Skip to main content

A-Polynomial, B-Model, and Quantization

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Homological Mirror Symmetry and Tropical Geometry

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes of the Unione Matematica Italiana ((UMILN,volume 15))

Abstract

Exact solution to many problems in mathematical physics and quantum field theory often can be expressed in terms of an algebraic curve equipped with a meromorphic differential. Typically, the geometry of the curve can be seen most clearly in a suitable semi-classical limit, as \(\hslash \rightarrow 0\), and becomes non-commutative or “quantum” away from this limit. For a classical curve defined by the zero locus of a polynomial A(x, y), we provide a construction of its non-commutative counterpart \(\hat{A}(\hat{x},\hat{y})\) using the technique of the topological recursion. This leads to a powerful and systematic algorithm for computing \(\hat{A}\) that, surprisingly, turns out to be much simpler than any of the existent methods. In particular, as a bonus feature of our approach comes a curious observation that, for all curves that “come from geometry,” their non-commutative counterparts can be determined just from the first few steps of the topological recursion. We also propose a K-theory criterion for a curve to be “quantizable,” and then apply our construction to many examples that come from applications to knots, strings, instantons, and random matrices. The material contained in this chapter was presented at the conference Mirror Symmetry and Tropical Geometry in Cetraro (July 2011) and is based on the work: Gukov and Sułkowski, “A-polynomial, B-model, and quantization”, JHEP 1202 (2012) 070.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    It seems that all polynomials A(x, y) that come from geometry have this property. Why this happens is a mystery.

  2. 2.

    As will be explained in Sect. 2.3, this choice is related to the choice of polarization.

  3. 3.

    Notice, our prescription here and also in Eq. (23) differs from that in [16]. As will be explained below, these differences are important for overcoming the obstacles in [16] and reproducing the “quantum” q-corrections in the quantization of the A-polynomial (17).

  4. 4.

    For curves of genus one or higher one should consider more general Baker–Akhiezer function, which in addition includes non-perturbative corrections represented by certain θ-functions [27]. As the examples which we consider concern mostly curves of genus zero, we do not analyse such corrections explicitly.

  5. 5.

    For reasons that will become clear later, we choose a sign opposite to the conventions of [28].

  6. 6.

    Notice, compared to the conventions of [28] we introduce an extra minus sign in our definition of F g in order to account for the sign of W 1 g originating from the sign in (26).

  7. 7.

    Strictly speaking, this equation holds for k > 2 and there are some corrections to the lowest order terms with k = 1 and k = 2 [28].

  8. 8.

    Once again, we point out that, when expressed in terms of variables u and v, most of our formulas have the same form on any complex symplectic twofold with the holomorphic symplectic 2-form (2). In particular, the hierarchy of differential equations (42) written in variables (u, v) looks identical for curves in \(\mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{C}\) and in \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\times \mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\). Of course, the reason is simple: it is not the algebraic structure, but, rather, the symplectic structure that matters in the quantization problem. For this reason, throughout the paper we write most of our general formulas in variables (u, v) with understanding that, unless noted otherwise, they apply to curves in arbitrary complex symplectic twofold with the holomorphic symplectic 2-form (2).

  9. 9.

    In most applications.

  10. 10.

    Notice, a priori this definition of “quantizability” has nothing to do with the nice property (15) exhibited by many quantum operators \(\hat{A}\) that come from physical problems; one can imagine a perfectly quantizable polynomial \(A(x,y)\) in the sense described here, for which the quantum corrections (6) can not be summed up into a finite polynomial of x, y, and q. We plan to elucidate the relation between these two properties in the future work.

  11. 11.

    At first, this may seem a little surprising, because the quantization problem is about symplectic geometry and not about complex geometry of \(\mathcal{C}\). (Figuratively speaking, quantization aims to replace all classical objects in symplectic geometry by the corresponding quantum analogs.) However, our “phase space,” be it \(\mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{C}\) or \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\times \mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\), is very special in a sense that it comes equipped with a whole \(\mathbb{C}\mathbf{P}^{1}\) worth of complex and symplectic structures, so that each aspect of the geometry can be looked at in several different ways, depending on which complex or symplectic structure we choose. This hyper-Kähler nature of our geometry is responsible, for example, for the fact that a curve \(\mathcal{C}\) “appears” to be holomorphic (or algebraic). We put the word “appears” in quotes because this property of \(\mathcal{C}\) is merely an accident, caused by the hyper-Kähler structure on the ambient space, and is completely irrelevant from the viewpoint of quantization. What is important to the quantization problem is that \(\mathcal{C}\) is Lagrangian with respect to the symplectic form (2).

  12. 12.

    Notice, various choices discussed in Sect. 2.3 lead to expressions for ϕ which differ by (non-holomorphic) exact terms. For more details on change of polarization see e.g. [33].

  13. 13.

    Defined by Beilinson [6] after Bloch [7].

  14. 14.

    More generally, one can consider a generalized Bergman kernel [28], which differs from an ordinary Bergman kernel by a dependence on an additional parameter κ. In most applications, including matrix models, one can set κ = 0, which leads to the ordinary Bergman kernel given above.

  15. 15.

    Taking the common denominator of the two square roots, the dependence on branch points in numerator can be expressed in terms of symmetric functions of a i , which leads to the formula presented in [16].

  16. 16.

    The choice of the prescription in [16] automatically incorporates the symmetries of the \(\mathit{SL}(2, \mathbb{C})\) character variety, in particular, the symmetry of the A-polynomial under the Weyl reflection xx −1 and yy −1.

  17. 17.

    In fact, this polynomial occurs as a geometric factor in the moduli space of flat \(\mathit{SL}(2, \mathbb{C})\) connections for infinitely many distinct incommensurable 3-manifolds [23] that can be constructed e.g. by Dehn surgery on one of the two cusps of the Neumann–Reid manifold ( = the unique 2-cover of m135 with \(H_{1} = \mathbb{Z}/2 + \mathbb{Z}/2 + \mathbb{Z} + \mathbb{Z}\)). Indeed, the latter is a two cusped manifold with strong geometric isolation, which means that Dehn surgery on one cusp does not affect the shape of the other and, in particular, does not affect the A-polynomial. As a result, all such Dehn surgeries have the same A-polynomial \(A(x,y) = 1 + \mathit{ix} + \mathit{iy} + \mathit{xy}\) as the manifold m135.

  18. 18.

    That is defined by the zero locus of the A-polynomial.

  19. 19.

    For example, \(\nabla _{\mathbf{3}_{1}}(z) = 1 + z^{2}\) for the trefoil knot and \(\nabla _{\mathbf{4}_{1}}(z) = 1 - z^{2}\) for the figure-8 knot. Note, that our definition of T(u) is actually the inverse of the Ray–Singer torsion, as defined in the mathematical literature. This unconventional choice turns out to be convenient in other applications, beyond knots and 3-manifolds.

  20. 20.

    In this model, computation of \(W_{n}^{g}\) and their generating functions are also presented in [28].

  21. 21.

    By definition, the action of the Galois group preserves the form of the curve (104).

  22. 22.

    One can invert the curve equation [9, 10] to find the expansion \(y(x) = -1 +\sum _{ k=1}^{\infty }(-1)^{k(f+1)}\frac{(-kf+k-2)!} {(-kf-1)!k!} x^{k}\) (where the factorial function with negative argument is understood as the appropriate Γ-function).

  23. 23.

    We shifted the argument x by q f to match our conventions with the topological vertex ones. Also note, that for framing f, one has

    $$\displaystyle{\langle \mathrm{Tr\,}U^{m}\rangle = \frac{[m + fm - 1]!} {m[fm]![m]!} \,,}$$

    where \([x] = q^{x/2} - q^{-x/2}\) is the q-number. Notice that for f = 0 it reduces to \(\frac{1} {m[m]}\), which is the answer for zero framing leading to the dilogarithm. We do not know a product formula for

    $$\displaystyle{\sum _{m=1}^{\infty }\frac{[m + fm - 1]!} {m[fm]![m]!} x^{m}\,.}$$
  24. 24.

    In which B(x) and C(x) have a product form \(B(x) =\prod _{i}(1 + Q_{i}x)\) and \(C(x) =\prod _{j}(1 +\tilde{ Q}_{j}x)\).

  25. 25.

    We thank Mina Aganagic and Robbert Dijkgraaf for clarifying discussions on this.

References

  1. M. Aganagic, M.C.N. Cheng, R. Dijkgraaf, D. Krefl, C. Vafa, Quantum Geometry of Refined Topological Strings, JHEP, 2012, 19 (2012). doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2012)019

  2. M. Aganagic, R. Dijkgraaf, A. Klemm, M. Marino, C. Vafa, Topological strings and integrable hierarchies. Commun. Math. Phys. 261, 451–516 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. M. Aganagic, A. Klemm, M. Marino, C. Vafa, Matrix model as a mirror of Chern-Simons theory. JHEP 0402, 010 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. M. Aganagic, A. Klemm, M. Marino, C. Vafa, The topological vertex. Commun. Math. Phys. 254, 425–478 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. G. Akemann. Higher genus correlators for the Hermitian matrix model with multiple cuts. Nucl. Phys. B482, 403–430 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. A. Beilinson, Higher regulators and values of l-functions of curves. Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen. 14(2), 46–47 (1980)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. S. Bloch. The dilogarithm and extensions of lie algebras, in Algebraic K-Theory, Evanston 1980. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 854 (Springer, Berlin, 1981), pp. 1–23

    Google Scholar 

  8. G. Bonnet, F. David, B. Eynard, Breakdown of universality in multicut matrix models. J. Phys. A A33, 6739–6768 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. V. Bouchard, A. Klemm, M. Marino, S. Pasquetti, Remodeling the b-model. Commun. Math. Phys. 287, 117–178 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. V. Bouchard, P. Sułkowski, Topological recursion and mirror curves. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 16, 1443–1483 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. D. Boyd, F. Rodriguez-Villegas, N. Dunfield, Mahler’s measure and the dilogarithm (ii) (2003) [arXiv:math/0308041]

    Google Scholar 

  12. E. Brezin, C. Itzykson, G. Parisi, J.B. Zuber, Planar diagrams. Commun. Math. Phys. 59:35 (1978)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. D. Cooper, M. Culler, H. Gillet, D. Long, Plane curves associated to character varieties of 3-manifolds. Invent. Math. 118(1), 47–84 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. P. Di Francesco, P.H. Ginsparg, J. Zinn-Justin, 2-D Gravity and random matrices. Phys. Rep. 254, 1–133 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. R. Dijkgraaf, H. Fuji. The volume conjecture and topological strings. Fortsch. Phys. 57, 825–856 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. R. Dijkgraaf, H. Fuji, M. Manabe, The volume conjecture, perturbative knot invariants, and recursion relations for topological strings. Nucl. Phys. B849, 166–211 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. R. Dijkgraaf, L. Hollands, P. Sułkowski, Quantum curves and D-modules. JHEP 0911, 047 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. R. Dijkgraaf, L. Hollands, P. Sułkowski, C. Vafa, Supersymmetric gauge theories, intersecting branes and free fermions. JHEP 0802, 106 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. T. Dimofte, Quantum Riemann surfaces in Chern-Simons theory (2011) [arXiv:1102.4847]

    Google Scholar 

  20. T. Dimofte, S. Gukov, L. Hollands, Vortex counting and Lagrangian 3-manifolds. Letters in Mathematical Physics, 98(3), 225–287 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. T. Dimofte, S. Gukov, J. Lenells, D. Zagier, Exact results for perturbative Chern-Simons theory with complex gauge group. Commun. Number Theory Phys. 3, 363–443 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. T. Dimofte, S. Gukov, P. Sułkowski, D. Zagier, (2011) (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  23. N. Dunfield, Examples of non-trivial roots of unity at ideal points of hyperbolic 3-manifolds. Topology 38, 457–465 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. B. Eynard, All orders asymptotic expansion of large partitions. J. Stat. Mech. 0807, P07023 (2008)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. B. Eynard, A.-K. Kashani-Poor, O. Marchal, A matrix model for the topological string I: Deriving the matrix model (2010) [arXiv:1003.1737]

    Google Scholar 

  26. B. Eynard, A.-K. Kashani-Poor, O. Marchal, A Matrix model for the topological string II. The spectral curve and mirror geometry (2010) [arXiv:1007.2194]

    Google Scholar 

  27. B. Eynard, M. Marino, A Holomorphic and background independent partition function for matrix models and topological strings. J. Geom. Phys. 61, 1181–1202 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. B. Eynard, N. Orantin, Invariants of algebraic curves and topological expansion, Communications in Number Theory and Physics, 1, (2007). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4310/CNTP.2007.v1.n2.a4

  29. S. Friedl, S. Vidussi, A survey of twisted Alexander polynomials, in Proceedings of the Conference ‘The Mathematics of Knots: Theory and Application’, Heidelberg, December 2008

    Google Scholar 

  30. C. Frohman, R. Gelca, W. Lofaro, The a-polynomial from the noncommutative viewpoint. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 354, 735–747 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. S. Garoufalidis, On the characteristic and deformation varieties of a knot. Geom. Topol. Monogr. 7, 291–304 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. S. Gukov, Three-dimensional quantum gravity, chern-simons theory, and the a-polynomial. Commun. Math. Phys. 255(3), 577–627 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. S. Gukov, H. Murakami, Sl(2,c) chern-simons theory and the asymptotic behavior of the colored jones polynomial. Lett. Math. Phys. 86, 79–98 (2008). doi:10.1007/s11005-008-0282-3

  34. S. Gukov, P. Sułkowski, A-polynomial, B-model, and quantization. JHEP 1202, 070 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. M. Kashiwara, D-Modules and Microlocal Calculus. Translations of Mathematical Monographs, Amer. Math. Soc. vol. 217

    Google Scholar 

  36. M. Kashiwara, P. Schapira, Modules over deformation quantization algebroids: An overview. Lett. Math. Phys. 88(1–3), 79–99 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. A. Klemm, P. Sułkowski, Seiberg-Witten theory and matrix models. Nucl. Phys. B819, 400–430 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. M. Kontsevich, Holonomic d-modules and positive characteristic. Japan. J. Math. 4, 1–25 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. W. Li, Q. Wang, On the generalized volume conjecture and regulator. Comm. Cont. Math. 10, 1023–1032 (2008), Suppl. 1

    Google Scholar 

  40. J.M. Maldacena, G.W. Moore, N. Seiberg, D. Shih, Exact vs. semiclassical target space of the minimal string. JHEP 0410, 020 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  41. M. Marino, Open string amplitudes and large order behavior in topological string theory. JHEP 0803, 060 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. J. Milnor, A duality theorem for reidemeister torsion. Ann. Math. 76, 137 (1962)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. J. Milnor, Algebraic k-theory and quadratic forms. Invent. Math. 9, 318–344 (1969)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. N.A. Nekrasov, Seiberg-witten prepotential from instanton counting. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 7, 831–864 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  45. N.A. Nekrasov, S.L. Shatashvili, Quantization of integrable systems and four dimensional gauge theories. [arXiv:0908.4052]

    Google Scholar 

  46. H. Ooguri, P. Sułkowski, M. Yamazaki, Wall crossing as seen by matrix models. Commun. Math. Phys. 307, 429–462 (2011)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. J. Porti, Torsion de reidemesiter poir les variétés hyperboliques. Mem. Am. Math. Soc. 128(612), p. 139 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  48. N. Seiberg, E. Witten, Electric-magnetic duality, monopole condensation, and confinement in n=2 supersymmetric yang-mills theory. Nucl. Phys. B426, 19–52 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  49. P. Sułkowski, Matrix models for 2* theories. Phys. Rev. D80, 086006 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  50. V. Turaev, Reidemeister torsion in knot theory. Russ. Math. Surv. 41, 97 (1986)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  51. F.R. Villegas, Modular mahler measures i, in Topics in Number Theory, ed. by S.D. Ahlgren, G.E. Andrews, K. Ono (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1999), pp. 17–48

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

It is pleasure to thank Vincent Bouchard, Tudor Dimofte, Nathan Dunfield, Bertrand Eynard, Maxim Kontsevich, and Don Zagier for helpful discussions and correspondence. The work of S.G. is supported in part by DOE Grant DE-FG03-92-ER40701FG-02 and in part by NSF Grant PHY-0757647. The research of P.S. is supported by the DOE grant DE-FG03-92-ER40701FG-02 and the European Commission under the Marie-Curie International Outgoing Fellowship Programme. Opinions and conclusions expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of funding agencies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sergei Gukov .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices

Appendix 1: A Hierarchy of Differential Equations

In this appendix we provide more details on the hierarchy of differential equations (42) arising from the quantum curve equation \(\hat{A}Z = 0\). This hierarchy allows to determine the quantum operator \(\hat{A}\), order by order in \(\hslash\), from the knowledge of the partition function Z it annihilates, or vice versa. We stress that the hierarchy (42) takes the same form for curves embedded in \(\mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{C}\) or \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\times \mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\), even though its derivation in both cases is much different.

We recall that, in the classical limit, we consider curves embedded either in \(\mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{C}\) with coordinates (u, v), or in \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\times \mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\) with coordinates \((x = e^{u},y = e^{v})\). The classical curve is given by the polynomial equation

$$\displaystyle{ 0 = A \equiv A_{0}. }$$
(171)

In the quantum regime we introduce the commutation relation \([\hat{v},\hat{u}] = \hslash\) and use the representation \(\hat{u} = u,\hat{v} = \hslash \partial _{u}\). For \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\) coordinates we then have \(\hat{x} = x = e^{u},\hat{y} = e^{\hat{v}} = e^{\hslash \partial _{u}}\) and \(\hat{y}\hat{x} = q\hat{x}\hat{y}\), where \(q = e^{\hslash }\). In what follows we denote derivatives w.r.t u by \(' = \partial _{u} = x\partial _{x}\).

To represent the quantum curves corresponding to (171) we use the following expansions, respectively in \(\mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{C}\) and \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\times \mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\) case

$$\displaystyle{\hat{A} =\sum _{ j=0}^{d}a_{ j}(u, \hslash )\hat{v}^{j},\qquad \quad \hat{A} =\sum _{ j=0}^{d}a_{ j}(x, \hslash )\hat{y}^{j},}$$

where, respectively,

$$\displaystyle{ a_{j}(u, \hslash ) =\sum _{ l=0}^{\infty }a_{ j,l}(u)\hslash ^{l},\qquad \quad a_{ j}(x, \hslash ) =\sum _{ l=0}^{\infty }a_{ j,l}(x)\hslash ^{l}. }$$

We also reassemble contributions of fixed \(\hslash\) order into, respectively,

$$\displaystyle{ A_{l} = A_{l}(u,v) =\sum _{ j=0}^{d}a_{ j,l}(u)v^{j},\qquad \quad A_{ l} = A_{l}(x,y) =\sum _{ j=0}^{d}a_{ j,l}(x)y^{j}. }$$
(172)

Replacing classical variables in these expansions by quantum operators \(\hat{u},\hat{v}\) or \(\hat{x},\hat{y}\), ordered such that \(\hat{v}\) or \(\hat{y}\) appear to the right of \(\hat{u}\) or \(\hat{x}\), defines corrections \(\hat{A}_{l}\) to the quantum curve (6). Using the above notation, the quantum curve equation can be written, respectively in \(\mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{C}\) and \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\times \mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\) case, as

$$\displaystyle{ \hat{A}Z(u) =\Big (\sum _{j=0}^{d}a_{ j}(u, \hslash )\hat{v}^{j}\Big)Z(u) = 0,\qquad \hat{A}Z(x) =\Big (\sum _{ j=0}^{d}a_{ j}(x, \hslash )\hat{y}^{j}\Big)Z(x) = 0, }$$
(173)

where

$$\displaystyle{ Z =\exp \Big (\frac{1} {\hslash }\sum _{k=0}^{\infty }\hslash ^{k}S_{ k}\Big). }$$
(174)

1.1 Hierarchy in the \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\) Case: q-Difference Equation

The quantum curve equation gives rise to a hierarchy of differential equations which arise as follows. Substituting the partition function (174) into (173) and dividing by \(e^{\hslash ^{-1}S_{ 0}}\) results in

$$\displaystyle{ 0 =\sum _{ j,l=0}^{\infty }a_{ j,l}\hslash ^{l}e^{jS'_{0} }\exp \Big(\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }\hslash ^{n}\mathfrak{d}_{ n}(j)\Big), }$$
(175)

where \(\mathfrak{d}_{n}(j)\) combine terms with a fixed power of \(\hslash\) in the expansion of \(\sum _{k}\hslash ^{k}S_{k}\big(e^{u+j\hslash }\big)\)

$$\displaystyle{ \mathfrak{d}_{n}(j) =\sum _{ r=1}^{n+1}\frac{j^{r}} {r!} S_{n+1-r}^{(r)}(x). }$$
(176)

For example

$$\displaystyle\begin{array}{rcl} \mathfrak{d}_{1}(j)& =& \frac{j^{2}} {2} S''_{0} + jS'_{1}, {}\\ \mathfrak{d}_{2}(j)& =& \frac{j^{3}} {6} S'''_{0} + \frac{j^{2}} {2} S''_{1} + jS'_{2}, {}\\ \mathfrak{d}_{3}(j)& =& \frac{j^{4}} {4!} S_{0}^{(4)} + \frac{j^{3}} {3!} S'''_{1} + \frac{j^{2}} {2} S''_{2} + jS'_{3}, {}\\ \end{array}$$

and note that for each n we have \(\mathfrak{d}_{n}(0) = 0\). Let us now expand the exponent in (175) and collect terms with fixed power of \(\hslash\)

$$\displaystyle{ \exp \Big(\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }\hslash ^{n}\mathfrak{d}_{ n}(j)\Big) =\sum _{ r=0}^{\infty }\hslash ^{r}\mathfrak{D}_{ r}(j), }$$
(177)

so that, for example,

$$\displaystyle\begin{array}{rcl} \mathfrak{D}_{0}(j)& =& 1, {}\\ \mathfrak{D}_{1}(j)& =& \mathfrak{d}_{1}(j) = \frac{S''_{0}} {2} j^{2} + S'_{ 1}j, {}\\ \mathfrak{D}_{2}(j)& =& \mathfrak{d}_{2}(j) + \frac{1} {2}\mathfrak{d}_{1}(j)^{2} = \frac{(S''_{0})^{2}} {8} j^{4} + \frac{1} {6}\big(S'''_{0} + 3S''_{0}S'_{1}\big)j^{3} {}\\ & & +\,\frac{1} {2}\big(S''_{1} + (S'_{1})^{2}\big)j^{2} + S'_{ 2}j, {}\\ \mathfrak{D}_{3}(j)& =& \mathfrak{d}_{3}(j) + \mathfrak{d}_{1}(j)\mathfrak{d}_{2}(j) + \frac{1} {6}\mathfrak{d}_{1}(j)^{3} {}\\ & =& \frac{(S''_{0})^{3}} {48} j^{6} +\Big (\frac{S''_{0}S'''_{0}} {12} + \frac{(S''_{0})^{2}S'_{1}} {8} \Big)j^{5} {}\\ & & +\, \frac{1} {24}\big(S''''_{0} + 6S''_{0}S''_{1} + 4S'''_{0}S'_{1} + 6S''_{0}(S'_{1})^{2}\big)j^{4} + {}\\ & & +\frac{1} {6}\big(3S''_{1}S'_{1} + (S'_{1})^{3} + S'''_{ 1} + 3S''_{0}S'_{2}\big)j^{3} +\big (\frac{S''_{2}} {2} + S'_{1}S'_{2})j^{2} + S'_{ 3}j, {}\\ \mathfrak{D}_{4}(j)& =& \mathfrak{d}_{4}(j) + \mathfrak{d}_{1}(j)\mathfrak{d}_{3}(j) + \frac{1} {2}\mathfrak{d}_{2}(j)^{2} {}\\ & & +\frac{1} {2}\mathfrak{d}_{1}(j)^{2}\mathfrak{d}_{ 2}(j) + \frac{1} {4!}\mathfrak{d}_{1}(j)^{4} {}\\ & =& \frac{(S''_{0})^{4}} {384} j^{8} + \frac{1} {48}\big((S''_{0})^{2}S'''_{ 0} + (S''_{0})^{3}S'_{ 1}\big)j^{7} {}\\ & & +\ldots + \frac{1} {2}\big((S'_{2})^{2} + S''_{ 3} + 2S'_{1}S'_{3}\big)j^{2} + S'_{ 4}j. {}\\ \end{array}$$

Finally, expanding (175) in total power of \(\hslash\) and collecting terms with a fixed such power \(\hslash ^{n}\), gives rise to a hierarchy of differential equations

$$\displaystyle{ 0 =\sum _{j}e^{jS'_{0} }\sum _{r=0}^{n}a_{ j,r}\mathfrak{D}_{n-r}(j). }$$
(178)

Now we use the fact that the disk amplitude in \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\times \mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\) case is \(S_{0} =\int \log (y)\frac{\mathit{dx}} {x}\), so S0 = log(y). Therefore \(e^{jS'_{0}} = y^{j}\) and we can write (178) in terms of corrections A k to the quantum curve (172). In particular the first equation in the hierarchy \(0 =\sum _{ j=0}^{d}a_{j,0}y^{j} = A_{0}(x,y)\) coincides with the classical curve equation (171). Now, writing \(\mathfrak{D}_{n-r}(j) =\sum _{m}\mathfrak{D}_{n-r,m}j^{m}\), we can rewrite (178) as

$$\displaystyle\begin{array}{rcl} 0& =& \sum _{r=0}^{n}\sum _{ j,m}a_{j,r}\mathfrak{D}_{n-r,m}j^{m}y^{j} =\sum _{ r=0}^{n}\sum _{ j,m}a_{j,r}\mathfrak{D}_{n-r,m}(y\partial _{y})^{m}y^{j} {}\\ & =& \sum _{r=0}^{n}\Big(\sum _{ m}\mathfrak{D}_{n-r,m}(y\partial _{y})^{m}\Big)A_{ r}. {}\\ \end{array}$$

The expression in the last bracket is nothing but the operator \(\mathfrak{D}_{n-r}(j)\) from (177) with all j replaced by y∂ y  =  v . Therefore we denote this operators by \(\mathfrak{D}_{n-r}(\partial _{v})\), or simply \(\mathfrak{D}_{n-r}\); for example

$$\displaystyle{\mathfrak{D}_{1} = \frac{S''_{0}} {2} (y\partial _{y})^{2} + S'_{ 1}(y\partial _{y}),}$$

etc. In terms of these new operators, the hierarchy of Eqs. (178) takes a particularly simple form

$$\displaystyle{ 0 =\sum _{ r=0}^{n}\mathfrak{D}_{ n-r}A_{r}, }$$
(179)

as advertised in (42), and with \(\mathfrak{D}_{n-r}\) defined as in (177) with j replaced by v .

1.2 Hierarchy in the \(\mathbb{C}\) Case: Differential Equation

Now we show that the hierarchy of equations which arises for curves in \(\mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{C}\) takes the same form (42) as in \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\times \mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\) case, even though the explicit derivation of this hierarchy is much different. Now Eq. (173) takes a form

$$\displaystyle{ 0 =\hat{ A}Z(u) =\sum _{ j=0}^{d}\sum _{ l=0}^{\infty }a_{ j,l}\hslash ^{l+j}\partial _{ u}^{j}Z(u), }$$

and by induction we find that the last term can be written as \(\partial _{u}^{j}Z = Z(\partial _{u} + S')^{j}S'\). Then the factor of Z can be factored out of an entire expression, which results in

$$\displaystyle{ 0 =\sum _{ l=0}^{\infty }\Big[a_{ 0,l}\hslash ^{l} +\sum _{ j=0}^{d-1}a_{ j+1,l}\hslash ^{l}\Big(\hslash \partial _{ u} +\sum _{ k=0}^{\infty }\hslash ^{k}S'_{ k}\Big)^{j}\sum _{ r=0}^{\infty }\hslash ^{r}S'_{ r}\Big]. }$$
(180)

Recalling that S0 = v, an explicit computation reveals that the last term in this expression can be written as

$$\displaystyle{ \big(\hslash \partial _{u} + \hslash S'\big)^{j}\hslash S' = v^{j+1} + \hslash \Big(S''_{ 0}\frac{j(j + 1)} {2} v^{j-1} + S'_{ 1}(j + 1)v^{j}\Big)+ }$$
(181)
$$\displaystyle{+\hslash ^{2}\Big((S''_{ 0})^{2}\frac{(j - 2)(j - 1)j(j + 1)} {8} v^{j-3} +\big (S'''_{ 0} + 3S''_{0}S'_{1}\big)\frac{(j - 1)j(j + 1)} {6} v^{j-2}+}$$
$$\displaystyle{+\big(S''_{1} + (S'_{1})^{2}\big)\frac{j(j + 1)} {2} v^{j-1} + S'_{ 2}(j + 1)v^{j}\Big) + \mathcal{O}(\hslash ^{3}) =}$$
$$\displaystyle\begin{array}{rcl} & =& \Big[1 + \hslash \Big(\frac{S''_{0}} {2} \partial _{v}^{2} + S'_{ 1}\partial _{v}\Big) + \hslash ^{2}\Big(\frac{(S''_{0})^{2}} {8} \partial _{v}^{4} + \frac{S'''_{0} + 3S''_{0}S'_{1}} {6} \partial _{v}^{3} + \frac{S''_{1} + (S'_{1})^{2}} {2} \partial _{v}^{2} {}\\ & & +\,S'_{2}\partial _{v}\Big) + \mathcal{O}(\hslash ^{3})\Big]v^{j+1}. {}\\ \end{array}$$

We see that a coefficient at each power \(\hslash ^{r}\) above is nothing but \(\mathfrak{D}_{r}\) introduced in (179), i.e. the operator defined in (177) with j replaced by v . Therefore

$$\displaystyle{\big(\hslash \partial _{u} + \hslash S'\big)^{j}\hslash S' =\sum _{ r=0}^{\infty }\hslash ^{r}\mathfrak{D}_{ r}.}$$

Using a definition A r from (172) we find that (180) takes form

$$\displaystyle{0 =\sum _{r,l=0}\sum _{j=0}^{d}a_{ j,l}\hslash ^{l}\hslash ^{r}\mathfrak{D}_{ r}v^{j} =\sum _{ r,l}\hslash ^{r+l}\mathfrak{D}_{ r}A_{l} =\sum _{ n=0}^{\infty }\hslash ^{n}\Big(\sum _{ r=0}^{n}\mathfrak{D}_{ n-r}A_{r}\Big).}$$

Therefore at order \(\hslash ^{n}\) we get

$$\displaystyle{ 0 =\sum _{ r=0}^{n}\mathfrak{D}_{ n-r}A_{r}, }$$
(182)

with \(\mathfrak{D}_{n-r}\) defined as in (177) with j replaced by v . This is the same equation as in \(\mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\times \mathbb{C}^{{\ast}}\) case (179), and as already advertised in (42).

Appendix 2: Quantum Dilogarithm

In literature several representations of quantum dilogarithm can be found. We use the following one

$$\displaystyle\begin{array}{rcl} \psi (x)& =& \prod _{k=1}^{\infty }(1 - xe^{\hslash (k-1/2)})^{-1} = \\ & =& \exp \Big(-\sum _{k=1}^{\infty } \frac{x^{k}} {k(e^{\hslash k/2} - e^{-\hslash k/2})}\Big) = \\ & =& \sum _{k=0}^{\infty }x^{k}e^{\frac{\hslash k} {2} }\prod _{i=1}^{k} \frac{1} {1 - e^{i\hslash }}, {}\end{array}$$
(183)

which has the following “genus expansion”

$$\displaystyle\begin{array}{rcl} \log \psi (x)& =& \frac{1} {\hslash }S_{0}(x) + S_{1}(x) + \hslash S_{2}(x) + \hslash ^{2}S_{ 3}(x) + \hslash ^{3}S_{ 4}(x) + \hslash ^{4}S_{ 5}(x) +\ldots \\ & \equiv & -\frac{1} {\hslash }\mathrm{Li}_{2}(x) + \frac{\hslash } {24}\mathrm{Li}_{0}(x) - \frac{7\hslash ^{3}} {5760}\mathrm{Li}_{-2}(x) \\ & & +\, \frac{31\hslash ^{5}} {967680}\mathrm{Li}_{-4}(x)+\ldots = {}\end{array}$$
(184)
$$\displaystyle\begin{array}{rcl} & =& \sum _{k=0}^{\infty }\hslash ^{k-1}(1 - 2^{1-k})\frac{B_{k}} {k!} \mathrm{Li}_{2-k}(x)\,.{}\end{array}$$
(185)

Note, all terms with even power of \(\hslash\) vanish. For terms \(\sim \hslash ^{k-1}B_{k}\) with k = 3, 5, 7,  this is so, because \(B_{3} = B_{5} = B_{7} =\ldots = 0\). On the other hand, the term with k = 1 is proportional to \((1 - 2^{1-1}) = 0\), hence it vanishes as well. Further details can be found e.g. in [21].

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gukov, S., Sułkowski, P. (2014). A-Polynomial, B-Model, and Quantization. In: Castano-Bernard, R., Catanese, F., Kontsevich, M., Pantev, T., Soibelman, Y., Zharkov, I. (eds) Homological Mirror Symmetry and Tropical Geometry. Lecture Notes of the Unione Matematica Italiana, vol 15. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06514-4_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics