text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In confining theories, such as the Yang-Mills theory, non-supersymmetric or supersymmetric ($`𝒩=1`$ gluodynamics), heavy (probe) color sources in the fundamental representation are connected by color flux tubes, fundamental QCD strings. The fundamental string tension is of the order of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$ where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the dynamical scale parameter of the gauge theory under consideration, and its transverse size is of the order of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$. Both parameters are independent of the number of colors (in what follows the gauge group is assumed to be SU($`N`$)) and, besides $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, can contain only numerical factors.

Significant effort has been invested recently in studies of the flux tubes induced by color sources in higher representations of SU($`N`$), mostly in connection — but not exclusively — with high-precision lattice calculations, see e.g.  and references therein. The composite flux tubes attached to such color sources are also known as $`k`$-strings, where $`k`$ denotes the $`N`$-ality of the color representation under consideration. The $`N`$-ality of the representation with $`\mathrm{}`$ upper and $`m`$ lower indices (i.e. $`\mathrm{}`$ fundamental and $`m`$ anti-fundamental) is defined as $`k=|\mathrm{}m|`$.

Some qualitative features of the $`k`$-strings are well understood. The most important feature is that the string tension does not depend on the particular representation of the probe color source, but only on its $`N`$-ality. Indeed, the particular Young tableau of the representation plays no role, since all representations with the given $`N`$-ality can be converted into each other by emitting an appropriate number of soft gluons. For instance, the adjoint representation has zero $`N`$-ality; therefore, the color source in the adjoint can be completely screened by gluons, and the flux tube between the adjoint color sources should not exist. The same is true for any representation with $`N`$ fundamental or $`N`$ anti-fundamental indices. Theoretical ideas regarding confinement in lattice gauge theories and the role of $`N`$-ality are extensively reviewed in Ref. .

At the same time, one can find in the literature — especially, devoted to lattices — reports on the adjoint string tension at intermediate distances, measurements of distinct string tensions for symmetric and anti-symmetric representations of one and the same $`N`$-ality, and so on. For instance, in Ref.  which deals with SU(3) gauge group, the string tensions (at distances up to $`2`$ fm) are measured for representations 8 of $`N`$-ality 0, 3 and 6 of $`N`$-ality 2, 10 of $`N`$-ality 3, and for some other representations. The question is: “Is there a conflict between the above results and the general principles?”

A part of the apparent contradiction is due to semantics. There is an objective difficulty too: quantitative analysis is hindered by the fact that seemingly there is no small expansion parameter in the $`k`$-string problem, that could play a guiding role.

In this paper we demonstrate that, using $`1/N`$ as such a parameter, one can not only resolve the above conflict, but put the analysis on a relatively quantitative basis. (Here $`N`$ is the number of colors). We assume the ’t Hooft scaling, i.e. $`g^21/N`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is kept fixed.

Gauge theories at strong coupling have no expansion parameter other than $`1/N`$. Within the ’t Hooft framework, the $`1/N`$ expansion is abstracted from the Feynman graphs. However, since one in fact uses only the topology of the graph, the result obtained is valid to all orders in the gauge coupling $`Ng^2`$ and is, thus, nonperturbative. The leading term in the $`1/N`$ expansion corresponds to the planar ’t Hooft graphs, the next-to-leading to the ’t Hooft graphs with one handle, and so on. This feature — the topological character of the $`1/N`$ expansion — is inherited and fully incorporated into string theory. The string perturbation theory is the expansion in $`g_{\mathrm{st}}`$. For closed strings it is $`g_{\mathrm{st}}^2`$ that enters, which corresponds to a $`1/N^2`$ expansion in gauge theories. Non-perturbative stringy effects (D-branes), that are exponential in $`1/g_{\mathrm{st}}`$, may give rise to exponential terms of the type $`\mathrm{exp}(N)`$ or $`\mathrm{exp}(N^2)`$ in gauge theories.

At large $`N`$ the problem of composite strings becomes, in essence, a weak coupling problem. A crucial starting observation is that at $`N=\mathrm{}`$ the fundamental strings (i.e. strings that connect a quark-antiquark pair in the fundamental representation) become free and non-interacting, while their interaction emerges only at the level of $`1/N^2`$ corrections .

In the remainder of this paper we will adopt the following convenient convention: the length of the strings under consideration will be chosen to be $`N`$-independent (but certainly much larger than $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$). The $`N`$ dependence is reserved for time duration of the measurement.

We view a $`k`$-string as a bound state of $`k`$ elementary fundamental strings (see Fig. 1). This standpoint is natural in the gauge theory/supergravity correspondence  where the $`k`$-string world sheet (Wilson loop) is described as $`k`$-coincident elementary world sheets . Accordingly, in field theory one can define the $`k`$-string Wilson loop as $`k`$ coincident fundamental Wilson loops. In doing so, one will deal with the probe source which belongs to a reducible representation with $`k`$ upper indices. If the (Euclidean) observation time is sufficiently large, all excited-string contributions will die out, and one will measure the ground-state string tension. Alternatively, for the study of quasi-stable strings, one can single out a particular representation of the probe source, by considering the Wilson loop in the appropriate representation.

The question we address below is the life-times of quasi-stable strings and tension splittings. Our approach is based on a Minkowskian (quasiclassical) picture of string interactions which is especially appropriate for the description of various tunneling transitions. Some elements of this picture can be traced back to the 1970’s . The validity of the quasiclassical approximation is justified by the smallness of $`1/N`$. We then translate our results in the Euclidean language appropriate for lattice simulations.

Using general properties of weakly coupled systems we will show that the decay rates of the quasi-stable strings (per unit length per unit time) scale as $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(N)`$. The dependence $`(N)`$ is either $`N^2`$ in the case of the adjoint string, $`\mathrm{exp}(N^2)`$ is the case of a decay from a pure higher (i.e. non-anti-symmetric) representation into the ground state (the anti-symmetric representation), or $`\mathrm{exp}(N)`$ when $`kN`$ (the saturation limit). The common reason behind the $`N`$ dependence is that all these processes are non-planar in their nature and, therefore, in the large-$`N`$ limit they will never occur (an infinite amount of time is needed to observe them).

For translating our results in the Euclidean language it is important to understand into which particular final state quasi-stable strings decay. We will comment on this issue too. We expand our previous results  on the $`k`$-string tensions by further analyzing string interactions at large/small distances. In particular, we explain, from a somewhat new angle, the impossibility of the Casimir scaling 111The very term Casimir scaling was introduced in Ref. . for the bona fide $`k`$-strings 222By bona fide $`k`$-strings we mean the stable strings with all $`k`$ indices antisymmetrized. and what may mimic the Casimir scaling in lattice measurements at intermediate distances.

The organization of the paper is as follows: Section 2 presents short theoretical and lattice-data reviews on Wilson loops and $`k`$-strings. In Sect. 3 we estimate the decay rates of quasi-stable strings in various situations. In Sect. 4 we introduce the notion of the saturation limit and discuss the relevance of the sine formula in this limit. Section 6 is devoted to oversatuarted strings. In Sect. 7 we provide a physically transparent explanation of the interaction term $`k^3/N^2`$ in the expansion of the sine formula. In Sect. 8 we introduce and discuss the tension deficit for composite strings. In Sect. 9 we suggest a tentative explanation why the Casimir scaling could be observed at intermediate distances. Section 10 is devoted to $`k`$-strings in the “orientifold field theories”. In Sects. 11 we discuss the impact of our results on the Euclidean lattice calculations. Finally, Sect. 12 presents concluding comments and discussion of relevance of our estimates to $`N=3`$. A toy (exactly solvable) model illustrating $`k^3/N^2`$ in the expansion of the sine formula in the tension can be found in the Appendix.

## 2 Preliminaries: theoretical background, lattice data

The purpose of this section is to define and review the notion of stable (quasi-stable) $`k`$-strings and review the way their tensions are measured. We also briefly summarize our previous paper .

### 2.1 $`k`$-Strings — theoretical background

Suppose we wish to measure a long-distance quark-antiquark potential in pure SU$`(N)`$ gauge theory or in its minimal supersymmetric extension, supersymmetric gluodynamics. We assume that the quark-antiquark pair is in a specific representation $`R`$. The expected long-distance potential is

$$V=\sigma L.$$
(1)
The stable string tension $`\sigma `$ should not depend on the specific representation $`R`$ of the quark-antiquark pair, but rather on its $`N`$-ality $`k`$, since a soft gluon can transform a representation $`R`$ into a representation $`R^{}`$ within the same $`N`$-ality. For this reason we can evaluate the string tension by considering a reducible representation with a given $`N`$-ality $`k`$ instead of a specific representation $`R`$, provided this reducible representation contains $`R`$. For instance, one can consider, as a probe source, an ensemble of $`k`$ heavy quarks (in the fundamental representation) nailed in close proximity from each other. Another source, at distance $`L`$ from the former, will be composed of $`k`$ heavy anti-quarks. Since the fully anti-symmetric representation is expected to have the lowest energy, the string attached to a source in a reducible representation will evolve into the anti-symmetric string after a certain time $`\tau `$. The time $`\tau `$ is definitely $`\text{ }>`$ than a typical inverse splitting between the energies of the anti-symmetric string and other representations. In fact, sometimes it may be much larger.

By the same token, if the probe charges have $`N`$-ality zero, even if they are connected by a string at time zero, it will inevitably evolve into a no-string state since such charges can be totally screened. For instance, the adjoint probe heavy quark is screened by a gluon. Another example: if one has $`N`$ fundamental quarks separated from $`N`$ fundamental anti-quarks by a large distance $`L`$ eventually each of the two $`N`$-quark ensembles will develop string junctions (a baryon vertex), and there will be no string connecting the two ensembles.

A graphic illustration is presented in Fig. 2. Suppose that one calculates the expectation value of a Wilson loop in the adjoint representation (i.e. induced by an adjoint probe “quark”). Dynamically, a Wilson “counter-loop” in the adjoint representation will be formed thus screening the non-dynamical probe quark. In physical terms, a gluon lump is produced which combines with the probe adjoint source to form a color singlet.

The fundamental string, by definition, is the one that connects a fundamental heavy quark with an anti-quark. The interaction between the fundamental strings is via the glueball exchanges. The process is non-perturbative in the coupling $`g^2N`$. Although one uses the Feynman graphs in the ’t Hooft representation in order to analyze the $`N`$ dependence, by no means it is implied that the results thus obtained are perturbative in the gauge coupling and “correspond to few-gluon exchange.” As is standard in the ’t Hooft framework, since the $`1/N`$ analysis is based only on topology of the graphs (e.g. planarity vs. non-planarity), the results are expected to fully represent the non-perturbative strong coupling gauge dynamics.

Since we deal with the interactions between color-singlet objects and the interaction is non-planar, it will be controlled by $`O(1/N^2)`$, see Ref. . At $`N=\mathrm{}`$ the interaction vanishes, and we have $`k`$ free fundamental strings with $`\sigma _k=k\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$. A sample $`1/N^2`$ interaction between two fundamental Wilson loop is depicted in Fig. 3a. The fact that the corrections to the free strings relation $`\sigma _k=k\sigma _1`$ run in powers of $`1/N^2`$ was used  to exclude the Casimir scaling hypothesis. On general grounds one can assert that at distances $`\text{ }>\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ the fundamental strings attract each other , while at short distances there is a repulsion (see the end of this section), so that composite $`k`$-strings develop.

This picture is supported by string theory. String theorists prefer to call the Wilson loop a string world sheet. The realization of the $`k`$-string will be simply $`k`$ coincident elementary (fundamental) strings, or more precisely, a bound state of $`k`$ elementary string world sheets, see Fig. 3b.

Within the AdS/CFT correspondence  we can elevate this model to a quantitative level . Indeed, the AdS/CFT correspondence is a natural framework for calculating the $`k`$-string tension, since in the dual string picture we work at strong ’t Hooft coupling. In addition, $`1/N`$ is represented by $`g_{\mathrm{st}}`$. In this framework the Wilson loop on the AdS boundary is described by a fundamental world sheet that extends inside the bulk AdS . The value of the Wilson loop is the area of the minimal surface, given simply by the Nambu-Goto action

$$𝒲=\mathrm{exp}\left(S_{\mathrm{NG}}\right).$$
(2)
Similarly, the $`k`$-string Wilson loop (6) is described by $`k`$ coincident world sheets. In the supergravity approximation, $`g_{\mathrm{st}}=0`$, we obtain $`\sigma _k=k\sigma _1`$ , as expected. In order to calculate $`1/N`$ corrections, one has to consider string interactions, namely to go beyond the lowest order in $`g_{\mathrm{st}}`$. It is clear, however, that in the closed string theory (and, in particular, in type IIB) the expansion parameter is $`g_{\mathrm{st}}^2=1/N^2`$.

The fact that the interaction between the fundamental strings is proportional to $`1/N^2`$ and, thus, vanishes at $`N\mathrm{}`$ is explained in detail in Ref. Moreover, from the same work we know that at distances $`\text{ }>\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ the interaction is attractive. An attractive potential between the fundamental strings is also obtained  in lattice strong-coupling calculations. What is the nature of the inter-string interaction at distances of the order of the fundamental string thickness?

Logically there are two options. Either the parallel strings attract at all distances (then $`k`$ closely situated 1-strings will glue together forming a structureless flux tube carrying $`k`$ units of $`N`$-ality), or the attraction gives place to repulsion at shorter distances (then the $`k`$-string will have a substructure in the transverse plane reminiscent of that of a nucleus). The large-$`N`$ expansion of the $`k`$-string tension suggests that it is the latter option that is realized in QCD. Indeed, on general grounds, with no model dependence, one can show that at $`N1`$ and $`k1`$

$$\left(\frac{\sigma _k}{k\sigma _\mathrm{f}}1\right)\frac{k^2}{N^2}$$

(see Sect. 4.1). The above $`k`$ dependence of the binding “energy” has no natural explanation in the picture of a forced “collectivization” inevitable under the assumption that the parallel 1-strings attract at all distances. At least, we are unaware of such an explanation and were unable to obtain it, in spite of several attempts.

At the same time, the repulsion at shorts distances, that naturally leads to a nucleus-type structure of the slice of the $`k`$-string, and  explains the above $`k`$ dependence of the binding “energy” (see Sect. 7) is an immediate consequence of the following consideration.

The trace of the energy-momentum tensor $`\theta _\mu ^\mu `$ in pure Yang-Mills theory or in QCD with massless fermions has the form (the scale anomaly)

$$\theta _\mu ^\mu =\frac{b}{32\pi ^2}G_{\mu \nu }^aG^{\mu \nu ,a}$$

where $`G_{\mu \nu }^a`$ is the operator of the gluon field strength tensor ($`b`$ is the first coefficient of the Gell-Mann–Low function). One can use $`\theta _\mu ^\mu (x)`$ as a local probe of the energy density. Indeed the value of $`\theta _\mu ^\mu G^2`$, in the presence of a Wilson loop $`W(C)`$, measures the string tension ,

$$W(C)^1d^3x\theta _\mu ^\mu (x),W(C)_{\mathrm{c},\mathrm{eucl}}=2\sigma R,$$
(3)
where the subscript c stands for connected part. The chromomagnetic part is presumably negligible for the static flux tubes attached to static color sources. This implies that the energy density is proportional to the expectation value of the operator $`\stackrel{}{E}^2(x)`$, where $`\stackrel{}{E}`$ is the chromoelectric field, and the arrow is used to represent both vectorial and color indices. Then the string tension (the energy per unit length in the $`z`$ direction) is given by the integral

$$\sigma d^2x\stackrel{}{E}^2(x),$$

where the integral runs in the perpendicular plane.

Two overlapping fundamental flux tubes are depicted in Fig. 4. Now

$$\sigma _2d^2x\left(\stackrel{}{E}_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}(x)+\stackrel{}{E}_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}(x)\right)^2=2\sigma _\mathrm{f}+2d^2x\stackrel{}{E}_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}(x)\stackrel{}{E}_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}(x)$$

The fluxes are fixed by the given (static) color sources. This implies that the interference term is positive. It is not difficult to see that it is also suppressed by $`1/N^2`$, because generically $`\stackrel{}{E}_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}`$ is orthogonal to $`\stackrel{}{E}_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}`$ in the color space; only the Cartan components of the chromoelectric field are important. Thus, if two parallel 1-strings overlap, the energy per unit length is larger than $`2\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$ by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/N^2`$, i.e. overlapping flux tubes repel each other.

Certainly, the arguments presented above are somewhat quasiclassical. We believe, however, that they are qualitatively correct; they certainly lead to a self-consistent overall picture. For further discussion see Sect. 7.

### 2.2 A mini-review of the lattice literature on $`k`$-strings

The Euclidean/lattice formulation of the problem is usually given through the expectation value of a rectangular Wilson loop,

$$𝒲(C)=\mathrm{tr}\mathrm{exp}(iA_\mu ^aT_R^a𝑑x^\mu ),$$
(4)
where $`T_R^a`$ are the generators of SU$`(N)`$ in the given representation, which may or may not be irreducible. Sometimes, for practical purposes, it is more convenient to consider a correlation function of two Polyakov lines. Assume that the (Euclidean) time direction is compactified, and one defines two Polyakov lines in the time direction, separated by a distance $`L`$. The Polyakov line is defined through the integral similar to (4), with the generators in the given representation $`R`$. If time interval is large enough, the measurement of the correlation function of two Polyakov lines must yield $`\mathrm{exp}(\sigma _RLT)`$.

The generators of the reducible representation with $`N`$-ality $`k`$ are given by tensor products of the fundamental representation. For example, in the case of $`N`$-ality $`2`$ we have

$$\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }=\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }+\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }.$$
(5)
Therefore we can evaluate the $`k`$-string tension by considering the following Wilson loop

$$𝒲_{k\text{-string}}(C)\left[𝒲_{\text{ fund}}(C)\right]^k.$$
(6)
Physically, the above definition (6) represents $`k`$-fundamental coincident Wilson loops. It is instructive to think of it as of $`k`$ fundamental probe sources placed at one point. The resulting composite probe source is in the reducible representation of the $`N`$-ality $`k`$, which includes a mixture of irreducible representations, starting from fully anti-symmetric, up to fully symmetric.

One of the main tasks of this paper is to bridge a gap between theoretical studies of $`k`$-strings from the string theory side and large-$`N`$ field theory side on the one hand, and lattice studies, on the other hand. Therefore, it is natural to give a brief summary of some lattice works devoted to $`k`$-strings.

Let us start with analytic studies, namely the strong coupling expansion. Since the seminal work of Wilson  it is known that in the Yang-Mills theory with no dynamical matter in the fundamental representation, the expectation value of a large Wilson loop induced by a heavy (non-dynamical) fundamental quark will trivially exhibit an area law

$$\mathrm{tr}\mathrm{exp}\left(iA_\mu 𝑑x^\mu \right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\sigma 𝒜\right).$$
(7)
Here $`\sigma `$ the string tension, $`\sigma (\mathrm{ln}g^2)a^2`$, where $`a`$ is the lattice cite and $`g`$ is the gauge coupling, $`g\mathrm{}`$.

The area law for the fundamental Wilson loop is also well established in the continuum limit, through numerical simulations. To detect the area law there is an obvious necessary condition on the area of the loop,

$$𝒜\mathrm{\Lambda }^2.$$
(8)
The slope in front of the area, Eq. (7) — the fundamental string tension — is measured to a reasonable accuracy. Moreover, a perpendicular slice of the fundamental string was studied too. A typical transverse dimension of the fundamental string is $`0.7`$ fm.

On the other hand, an area law has been also detected for the adjoint Wilson loop for contours satisfying the condition (8). For instance, typical distances in Ref.  were $`1.5`$ to 2 fm. The adjoint string tension was measured. The reported ratio $`\sigma _{\mathrm{adj}}/\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$ is close to the Casimir formula which for SU(3) yields 9/4. (Please, note that this number is larger than 2; we will return to this point in Sect. 9.) In fact, the adjoint strings emerge practically in all lattice studies. So far, only one work  reports an observation of the adjoint string breaking.333This work is based on a technique different from all other calculations.

A linear potential between an adjoint probe quark and anti-quark implies the existence of a quasi-stable string. It is certain that for asymptotically large areas, the area law must give place to the perimeter one; the linear potential must flatten off at the level corresponding to the creation of two gluelumps . The effect is not seen, however, in the existing simulations. The question to ask is: “what is the critical size/time needed for detecting the adjoint string breaking?”

Now, the very same dynamical adjoint “counter-loop” as in Fig. 2 (or a few “counter-loops”) can transform external probe quarks in a given representation $`R`$ to a different representation $`R^{}`$ with the same $`N`$-ality. In physical terms, if we have, say, an anti-symmetric source $`Q^{[ij]}`$, we can convert it into an object with two symmetric indices $`\{ij\}`$ by adding a soft gluon. It is clear, then, why one expects the $`k`$-string tension to depend on the $`N`$-ality, and not on the specific representation $`R`$. The genuine stable string for the given $`N`$-ality is expected to be attached to the probe source in the anti-symmetric representation. The probe sources in other representations with $`k`$ (upper) indices give rise to quasi-stable strings whose tension is supposed to depend not only on the $`N`$-ality, but on the particular representation. If the probe sources have $`k>[N]/2`$, we will call such strings oversaturated. Representations which have both upper and lower indices can be viewed as bound states of $`k`$-strings and some number of adjoint strings. Obviously, they are also quasi-stable. We will refer to such strings as bicomposites.

Lattice measurements of the Wilson loops or Polyakov line correlators seem to defy the above argument. They yield string tensions which depend on the particular representation under consideration rather than on the $`N`$-ality of the representation. For instance, in Ref.  which treats the SU(4) and SU(6) cases and measures the anti-symmetric and symmetric Wilson loops, distinct tensions are obtained for the anti-symmetric and symmetric two-index representations. It was argued  that the symmetric string is not stable and that it will have to decay into two fundamental strings. In light of the above, again, the most crucial question is what contour sizes are needed to exhibit the decay of the symmetric string into anti-symmetric. It is clear that the answer depends on the decay rate of the symmetric string.

Returning to the tensions of the stable (anti-symmetric) strings, there is no consensus in the lattice literature on the $`k`$-string tension. The Casimir scaling is often reported. In  is it argued that in three dimensions the $`k`$-string tension is very close to the Casimir scaling. A similar claim is made in  for four-dimensional SU(3) theories, where the Casimir behavior is found for symmetric representations. On the other hand, there are dedicated studies  which favor the sine formula for the antisymmetric strings.

As we have already mentioned, the Casimir scaling behavior for a stable string  is in contradiction with our analytical considerations : the string tension should be expandable in powers of $`1/N^2`$ rather than $`1/N`$.

## 3 Decay rates of the quasi-stable strings: case study

In this section we will give systematic estimates of the quasi-stable string decay rates. The strings are assumed to live in the Minkowski time. As was mentioned, the length of the strings under consideration will be chosen to be $`N`$-independent (but certainly much larger than $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$). The $`N`$ dependence is reserved for time duration. We will calculate the $`N`$ and representation dependence of the decay rates per unit time per unit length of the string. We will assume that $`N1`$ to infer regularities in this limit, and then speculate as to which extent our results may survive extrapolation to $`N=3`$. The question as to how these rates are reflected in the lattice measurements of the Wilson loops/Polyakov lines is deferred till Sect. 11.

### 3.1 Fundamental string in QCD with dynamical quarks

To warm up, let us start our consideration from SU$`(N)`$ Yang-Mills theory with, say, one dynamical (Dirac) quark in the fundamental representation. In this context, the title of this section might seem provocative, since, as everybody knows, dynamical quarks screen the fundamental probe color charges, and the string does not exist in this case.

Remember, however, that at large $`N`$ the dynamical quark production is suppressed by $`1/N`$. The quark loops decouple at $`N=\mathrm{}`$; in this limit the fundamental stable string exists, and its tension is well-defined and equal to a numerical constant times $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$. At large but finite $`N`$ the string is quasi-stable. The probability of its breaking per unit length per unit time was found long ago ,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{f}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2N^1.$$
(9)
This follows from the fact that planar graphs with one quark-loop insertion are suppressed by the factor $`N^1`$.

After the string is broken by the dynamical quark-antiquark pair it decays into two strings — one attached to the pair $`Q\overline{q}`$, another to $`\overline{Q}q`$ (here $`Q`$ is the probe non-dynamical quark, while $`q`$ is a dynamical one). Let us have a closer look at the final state (the reason why we dwell on this issue will become clear later).

If we limit ourselves to the classical approximation, we will have to conclude that the final-state strings are typically long, so that the overall energy carried by these two strings is $`\sigma _\mathrm{f}L`$ mod $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, i.e. the same as the energy stored in the original string before breaking. Indeed, the $`\overline{q}q`$ pair is produced from the vacuum in a “soft” manner, locally, at a certain point on the string. Typically, the momenta of $`\overline{q}`$ and $`q`$ at the time of production are of the order of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Larger momenta are highly unprobable since they can be obtained only from exponentially suppressed tails of the “wave function.”

In the large $`N`$ limit, the configuration obtained after the production of the $`\overline{q}q`$ pair evolves in time with no further breakings. Let us have a closer look at the “halves” of the broken string. Each consists of two well separated quarks (say, $`\overline{Q}q`$) connected by a long well developed string carrying energy scaling as $`L`$. The probability for this configuration to materialize as a ground-state meson is exponentially suppressed. In typical resonances, strings have sizes $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ (stricktly speaking, they cannot be called strings, rather “sausages”). A long string resides in exponentially suppressed tails of the meson wave functions.

On the other hand, exactly this configuration — two quarks connected by a long well developed string — is typical for highly excited meson states (radial excitations). Being highly excited, they can be treated quasiclassically. In such mesons the light quark is “smeared” around the heavy one at a large distance, which parametrically grows with the excitation number. The energy stored in the gluonic degrees of freedom is proportional to this distance. If it were not for the $`1/N`$ suppression, this meson would decay into the ground-state $`\overline{Q}q`$ meson plus multiple glueballs.

As was mentioned, quantum-mechanically, there is a certain overlap of the final state described above with the ground state mesons $`Q\overline{q}`$ and $`\overline{Q}q`$ depicted in Fig. 5a. This projection must be small, however. The smallness is unrelated to $`N`$; it is controlled by the parameter $`L\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. We will return to the issue of the smallness of this projection in Sect. 11.

Equation (9) implies a particular relation between the mass of a highly excited meson and its decay width, namely,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_n=CM_nN^1,C0.5.$$
(10)
Here $`n`$ is the excitation number, $`n1`$. The above relation was numerically studied in the ’t Hooft model and was confirmed to be valid .

### 3.2 Adjoint string

Now, consider pure SU$`(N)`$ Yang-Mills theory (no dynamical quarks) with the probe heavy sources in the adjoint representation. The screening of the sources occurs via creation of a pair of gluons. At the hadronic level, the string breaking is equivalent to the statement that the operator $`\overline{Q}Q`$ produces a pair of (color-singlet) mesons of the type $`QG`$. Here $`Q`$ is the field of the probe heavy quark while $`G`$ stands for the gluon. It is easy to see that the amplitude of this process is suppressed by $`1/N`$, while the probability of the string breaking (per unit length per unit time) is $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/N^2`$ (see Fig. 2b),

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{adj}}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2N^2.$$
(11)
The adjoint string is quasi-stable, much in the same way as the one in Sect. 3.1. The difference is that now the decay rate is suppressed by $`N^2`$ rather than $`N^1`$. Although the distinction is quantitative rather than qualitative, it may entail consequences for numerical simulations. Indeed, for large $`N`$, the available lattice sizes may be insufficient to place Wilson contours large enough to observe the adjoint string decay (see, however, Ref. ).

What can be said about the adjoint string tension $`\sigma _{\mathrm{adj}}`$? On general grounds

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{adj}}=2\sigma _\mathrm{f}\left(1+O\left(N^2\right)\right).$$
(12)
Since at distances $`\text{ }>\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ there is an attraction between the fundamental strings, the $`O\left(N^2\right)`$ term on the right-hand side must be negative. To measure this term in the Euclidean lattice simulations one would need to have the contour area $`𝒜>\mathrm{\Lambda }^2N^2`$. However, the adjoint string will decay at parametrically smaller areas, see Sect. 11.1. Therefore, at asymptotically large $`N`$ the adjoint string tension is not measurable through existing lattice methods. At $`N=3`$ the splitting between $`\sigma _{\mathrm{adj}}`$ and $`2\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$ may be measurable, though, if the interplay of numerical factors is favorable.

### 3.3 Bicomposites

In this section we will discuss quasi-stable strings combining features of the adjoint strings and $`k`$-strings, namely, we will consider the probe source of the type

$$Q_j^{i_1\mathrm{}i_ki_{k+1}}.$$
(13)
One can either deal with the reducible representation or pick up an irreducible one, say, by anti-symmetrizing all upper indices. In fact, the situation is very similar to that discussed in Sect. 3.2, as long as $`k`$ does not scale with $`N`$.

In this case the (quasi-stable) string tension does not depend on the $`N`$-ality $`k`$, but, rather, on the index $`\kappa `$,

$$\kappa =n+m,$$
(14)
where $`n`$ is the number of fundamental and $`m`$ anti-fundamental indices of the probe field $`Q`$. For the probe source (13) $`\kappa =k+2`$.

The tension of the given bicomposite is

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{bicomp}}=(2+k)\sigma _\mathrm{f}\left(1+O\left(N^2\right)\right).$$
(15)
It decays into a $`k`$-string through the gluelump creation, Fig. 2. The decay rate is given by Eq. (11) and is suppressed by $`1/N^2`$. Since the binding energy is $`O(1/N^2)`$ and the critical contour area scales as $`\mathrm{ln}(N^2/C)`$, the determination of the binding energy of this quasi-stable string is impossible at asymptotically large $`N`$.

As $`k`$ grows, on combinatorial grounds one expects the decay rate to increase, and loose its $`1/N^2`$ suppression when $`k`$ becomes of the order of $`N/2`$.

### 3.4 $`𝒌`$-Strings and their excitations

In this section we will consider probe color sources of the type $`Q^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_k}`$ or $`Q_{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_k}`$, with $`k`$ fundamental or anti-fundamental indices. The values of $`k`$ to be discussed in this section are of the order of $`N^0`$. The values of $`kN^1`$ are considered in Sects. 4 and 5.

In the general case, this is a reducible representation of SU($`N`$). To single out irreducible representations, one must perform symmetrization (anti-symmetrization) according to the given Young tableau. Not to overburden the subsequent discussion, for the time being we will limit ourselves to $`k=2`$ (higher values of $`N`$-ality will be considered in Sects. 4.1 and 5). In this case there are two Young tableaux — full symmetrization and full anti-symmetrization, $`Q^{\{ij\}}`$ and $`Q^{[ij]}`$. One can view the color source $`Q^{ij}`$ as the source composed of two fundamental heavy quarks, $`Q^i`$ and $`Q^j`$. If $`Q^i`$ and $`Q^j`$ are placed close to each other, a flux tube which connects them with two corresponding anti-quarks is called $`2`$-string, see Fig. 1. In the general case of $`k`$ fundamental quarks, we would be dealing with the $`k`$-strings.

In Ref.  we presented arguments that at distances $`\text{ }>\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ in the transverse direction the fundamental strings attract each other, that the lowest-energy state belongs to the anti-symmetric string, and that the tension splitting between the symmetric quasi-stable string and anti-symmetric string scales as $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2N^2`$. Numerical evidence also suggests (see  and ) that the symmetric quasi-stable 2-string has a larger tension than the anti-symmetric 2-string.

If one studies the probe charges in the reducible representation, as in Fig. 1, containing a mixture of the symmetric and anti-symmetric quasi-stable 2-strings, it is quite obvious that one will need the time interval $`\tau N^2\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ to resolve the tension splitting. In the Euclidean language, at $`TN^2\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$, the excited (symmetric) string contributions dies off.

A question which is more subtle and interesting is as follows: “Assume, one starts from the pure (excited) state, i.e. one considers the Wilson loop for $`Q^{\{ij\}}`$; then what is its decay time?”

We want to show that the symmetric string does not decay into the anti-symmetric one to any finite order in $`1/N^2`$. The decay rate is exponential. Indeed, in order to convert the symmetric color representation into anti-symmetric one has to produce a pair of gluons. This takes energy of the order of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. However, the string is not entirely broken, rather it is restructured, with the tension splitting $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2N^2`$. To collect enough energy, the gluon creation should take place not locally, but, rather at the interval of the length $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1N^2`$. This is then a typical tunneling process.

In fact, the decay rate can be found quasiclassically. The world sheet of the symmetric string is shown in Fig. 6a. Its decay proceeds via a bubble creation, see Fig. 6b. The world sheet of the symmetric string is two-dimensional “false vacuum,” while inside the bubble we have a “true vacuum,” i.e. the surface spanned by the anti-symmetric string. The tension difference — in the false vacuum decay problem, the vacuum energy difference — is $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2N^2`$, while the energy $`T`$ of the bubble boundary (per unit length) is $`T\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. This means that the thin wall approximation  is applicable, and the decay rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (per unit length of the string per unit time) is

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\pi T^2}{}\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\mathrm{exp}\left(\gamma N^2\right),$$
(16)
where $`\gamma `$ is a positive constant of the order of unity. Once the true vacuum domain is created through tunneling, it will expand in the real time pushing the boundaries (i.e. the positions of the gluons responsible for the conversion) toward the string ends.

## 4 $`𝒌`$-Strings: saturation limit and the sine formula

The strings attached to the sources which have $`k`$ fundamental indices (with no anti-fundamental), or vice versa are generically referred to as $`k`$-strings. The stable $`k`$-strings (or bona fide $`k`$-strings) are those attached to the fully anti-symmetric sources. Others are quasi-stable $`k`$-strings. In this section we will assume that $`k`$ scales as $`N^1`$ at large $`N`$.

### 4.1 Saturation limit: generalities

In this section we will address the issue of the stable $`k`$-string tension in a limit which we call saturation,

$$N\mathrm{},k\mathrm{},\frac{\pi k}{N}x\text{fixed}.$$
(17)
We will combine the knowledge obtained from (i) symmetry properties; (ii) the saturation limit; (iii) $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit with $`k`$ fixed; and (iv) $`1/N^2`$ expansion to prove that the general formula for the $`k`$-string tension in the saturation limit is as follows:

$$\frac{\sigma _k}{k}=\sigma _\mathrm{f}f(x),$$
(18)
where the function $`f`$ can be expanded in even powers of $`x`$,

$$f(x)=1+a_1x^2+a_2x^4+\mathrm{}$$
(19)
We then comment on how this peculiar $`k`$ dependence can be physically understood.

The central element of the proof is the $`Z_N`$ symmetry, i.e. the fact that the bona fide string tension $`\sigma _k`$ does not change under the replacements

$$kNk,\text{and}kk+N.$$
(20)
The function $`f`$ is dimensionless and, generally speaking, depends on two parameters, $`k`$ and $`N`$. Equation (20) implies that $`k`$ may enter only in a very special way, namely, through powers of $`|\mathrm{sin}x|`$. Thus, in general one can write

$$\sigma _k=\frac{\sigma _\mathrm{f}}{\pi }\left[c_1(N)|\mathrm{sin}x|+c_2(N)|\mathrm{sin}x|^2+c_3(N)|\mathrm{sin}x|^3+\mathrm{}\right],$$
(21)
where $`c_{\mathrm{}}(N)`$ are coefficients.

Now, we make use of the facts that (a) the saturation limit should be smooth, and (b) for fixed $`k`$ the expansion parameter is $`N^2`$ rather than $`N^1`$. Then we conclude that the coefficients $`c_{2\mathrm{}+1}=O(N^1)`$ while $`c_{2\mathrm{}+2}=O(N^0)`$ (here $`\mathrm{}=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$). Moreover, from the condition (iii) above it follows that $`c_1(N)=N`$.

Omitting terms vanishing in the saturation limit, we get

$$\sigma _k=\frac{\sigma _\mathrm{f}}{\pi }N\left\{|\mathrm{sin}x|+C_3|\mathrm{sin}x|^3+\mathrm{}\right\},$$
(22)
which is equivalent to Eq. (19) (here $`C_3`$ and possibly $`C_5`$, $`C_7`$ and so on are numerical coefficients). Numerical lattice evidence suggests  that $`C_3`$ is strongly suppressed. Assuming that only $`C_3`$ exists, and fitting the results for the $`k`$-strings, Del Debbio, Panagopoulos, and Vicari obtain

$$C_3=0.01\pm 0.02.$$

At $`N=\mathrm{}`$ and $`k`$ fixed Eq. (22) yields that $`\sigma _k=k\sigma _1.`$ Including the next-to-leading term in the $`x`$-expansion we get

$$\sigma _k=\sigma _\mathrm{f}k\left(1\stackrel{~}{C}_3\frac{k^2}{N^2}\right).$$
(23)
The term $`\sigma _\mathrm{f}\stackrel{~}{C}_3k^3/N^2`$ can be interpreted as the binding energy. The $`1/N^2`$ factor is well understood, see Ref. . A challenging question is to understand why the next-to-leading correction to $`\sigma _k`$ scales as $`k^3`$. Alternatively, one can say that the binding energy per one fundamental string in the $`k`$-string compound scales as $`k^2`$. Experience based on numerous discussions with our colleagues tells us that the first guess is, rather, that it is the first power of $`k`$ that must appear in the binding energy per one fundamental string.

To get a better idea, let us turn to the supersymmetric $`k`$-wall tension where the exact result is known. In this case the $`k^3`$ dependence is very general and is a consequence of the $`Z_N`$ symmetry (see Appendix). Apparently, the $`Z_N`$ symmetry is also instrumental for $`k`$-strings. For the U(1) $`k`$-strings (i.e. the Abrikosov-Nielsen-Olesen vortices), the $`k`$ behavior of $`\sigma _k/k`$ is expected to be different.

A physical picture underlying string dynamics that explains Eq. (23) is presented in Sect. 7.

### 4.2 How exact is the sine formula (in the saturation limit)?

The tension of the $`k`$ string, $`\sigma _k`$, a crucial parameter of the confinement dynamics, is under intense scrutiny since the mid-1980’s. Most frequently were discussed two competing hypotheses: (a) the Casimir scaling and (b) the sine formula originally suggested by Douglas and Shenker  (for extensive reviews and representative list of references see e.g. ). The Casimir scaling hypothesis was recently shown  to be inconsistent with the large $`N`$ expansion. In the same paper we argued that the sine formula should hold; in our terms the sine formula can be presented as follows:

$$f(x)=\frac{\mathrm{sin}x}{x}.$$
(24)
It amounts to keeping only the first term in the general expansion (22). The suppression of higher terms in this expansion cannot be inferred on general grounds alone; it is a dynamical statement following from the model .

In the previous section we wrote down the most general expression for the $`k`$-string tension (21), that is compatible with the $`Z_N`$ symmetry of the problem and $`1/N^2`$ nature of corrections. In the saturation limit the expression simplifies further to (22). It is tempting to speculate that the first term, the sine, controls the dynamics in the saturation limit (17), namely, that the $`k`$-string tension is exactly given by

$$\sigma _k=\mathrm{\Lambda }^2N\mathrm{sin}\pi \frac{k}{N}.$$
(25)
While there is no proof that the relation (25) is exact, there are arguments suggesting that it might be exact or, at least, present a good approximation (although we hasten to add that a parameter controlling this approximation is yet to be discovered). Below we will summarize theoretical evidence in favor of the above assertion.

The QCD string is not obviously a BPS object in $`𝒩=1`$gluodynamics. Therefore, in principle, it could get higher order corrections in powers of sine, as in (22). The statement that Eq. (25) is exact is equivalent to the statement that the QCD-string approaches a “ BPS status” in the saturation limit. Below we explain why a BPS QCD string should satisfy a sine relation. An additional general argument is given in the Appendix.

The first hint in favor of the sine formula comes from the large-$`N`$ analysis of $`𝒩=2`$SYM theory softly broken to $`𝒩=1`$SYM by the adjoint mass term $`m`$, due to Douglas and Shenker . In slightly broken $`𝒩=2`$SYM the QCD string is BPS-saturated to the leading order in $`m`$; therefore, no surprise that the sine formula $`\sigma _k=m\mathrm{\Lambda }N\mathrm{sin}\pi k/N`$ was found. Details are as follows. In the softly broken $`𝒩=2`$theory Douglas and Shenker found that

$$\sigma _kmN^2M_{k,k+1},$$
(26)
where $`M_{k,j}`$ are the masses of the BPS $`W`$ bosons,

$$M_{k,j}=|m_km_j|.$$

Here

$$m_k\mathrm{\Lambda }N\left(\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi k}{N}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi (k1)}{N}\right).$$

At large $`N`$, to the leading order in $`1/N`$, (keeping $`k/N`$ fixed), one then arrives at the sine formula,

$$M_{k,k+1}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{N}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi k}{N},\sigma _km\mathrm{\Lambda }N\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi k}{N}.$$

At order $`m^2`$ the strings cease to be BPS, and, accordingly, the $`m^2`$ correction to the string tension was found  to defy the sine formula.

The second evidence comes from MQCD. Here again the sine formula is obtained , without an a priori reason. Though the MQCD theory is not QCD, it is not clear why the obtained result is the exact sine. A possible reason is that MQCD possesses more symmetries than $`𝒩=1`$SYM, but no such a symmetry is known at present.

The third hint is the derivation of the $`k`$-string tension via supergravity . Here the result is model-dependent. For the Klebanov-Strassler background the sine formula was found to be an excellent approximation, but not exact. It was found to be exact for the Maldacena-Nuñez background. While both backgrounds are conjectured to be a dual description of pure $`𝒩=1`$gluodynamics in the far infrared, they have different ultraviolet contents. For this reason, presumably, different results were obtained. Note that the above arguments do not apply to pure $`𝒩=1`$SYM theory. Moreover, only the first argument is valid within field theory per se.

The last argument in favor of the sine formula — a field-theoretic one — is the relation between the $`k`$-string tension and the $`k`$-wall tension in $`𝒩=1`$gluodynamics . It is known that the BPS domain wall tensions in $`𝒩=1`$gluodynamics are exactly given by the formula

$$T_k=N^2\mathrm{\Lambda }^3\mathrm{sin}\pi \frac{k}{N}.$$
(27)
If one accepts the picture advocated in , that domain walls are built from a network of QCD-strings connected by baryon junctions, one immediately arrives at the sine formula, for a detailed discussion see Ref. . In this picture, the QCD-string effectively becomes a BPS object in the saturation limit. The suggestion of the “walls built of the string network” is admittedly a model, albeit motivated by various arguments. The most crucial question we see at the moment is whether the expansion parameter controlling the accuracy of this model is numerical or related to some well-defined limits, such as large $`N`$, saturation limit, and so on. In the absence of the analytic answer to this question one may resort to lattices, see the remark after Eq. (22). While the saturation limit is clearly difficult to achieve on the lattice, the effort is worthwhile.

## 5 Decays of quasi-stable strings in the saturation limit

In Sect. 3.4 we have discussed the decays of the quasi-stable $`k`$-strings with a relatively small $`k`$, i.e. $`kN^0`$, for instance, those attached to the source $`Q^{\{i_1i_2\}}`$. In this section we will deal with a generic representation obtained from the probe color sources of the type $`Q^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_k}`$ or $`Q_{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_k}`$, with $`k`$ fundamental or anti-fundamental indices and $`kN`$. This will correspond to $`x`$ not close to zero or $`\pi `$ in the consideration of Sect 4.

The reducible representation $`Q^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_k}`$ can be decomposed in a number of irreducible representations. For $`k<N`$ the number of different types of representations of SU($`N`$) equals to 444We are grateful to Haris Panagopoulos for pointing out to us this formula. $`P(k)`$ where $`P(k)`$ = number of partitions of the integer $`k`$,

$$P(k)\mathrm{exp}(\pi \sqrt{2k/3})/(4k\sqrt{3}),k1.$$
(28)
All strings except that attached to the fully anti-symmetric sources are quasi-stable. Their tensions are expected to cover densely the shaded area in Fig. 9. The tensions of “neighboring” strings may be expected to differ by an exponentially small amount. The decay rate of a given quasi-stable string into a certain close-lying string will be enormously suppressed. The density of final states is exponentially high, however. We are interested in inclusive probability, i.e. the probability of decay of a given quasi-stable string into any state, with the possible subsequent cascading into the stable anti-symmetric string.

To do the estimate we will “fuse” possible final states into one effective final string (say, anti-symmetric), ignoring the fact that the string tensions are spread practically continuously. We will estimate the decay rate by evaluating a direct single-leap tunneling into the effective final string.

In Sect. 3.4 we explained that the conversion of the symmetric two-index string into the antisymmetric one can be considered as a quasiclassical tunneling process which, in turn, can be treated through “bubble formation” . It was important that the tension difference between the initial and final strings was suppressed by $`1/N^2`$ while the mass of the gluelumps produced was not suppressed by $`1/N`$ factors. Under these conditions the approximation of thin domain wall  is applicable, the exponential factor in the decay rate does not depend on dynamical details, and is fully determined by two parameters: the tension difference and the gluelump mass.

Now we want to extend our estimates to cover the case of $`k`$ indices where $`k`$ is specified in Eq. (17). As we will see, again the thin-wall bubble formation is the adequate approximation. This method guarantees a correct evaluation of the exponent in the exponential factor determining the inclusive decay rate of a given quasi-stable string. The inclusive summation over the final state is a built-in feature of the method. Particular details of the summation affect only the pre-exponential factor and are, thus, subleading.

A typical decay of a given $`k`$-string is characterized by a rearrangement of many indices; in the saturation approximation the number of indices rearranged scales as $`N`$. Then the tension deficit between the initial (quasi-stable) string and a typical decay product is of the order of unity. This implies, in turn, that we must set $`k\mathrm{\Lambda }^2N\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$ (for the definition of $``$ see Sect. 3.4).

The above rearrangement is accompanied by the production of $`k`$ gluon lumps, so that $`Tk\mathrm{\Lambda }N\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. As a result, the decay rate of a generic quasi-stable $`k`$-string turns out to be of the order of

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{gen}}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\mathrm{exp}(\gamma N).$$
(29)
The suppression is still exponential but less severe than in Eq. (16). This enhancement of the decay rate is in one-to-one correspondence with the enhancement of the binding energy in the saturation limit $`k/N=`$ const, $`N\mathrm{}`$.

## 6 Oversaturated $`k`$-strings

For definiteness we will assume in this section the number of colors $`N`$ to be even. (Consideration of odd $`N`$ can be carried out in parallel.) Let us define

$$k_{}=\frac{N}{2}.$$
(30)
The stable $`k`$-string tension grows as a function of $`k`$, reaching its maximum at $`k=k_{}`$. It is clear that for $`k>k_{}`$ it is energetically expedient to split an $`N`$ 1-string cluster and annihilate it, remaining with an ensemble of $`(Nk)`$ 1-strings. This is a tunneling process, however. Quasi-stable strings with $`k=k_{}+\mathrm{}`$ do exist ($`\mathrm{}>0`$). Our task here is to evaluate their lifetime with respect to the decay into stable strings with $`k=k_{}\mathrm{}`$.

For simplicity let us start from the probe source

$$Q^{[i_1\mathrm{}i_k]}\text{with}k=k_{}+1.$$
(31)
The string created by this source will be composed of $`k_{}+1`$ 1-strings, and will decay into the stable $`k`$-string with $`k=k_{}1`$. How does this decay occur?

This process is schematically depicted in Fig. 7 where we took $`N=6`$. Two $`N`$-string junctions (baryon vertices) are produced due to tunneling, converting a part of the string between them from $`k=k_{}+1`$ into $`k=k_{}1`$. An estimate of the decay rate can be obtained from exactly the same consideration as in Sect. 3.4. The tunneling occurs through a bubble creation. The $`N`$-string junction scales as $`N\mathrm{\Lambda }`$; therefore, $`TN\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, see Eq. (16). At the same time the gain in the “energy density” (i.e. $``$ in Eq. (16)) is equal to $`2\sigma _1\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$. As a result,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }[(k_{}+1)(k_{}1)]\mathrm{exp}\left(\gamma N^2\right),$$
(32)
where $`\gamma `$ is a positive numerical coefficient of the order of unity.

In fact, there are reasons to believe that the decay rate will be further strongly suppressed by a large transverse size of the $`k`$-string (see Sect. 7), but we will ignore this effect for the time being. It will be discussed elsewhere.

The same estimate (32) is valid for $`\mathrm{}>1`$, but not scaling with $`N`$.

## 7 Physical picture beyond the sine formula for stable $`k`$-strings

In Ref.  we suggested a dynamical model leading to the sine formula for the stable $`k`$-string tensions. Irrespective of this model, the argument of Sect. 4.1 shows that the expansion of the $`k`$ string tension has the form (23). While the $`1/N^2`$ factor in the first correction is perfectly clear, it is instructive to get a physical understanding of the $`k^3`$ scaling of the $`1/N^2`$ correction.

First of all let us note that at $`N1`$ the 1-string interactions are weak, and a quasiclassical picture is applicable. In order to reconcile the facts that both the flux of the $`k`$-string and its tension (in the leading order) grow as $`k`$ we have to conclude that the total transverse area of the $`k`$-string scales as $`k`$ at $`k1`$, see Fig. 8. Thus, the $`k`$-string presents an ensemble of loosely bound 1-strings, with $`k`$ non-intersecting cores of 1-strings. The interaction occurs only at the periphery, in the gaps. This is very similar to the structure of molecules.

There are of the order of $`k`$ gaps altogether, each having the area of the order of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$. Let us compare the chromoelectric fields at the periphery of the 1-string core in two cases: (i) isolated 1-string; (ii) 1-string which is bound inside the $`k`$-string. It is clear that the distortion of the field at the periphery in passing from (i) to (ii) is of the order of $`k/N`$. The energy per one gap (which is proportional to the chromoelectric field squared) thus scales as $`(k/N)^2`$. Given that the number of the gaps scales as $`k`$, we naturally obtain the $`k^3/N^2`$ regime for the first correction in the $`k`$-string tension.

Within this picture the expansion parameter $`(k/N)^2`$, with the overall $`k`$ factor, occurs naturally, leading to the scaling parameter $`x`$ introduced in Sect. 4.1.

The linear growth of the string cross section with $`k`$ at large $`k`$ is a prediction following from our analysis.

We check the above picture in a toy supersymmetric model in the Appendix.

## 8 Tension defect vs. the scaling variable $`𝒙`$

In this section we will discuss the binding energy of stable and quasi-stable $`k`$-strings in the saturation limit. It is convenient to introduce a quantity analogous to the mass defect in nuclear physics. We will call it tension defect $`𝒯_k`$,

$$𝒯_k=1\frac{\sigma _k}{\sigma _\mathrm{f}\mathrm{Min}\{k,Nk\}}.$$
(33)
If the sine formula is correct for the stable $`k`$-strings (up to $`1/N`$ corrections), then

$$𝒯_k=1\mathrm{sin}x\times \{\begin{array}{c}x^1\text{at}x<\pi /2,\hfill \\ (\pi x)^1\text{at}x>\pi /2,\hfill \end{array}$$
(34)
see Fig. 9. The presence of higher powers of sine in Eq. (22) may somewhat change the precise form of the curve, but qualitatively its shape should remain as in Fig. 9. For stable strings, the maximal tension defect is $`1(2/\pi )`$, achieved at $`x=\pi /2`$.

The area between the curve (34) and the horizontal axis is covered by quasi-stable strings. Indeed, for the given $`N`$-ality $`k`$ we have $`P(k)`$ distinct representation, see Eq. (28), starting from the fully anti-symmetric, through mixed symmetries, up to fully symmetric. $`P(k)`$ is exponentially large. We expect that the tension splittings are roughly the same. Then it is obvious that the string tensions of the quasi-stable strings are separated from each other by exponentially small intervals.

Under the circumstances it would be appropriate to replace the discrete tension spacings by a continuous distribution $`\rho (𝒯;x)`$, which for each given $`x`$ gives the density of strings per interval $`d𝒯`$. Calculating $`\rho (𝒯;x)`$ is a very interesting dynamical problem.

## 9 More on the Casimir scaling

In Sect. 2.2 we mentioned that: (a) many lattice measurements detect quasi-stable strings, with no hint on their breaking; and (b) observe the Casimir scaling in the ratio of the tension of the given string to that of the fundamental string. For instance, in Ref.  ample data are presented regarding the adjoint and a number of other quasi-stable strings in SU(3). No deviations from the Casimir scaling are seen withing the achieved accuracy.

According to the Casimir formula,

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{adj}}/\sigma _\mathrm{f}=9/4,(\text{SU(3) Casimir}).$$
(35)
The adjoint string is built of two fundamental ones, and at distances $`\text{ }>\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ they attract, so that placing these two strings at an appropriate distance one must and can get the above ratio less than 2. Even if we take the separation distance between the two 1-strings involved very large, the ratio will equal 2.

How can one get this ratio larger than 2?

Typical string sizes on the lattice are $`<2`$ fm, while the transverse size of the fundamental string is $`0.7`$ fm. As we have argued above, the transverse size of the composite string must be even larger. Thus, the length/thickness ratio is in fact not large.

If one could measure the tension of the configuration depicted in Fig. 10a, because of the attraction, one would get less than $`2\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$. The only way to get more than $`2\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$ is to force the fundamental strings to overlap. Then, because of the repulsion of the overlapping fluxes, (prior to the string decay), see the end of Sect. 2, one will get $`>2\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$ for the energy per unit length.

This is precisely what happens if one considers the probe quark of the form $`Q_i^j`$, see Fig. 10b. Because of the insufficient separation between $`Q_i^j`$ and $`\overline{Q_k^l}`$ the overlap has to be substantial. For bona fide long strings (Fig. 10c) the overlap would be insignificant, and will affect only the part of the potential which does not scale with $`L`$ as $`L^1`$.

Still, the question remains: Why a sausage-like configuration (Fig. 10b), which develops at intermediate distances, is characterized by energy per unit length which follows the Casimir formula?

Here we suggest a tentative “semi-empiric” answer. It is known since the 1970’s  that basic properties of low-lying quark mesons 555 By low-lying we mean the lowest radial excitations in each channel with the given spin and parity. are to a large extent determined by the gluon condensate. The coefficient in front of the gluon condensate is proportional to the quadratic Casimir operator. Therefore, as long as the higher condensates are not very important numerically, the masses of the lowest mesons will be related to the quadratic Casimir operators. These latter masses, in turn, are determined by “short strings.”

If this explanation is correct, approximate Casimir scaling should take place at intermediate distances when the overlap between constituents of the composite string is significant.

## 10 Orientifold theories vs. supersymmetric gluodynamics

The orientifold gauge theory is obtained from SU($`N`$) supersymmetric gluodynamics by twisting the color indices of the fermion field. The fermion sector of the orientifold gauge theory consists of two Weyl spinors, in the color representations

$$\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{and}\overline{\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }\text{ }}.$$

One can combine them in one Dirac spinor. Recently it was shown  that in the planar limit $`N=\mathrm{}`$ the orientifold gauge theory is equivalent to $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetric gluodynamics in its bosonic sector (For a general introduction to the topic of planar equivalence see Ref. .)

In connection with the $`k`$-string tensions, the above equivalence apriori might seem rather puzzling. Indeed, the only dynamical fields in supersymmetric gluodynamics are those belonging to the adjoint representation — they can screen no probe color charge with a non-vanishing $`N`$-ality. At the same time, the anti-symmetric two-index “quarks” of the orientifold theory do screen probe color charges with the even $`N`$-ality, 2, 4, 6, etc. This seemingly results in distinct dynamical patterns.

In fact, there is no paradox. Let us remember that the above equivalence takes place only in the limit $`N=\mathrm{}`$. Non-planar effects are certainly different in the supersymmetric and orientifold (parent and daughter) theories. Breaking the string — that’s how the probe color-charge screening is seen in the hadronic language — is a non-planar effect.

Thus, we expect then the Wilson loops of the parent and daughter theories to be related, only provided their area, being large compared to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$, does not scale with $`N`$. In this case, as we already know from the previous sections (see also Sect. 11), there is no time for screening to occur in either theories. We hasten to add, however, that for such contours the accuracy of the measurement of the $`k`$-string tension is such that sub-leading in $`1/N`$ corrections cannot be detected, and we will arrive at a rather trivial formula

$$\sigma _k=\kappa \sigma _1,$$
(36)
where $`\sigma _k`$ is the $`k`$-string tension, $`\sigma _1\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$ and the parameter $`\kappa `$ is introduced in Eq. (14). Detecting $`1/N`$ corrections on the right-hand side of Eq. (36) would require contours with area growing with $`N`$, which would invalidate the planar equivalence.

## 11 Implications of our results for lattice measurements

Throughout the paper we discussed the decays of quasi-stable strings into stable strings within the Minkowskian picture. Lattice measurements are mainly performed within the Euclidean approach. Most commonly lattice theorists measure Euclidean Wilson loops or correlators of the Polyakov lines (see e.g. Ref. ). It is natural to ask what is the impact of our results on the Euclidean lattice measurements. Below we will discuss two typical examples. Other examples can be treated in a similar manner.

### 11.1 Decay of the adjoint string from the Euclidean standpoint

Let us first discuss the adjoint string decay into a broken string. In Sect. 3.2 we estimated the life-time of the adjoint string as $`\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }^1N^2`$. When one studies the adjoint string by calculating the Euclidean Wilson loop (in the adjoint representation), one arrive at a two-term formula 666We are grateful to J. Greensite for an insightful discussion of this issue. See also Ref. .

$$𝒲e^{\sigma _{\mathrm{adj}}𝒜}+\frac{1}{N^2}Ce^{\mu P},$$
(37)
where the numerical coefficient $`C`$ is $`N`$ independent but is very small (see the end of Sect. 3.1 for the relevant discussion). The suppression of $`C`$ is determined by geometrical factors, the appropriate parameter being $`L\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The numerical parameter $`\mu `$ in the second term in Eq. (37) is of the order of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. In fact, it represents the gluelump mass, which is expected to be rather large, in the ballpark of 0.8 to 1 GeV. It is quite obvious that for the asymptotically large contours the perimeter term (representing the adjoint string breaking) always wins. However, given the pre-exponential suppression and a relative largeness of $`\mu `$, at intermediate sizes there will be a competition between the area term and the perimeter term.

The perimeter behavior is non-planar and, therefore, it is suppressed by $`1/N^2`$. In addition, as was mentioned, there is an additional suppression due to the fact that the final state producing the perimeter law is not a state with highly excited mesons but, rather, that with the lowest-mass mesons. By equating the area term with the perimeter term we arrive at an estimate for the (Euclidean time) duration of the process

$$T\mathrm{\Lambda }^1\mathrm{ln}\left(N^2/C\right),C1.$$
(38)
The critical contour size needed to see the adjoint string breaking grows with $`N`$, albeit rather slowly.

### 11.2 Decay (conversion) of the excited $`𝒌`$-string from the Euclidean standpoint

The prime emphasis in this paper was on the decay of the excited $`k`$-strings. Let us consider for definiteness 2-strings — symmetric and anti-symmetric. The Minkowskian description of the decay of the symmetric string into the anti-symmetric one is presented in Sect. 3.4. Here we will discuss the impact of our result on the Euclidean measurement of the Wilson loop in the symmetric two-index representation of SU($`N`$).

The two-term formula (38) now has to be modified, since, after the breaking of the symmetric string, the anti-symmetric one is formed and, therefore, both terms exhibit the area law,

$`𝒲`$ $``$ $`e^{\gamma N^2}Ce^{\sigma _{\mathrm{anti}\mathrm{symm}}𝒜}+e^{\sigma _{\mathrm{symm}}𝒜}`$ (39)
$`=`$ $`e^{\sigma _{\mathrm{anti}\mathrm{symm}}𝒜}\left\{Ce^{\gamma N^2}+e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2𝒜/N^2}\right\}.`$
As was explained in Sect. 3.4, the transition into the stable (anti-symmetric) state is exponentially suppressed, since it is a tunneling process. It is also suppressed by a numerical (geometrical) factor C ($`C1`$) which is $`N`$-independent. In the second line of Eq. (39) we use the fact that the tension difference is

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{symm}}\sigma _{\mathrm{anti}\mathrm{symm}}=\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/N^2.$$
(40)
To guarantee that the first term wins (i.e. the decay of the symmetric symmetric string into anti-symmetric becomes visible) one needs the area

$$𝒜_{\mathrm{crit}}\text{ }>\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\left\{\gamma N^4(\mathrm{ln}C)N^2\right\},C1.$$
(41)
The numerical value of the coefficient $`\gamma `$ is unknown. Given the extremely steep $`N^4`$ dependence of $`𝒜_{\mathrm{crit}}`$ it will be extremely difficult to measure the symmetric string conversion into the anti-symmetric one within the existing lattice methods, unless $`\gamma `$ is abnormally small, which, apriori seems quite unlikely.

Equation (40) implies that the area necessary for measuring $`\sigma _{\mathrm{symm}}`$ (more exactly, the split between $`\sigma _{\mathrm{symm}}`$ and $`2\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$) must scale as $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2N^2`$. This is especially obvious if the measurement is carried out through the Wilson loop in the reducible two-index representation, or $`𝒲_{\mathrm{fund}}^2`$.

## 12 Discussion and conclusions

In this paper we started developing a systematic description of quasi-stable and stable composite QCD strings ($`k`$-strings) based on the $`1/N`$ expansion. The paper consists of three main parts. First, we considered various quasi-stable strings and found their decay rates (per unit time per unit length). These results are summarized in Table 1. The picture that we developed here is the physical Minkowskian one. We have viewed the quasi-stable strings in their relation to quasi-stable mesons that can break due to non-planar interactions. The key observation was that at large $`N`$, the probability is small and hence the life-time of the string (and, correspondingly, excited resonances) is large.

Intuitively it is clear that the longevity of the quasi-stable strings at large $`N`$ must imply that detecting the breaking of such strings in the Euclidean lattice simulations must require large areas. In fact, this is the raison d’etre of the adjoint strings, of the symmetric strings with the tension distinct from that of anti-symmetric, and so on. Numerous observations of these quasi-stable strings at “intermediate areas” are reported in the lattice literature, with very few (if at all) observations of the string breaking.

The central question is — what does it mean, an “intermediate area”? To answer this question we need to connect our Minkowskian picture to the Euclidean approach based on lattice measurements using rectangular Wilson loops or Polyakov line correlators. In Sect. 11 — our second main part — we gave estimates of the contour areas needed in order to detect the string breaking (conversion). The $`N`$ dependence of the critical area for the adjoint string is logarithmic. In contrast, to see the conversion of excited $`k`$-strings into anti-symmetric one would need to deal contour areas growing as powers of $`N`$.

Finally, the third main part of this paper is devoted to the tensions of the composite strings. We summarized old and presented some new arguments in favor of the sine formula for the tensions of the stable (fully anti-symmetric) $`k`$-strings. We made estimates regarding the splittings between the tensions of the quasi-stable strings and the tension of the stable string. We introduced the notions of the tension defect, saturation limit, and oversaturated strings. We tried to explain why the Casimir scaling which in many instances predicts $`\sigma _R/\sigma _\mathrm{f}>\kappa `$, where $`\kappa `$ is introduced in Eq. (14), is physically senseless, on the one hand, and still, nevertheless, many existing lattice measurements seem to confirm the ratio of the Casimir operators for $`\sigma _R/\sigma _\mathrm{f}`$.

Now, we would like to say a few words on the actual QCD ($`N=3`$) string. In the actual world $`1/N=1/3`$, and one may wonder which aspects of (or conclusions from) our analysis are applicable for such not-so-small value of the expansion parameter, if at all. Besides, for the SU(3) color group, only one string — the fundamental one — is truly stable.

We have seen that in some cases the relevant parameter is $`N^210`$. Although we do not know numerical coefficients, it is reasonable to expect that the conclusions based on this parameter will survive, at least, at a semi-quantitative level.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank J. Ambjorn, P. de Forcrand, S. Deldar, L. Del Debbio, J. Greensite, K. Konishi, A. Kovner, C. Korthals Altes, B. Lucini, M. Lüscher, H. Meyer, H. Panagopoulos, P. Rossi, M. Teper, and E. Vicari for numerous enlightening and fruitful discussions. Stimulating communications with D. Khmelnitskii and V. Shevchenko are gratefully acknowledged. A.A. thanks Imperial College, Oxford University and Niels Bohr Institute where a part of this work was carried out, for warm hospitality.

The work of M.S. is supported in part by DOE grant DE-FG02-94ER408.

## Appendix

This Appendix can be viewed as a supplement to Sect. 7 where we argued that the $`k^3/N^2`$ behavior of the $`k`$-string binding energy is natural. Here we illustrate this argument by an exactly solvable model, which exhibits some general features of the $`k`$-string ensemble.

Consider s supersymmetric Wess-Zumino model with one complex scalar field and one complex two-component spinor. In four dimensions this is the theory of one chiral superfield with the minimal supersymmetry ($`𝒩=1`$, four supercharges), while in two and three dimensions the supersymmetry is extended. While the concrete form of the superpotential is unimportant, it is important to choose it to be $`Z_N`$ invariant. An appropriate choice is

$$W=\frac{N}{2}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\frac{1}{N+1}\mathrm{\Phi }^{N+1}\right).$$
(A.1)
Irrespective of the number of dimensions (two, three or four), the central charge is

$$Z_{n,n+k}=\frac{N}{2}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{2\pi }{N}(n+k)\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{2\pi }{N}k\right)\right].$$
(A.2)
The mass of the BPS object built of $`k`$ constituents is

$$M_k=N\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi k}{N}.$$
(A.3)
This is an exact formula.

It is easy to see that the only ingredients important for the derivation are: (i) the holomorphic nature of the central charge; and (ii) $`Z_N`$ symmetry. At $`N\mathrm{}`$ and $`kN`$ the mass defect is

$$M_kkM_1=\frac{\pi ^2}{6}\frac{k^3}{N^2},$$
(A.4)
i.e. the same as discussed in Sect. 7. In the case at hand, however, the problem is exactly solvable, everything is known, and the question of the physical interpretation is easy.

The BPS object built from $`k`$ constituents (i.e. $`k`$ elementary solitons) has mass (A.4). Each elementary soliton is separated from its neighbor by a gap, in which the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ deviates from its vacuum value only slightly. It is not difficult to see that the mass defect is saturated in the inter-soliton gaps, due to a modification of the soliton tails far from their cores. There are $`k`$ such gaps, and $`\delta \mathrm{\Phi }`$ in the gaps is typically $`k/N`$. Then the mass defect produced by each gap scales as $`k^2/N^2`$. The overall mass defect scales as $`k\times k^2/N^2`$.