--- author: - | Davide Gaiotto$^1$, Gregory W. Moore$^2$, Andrew Neitzke$^3$\ $^1$ School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study,\ Princeton, NJ 08540, USA\ $^2$ NHETC and Department of Physics and Astronomy, Rutgers University,\ Piscataway, NJ 08855–0849, USA\ $^3$ Department of Physics, Harvard University,\ Cambridge, MA 02138, USA\ \ <span>sarah71@example.net, sarah71@example.net, sarah71@example.net</span> bibliography: - 'Lamination-Paper.bib' title: Framed BPS States --- Introduction and Summary ======================== This paper continues an investigation @Gaiotto:2008cd [@Gaiotto:2009hg] into the properties of moduli spaces $\CM$ naturally associated to $\CN=2$ supersymmetric quantum field theories in four dimensions @Seiberg:1994rs [@Seiberg:1996nz]. These moduli spaces are the moduli spaces of vacua of such theories on $\IR^3 \times S^1$. They can be given the structure of completely integrable systems and have been the subject of much intense research. The focus of @Gaiotto:2008cd [@Gaiotto:2009hg] was on a collection of functions on $\CM$, the so-called "Darboux coordinates" which are both useful and interesting. They are useful because they provide a neat way to compute metrics on $\CM$, because they provide a framework within which one can prove the Kontsevich-Soibelman wall-crossing formula @ks1, and because they can be used to construct scattering amplitudes in $\CN=4$ theories at strong coupling @Alday:2009yn [@Alday:2009dv]. They are interesting because they have many beautiful asymptotic and analytic properties, linking them to several other subjects including the Thermodynamic Bethe ansatz of integrable systems theory and the Fock-Goncharov coordinates of (higher) Teichmüller theory. In the rest of this introduction we give a brief expository description of the four main results of this paper. In view of the central importance of the Darboux coordinates on $\CM$ it is desirable to give them a more direct physical interpretation. One of the primary goals of this paper is to provide just such an interpretation: They are vevs of line operators in the $\CN=2$ theory. This is our first main result. This interpretation is encapsulated in equation of Section \[sec:linehol\]: $$\label{eq:intro-eq} {\langleL_\zeta\rangle} = \sum_\gamma {{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}(L_\zeta, \gamma) \CY_\gamma.$$ The left side of this equation is the vacuum expectation value of a supersymmetric line operator $L_\zeta$. This operator sits at a single point in space, stretches along the time direction, and preserves four Poincaré supercharges specified by an angle $\zeta$ — the same four supersymmetries preserved by a BPS particle of phase $\zeta$. (Section \[sec:Susy-BPS-line\] goes over this definition in detail and summarizes some basic aspects of the theory of supersymmetric line operators.) Supersymmetric 't Hooft-Wilson operators provide examples of possible $L_\zeta$, but there are others, as we will see. The right side of is an expansion in the Darboux coordinates $\CY_\gamma$. Heuristically speaking, $\CY_{\gamma}$ can be thought of as the vev of a line operator in the low energy IR theory, obtained by inserting an infinitely heavy dyon, which carries electromagnetic charge $\gamma$ and central charge of phase $\zeta$. In this sense, expresses how UV line operators $L_\zeta$ decompose into IR line operators. The coefficients ${{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}(L_\zeta, \gamma)$ of the expansion are integers, and in fact define a new kind of BPS index, counting a new kind of BPS state which we call a *framed BPS state*. These states are introduced in Section \[sec:Hilbert-Halo-WC\]. Briefly, the Hilbert space $\CH_L$ of the theory in the presence of the line operator $L$ is a representation of the unbroken part of the ${{\cal N}}=2$ supersymmetry. It is still graded by electromagnetic charge $\gamma$, and in the sector labeled by $\gamma$, the energy satisfies a modified BPS bound $$E\geq - {\rm Re} (Z_\gamma/\zeta).$$ Framed BPS states are states in $\CH_L$ which saturate this bound. To reduce confusion, we will call the BPS states of the original $\CN=2$ theory, in the absence of line operators, the "vanilla BPS states." We can refine the BPS index to account for the spin information of the framed BPS states. This very interesting index, defined in and of Section \[subsec:BPS-Deg-PSC\], is called a *protected spin character* (PSC). A PSC can be defined for both framed and vanilla BPS states. The PSC is a function of a variable $y$ and is denoted ${{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}(L_\zeta,\gamma;y)$. Its specialization to $y=-1$ gives the BPS index. The second and third main results of this paper revolve around the properties of the generating functions of framed protected spin characters (such as ): $$\label{eq:intro-eq-2} F( L_\zeta ) := \sum_{\gamma} {{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}( L_\zeta, \gamma;y) X_\gamma.$$ Here the formal variables $X_{\gamma}$ in the generating function are meant to be thought of as elements of a noncommutative Heisenberg algebra, and hence satisfy $$X_{\gamma} X_{\gamma'} = y^{\langle \gamma, \gamma' \rangle} X_{\gamma+\gamma'}$$ where $\langle \gamma, \gamma' \rangle$ is the usual Dirac-Schwinger-Zwanziger antisymmetric product of charges. The second main result of this paper is that the algebra of the generating functions gives a noncommutative deformation of the algebra of functions on $\CM$, where $y$ is the deformation parameter. This multiplication law is justified on physical grounds in Section \[subsec:Deformed-Ring\]. The resulting noncommutative algebras are illustrated in many concrete examples in Section \[sec:Formal-line-operators\]. In Section \[sec:Examples-of-M\] we describe the commutative ring of Darboux coordinates in a way suitable to make clear that the algebras of Section \[sec:Formal-line-operators\] are indeed noncommutative deformations. In one important class of examples (the $A_1$ theories) this algebra is related to the algebra of quantum geodesic length operators in quantum Teichmüller theory, as described in Section \[sec:Quantum-Holonomy\]. The main difference between the PSC and the "refined BPS index," which has been the subject of many recent investigations @Gukov:2004hz [@Diaconescu:2007bf; @Dimofte:2009bv; @Dimofte:2009tm], is that the PSC is, on *a priori* grounds, an index. Nevertheless, in the examples we have examined, the two quantities agree. This agreement is nontrivial and implies the absence of certain representations of supersymmetry among both the framed and vanilla BPS states. This surprising agreement is formalized as a "strong positivity conjecture" in Section \[subsec:BPS-Deg-PSC\]. The truth of this conjecture would have far-reaching consequences. We show in Section \[sec:Formal-line-operators\] that strong positivity implies that the ring of line operators and their vevs can be computed essentially by formal algebraic means. Given the geometrical interpretations of PSC's this is a highly nontrivial result. Moreover, the strong positivity properties of line operators are reminiscent of some deep mathematics, including the canonical bases of quantum groups of Lusztig and Kashiwara, the Laurent phenomenon of cluster algebras of Fomin and Zelevinsky, and the universal Laurent polynomials of Fock and Goncharov. We have not attempted to make these connections very precise, and we leave that to future work. The framed BPS states undergo wall-crossing analogous to that of the vanilla BPS states. The analog of walls of marginal stability are the BPS walls defined in . Near these walls some of the framed BPS states have a very simple physical description which is closely analogous to the "halo" configurations of multi-centered supergravity solutions which were discovered by Frederik Denef. The wall-crossing mechanism is essentially identical to that described in @Denef:2007vg in which entire Fock spaces of halo configurations are created or annihilated as parameters cross a BPS wall. The third main result of this paper is a formula describing the wall-crossing of the generating functions . It is essentially given by conjugation with quantum dilogarithms (the precise formula is stated in and ). A corollary of this framed wall-crossing formula is a simple physical derivation of the so-called "motivic wall-crossing formula" of Kontsevich and Soibelman for the <span>*vanilla*</span> PSC's, described in Section \[subsec:Motivic-WCF\]. Roughly, the idea is to study the spectrum of the vanilla BPS states indirectly through their effects on the framed ones. (This is related to our earlier derivation of the wall-crossing formula @Gaiotto:2008cd, which also involved studying vanilla BPS states indirectly through their effects on something else — in that case, on the effective Lagrangian of a dimensionally reduced theory.) In this way we show that the motivic KSWCF follows directly from the simple physics of halo Fock spaces. Finally, in the remainder of the paper we demonstrate our fourth main result: a description of how to compute framed BPS indices and framed PSC's in an interesting class of examples of $\CN=2$ theories, namely the class $\CS$ of theories obtained by a partially twisted compactification of the $d=6$ nonabelian $(2,0)$ theories on a Riemann surface $C$ of genus $g$ with $n$ punctures @Witten:1997sc [@Gaiotto:2009we; @Gaiotto:2009hg]. After a brief review of $d=6$ $(2,0)$ theories in Section \[sec:Six-Dim-View\] we use the surface operators of the $d=6$ theory to arrive at the key result which makes computations possible. This result states that one can identify $\CM$ with a moduli space of flat connections on $C$ and express the quantum expectation value of a line operator as a classical holonomy of the flat connection. In Section \[sec:Examples\] we spell out many examples drawn from the class of "$A_1$ theories," theories in $\CS$ based on the $d=6$ theories with $\lieg = su(2)$. Along the way, in Section \[sec:A1\], we extend the classification of line operators for the conformal $A_1$ theories (proposed in @Drukker:2009tz) to asymptotically free theories. The upshot is that isotopy classes of closed curves on $C$ are replaced by objects known as "laminations" (see Section \[subsec:Lams-Def\] for the definition). We thereby make contact with some very interesting work of Fock and Goncharov @MR2349682 [@MR2567745]. Once this connection is made, computations of framed BPS indices are in principle straightforward and can be reduced to an essentially well-known algorithm — which we call the *traffic rule* algorithm — described in detail in Appendix \[app:traffic\]. The results of the fairly straightforward traffic-rule computations lead to some physically surprising and mathematically nontrivial results. For example, the Wilson line amplitude in the fundamental representation for the $SU(2)$ $\CN_f=0$ theory is given by a three-term expression of the form $$\CY_{\gamma_e} + \CY_{-\gamma_e} + \CY_{\gamma_m},$$ where $\gamma_e$ is half the charge of the $W$-boson and $\gamma_m$ is a mutually nonlocal charge. The first two terms are expected from semiclassical reasoning but the third one is a suprise. It is exponentially small in the weak coupling domain. One can go on in this vein with several examples, as we do in Section \[sec:Examples\]. We mention here only one more example: In the $SU(2)$ $\CN_f=4$ theory at strong coupling the Wilson line supports $7$ framed BPS hypermultiplets, as revealed by the simple computation . It would probably be somewhat nontrivial to reproduce this result by studying the geometry of monopole moduli spaces. In Sections \[sec:Cluster-Algebras\] and \[sec:Tropic\] we briefly explore some relations to interesting mathematics, and show that these relations have useful physical applications. In Section \[sec:Cluster-Algebras\] we show that the algebra of formal line operators is an example of a quantum cluster algebra. This viewpoint proves useful in constructing the formal line operators for the $\CN=2^*$ theory and suggests refinements of some of the positivity conjectures in the cluster algebra literature. We introduce the concept of a "cluster $\CN=2$ theory." In Section \[sec:Tropic\] we similarly introduce a notion of a "tropical $\CN=2$ theory," and we introduce "tropical labels" for line operators. These should be thought of as defining a kind of $UV$ to $IR$ mapping of the enumeration of (simple) line operators. In these two Sections we have just scratched the surface of what is perhaps a very deep connection. Some technical arguments and some conventions are relegated to the appendices. Despite its (regrettable) length, the present paper leaves many pretty stones unturned. We point out a few open problems and future directions for research in Section \[sec:Open-Problems\]. BPS line operators {#sec:Susy-BPS-line} ================== Definition of line operators of type $\zeta$ --------------------------------------------- In this paper we will follow the definition of line operators advocated in @Kapustin:2005py [@Kapustin:2006pk]. We consider a quantum field theory defined by relevant perturbations from an ultraviolet fixed point theory, and a line operator is a conformally invariant boundary condition for that uv theory on $AdS_2 \times S^2$. In this paper we focus on theories with $d=4, \CN=2$ supersymmetry. Thus the uv fixed point has $su(2,2\vert 2)$ superconformal symmetry. (Our conventions are spelled out in Appendix \[app:Susy-Conventions\].) We will usually focus on line operators in $\IR^{1,3}$ which are located at a spatial origin $x^1 = x^2 =x^3 =0$ and extend in the time direction. In this case the unbroken subalgebra of the conformal algebra $so(2,4)$ is generated by $D,P_0,K_0$, (these generate a copy of $sl(2,\IR)$), and spatial rotations $M_{ij}$ (these generate a copy of $so(3)$). Thus, the uv boundary condition defining our line operator preserves $sl(2,\IR)\oplus so(3) \cong so(4^*)$, the Lie algebra of isometries of $AdS_2 \times S^2$. In addition we choose to study operators preserving the $su(2)_R$ $R$-symmetry of the superconformal algebra. We also choose to preserve half the supersymmetry, and hence we want to study line operators preserving the superalgebra $osp(4^*\vert 2)$. There are, in fact many ways of choosing the odd generators of this subalgebra, and the existence of this family will be of some importance in what follows. There is an involution $I_\zeta$ of the superalgebra induced by conjugating the spatial reflection $x^i \to - x^i$ by a $U(1)_R$ transformation of the superconformal group. On the Poincaré supersymmetries this involution acts by $$\begin{split} Q_\alpha^A & \rightarrow \zeta^{-1} \epsilon^{AB} \sigma^0_{\alpha\dot \beta}\bar Q^{\dot \beta}_{~ B} \\ \bar Q^{\dot \alpha}_{~ A} & \rightarrow \zeta \epsilon_{AB} \bar\sigma^{0 \dot \alpha\beta} Q_\beta^{~B} \end{split}$$ with a similar action on the special conformal supersymmetries $S_\alpha^{~A}, \bar S^{\dot \alpha A}$. Here $\zeta$ is a phase resulting from the $U(1)_R$ rotation. The fixed subalgebra of this automorphism will be denoted $osp(4^*\vert 2)_\zeta$ and is isomorphic to $osp(4^*\vert 2)$ for all $\vert \zeta \vert =1 $. Indeed, all such subalgebras are rotated into each other by a $U(1)_R$ transformation. We will denote line operators preserving the above superalgebra by $L(\zeta ; \dots)$, or $L_\zeta( \cdots ) $, where $\dots$ will refer to other parameters defining a specific line operator such as those discussed in Section \[subsec:LabelsForLines\] below. As we will see from examples in Sections \[sec:Formal-line-operators\] and \[sec:Examples\], the line operators are in general only single-valued on the universal cover of the $\zeta$ circle. We will be studying field theories which are perturbed from their superconformal fixed points either by moving on the Coulomb branch or by turning on masses. In the IR description of the theory there is $d=4, \CN=2$ Poincaré supersymmetry. The involution $I_\zeta$ also acts on this superalgebra with the additional rule that $I_\zeta: Z \to \zeta^2 \bar Z$, where $Z$ is the central charge operator. It will be convenient for us to choose a squareroot of $\zeta^{-1}$, call it $\xi$, and define the fixed supercharges under the involution by $$\label{eq:Q-zeta-susy} \CR_{\alpha}^{~A} = \xi^{-1} Q_{\alpha}^{~A} + \xi \sigma^0_{\alpha \dot \beta } \bar Q^{\dot \beta A}$$ The theory in the presence of a line operator $L$ extended along the time direction has a Hilbert space denoted $\CH_L$. The $\CR_{\alpha}^{~A}$ are operators on this Hilbert space. Semiring of line operators {#subsubsec:RingStructure} -------------------------- An interesting observation @Kapustin:2006hi, developed in further detail in @Kapustin:2007wm, is that supersymmetric line operators in ${\CN=2}$ gauge theories form a semiring, with a rather intricate structure, which depends in detail on the matter content of the theory. To define the sum we say that the correlation function of the sum $L+L'$ of two line operators is simply the sum of the correlation functions of $L$ and $L'$. The Hilbert space of the theory in the presence of the sum of two operators is simply the sum of two superselection sectors: the Hilbert spaces associated with the two operators: $$\label{eq:sum-line} \CH_{L+L'}:= \CH_L \oplus \CH_{L'}.$$ We define a *simple line operator* to be a line operator which is not a sum of two other line operators. Moreover, one can define a product of operators $LL'$ by considering the path integral with the insertion of two line operators. The line operators we are considering have the special property that their correlation functions are independent of the distance of separation. To see this, note that the supersymmetries $T_{\alpha}^A = \xi^{-1} Q_\alpha^A - \xi \sigma^0_{\alpha \dot \beta } \bar Q^{\dot \beta A}$ which are odd under the involution $I_\zeta$ satisfy the commutation relation $$[\CR_\alpha^A, T_\beta^B ] = 2 \epsilon_{\alpha\beta} \epsilon^{AB} (\bar Z - \zeta^{-2} Z) + 8 \zeta^{-1} \epsilon^{AB} \sigma^{0m}_{\alpha\beta} P_m$$ Taking the symmetric part in $\alpha\beta$ we can write the spatial translation operators $P_i$ as a $\CR_\alpha^A$ commutator, and therefore correlation functions of line operators of type $I_\zeta$ all aligned with the $x^0$ axis will be independent of space coordinates. We can let these operators approach one another and then, by locality, the product should be equivalent to some other line defect. Thus, the operator product expansion should define a ring multiplication. We will determine it for several interesting examples below. It is interesting to relate the Hilbert space associated to the product of two line operators to the Hilbert spaces associated to the two line operators. This is possible, but surprisingly subtle. It will lead us to define an interesting non-commutative deformation of the product of line operators in Section \[subsec:Deformed-Ring\]. Labels for line operators in Lagrangian gauge theories {#subsec:LabelsForLines} ------------------------------------------------------ Many $d=4, \CN=2$ theories admit a Lagrangian description, in terms of vectormultiplets and hypermultiplets. For such theories we can be more specific about the definition of the line operators we are interested in following @Kapustin:2005py and @Kapustin:2006hi (notice that our $\zeta$ is $t^{-1}$ in the latter reference). We begin by reviewing some Lie algebra theory. Let us first begin with a simple Lie algebra $\lieg$ and define some standard lattices. Choose a Cartan subalgebra $\liet \subset \lieg$. Then there is a canonical set of roots $\Phi(\lieg)\subset \liet^*$ which arise from diagonalizing the adjoint action of $\liet$ on $\lieg$. For each root $\alpha \in \Phi(\lieg)$ there is a copy of $sl(2)_\alpha \subset \lieg$ and we can canonically define the corresponding *coroot* $H_{\alpha}\subset \liet$ which generates a Cartan subalgebra of $sl(2)_\alpha$ and is normalized so that $\langle \beta , H_{\alpha} \rangle = 2 (\beta,\alpha)/(\alpha,\alpha)$. (On the left we write the canonical pairing of $\liet^*$ with $\liet$, while on the right we have used a Cartan-Killing form, but the normalization drops out since we assume $\lieg$ is simple.) The roots and coroots generate lattices $\Lambda_r\subset \liet^*$ and $\Lambda_{cr}\subset \liet$, respectively. There are two useful ways to think about the coroot lattice. By Lie's theorem there is a unique simply connected and connected compact Lie group $\tilde G$ whose lie algebra is $\lieg$. Elements of the coroot lattice can be identified with homomorphisms of $U(1)$ into $\tilde T$, the maximal torus of $\tilde G$ with Lie algebra $\liet$. Alternatively, $\Lambda_{cr}$ is the kernel of $\exp[ 2\pi \cdot]: \liet \to \tilde T$. Using the perfect pairing of $\liet$ with $\liet^*$ (and *not* the Killing form) we then have canonically defined weight and magnetic weight lattices: $$\begin{split} \Lambda_{wt} & := \Lambda_{cr}^* \subset \liet^* \\ \Lambda_{mw} & := \Lambda_{r}^* \subset \liet. \end{split}$$ A standard result states that the center $Z(\tilde G)$ is isomorphic to the quotients $$Z(\tilde G) \cong \Lambda_{mw}/\Lambda_{cr} \cong \Lambda_{wt}/\Lambda_r.$$ Finally, let $\CW$ be the Weyl group of the Lie algebra $\lieg$. This is isomorphic to $N(\tilde T)/\tilde T$ where $N(\tilde T)$ is the normalizer of $\tilde T$ in $\tilde G$. Now, our theories will have matter fields in general and therefore we should consider a general compact connected simple Lie group with Lie algebra $\lieg$. Again by Lie's theorem, such a group must be of the form $G\cong \tilde G/\CZ$, where $\CZ\subset Z(\tilde G)$ is a subgroup of the center. Thus, $Z(G) \cong Z(\tilde G)/\CZ$. Since the center is fixed by the action of the Weyl group we can find a $\CW$-invariant lattice $\Lambda_G$, where $$\Lambda_{cr}\subset \Lambda_G \subset \Lambda_{mw}$$ so that $\CZ \cong \Lambda_G/\Lambda_{cr} $. Indeed can identify $\Lambda_G$ with the kernel of the exponential map for the group $G$: $$\Lambda_G = \{ P \in \liet \vert \exp(2\pi P) = 1_G \}$$ That is $\Lambda_G \cong {\rm Hom}(U(1), T)$, where $T= \tilde T/\CZ$ is a maximal torus of $G$. Dually, the character group of $G$ is ${\rm Hom}(T, U(1))$, and is canonically dual to ${\rm Hom}(U(1),T)$ because there is a perfect pairing $${\rm Hom}(U(1),T) \times {\rm Hom}(T,U(1)) \rightarrow {\rm Hom}(U(1),U(1))\cong \IZ$$ Thus the character group is isomorphic to $\Lambda_G^*$, and for this reason $\Lambda_G$ is sometimes called the cocharacter lattice of $G$. $\Lambda_G^*$ can be identified with the weight lattice $\Lambda_{wt}(G)$. This lattice may also be viewed as the weights in representations of $\tilde G$ which transform trivially under $\CZ$. This completes our review of Lie algebra theory. As we have said, with explicit field multiplets we can construct some explicit line operators. The most obvious line operators we can consider are the supersymmetric Wilson lines @Baulieu:1997nj [@Maldacena:1998im; @Rey:1998ik] along a path $p$ along the time direction, at some fixed $\vec x$, in a representation $\rho_\CR: G\to {\rm End}(V)$ of the gauge group: $$\label{eq:Susy-Wilson-Zeta} L_\zeta(\vec x ;\CR) = \rho_{\CR} P\exp \oint_{p} \left( \frac{\varphi}{2\zeta } - i A - \frac{\zeta \bar \varphi}{2 } \right).$$ In addition, we can construct 't Hooft operators. Recall that these are defined by imposing boundary conditions on the fields in the infinitesimal neighborhood of the line operator. In our case we require the limiting values of the fields on small linking spheres $S^2$ to correspond to a supersymmetric magnetic monopole preserving the Poincaré subalgebra of $osp(4^*\vert 2)_\zeta$. Recall that spherically symmetric magnetic monopole in a theory with gauge group $G$ is specified by a transition function for a $G$-bundle on $S^2$ (which determines the principal bundle on the physical space $\IR^4-\{p\}$). Such $G$-bundles are identified with $\Lambda_G \cong {\rm Hom}(U(1),T)$. Indeed, for any such homomorphism we can construct a solution preserving the Poincaré subalgebra of $osp(4^*\vert 2)_\zeta$, by slightly modifying the construction of Kapustin. (See Appendix \[app:Fixed-Point-Equations\] equation ). Thus, each homomorphism defines an 't Hooft line operator $L_\zeta (p;v)$ where $v \in \Lambda_G$. [^1] As is well-known, one can combine the above two constructions and define Wilson-'t Hooft operators $L_\zeta(p;v,\CR)$ where $\CR$ is a representation of the commutant of $v$. As shown in @Kapustin:2005py the set of such Wilson-'t Hooft operators is *a priori* labeled by elements of $\Lambda_{mw} \times \Lambda_{wt}$. However, there are locality conditions on collections of compatible line operators. For example, in the presence of an 't Hooft operator labeled by $(P,0)$ a Wilson line operator labeled by $(0,Q)$ will only make sense for true (not projective) representations of the structure group of the gauge bundle on $\IR^3- \{0 \} $. More generally, we expect that consistent sets of simple line operators can be constructed from maximal sublattices $\CL\subset \Lambda_{mw} \times \Lambda_{wt}$ which satisfy a Dirac-like quantization condition: $$\label{eq:Line-Op-Locality} \forall (P,Q), (P',Q')\in \CL : \qquad \qquad \langle P, Q' \rangle - \langle P' , Q \rangle \in \IZ$$ Since operators related by Weyl transformations are gauge-equivalent we should require that $\CL$ is $\CW$-invariant, and in this case the gauge isomorphism classes of the line operators are in one-one correspondence with $\bar\CL=\CL/\CW$. A natural example of such a consistent set is $$\label{eq:Wilson-tHooft-B} \bar\CL_G := (\Lambda_G \times \Lambda_G^*)/\CW$$ At the two extremes, for $G=\tilde G$ we have $(\Lambda_{cr}\times \Lambda_{wt})/\CW$ while for the adjoint group $G = G_{\rm ad}:= \tilde G/Z(\tilde G)$ we have $(\Lambda_{mw} \times \Lambda_{r})/\CW$. The most general maximal mutually local sublattice $\CL$ sits in an exact sequence $$\label{eq:label-seq} 0 \rightarrow \Lambda_G^* \rightarrow \CL \rightarrow \Lambda_G \rightarrow 0$$ In order to see this consider first the projection $(P,Q) \to P$. This defines a sublattice of $\Lambda_{mw}$ which must be $\Lambda_G$ for some $G$. Then since $\CL$ is maximal and local, the kernel of the map must be $(0,Q)$ where $Q \in \Lambda_G^*$. While the sequence is split it is not naturally split — reflecting the possibility of the Witten effect — so if we consider local systems (e.g. over the coupling constant space or the $\zeta$ plane $\IC^*$) then can be nontrivial. A more general mutual locality condition on line operators can be stated which should apply to nonlagrangian theories. The Hilbert space in the presence of the line operator $\CH_L$ should be a representation of the spatial rotation group $SU(2)$. If we consider two line operators $L_1,L_2$ at $\vec x_1, \vec x_2\in \IR^3$ then the rotation group is broken to the group $U(1)_{\vec x_1 \vec x_2}$ which double-covers the group of rotations about the $\vec x_1 \vec x_2$ axis. The Hilbert space $\CH_{L_1 L_2}$ associated to the product of the line operators is certainly a representation of the universal cover of $U(1)_{\vec x_1 \vec x_2}$. Our mutual locality condition is the statement that $\CH_{L_1 L_2}$ is a true representation of $U(1)_{\vec x_1 \vec x_2}$. In $\CN=2$ gauge theories with a Lagrangian description we can recover the previous statement of the mutual locality condition by moving far onto the Coulomb branch so that the fields sourced by the line operators can be put in the Cartan subalgebra. Then we can apply the classical computation of the electromagnetic field in the presence of a pair of dyons to derive . ### Example: $A_1$ theories {#subsubsec:A1-labels} In this section we will discuss line operator labels in $A_1$ theories. These are the most general Lagrangian $\CN=2$ SCFTs built from $su(2)$ gauge groups. They are members of a larger class of theories denoted $\CS$ in @Gaiotto:2009hg, to which we refer for background and notation. These $d=4, \CN=2$ theories are defined by considering a partially twisted $ADE$ $(0,2)$ six dimensional theory on a Riemann surface $C$ which is decorated with punctures. The remarkable S-duality properties of these theories were elucidated in @Gaiotto:2009we. A typical theory in the class $\CS$ admits several S-dual descriptions, as a non-Abelian gauge theory weakly coupled to non-Lagrangian matter theories. We expect half-BPS line operators of the Wilson-'t Hooft type to exist for the non-Abelian gauge groups, but we do not know at this point how to classify the line operators which are available in the non-Lagrangian matter theories. The $A_1$ theories are a useful example, as they share many of the interesting properties of the theories of the $\CS$ class, but have a Lagrangian description in all S-duality frames. A warmup example is an $su(2)$ gauge theory with ${\cal N}=4$ supersymmetry @Kapustin:2006pk. There is a single coroot $H$ and $\Lambda_{cr} = H \IZ$, and there is a single root $\alpha$ so $\Lambda_r = \alpha \IZ$. The duality pairing is $\langle \alpha, H\rangle = 2$ and hence $\Lambda_{wt} = \half \alpha \IZ$ and $\Lambda_{mw} = \half H \IZ$. Electric charge and magnetic charge are traditionally defined by choosing isomorphisms $\Lambda_{wt} \cong \IZ$ and $\Lambda_{mw} \cong \IZ$ respectively, so we identify $(P,Q) = (\frac{p}{2} H, \frac{q}{2}\alpha)$ with a pair of integers $(p,q)\in \IZ\times \IZ$. The consistency condition becomes $pq'-p'q= 0 \mod 2$. With this isomorphism understood, if $G = SU(2)$ then $\Lambda_G \times \Lambda_G^* = 2\IZ \times \IZ$, i.e. we have even magnetic charge and any integral electric charge whereas if $G=SO(3)$ we have $\Lambda_G \times \Lambda_G^* = \IZ \times 2\IZ$, i.e. any integral magnetic charge, but even electric charge. The two are related by $S$-duality. However, there is a third consistent set of line operators, which is not of the form $\CL_G$, and is obtained by shifting the theta angle of the $SO(3)$ theory by a half-period. [^2] This consists of the set of $(p,q)$ such that $p=q \mod 2$. Now let us return to the $A_1$ theory on a curve $C$ of genus $g$ with $n$ punctures. Recall that a weak-coupling limit is specified by choosing a pants decomposition associated with separating curves $c_i$, $i=1,\dots, 3g-3+n$. The Lie algebra of the gauge group is $\lieg = su(2)^{\oplus 3g-3 + n}$, and there are hypermultiplets $\Phi_{i_1i_2i_3}$ associated with each trinion bounded by a triplet of curves $(c_{i_1}, c_{i_2},c_{i_3})$. These hypermultiplets are in the representation $2_{i_1}\otimes 2_{i_2} \otimes 2_{i_3}$ with a reality condition (for a total of $16$ independent real scalar fields) @Gaiotto:2009we. First of all, let us note that there are several possible gauge groups associated with a given weak coupling cusp. Let $\tilde G= SU(2)^{3g-3+n}$. Then allowed gauge groups are of the form $\tilde G/\CZ$ where $\CZ$ is any subgroup of the center $Z(\tilde G)$ which acts trivially on all the $2g-2+n$ hypermultiplets. We can express this more concretely by associating a number $\epsilon(c_i)\in \IZ_2$ for each $i$ thus fixing an isomorphism $Z(\tilde G) \cong \IZ_2^{3g-3+n}$. Then the subgroup $\CZ_{\rm max}$ which acts trivially on the trinions is defined by $2g-2+n$ conditions on the vectors $\vec \epsilon$. There is one relation between these relations and hence $\CZ_{\rm max}$ is generated by $g$ elements. Fix some isomorphism $\CZ_{\rm max} \cong \IZ_2^g$. We denote $G_{\rm max}:= \tilde G/\CZ_{\rm max}$. The allowed gauge groups for the $A_1$ theory at the cusp defined by the separating curves $c_i$ are in one-one correspondence with subgroups $\CZ \subset \CZ_{\rm max}$. (Incidentally, the number of such subgroups is the Galois number $$\CG_g = 1+ \sum_{k=1}^g \frac{ (2^g-1)(2^{g-1}-1) \cdots (2^{g-k+1}-1)}{(2^k-1)(2^{k-1}-1)\cdots (2-1)}.$$ For large $g$ we have $ \CG_g \sim 2^{\frac{1}{4}g^2 }$, so there can be quite a large variety of choices.) Now, for $\lieg = su(2)^{\oplus 3g-3+n}$ we extend the isomorphism described above for $su(2)$ to an isomorphism $\Lambda_{mw} \times \Lambda_{wt} \cong \IZ^{3g-3+n} \times \IZ^{3g-3+n}$. Consistent sets of line operators will be constructed from maximal $\CW$-invariant collections of vectors $(\vec p, \vec q) \subset \Lambda_{G_{\rm max}} \times \Lambda_{wt}$ satisfying $\vec p\cdot \vec q' - \vec p' \cdot \vec q = 0 \mod 2$ for all pairs $(\vec p, \vec q)$ and $(\vec p', \vec q')$. The vector $\vec p$ specifies an $SO(3)^{3g-3+n}$ bundle on $\IR^3-\{ 0 \} $ and the restriction $\vec p \in \Lambda_{G_{\rm max}}$ arises because the hypermultiplet fields $\Phi_{abc}$ must be sections of the associated bundle in the representation $2_a \otimes 2_b \otimes 2_c$. We fix a fundamental domain for the action of the Weyl group by taking $p_i \geq 0$ and $q_i \geq 0$ if $p_i=0$. A beautiful observation of Drukker, Morrison, and Okuda @Drukker:2009tz is that the classification of simple line operators in $A_1$ theories is closely related to the Dehn-Thurston classification of isotopy classes of curves on $C$. Recall that for such a curve $c$ we can define $p_i = c \# c_i$ and $q_i = {\rm Twist}_{c_i}(c)$. Here $\# $ is the homotopy intersection number, defined as the positive sum of intersections, minimized over isotopy classes. For details of the twist see @Drukker:2009tz. (In what follows $c$ sometimes denotes a curve, and sometimes denotes its isotopy class, depending on context.) It turns out rather beautifully that $p_a + p_b + p_c = 0 \mod 2$ for all trinions and this is precisely the condition that $\vec p \in \Lambda_{G_{\rm max}}$. We can therefore define a one-one and onto map, which we denote $\tau_{DMO}$, from the set of all isotopy classes of paths on $C$ to $(\Lambda_{G_{\rm max}} \times \Lambda_{wt})/\CW$. Now, what consistent sets of line operators, $\CL$, can we define in these theories? Under the correspondence $\tau_{DMO}$ the condition is equivalent to the condition $$\label{eq:max-even} c \# c' = 0 \mod 2.$$ We will call a set $\CP$ of (isotopy classes of) paths *even* if holds for all pairs in $\CP$, and *maximal even* if $\CP$ is not properly contained in any larger even set. Thus, a consistent set of line operators $\CL$ defines a maximal even set of paths on $C$. In particular, if we choose $G = \tilde G/\CZ$ for some subgroup $\CZ \subset \CZ_{\rm max}$, then $(\Lambda_G \times\Lambda_G^*)/\CW$ determines a maximal even set of paths which we can denote $\CP_G$. Conversely, given $\CP$ we can project it to the magnetic charges and reconstruct an exact sequence as in \[eq:label-seq\]. The $S$-duality group, i.e. the modular group, will change the gauge group, as in the $\CN=4$ example mentioned above. It is possible to give an explicit formula for how $\CZ$ changes in terms of mod-two homology. This complements the discussion of the $S$-duality action on the line operators in @Drukker:2009tz. Hilbert spaces, halos, and wall-crossing {#sec:Hilbert-Halo-WC} ======================================== Framed BPS States {#sec:framed-BPS-states} ----------------- So far we have only discussed UV aspects of the $\CN=2$ theory. We are now going to pass to the IR. We need a little notation. We denote the Coulomb branch as $\CB$, its singular divisor as $\CB^{sing}$, and the lattice of vanilla electromagnetic charges as $\Gamma$. [^3] We now study the Hilbert space of the theory on $\IR^{1,3}$, with vacuum at infinity labeled by $u\in \CB$, and with a simple line operator $L_\zeta$ inserted at the origin $x^i=0$. This Hilbert space, which we denote by $\CH_{u,L,\zeta}$, is a representation of the Poincaré sub-superalgebra of $osp(4^*\vert 2)_\zeta$. In addition it is graded by the electromagnetic charge as measured on the surface at infinity: $$\label{eq:Grade-Hilbert} \CH_{u,L,\zeta} = \bigoplus_{\gamma \in \Gamma_L} \CH_{u,L,\zeta,\gamma}.$$ Here $\Gamma_L$ is the Poisson lattice of flavor and electromagnetic charges in the presence of $L$, and is a torsor for the lattice $\Gamma$ of vanilla electromagnetic charges. That is, it is of the form $$\label{eq:Lattice-Shift} \Gamma_L = \Gamma + \gamma_L$$ where $\gamma_L \in \Gamma \otimes \IR$, and $\langle \gamma_L, \gamma\rangle \in \IZ$ for all $\gamma \in \Gamma$. In terms of a path integral formulation, the direct sum over $\Gamma$ in becomes a sum over topological sectors. The need for a sum over $\gamma$ in can be seen easily in a weakly coupled pure $SU(N)$ theory, far out on the Coulomb branch so that the gauge symmetry is strongly broken to $U(1)^{N-1}$. Consider for example the Wilson line operator . In the naive classical limit the vev of this operator would be a sum of vevs corresponding to supersymmetric Wilson lines of the IR theory, labeled by the weights of the representation $\CR$. [^4] This example also makes clear the physical origin of the shift in . Consider the example of a fundamental Wilson line operator in a pure $SU(2)$ gauge theory: all vanilla BPS states carry even electric charge (in conventions where a W-boson has charge $2$), but a state in the presence of a fundamental Wilson loop should be able to carry an odd electric charge. The freedom to add vanilla BPS particles to the system makes it obvious that $\Gamma_L$ should be a torsor for $\Gamma$. The mutual locality condition on line operators shows that the $\Gamma_L$ for a consistent set of line operators $L \in \CL$ should all lie in a common lattice $\Gamma_{\CL}$, such that $$\label{eq:Consist-LO-Latt} \Gamma \subset \Gamma_{\CL}, $$ with an integral antisymmetric form on $\Gamma_{\CL}$ restricting to the standard one on $\Gamma$. Each of the sectors $\CH_{u,L,\zeta,\gamma}$ is a representation of the Poincaré sub-superalgebra of $osp(4^*\vert 2)_\zeta$. When we quantize with time slices of constant $x^0$, the supersymmetry operators satisfy the Hermiticity conditions $$\begin{split} (\CR_{1}^{~1})^\dagger & = - \CR_{2}^{~2}, \\ (\CR_{1}^{~2})^\dagger & = \CR_{2}^{~1}. \end{split}$$ Moreover, in the theory deformed from its superconformal point, there will be sectors of the Hilbert space with nonzero central charges for the $\CN = 2$ Poincaré supersymmetry. The operators $\CR_{\alpha}^{~A}$ satisfy the algebra $$\{ \CR_{\alpha}^{~A} , \CR_{\beta}^{~B} \} = 4 \left( E + {\rm Re}(Z/\zeta) \right) \epsilon_{\alpha\beta} \epsilon^{AB}$$ where $E=P^0$ is the energy operator. Combining this with the Hermiticity conditions gives the BPS bound $$\label{eq:bps-bound} E + {{\rm Re }}\, (Z / \zeta) \geq 0,$$ where $Z = Z_\gamma(u)$ is the standard central charge associated with the vacuum $u\in \CB$ in the sector $\gamma$. Now we are ready for one of the main definitions of this paper: we define a *framed BPS state* to be one which saturates this BPS bound, i.e. $E = -{{\rm Re }}\, (Z / \zeta)$. (The motivation for the name comes from the notion of framed quiver representations.) We can specialize to the subspace consisting of framed BPS states: $$\label{eq:Grade-BPS-Hilbert} \CH_{u,L,\zeta}^{\rm BPS} = \bigoplus_{\gamma \in \Gamma_L} \CH_{u,L,\zeta,\gamma}^{\rm BPS}.$$ Note that differs from the standard BPS bound $E \geq \vert Z \vert$. There is a nice heuristic for understanding , using an IR version of the standard interpretation of a Wilson-'t Hooft operator as the insertion of an infinitely heavy dyon. Extend the lattice $\Gamma$ by one extra flavor charge $\gamma_f$, and consider a very heavy particle, of charge $\gamma_f - \gamma$ and central charge $Z = \zeta M - Z_\gamma$, where $M>0$. The renormalized BPS bound in the limit $M \to +\infty$ is just $$\label{eq:heuristic-bound} E \geq \lim_{M\to +\infty} \left(\vert \zeta M - Z_\gamma\vert - M \right)= - {\rm {{\rm Re }}}(Z_\gamma/\zeta).$$ BPS particles of total charge $\gamma$ have energy bounded below by $\vert Z_\gamma(u)\vert$. However, we will argue below that in the presence of line operators there can be interesting quantum states with energy levels below $\vert Z_\gamma(u)\vert$, but above the bound $-{{\rm Re }}\, (Z / \zeta)$. Viewed from far away these look like a "core particle" of charge $\gamma_c$, located at the position of the line operator, interacting with one (or more) "halo particle(s)" of charge $\gamma_h$ such that $\gamma_c + \gamma_h = \gamma$. States in which the halo particle is not bound – i.e. does not have its wavefunction essentially confined to a finite region of space – have energies which form a continuum starting at $-{{\rm Re }}\, (Z_{\gamma_c}(u) / \zeta)+ \vert Z_{\gamma_h}(u)\vert$. In addition there are bound states analogous to the multi-centered boundstates of supergravity @Denef:2000nb [@Denef:2000ar]. For these states the wavefunction of the halo particle is essentially confined to a compact region of space. Such states have a discrete energy spectrum. As long as there is no halo charge which saturates the bound $-{{\rm Re }}\, (Z_{\gamma_h}(u) / \zeta) = \vert Z_{\gamma_h}(u)\vert$, there is a nonzero energy gap between the framed BPS states and the continuum states. In Figure \[fig:spectrum\] we show a schematic picture of the energy spectrum. ![A schematic picture of the spectrum of energies of states with charge $\gamma$, in the theory with the line operator $L_\zeta$ inserted. At the bottom we see the framed BPS states. Next there are discrete excited states bound to the line operator. Finally there are various continua of unbound states, corresponding to different possible decompositions of $\gamma$ as $\gamma_c + \gamma_h$. The framed BPS states are safely separated from the continua except when there is a $\gamma_h$ with $-{{\rm Re }}\, (Z_{\gamma_h}(u) / \zeta)= \vert Z_{\gamma_h}(u)\vert$.<span data-label="fig:spectrum"></span>](figures/spectrum-crop.pdf) The condition $-{{\rm Re }}\, (Z_\gamma(u) / \zeta)= \vert Z_{\gamma}(u)\vert$ defines the <span>*BPS walls*</span>:[^5] $$\label{eq:Def-BPS-Walls} \hW(\gamma ):=\{ (u,\zeta) \vert Z_{\gamma}(u)/\zeta \in \IR_- \}\subset \widetilde \CB \times \widetilde\IC^*.$$ As we vary parameters in the space $\tilde \CB \times \IC^*$, framed BPS states can mix with the continuum whenever we hit one of the BPS walls. Framed BPS degeneracies and the Protected Spin Characters {#subsec:BPS-Deg-PSC} --------------------------------------------------------- The framed BPS states transform in representations of the Lie algebra of spatial rotations $so(3)$. At fixed grading $\gamma$ they are finite dimensional and we can define a simple index counting the framed BPS degeneracies defined by $${{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}(u,L_\zeta, \gamma) := {\rm Tr}_{\CH_{u,L,\zeta,\gamma}^{\rm BPS}} (-1)^{(2J_3)}$$ In fact, we can define a more refined quantity which counts framed BPS states. We would like to define a quantity which keeps track of the spin information. The simple spin character ${\rm Tr} y^{2J_3}$ would naively do the job, but it might jump unpredictably if several BPS states pair up into an unprotected representation of the SUSY algebra. To get a more robust index we recall that framed BPS states transform under $su(2)_R$ as well, and one of the four supercharges $\CR_\alpha^A$ is a singlet under the diagonal combination of the spin $so(3)$ and $su(2)_R$, namely, $$\CQ := \epsilon_{\alpha A} \CR_{\alpha}^A.$$ So we can define what we will call a *(framed) Protected Spin Character*, abbreviated PSC:[^6] $$\label{eq:Def-Framed-PSC} {{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}(u,L_\zeta, \gamma;y) := {\rm Tr}_{\CH_{u,L,\zeta,\gamma}^{\rm BPS}} (-1)^{2J_3} (-y)^{2\CJ_3} = {\rm Tr}_{\CH_{u,L,\zeta,\gamma}^{\rm BPS}} y^{2J_3} (-y)^{2I_3}$$ where $I_3$ is an R-symmetry generator and $$\CJ_3 := J_3 + I_3.$$ The PSC is an index because $\CQ$ is a singlet under $\CJ_a$, anticommutes with $(-1)^F$, and is invertible on long representations of the algebra of the $\CR_{\alpha}^A$. Usually we will shorten the notation and leave the dependence on $u$ implicit. Specializing to $y=-1$ we recover the framed BPS degeneracies ${{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}(u,L_\zeta, \gamma)$. Thanks to the rigidity of small representations of supersymmetry, they are invariant under deformations of parameters provided no states enter or leave the Hilbert space. However, there will be wall-crossing phenomena analogous to the usual wall-crossing of BPS states in the absence of line operators. We investigate this in Section \[subsec:Halos\]. A Protected Spin Character can also be defined for the usual vanilla BPS states. To see this observe that the quantity $$\label{eq:PSC-one} {\rm Tr}_{\CH^{BPS}_{u,\gamma}}(2 J_3) (-1)^{2J_3} (-y)^{2\CJ_3}$$ vanishes on long representations of the $\CN=2$ algebra. To prove this consider the quantity ${\rm Tr} x_1^{2J_3} x_2^{2I_3}$. We obtain from it by $$\label{eq:Inermed-PSC} {\rm Tr}(2 J_3) (-1)^{2J_3} (-y)^{2\CJ_3} = x_1{\p \over \p x_1}\left({\rm Tr} x_1^{2J_3} x_2^{2I_3}\right)\vert_{x_1=-x_2 = y}$$ Now, for long representations the broken supercharges — the creation operators in the Clifford algebra — transform in the $(\half;\half)$ of $so(3) \oplus su(2)_R$. Therefore, long representations are of the form $\Lambda^*(\half;\half) \otimes \omega$, where $\omega$ is a Clifford vacuum transforming in some representation of $so(3) \oplus su(2)_R$. Computing the right hand side of for such a representation, one finds a sum of two terms. Now observe that ${\rm Tr} x_1^{2J_3} x_2^{2I_3} = (x_1+ x_1^{-1} + x_2 + x_2^{-1})^2$ for $\Lambda^*(\half;\half)$. The two terms in involve setting $x_1=-x_2 = y$ or taking a derivative $x_1{\p \over \p x_1}$ and then setting $x_1=-x_2 = y$ on $(x_1+ x_1^{-1} + x_2 + x_2^{-1})^2$ and plainly both of these vanish. Thus vanishes on long representations. BPS representations, on the other hand, are of the form $[(\half;0)\oplus (0;\half)]\otimes \omega$ so from the first factor (the "half-hypermultiplet") we get only one factor $(x_1+ x_1^{-1} + x_2 + x_2^{-1})$ when we compute ${\rm Tr} x_1^{2J_3} x_2^{2I_3} $. One of the two terms in survives, contributing an overall factor of $(y- 1/y)$ from the half-hypermultiplet. Therefore, we can define an (unframed) Protected Spin Character $\Omega(u,\gamma;y)$ by $$(y-1/y) \Omega(u,\gamma;y) := {\rm Tr}(2 J_3) (-1)^F (-y)^{2\CJ_3}.$$ Note that if the Clifford vacuum is of the form $\omega = (j;0)$, that is, if the Clifford vacuum is a singlet under $SU(2)_R$, then the Protected Spin Character <span>*coincides*</span> with the spin character of $\omega$. Thus, we immediately see that a standard hypermultiplet, which has Clifford vacuum $\omega = (0;0)$, has PSC $\Omega(u,\gamma;y)=1$. A standard W-boson, on the other hand, has $\omega = (\half;0)$ and therefore gives $\Omega(u,\gamma;y)=y+1/y$. In fact, in all the examples of which we are aware, the BPS particles have representations coming from Clifford vacua of the form $\omega = (j;0)$. We therefore call BPS particles with vacua of the form $(j;j')$ with $j'\not=0$ *exotic BPS particles*. Similarly, we call framed BPS states which transform nontrivially under $SU(2)_R$ *exotic framed BPS states*. For nonexotic BPS states our PSC is the same as the "refined index" of @Gukov:2004hz [@Dimofte:2009bv; @Dimofte:2009tm] up to a (convention-dependent) sign. We now state a pair of "strong positivity" conjectures for BPS and framed BPS states. These conjectures state that there are no exotic particles at smooth points on the Coulomb branch.[^7] As we have noted, for nonexotic particles the PSC is the ordinary $SU(2)$ character of $\omega$. It follows that the PSC must be a positive integral linear combination of $so(3)$ characters of irreducible representations. In particular at $y=1$ the PSC computes dimensions of vector spaces, and must be positive. We can also formulate a "weak positivity" condition which simply requires the framed BPS degeneracies to be positive integers. Note that by wall-crossing the existence of exotic BPS particles would surely lead to exotic framed BPS states. We will see in Section \[sec:Formal-line-operators\] that the strong positivity conjecture (even in a weakened form) has far reaching, beautiful consequences for the framed and standard BPS spectrum. There is strong evidence it is true for all theories in the $A_1$ class, in a very non-trivial fashion. Another fact which appears to be true in all our examples is that for a fixed line operator the spaces $\CH_{u,L,\zeta,\gamma}^{\rm BPS}$ are only nonvanishing for a finite number of charges $\gamma$. That is, there are only a finite number of nonvanishing framed BPS invariants for a fixed line operator. We have no simple field-theoretical argument to justify this statement, but we suspect that this finiteness property might be universally true in field theory. However, it must be admitted that all our evidence is based on the $A_1$ class of theories. This is one reason why it is important to understand better the higher rank theories in the class $\CS$, a project to which we hope to return. A final observation is in order. Spin characters have been studied recently in the literature, but always in the context of field theory rather than supergravity. Our construction suggests one reason why the field theory case is preferred: in supergravity there is no $SU(2)_R$ symmetry available, hence no way of constructing a protected spin character. Halos and halo Fock spaces {#subsec:Halos} -------------------------- We now describe a particularly interesting class of framed BPS states, namely bound states between a "core" supported in a small neighborhood of the line operator and a surrounding "halo" of BPS particles. Such configurations are closely related to Denef's halo solutions of $\CN=2$ supergravity @Denef:2000nb [@Denef:2000ar; @Denef:2002ru]. In @Denef:2007vg this phenomenon was used to derive the semi-primitive wall-crossing formula. As we will see shortly, halos are important for the framed version of the wall-crossing problem as well. We begin by working classically, in the simple case of a BPS core of charge $\gamma_c$, bound to a single halo particle of charge $\gamma_h$. A variant of an argument from @Denef:2000nb shows the following.[^8] The energy of a halo particle probing the IR background associated with the core charge $\gamma_c$ is $$\label{eq:Halo-Particle-Energy} E_{halo} = \vert Z_{\gamma_h}(u(r))\vert \left(1 + \cos(\alpha_h - \alpha_\zeta)\right) - {\rm Re}(Z_{\gamma_h}(u)/\zeta).$$ Recall that $u \in \CB$ stands for the value of the vacuum sarah71@example.net. The moduli detected by the probe particle at a distance $r$ from the line operator depends on $r$, and we denote $Z_{\gamma_h}(u(r)) =\vert Z_{\gamma_h}(u(r))\vert e^{i \alpha_h(r)}$. On the other hand $\zeta$ is independent of $r$, and we write its phase as $\zeta = e^{i \alpha_\zeta}$. The halo particle minimizes its energy at some $r$ with $e^{i\alpha_h(r)} / \zeta = -1$. This gives a close analog of Denef's formula for the boundstate radius of BPS black holes @Denef:2000nb:[^9] $$\label{eq:halo-rad} r_{\rm halo} = \frac{\langle \gamma_h, \gamma_c\rangle}{2 {\rm Im}(Z_{\gamma_h}(u)/\zeta)}.$$ This result has several important consequences. First, it gives an analog of the Denef stability condition: the halo configuration only exists for $(u,\zeta)$ such that $r_{\rm halo}$ given in is positive. Second, note that $r_{\rm halo} \to \infty$ when $ Z_{\gamma_h}(u) = - \vert Z_{\gamma_h}(u)\vert \zeta $ — in other words, when $(u, \zeta)$ lie on the BPS wall $\hW(\gamma_h)$. Unless we are very near this wall, $r_{\rm halo}$ is much smaller than the natural cutoff for the validity of the IR description. So the picture is that as one approaches the BPS wall $\hW(\gamma_h)$, halo configurations built from of particles of charge (a multiple of) $\gamma_h$ reach a size which justifies treating them purely within the IR theory. These haloes grow to infinite size when we reach the wall, and disappear on the other side. What are the <span>*quantum*</span> states associated with these haloes? Fortunately it is easy to quantize the classical halo configurations: being mutually BPS, the halo particles do not interact with one another, and simply generate a $\IZ_2$-graded Fock space of quantum states. To describe this mathematically, let $\CH'(\gamma_h;u)$ be the space of vanilla BPS states of charge $\gamma$, with a half-hypermultiplet factored out. It is a representation of spatial $so(3)$ and $su(2)_R$. We define a $\IZ_2$ grading by $-(-1)^{2J_3}$. The usual BPS degeneracy $\Omega(\gamma_h;u)$ is minus the superdimension of $\CH'(\gamma_h;u)$ with respect to this grading. Letting $J_{\gamma_c,\gamma_h}= \half (\vert \langle \gamma_c, \gamma_h\rangle \vert-1)$, introduce the representation $(J_{\gamma_c,\gamma_h})$ of spatial $so(3)$, of dimension $\vert \langle \gamma_c, \gamma_h\rangle \vert$. This accounts for the spin of the electromagnetic field from the halo-core interaction. We build a $\IZ_2$-graded Fock space on the finite-dimensional vector space $(J_{\gamma_c,\gamma_h})\otimes \CH'(\gamma_h;u)$, considering the $\IZ_2$ grading of $(J_{\gamma_c,\gamma_h})$ to be *even*.[^10] Concretely, if we define a set of integers $a_{m, \gamma_h}$ by $$\Omega(u,\gamma_h;-z) = {\operatorname{{Tr}}}_{\CH'(\gamma_h;u)}(-z)^{2J_3} z^{2 I_3} = \sum_{-M_{\gamma_h}}^{M_{\gamma_h}} a_{m, \gamma_h} z^m$$ where $M_{\gamma_h} \ge 0$ is twice the maximal $\CJ_3$ of a halo particle, our Fock space is generated by $\vert a_{m,\gamma_h}\vert $ creation operators of $2 \CJ_3$ eigenvalue $m+m'$, for each $m'$ of the form $m' = -2J_{\gamma_c,\gamma_h}, -2J_{\gamma_c,\gamma_h} + 2, \dots,2J_{\gamma_c,\gamma_h}-2, 2J_{\gamma_c,\gamma_h}$. The oscillators are fermionic for $m$ even (i.e. $a_{m,\gamma_h}>0$) and bosonic for $m$ odd (i.e. $a_{m,\gamma_h}<0$). Note that $\Omega(\gamma_h;u) = \sum_m a_{m, \gamma_h}$. If $\langle\gamma_c,\gamma_h \rangle=0$ then we consider $(J_{\gamma_c,\gamma_h})$ to be the zero vector space, and no halos form. Of course, $a_{m, \gamma_h}$ is a piecewise continuous integer function of $u$, but we usually suppress the dependence in the notation. Framed wall-crossing {#subsec:Halo-Wall-Crossing} -------------------- In Section \[subsec:BPS-Deg-PSC\] we defined the protected spin character ${{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}(L,\gamma;u, \zeta)$ which "counts" framed BPS states. But as we noted in Section \[sec:framed-BPS-states\], when $(\zeta, u)$ cross a BPS wall, the framed BPS states can mix with the continuum. Hence the standard arguments for the invariance of ${{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}(L,\gamma;u, \zeta)$ break down. This is the framed version of the "wall-crossing" problem. Fortunately, it is easier than the full-fledged wall-crossing problem for the vanilla BPS states: the states which disappear from the framed BPS spectrum are just the simple halo states which we have described in Section \[subsec:Halos\]. So we can completely describe the jump of ${{\overline{\underline{\Omega}}}}(L,\gamma;u, \zeta)$ as we cross the wall. Consider a path $(u_t,\zeta_t)\in \widehat \CB \times \widehat{U(1)}$ which crosses a wall $\widehat{W}(\gamma_h)$. As noted above, when we reach the wall $r_{\rm halo}$ goes to infinity. Hence an entire Fock space of halo boundstates, constructed from halo particles
{'source': 'arXiv_out/1006'}