4
$\begingroup$

BCOV in their famous paper (http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9309140) state the genus one holomorphic anomaly equation (on page 53) to be $$\partial_i \partial_{\bar{j}} F_{1} = \frac{1}{2}C_{ikl}\bar{C}^{kl}_{\bar{j}} + (1-\frac{\chi}{24})G_{i \bar{j}}$$ where $C_{ijk}$ is the 3 point function or Yukawa coupling on Calabi-Yau moduli space, $$\bar{C}^{kl}_{\bar{j}} = e^{2K}\bar{C}_{\bar{a}\bar{b}\bar{j}}G^{k \bar{a}} G^{l \bar{c}},$$ $K$ being the Kahler potential for the Weil-Pietersson metric on CY moduli space.

In an earlier paper (http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9302103v1.pdf) on page 14 they claim that $$F_1 = \text{log}\big[\text{exp}(3+h^{1,1} -\frac{\chi}{12})K \,\, \text{det}[G^{-1}] |f(z)|^2\big]$$ with $f(z)$ a holomorphic function.

However this does not seem to check out. Taking a holomorhic and anti-holomorphic derivative on the above solution and using the "special geometry relation" (a relation expressing the curvature in terms of the metric and 3-point function) I get a similar equation, but not exactly the same as the BCOV equation above. In particular, there seems to be no way to get rid of the appearance of the Hodge number $h^{1,1}$. What seems to be the problem?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

There is an introduction to the BCOV theory from math perspective in this artcle by Kanazawa and Zhou. In the case $h^{1,1}=1$, it is checked in page 16 that the $\mathcal{F}_1$ (non-holomorphic object) satisfies the anomaly equation. The general case should follow in a similar manner.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.