A toy model in 0-d QFTPath integrals outside QFTMurray-von Neumann classification of local algebras in Haag-Kastler QFTProof of PCT theorem for Haag-Kastler nets in QFTLinear/Non-linear sigma modelComparison of Different Types of QFTHow to learn QFT from mathematical perspective?The coupon collector's earwormThe proof that a vertex algebra can lead to a Wightman QFT

A toy model in 0-d QFT


Path integrals outside QFTMurray-von Neumann classification of local algebras in Haag-Kastler QFTProof of PCT theorem for Haag-Kastler nets in QFTLinear/Non-linear sigma modelComparison of Different Types of QFTHow to learn QFT from mathematical perspective?The coupon collector's earwormThe proof that a vertex algebra can lead to a Wightman QFT













7














$begingroup$


Questions



  1. For any positive integer $r$, compute $$(fracddY)^r e^(Y^2)| _Y=0.$$ The answer should directly relates to a counting problem about Feynman diagrams.


  2. Is there a tutorial for how Feynman diagrams work in this context? I look forward to an answer a lot, since the question has been reduced to the simplest form. Thank you!


EDIT:
3. Turns out the answer to the first question is trivial considering its Taylor expansion. So a better question should be what's the benefit of solving the first one by the combinatorial way.



Context



I am a math student trying to learn QFT and Feynman Diagrams using Mori et al's Mirror Symmetry. Much to my surprise, even a toy model in 0-dimension the theory is already complicated (for me).



On a point, a function is just a number, so integration over all functions reduces to an ordinary integral. I am looking at the following particular toy model:



$$ int dX e^-S(X), $$



where $S(X) = frac12X^2 + iepsilon X^3$, and am focusing on the perturbation with small $epsilon$, which reduces to the computation
$$(fracddY)^r e^(Y^2)| _Y=0.$$



Basic attempts show that this is a combinatorial problem, which I have no idea how to solve. This is where the book introduces Feynman diagrams, claiming that they help computing the value at zero of the $r$-th derivative above.



However, the explanation is not clear to me. I don't know what the book means by "choosing pairs", "contracting", and "propagators". I have tried other lecture notes online, but all of what I have found use physics terminologies making the situation more complicated.










share|cite|improve this question












$endgroup$










  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Hermite polynomials
    $endgroup$
    – abx
    Oct 12 at 16:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    There are two different aspects one needs to master to be fully conversant with the language of Feynman diagrams. 1) how does one evaluate a single diagram 2) how to precisely define the sum over all diagrams. For 1), a diagram is just a graphical encoding of a contraction of tensors which generalize matrix algebra. Even $Delta=b^2-4ac$ from high school can be learned that way see, e.g., arxiv.org/abs/math/0411110 For 2), the best mathematical formalism for that is that Joyal's theory of species, see, e.g., emis.de/journals/SLC/wpapers/s49abdess.pdf
    $endgroup$
    – Abdelmalek Abdesselam
    Oct 12 at 19:47










  • $begingroup$
    What you are looking at is the Wick theorem. It has many views, one of which is integration by parts (this should relate to your combinatorial interpretation)
    $endgroup$
    – lcv
    Oct 13 at 13:38






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I don't understand your follow-up question no. 3. Wasn't the whole point of this exercise to learn a new method? Isn't that a benefit?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Engelhardt
    Oct 13 at 16:47






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Regarding edit 3, I think the short answer is that there really isn't a good reason to do it for this integral; the point is to introduce the concept so it can be applied to more complicated integrals of the same "shape".
    $endgroup$
    – lambda
    Oct 13 at 19:51















7














$begingroup$


Questions



  1. For any positive integer $r$, compute $$(fracddY)^r e^(Y^2)| _Y=0.$$ The answer should directly relates to a counting problem about Feynman diagrams.


  2. Is there a tutorial for how Feynman diagrams work in this context? I look forward to an answer a lot, since the question has been reduced to the simplest form. Thank you!


EDIT:
3. Turns out the answer to the first question is trivial considering its Taylor expansion. So a better question should be what's the benefit of solving the first one by the combinatorial way.



Context



I am a math student trying to learn QFT and Feynman Diagrams using Mori et al's Mirror Symmetry. Much to my surprise, even a toy model in 0-dimension the theory is already complicated (for me).



On a point, a function is just a number, so integration over all functions reduces to an ordinary integral. I am looking at the following particular toy model:



$$ int dX e^-S(X), $$



where $S(X) = frac12X^2 + iepsilon X^3$, and am focusing on the perturbation with small $epsilon$, which reduces to the computation
$$(fracddY)^r e^(Y^2)| _Y=0.$$



Basic attempts show that this is a combinatorial problem, which I have no idea how to solve. This is where the book introduces Feynman diagrams, claiming that they help computing the value at zero of the $r$-th derivative above.



However, the explanation is not clear to me. I don't know what the book means by "choosing pairs", "contracting", and "propagators". I have tried other lecture notes online, but all of what I have found use physics terminologies making the situation more complicated.










share|cite|improve this question












$endgroup$










  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Hermite polynomials
    $endgroup$
    – abx
    Oct 12 at 16:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    There are two different aspects one needs to master to be fully conversant with the language of Feynman diagrams. 1) how does one evaluate a single diagram 2) how to precisely define the sum over all diagrams. For 1), a diagram is just a graphical encoding of a contraction of tensors which generalize matrix algebra. Even $Delta=b^2-4ac$ from high school can be learned that way see, e.g., arxiv.org/abs/math/0411110 For 2), the best mathematical formalism for that is that Joyal's theory of species, see, e.g., emis.de/journals/SLC/wpapers/s49abdess.pdf
    $endgroup$
    – Abdelmalek Abdesselam
    Oct 12 at 19:47










  • $begingroup$
    What you are looking at is the Wick theorem. It has many views, one of which is integration by parts (this should relate to your combinatorial interpretation)
    $endgroup$
    – lcv
    Oct 13 at 13:38






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I don't understand your follow-up question no. 3. Wasn't the whole point of this exercise to learn a new method? Isn't that a benefit?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Engelhardt
    Oct 13 at 16:47






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Regarding edit 3, I think the short answer is that there really isn't a good reason to do it for this integral; the point is to introduce the concept so it can be applied to more complicated integrals of the same "shape".
    $endgroup$
    – lambda
    Oct 13 at 19:51













7












7








7


3



$begingroup$


Questions



  1. For any positive integer $r$, compute $$(fracddY)^r e^(Y^2)| _Y=0.$$ The answer should directly relates to a counting problem about Feynman diagrams.


  2. Is there a tutorial for how Feynman diagrams work in this context? I look forward to an answer a lot, since the question has been reduced to the simplest form. Thank you!


EDIT:
3. Turns out the answer to the first question is trivial considering its Taylor expansion. So a better question should be what's the benefit of solving the first one by the combinatorial way.



Context



I am a math student trying to learn QFT and Feynman Diagrams using Mori et al's Mirror Symmetry. Much to my surprise, even a toy model in 0-dimension the theory is already complicated (for me).



On a point, a function is just a number, so integration over all functions reduces to an ordinary integral. I am looking at the following particular toy model:



$$ int dX e^-S(X), $$



where $S(X) = frac12X^2 + iepsilon X^3$, and am focusing on the perturbation with small $epsilon$, which reduces to the computation
$$(fracddY)^r e^(Y^2)| _Y=0.$$



Basic attempts show that this is a combinatorial problem, which I have no idea how to solve. This is where the book introduces Feynman diagrams, claiming that they help computing the value at zero of the $r$-th derivative above.



However, the explanation is not clear to me. I don't know what the book means by "choosing pairs", "contracting", and "propagators". I have tried other lecture notes online, but all of what I have found use physics terminologies making the situation more complicated.










share|cite|improve this question












$endgroup$




Questions



  1. For any positive integer $r$, compute $$(fracddY)^r e^(Y^2)| _Y=0.$$ The answer should directly relates to a counting problem about Feynman diagrams.


  2. Is there a tutorial for how Feynman diagrams work in this context? I look forward to an answer a lot, since the question has been reduced to the simplest form. Thank you!


EDIT:
3. Turns out the answer to the first question is trivial considering its Taylor expansion. So a better question should be what's the benefit of solving the first one by the combinatorial way.



Context



I am a math student trying to learn QFT and Feynman Diagrams using Mori et al's Mirror Symmetry. Much to my surprise, even a toy model in 0-dimension the theory is already complicated (for me).



On a point, a function is just a number, so integration over all functions reduces to an ordinary integral. I am looking at the following particular toy model:



$$ int dX e^-S(X), $$



where $S(X) = frac12X^2 + iepsilon X^3$, and am focusing on the perturbation with small $epsilon$, which reduces to the computation
$$(fracddY)^r e^(Y^2)| _Y=0.$$



Basic attempts show that this is a combinatorial problem, which I have no idea how to solve. This is where the book introduces Feynman diagrams, claiming that they help computing the value at zero of the $r$-th derivative above.



However, the explanation is not clear to me. I don't know what the book means by "choosing pairs", "contracting", and "propagators". I have tried other lecture notes online, but all of what I have found use physics terminologies making the situation more complicated.







co.combinatorics quantum-field-theory perturbation-theory feynman-integral






share|cite|improve this question
















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Oct 13 at 13:24







Student

















asked Oct 12 at 15:34









StudentStudent

3331 silver badge6 bronze badges




3331 silver badge6 bronze badges










  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Hermite polynomials
    $endgroup$
    – abx
    Oct 12 at 16:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    There are two different aspects one needs to master to be fully conversant with the language of Feynman diagrams. 1) how does one evaluate a single diagram 2) how to precisely define the sum over all diagrams. For 1), a diagram is just a graphical encoding of a contraction of tensors which generalize matrix algebra. Even $Delta=b^2-4ac$ from high school can be learned that way see, e.g., arxiv.org/abs/math/0411110 For 2), the best mathematical formalism for that is that Joyal's theory of species, see, e.g., emis.de/journals/SLC/wpapers/s49abdess.pdf
    $endgroup$
    – Abdelmalek Abdesselam
    Oct 12 at 19:47










  • $begingroup$
    What you are looking at is the Wick theorem. It has many views, one of which is integration by parts (this should relate to your combinatorial interpretation)
    $endgroup$
    – lcv
    Oct 13 at 13:38






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I don't understand your follow-up question no. 3. Wasn't the whole point of this exercise to learn a new method? Isn't that a benefit?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Engelhardt
    Oct 13 at 16:47






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Regarding edit 3, I think the short answer is that there really isn't a good reason to do it for this integral; the point is to introduce the concept so it can be applied to more complicated integrals of the same "shape".
    $endgroup$
    – lambda
    Oct 13 at 19:51












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Hermite polynomials
    $endgroup$
    – abx
    Oct 12 at 16:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    There are two different aspects one needs to master to be fully conversant with the language of Feynman diagrams. 1) how does one evaluate a single diagram 2) how to precisely define the sum over all diagrams. For 1), a diagram is just a graphical encoding of a contraction of tensors which generalize matrix algebra. Even $Delta=b^2-4ac$ from high school can be learned that way see, e.g., arxiv.org/abs/math/0411110 For 2), the best mathematical formalism for that is that Joyal's theory of species, see, e.g., emis.de/journals/SLC/wpapers/s49abdess.pdf
    $endgroup$
    – Abdelmalek Abdesselam
    Oct 12 at 19:47










  • $begingroup$
    What you are looking at is the Wick theorem. It has many views, one of which is integration by parts (this should relate to your combinatorial interpretation)
    $endgroup$
    – lcv
    Oct 13 at 13:38






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I don't understand your follow-up question no. 3. Wasn't the whole point of this exercise to learn a new method? Isn't that a benefit?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Engelhardt
    Oct 13 at 16:47






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Regarding edit 3, I think the short answer is that there really isn't a good reason to do it for this integral; the point is to introduce the concept so it can be applied to more complicated integrals of the same "shape".
    $endgroup$
    – lambda
    Oct 13 at 19:51







1




1




$begingroup$
Hermite polynomials
$endgroup$
– abx
Oct 12 at 16:50




$begingroup$
Hermite polynomials
$endgroup$
– abx
Oct 12 at 16:50




1




1




$begingroup$
There are two different aspects one needs to master to be fully conversant with the language of Feynman diagrams. 1) how does one evaluate a single diagram 2) how to precisely define the sum over all diagrams. For 1), a diagram is just a graphical encoding of a contraction of tensors which generalize matrix algebra. Even $Delta=b^2-4ac$ from high school can be learned that way see, e.g., arxiv.org/abs/math/0411110 For 2), the best mathematical formalism for that is that Joyal's theory of species, see, e.g., emis.de/journals/SLC/wpapers/s49abdess.pdf
$endgroup$
– Abdelmalek Abdesselam
Oct 12 at 19:47




$begingroup$
There are two different aspects one needs to master to be fully conversant with the language of Feynman diagrams. 1) how does one evaluate a single diagram 2) how to precisely define the sum over all diagrams. For 1), a diagram is just a graphical encoding of a contraction of tensors which generalize matrix algebra. Even $Delta=b^2-4ac$ from high school can be learned that way see, e.g., arxiv.org/abs/math/0411110 For 2), the best mathematical formalism for that is that Joyal's theory of species, see, e.g., emis.de/journals/SLC/wpapers/s49abdess.pdf
$endgroup$
– Abdelmalek Abdesselam
Oct 12 at 19:47












$begingroup$
What you are looking at is the Wick theorem. It has many views, one of which is integration by parts (this should relate to your combinatorial interpretation)
$endgroup$
– lcv
Oct 13 at 13:38




$begingroup$
What you are looking at is the Wick theorem. It has many views, one of which is integration by parts (this should relate to your combinatorial interpretation)
$endgroup$
– lcv
Oct 13 at 13:38




1




1




$begingroup$
I don't understand your follow-up question no. 3. Wasn't the whole point of this exercise to learn a new method? Isn't that a benefit?
$endgroup$
– Michael Engelhardt
Oct 13 at 16:47




$begingroup$
I don't understand your follow-up question no. 3. Wasn't the whole point of this exercise to learn a new method? Isn't that a benefit?
$endgroup$
– Michael Engelhardt
Oct 13 at 16:47




1




1




$begingroup$
Regarding edit 3, I think the short answer is that there really isn't a good reason to do it for this integral; the point is to introduce the concept so it can be applied to more complicated integrals of the same "shape".
$endgroup$
– lambda
Oct 13 at 19:51




$begingroup$
Regarding edit 3, I think the short answer is that there really isn't a good reason to do it for this integral; the point is to introduce the concept so it can be applied to more complicated integrals of the same "shape".
$endgroup$
– lambda
Oct 13 at 19:51










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















5
















$begingroup$

Draw a point from which $r$ lines emanate (a "vertex"). The ends of the lines are associated with the derivatives. Now let the derivatives act. Two things can happen:



a.) The derivative acts on the exponential. Represent this by attaching a dot to the end of the line (now the derivative is gone, but there's a factor $Y$ associated with the end of the line, symbolized by the dot).



b.) The derivative acts on one of the dots, i.e., one of the $Y$ prefactors you've generated by previous applications of derivatives. Represent this by attaching the line you're considering to one of the dots at the end of another line, erasing the dot (that factor $Y$ is now gone, having acted with the derivative) - so altogether you now have a loop emanating from the vertex and going back into it.



Finally, set $Y=0$. This means that all diagrams which still have dots are erased.



So, your combinatorial problem is to find all different diagrams you can construct this way; in effect, in your example, pairing off lines emanating from the vertex to form loops. There are some numerical factors to take care of, here, just the factors 2 from taking derivatives of $Y^2 $.



In the exponential, you can think of the $Y^2 $ as two dots connected by a line - then this incorporates a.) into the notion used in b.) of "derivatives erasing dots". And you can incorporate the aforementioned factors 2 this way - you have a choice of which dot you're attaching and erasing.



Although it might be a bit facile of me to say, since I'm familiar with the physics parlance, don't be afraid of trying to understand the physics tutorials on this. As far as these diagrammatics go, you don't need to understand the physics behind "propagators", "vertices" and the like. You just need a rudimentary dictionary of what these things are in the graphs. I already mentioned "vertex". "Propagators" are just the lines. The dots are "sources". When you connect two lines, erasing the dot, you're "contracting" ...



So let's complete the exercise: Of course, for odd $r$, the result is zero - there are no valid diagrams. For even $r$, there are $r!/(2^r/2 (r/2)!)$ ways of pairing off lines coming from the vertex. Multiplied by a factor $2^r/2 $ from taking $r/2$ derivatives of the exponential, as mentioned above, yields $r!/(r/2)!$. As a check, these are indeed the absolute values of the constant terms in the Hermite polynomials $H_r $.






share|cite|improve this answer












$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    Thank you! I followed the procedure you gave and understood finally.
    $endgroup$
    – Student
    yesterday


















5
















$begingroup$

Here is how I understand the appearance of diagrams in computing that integral, which may not be how the book does it.



We can formally expand as a series in $epsilon$ and write $$int_-infty^infty dX,e^-S(X) = sum_n ge 0 frac(-iepsilon)^n n! int_-infty^infty dX,e^-frac12X^2X^3n$$ so the problem reduces to computing the integral on the RHS. This is somewhat well-known to vanish for odd $n$ and to be equal to $sqrt2pi$ times the double factorial
$$(3n - 1)!! = (3n - 1) (3n - 3) cdots 1$$
when $n$ is even.



Combinatorially, the double factorial counts perfect matchings (partitions into blocks of size 2) of a set of size $3n$. Given a perfect matching of the set $1, dots, 3n$, we can construct a $3$-regular graph as follows:



  • The vertices are $1, dots, n$.

  • To each vertex $j$, attach three "half-edges" labelled $3j-2, 3j-1, 3j$.

  • Join half-edges together according to the perfect matching to form edges.

Thus we can interpret the coefficient of $epsilon^n$ as counting cubic graphs of size $n$. (Though the way we've labelled the half-edges means there is some overcounting to deal with.) Thinking of it this way might not seem very motivated, but for slightly more complicated integrals the benefit is easier to see. For instance, if we added an $epsilon^4$ term as well, we'd get something counting graphs where vertices can have either degree 3 or 4. The Isserlis–Wick theorem is the generalization of that "well-known" fact about double factorials to the multivariate setting, and can be used to interpret multivariate integrals of this type as counting graphs with decorated edges.






share|cite|improve this answer












$endgroup$
















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "504"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );














    draft saved

    draft discarded
















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f343707%2fa-toy-model-in-0-d-qft%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown


























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    5
















    $begingroup$

    Draw a point from which $r$ lines emanate (a "vertex"). The ends of the lines are associated with the derivatives. Now let the derivatives act. Two things can happen:



    a.) The derivative acts on the exponential. Represent this by attaching a dot to the end of the line (now the derivative is gone, but there's a factor $Y$ associated with the end of the line, symbolized by the dot).



    b.) The derivative acts on one of the dots, i.e., one of the $Y$ prefactors you've generated by previous applications of derivatives. Represent this by attaching the line you're considering to one of the dots at the end of another line, erasing the dot (that factor $Y$ is now gone, having acted with the derivative) - so altogether you now have a loop emanating from the vertex and going back into it.



    Finally, set $Y=0$. This means that all diagrams which still have dots are erased.



    So, your combinatorial problem is to find all different diagrams you can construct this way; in effect, in your example, pairing off lines emanating from the vertex to form loops. There are some numerical factors to take care of, here, just the factors 2 from taking derivatives of $Y^2 $.



    In the exponential, you can think of the $Y^2 $ as two dots connected by a line - then this incorporates a.) into the notion used in b.) of "derivatives erasing dots". And you can incorporate the aforementioned factors 2 this way - you have a choice of which dot you're attaching and erasing.



    Although it might be a bit facile of me to say, since I'm familiar with the physics parlance, don't be afraid of trying to understand the physics tutorials on this. As far as these diagrammatics go, you don't need to understand the physics behind "propagators", "vertices" and the like. You just need a rudimentary dictionary of what these things are in the graphs. I already mentioned "vertex". "Propagators" are just the lines. The dots are "sources". When you connect two lines, erasing the dot, you're "contracting" ...



    So let's complete the exercise: Of course, for odd $r$, the result is zero - there are no valid diagrams. For even $r$, there are $r!/(2^r/2 (r/2)!)$ ways of pairing off lines coming from the vertex. Multiplied by a factor $2^r/2 $ from taking $r/2$ derivatives of the exponential, as mentioned above, yields $r!/(r/2)!$. As a check, these are indeed the absolute values of the constant terms in the Hermite polynomials $H_r $.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      Thank you! I followed the procedure you gave and understood finally.
      $endgroup$
      – Student
      yesterday















    5
















    $begingroup$

    Draw a point from which $r$ lines emanate (a "vertex"). The ends of the lines are associated with the derivatives. Now let the derivatives act. Two things can happen:



    a.) The derivative acts on the exponential. Represent this by attaching a dot to the end of the line (now the derivative is gone, but there's a factor $Y$ associated with the end of the line, symbolized by the dot).



    b.) The derivative acts on one of the dots, i.e., one of the $Y$ prefactors you've generated by previous applications of derivatives. Represent this by attaching the line you're considering to one of the dots at the end of another line, erasing the dot (that factor $Y$ is now gone, having acted with the derivative) - so altogether you now have a loop emanating from the vertex and going back into it.



    Finally, set $Y=0$. This means that all diagrams which still have dots are erased.



    So, your combinatorial problem is to find all different diagrams you can construct this way; in effect, in your example, pairing off lines emanating from the vertex to form loops. There are some numerical factors to take care of, here, just the factors 2 from taking derivatives of $Y^2 $.



    In the exponential, you can think of the $Y^2 $ as two dots connected by a line - then this incorporates a.) into the notion used in b.) of "derivatives erasing dots". And you can incorporate the aforementioned factors 2 this way - you have a choice of which dot you're attaching and erasing.



    Although it might be a bit facile of me to say, since I'm familiar with the physics parlance, don't be afraid of trying to understand the physics tutorials on this. As far as these diagrammatics go, you don't need to understand the physics behind "propagators", "vertices" and the like. You just need a rudimentary dictionary of what these things are in the graphs. I already mentioned "vertex". "Propagators" are just the lines. The dots are "sources". When you connect two lines, erasing the dot, you're "contracting" ...



    So let's complete the exercise: Of course, for odd $r$, the result is zero - there are no valid diagrams. For even $r$, there are $r!/(2^r/2 (r/2)!)$ ways of pairing off lines coming from the vertex. Multiplied by a factor $2^r/2 $ from taking $r/2$ derivatives of the exponential, as mentioned above, yields $r!/(r/2)!$. As a check, these are indeed the absolute values of the constant terms in the Hermite polynomials $H_r $.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      Thank you! I followed the procedure you gave and understood finally.
      $endgroup$
      – Student
      yesterday













    5














    5










    5







    $begingroup$

    Draw a point from which $r$ lines emanate (a "vertex"). The ends of the lines are associated with the derivatives. Now let the derivatives act. Two things can happen:



    a.) The derivative acts on the exponential. Represent this by attaching a dot to the end of the line (now the derivative is gone, but there's a factor $Y$ associated with the end of the line, symbolized by the dot).



    b.) The derivative acts on one of the dots, i.e., one of the $Y$ prefactors you've generated by previous applications of derivatives. Represent this by attaching the line you're considering to one of the dots at the end of another line, erasing the dot (that factor $Y$ is now gone, having acted with the derivative) - so altogether you now have a loop emanating from the vertex and going back into it.



    Finally, set $Y=0$. This means that all diagrams which still have dots are erased.



    So, your combinatorial problem is to find all different diagrams you can construct this way; in effect, in your example, pairing off lines emanating from the vertex to form loops. There are some numerical factors to take care of, here, just the factors 2 from taking derivatives of $Y^2 $.



    In the exponential, you can think of the $Y^2 $ as two dots connected by a line - then this incorporates a.) into the notion used in b.) of "derivatives erasing dots". And you can incorporate the aforementioned factors 2 this way - you have a choice of which dot you're attaching and erasing.



    Although it might be a bit facile of me to say, since I'm familiar with the physics parlance, don't be afraid of trying to understand the physics tutorials on this. As far as these diagrammatics go, you don't need to understand the physics behind "propagators", "vertices" and the like. You just need a rudimentary dictionary of what these things are in the graphs. I already mentioned "vertex". "Propagators" are just the lines. The dots are "sources". When you connect two lines, erasing the dot, you're "contracting" ...



    So let's complete the exercise: Of course, for odd $r$, the result is zero - there are no valid diagrams. For even $r$, there are $r!/(2^r/2 (r/2)!)$ ways of pairing off lines coming from the vertex. Multiplied by a factor $2^r/2 $ from taking $r/2$ derivatives of the exponential, as mentioned above, yields $r!/(r/2)!$. As a check, these are indeed the absolute values of the constant terms in the Hermite polynomials $H_r $.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    $endgroup$



    Draw a point from which $r$ lines emanate (a "vertex"). The ends of the lines are associated with the derivatives. Now let the derivatives act. Two things can happen:



    a.) The derivative acts on the exponential. Represent this by attaching a dot to the end of the line (now the derivative is gone, but there's a factor $Y$ associated with the end of the line, symbolized by the dot).



    b.) The derivative acts on one of the dots, i.e., one of the $Y$ prefactors you've generated by previous applications of derivatives. Represent this by attaching the line you're considering to one of the dots at the end of another line, erasing the dot (that factor $Y$ is now gone, having acted with the derivative) - so altogether you now have a loop emanating from the vertex and going back into it.



    Finally, set $Y=0$. This means that all diagrams which still have dots are erased.



    So, your combinatorial problem is to find all different diagrams you can construct this way; in effect, in your example, pairing off lines emanating from the vertex to form loops. There are some numerical factors to take care of, here, just the factors 2 from taking derivatives of $Y^2 $.



    In the exponential, you can think of the $Y^2 $ as two dots connected by a line - then this incorporates a.) into the notion used in b.) of "derivatives erasing dots". And you can incorporate the aforementioned factors 2 this way - you have a choice of which dot you're attaching and erasing.



    Although it might be a bit facile of me to say, since I'm familiar with the physics parlance, don't be afraid of trying to understand the physics tutorials on this. As far as these diagrammatics go, you don't need to understand the physics behind "propagators", "vertices" and the like. You just need a rudimentary dictionary of what these things are in the graphs. I already mentioned "vertex". "Propagators" are just the lines. The dots are "sources". When you connect two lines, erasing the dot, you're "contracting" ...



    So let's complete the exercise: Of course, for odd $r$, the result is zero - there are no valid diagrams. For even $r$, there are $r!/(2^r/2 (r/2)!)$ ways of pairing off lines coming from the vertex. Multiplied by a factor $2^r/2 $ from taking $r/2$ derivatives of the exponential, as mentioned above, yields $r!/(r/2)!$. As a check, these are indeed the absolute values of the constant terms in the Hermite polynomials $H_r $.







    share|cite|improve this answer















    share|cite|improve this answer




    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Oct 12 at 19:42

























    answered Oct 12 at 17:42









    Michael EngelhardtMichael Engelhardt

    7761 gold badge1 silver badge10 bronze badges




    7761 gold badge1 silver badge10 bronze badges














    • $begingroup$
      Thank you! I followed the procedure you gave and understood finally.
      $endgroup$
      – Student
      yesterday
















    • $begingroup$
      Thank you! I followed the procedure you gave and understood finally.
      $endgroup$
      – Student
      yesterday















    $begingroup$
    Thank you! I followed the procedure you gave and understood finally.
    $endgroup$
    – Student
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    Thank you! I followed the procedure you gave and understood finally.
    $endgroup$
    – Student
    yesterday











    5
















    $begingroup$

    Here is how I understand the appearance of diagrams in computing that integral, which may not be how the book does it.



    We can formally expand as a series in $epsilon$ and write $$int_-infty^infty dX,e^-S(X) = sum_n ge 0 frac(-iepsilon)^n n! int_-infty^infty dX,e^-frac12X^2X^3n$$ so the problem reduces to computing the integral on the RHS. This is somewhat well-known to vanish for odd $n$ and to be equal to $sqrt2pi$ times the double factorial
    $$(3n - 1)!! = (3n - 1) (3n - 3) cdots 1$$
    when $n$ is even.



    Combinatorially, the double factorial counts perfect matchings (partitions into blocks of size 2) of a set of size $3n$. Given a perfect matching of the set $1, dots, 3n$, we can construct a $3$-regular graph as follows:



    • The vertices are $1, dots, n$.

    • To each vertex $j$, attach three "half-edges" labelled $3j-2, 3j-1, 3j$.

    • Join half-edges together according to the perfect matching to form edges.

    Thus we can interpret the coefficient of $epsilon^n$ as counting cubic graphs of size $n$. (Though the way we've labelled the half-edges means there is some overcounting to deal with.) Thinking of it this way might not seem very motivated, but for slightly more complicated integrals the benefit is easier to see. For instance, if we added an $epsilon^4$ term as well, we'd get something counting graphs where vertices can have either degree 3 or 4. The Isserlis–Wick theorem is the generalization of that "well-known" fact about double factorials to the multivariate setting, and can be used to interpret multivariate integrals of this type as counting graphs with decorated edges.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    $endgroup$



















      5
















      $begingroup$

      Here is how I understand the appearance of diagrams in computing that integral, which may not be how the book does it.



      We can formally expand as a series in $epsilon$ and write $$int_-infty^infty dX,e^-S(X) = sum_n ge 0 frac(-iepsilon)^n n! int_-infty^infty dX,e^-frac12X^2X^3n$$ so the problem reduces to computing the integral on the RHS. This is somewhat well-known to vanish for odd $n$ and to be equal to $sqrt2pi$ times the double factorial
      $$(3n - 1)!! = (3n - 1) (3n - 3) cdots 1$$
      when $n$ is even.



      Combinatorially, the double factorial counts perfect matchings (partitions into blocks of size 2) of a set of size $3n$. Given a perfect matching of the set $1, dots, 3n$, we can construct a $3$-regular graph as follows:



      • The vertices are $1, dots, n$.

      • To each vertex $j$, attach three "half-edges" labelled $3j-2, 3j-1, 3j$.

      • Join half-edges together according to the perfect matching to form edges.

      Thus we can interpret the coefficient of $epsilon^n$ as counting cubic graphs of size $n$. (Though the way we've labelled the half-edges means there is some overcounting to deal with.) Thinking of it this way might not seem very motivated, but for slightly more complicated integrals the benefit is easier to see. For instance, if we added an $epsilon^4$ term as well, we'd get something counting graphs where vertices can have either degree 3 or 4. The Isserlis–Wick theorem is the generalization of that "well-known" fact about double factorials to the multivariate setting, and can be used to interpret multivariate integrals of this type as counting graphs with decorated edges.






      share|cite|improve this answer












      $endgroup$

















        5














        5










        5







        $begingroup$

        Here is how I understand the appearance of diagrams in computing that integral, which may not be how the book does it.



        We can formally expand as a series in $epsilon$ and write $$int_-infty^infty dX,e^-S(X) = sum_n ge 0 frac(-iepsilon)^n n! int_-infty^infty dX,e^-frac12X^2X^3n$$ so the problem reduces to computing the integral on the RHS. This is somewhat well-known to vanish for odd $n$ and to be equal to $sqrt2pi$ times the double factorial
        $$(3n - 1)!! = (3n - 1) (3n - 3) cdots 1$$
        when $n$ is even.



        Combinatorially, the double factorial counts perfect matchings (partitions into blocks of size 2) of a set of size $3n$. Given a perfect matching of the set $1, dots, 3n$, we can construct a $3$-regular graph as follows:



        • The vertices are $1, dots, n$.

        • To each vertex $j$, attach three "half-edges" labelled $3j-2, 3j-1, 3j$.

        • Join half-edges together according to the perfect matching to form edges.

        Thus we can interpret the coefficient of $epsilon^n$ as counting cubic graphs of size $n$. (Though the way we've labelled the half-edges means there is some overcounting to deal with.) Thinking of it this way might not seem very motivated, but for slightly more complicated integrals the benefit is easier to see. For instance, if we added an $epsilon^4$ term as well, we'd get something counting graphs where vertices can have either degree 3 or 4. The Isserlis–Wick theorem is the generalization of that "well-known" fact about double factorials to the multivariate setting, and can be used to interpret multivariate integrals of this type as counting graphs with decorated edges.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        $endgroup$



        Here is how I understand the appearance of diagrams in computing that integral, which may not be how the book does it.



        We can formally expand as a series in $epsilon$ and write $$int_-infty^infty dX,e^-S(X) = sum_n ge 0 frac(-iepsilon)^n n! int_-infty^infty dX,e^-frac12X^2X^3n$$ so the problem reduces to computing the integral on the RHS. This is somewhat well-known to vanish for odd $n$ and to be equal to $sqrt2pi$ times the double factorial
        $$(3n - 1)!! = (3n - 1) (3n - 3) cdots 1$$
        when $n$ is even.



        Combinatorially, the double factorial counts perfect matchings (partitions into blocks of size 2) of a set of size $3n$. Given a perfect matching of the set $1, dots, 3n$, we can construct a $3$-regular graph as follows:



        • The vertices are $1, dots, n$.

        • To each vertex $j$, attach three "half-edges" labelled $3j-2, 3j-1, 3j$.

        • Join half-edges together according to the perfect matching to form edges.

        Thus we can interpret the coefficient of $epsilon^n$ as counting cubic graphs of size $n$. (Though the way we've labelled the half-edges means there is some overcounting to deal with.) Thinking of it this way might not seem very motivated, but for slightly more complicated integrals the benefit is easier to see. For instance, if we added an $epsilon^4$ term as well, we'd get something counting graphs where vertices can have either degree 3 or 4. The Isserlis–Wick theorem is the generalization of that "well-known" fact about double factorials to the multivariate setting, and can be used to interpret multivariate integrals of this type as counting graphs with decorated edges.







        share|cite|improve this answer















        share|cite|improve this answer




        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited 5 mins ago

























        answered Oct 12 at 17:54









        lambdalambda

        4641 gold badge3 silver badges12 bronze badges




        4641 gold badge3 silver badges12 bronze badges































            draft saved

            draft discarded















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f343707%2fa-toy-model-in-0-d-qft%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown









            Popular posts from this blog

            Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

            Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

            Ласкавець круглолистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Галерея | Примітки | Посилання | Навігаційне меню58171138361-22960890446Bupleurum rotundifoliumEuro+Med PlantbasePlants of the World Online — Kew ScienceGermplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN)Ласкавецькн. VI : Літери Ком — Левиправивши або дописавши її