν , Nµνρσ = 4D̂ p1,µ p2,ν p3,ρ p4,σ .

In the t-channel (and similarly in the u-channel with t → u) we find that

1  2 t2
N0 = t2 tx(1 − x) + n2 , N2 = t3 x(1 − x) + t2 n2 , N4 = , Mµν = 0 , Nµνρσ = 0 ,
2  2
Nµν = −2t2 x(1 − x) p1,µ p4,ν − p1,µ p2,ν − p3,µ p4,ν + p3,µ p2,ν − t2 p1,µ p2,ν + p3,µ p4,ν .



(3.23)

14
From these expressions we can then compute the coefficients γk defined as in (2.24) and appearing
in the analogs of the expressions (2.23) and (2.27). Remarkably, we find that they do not depend
not only on d = 2 − 2ǫ but also on the mode number n and we find the expressions that look the
same as in the massless case in (2.26), i.e.

1 1
γ0,s = (D̂ − 8)s4 x2 (1 − x)2 , γ2,s = −s3 x(1 − x) , γ4,s = s2 − D̂tu , (3.24)
4 2
1
γ0,t = 2t4 x2 (1 − x)2 , γ2,t = t2 s + 3x(1 − x)t3 , γ4,t = 0 , (3.25)
2
1 2
γ0,u = 2u4 x2 (1 − x)2 , γ2,u = u s + 3x(1 − x)u3 , γ4,u = 0 . (3.26)
2

Some details of the calculation of the 1-loop amplitudes at fixed n can be found in Appendix D.
Expanding the analog of (2.23) in ǫ → 0 and summing over the three channels as in (2.14) we
(1)
get for the singular part of the Ân amplitude:

1 1 h
i
Â(1)
n,ǫ = − γ + log 4π − (D̂ − 6)stu − 12n2 s2 − 12 D̂tu . (3.27)
96π ǫ

As we have only massless particles on external legs, the stu term vanishes due to the kinematical
constraint (2.12) and the divergence is thus proportional to n2 or the effective mass-squared term.
To sum over n we will apply the Riemann ζ-function regularization. The same regularization
was used in the 1-loop membrane computations in [6]. It is consistent with the expected absence
of the 1-loop logarithmic divergences in the original 3d membrane theory (the absence of 1-loop
log UV divergences in a 3d theory should not depend on S 1 compactification). Explicitly, for any
positive or zero integer k we will set10
∞
X ∞
X
2k
n = 2 ζR (−2k) = 0 , 1 = 1 + 2ζR (0) = 0 . (3.28)
n=−∞ n=−∞

Thus the sum of the full expression (3.27) is regularized to 0 even without using that stu = 0.
Thus the total 1-loop amplitude is finite and given by the sum over n of the remaining parts of
the partial amplitudes (we again choose the kinematics so that t = 0 and thus u = −s)

s2 h i
Â(1)
n =− (D̂ − 24)s + 6(D̂ + 4)n2 − 24n2 ln n2 − 6n2 (D̂n2 − 2s)Qn (−s) + 12n2 sQn (s) ,
192π
s2 h i
B̂n(1) = − 12D̂n2 + 12D̂n2 ln n2 + 6s(s − 2n2 )Qn (−s) + 6s(s + 2n2 )Qn (s) , (3.29)
192π
s2 h i
Ĉn(1) = (D̂ − 24)s − 6(D̂ + 4)n2 + 24n2 ln n2 + 6n2 (D̂n2 + 2s)Qn (s) + 12n2 sQn (−s) .
192π
10
The existence of these “trivial” zeroes of ζR (z) = ∞ −z
P
n=1 n follows, e.g., from the reflection formula ζR (z) =
z z−1 πz
2 π sin 2 Γ(1 − z) ζR (1 − z) after setting z = −2k. This property can be proved also directly by considering
2k −εn ∂ 2k
the regularized sum ∞ = 1−e1−εn and observing that the resulting
P P∞ −εn
n=1 n e = ∂ε 2k I(ε) where I(ε) = n=1 e
2k
∂ 1
expansion in ε → 0 contains only odd powers of ε. Indeed, ∂ε 2k I(ε) changes sign under ε → −ε as 1−e−εn
=
1
− 1−eεn + 1 so that and thus there is no finite part after subtracting all poles.

15
Here the function Qn (s) is defined by (see (D.7))
q
4n2
2 1+ s −1
Qn (s) ≡ − q ln q , (3.30)
4n2 4n2
s 1+ s 1+ s +1
1 s 1 2 n2
Qn (s) = 2
− 4 + O( 6 ) , Qn (s) =− ln + O(n2 ) . (3.31)
n→∞ n 6n n n→0 s s
One can check that for n = 0 the expressions in (3.29) reduce to the ones for the NG string in
(2.33)–(2.35) (with t = 0).
Note that restoring the R dependence in (3.29) using (3.21) as well as the effective tension factor
from (3.3) corresponds to

Â(1)
n (s) → T̂
−2 −6 (1)
R Ân (R2 s) , etc . (3.32)

3.3.1 Finite expression for the amplitude

The total amplitude is thus given by

∞
(1) (1)
X
Â(1) = Â0 + 2 Ân,f , (3.33)
n=1

and by similar expressions for B̂ (1) and Ĉ (1) . We shall define the sum over n using again the
Riemann ζ-function. Then using (3.28) the terms with only n2k factors in (3.29) will be zero after
the summation. We will also need
∞
X
n2 log n = −ζR
′
(−2) = 0.0305... . (3.34)
n=1

The remaining non-trivial sums involving Qn (s) can be defined by extracting the part that diverges
at large n and define it using (3.28),(3.34). As the expressions in (3.29) contain Qn multiplied by
n2k with k = 0, 1, 2, then in view of (3.31) it is useful to subtract the n12 and n14 parts from the
large n expansion of Qn and define (for n > 0)
1 s
Q̄n (s) = Qn (s) − 2
+ 4 . (3.35)
n 6n
Then the sums involving Q̄n will be finite, i.e. the non-trivial part of the amplitude will be given
by finite terms like ∞ 4 2
P
n=1 (an + bn + c)Q̄n (s). Explicitly, written in terms of Q̄n the expressions
in (3.29) read

(1) s2 h
i
Ân,f = − 24n2 − 24n2 ln n2 − 6D̂n4 Q̄n (−s) + 12n2 s Q̄n (−s) + Q̄n (s) ,
192π
s2 8s2

(1) 2 2 2 2 2
B̂n,f = −12D̂n + 12D̂n ln n + 2 + 6s(s − 2n )Q̄n (−s) + 6s(s + 2n )Q̄n (s) , (3.36)
192π n
s 2 h
i
(1)
Ĉn,f = −24n2 + 24n2 ln n2 + 6D̂n4 Q̄n (s) + 12n2 s Q̄n (−s) + Q̄s (s) .
192π
16
 π2
As a result, we find (here ζR (2) = 6 )

D̂ − 24 3 s2 h ′
i
Â(1) = − s − 8 ζR (−2) − D̂ P4 (−s) + 2s P2 (s) + P2 (−s) , (3.37)
192π 16π
i 3 s2 h 4
B̂ (1) = s + − 4D̂ ζR′
(−2) + s2 ζR (2)
16 16π 3
2


i
+ s P0 (s) + P0 (−s) + 2s P2 (s) − P2 (−s) , (3.38)
D̂ − 24 3 s2 h
i
Ĉ (1) = s + ′
− 8 ζR (−2) + D̂ P4 (s) + 2s P2 (s) + P2 (−s) , (3.39)
192π 16π
∞
X
P2k (s) ≡ n2k Q̄n (s) . (3.40)
n=1

We conclude that the 1-loop 4-point massless scattering amplitudes in compactified membrane the-
ory are expressed in terms of complicated (non-polynomial) functions of s that cannot be cancelled
by adding local counterterms. This is again an indication of non-integrability of the compactified
membrane theory viewed as an effective 2d theory.
One may also obtain an alternative representation for the 1-loop amplitude by starting with
the Feynman parameter integral representation (3.19) and first doing the sum over n under the
integral. This gives

1
1
Z h i
Â(1)
s = dx γ0,s F (1 + ǫ; ∆s ) + γ2,s F (ǫ; ∆s ) + γ4,s F (−1 + ǫ; ∆s ) , (3.41)
8π 0

where ∆s = −x(1 − x)s and γk,s were given in (3.20) and (3.24), and we defined a function F which
is proportional to the Epstein zeta function

∞
X 1
F (w; c) ≡ Γ(w) ζE (w; c) , ζE (w; c) = . (3.42)
n=−∞
(n2 + c)w

To understand the pole structure of the function F (w; c) in w it is useful to use its infinite sum
representation in (B.6) (see (B.5),(B.6))

√ ∞
π 1 4π w X w− 1 √
F (w; c) = 1 Γ(w − 2) + √ 1 l 2K 1 (2πl c) , (3.43)
w− 2
cw− 2 ( c)w− 2 n=1

where we assumed that c > 0 and Kν denotes the modified Bessel function of the second kind.11
This expression provides an analytic continuation of the Epstein zeta function and can be used to
regularise the infinite sum for w ≤ 0 (in (3.41) we need w → 0 and w → −1). Using (3.43) we can

11
The first term in (3.43) contains poles at w = 12 , − 21 , − 32 , . . . . The second term is a convergent series.

17
then take the limit ǫ → 0 and end up with the following finite expression12
Z 1 h
(1) 1 i
Âs = dx γ0,s F (1; ∆s ) + γ2,s F (0; ∆s ) + γ4,s F (−1; ∆s ) , (3.44)
8π 0
π 2π √ √
Li0 (e−2π ∆s ) , F (0; ∆s ) = −2π ∆s + 2 Li1 (e−2π ∆s ) , (3.45)
p
F (1; ∆s ) = √ +√
∆s ∆s
√ √ √
4 p
3 2 ∆s 1
F (−1; ∆s ) = π( ∆s ) + Li2 (e−2π ∆s ) + 2 Li3 (e−2π ∆s ) . (3.46)
3 π π
Let us recall that here ∆s = −x(1 − x)s with x ∈ [0, 1] and s > 0, so that ∆s < 0 in the
√
physical kinematic region. To define ∆s let us recall that we implicitly assume the iε shift in the
propagators in (3.19) as in (2.15),(2.16), i.e.
p p p p
∆s → ∆s − iε = −x(1 − x)s − iε = −i |∆s | + ε̃ , ε̃ > 0 . (3.47)
(1) (1)
Similar finite expressions can be found for Ât and Âu using the values of γ-coefficients in (3.25)
and (3.26).

3.3.2 Tadpole diagram contribution

In addition to the bubble diagram contributions (cf. Figure 1) leading to (3.19) there is also a
possible 1-loop tadpole contribution. It was vanishing in the string case in section 2.2 but may be
non-vanishing in the present case of the massive modes propagating in the loop.
There are five different possibilities for the contraction of indices in the 6-point vertex in the
action in (2.6),(3.3) that contribute to the one-loop 4-point amplitude A(1) (where particles 1, 2
and 3, 4 have contracted indices). Pictorially, these are given by

The first diagram contains an internal loop over the SO(D̂) index and therefore contributes a factor
(1)
of D̂. As a result, the tadpole contribution to the fixed n amplitude Atad,n may be written as

1 dd p Ntad
Z
(1)
Atad,n = − , (3.48)
2i (2π) p + n2 − iε
d 2

Ntad = D̂A(0) [p1 , p2 , p, p, p3 , p4 ] + A(0) [p1 , p, p2 , p, p3 , p4 ]

(3.49)
+ A(0) [p1 , −p, p, −p2 , p3 , p4 ] + A(0) [p1 , p2 , p, p3 , p, p4 ] + A(0) [p1 , p2 , p, p4 , p3 , p] ,
12
It should be possible to relate this representation to the one in (3.37)-(3.39). Note, in particular, that the sums
P2k (s) should admit equivalent integral representations similar to the following one for the sum of Qn
∞ ∞   Z 1
X X s k 1  s

Qn (s) = ζE k + 1; = dx ζE 1; x(1 − x)s ,
n=−∞ k=0
4 2k + 1 4 0

18
where A(0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 , p5 , p6 ] is the tree-level 6-point amplitude in (C.2). Setting d = 2 − 2ǫ and
taking ǫ → 0 this leads to
(1) 1 h 1 i
− γ + ln 4π − ln n2 + 1 n2 (s2 − D̂ tu) .


Atad,n = (3.50)
8π ǫ
Summing over n using (3.28),(3.27) we get a finite term 13

(1) 1 ′
Atad = ζ (−2) (s2 − D̂ tu) . (3.51)
2π R
This contribution should be combined with the bubble diagram one in (3.37) (where t = 0); as a
′ (−2)s2 term. The same applies to B (1) and C (1)
result the total amplitude does not contain the ζR
amplitudes.

3.3.3 R → ∞ and R → 0 limits

Let us now restore the dependence on the compactification radius R using (3.21) and consider the
limits R → ∞ and R → 0, or, equivalently, large and small momenta. For large R or large momenta
we should expect to recover the scattering amplitude on uncompactified (i.e. R2 -shape) membrane,
while for small R or small momenta the contributions of massive KK modes should be suppressed
and we should get the scattering amplitude of the NG string.
As follows from the form of the action in (3.3),(3.4),(3.7) for R → ∞ we need also to consider n
n
large and introduce as usual a continuous 3rd component of the momentum p3 = R thus effectively
recovering the case of uncompactified membrane. To take this limit directly in the amplitude
(3.44)–(3.46) with ∆s → R2 ∆s we note that using (3.47) we have (keeping ε̃ > 0)
√ √
lim Lik (e−2πR ∆s ) = lim Lik (e2πi |∆s |−2πε̃R ) = 0 , k = −1, 0, 1 . (3.52)
R→∞ R→∞

Thus in the large R limit the terms involving polylogarithms in (3.45),(3.46) do not contribute to
the integral over the Feynman parameter in (3.44).
Including the tension factor T̂ −2 = (2πR)−2 T2−2 from (3.3) as in (3.32) (with T2 held fixed in
the large R limit) and keeping s, t arbitrary (with s + t + u = 0) we thus get for the limit of the
total Â(1) amplitude
1 1 h i
Â(1) 3/2 2 5/2 5/2
 3 1

= (−s) ( 32 D̂ − 1)s − 4 D̂ tu − (−t) (2s + 3t) − (−u) (2s + 3u) .
R→∞ 2πR 256 T22
(3.53)
Assuming that 2d momenta here are restrictions of momenta of massless 3d particles, this is indeed
the same expression as for the 1-loop amplitude of scattering of the massless 3d modes that follows
directly from the action (2.3) expanded near the uncompactified R2 membrane vacuum (see (3.59)
below), modulo a factor of (2πR)−1 that comes from going from 3d to 2d.14
13
Being polynomial in momenta, (3.51) can be, in principle, cancelled by a local counterterm.
14
Since T2 ∼ (length)−3 the amplitude in (3.53) has dimension (length)−2 as appropriate for d = 2, while the
3d amplitude in (3.59) has dimension (length)−1 as appropriate for d = 3 (cf. (A.6),(A.7)), hence the need for an
additional R−1 . This can also be recovered from the additional delta function in the S matrix, see (3.8) and (A.6).

19
 In the opposite limit of R → 0 the form of the action in (3.4),(3.7) implies that only the modes
with n = 0 should contribute, i.e. we should recover the scattering amplitude in the NG string case.
Taking this limit directly in (3.44) with ∆s → R2 ∆s we find that the functions in (3.45),(3.46) have
the following expansion

π2
1
F (1; R2 ∆s ) = + O(R)2 , F (0; R2 ∆s ) = −2 log(2πR ∆s ) + O(R)2 , (3.54)
p
+
sR2 ∆ 3
1 h i
F (−1; R2 ∆s ) = 2 ζR (3) + R2 ∆s 2 log(2πR ∆s ) − 1 + O(R)4 .
p
(3.55)
π

Adding the contributions of the three channels we get for the R → 0 limit of the total 1-loop
amplitudes (assuming t = 0, u = −s and fixing the effective string tension T̂ = 2πRT2 in (3.3))15

1 h ζR (3) 2 D̂ − 24 3 i
R→0: Â(1) = s − s ,
T̂ 2 8π 3 R2 192π
(3.56)
(1) i 1 h ζR (3) 2 D̂ − 24 3 i
B̂ = s3 , Ĉ (1) = s + s .
16 T̂ 2 T̂ 2 8π 3 R2 192π

The same expression is found by starting with the first representation (3.37)–(3.39) for the am-
plitudes in terms of the sums over n where the singular R12 terms appear in an equivalent form
as
ζ ′ (−2) 1
− R 2 s2 , ζR′
(−2) = − 2 ζR (3) . (3.57)
2πR 4π
This singular contribution cancels once one adds the tadpole diagram contribution in (3.51) (with
t = 0 and the dependence on R restored). The remaining finite parts of the amplitudes in (3.56)
are then indeed the same as in the NG string case in (2.36).

3.4 Scattering amplitudes on uncompactified membrane

Let us now consider the S-matrix on uncompactified membrane found by expanding the Dirac
action (2.1),(2.3) near the plane R2 membrane vacuum. The scattering modes are then massless
3d fields representing D̂ = D − 3 transverse membrane coordinates.
The tree-level amplitudes are given by the same expressions (2.11) as in the string case but
with the 3d kinematic variables subject only to the s + t + u = 0 constraint. Including the factor
of the inverse membrane tension we thus have (cf. footnote 14)

1 1 1
d=3: A(0) = tu , B (0) = su , C (0) = st . (3.58)
2 T2 2 T2 2 T2

The 1-loop amplitudes are given by the same integrals as in (2.15). In particular, the numerator Ns
in (2.18),(2.19) is the same as in the string case, and so is the expression (2.23) with the coefficients
as in (2.24) and (2.25) but now with d = 3.
15
As T̂ ∼ (length)−2 these amplitudes have dimension (length)−2 as appropriate for d = 2.

20
 For d = 3 the integral in (2.23) is UV finite and we find that
1 h   i
A(1) = (−s) 3/2
( 3
32 D̂ − 1)s 2
− 1
4 D̂tu + (−t) 3/2
(2st + 3t 2
) + (−u) 3/2
(2su + 3u 2
) ,
256 T22
1 h   i
B (1) = (−t)3/2
( 3
32 D̂ − 1)t 2
− 1
4 D̂su + (−s) 3/2
(2ts + 3s 2
) + (−u) 3/2
(2tu + 3u 2
) , (3.59)
256 T22
1 h   i
C (1) = (−u) 3/2
( 3
32 D̂ − 1)u 2
− 1
4 D̂st + (−t)3/2
(2ut + 3t 2
) + (−s)3/2
(2us + 3s 2
) .
256 T22
√ πp
As −s = ei 2 |s| = i |s| this 1-loop 4-point amplitude contains an imaginary part consistent
p

with unitarity.16
While this 1-loop S-matrix is finite, the non-renormalizability of the membrane action means
that log UV divergences may appear at higher loops. It would be very interesting to find a higher
loop generalization of (3.59) that could be the analog of the pure-phase S-matrix (2.47) in the NG
string case and, especially, its supermembrane [1] analog that may be better defined.

4 Integrable T T̄ deformation of infinite tower of 2d fields

The integrability of the NG string model (2.3) has a natural explanation in terms of a T T̄ defor-
mation of a free 2d scalar theory [14, 16]. While the effective 2d model obtained from compactified
membrane was found above to be non-integrable, it is possible to construct an integrable model
with the same free-field spectrum by applying a T T̄ deformation to the massless plus massive tower
of 2d fields in (3.4). In this case the interaction Lagrangian will be different from (3.7) and will not
correspond to a compactification of some local Lorentz invariant theory in 3 dimensions.

4.1 T T̄ deformation of free massless 2d field

The T T̄ deformation can be applied to any 2d theory with an energy momentum tensor Tαβ . When
the seed theory is integrable, its T T̄ deformation will preserves integrability. In general, the “T T̄ ”
operator is defined as det Tµν , i.e.
1
OT T̄ = ǫαβ ǫγρ Tαγ Tβρ = ǫγρ T0γ T1ρ , (4.1)
2
with ǫ01 = −ǫ10 = 1 the antisymmetric Levi-Civita symbol. The corresponding action is (λ is a
deformation parameter)
√
Z
S = d2 σ −g L(λ) , ∂λ L = OT T̄ , (4.2)

where, using that Tαβ = √2 δS

= −gαβ L + 2 ∂g∂L
αβ , we have
−g δg αβ

∂L ∂L ∂L
OT T̄ = −L2 + 2Lgαβ αβ
+ 2ǫαβ ǫρσ αρ βσ . (4.3)
∂g ∂g ∂g
16
Note that the amplitude is non-zero even for D̂ = D − 3 = 0 when there are no transverse excitations as we
formally assume that the propagator is always normalized to one and the interaction vertices are D-independent.

21
Let us start with the Lagrangian of D̂ free massless fields
1
L0 = ∂ α X j ∂β X j , j = 1, . . . , D̂. (4.4)
2
The first-order (t → 0) deformation of the Lagrangian will then be
1 1  
L1 = L0 + λ OT T̄ = ∂α X j ∂ α X j − λ 21 Xαα Xββ − Xαβ X αβ , (4.5)
2 2
where we follow the notation in (2.5), i.e. Xαβ ≡ ∂α X j ∂β X j . The interaction term here has the
same form as the first term in the expansion of the NG action in (2.4). In d = 2 there are only
two independent invariants J1 and J2 among Jn ≡ Tr[X n ] (for instance, J3 = − 12 J31 + 32 J1 J2 , J4 =
− 21 J41 + J21 J2 + 12 J22 ). This allows one to obtain the closed form of the deformed Lagrangian as
L(λ, J1 , J2 ). Using that

∂L ∂L ∂L
αβ
= ∂α X j ∂β X j + ∂α X j ∂ρ X j ∂ ρ X k ∂β X k , (4.6)
∂g ∂J1 ∂J2
 ∂L ∂L  h ∂L 2  ∂L 2 ∂L ∂L i
OT T̄ = −L2 + 2L J1 + 2 J2 − 2(J21 − J2 ) + 2(J21 − J2 ) + 2J1 ,
∂J1 ∂J2 ∂J1 ∂J2 ∂J1 ∂J2
we find that L(λ, J1 , J2 ) satisfying the flow equation in (4.2) is given by
r
1h 1 i 1 hq i
L(t, J1 , J2 ) = 1 + λ J1 + λ2 (J21 − J2 ) − 1 = −det(ηαβ + λ ∂α X j ∂β X j ) − 1 . (4.7)
λ 2 λ
It is thus equivalent to the NG Lagrangian in the static gauge (cf. (2.1),(2.2),(2.3)).

4.2 T T̄ deformation of a tower of massless and massive 2d fields

Let us now start with D̂ free scalars in 3 dimensions and assume that the third direction is a circle
of radius R. The equivalent 2d theory is represented by the tower of 2d fields which is the free part
in the compactified membrane action in (3.3), i.e.
∞
X 1 j j
 n
L0 = ∂α Xnj ∂ α X−n + m2n Xnj X−n , mn = . (4.8)
n=−∞
2 R

Computing the corresponding T T̄ operator in (4.3) we get for the deformed Lagrangian

L = L0 + λ OT T̄ + O(λ2 ) , (4.9)
∞
1 X 
j j
L = L0 − λ c2 ∂α Xnj ∂ α X−n ∂β Xqk ∂ β X−q
k
+ c3 ∂α Xnj ∂ β X−n ∂β Xqk ∂ α X−q
k
2 n,q=−∞
j
 1 1
+ c̃ m2n m2q Xnj X−n Xqk X−q k
+ O(λ2 ) , c2 = , c3 = −1, c̃ = . (4.10)
2 2
Here the n = q = 0 term is the same as in (4.5). Compared to the quartic interaction term in the
compactified membrane action in (3.7) here we get only a subsector of (∂X)4 terms with n1 = −n2
and n3 = −n4 , no X 2 (∂X)2 terms and the X 4 term with n1 = −n2 and n3 = −n4 .
22
 Note that in contrast to (3.7) the interaction term in the 2d Lagrangian (4.9) given by the
product of the components of the two 2d stress tensors cannot be obtained from a local 3d action:
instead of a single δn1 +n2 ,−n3 −n4 it contains δn1 ,−n2 δn3 ,−n4 that may only originate from a double
integral over the 3rd S 1 direction.
This difference is important for understanding of why the membrane theory interaction term
in (3.7) does not correspond to an integrable theory while the T T̄ one in (4.9) may. Indeed, the
structure of (3.7) with only a single δn1 +n2 ,−n3 −n4 does not prohibit particle transmutation processes
when, e.g., 2 particles with mass m scatter into particle with mass m and m′ . Such processes are,
however, excluded by the presence of δn1 ,−n2 δn3 ,−n4 in (4.10).
Below we shall check that the theory (4.10) is indeed integrable by computing the tree-level and
1-loop contributions to the corresponding scattering amplitude.

4.2.1 Tree-level 4-point amplitude

Let us define the scattering amplitude of 4 particles with indices (i, j; k, l), mode numbers or
masses (n1 , n2 ; n3 , n4 ) and momenta (p1 , p2 ; p3 , p4 ) as (we take into account the specific structure
of (4.10))17

Mij,kl = A δij δkl δn1 ,−n2 δn3 ,−n4 + B δik δjl δn1 ,n3 δn2 ,n4 + C δil δjk δn1 ,n4 δn2 ,n3 . (4.11)

We find from (4.10) the following tree-level amplitudes

A(0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] = 2c2 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p4 ) + c3 (p1 · p4 )(p2 · p3 ) + c3 (p1 · p3 )(p2 · p4 ) + 2c̃n21 n23 ,
B (0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] = 2c2 (p1 · p3 )(p2 · p4 ) + c3 (p1 · p4 )(p2 · p3 ) + c3 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p4 ) + 2c̃n21 n22 ,
C (0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] = 2c2 (p1 · p4 )(p2 · p3 ) + c3 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p4 ) + c3 (p1 · p3 )(p2 · p4 ) + 2c̃n21 n22 .
(4.12)
(0) (0) (0)
Here B [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] and C [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] can be of course obtained from A [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] by
(p2 ↔ −p3 , n2 ↔ −n3 ) and (p2 ↔ −p4 , n2 ↔ −n4 ) respectively. In the massless scattering case of
n1 = n2 = n3 = n4 = 0 one recovers the expressions in (2.9).
Expressing (4.12) in terms of the Mandelstam variables in (A.1) we get

1 1 
A(0) = (2c2 + c3 ) s2 − 2s(n21 + n23 ) + 2(c2 + c3 + c̃)n21 n23 − c3 tu − (n21 − n23 )2 ,
  
4 2
1 1
B (0) = (2c2 + c3 ) t2 − 2t(n21 + n22 ) + 2(c2 + c3 + c̃)n21 n22 − c3 su − (n21 − n22 )2 ,
   
(4.13)
4 2
1 1 
(0)
C = (2c2 + c3 ) u − 2u(n1 + n2 ) + 2(c2 + c3 + c̃)n1 n2 − c3 st − (n21 − n22 )2 .
 2 2 2
 2 2

4 2
Here we took into account the delta-symbol constraints on the mode numbers or masses in (4.11).
For the specific coefficients in (4.10) the first two terms in each expression in (4.13) vanish, i.e.

1 1 1
A(0) = tu − (n21 − n23 )2 , B (0) = su − (n21 − n22 )2 , C (0) = st − (n21 − n22 )2 . (4.14)
  
2 2 2
17
We set R = 1 and also ignore the effective coupling λ factor in (4.10).

23
One can check using (A.1)–(A.3) that in the 2d case

tu − (n21 − n23 )2 δn1 ,−n2 δn3 ,−n4 = st − (n21 − n22 )2 δn1 ,n4 δn2 ,n3 = 0 → A(0) = C (0) = 0,
   
  
2 2 1 2
su − 4n1 n2 + s − (n1 + n2 ) δn1 ,n3 δn2 ,n4 = 0 → B (0) = 2n21 n22 − s − (n21 + n22 ) . (4.15)
2 2 2

2
Thus the only non-vanishing amplitude is the transmission B one, consistent with the integrability.
For the scattering of massive particles we may use the notation in terms of the rapidities,
pr = nr sinh θr , so that the amplitude B (0) in (4.15) may be
p
ωr = p~r 2 + n2r = nr cosh θr and ~
written as
B (0) = −2n21 n22 sinh2 (θ1 − θ2 ) . (4.16)
We conclude that the tree-level 4-point S-matrix is proportional to the identity and the Yang-Baxter
equation is trivially satisfied, in agreement with the expected integrability of the T T̄ deformation.

4.2.2 1-loop scattering amplitude for massless fields

To compare to the results in section 3 for the 1-loop massless scattering amplitude in the compact-
ified membrane theory let us consider the same problem in the case of the T T̄ deformed theory
(4.9). We shall thus assume that for the external particles n1 = n2 = n3 = n4 = 0. The mode
number in the loop will be denoted as n.
Let us start with the contribution of the bubble diagrams in Figure 1. The resulting expression
(1)
for As amplitude is given by the same expressions as in (3.18),(3.19),(2.18) where instead of (3.22)
we get (in the s-channel)
1
N0 = 0 , N2 = −s3 x(1 − x)δn,0 , N4 = (D̂ − 4δn,0 )s2 ,
4


Mµν = (D̂ − 2)s p1,µ p2,ν + p3,µ p4,ν , Nµνρσ = 4D̂p1,µ p2,ν p3,ρ p4,σ ,
Nµν = − 2s2 x(1 − x) + s(D̂ − 2)n2 p1,µ p2,ν + p3,µ p4,ν .
 

(4.17)

This leads to (2.27) where now (cf. (3.24))

1  h  i
γ0,s = s2 n2 − x(1 − x)s D̂ n2 − x(1 − x)s + 8x(1 − x)sδn,0 ,

4 (4.18)
1
γ2,s = −s3 x(1 − x)δn,0 , γ4,s = − D̂tu + s2 δn,0 .
2
For the massless loop mode n = 0 this reduced to the coefficients found in (2.26).
Similarly, in the t-channel we get (the u-channel expressions are found by t ↔ u and p3 ↔ p4 )
1 1
N0 = t4 x2 (1 − x)2 δn,0 , N2 = t3 x(1 − x)δn,0 , N4 = t2 δn,0 , Mµν = 0 , Nµνρσ = 0
2 2
2
Nµν = −2t x(1 − x) p1,µ p4,ν − p1,µ p2,ν − p3,µ p4,ν + p3,µ p2,ν − t2 p1,µ p2,ν + p3,µ p4,ν .



(4.19)

This gives
1 2
γ0,t = 2t4 x2 (1 − x)2 δn,0 , t s + 3t3 x(1 − x) δn,0 ,

γ2,t = γ4,t = 0,
2 (4.20)
4 2 2
1 2
= u s + 3u3 x(1 − x) δn,0 ,

γ0,u = 2u x (1 − x) δn,0 , γ2,u γ4,u = 0.
2
24
As a result, the pole part of the total A(1) amplitude reads
1 1 h i
A(1)
n,ǫ = − γ + ln 4π − (D̂ − 6δn,0 )stu + 6D̂n 2
tu . (4.21)
96π ǫ
Compared to the compactified membrane case in (3.27) here we get no s2 term so this expression
vanishes for t = 0 choice of the 2d kinematics even before summation over n, i.e. the amplitude is
UV finite for fixed n.
For the remaining finite part of the fixed-n amplitudes we find (setting t = 0, u = −s)18
1 h i
A(1)
n = − ( D̂ − 24δn,0 )s 3
− 6D̂n 2 2
s , (4.22)
192π
1 h 1 i
Bn(1) = is3 δn,0 − D̂n2 (1 − ln n2 ) s2 , (4.23)
16 π
1 h i
Cn(1) = (D̂ − 24δn,0 )s3 + 6D̂n2 s2 . (4.24)
192π
For n = 0 this of course reduces to the string scattering amplitudes in (2.36).
The total amplitude is given by the sum over n which we may define again using the Riemann
ζ-function prescription as in (3.28). Then the D̂s3 and D̂s2 n2 terms in A(1) and C (1) disappear
and the remaining real s3 terms can be cancelled by a local counterterm as in (2.41). The real
(1) ′ (−2)D̂s2 (cf. (3.34)) should cancel against the contribution
contribution to Bn proportional to ζR
of the tadpole diagrams as in (3.51).19
Then the final expression for the 1-loop massless amplitude is the same as in the purely mass-
less (string) theory. This is consistent with the origin of (4.10) as a T T̄ deformation of the free
(integrable) model: the S-matrix should be given by that of the undeformed theory, dressed by a
CDD factor. The CDD factor is only sensitive to the quantum numbers of the external particles,
not those of the virtual particles in the loop. Therefore, we should indeed end up with the same
amplitude as in the purely massless case.
Let us note that in the case of 1-loop correction to scattering of massive fields in the deformed
theory (4.9) one will find UV divergent terms that need to be cancelled by appropriate counterterms
[17]. The ambiguity in the structure of finite counterterms may be fixed by requiring that the theory
should be integrable at the quantum level, i.e. its S-matrix should satisfy the YB equation.20

5 Concluding remarks
We have found that the S-matrix of the effective 2d model corresponding to the bosonic membrane
action expanded near the cylindrical vacuum is not integrable, so the question of possible hidden
symmetries in membrane theory remains open.
18 (1)
To find the expression for Bn,f we used the small n expansion of the function Qn (s) in (3.30),(2.31) implying
 
that Qn (s) + Qn (−s) δn,0 = 2iπs−1 δn,0 .
19
The direct computation of the tadpole diagram requires fixing the 6-point vertex in the deformed Lagrangian in
(4.9).
20
This was demonstrated on an example of a T T̄ deformation of a single massive field in [17] using a momentum
cutoff regularization. We have checked that similar result is found using dimensional regularisation.

25
 There are several possible extensions. An interesting problem is to extend the computation of
the S-matrix in the bosonic string and membrane theories to the Green-Schwarz superstring21 and
the supermembrane theories. Starting with the GS string in the static gauge one finds [23] that its
partition function is UV finite and trivial at 1-loop and also 2-loop orders (the 2-loop log divergences
cancel also in AdS5 × S 5 case [23, 24]). It would be important to show that the corresponding 2d
scattering amplitudes are also 1-loop and 2-loop finite, despite formal non-renormalizability of the
GS theory.
Similarly, in the case of the supermembrane in flat target space it would be interesting to check
first that the 2-loop partition function of the cylindrical membrane is UV finite (the 1-loop one is
always finite in d = 3). One may then compute the corresponding S-matrix to 2-loop order to see
if it is also well defined and have a simple structure.
One may also investigate the T T̄ deformation of the free 2d theory obtained from compactified
supermembrane (i.e. containing free superstring modes plus a tower of massive 2d fields). This
should produce an integrable model with an infinite set of 2d bosons and fermions, generalizing the
static-gauge GS action.

Acknowledgements
We are grateful to S. Giombi for the initial suggestion to study S-matrix in membrane theory and
useful discussions. We also thank D. Polvara, R. Roiban and A. Sfondrini for helpful comments and
R. Metsaev for important remarks on the draft. FS is supported by the European Union Horizon
2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement num-
ber 101027251, and would like to thank the participants of the Filicudi workshop on Integrability
in lower-supersymmetry systems for stimulating discussions. AAT is supported by the STFC grant
ST/T000791/1. He also acknowledges the hospitality of Nordita program “New perspectives on
quantum field theory with boundaries, impurities and defects” at the final stage of this work.

21
In the integrable superstring case tree-level S-matrix was already discussed in [22].

26
A Notation and basic relations

We use the Minkowski signature (− + ...+). D denotes the target space dimension of a string or
membrane theory, d is the world-volume dimension. We also use the notation D̂ = D − d for the
number of the physical “transverse” fields remaining after fixing a static gauge.
For the four-point scattering involving particles with momenta pr and masses mr (r = 1, 2, 3, 4)
we define the Mandelstam variables as (p1 , p2 are incoming and p3 , p4 are outgoing momenta,
p1 + p2 = p3 + p4 , p2r = −m2r )

s = −(p1 + p2 )2 = −(p3 + p4 )2 = m21 + m22 − 2p1 · p2 = m23 + m24 − 2p3 · p4 ,

t = −(p1 − p3 )2 = −(p2 − p4 )2 = m21 + m23 + 2p1 · p3 = m22 + m24 + 2p2 · p4 ,
u = −(p1 − p4 )2 = −(p2 − p3 )2 = m21 + m24 + 2p1 · p4 = m22 + m23 + 2p2 · p3 ,
s + t + u = −p21 − p22 − p23 − p24 = m21 + m22 + m23 + m24 . (A.1)

In two dimensions the Mandelstam variables satisfy an additional constraint: we have 4 × 2 com-
ponents of momenta subject to 2 energy-momentum conservation and 4 mass shell constraints plus
there is 1 parameter of SO(1, 1) Lorentz transformation leaving only 8 − 2 − 4 − 1 = 1 independent
kinematic variable. This constraint can be expressed, e.g., as follows:

p1 · p1 p1 · p2 p1 · p3 −m21 − 12 (s − m21 − m22 ) 1 2 2

2 (t − m1 − m3 )
0 = −4 p2 · p1 p2 · p2 p2 · p3 = −4 − 12 (s − m21 − m22 ) −m22 1 2 2
2 (u − m2 − m3 )
1 2 2 1 2 2
p3 · p1 p3 · p2 p3 · p3 2 (t − m1 − m3 ) 2 (u − m2 − m3 ) −m23
= stu + s(m21 + m22 )(m23 + m24 ) + t(m21 + m23 )(m22 + m24 ) + u(m21 + m24 )(m22 + m23 )
4 4 4 4
1  X 2 3 1  X 2  X 4  2  X 6 
− mj − mj mj + mj . (A.2)
6 2 3
j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1

Using (A.1) allows to express, e.g., t and u in terms of s. We choose the solution of the resulting
quadratic equations that becomes t = 0 and u = −s in massless case22

m21 + m22 + m23 + m24 − s (m21 − m22 )(m23 − m24 ) − Σ(s)

t= − ,
2 2s
m2 + m22 + m23 + m24 − s (m21 − m22 )(m23 − m24 ) − Σ(s)
u= 1 + , (A.3)
2 2s
p
Σ(s) ≡ (s − v1 )(s − v2 )(s − v3 )(s − v4 ),
v1 = (m1 − m2 )2 , v2 = (m1 + m2 )2 , v3 = (m3 − m4 )2 , v4 = (m3 + m4 )2 .

In general, the S-matrix can be represented as

S = 1 + iT , (A.4)
22
The other solution corresponds to u = 0 and t = −s and is simply obtained by t ↔ u.

27
where 1 denotes the identity (corresponding to the free theory) and T encodes the contribution of
interactions. The operators 1 and T act on the asymptotic states for the 4-point scattering as

X k (~
p3 )X l (~
p4 )|1|X i (~
p1 )X j (~
p2 ) = δ(d−1) (~
p1 − ~p3 )δ(d−1) (~
p2 − p~4 ) δik δjl , (A.5)
4
Y 1
X k (~
p3 )X l (~
p4 )|T |X i (~
p1 )X j (~
p2 ) = Mij,kl [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] δ(d) (p1 + p2 − p3 − p4 ) √ . (A.6)
r=1
2ωr

Here p = (ω, p~) with ω being the energy and ~p denoting the spatial components of the momentum
(we shall use this notation also in d = 2). The scattering amplitude may be written as

Mij,kl [p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] = A[p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] δij δkl + B[p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] δik δjl + C[p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 ] δil δjk , (A.7)
p
where it is assumed that all particles are on shell, i.e. one has ωr = p~r 2 + m2r .
Note that Mij,kl has mass dimension 4 − d, so that the right-hand sides of both (A.5) and (A.6)
have the same mass dimension 2 − 2d. This is consistent with the expressions for the amplitudes in
the main text. Restoring the tension factors both tree-level and one-loop amplitudes Mij,kl have
mass dimension 2 in d = 2 and 1 in d = 3.
Specialising to d = 2, if the theory is integrable, then there is no particle transmutation, i.e. only
the processes with (~ p1 , m1 ) = (~p3 , m3 ) and (~ p4 , m4 ) are allowed.23 It is then customary
p2 , m2 ) = (~
to pull out an overall δ(~ p1 − p~3 )δ(p~2 − p~4 ) factor in (A.5),(A.6) and define the S-matrix element as
J(ω1 , ω2 ) ω1 ω2
Sij,kl (p~1 , p~2 ) = δik δjl + i Mij,kl [~
p1 , p~2 , p~1 , p~2 ] , J(ω1 , ω2 ) = . (A.8)
4ω1 ω2 |~
p1 ω2 − p~2 ω1 |
Let us also recall that a necessary condition for integrability of a 2d theory is that the S-matrix
satisfies the quantum Yang-Baxter equation that has the following operator form

S12 S13 S23 = S23 S13 S12 . (A.9)

This relation is automatically satisfied if S is proportional to the identity. Using (A.4) we then get
to the leading interaction order

[T12 , T13 ] + [T13 , T23 ] + [T12 , T23 ] = 0 . (A.10)

B Some useful integrals

To compute 1-loop momentum integrals one may use, e.g., Feynman or Schwinger parametrization
Z 1
1 (n − 1)!
= dx1 . . . dxn δ(x1 + · · · + xn − 1) ,
A1 . . . An (x A + · · · + xn An )n
Z0 ∞ Z ∞ 1 1
= dτ1 · · · dτn e−(τ1 A1 +···+τn An ) , (B.1)
0 0
τi
xi = , i = 1, . . . , n .
τ1 + · · · + τn
23
Here we are assuming that ~
p1 > p~2 and p~3 > p~4 (~p is simply a scalar in 2d). For the opposite ordering of the
outgoing momenta, only the processes with (~
p1 , m1 ) = (~
p4 , m4 ) and (~
p2 , m2 ) = (~
p3 , m3 ) are allowed.

28
The standard momentum integrals in d dimensions are

dd p 1 iΓ(n − d2 )  1 n− d2
Z
I0 = = ,
(2π)d (p2 + ∆)n (4π)d/2 Γ(n) ∆
dd p p2 iΓ(n − 1 − d2 )  1 n−1− d2 d
Z
I2 = = ,
(2π)d (p2 + ∆)n (4π)d/2 Γ(n) ∆ 2
dd p pµ pν iΓ(n − 1 − d2 )  1 n−1− d2 1 µν
Z
µν
I2 = = η , (B.2)
(2π)d (p2 + ∆)n (4π)d/2 Γ(n) ∆ 2
dd p (p2 )2 iΓ(n − 2 − d2 )  1 n−2− d2 d(d + 2)
Z
I4 = = ,
(2π)d (p2 + ∆)n (4π)d/2 Γ(n) ∆ 4
dd p pµ pν pρ pσ iΓ(n − 2 − d2 )  1 n−2− d2 1  µν ρσ
Z 
I4µνρσ = = η η + η µρ νσ
η + η µσ νρ
η ,
(2π)d (p2 + ∆)n (4π)d/2 Γ(n) ∆ 4

where in general dd p pµ pν f (p2 ) = d1 η µν dd p p2 f (p2 ), etc.

R R

The 1-loop integrals we use are (B.2) with n = 2 and to define them we apply dimensional
k
regularization with d = 2− 2ǫ. Taking into account that Γ(−k + ǫ) = (−1) 1 Pk 1

k! ǫ −γ + r=1 r + O(ǫ) ,
with γ the Euler-Mascheroni constant, we get for the above integrals
i 1 i 1 
I0 = , I2 = − γ + ln 4π − ln ∆ ,
4π ∆ 4π ǫ
i 1 1 i 1 
I2µν = − γ + ln 4π − ln ∆ η µν , I4 = − γ + ln 4π − ln ∆ + 1 (−2∆) , (B.3)
4π ǫ 2 4π ǫ
i 1  1  µν ρσ 
I4µνρσ = − γ + ln 4π − ln ∆ + 1 (−∆) η η + η µρ η νσ + η µσ η νρ .
4π ǫ 4
In section 3 we use the Epstein ζ-function defined by (assuming c > 0):
∞ ∞ Z ∞
X 1 1 X 2
ζE (w; c) = 2 w
= dy y w−1 e−(n +c)y . (B.4)
n=−∞
(n + c) Γ(w) n=−∞ 0

2 n2
P∞ −yn2
P∞ −π
Applying the Poisson resummation n=−∞ e = ( πy )1/2 n=−∞ e
y and assuming the inte-
gral and the sum commute we get
√Z ∞ ∞ 2 2
π w− 23 −c y
X −π n
ζE (w; c) = dy y e e y
Γ(w) 0 n=−∞
√ Z ∞ √ Z ∞
(B.5)
π w− 23 −c y 2 π ∞ w− 23 −c y
X 2 2
−π n
= dy y e + dy y e e y ,
Γ(w) 0 Γ(w) 0
n=1

where in the last equality we separated the n = 0 contribution. We thus find that
√ ∞
π 1 4π w X w− 1 √
F (w; c) ≡ Γ(w) ζE (w; c) = 1 Γ(w − 2 ) + √ 1 n 2K 1 (2πn c) , (B.6)
w− 2
cw− 2 ( c)w− 2 n=1

where Kν = K−ν is a Bessel function, see, e.g., [25]. The integrals in (B.4),(B.5) converge if c > 0.
For c < 0 we define (B.6) by an analytic continuation.
29
C Tree-level 6-point amplitude
From the expression for L6 in (2.6),(2.7) (parametrized for generality by constants c4 , c5 , c6 ) we
obtain the following three Feynman diagrams contributing to the tree-level amplitude of scattering
of 6 scalars

∼ c4 ∼ c5 ∼ c6

Assuming that incoming momenta are p1 , p2 , p3 and outgoing ones are p′1 , p′2 , p′3 the amplitude with
the SO(D̂) indices contracted as indicated in the picture below

(p′3 , k′ ) (p′2 , j ′ ) (p′1 , i′ )

(p1 , i) (p2 , j) (p3 , k)

contributes a term
Mijk,i′ j ′ k′ ⊃ A(0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p′1 , p′2 , p′3 ] δij δki′ δj ′ k′ , (C.1)

4
A(0) [p1 , p2 , p3 , p′1 , p′2 , p′3 ] = 8c4 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p′1 )(p′2 · p′3 ) + c5 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p′3 )(p′1 · p′2 )
3
4 4 4
+ c5 (p1 · p2 )(p3 · p′2 )(p′1 · p′3 ) + c5 (p3 · p′1 )(p1 · p′2 )(p2 · p′3 ) + c5 (p3 · p′1 )(p1 · p′3 )(p2 · p′2 )
3 3 3
4 4
+ c5 (p2 · p3 )(p1 · p3 )(p2 · p1 ) + c5 (p2 · p3 )(p1 · p1 )(p2 · p3 ) + c6 (p1 · p3 )(p2 · p′2 )(p′1 · p′3 )
′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′
3 3
+ c6 (p1 · p3 )(p2 · p3 )(p1 · p2 ) + c6 (p1 · p′1 )(p2 · p′2 )(p3 · p′3 ) + c6 (p1 · p′1 )(p2 · p′3 )(p3 · p′2 )
′ ′ ′

+ c6 (p1 · p′2 )(p2 · p3 )(p′1 · p′3 ) + c6 (p1 · p′2 )(p2 · p′1 )(p3 · p′3 )
+ c6 (p1 · p′3 )(p2 · p3 )(p′1 · p′2 ) + c6 (p1 · p′3 )(p2 · p′1 )(p3 · p′2 ). (C.2)

To get contributions to M with other contractions of indices we need to permute the momenta.
In the case of the effective 2d action of the compactified membrane (3.3), assuming the in-
going particles have mode numbers or masses (n1 , n2 , n3 ) and the outgoing ones (n′1 , n′2 , n′3 ), the
corresponding 6-point amplitude can be obtained from, e.g., (C.2) by the replacement

pj · pk → pj · pk + n j n k . (C.3)

D Details of 1-loop computation in section 3.3

The computation of the 1-loop amplitude in the case of the compactified membrane in section 3.3
follows the discussion in the NG case (see (2.23),(2.24),(2.26)).
30
 For example, in the s-channel we need to compute the integral
Z 1 Z 1  
Is ≡ dx Is = ˆ −1−ǫ + γ2,s Γ(ǫ) ∆
dx γ0,s Γ(1 + ǫ) ∆ ˆ −ǫ + γ4,s Γ(−1 + ǫ) ∆
ˆ 1−ǫ , (D.1)
s s s
0 0

ˆ s = n2 − x(1 − x)s as in (3.20). In the limit ǫ → 0 we get

where γr,s are given in (3.24) and ∆
1
ˆ s + γ4,s 1 − γ + ln 4π − ln ∆
ˆ −1 + γ2,s 1 − γ + ln 4π − ln ∆
Z h     i
Is = dx γ0,s ∆ ˆ s + 1 (−∆
ˆ s ) . (D.2)
s
0 ǫ ǫ

Adding similar contributions of the other channels using (3.25),(3.26), the total integrand may be
written as
1 ˆ −1 2 1 2 ˆ −1
I = Is + It + Iu = (D̂ − 8)s4 x2 (1 − x)2 ∆ 4 2 4 2
s + 2t x (1 − x) ˆ + 2u x (1 − x) ∆u
4 ∆t
 1
ˆ s + s2 − 1 D̂ ut 1 − γ + ln 4π − ln ∆
   
+ − s3 x(1 − x) ˆ s + 1 (−∆
ˆ s)

− γ + ln 4π − ln ∆
ǫ 2 ǫ
1  1
ˆ t + 1 u2 s + 3u3 x(1 − x) 1 − γ + ln 4π − ln ∆
   
+ t2 s + 3t3 x(1 − x) − γ + ln 4π − ln ∆ ˆu .
2 ǫ 2 ǫ
(D.3)
For the divergent part we find
1  1 1 1  
− 3x(1 − x) s3 − 1 + (D̂ − 18)x(1 − x) stu − s2 − D̂ ut n2 .
   
Iǫ = − γ + ln 4π
ǫ 2 2 2
(D.4)
R1 1
Using that 0 x(1 − x) = 6 this gives
1 1 1 n2
Z h
i
Iǫ = dx Iǫ = − γ + ln 4π − (D̂ − 8)stu − 2s2 − D̂ut . (D.5)
0 ǫ 12 2

To simplify the expression for the finite part we choose the kinematics so that t = 0 and u = −s.
Then
1 h 1 1 s
s i
If = − (D̂ − 24)s3 + s2 n2 − (D̂ + 4) + ln n2 + D̂ n2 − Qn (−s) − Qn (s) , (D.6)
24 4 4 2 2
where q
4n2
Z 1
2 1+ s −1
Qn (s) ≡ ˆ −s )
dx (∆ −1
=− q ln q , (D.7)
0 4n2 4n2
s 1+ s 1+ s +1

and we also used the following integrals24

Z 1 Z 1
ˆ 2 s ˆ −s = ln n2 − 2 + 1 (4n2 + s)Qn (s) , (D.8)
W (s) = dx ∆−s = n + , Y (s) = dx ln ∆
0 6 0 2
Z 1 2 2
ˆ −s = n2 + s Y (s) − 2 W (s) + 8n + s − n (4n2 + s)Qn (s) .
 
Z(s) = ˆ −s ln ∆
dx ∆ (D.9)
0 6 3 6 6

24
Here the integrands involve ∆ˆ −s = n2 + x(1 − x)s so that the resulting expressions are well defined for s > 0. To
write Y (s) and Z(s) in terms of W (s) and Qn (s) we used integration by parts.

31
References
[1] E. Bergshoeff, E. Sezgin and P. K. Townsend, Supermembranes and eleven-dimensional supergravity,
Phys. Lett. B189 (1987) 75.

[2] E. Bergshoeff, E. Sezgin and P. K. Townsend, Properties of the Eleven-Dimensional Super Membrane
Theory, Annals Phys. 185 (1988) 330.

[3] B. de Wit, J. Hoppe and H. Nicolai, On the Quantum Mechanics of Supermembranes,

Nucl. Phys. B 305 (1988) 545.
M. J. Duff, Supermembranes, in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics
(TASI 96): Fields, Strings, and Duality, 6, 1996, hep-th/9611203.
H. Nicolai and R. Helling, Supermembranes and M(atrix) theory, in ICTP Spring School on
Nonperturbative Aspects of String Theory and Supersymmetric Gauge Theories, pp. 29–74, 3, 1998,
hep-th/9809103.

[4] E. Bergshoeff, M. J. Duff, C. N. Pope and E. Sezgin, Compactifications of the Eleven-Dimensional

Supermembrane, Phys. Lett. B 224 (1989) 71.
M. J. Duff, C. N. Pope and E. Sezgin, A Stable Supermembrane Vacuum With a Discrete Spectrum,
Phys. Lett. B 225 (1989) 319.
B. de Wit, K. Peeters, J. Plefka and A. Sevrin, The M theory two-brane in AdS4 × S 7 and AdS7 × S 4 ,
Phys. Lett. B443 (1998) 153 [hep-th/9808052].
P. Pasti, D. P. Sorokin and M. Tonin, On gauge fixed superbrane actions in AdS superbackgrounds,
Phys. Lett. B 447 (1999) 251 [hep-th/9809213].
P. Claus, Super M-brane actions in AdS4 × S 7 and AdS7 × S 4 , Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 066003
[hep-th/9809045].

[5] O. Aharony, O. Bergman, D. L. Jafferis and J. Maldacena, N=6 superconformal Chern-Simons-matter

theories, M2-branes and their gravity duals, JHEP 10 (2008) 091 [0806.1218].
J. Bagger, N. Lambert, S. Mukhi and C. Papageorgakis, Multiple Membranes in M-theory,
Phys. Rept. 527 (2013) 1 [1203.3546].

[6] S. Giombi and A. A. Tseytlin, Wilson Loops at Large N and the Quantum M2-Brane,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023) 201601 [2303.15207].
M. Beccaria, S. Giombi and A. A. Tseytlin, Instanton contributions to the ABJM free energy from
quantum M2 branes, 2307.14112.

[7] N. Drukker, M. Marino and P. Putrov, From weak to strong coupling in ABJM theory,
Commun. Math. Phys. 306 (2011) 511 [1007.3837].
N. Drukker, M. Marino and P. Putrov, Nonperturbative aspects of ABJM theory, JHEP 11 (2011) 141
[1103.4844].
A. Klemm, M. Marino, M. Schiereck and M. Soroush, Aharony-Bergman-Jafferis–Maldacena Wilson
loops in the Fermi gas approach, Z. Naturforsch. A 68 (2013) 178 [1207.0611].
Y. Hatsuda, S. Moriyama and K. Okuyama, Instanton Effects in ABJM Theory from Fermi Gas
Approach, JHEP 01 (2013) 158 [1211.1251].

32
 [8] M. J. Duff, T. Inami, C. N. Pope, E. Sezgin and K. S. Stelle, Semiclassical Quantization of the
Supermembrane, Nucl. Phys. B 297 (1988) 515.

[9] L. Mezincescu, R. I. Nepomechie and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Do supermembranes contain massless

particles?, Nucl. Phys. B 309 (1988) 317.
S. Forste, Membrany corrections to the string anti-string potential in M5-brane theory,
JHEP 05 (1999) 002 [hep-th/9902068].
N. Drukker, S. Giombi, A. A. Tseytlin and X. Zhou, Defect CFT in the 6d (2,0) theory from M2 brane
dynamics in AdS7 ×S4 , JHEP 07 (2020) 101 [2004.04562].

[10] M. J. Duff, P. S. Howe, T. Inami and K. S. Stelle, Superstrings in D=10 from Supermembranes in
D=11, Phys. Lett. B 191 (1987) 70.
A. Achucarro, P. Kapusta and K. S. Stelle, Strings From Membranes: The Origin of Conformal
Invariance, Phys. Lett. B 232 (1989) 302.

[11] S. Dubovsky, R. Flauger and V. Gorbenko, Effective String Theory Revisited, JHEP 09 (2012) 044
[1203.1054].
[12] S. Dubovsky, R. Flauger and V. Gorbenko, Solving the Simplest Theory of Quantum Gravity,
JHEP 09 (2012) 133 [1205.6805].

[13] P. Conkey and S. Dubovsky, Four Loop Scattering in the Nambu-Goto Theory, JHEP 05 (2016) 071
[1603.00719].

[14] A. Cavaglià, S. Negro, I. M. Szécsényi and R. Tateo, T T̄ -deformed 2D Quantum Field Theories,
JHEP 10 (2016) 112 [1608.05534].

[15] A. B. Zamolodchikov, Expectation value of composite field T anti-T in two-dimensional quantum field
theory, hep-th/0401146.
[16] G. Bonelli, N. Doroud and M. Zhu, T T̄ -deformations in closed form, JHEP 06 (2018) 149
[1804.10967].

[17] V. Rosenhaus and M. Smolkin, Integrability and renormalization under T T̄ ,

Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 065009 [1909.02640].

[18] P. A. M. Dirac, An Extensible model of the electron, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 268 (1962) 57.

[19] J. Polchinski and A. Strominger, Effective string theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 (1991) 1681.
[20] O. Aharony and Z. Komargodski, The Effective Theory of Long Strings, JHEP 05 (2013) 118
[1302.6257].

[21] P. Dorey, Exact S matrices, in Eotvos Summer School in Physics: Conformal Field Theories and
Integrable Models, pp. 85–125, 8, 1996, hep-th/9810026.

[22] P. Cooper, S. Dubovsky, V. Gorbenko, A. Mohsen and S. Storace, Looking for Integrability on the
Worldsheet of Confining Strings, JHEP 04 (2015) 127 [1411.0703].

[23] R. Roiban, A. Tirziu and A. A. Tseytlin, Two-loop world-sheet corrections in AdS(5) × S5

superstring, JHEP 07 (2007) 056 [0704.3638].
[24] S. Giombi, R. Ricci, R. Roiban, A. A. Tseytlin and C. Vergu, Quantum AdS(5) × S5 superstring in
the AdS light-cone gauge, JHEP 03 (2010) 003 [0912.5105].

33
[25] E. Elizalde, Ten physical applications of spectral zeta functions. Lect. Notes Phys. Monogr. , vol. 35.
Springer, 1995, 10.1007/978-3-540-44757-3.

34