text:
# 1 The AdS/CFT correspondence

## 1 The AdS/CFT correspondence

One of the most remarkable aspects of string theory is the existence of a dual description of D-branes. In perturbative string theory D-branes are D+1-dimensional hypersurfaces in spacetime where open strings are allowed to begin and end. On the other hand, they are also identified with the solitonic black brane solutions of supergravity or type II superstring theory. This gives two alternative formulations of their dynamics. In the first, the low energy degrees of freedom are described by gauge fields which are the lowest energy excitations of the open strings. The dynamics is that of a supersymmetric Yang-Mills gauge theory living on the world-volume of the branes. In the second, the low energy dynamics is supergravity which is the low energy limit of closed string theory. The degrees of freedom are fluctuations of the supergravity fields about the black brane background and they live in the bulk of ten dimensional spacetime.

There are some situations where these two descriptions have an overlapping domain of validity. In those cases, the same physical system is described by two different theories which must therefore be dual to each other. Because the degrees of freedom in these theories live on spaces of different dimensions, this has been called holographic duality, and is often viewed as an explicit realization of old ideas about the degrees of freedom in quantum gravity . The application of holographic duality to study the relationship between gauge fields and gravity is known as the AdS/CFT correspondence -.

The most precise statement of holographic duality is contained in the Maldacena conjecture . In this conjecture, on the gravity side, the asymptotically flat exterior of an extremal black D3-brane is replaced by its near-horizon geometry which is a product of 5-dimensional anti-de Sitter (AdS) space and the 5-sphere, $`AdS^5\times S^5`$. The conjecture in its strongest form then asserts an exact duality between type IIB superstring theory on this background and four dimensional $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory (SYM) on flat 4-dimensional space. The gauge group of the Yang-Mills theory is $`SU(N)`$ and there are $`N`$ units of Ramond-Ramond (RR) 4-form flux in the string theory. This duality includes a prescription for identifying correlation functions in the two theories .

$`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory has vanishing beta function and is a conformal field theory. Its degrees of freedom are a gauge field $`A_\mu `$, six scalars $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$ and four Majorana spinors $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. All fields transform in the adjoint representation of the gauge group. The Lagrangian (in Euclidean space) is

$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_{YM}^2}}\mathrm{Tr}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F_{\mu \nu }^2+(D_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_i)^2{\displaystyle \underset{i<j}{}}[\mathrm{\Phi }_i,\mathrm{\Phi }_j]^2+i\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu D_\mu \mathrm{\Psi }+i\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }^i[\mathrm{\Phi }_i,\mathrm{\Psi }]\right\}.`$ (1.1)
This action can be obtained as a dimensional reduction of ten-dimensional $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory to four dimensions. This is reflected in our notation where we assemble the fermions into a single ten-dimensional 16-component Majorana-Weyl spinor $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ with $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }^\mu ,\mathrm{\Gamma }^i)`$ the ten dimensional Dirac matrices in the Majorana-Weyl representation.

The dual supergravity background is the near-horizon geometry of a black D3-brane which has $`N`$ units of RR-flux. This is the string theory state with $`N`$ coinciding D3-branes. The metric can be written with coordinates $`(x^\mu ,y^i)`$, $`\mu =1,\mathrm{},4`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},6`$ in the form

$$ds^2=R^2\frac{dx^\mu dx^\mu +dy^idy^i}{y^2}.$$
(1.2)
The unit 6-vector $`y^i/y`$ parameterizes $`S^5`$ and $`x^\mu ,y`$ are the coordinates of $`AdS^5`$. The $`AdS^5`$ and $`S^5`$ have equal radii of curvature, $`R`$. The boundary of the space is at $`y=0`$ and the AdS horizon is at $`y=\mathrm{}`$. The metric written explicitly in product form is

$$ds^2=R^2\frac{dx_\mu ^2+dy^2}{y^2}+R^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_{S^5}^2.$$
(1.3)
In the AdS/CFT correspondence, the radius $`R`$ is related to the Yang-Mills coupling by

$$R=\sqrt{\alpha ^{}}\left(g_{YM}^2N\right)^{1/4}$$
(1.4)
The line-element (1.2) is invariant under coordinate transformations which form the AdS group $`SO(2,4)`$. The rest of the isometry group of (1.2) is the symmetry group of $`S^5`$, which is $`SO(6)SU(4)`$. Together with the supersymmetry, these form the super-group $`SU(2,2|4)`$.

On the gauge theory side, the bosonic symmetries are manifest as the $`SO(2,4)`$ conformal symmetry and the $`SU(4)`$ R-symmetry of SYM theory. In fact, the $`SO(2,4)`$ transformations which leave the AdS metric (1.2) invariant reduce to conformal transformations on the boundary of $`AdS^5`$ where the SYM observables are defined. The radial coordinate $`y`$ is associated with the scale in the SYM theory  – larger objects on the boundary probe larger distances in $`AdS^5`$.

The string theory on the background metric (1.2) is a sigma model with coupling constant given by the inverse of the effective string tension,

$$T=R^2/2\pi \alpha ^{}=\sqrt{g_{YM}^2N}/2\pi $$
(1.5)
which is a dimensionless quantity.

Furthermore, the string coupling $`g_s`$ and the Yang-Mills coupling $`g_{\mathrm{YM}}`$ are related by

$$g_s=4\pi g_{\mathrm{YM}}^2$$
(1.6)
This relation can be understood from the fact that the gauge theory action, in front of which the gauge coupling should appear as the factor $`1/g_{\mathrm{YM}}^2`$, is obtained from the disc amplitude in string perturbation theory which is of order $`1/g_s`$.

With these identifications, the string theory and the SYM theory are conjectured to be exactly equivalent. This equivalence is a remarkable and extremely non-trivial fact. However, it is hard to work out its consequences in the general setting, when both sides of the duality correspond to complicated strongly interacting systems. Weaker and computationally more useful versions of the AdS/CFT duality are obtained by taking limits (table 1). The ’t Hooft limit of the gauge theory  takes $`g_{YM}0`$ and $`N\mathrm{}`$ with the ’t Hooft coupling $`\lambda g_{YM}^2N`$ held fixed. In the string theory, this coincides with the classical limit where $`g_s0`$ and the radius of curvature of the background space, $`R`$, is held constant. In this limit, large $`N`$ Yang-Mills theory is dual to classical string theory on the $`AdS^5\times S^5`$ background.

The $`g_s0`$ limit of string theory in AdS space is still a complicated dynamical theory. The limit projects the string path integral onto an integration over world-sheets of minimal genus. In this limit, the string sigma model is still a highly non-linear two dimensional conformal field theory. This sigma model simplifies in its weak coupling limit, which coincides with the limit where the string tension $`T`$ and hence the radius of curvature of the space in string units is taken to be large. When the string tension is large, only massless states of the string are important. Other states become infinitely massive and decouple from low energy physics. Thus, the limit of the type IIB string theory which takes the string tension to infinity is approximated by type IIB supergravity on the background $`AdS^5\times S^5`$. In the gauge theory, this corresponds to the limit of large ’t Hooft coupling $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$. Thus, the strongly coupled large $`N`$ limit of Yang-Mills theory should coincide with IIB supergravity on the background $`AdS^5\times S^5`$.

Even the last, weakest version of this duality has profound consequences. Previous to it, the main quantitative tool which could be used for super-Yang-Mills theory was perturbation theory in $`g_{YM}^2`$, the Yang-Mills coupling constant. This is limited to the regime where $`g_{YM}^2`$ and $`\lambda `$ are both small. The conjectured duality allows one to do concrete computations in a new regime, the limit where $`g_{YM}^2`$ is small and $`N`$ and $`\lambda `$ are both large .

The large $`N`$ expansion of gauge theory has long been thought to be related to some sort of weakly coupled string theory . Development of this idea has been limited by the fact that, although some qualitative features of the large $`N`$ limit are known, it is not possible to solve the infinite $`N`$ limit explicitly. Maldacena’s conjecture now gives one explicit example where a string theory is dual to a gauge theory. Moreover, the string theory can be used to solve the large $`N`$ and large $`\lambda `$ limit of the gauge theory.

The best evidence in support the AdS/CFT correspondence comes from symmetry. The global symmetries on the both sides of the correspondence combine into the super-group $`SU(2,24)`$. Not only are the global symmetries the same, but some of those objects which carry the representations of the symmetry group — the spectrum of chiral operators in the field theory and the fields in supergravity theory can be matched . Furthermore, both theories are conjectured to have a Montonen-Olive $`SL(2,Z)`$ duality.

The super-conformal symmetry of $`𝒩`$=4 super-Yang-Mills theory severely restricts the form of correlation functions and in some cases it protects them from radiative corrections so that they have only a trivial dependence on the coupling constant. A number of these have been computed using the AdS/CFT correspondence and have been found to agree with their free field limit. This can be viewed as a simultaneous confirmation of supersymmetric non-renormalization theorems and the prediction of AdS/CFT. Examples are the two- and three-point functions of chiral primary operators .

However, because AdS/CFT and perturbation theory compute different limits, it is difficult to obtain an explicit check of the AdS/CFT correspondence for a quantity which has a non-trivial dependence on the coupling constant. An example of such a quantity is the free energy of Yang-Mills theory heated to temperature $`T`$ which, because of conformal invariance, must be of the form

$$F=f(\lambda ,N)\frac{\pi ^2}{6}N^2T^4V$$
(1.7)
When computed perturbatively in the large $`N`$ limit,

$$f(\lambda ,N)=13\lambda /2\pi ^2+\mathrm{}$$

The gravitational dual of SYM at non-zero temperature is the AdS black hole with Hawking temperature $`T`$. Its free energy can be deduced from its Beckenstein-Hawking entropy. There are also stringy corrections computed in . The result is (1.7) with

$$f(\lambda ,N)=\frac{3}{4}+\frac{45}{32}\zeta (3)\lambda ^{\frac{3}{2}}+\mathrm{}$$

The first computation is an expansion in $`\lambda `$ whereas the second is an expansion in $`1/\lambda ^{1/2}`$. Though it is not known in the intermediate regime, it has been conjectured that $`f(\lambda )`$ is a smooth function that interpolates monotonically between 1 and $`\frac{3}{4}`$ as $`\lambda `$ goes from 0 to $`\mathrm{}`$. The corrections on both sides go in the right direction and are consistent with monotonicity of the transition from weak to strong coupling.

There are now a few examples of quantities which are non-trivial functions of the coupling constant and whose large $`N`$ limit is computable and is thought to be known to all orders in perturbation theory in planar diagrams . All of these quantities involve Wilson loops, which play an important role in the AdS/CFT correspondence for several reasons. Apart from allowing one to obtain exact results in certain cases, Wilson loops are the objects in $`𝒩=4`$ SYM theory whose string theory dual is a source for strings. Thus, they probe string theory directly. This is true even in the supergravity regime where the string that is induced by a Wilson loop source behaves as a classical object. A review of Wilson loops in $`𝒩=4`$ SYM theory is the central theme of this Paper. This review is not comprehensive. Our main emphasis will be on the exact results and we will omit several interesting issues which are discussed extensively elsewhere. Notable omissions are computation of quantum corrections to Wilson loops due string fluctuations , the instanton contribution to Wilson loop expectation values , and extensions to less supersymmetric and non-conformal examples of gauge theory / gravity correspondence. Wilson loops in the that context are reviewed in .

## 2 Wilson loops at strong coupling

The Wilson loop operator in $`𝒩=4`$ super-Yang-Mills theory is associated with the holonomy of a heavy W-Boson. This W-Boson arises when the $`SU(N+1)`$ gauge symmetry is broken to $`SU(N)\times U(1)`$ and the symmetry breaking condensate is sent to infinity. The phase factor in the path-integral representation of the W-Boson propagator involves not only gauge fields, but also scalars:

$$W(C)=\frac{1}{N}tr\mathrm{P}\mathrm{exp}\left[_C𝑑\tau \left(iA_\mu (x)\dot{x}^\mu +\mathrm{\Phi }_i(x)\theta ^i|\dot{x}|\right)\right].$$
(2.1)
Here, $`C`$ is a closed curve parameterized by $`x^\mu (\tau )`$ and $`\theta _i`$ is a unit 6-vector, $`\theta ^2=1`$, in the direction of the symmetry breaking condensate.

This operator plays more important role in the AdS/CFT correspondence than the usual Wilson loop for several reasons. One of the most important of them is supersymmetry. The supersymmetry transformations of gauge and scalar fields are

$$\delta _ϵA_\mu (x)=\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu ϵ,\delta _ϵ\mathrm{\Phi }_i(x)=\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}(x)\mathrm{\Gamma }_iϵ$$
(2.2)
Under the infinitesimal supersymmetry transformation, the exponent in the Wilson loop changes by

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\left(i\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu \dot{x}^\mu (\tau )\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\theta ^i|\dot{x}(\tau )|\right)ϵ.$$

The linear combination of Dirac matrices $`\left(i\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu \dot{x}^\mu (\tau )\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\theta ^i|\dot{x}(\tau )|\right)`$ squares to zero and has eight zero eigenfunctions. When these eigenfunctions are $`\tau `$-independent, the loop retains half of the supersymmetry. This occurs only when $`\dot{x}^\mu (\tau )`$ is a constant, that is, when $`C`$ is a straight line. In that case $`W(C)`$ is a BPS operator that commutes with half of the supercharges. Consistent with this property, it seems to be protected from radiative corrections. Indeed, in the leading orders of perturbation theory and also in the strong coupling limit which is computed by the AdS/CFT correspondence, it is independent of the coupling constant and

$$W(\mathrm{straight}\mathrm{line})=1$$
(2.3)
A Wilson loop which is not a straight line but is a smooth curve still has local supersymmetry and has better ultraviolet properties than the conventional loop which does not have the scalar field.

The AdS/CFT correspondence can be used to compute the expectation value of a Wilson loop in the large $`\lambda `$, large $`N`$ limit. In Yang-Mills theory, the amplitude for a heavy W-boson to traverse a closed curve $`C`$ of length $`L(C)`$ is given by the vacuum expectation value of the Wilson loop accompanied by an exponential factor which is associated with the mass of the W-Boson:

$$𝒜=\mathrm{e}^{ML(C)}W(C),$$
(2.4)
where $`M`$ is the mass and this formula is accurate when $`M\mathrm{}`$.

According to the AdS/CFT correspondence, this amplitude can also be computed using string theory. The strings propagate in the bulk of $`AdS^5\times S^5`$ and we should consider those whose worldsheets have boundary on the loop $`C`$ :

$`𝒜`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }DX^\mu DY^iDh_{ab}D\vartheta ^\alpha \mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle _D}d^2\sigma \sqrt{h}h^{ab}{\displaystyle \frac{_aX^\mu _bX^\mu +_aY^i_bY^i}{Y^2}}`$ (2.5)
$`+\mathrm{fermions}),`$
where $`\vartheta ^\alpha `$ are anticommuting coordinates on the superspace whose bosonic part is $`AdS^5\times S^5`$. The fermion piece of the world sheet action, which makes it supersymmetric, is known  and takes a reasonably simple form in a suitable gauge , but we will not need its explicit form here. The contour $`C`$ is located on the boundary of $`AdS^5`$, and the string partition function is supplemented by the following boundary conditions:

$$X^\mu |_D=x^\mu (\tau ),Y^i|_D=\theta ^iY|_D,Y|_D=0.$$
(2.6)
The string partition function (2.5) defines a complicated 2 dimensional sigma model which cannot be solved exactly. It simplifies considerably in the large ’t Hooft coupling limit where the string tension, $`T=\sqrt{\lambda }/2\pi `$, becomes large and suppresses string fluctuations. The superstring path integral is then dominated by the bosonic action at its saddle-point. The saddle-point corresponds to a minimal surface in $`AdS^5\times S^5`$. Because of the $`O(6)`$ symmetry of the boundary condition (2.6), the minimal surface is embedded in $`AdS^5`$ and sits at a particular point, $`\theta ^i`$ on $`S^5`$.

The string action at the saddle-point is obtained by minimizing the Nambu-Goto action, that is classically equivalent to the Polyakov action in (2.5):

$$\mathrm{Area}(C)=d^2\sigma \frac{1}{Y^2}\sqrt{\underset{ab}{det}\left(_aX^\mu _bX^\mu +_aY_bY\right)}.$$

If we equate the two vacuum amplitudes (2.4) and (2.5) and solve for the Wilson loop we get

$$\mathrm{ln}W(C)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{2\pi }\mathrm{Area}(C)ML(C).$$
(2.7)
The area of a surface whose boundary is $`C`$ is infinite. This infinite part should cancel between the terms on the right-hand-side of (2.7) when we take $`M`$ to infinity. We shall discuss the reason for this cancellation shortly. The infinite part of the area can be regularized by letting the curve $`C=(x^\mu (\tau ),y^i(\tau ))`$ lie in the bulk of $`AdS^5\times S^5`$ and later projecting it onto the boundary by taking $`y^i(\tau )0`$. Let us show that the divergence that arises in this limit is always proportional to the perimeter of $`C`$. Take, for simplicity, $`y^i(\tau )=\theta ^i\epsilon `$. Then, it is straightforward to solve for the minimal surface near the boundary. In appropriate coordinates:

$$Y^i(\tau ,y)=y\theta ^i,X^\mu (\tau ,y)=x^\mu (\tau )+𝒪(y^2),$$
(2.8)
so

$`\mathrm{Area}(C)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑\tau _\epsilon 𝑑y\frac{1}{y^2}\sqrt{\dot{X}^2+\dot{X}^2X^2(\dot{X}X^{})^2}}`$ (2.9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑\tau _\epsilon \frac{dy}{y^2}\left(\sqrt{\dot{x}^2}+O(y^2)\right)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\epsilon }}L(C)+\mathrm{finite}.`$
This is the divergent part of the area which should cancel the term with the mass of the W-Boson in (2.7). Since the divergent piece is inversely proportional to the distance from the boundary, when we take the minimal area to be a functional of the boundary curve, the divergent part can be idenditied using the operator

$$_C𝑑\tau y^i(\tau )\frac{\delta }{\delta y^i(\tau )}.$$

The finite part of the area determines the Wilson loop expectation value:

$$\mathrm{ln}W(C)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{2\pi }\underset{|y|0}{lim}\left(1+_C𝑑\tau y^i(\tau )\frac{\delta }{\delta y^i(\tau )}\right)\mathrm{Area}(C)\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{2\pi }\widehat{A}(C)$$
(2.10)
This is a Legendre transform with respect to the variable $`y^i/y^2`$ which was noticed and given an interpretation in terms of T-duality in . If one defines the momentum variable

$$\pi ^i=y^2\frac{\delta \mathrm{Area}[x^\mu ,y^i]}{\delta y^i(\tau )},$$

then the above equation states that

$$\mathrm{ln}W(C)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{2\pi }\widehat{A}[x^i,\pi ^i]$$

is a function of the coordinates $`x^i`$ and momenta $`\pi ^i`$. The latter should be specified in such a way that the position of world sheet boundary, which is obtained from it by the functional derivative

$$\frac{y^i}{y^2}=\frac{\delta \widehat{A}}{\delta \pi ^i(\tau )}$$

is at the boundary of the AdS space. Of course, the equations of motion for the variational problem with area $`\widehat{A}(C)`$ are identical to those for $`\mathrm{Area}(C)`$ and the boundary condition is usually easily implemented once $`\widehat{A}(C)`$ is identified.

Let us also clarify why is it legitimate, at least on the qualitative level, to identify $`1/\epsilon `$ with the mass of the W-Boson. In type II string theory, $`𝒩=4`$ super-Yang-Mills theory describes the low energy limit of $`N`$ parallel D3-branes stacked on top of each other. A W-boson appears in the Higgs phase when the $`SU(N+1)`$ symmetry is broken to $`SU(N)\times U(1)`$ by a condensate $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$. This corresponds to the state where one of the D3-branes is separated from the remaining stack. The W-boson is the lowest energy excitation of the superstring which connects the separated brane and the stack. Its mass is given by the string’s minimal length divided by $`\alpha ^{}`$. In the full D3-brane solution of type IIB supergravity, the near-horizon geometry, which is $`AdS^5\times S^5`$, is glued to the asymptotically flat region at the boundary of AdS space. The infinite mass of the W-boson is proportional to the distance from the horizon to the boundary. The subtraction in (2.7) is a regulated version of this distance times the length of the contour, $`C`$. Indeed, the area of the surface

$$Y^i=y\theta ^i,X^\mu =x^\mu (\tau ),$$
(2.11)
where $`y`$ runs from $`\epsilon `$ to infinity is exactly $`1/\epsilon `$. The divergence in (2.9) is then equal to the mass of the W-boson times $`L(C)`$. Thus, there is exact cancellation of the subtracted term and the W-boson mass.

By definition, the minimal surface has the smallest area for given boundary conditions. The area of the surface (2.11), to be subtracted for the sake of regularization, is always larger. Consequently, the renormalized area is always negative. Thus, there are three universal predictions of the AdS/CFT correspondence: in the strong ’t Hooft coupling limit the Wilson loop expectation value exponentiates, the exponent is proportional to $`\sqrt{\lambda }`$ and the co-efficient is positive,

$$W(C)=\mathrm{exp}\left(\sqrt{\lambda }\times \mathrm{positive}\mathrm{number}\right).$$
(2.12)
Corrections to the Wilson loop in the large $`\lambda `$ limit come from the string fluctuations and are suppressed when $`\lambda `$ is large. An expansion which includes them perturbatively is an ordinary $`\alpha ^{}`$ expansion of the world-sheet sigma model and, for AdS string, goes in powers of $`1/\sqrt{\lambda }`$. There is also an overall factor associated with zero modes that arises upon gauge fixing in the integral over internal metrics. The number of zero modes is equal to three times the Euler character of the world sheet  and the path integral over each zero mode contributes a factor of $`\lambda ^{1/4}`$. For the disk amplitude, which determines the Wilson loop expectation value in the $`g_s0`$ limit, since the Euler character of the disk is $`1`$, this gives a factor of $`\lambda ^{3/4}`$. Hence, a general form of the strong-coupling expansion for a Wilson loop expectation value is

$$W(C)=\lambda ^{3/4}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{2\pi }\widehat{A}(C)}\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_n\lambda ^{n/2},$$
(2.13)
where $`c_n`$ are numerical coefficients that depend on the contour $`C`$.

There are several cases of curve $`C`$ for which the minimal area can be calculated explicitly. As a warm-up exercise, we could try to produce the conjectured expectation value of the straight-line Wilson loop (2.3). There,

$$x^\mu (\tau )=(\tau ,0,0,0)$$

By symmetry, we expect that the minimal surface which has this boundary is an infinite plane which is perpendicular to the boundary of AdS space,

$$X^\mu (\sigma ,\tau )=(\tau ,0,0,0),Y^i(\sigma ,\tau )=\sigma \theta ^i$$
(2.14)
Indeed, it is easy to see that this surface solves the equations for a minimal surface which are obtained from the area using a variational principle. The induced metric is

$$ds^2=\frac{d\tau d\tau +d\sigma d\sigma }{\sigma ^2}$$

which is that of the space $`AdS^2`$. The area element is

$$dA=\frac{1}{\sigma ^2}d\sigma d\tau $$

which, to compute the area should be integrated over $`\tau (\mathrm{},\mathrm{})`$ and $`\sigma [0,\mathrm{})`$. The integration has two sources of divergence, one coming from the infinite length of the line, which is $`L=𝑑\tau `$, and the other coming from the expected singular behavior of the area element near the boundary of AdS space which we cut off according to our prescription of replacing 0 in the lower limit of the integral over $`\sigma `$ with $`ϵ`$. Then, the area is

$$A(\mathrm{straight}\mathrm{line})=\frac{L}{ϵ}$$

The subtracted area is

$$\widehat{A}(\mathrm{straight}\mathrm{line})=\left(1+ϵ\frac{}{ϵ}\right)A(\mathrm{straight}\mathrm{line})=0$$
(2.15)
which vanishes. Exponentiation gives (2.3), which is the expected unit expectation value of the straight line Wilson loop.

Another important example is the rectangular Wilson loop. The interaction potential for a $`W\overline{W}`$ static pair of $`W`$-boson sources can be extracted from the expectation value of a rectangular Wilson loop with length $`T`$ and width $`L`$ by taking the limit

$$V(L)=\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{T}\mathrm{ln}W(C_{L\times T}).$$
(2.16)
Because of scale invariance, the expectation value of a rectangular loop can depend only on the ratio $`T/L`$. Then, dimensional analysis implies that $`V(L)1/L`$ which is the scale invariant Coulomb interaction. This is what is expected to occur in a conformally invariant gauge theory. Indeed, solving for the minimal surface and evaluating its area one finds :

$$V(L)=\frac{4\pi ^2\sqrt{\lambda }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^4(1/4)L}.$$
(2.17)
The effective Coulomb charge turns out to be proportional to $`\sqrt{\lambda }`$, which is smaller than one would expect from the naive extrapolation of the weak-coupling $`O(\lambda )`$ behavior. This can be interpreted as a screening effect of the processes corresponding to the sum of all planar Feynman diagrams.

### 2.1 Circular loop

Another example where the minimal area can be easily found is that of a circular loop.

The minimal surface whose boundary at $`y=0`$ is a circle of radius $`a`$ is very simple . It is the solution of the quadratic equation

$$x_1^2+x_2^2+y^2=a^2.$$
(2.18)
The induced metric of this minimal surface is

$$ds^2=\frac{a^2}{y^2(a^2y^2)}dy^2+\frac{a^2y^2}{y^2}d\phi ^2,$$

where we parameterize the surface by the AdS scale $`y`$ and the polar angle in the $`(x_1,x_2)`$ plain $`\phi `$. The area element is:

$$dA=\frac{a}{y^2}dyd\phi ,$$

and the regularized minimal area is readily computed:

$$\widehat{A}(\mathrm{circle})=\left(1+\epsilon \frac{}{\epsilon }\right)2\pi a_\epsilon ^a\frac{dy}{y^2}=2\pi .$$
(2.19)
For the expectation value of the circular loop we get:

$$W(\mathrm{circle})=\mathrm{e}^\sqrt{\lambda }.$$
(2.20)
This result does not look suspicious, unless one wonders how it was originally derived. The easiest way to solve for the minimal surface is to use the conformal invariance : the inversion transformation $`x_\mu x_\mu /x^2`$ maps the circle onto a straight line, for which the minimal surface in (2.14) is really simple. This transformation is conformal and can be extended to an isometry of AdS space:

$`x_\mu `$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{x_\mu }{x^2+y^2}},`$
$`y`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{y}{x^2+y^2}}.`$ (2.21)
The minimal surface bounded by a straight line is a half-plane which extends to the horizon and has a geometry of AdS<sup>2</sup>. The combination of the inversion and the translation by $`a`$ in $`x_1`$ maps the half-plane $`x_3=0,x_1=1/2a`$ onto the hemisphere (2.18).

The minimal area for the straight line (2.15), after the divergence is removed, is zero. This differs from the result for the circle (2.19). What is surprising is that the expectation values for the circle and for the straight line are not the same, in apparent contradiction with the conformal symmetry. Since the expectation values are different for conformally equivalent operators, conformal invariance has been violated.

The violation of conformal symmetry obviously stems from the necessity of regularizing the area. Any regularization explicitly breaks conformal invariance. There is the question of whether conformal symmetry is restored once the infinity is subtracted and the regularization is removed. When properly defined, the area is finite, but renormalization amounts to subtraction of a linearly divergent constant and this leaves a finite effect that breaks conformal invariance. In this respect, the difference between the Wilson line and the circular Wilson loop is reminiscent of the usual conformal anomaly.

The simplest regularization, used in (2.19), moves the boundary of AdS space from $`y=0`$ to $`y=\epsilon `$. The transformation (2.1) maps the true boundary $`y=0`$ on itself and acts on it as the inversion. But the shifted boundary $`y=\epsilon `$ gets mapped onto a sphere of a very large radius:

$$x_\mu ^2+\left(y\frac{1}{2\epsilon }\right)^2=\frac{1}{4\epsilon ^2}.$$
(2.22)
Therefore, the conformal transformation changes the regularization prescription, fig. 1. The ”regularized” AdS space is now the interior of this sphere. If we want to calculate the minimal area for the circle by first mapping it onto a straight line, we must use this unusual regularization. The regularized minimal surface is then the interior of a circle

$$x^2+\left(y\frac{1}{2\epsilon }\right)^2=\frac{1}{4\epsilon ^2}\frac{1}{4a^2}$$

in AdS<sub>2</sub>. The discrepancy between the circle and the straight line derives from the difference in regularization prescriptions. This difference becomes even more evident after the rescaling $`(x,y)(x/2\epsilon ,y/2\epsilon )`$, which is an isometry of AdS<sub>2</sub>. The radius of the circle then becomes finite:

$$x^2+(y1)^2=1\epsilon ^2/a^2.$$
(2.23)
The area of its interior is

$$\frac{dxdy}{y^2}=2_{\sqrt{1\epsilon ^2/a^2}}^{\sqrt{1\epsilon ^2/a^2}}𝑑x\frac{\sqrt{1\epsilon ^2/a^2x^2}}{x^2+\epsilon ^2/a^2}=\frac{2\pi a}{\epsilon }2\pi ,$$
(2.24)
in agreement with (2.19).

The difference between the Wilson loop expectation values has the classic form of an anomaly. In both cases there is a linear divergence that must be subtracted according to some prescription. The subtraction is what ruins the formal symmetry which would otherwise relate them. However, the area anomaly affects only extended objects such as Wilson loops and should not be confused with ordinary conformal anomaly which affects local operators and which is absent in $`𝒩=4`$ SYM in flat Euclidean space.

We have already noted that it could be expected that the straight line Wilson loop has cancelling radiative corrections due to the fact that it is a BPS operator, i.e. it commutes with half of the supercharges. In the super-conformal algebra, besides the 16 supercharges, there are also 16 superconformal charges. The circular Wilson loop commutes with half of the super-conformal charges. In order to regulate the theory, it is necessary to introduce an ultraviolet cutoff. It is possible to cut off in a way that does not break the supersymmetry  and thereby preserve the algebra of supercharges in the cut off theory. However, the algebra of conformal supercharges cannot be preserved since the conformal invariance is broken by a cut off. Thus, one might expect that the straight line Wilson loop is more protected by supersymmetry than the circular Wilson loop. This leaves open the possibility that the circular loop can get quantum corrections.

### 2.2 Operator product expansion (OPE)

When probed from a distance much larger than the size of the loop, the Wilson loop should behave effectively as a local operator. More precisely, it can be expanded in a series of local operators :

$$W(C)=W(C)𝒞_AR^{\mathrm{\Delta }_A}𝒪^A(0)$$
(2.25)
where $`𝒪^A(0)`$ is an operator evaluated at the center of the loop, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_A`$ is the conformal dimension of $`𝒪^A(x)`$, $`R`$ is the radius of the loop, and $`𝒞_A`$ are OPE coefficients.

The OPE coefficients can be read off from the correlation functions of the Wilson loop with local operators. We can choose the basis of unit normalized primary operators (those which have the lowest dimension in a given representation of the conformal group):

$$𝒪^A(x)𝒪^B(y)=\frac{\delta ^{AB}}{\left|xy\right|^{\mathrm{\Delta }_A+\mathrm{\Delta }_B}}$$
(2.26)
Their OPE coefficients can be extracted from the large distance behavior of the connected two-point correlator:

$$\frac{W(C)𝒪^A(L)_c}{W(C)}=𝒞_A\frac{R^{\mathrm{\Delta }_A}}{L^{2\mathrm{\Delta }_A}}+\mathrm{}$$
(2.27)
where $`LR`$. The omitted terms correspond to descendants and are of higher order in $`R/L`$.

The strong-coupling evaluation of the OPE coefficients  involves a hybrid of the string and the supergravity calculations: The classical string world sheet created by the Wilson loop absorbs the supergravity mode emitted at the point of operator insertion:

$$\frac{W(C)𝒪^A(L)_c}{W(C)}=d^2\sigma \sqrt{h}V_A(X,/X)G_A(X,L),$$
(2.28)
where $`V_A(X,/X)`$ is the vertex operator of the supergravity mode associated with $`𝒪^A`$, $`G_A(X,L)`$ is bulk-to-boundary propagator, and the integral runs over the classical string world sheet. The propagator factorizes at large separation and gives a factor $`1/L^{2\mathrm{\Delta }_A}`$ (fig. 2). Indeed, the scalar bulk-to-boundary propagator associated with a dimension-$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ operator behaves at large distances asAn overall coefficient is chosen to unit normalize the two-point function.:

$$G(x,y;L)=\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }1}{2\pi ^2}}\left[\frac{y}{y^2+(Lx)^2}\right]^\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }1}{2\pi ^2}}\frac{y^\mathrm{\Delta }}{L^{2\mathrm{\Delta }}}.$$
(2.29)
The OPE coefficient of a scalar operator is thus given by an integral of the vertex operator over the string world sheet:

$$𝒞_A=R^{\mathrm{\Delta }_A}\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_A1}{2\pi ^2}}d^2\sigma \sqrt{h}V_A(X,/X)Y\mathrm{\Delta }_A.$$
(2.30)
Explicit calculations for a number of chiral operators can be found in Ref. .

A chiral primary operator (CPO) is a primary operator which commutes with half of the supercharges and therefore lies in a short representation of the super-conformal algebra. This particularly interesting set of operators are traces of the scalar fields,

$$𝒪_k^I=\frac{(8\pi ^2)^{k/2}}{\sqrt{k}\lambda ^{k/2}}C_{i_1\mathrm{}i_k}^Itr\mathrm{\Phi }^{i_1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Phi }^{i_k},$$
(2.31)
where $`C_{i_1\mathrm{}i_k}^I`$ are totally symmetric traceless tensors which are normalized as

$$C_{i_1\mathrm{}i_k}^IC_{i_1\mathrm{}i_k}^J=\delta ^{IJ}.$$
(2.32)
Here, we are following the convention of refs. . The first of the CPOs,

$$𝒪^{ij}=\frac{8\pi }{\sqrt{2}\lambda }tr\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^i\mathrm{\Phi }^j\frac{1}{6}\delta ^{ij}\mathrm{\Phi }^2\right),$$
(2.33)
has lowest possible conformal dimension, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=2`$, and in this sense is the most important operator in $`𝒩=4`$ SYM theory.

The overall coefficient in the definition of CPOs has been chosen to unit normalize their two-point functions. The two-point correlators of CPOs are protected by supersymmetry and do not receive radiative corrections. This insures that they have the correct normalization to all orders of perturbation theory once the normalization is set at weak coupling. This will be important when we will compare perturbative calculations to the supergravity predictions for strong coupling behavior.

The AdS duals of CPOs are particular linear combinations of spin-zero Kaluza-Klein modes on $`S^5`$ of the metric and the anti-symmetric two form. Each CPO thus is associated with a spherical function:

$$Y^I(\theta )=C_{i_1\mathrm{}i_k}^I\theta ^{i_1}\mathrm{}\theta ^{i_k}.$$
(2.34)
The OPE coefficients of a Wilson loop must be proportional to $`Y^I(\theta )`$. An explicit calculation for the circular contour gives the large $`\lambda `$ limit of the correlator, :

$$\frac{W(C)𝒪_k^I}{W(C)}=2^{k/21}\sqrt{k\lambda }\frac{R^k}{L^{2k}}Y^I(\theta )(\lambda \mathrm{}).$$
(2.35)
### 2.3 Wilson loop correlator

The two-point correlator of Wilson loops in the regime when the distance between the loops is large compared to their sizes is one of the cases in which the use of OPE expansion is justified. For identical loops of opposite orientation separated by distance $`L`$,

$$\frac{W(C_1)W(C_2)_c}{W(C_1)W(C_2)}=|𝒞_A|^2\left(\frac{R}{L}\right)^{2\mathrm{\Delta }_A}.$$
(2.36)
This representation of the Wilson loop correlator imposes certain constraints on the OPE coefficients. Since the number of operators of a given conformal dimension grows exponentially with the increase of the dimension, the sum over all operators in intermediate states in (2.36) will diverge at distances comparable to the size of the loops $`RL`$, unless operators of large dimensions are strongly suppressed (stronger than exponentially). If there is no suppression, the correlator of Wilson loops will undergo a phase transition at some $`LR`$.

Suppression of operators with large quantum numbers (such as conformal dimensions, spins, etc.) is quite a general statement, which applies to confining theories as well . Indeed, consider the spectral representation for the Wilson loop correlator:

$$W(C_1)W(C_2)_c=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑E\rho _C(E)\mathrm{e}^{EL},$$
(2.37)
where

$$\rho _C(E)=\underset{n0}{}\delta (EE_n)\left|0|W(C)|n\right|^2.$$
(2.38)
The density of states is expected to grow exponentially as $`\mathrm{exp}(E/T_H)`$, where $`T_H`$ is the Hagedorn temperature. The form-factor of the Wilson loop must suppress this growth. Otherwise, the correlator will undergo a phase transition at $`L=1/T_H`$, which is similar to the Hagedorn transition at finite temperature. Such phase transitions in correlation functions are expected in quantum gravity , but not in gauge theories. Consequently, the form-factor of the Wilson loop must suppress highly excited states, either in $`𝒩=4`$ SYM or in confining gauge theories.

The operators of large scaling dimension are indeed suppressed at weak coupling. Consider perturbative calculation of the OPE coefficients as defined by eq. (2.27); say, for chiral primary operators (2.31). The lowest order diagrams for the dimension-$`k`$ operator contain at least $`k`$ scalar propagators that go from the operator insertion to the Wilson loop and require an expansion of the loop to at least $`k`$-th order in the scalar fields. Since Wilson loop is an exponential, the OPE coefficient will be suppressed by $`1/k!`$. The same is obviously true at weak coupling for any other operator that has large scaling dimension or spin.

Can we see this suppression on the supergravity side of the AdS/CFT correspondence? The answer to this question seems to be negative. The OPE coefficients for the dimension-$`k`$ chiral primary actually grow with $`k`$ at strong coupling! This follows from the AdS/CFT prediction, eq. (2.35). Does this mean that, if the coupling is strong enough, the pair correlator of Wilson loops indeed diverges at short distances and there is a phase transition at some critical separation between the loops? We will argue later that growth of OPE coefficients with dimension is an artifact of taking the strong-coupling limit. Exact OPE coefficients rapidly decrease with $`k`$ if we carefully take the limit $`k\mathrm{}`$ at any large but finite $`\lambda `$.

But there is indeed a phase transition in the Wilson loop correlator at strong coupling. However, it is associated with another phenomenon, the string breaking. The string breaking is a consequence of the area law, and is specific to string theory. At short distances, the correlator of two Wilson loops is saturated by the string stretched between the contours. When the separation between the loops grows, the area of the string world sheet evidently grows too. Since the string has tension, eventually the world sheet breaks into two minimal surfaces that span each of the contours separately (fig. 3) . In between the surfaces, the string world sheet degenerates into an infinitely thin tube which describes propagation of individual supergravity modes. The OPE expansion (2.36) then becomes a good approximation. The two regimes are separated by the Gross-Ooguri phase transition, and the correlator is not analytic in the distance between the loops . As an example, we plot the logarithm of the correlator of two circular loops as a function of the distance $`L`$ between them in fig. 4. The first derivative of the correlator is discontinuous at the critical separation, so Gross-Ooguri transition is first order in this case.

The Gross-Ooguri transition in an inherently stringy phenomenon and looks rather counterintuitive from the field theory perspective. Indeed, any Feynman diagram that contributes to the Wilson loop correlator is an analytic function of the distance between the loops. Of course, one has to sum an infinite series of all planar diagrams to reach the strong-coupling limit on the field theory side. Surprisingly, even partial resummation that takes into account only planar graphs without internal vertices reveals the Gross-Ooguri transition at strong coupling . It is also possible to see how the Gross-Ooguri transition disappears as one gradually decrease the coupling on the string side of the correspondence . The string fluctuations, that should be taken into account beyond the strong-coupling limit, make the transition smooth, it becomes a crossover at finite $`\lambda `$ and is completely washed out at weak coupling.

## 3 Wilson loops in perturbation theory

To the leading order in perturbation theory,

$$W(C)=1+\frac{\lambda }{16\pi ^2}_C𝑑\tau _1𝑑\tau _2\frac{|\dot{x}(\tau _1)||\dot{x}(\tau _2)|\dot{x}(\tau _1)\dot{x}(\tau _2)}{|x(\tau _1)x(\tau _2)|^2}+\mathrm{}.$$
(3.1)
The first term in the integral comes from the scalars and the second comes from vector exchange. For a loop without cusps or self-intersections, their sum is finite. This cancellation occurs because of local supersymmetry of the Wilson loop operator. Cusps and self-intersections of the contour lead to divergences as discussed in . An expectation value for a smooth contour is known to be finite at two  and three  loops. The the cancellations are likely to persist to higher orders of perturbation theory, though no rigorous proof of the finiteness to all orders has been given.

The integrand in (3.1) is non-negative by triangle inequality. The extremal case is the straight line, for which the correction is strictly zero, as it should be for a BPS operator. For any other contour,

$$\mathrm{ln}W(C)=\lambda \times \mathrm{positive}\mathrm{number}.$$
(3.2)
This is a general prediction of perturbation theory. Comparing to the string theory prediction (2.12), we see that a Wilson loop expectation value interpolates between linear and square-root scaling with $`\lambda `$ as we go from weak to strong coupling. One would expect that this interpolation is smooth. In particular, higher-order perturbative corrections should decrease $`\mathrm{ln}W(C)`$. Explicit calculations indeed demonstrate that next-to-leading order corrections go in the right direction for simplest contours. For instance, the first perturbative correction to the static potential is repulsive:

$$V(L)=\left(\frac{\lambda }{4\pi }\frac{\lambda ^2}{8\pi ^3}\mathrm{ln}\frac{1}{\lambda }+\mathrm{}\right)\frac{1}{L}.$$
(3.3)
The non-analytic dependence on $`\lambda `$ is a consequence of an IR divergence in the rectangular Wilson loop in the limit when its temporal extent becomes infinite . Careful treatment of this divergence requires infinite resummation of Feynman diagrams, which removes the IR singularity, but makes the static potential non-perturbative beyond the leading order of weak coupling expansion .

Another example is the circular loop, for which

$$\mathrm{ln}W(\mathrm{circle})=\frac{\lambda }{8}\frac{\lambda ^2}{384}+\mathrm{}.$$
(3.4)
Again perturbative series is sign-alternating. Diagram calculations that lead to this formula can be generalized to include a particular class of diagrams to all orders of perturbation theory, namely diagrams without internal vertices (rainbow graphs). The sum of these diagrams is believed to give a large-$`N`$ exact result for the circular Wilson loop.

## 4 Exact results for circular Wilson loop

As we discussed before, the circular Wilson loop is almost a BPS operator. The circular loop and the straight line, which is exactly BPS, are conformally equivalent. This equivalence is spoiled by an anomaly and the circular loop gains an expectation value, which is a non-trivial function of the ’t Hooft coupling. Still, one can anticipate that supersymmetry leads to many cancellations among quantum correction for the circle. It was argued  that rainbow diagrams exhaust all correction that survive supersymmetry cancellations.

### 4.1 Expectation value to all orders in perturbation theory

In this section, we consider a circular Wilson loop, whose radius we can assume to be unity. A convenient parameterization of this loop is $`x(\tau )=(\mathrm{cos}\tau ,\mathrm{sin}\tau ,0,0)`$.

We will sum all planar diagrams which have no internal vertices. It is instructive to consider first the lowest order of perturbation theory (3.1). For the circular loop, that expression greatly simplifies, because

$$|x(\tau _1)x(\tau _2)|^2=22x(\tau _1)x(\tau _2)=2\left(1\dot{x}(\tau _1)\dot{x}(\tau _2)\right),$$

and, consequently,

$$\frac{|\dot{x}(\tau _1)||\dot{x}(\tau _2)|\dot{x}(\tau _1)\dot{x}(\tau _2)}{|x(\tau _1)x(\tau _2)|^2}=\frac{1}{2},$$
(4.1)
independently of $`\tau _1`$ and $`\tau _2`$. The contour integrals in (3.1) are trivial and just give an overall factor of $`(2\pi )^2`$. Computation of the first term in perturbative series (3.4) turns out very simple. The only complication we encounter at higher orders is path ordering and necessity to keep only planar diagrams. In virtue of (4.1), the gluon and the scalar propagators, whose ends lie on the same circle, always combine to a constant. This observation makes the problem of resummation of rainbow diagrams essentially zero-dimensional. In fact, we can express the circular loop in terms of a correlator in a zero-dimensional field theory:

$$W(\mathrm{circle})=\frac{1}{N}tr\mathrm{e}^M_M,$$
(4.2)
where the ”path integral” is defined by the partition function

$$Z=d^{N^2}M\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{8\pi ^2}{\lambda }N\mathrm{tr}M^2\right).$$
(4.3)
Averaging over $`M`$ correctly accounts for the combinatorics of rainbow diagrams and the measure is chosen to reproduce the field-theory propagator.

It is now straightforward to compute the expectation value of the circular loop using classic results in random matrix theory . The eigenvalues of the Gaussian random matrix $`M`$ have a continuous distribution with finite support in the large-$`N`$ limit. The distribution of eigenvalues obeys the semi-circle law:

$$\frac{1}{N}trf(M)_M=\frac{2}{\pi }_\sqrt{\lambda }^\sqrt{\lambda }𝑑m\sqrt{\lambda m^2}f(m).$$
(4.4)
Substituting $`f(m)=\mathrm{e}^m`$, we find:

$$W(\mathrm{circle})=\frac{2}{\sqrt{\lambda }}I_1\left(\sqrt{\lambda }\right),$$
(4.5)
where $`I_1`$ is modified Bessel function.

We can compare this result with the prediction of AdS/CFT correspondence by taking the large-$`\lambda `$ limit:

$$W(\mathrm{circle})=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi }}\lambda ^{3/4}\mathrm{e}^\sqrt{\lambda }(\lambda \mathrm{}).$$
(4.6)
The prediction of the string theory, eq. (2.13), has exactly the same form. Recalling that the area of minimal surface associated with the circle is equal to $`2\pi `$, we find the complete agreement with string theory prediction! The exact expression (4.5) smoothly interpolate between perturbative series in $`\lambda `$ and the strong coupling regime, where the natural expansion parameter is $`1/\sqrt{\lambda }`$. This latter expansion is to be identified with $`\alpha ^{}`$ expansion of the world-sheet sigma model.

The summation of rainbow diagrams for the circular Wilson loop can be extended to all orders of $`1/N^2`$ expansion. In agreement with expectations from string theory, each order contains the same exponential factor multiplied by an overall power of $`\lambda ^{1/4}`$ at strong coupling :

$$W(\mathrm{circle})=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi }}\underset{g=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{N^{2g}}\frac{1}{96^gg!}\lambda ^{(6g3)/4}\mathrm{e}^\sqrt{\lambda }(\lambda \mathrm{}).$$
(4.7)
As was explained by Drukker and Gross , the power of $`\lambda ^{1/4}`$ at $`g`$-th order of $`1/N^2`$ expansion correctly counts the number of zero modes at $`g`$-th order of string perturbation theory.

### 4.2 OPE coefficients for chiral primary operators

At weak coupling, the OPE coefficient of the circular Wilson loop for dimension-$`k`$ CPO (2.31) is proportional to $`\lambda ^{k/2}`$:

$$\frac{W(\mathrm{circle})𝒪_k^I}{W(\mathrm{circle})}=2^{k/2}\frac{\sqrt{k}}{k!}\lambda ^{k/2}\frac{R^k}{L^{2k}}Y^I(\theta )+\mathrm{}(\lambda 0).$$
(4.8)
Comparing this with the AdS/CFT prediction (2.35) we see that OPE coefficients are non-trivial functions of the ’t Hooft coupling.

Again, appealing to supersymmetry and conformal invariance, we argue that correlators of the circular Wilson loop with chiral operators are saturated by free fields. Therefore, calculation of these correlators amounts in resummation of all planar rainbow diagrams of the kind shown in fig. 5. This is a rather lengthy exercise for arbitrary $`k`$ which involves the use of loop equations  in the matrix model (4.3). The details may be found in the original reference . Here, we only quote the result:

$$\frac{W(\mathrm{circle})𝒪_k^I}{W(\mathrm{circle})}=2^{k/21}\sqrt{k\lambda }\frac{I_k\left(\sqrt{\lambda }\right)}{I_1\left(\sqrt{\lambda }\right)}\frac{R^k}{L^{2k}}Y^I(\theta ).$$
(4.9)
We expect that this expression is exact in the large N limit. Its perturbative series expansion starts with (4.8).

At strong coupling we expect to reproduce the AdS/CFT prediction (2.35), and this is indeed the case, because all modified Bessel functions have the same asymptotics at infinity. This provides an infinite series of correlation functions, for which resummed perturbative series allow to trace an interpolation between weak coupling regime and the strong-coupling prediction of string theory in Anti-de-Sitter space.

The non-perturbative expression (4.9) resolves the puzzle mentioned in sec. 2.3, where we argued that OPE coefficients must be small for operators of large dimension and noticed that this is not the case if we use the supergravity prediction for OPE coefficients. However, expanding the Bessel function $`I_k\left(\sqrt{\lambda }\right)`$ in $`\lambda `$ one can check that the smallness parameter of perturbation theory for $`W(C)𝒪_k^I`$ is not $`\lambda `$, but $`\lambda /k`$, so large-$`k`$ limit is always perturbative. If we take the limit $`k\mathrm{}`$ before $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$, we can keep only the first term of perturbation series, which is indeed suppressed by $`1/k!`$.

## 5 Remarks

One of the many achievements made possible by the discovery of the AdS/CFT correspondence is a systematic way to do computations in the interacting field theory at strong coupling. These computation are done by methods that are quite unusual and sometimes counterintuitive from the field theory perspective. It is therefore very important that non-trivial predictions of string theory and supergravity can be reproduced by more or less ordinary techniques of planar perturbation theory. Of course, this is possible only in special cases and depends on symmetries of $`𝒩=4`$ SYM theory, but the very fact that it is possible is quite surprising. It is also important that exact field-theory calculations can be done for Wilson loops which probe string theory directly and therefore allow to test the AdS/CFT correspondence in its strongest form.

The current status of this subject leaves many questions unanswered. Some of the immediate questions are

$``$The straight line Wilson loop appears to have unit expectation value. This is a prediction of the supergravity computation for the strong coupling limit and it also seems to be so for perturbative computations to a reasonably high order in the Feynman gauge. In other gauges which are related by conformal transformation with the Feynman gauge, the leading perturbative corrections need not vanish but can reproduce the perturbative limit of the circle Wilson loop. It is clear that a deeper understanding of the gauge dependence of this object is needed. It would be interesting to extend the arguments for non-renormalization of correlators of local BPS operators to the case of the Wilson line, which is a non-local operator.

$``$ There should be a more rigorous proof that radiative corrections to the results in this paper actually cancel. One approach which was suggested in  is to show that the result for the circle comes from a conformal anomaly. Establishing this at a rigorous level would be an important step in the right direction.

$``$ It should be possible to study other kinds of Wilson loops .

$``$ Most desirable would be to obtain some results for non-conformally invariant gauge theories. At this point this appears to be very difficult as most of the analytic computations that have been done so far depend heavily on conformal invariance.


format: text

text:
# Entropic torque

## Abstract

Quantitative predictions are presented of a depletion-induced torque and force acting on a single colloidal hard rod immersed in a solvent of hard spheres close to a planar hard wall. This torque and force, which are entirely of entropic origin, may play an important role for the key-lock principle, where a biological macromolecule (the key) is only functional in a particular orientation with respect to a cavity (the lock).

The depletion effect, i.e., the effect that smaller particles in a colloidal mixture are expelled from those regions where bigger particles are sufficiently close together, leads to an effective force between the bigger particles. In the case of hard-core interactions these effective forces are purely entropic in origin . For the relatively simple geometries of two large spheres or a sphere close to a planar or curved wall in a solvent of small hard spheres this depletion force has been studied in detail in theory , simulation , and experiment . Depletion forces are crucial for the phase behavior of colloidal system; they can drive gas-liquid and liquid-solid phase separation, e.g., in colloid-polymer  and colloid-colloid mixtures . It has been suggested  that depletion effects play an important role in the biological “key-lock” mechanism, in which a nonspherical macromolecule (the key) fits into a cavity (the lock) and forms a chemical bond, but only if the key has a particular orientation. A robust performance of this mechanism is possible if the biological environment is capable of passively transporting the key, correctly oriented, to the lock. This requires a chemically unspecific force to transport the center-of-mass of the macromolecule towards the cavity and a torque to orient it. In order to be able to study the relevance of the entropic contribution to this mechanism a quantitatively reliable tool for predicting such an entropic torque is needed. Using density functional theory and computer simulations, we show and predict quantitatively that depletion effects can generate both a force and a torque on a nonspherical particle in the vicinity of a planar wall thereby providing further evidence for the relevance of depletion phenomena in key-lock mechanisms.

The specific system we study is illustrated in Fig.1 and consists of (i) an infinite planar hard wall located at $`z=0`$, (ii) a hard spherocylinder with cylinder length $`L`$, diameter $`\sigma `$, at distance $`z`$ from the wall and forming an angle $`\theta [0,\pi /2]`$ with respect to the wall normal, and (iii) a solvent of hard spheres with diameter $`\sigma _s`$ and number density $`\rho _s`$ in the bulk, i.e., far away from the wall. Since we are considering only hard interactions the temperature $`T`$ of the system plays only the role of an energy scale via $`\beta =1/k_BT`$. We are interested in the effective rod-wall potential $`W(z,\theta )`$ induced by the spheres. The force and the torque on the rod follow by differentiating $`W(z,\theta )`$ with respect to $`z`$ and $`\theta `$, respectively. The bare rod-wall interaction restricts the center of mass of the rod to $`z`$ to $`zz_{min}(\theta )`$ = $`(\sigma +L|\mathrm{cos}\theta |)/2`$. The system, and hence $`\beta W(z,\theta )`$, is completely characterized by the aspect ratio $`L/\sigma `$ of the rod, the diameter ratio $`\sigma /\sigma _s`$, and the packing fraction $`\eta =\rho _s\pi \sigma _s^3/6`$.

Following Asakura and Oosawa , a first approximation of the effective potential $`W(z,\theta )`$ can be obtained from the analysis of the volume that is excluded to the centers of the solvent spheres by the wall and the rod. The wall excludes the slab $`0<z<\sigma _s/2`$, and the rod the volume of a spherocylinder of length $`L`$ and diameter $`\sigma +\sigma _s`$. If these two contributions to the excluded volume overlap, i.e., for $`z<z_{min}+\sigma _s`$ (see Fig. 1) the volume accessible to the centers of the spheres and hence the entropy of the solvent increases. This gain of entropy translates directly into an effective, purely attractive force acting on the center of the rod. An important ingredient of this so-called Asakura-Oosawa approximation (AOa) is that the density profile of the spheres is taken to be constant and equal to the bulk density $`\rho _s`$, i.e., all correlations in the solvent are entirely neglected. The AOa therefore underestimates the strength and the range of the force acting on the rod.

Here we go beyond the AOa taking the sphere-sphere correlations into account. We recall that the depletion potential equals the grand-potential change of the (inhomogeneous) fluid of spheres in contact with the wall upon moving the rod from $`z\mathrm{}`$ to a finite value of $`z`$, at a given $`\theta `$. Within density functional theory (DFT), with $`_{ex}[\rho _s,\rho _r]`$ the excess (over ideal) free energy functional of a mixture of hard spheres and rods, one can write

$$\beta W(z,\theta )=\underset{\rho _r0}{lim}[c_r^{(1)}(z\mathrm{},\theta )c_r^{(1)}(z,\theta )],$$
(1)
where $`c_r^{(1)}(z,\theta )=\delta \beta _{ex}[\rho _s,\rho _r]/\delta \rho _r(z,\theta )`$ is the direct one-body correlation function of the rods  where $`\rho _r(z,\theta )`$ is the number density of rods for a given orientation $`\theta `$. The functional we use is based on Rosenfeld’s fundamental measure theory (FMT) for mixtures of general convex hard bodies . FMT has proved to account accurately for both the structure and the thermodynamics of inhomogeneous hard-sphere mixtures  as compared with simulations. Recently, a FMT for a mixture of spheres and needles of vanishing thickness was proposed . Our extension to include a nonspherical particle with finite volume (the rod) in the theory requires the deconvolution of the Mayer-$`f`$ function of the rod-sphere interaction into a set of orientation dependent weight functions . The details of this technically involved deconvolution will be explained elsewhere .

We obtain the depletion potential in two steps. First we calculate the unperturbed density profile $`\rho _s(z)`$ of the spheres close to the wall. This is the equilibrium profile in the limit $`\rho _r0`$, as required in Eq.(1). The functional reduces, in this case, to the well-tested FMT for spheres. In the second step we use $`\rho _s(z)`$ to evaluate $`c_r^{(1)}(z,\theta )`$, using the deconvoluted Mayer-$`f`$ function. From Eq.(1) we then obtain the depletion potential $`W(z,\theta )`$ for all $`z`$ and $`\theta `$ (from the profile $`\rho _s(z)`$ alone!).

We present results for $`L/\sigma =10`$, $`\sigma /\sigma _s=1`$, and a packing fraction $`\eta _s=(\pi /6)\sigma _s^3\rho _s=0.2239`$ for the spheres. Figure 2 displays the depletion potential $`\beta W(z,\theta )`$ as function of $`z`$ and $`\theta `$. The first observation is that the potential is, unlike the AOa, not monotonic; the hard-sphere correlations generate a sequence of potential barriers and wells. The dashed and dotted curves in Fig. 2 denote the positions of the minima and maxima of the potential. We note that for small angles $`\theta 1`$ the shape of the rod-wall depletion potential $`W(z,\theta )`$ coincides almost perfectly with the depletion potential $`W_{ws}(z)`$ between a sphere of diameter $`\sigma `$ and the wall, i.e., $`W(z,\theta 1)W_{ws}(zL\mathrm{cos}|\theta |/2)`$. For these small angles the length of the rod $`L`$ is rather unimportant for details of the depletion potential, as we have verified for various values of $`L/\sigma `$ and $`\sigma /\sigma _s`$. For large angles, however, the whole geometry of the rod, i.e., $`L/\sigma `$ and $`\sigma /\sigma _s`$, is relevant, and the depth of the depletion potential at contact becomes more negative as both $`L/\sigma `$ and $`\sigma /\sigma _s`$ are increased. In addition the contact value of the depletion potential can be further decreased by increasing $`\eta _s`$.

Although certain general trends of the influence of the geometry on the shape of the depletion potential can already be roughly understood within the simple AOa , the correlations in the hard-sphere fluid are very important and can lead to a quantitatively and even qualitatively different behavior. In Fig. 3 we illustrate this by comparing the depletion potential at contact as obtained within our DFT approach ($`W(z_{min}(\theta ),\theta )`$, full line) with the corresponding quantity within the AOa ($`W^{AOa}(z_{min}(\theta ),\theta )`$, dotted line). While for small and large angles the contact value of the full depletion potential is more negative than within the AOa, for intermediate values of $`\theta `$ packing effects can shift the actual contact value above its corresponding AOa-value. If the rod is almost parallel to the wall, i.e., for $`\theta \pi /2`$ the deviation of the contact value calculated within the AOa from the prediction of the full DFT is significant and much more pronounced than in the well-studied wall-sphere or sphere-sphere geometry. The inset of Fig. 3 shows that a rod in contact with the wall can exhibit a metastable orientation for a certain angle $`0<\theta _0<\pi /2`$ while the AOa predicts that this configuration is unstable. Although for the parameters under consideration here the height of the potential barrier is rather small ($`0.007k_BT`$), we note that its value increases for smaller values of $`\sigma /\sigma _s`$.

As a consequence of the dependence of the rod-wall depletion potential on the orientation $`\theta `$ for a given (fixed) distance $`z`$ of the center of the rod from the wall an entropic torque acts on the rod which drives it into an orientation with minimal depletion potential. This torque can be estimated by replacing the spherocylinder by a dumbbell composed of two spheres with diameter $`\sigma `$ connected by an infinitesimally thin but rigid wire of length $`L`$. Since the sphere-wall depletion force $`f_{sw}(z)`$ acts on the two spheres located at $`z_\pm =z\pm (L/2)\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ the corresponding torque with respect to the center of mass is given by

$$M_{db}(z,\theta )=\frac{L}{2}\mathrm{sin}\theta \left[f_{sw}(z_{})f_{sw}(z_+)\right].$$
(2)
It turns out that at low packing fractions of the hard-sphere solvent, or at sufficiently large separations of the rod from the wall Eq. (2) yields a semi-quantitative expression for the torque acting on a spherocylinder.

From the full rod-wall depletion potential $`W(z,\theta )`$ one can obtain the torque by rotating the rod by an infinitesimal angle $`d\theta `$ around an axis through the center of the rod in a direction characterized by the unit vector $`𝐧_\theta `$ normal to the symmetry plane shown in Fig. 1. The corresponding change in the depletion potential is $`dW(z,\theta )`$ which can be written as $`dW=_i𝐟_id𝐫_i`$, i.e., as a sum of forces $`𝐟_i`$ acting on the rod at positions $`𝐫_i`$ from the center with $`d𝐫_i=d\theta (𝐫_i\times 𝐧_\theta `$). It follows that the torque $`𝐌(z,\theta )=M(z,\theta )𝐧_\theta `$ with respect to the center of mass is given by

$$M(z,\theta )=\frac{W(z,\theta )}{\theta }.$$
(3)
The symmetry of the problem leads to $`M(z,\theta )=0`$ for $`\theta =0`$ and $`\theta =\pi /2`$. A positive value of the torque acts on the rod as to increase the angle $`\theta `$ (rotating it parallel to the wall) while a negative value of $`M`$ leads to a decrease of $`\theta `$ (rotating it normal to the wall). Some typical examples for the torque as a function of $`\theta `$ for various values of $`z`$ are shown in Fig. 4. Lines and symbols denote results from DFT and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, respectively. The DFT predictions are in excellent agreement with the simulations. The details of the simulations will be presented elsewhere .

For larger distances of the rod from the wall $`W(z,\theta )`$ exhibits local minima and maxima in addition to the global minimum with corresponding zeros of the torque (see Fig. 4 for $`z=5.5\sigma _s`$ and $`z=4.5\sigma _s`$). A minimum (maximum) of $`W(z,\theta )`$ leads to a zero of $`M(z,\theta )`$ with a negative (positive) gradient in $`\theta `$. Furthermore, the torque can exhibit a cusp (see Fig. 4) if the minimal distance between the wall and the rod leaves space for precisely one solvent sphere. This can be realized for distances $`\sigma _s+\sigma /2z\sigma _s+(L+\sigma )/2`$ and a corresponding orientation $`\theta _{cusp}=\mathrm{arccos}((2(z\sigma _s)\sigma )/L)`$.

As the rod moves closer to the wall the modulus of the torque increases and for small separations from the wall (see, e.g., $`z=1.5\sigma _s`$ in Fig. 4) the torque vanishes only for $`\theta =\pi /2`$ which is, however, only a metastable configuration. For such small and fixed values of $`z`$ the entropic torque rotates the rod towards configurations with smaller angles until the rod is in contact with the wall and has to stop its rotation. Thus the rod reaches its most favorable configuration of lying parallel in contact with the wall not by approaching the wall in a parallel configuration but by touching the wall first at one end and then by decreasing the distance of its center from the wall. The modulus of the maximum of the entropic torque for the system considered here is of the order of about $`20k_BT`$ rad-1, which corresponds to roughly $`10^{20}`$ J rad-1 at room temperature. The strength of the torque increases for larger values of $`L/\sigma `$, $`\sigma /\sigma _s`$, or $`\eta _s`$. For example, for $`L/\sigma =20`$, $`\sigma /\sigma _s=2`$, and $`\eta _s=0.2239`$, the modulus of the maximum of the entropic torque reaches a value of about $`38.7k_BT`$ rad-1. We note that the maximum torque acts at small values of $`z`$ for which the AOa also would predict the existence of a torque; however, its magnitude is largely enhanced through the correlations in the solvent.

With the results presented so far we can comment on some aspects of the path in the $`z`$-$`\theta `$ plane a rod would take upon approaching the wall from the bulk. Only if the rod comes sufficiently close to the wall to be subject to the oscillations of the number density of the hard-sphere fluid as a function of $`z`$, the entropic force and torque will act on it. The closer the rod gets to the wall the higher are the potential barriers between the minima (see Fig. 2) the rod has to overcome by thermal motion in order to move still closer. The potential barriers are, however, only moderate and easy to overcome for small angles and increase for angles $`\theta 60`$ degrees so that it is not optimal to rotate the rod until it is parallel to the wall since then the potential barrier for further approach is largest and for the parameters considered here more than $`2.3k_BT`$. On the other hand along the line of the second minimum – see the dashed lines in Fig. 2$`\beta W`$ has a similar shape as $`\beta W(z_{min}(\theta ),\theta )`$ \[see Fig. 3\], so that the entropic torque will rotate the rod into the local minimum at $`\theta =\pi /2`$ if $`\theta `$ is already sufficiently large. Once the rod is in contact with the wall the torque will rotate it towards the pronounced global minimum of $`\beta W(z,\theta )`$.

We have presented quantitative predictions of the entropic torque acting on a hard spherocylinder close to a hard planar wall in a solvent of small hard spheres. Our DFT predictions are in excellent agreement with our MD simulations. We find that the the depletion effect leads to a significant entropic torque and it is tempting to speculate that this entropic torque can play an important role in understanding the key-lock principle.

It is a pleasure to thank R. Evans, M. Schmidt, C. Bechinger, and M. P. Allen for stimulating discussions. This work is part of the Research program of the “Stichting voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek der Materie (FOM)”, which is financially supported by the “Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO)”. D.A. acknowledges the support of the Overseas Research Students Grant, EPSRC grants GR/L89990, GR/M16023, INTAS grant 99-00312. MD simulations used the GBMEGA program of the ‘Complex Fluids Consortium’ with computer time allocated at the CSAR facility.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In the past three decades there has been a considerable interest in studying a class of non-equilibrium systems known collectively as Cellular Structures. The geometrical and dynamical properties of these systems are best displayed in the familiar pattern formed by a soap froth confined between two transparent plates. Other examples include polycrystalline domains in metals, ceramics, magnetic domains, biological tissues and mono layers of fatty acids on surface of water. One can also mention other examples from material science, like cracking in glazes, fracture and dewetting of polymer films above their glass transition temperature -. Despite the diversity in systems in which cellular structures are formed, numerous experiments have shown that the long time statistical behavior of these systems are characterized by certain universal, system independent laws. This means that topological and geometrical constrains influence the properties of these networks in a very essential way. For example, the fact that energy is associated with the length of the edges of cells, immediately leads to the conclusion that in the two dimensional structures all the vertices are 3-valent. Combination of this result with the Euler character formula shows that the average number of sides per cell, $`i`$ is equal to 6:

$$i=6.$$
(1)
Similar considerations in 3-dimensions, where energy is associated with the area of faces of cells, proves that all vertices are 4-valent and that:

$$f=\frac{12}{6i},$$
(2)
where $`f`$ and $`i`$ are the average number of faces per cell and the average number of edges per face respectively. Besides these properties which are a direct consequence of the Euler character formula, experiments have revealed a number of very general, properties among which the most important are : i) Von-Neumann  , ii) Lewis  and iii) Aboav-Weaire law . Von-Neumann law refers to the rate of expansion of a single cell and is accounted for theoretically in a satisfactory way. It has also been generalized to curved surfaces where the curvature of the surfaces plays a role both in the dynamic of a single cell and in it’s stability . The Aboav-Weaire law which is statistical in nature and refers to the correlation of adjacent cells has been shown to hold in random 3-valent graphs, viewed as planar Feynman graphs of $`\varphi ^3`$ theory and solved by techniques of matrix models . The authors of  have investigated the statistical properties of two dimensional random cellular systems in term of their shell structures.
However there has been no explanation of the empirical Lewis law which states that the average area of cells has a linear relation with the number of cells, for large number of edges. However recently there have been some attempts  to derive both Lewis and Aboav-weaire laws, from Poisson networks, i.e. networks based on a Poisson distribution of horizontal segments between a fixed set of parallel lines. In ref. it was shown that in such networks both the Aboav-Weaire and the Lewis laws were obeyed. The analysis of ref.  was however restricted to the uniform density case, i.e: where the distance between the horizontal lines were all equal. In this paper we extend this analysis to the non-uniform case and add one more ingredient of randomness to the network, where the distribution of vertical lines is also probabilistic. The paper consists of two parts, the first part (section 2), where we rederive the results of  in a somewhat clearer way, and part two (section 3) where we extend these results to the non-uniform density case.

## 2  Poisson Networks With Uniform Density

The two dimensional Poisson networks are generated as follows (fig.1). One takes a family of parallel lines in the y-direction in the plane. The distance between lines does not affect the topological properties of the network, although it affects the geometry. This distance is taken as uniform and equal to $`d_0`$. Suppose there are N columns, $`C_1,C_2,\mathrm{},C_N`$, in the network. The region between two successive columns is divided into cells. The division of each column $`C_\alpha `$, is based on a Poisson point distribution in the y-direction. An edge in the x-direction is taken through each Poisson point (P-point). In this way a 3-valent network is generated in the plane which, although different from the realistic cellular structures, is simple enough to be analyzed closely for the study of various statistical-topological properties of the network.

The 3-dimensional tetravalent network are generated by a similar process (fig.2). One takes an arbitrary 2-dimensional trivalent network(base network) on the xy plane (fig.2.a) and takes vertical planes (parallel to the z-axis) through each edge which divides the 3-dimensional space into prismatic columns. In each column one considers a Poisson distribution of uniform density in the z-direction and divides the columns into cells by planes perpendicular to the z-axis through each P-point (fig.2.b). The height of a cell, $`L`$, is the distance between adjacent P-points in the associated distribution (fig.2.c). The average cell height is unity.

Consider one of the columns, say $`C_\alpha `$. The Poisson distribution of $`n`$ points in a segment of length $`L`$ is given by :

$$P(n)=\frac{L^n}{n!}e^L.$$
(3)
Consider a particular set of columns $`C_\alpha ,C_\beta ,\mathrm{},C_\gamma `$. The probability that in a given distance $`L`$, there are $`n_\alpha ,n_\beta ,\mathrm{},n_\gamma `$ segments respectively in columns $`C_\alpha ,C_\beta ,\mathrm{},C_\gamma `$, is equal to

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(L,n_\alpha ,n_\beta ,\mathrm{},n_\gamma )P(n_\alpha )P(n_\beta )\mathrm{}P(n_\gamma ).$$
(4)
Now consider a reference column which we denote by $`C_\alpha `$. The probability that there is a cell with height between $`L`$ and $`L+dL`$ in this column is $`e^LdL`$. I denote the columns which are neighbors of this reference column by $`C_{\alpha _1},C_{\alpha _2},\mathrm{},C_{\alpha _k}`$. The number of these neighboring columns depend on the dimensionality and type of the network. The joint probability that there is a cell of height between $`L`$ and $`L+dL`$ in the column $`C_\alpha `$ such that its neighbors $`C_{\alpha _1},C_{\alpha _2},\mathrm{},C_{\alpha _k}`$ respectively have $`n_{\alpha _1},n_{\alpha _2},\mathrm{},n_{\alpha _k}`$ points in the interval $`L`$ is :

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha (L,n_{\alpha _1},n_{\alpha _2},\mathrm{},n_{\alpha _k})dL=P(n_{\alpha _1})P(n_{\alpha _2})\mathrm{}P(n_{\alpha _k})e^LdL.$$
(5)
Clearly this distribution function depends on the individual values of the variables $`n_{\alpha _1},n_{\alpha _2},\mathrm{},n_{\alpha _k}`$, however in the sequel another probability distribution will be useful. That is $`\mathrm{\Psi }(L,I)dL`$ were I is defined as $`I=n_{\alpha _1}+n_{\alpha _2}+\mathrm{}+n_{\alpha _k}`$. The joint probability $`\mathrm{\Psi }(L,I)dL`$, is calculated as follows:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha (L,I)dL=\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha (L,n_{\alpha _1},n_{\alpha _2},\mathrm{},n_{\alpha _k})dL=\frac{(kL)^I}{I!}e^{(k+1)L}dL,$$
(6)
where $`^{}`$ means the sum over all $`n_{\alpha _i}`$’s subject to the constraint that their sum be equal to I. It’s important to note that the distribution $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha (L,I)`$ is obtained from a sum of distribution of the form $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha (L,n_{\alpha _1},n_{\alpha _2},\mathrm{},n_{\alpha _k})`$ and is not equal to any of them.(compare with eq.(9a) of).

### 2.1  Statistical Properties of Poisson Networks

2.1.1 Two Dimensional Networks

In two dimensions, every column has two neighbors, hence in eq.(6), $`k=2`$, and the number of edges of a cell (see fig.1) in a reference column is equal to :

$$i=I+4.$$
(7)
Combining eqs.(6) and (7) gives the probability distribution $`g(L,i)`$ of finding i-cells of height in the interval $`(L,L+dL)`$:

$$g(L,i)dL=\frac{(2L)^{(i4)}}{(i4)!}e^{3L}dL.$$
(8)
Clearly this distribution function is normalized.

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}\underset{i=4}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}g(L,i)dL=1.$$
(9)
From eq.(8) one can obtain the average height of i-cells:

$$<L>_i=_0^{\mathrm{}}L\frac{g(L,i)}{g(i)}𝑑L,$$
(10)
where $`g(i)`$ is the total probability distribution of $`i\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠}`$ which given by:

$$g(i)=_0^{\mathrm{}}g(L,i)𝑑L=\frac{1}{3}(\frac{2}{3})^{i4}.$$
(11)
A simple computation now gives:

$$<L>_i=\frac{i3}{3}.$$
(12)
This equation, then can be used to calculate the average area of i-cells. For the Poisson networks (fig.1), where the width of all cells are equal to $`d_0`$, we find:

$$<A>_i=d_0<L>_i=\frac{d_0(i3)}{3},$$
(13)
which as far as linear dependence on the number of edges is concerned, agrees with Lewis law. One can also define a generating function:

$$G(q)=<e^{iq}>\underset{i=4}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}g(i)e^{iq},$$
(14)
a simple calculation shows that:

$$G(q)=\frac{e^{4q}}{32e^q},orlnG(q)=4qln(32e^q).$$
(15)
From which one obtains by successive differentiation various connected moments of the distribution:

$$<i>=6,$$
(16)
$$<i^2><i>^2=6,$$
(17)
$$<i^3>3<i^2><i>+2<i>^3=30.$$
(18)
In the remaining part of this subsection we review briefly the basic steps of the analysis of ref. for derivation of the Aboav - Weaire law. Consider an i-cell $`a`$ of length $`L`$ in a two dimensional Poisson network(fig.3). This cell is in column $`0`$ and has two neighbors in this column, called $`a^{}`$ and $`a^{\prime \prime }`$.
There are two adjacent neighbors $`1`$ and $`2`$, which respectively distribute $`n_1`$ and $`n_2`$ points inside the cell $`a`$. The number of sides of, $`a`$, is then equal to

$$i=n_1+n_2+4.$$
(19)
The total number of sides of the cells in column $`1`$ adjacent to $`a`$ is:

$$J_1=4(n_1+1)+(V_1+1)+(V_1^{}+1)+V_1^{\prime \prime },$$
(20)
where the meaning of the numbers $`V_1`$, $`V_1^{}`$ and $`V_1^{\prime \prime }`$ are specified in fig.3. For obtaning the Aboav-Weaire law we use one of the three figures (fig.3$`a`$), (fig.3$`b`$) or (fig.3$`c`$) and results are equivalent. Clearly $`im_i`$ which is the total number of sides of the cells adjacent to $`a`$ is:

$$im_i=12+J_1+J_2.$$
(21)
Where the definition of $`J_2`$ is similar to that of $`J_1`$ and the number $`12`$ comes from the average of sides of $`a^{}`$ and $`a^{\prime \prime }`$. For the average value of $`V_1`$, $`V_1^{}`$ and $`V_1^{\prime \prime }`$ we use:

$$<V_1+V_1^{}>=\frac{<L_{c_1}L_a>}{1}=<L_{c_1}L_a>,$$
(22)
$$<V_1^{\prime \prime }>=\frac{<L_{c_1}>}{1}=<L_{c_1}L_a>+<L_a>.$$
(23)
Where the segment $`L_{c_1}`$ in column $`C_1`$, which is the smallest segment containing $`L_a`$, is called the covering length of $`L_a`$ . With the probability distribution found in  for $`L_c`$ it is shown that the average $`<L_cL_a>=2`$, in any arbitrary column, it then follows that:

$$<im_i>=24+4(n_1+n_2)+<V_1+V_1^{}>+<V_2+V_2^{}>+<V_1^{\prime \prime }>+<V_2^{\prime \prime }>.$$
(24)
By substituting eqs.(10), (22), (23) and (24) one finds that:

$`<im_i>`$ $`=`$ $`16+4i+2<L>_i,`$ (25)
$`=`$ $`16+4i+{\displaystyle \frac{2(i3)}{3}}=14+{\displaystyle \frac{14}{3}}i.`$
Combining eq.(25) with (12) one obtains

$$<im_i>=16+4i+\frac{2(i3)}{3}=14+\frac{14}{3}i$$
(26)
This is in accord with Aboav-Weaire law, i.e: $`<im_i>=c_1+c_2i`$ with $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ which are 14 and $`\frac{14}{3}`$ respectively.

2.1.2. Three-Dimensional Networks.

Consider a 3-dimensional network and a column whose base is an i-cell. In eq.(6), we should now equate k with i and, relate I with the number of faces as follows:

$$I+2+i=F.$$
(27)
The probability distribution of F-cells (cells with F-faces) of height between $`L`$ and $`L+dL`$, is now obtained as:

$$g_i(L,F)dL=\frac{(iL)^{Fi2}}{(Fi2)!}e^{(i+1)L}dL.$$
(28)
The total distribution of $`F\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠}`$ whose base is an $`i\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙}`$ is given by:

$$g_i(F)=_0^{\mathrm{}}g_i(L,F)𝑑L=\frac{1}{(i+1)}(\frac{i}{i+1})^{Fi2}.$$
(29)
One can then obtain the average height of F-cells whose bases are i-cell.

$$<L>_{i,F}=_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{Lg_i(L,F)dL}{g_i(F)}=\frac{Fi1}{(i+1)}.$$
(30)
The average height of F-cells with any base is given by:

$$<L>_F=\underset{i=4}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}<L>_{F,i}g(i),$$
(31)
where $`g(i)`$ is the probability distribution of i-cells in the base. As an approximation one can assume that the base network is hexagonal and obtain:

$$<L>_{6,F}=<L>_F=\frac{F7}{7}.$$
(32)
So the average volume (Lewis law in three dimensions) of F-cells will than be:

$$<v>_F=S\frac{F7}{7},$$
(33)
where $`S`$ is the average area of cells in the base. Also, as second example, we assume that the network of base is Poisson network with uniform density, which has explained in previous section(eq.(11)), so that eq.(31) will become:

$$<L>_F=\frac{1}{3}\underset{i=4}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}<L>_{F,i}(\frac{2}{3})^{i4}=0.155F1.$$
(34)
Therefore by making use of eq.(13) we can obtain the overage volume of $`F\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠}`$ in this model:

$$<v>_F=\frac{d_0}{3}(i3)(0.155F1).$$
(35)
From the formula for $`g_i(F)`$ various moments can be calculated:

$`<F>_i`$ $`=`$ $`2i+2,`$ (36)
$`<F^2>_i`$ $`=`$ $`5i^2+9i+4,`$ (37)
and

$`<F>`$ $`=`$ $`2<i>+2=14,`$ (38)
$`<F^2>`$ $`=`$ $`5<i^2>+9<i>+4=268.`$ (39)
## 3 Poisson Networks With Non-Uniform Density

A little modification of the previous formulas is necessary to study the properties of a network where the density of points (the average distance between points to be denoted by $`\lambda `$, in the following) in different columns are different. Instead of eqs.(3) and (4) we have:

$$P_\alpha (n)=(\frac{L}{\lambda _\alpha })^n\frac{1}{n!}e^{\frac{L}{\lambda _\alpha }},$$
(40)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_0(L,n_1,n_2,\mathrm{},n_k)`$ $`=`$ $`P_1(n_1)P_2(n_2)\mathrm{}P_k(n_k),`$ (41)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{k}{}}}({\displaystyle \frac{L}{\lambda _\alpha }})^{n_\alpha }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n_\alpha !}}e^{\frac{L}{\lambda _\alpha }},`$
respectively. By defining $`\mathrm{\Psi }(L,I)dL`$ as before, we obtain:

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0(L,I)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n_1+n_2+\mathrm{}+n_k=I}{\overset{}{}}}\mathrm{\Phi }(L,n_1,n_2,\mathrm{},n_k){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda _0}}e^{\frac{L}{\lambda _0}}dL,`$ (42)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L^I(\xi _0\frac{1}{\lambda _0})^I}{\lambda _0I!}}e^{L\xi _0},`$
where $`\xi _0=\frac{1}{\lambda _0}+\frac{1}{\lambda _1}+\frac{1}{\lambda _2}+\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{\lambda _k}`$. Now we study another probability density. We consider a cell of length $`L`$ in which randomly located in the $`C_n`$th column (L is Poisson segment in $`C_n`$th column). The cover length, $`L_{c_{n+1}}`$, of L is defined as the smallest length in $`C_{n+1}`$th column such as it is contain length L(i.e. $`L_{c_{n+1}}L`$)(fig(1c)). Here, we wish to obtain the probability density of the cover length, $`L_{c_{n+1}}`$, whereas the main distribution in the columns of network is inhomogenous Poisson. So this new probability destiny must satisfy the following conditions:
1) In the constant length $`L_{n+1}`$ of L, there are m points of $`C_{n+1}`$th non-uniform Poisson distribution, i.e.

$$P_{n+1}(m,L_{n+1})=(\frac{L_{n+1}}{\lambda _{n+1}})^m\frac{1}{m!}e^{\frac{L_{n+1}}{\lambda _{n+1}}}.$$
(43)
2) There are segments $`l`$ and $`l^{}`$ in $`C_{n+1}`$th non-uniform density

$`P_{(n+1)}(l)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}}}e^{\frac{l}{\lambda _{n+1}}},`$ (44)
$`P_{(n+1)}(l^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}}}e^{\frac{l^{}}{\lambda _{n+1}}},`$ (45)
and

$`L_{c_{n+1}}`$ $`=`$ $`L_{n+1}+l+l^{},`$ (46)
$`L`$ $`=`$ $`L_{n+1}+t+t^{},`$ (47)
$`t`$ $``$ $`lL_{c_{n+\mathit{1}}}L+t.`$ (48)
3)

$$_L^{\mathrm{}}𝒫_{n+1}(L_{c_{n+1}},L)𝑑L_{c_{n+1}}=1.$$
(49)
where $`𝒫_{n+1}(L_{c_{n+1}},L)`$ is the non-uniform probability density of cover length $`L_{c_{n+1}}`$. Therefore, the probability density of cover length in $`C_{n+1}`$th non-uniform Poisson distribution with above conditions is:
$`𝒫_{n+1}(L_{c_{n+1}},L,m)=`$

$$Q_t^{L_{c_{n+1}}Lt}P_{n+1}(l)P_{n+\mathit{1}}(l^{})P_{n+\mathit{1}}(m,L_{n+\mathit{1}})\delta (L_{c_{n+\mathit{1}}}L_{n+\mathit{1}}ll^{})\mathrm{𝑑𝑙𝑑𝑙}^{},$$
(50)
where Q is a normalization factor. One can find probability density of cover length for any m:

$$𝒫_{n+1}(L_{c_{n+1}},L)=\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝒫_{n+1}(L_{c_{n+1}},L,m)=\frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}(L_{c_{n+1}}L)e^{\frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}}(L_{c_{n+1}}L)}.$$
(51)
We see that, this distribution is independent of $`L_{n+1}`$ and $`t`$. The average value of $`(L_{c_{n+1}}L)`$ for fixed L in column $`C_{n+1}`$ is:

$$<(L_{c_{n+1}}L)>=2\lambda _{n+1}.$$
(52)
Note that, it is independent of L. In the case which we study the 3D poisson network, for a given segment $`L`$, there are two cover lengths, $`L_{c_k}`$ and $`L_{c_j}`$ in two independent poisson distribution, in which are neighbour with each other(fig1.d). It is possible that these two cover lengths partly overlap. The probability density of the non-overlap length $`|L_{c_k}L_{c_j}|`$ is $`\frac{1}{\lambda _k}\mathrm{exp}(\frac{L_{c_k}L_{c_j}}{\lambda _k})`$, for $`C_k`$th column. The average of the non-overlap length in $`C_k`$th column is:

$$<|L_{c_k}L_{c_j}|>=\lambda _k.$$
(53)
### 3.1 Statistical Properties of Non-Uniform Density

3.1.1 Two Dimensional Networks

In a two dimensional network every column say $`C_n`$ has two neighbours, $`C_{n1}`$ and $`C_{n+1}`$. The number of sides of i-cell in column $`C_n`$, is $`i=4+I`$, where $`I=n_{n1}+n_{n+1}`$ and $`n_{n1}+n_{n+1}`$ are the number of vertices contributed by the cells in adjacent columns. Then for the distribution of i-cells of length between $`(L`$ and $`L+dL)`$ in column $`C_n`$, we obtain:

$$g_n(L,i)=\frac{L^{i4}(\xi _n\frac{1}{\lambda _n})^{i4}}{\lambda _n(i4)!}e^{L\xi _n},$$
(54)
where $`\xi _n=\frac{1}{\lambda _{n1}}+\frac{1}{\lambda _n}+\frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}}`$. Hence, the distribution of i-cells with any arbitrary length in column $`C_n`$ is:

$$g_n(i)=_0^{\mathrm{}}g_n(L,i)𝑑L=\frac{1}{\lambda _n\xi _n}(1\frac{1}{\lambda _n\xi _n})^{i4},$$
(55)
clearly this distribution function is normalized. From eq.(48) and (49) we also obtain the average height of $`i\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠}`$ in column $`C_n`$:

$$<L>_{n,i}=_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{Lg_n(L,i)dL}{g_n(i)}=\frac{i3}{\xi _n}.$$
(56)
So that for the Poisson networks with non-uniform density in one direction ($`y`$ direction)(fig1) Lewis law (average area of $`i\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠}`$) in column $`C_n`$ is:

$$<A>_{n,i}=\frac{d_0(i3)}{\xi _n}.$$
(57)
One can now evaluate various moments of the distribution $`g_n(i)`$. In all the following calculations, we use the following formulas for geometric sum:

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}x^k`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1x}},`$ (58)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}kx^k`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{x}{(1x)^2}},`$ (59)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}k^2x^k`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{x(1+x)}{(1x)^3}}.`$ (60)
A simple calculation shows that:

$`<i>_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=4}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}ig_n(i)=3+\lambda _n\xi _n=4+\lambda _n({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda _{n1}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}}}),`$ (61)
$`<i^2>_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=4}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}i^2g_n(i)=2(\lambda _n\xi _n)^2+5\lambda _n\xi _n+9,`$ (62)
where $`<i>_n`$ is the average number of i-cells in column $`C_n`$. The variance turns out to be equal to:

$$<i^2>_n<i>_n^2=(\lambda _n\xi _n)(\lambda _n\xi _n1).$$
(63)
In order to find the moments $`<i>`$ and $`<i^2>`$ in the whole lattice and not in a particular column $`C_n`$, we replace the average over the cells in a network, by an average over the densities in an ensemble of networks. Thus from eqs.(57), (61) and (LABEL:62) we have :

$`A_i`$ $`=`$ $`d_0(i3)<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi _n}}>,`$ (64)
$`i`$ $`=`$ $`4+<\lambda _n({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda _{n1}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}}})>,`$ (65)
$`i^2`$ $`=`$ $`2<(\lambda _n\xi _n)^2>+5<\lambda _n\xi _n>+9.`$ (66)
Where the averages on the right hand side are performed with a suitable distribution

$$P(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\mathrm{},\lambda _N).$$

For simplicity in the following we assume that this distribution, is a symmetric distribution, i.e:

$$P(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\mathrm{},\lambda _N)=P(\lambda _1^{},\lambda _2^{},\mathrm{},\lambda _N^{}),$$
(67)
where the primed indices are a permutation of the unprimed ones. Clearly this minor restriction allows our conclusions to be valid for a very large class of probability distributions. Finally, we consider Aboav-Weaire law for non-uniform Poisson distribution. By using of eqs.(22),(23) and (52), we obtain:

$$<V_1+V_1^{}>_{n+1}=\frac{<L_{c_{n+1}}L_a>_{n+1}}{\lambda _{n+1}}=2,$$
(68)
$$<V_1^{\prime \prime }>_{n+1}=\frac{<L_{c_{n+1}}>_{n+1}}{\lambda _{n+1}}+\frac{<L_a>_{n+1}}{\lambda _{n+1}}=2+\frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}}<L_a>_{n+1}.$$
(69)
Combining eqs.(24), (68) and (69), we have:

$$<im_i>=16+4i+\frac{<L_a>_{(n+1),i}}{\lambda _{n+1}}+\frac{1}{\lambda _{n1}}<L_a>_{(n1),i}.$$
(70)
By using of eqs.(57) and (70), obtain:

$$<im_i>=16+4i+(i3)(\frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}\xi _{n+1}}+\frac{1}{\lambda _{n1}\xi _{n1}}).$$
(71)
At last we have:

$$im_i=16+4i+(i3)<\frac{1}{\lambda _{n+1}\xi _{n+1}}+\frac{1}{\lambda _{n1}\xi _{n1}}>.$$
(72)
Where the last averaging are performed by a given distribution in eq.(67). If we use of uniform distribution we have $`\lambda _{n+1}\xi _{n+1}=\lambda _{n1}\xi _{n1}=3`$, so that:

$$im_i=14+\frac{14}{3}i,$$
(73)
we see that this result is the same in eq.(26)

3.1.2 Three-Dimensional Networks

Consider a 3-dimensional laminated Poisson network, based on an arbitrary 2-dimensional network, and a particular $`i\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙}`$ is the base. I label the column with this base by $`C_{i,0}`$. The number of faces in a cell in the column above this i-cell is

$$F=i+2+J,$$
(74)
where $`J=n_1+n_2+\mathrm{}+n_i`$, and $`n_k`$ is the number of additional lateral faces which results from the cells in the adjacent $`k`$column (fig.3). Let $`f_i(J)`$ be the fraction of the $`F\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠}`$ in column $`C_{i,0}`$. In formula (41), one should now replace $`k`$ by i, and I by J to obtain:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_0(L,F,i)=\frac{L^{Fi2}(\xi _0\frac{1}{\lambda _0})^{Fi2}}{\lambda _0(Fi2)!}e^{L\xi _0},$$
(75)
where $`\xi _0=\frac{1}{\lambda _0}+\frac{1}{\lambda _1}+\frac{1}{\lambda _2}+\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{\lambda _i}`$. Here $`\lambda _0`$ is the density of P-point distribution in the column $`C_{i,0}`$ and $`\lambda _\alpha `$ ($`\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},i`$) are the density of P-point distribution in the adjacent columns. $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0(L,F,i)dL`$ is the probability of finding an F-cell in column $`C_{i,0}`$, whose height is between $`L`$ and $`L+dL`$. Integrating over $`L`$, one obtains

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_0(F,i)=\frac{1}{\lambda _0\xi _0}(1\frac{1}{\lambda _0\xi _0})^{Fi2},$$
(76)
this is the probability of finding an F-cell in column $`C_{i,0}`$. The average height of $`F\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠}`$ with $`i\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙}`$ base in column $`C_0`$ is:

$$<L>_{0,i,F}=_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{L\mathrm{\Psi }_0(F,L,i)dL}{\mathrm{\Psi }_0(F,i)}=\frac{Fi1}{\xi _0},$$
(77)
hence, the average height of $`F\mathrm{𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠}`$ with any base in column $`C_0`$

$$<L>_{0,F}=\underset{i=4}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}<L>_{0,i,F}g_0(i).$$
(78)
Here, we can calculate eq.(78) for three different base networks. Assume that the network of base is:
1) hexagonal

$$<L>_{0,F}=\frac{F7}{\xi _0},$$
(79)
2) uniform Poisson network

$$<L>_{0,F}=\frac{1}{3}\underset{i=4}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(\frac{Fi1}{\xi _0})(\frac{2}{3})^{i4},$$
(80)
3) non-uniform Poisson network

$$<L>_{0,F}=\underset{i=4}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(\frac{Fi1}{\xi _0})g_0(i),$$
(81)
note that the non-uniform Poisson distribution in horizontal columns (2D Poisson network) and vertical columns are independent. Therefore we can easily calculate the final averaging in eq.(74). One can now find various moments of this distribution:

$`<F>_{i,0}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _0\xi _0+i+1,`$ (82)
$`<F^2>_{i,0}`$ $`=`$ $`(i+1)^2+(2i+1)(\lambda _0\xi _0)+2(\lambda _0\xi _0)^2.`$ (83)
By the same averaging procedure as in the two dimensional case one can obtain:

$`L_{F,i}`$ $`=`$ $`(Fi1)<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi _0}}>,`$ (84)
$`F_i`$ $`=`$ $`<\lambda _0\xi _0>+i+1,`$ (85)
$`F^2_i`$ $`=`$ $`(i+1)^2+(2i+1)<\lambda _0\xi _0>+2<(\lambda _0\xi _0)^2>.`$ (86)
The later averages are performed over the density distributions eq.(67). Note that for the distribution with uniform density in vertical columns one has: $`\lambda _0\xi _0=i+1`$ and the eqs.(84), (85) and (86) reduce to:

$`L_{i,F}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Fi1}{i+1}},`$ (87)
$`F_i`$ $`=`$ $`2i+2,`$ (88)
$`F^2_i`$ $`=`$ $`(i+1)(5i+4),`$ (89)
which are in agreement with equations (30), (36), (38).
In this section, we derive the 3D Aboav - Weaire law in non-uniform Poisson network. Consider a 3D cell $`a`$ with $`F`$ faces, height $`L_a`$ and a base with $`i`$ edges in reference column, $`C_0`$. We want find the total number of faces in cells adjacent to $`a`$ with fixed $`F`$ and $`i`$. This quantity is $`(Fm_F)_{0,i}`$. The number lateral walls in column $`k`$ is $`m_i`$. So that the total number of faces, which obtain from P-points within $`L_a`$ in first - neighbour columns to $`a`$ is:

$$J=\underset{k=1}{\overset{i}{}}J_k=\underset{k=1}{\overset{i}{}}\left[(m_i+2)(n_k+1)+(V_k+1)+(V_k^{}+1)\right],$$
(90)
and, the total number of faces, which obtain from P-point within second- neighbour columns to $`a`$ is:

$$J^{}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{im_i3i}{}}V_k^{}=(im_i3i)<V_k^{}>,$$
(91)
where, $`(im_i3i)`$ is the number of vertical walls of the adjacent cells that contact neighbours, and also there are another faces which obtain from P-points in pairs of adjacent column $`k`$, $`j`$ that are adjacent to each other. So the total number of extra faces of such adjacenceis is

$$J^{\prime \prime }=2\underset{k=1}{\overset{i}{}}[(n_k+1)+\frac{<|L_{c_k}Lc_j|>}{\lambda _k}],$$
(92)
where the number 2 is due to two distributions are overlap in each vertical wall. Clearly one can obtain $`(Fm_F)_{0,i}`$ as

$$<Fm_F>_{0,i}=28+J+J^{}+J^{\prime \prime }.$$
(93)
Hence the number 28 comes from the average of faces of two cells adjacent to $`a`$ in the same reference column, $`C_0`$. By substituting eqs. (90), (91), (92) in (93), and using of(52), (53), (68), (69) and (77), we have

$$<Fm_F>_{0,i}=m_i[(1+\frac{i}{\xi _0})F+(2\frac{(i+1)}{\xi _0})i2]+[4\frac{3i}{\xi _0}]F+\frac{3i(i+1)}{\xi _0}+20,$$
(94)
and at last, we have

$`Fm_F_i`$ $`=`$ $`m_i\{[i+i<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi _0}}>]F+[2(i+1)<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi _0}}>]i2\}`$ (95)
$`+`$ $`\{43i<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi _0}}>\}F+3i(i+1)<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi _0}}>+20.`$
Hence the double average are performed by a symmetric distribution such as (70). It is remarkable that these averaging are performed with respect to those distributions in vertical columns(for example z direction), and are independent of distributions in base network. So that if we use of non-uniform poisson network as base network, we have two averaging, which are independent.

## 4 Conclusion

My main conclusion is that Lewis and Aboav- Weaire laws apply to Poisson networks. I have shown that by more randomizing these networks; (i.e. in the sense of random density distribution in different columns) one can still obtain the above mentioned laws. In fact the most features of these networks have in common with real cellular structures. But the only property of real systems in which all the angles around any vertex are equal is obviously absent in these networks. So we see that these model satisfy Lewis and Aboav-Weaire laws with the coefficients which are slightly different from the results obtained in . Therefore despite this modification the main features of this model is still unaffected and one can derive the statistical and topological properties of random cellular structures from this modified model.