The Large N Limit of Superconformal Field Theories and Supergravity

Juan M. Maldacena · Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics / arXiv · 1998 · physics · 10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n2.a1 · record maldacena1997-adscft
tag layer · index · concepts · authors · עברית

Where this record's text came from. faceted 2026-08 by reading the locally held text (pdftext); every evidence string verified as an exact substring of that text before merging. The headline claim is a conjecture, so claim type sits between 'existence' and 'prediction'; 'existence' was chosen because what the paper demonstrates is that the supergravity sector is already present in the Hilbert space of the field theory. method is 'theoretical-derivation'; none of the suggested method values applies to an analytic string-theory argument. The scanned text contains OCR corruptions ('iV', 'JV', 'giV' for N, 'axe' for are); quotes preserve them exactly. Claim-relation targets are cited by reference number in the source, so the target strings paraphrase what the source says those references are. 2026-08-14 and 2026-08-15 schema-0.3 passes: every quote verified as an exact substring of the staged text and anchored at merge time; concept terms verified present; every edge endpoint an existing node. Update, 15 September 2026: EXCEPTION, measured with the merge gate's own predicate (Paper.locate): 6 quote(s) on this record are not found as one exact string in the current staged text - content_tags.definitions[3].evidence, content_tags.findings[3].evidence, content_tags.quantities[1].evidence, content_tags.quantities[2].evidence, content_tags.quantities[4].evidence, content_tags.variables[1].evidence. The sentence above does not hold for them as written. Where a row records why - the quote is grounded in another copy of the paper, joins two passages with an ellipsis, or differs from the staged text by extraction noise - that note stays on the row.

5 quotes on this page were cut from a different copy of this article. This project holds two extractions of this paper: the plain text every other quote here is anchored in, and the publisher’s own HTML edition, which we are not licensed to republish. They are verbatim in the second and cannot be found in the first — not because the tagging is wrong, but because the extraction damaged the passage: a page number dropped into the middle of a number, a formula moved out of its sentence, a ligature where two letters belong. The record names the copy for each one. The quote is the paper’s; the extraction is not.

How to read this page. The article itself is not reproduced here — this paper is not cleared for redistribution, so what follows is the tag layer alone. The evidence sentences are withheld with the article. The table at the foot lists every tag the record carries; each row names the facet it belongs to, and the whose words column says whether the tag records the paper's own wording or the tagger's sentence about the paper. Every tag links to each other paper in the corpus carrying it. The machine-readable edition of the same thing is the TEI file beside this one, where the tags live in standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.

Tags on this paper

Every tag the record carries, each linking to every other paper in the corpus that carries it. A tag appears here whether or not its words occur in the article — the spans below are only the ones a sentence in this paper licenses. Of the 7 concept tags on this paper, 4 are grounded in a quoted sentence.

AdS/CFT correspondence gauge-gravity duality holography conformal field theory string theory supergravity near horizon geometry the AdS/CFT (holographic) duality: a string/gravity theory in an anti-de Sitter spacetime is equivalent to a conformal field theory living on its lower-dimensional boundary conformal field theories large N limit Anti-deSitter super-Yang-Mills branes superconformal group M-theory duality decoupling limit R-symmetry 't Hooft limit N g U gN theory

Method, as described: theoretical-derivation

Legend

relation to other work	`claim_relations`	how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies
claim type	`claim_type`	the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null
concept edge	`concept_edges`	an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it
concept	`concepts`	an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it
content tag	`content_tags`	a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper
limitation	`limitations`	what the paper says its evidence cannot support
mechanism	`mechanisms`	how the reported effect is said to come about
method	`method`	how the paper produced its evidence
phenomenon	`phenomenon`	the effect or regularity under study
sense	`senses`	a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it

The paper

The full text is not reproduced here. This article is not cleared for redistribution, so the page carries the tag layer only. Its evidence sentences are withheld; the grounding status remains with each tag, and the article itself is at https://doi.org/10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n2.a1. The reading view exists for the papers whose licence permits it.

Every tag on this page

claim_relations 5 · claim_type 1 · concept_edges 1 · concepts 4 · content_tags 12 · limitations 10 · mechanisms 1 · method 1 · phenomenon 1 · senses 3

Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 1 relation here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.

This record holds no controls. A layer is empty when the tagger recorded nothing in it — which is not the same as the paper having nothing to record.

facet	tag	field	conf.	whose words
claim_type	existence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_type`		the paper's words
phenomenon	duality between large-N conformal field theories and supergravity on anti-de Sitter spacetimes Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`phenomenon`		the paper's words
method	theory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: theory	`method`		the paper's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. status: the paper's own words: We conjecture that also in: the AdS/CFT (holographic) duality: a string/gravity theory in an anti-de Sitter spacetime is equivalent to a conformal field theory living on its lower-dimensional boundary	`mechanisms[0]`		the tagger's words
limitations	the supergravity description is trustworthy only in the large-N limit Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: every supergravity result in the paper: Quotation withheld	`limitations[0]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The boundary conditions that the AdS side requires are not specified. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the AdS side of the correspondence as stated here: WE ARE NOT GOING TO SPECIFY THE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS IN ADS, WE LEAVE THIS INTERESTING PROBLEM FOR THE FUTURE	`limitations[1]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The predictions offered were not checked. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the status of the paper's predictions: WE CAN MAKE VERY NONTRIVIAL PREDICTIONS (THOUGH WE WERE NOT ABLE TO CHECK THEM)	`limitations[2]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The numerical mismatch between black hole entropy and the perturbative Yang-Mills calculation is unresolved. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the entropy comparison specifically: IT IS EXPECTED THAT LARGE g_YM EFFECTS CHANGE THIS NUMERICAL FACTOR, THIS PROBLEM REMAINS UNSOLVED	`limitations[3]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The lower-supersymmetry cases are treated sketchily and incompletely understood by the author. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the lower-supersymmetry cases: THERE ARE SEVERAL DETAILS OF THE CONFORMAL FIELD THEORIES INVOLVED WHICH I DO NOT COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND	`limitations[4]`		the tagger's words
limitations	A necessary condition of the five-dimensional black string conjecture is left open. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the five-dimensional black string conjecture: IT IS NOT CLEAR TO ME WHETHER THIS IS TRUE	`limitations[5]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The Reissner-Nordstrom section contains an unresolved puzzle. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the Reissner-Nordstrom section: IT IS MORE SKETCHY AND CONTAINS AN UNRESOLVED PUZZLE, SO THE READER WILL NOT MISS MUCH IF HE SKIPS IT	`limitations[6]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The programme as a whole is preliminary. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the programme as a whole: WE ARE ONLY SCRATCHING THE SURFACE AND THERE ARE MANY THINGS TO BE WORKED OUT	`limitations[7]`		the tagger's words
limitations	A published statement by others is flagged as needing caution, with the geometric reason given. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the cited U-duality between the AdS spacetime and the full black hole solution: this paper says that statement should be taken with caution, because in those cases the spacetime has identifications on circles that are becoming null	`limitations[8]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	A distinction the author states is the correct one is then deliberately not made anywhere in the rest of the paper. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the group-theoretic statements in this paper: the author notes the representation includes spinor objects so the group should be SU(4), and states that this and similar distinctions are not made in what follows	`limitations[9]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concepts	conformal field theory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: conformal field theory	`concepts[3]`		the paper's words
concepts	string theory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: string theory	`concepts[4]`		the paper's words
concepts	supergravity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: supergravity	`concepts[5]`		the paper's words
concepts	near horizon geometry Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: near horizon geometry	`concepts[6]`		the paper's words
senses	the central result - AS A CONJECTURE, and one whose statement requires boundary conditions that are called suitable without being given: the author's word is conjecture, not correspondence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[0]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	trust - THE PAPER'S EPISTEMIC VERB, and it never appears without a range: a solution is not valid or proved but trusted, and trusted only as long as a stated condition holds Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[1]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	the duality - ASYMMETRIC IN WHAT CAN BE COMPUTED: the regime where one side becomes untrustworthy is exactly the regime where the other can be trusted, which is what makes the pairing useful Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[2]`	1.0	the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → string theory and conformal field theory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[0]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → ref. [1], the finite-temperature study of the NS fivebrane theory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[1]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → the calculations for the 1D+5D system in refs [39, 53, 54] Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[2]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED (RETRACTED AND RE-ADDED WITH THE IMPORTED DESCRIPTION REMOVED) · extends → the matrix model of ref. [61], which proposed the large N limit of D0 brane quantum mechanics as a definition of eleven dimensional M-theory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED: RETRACTED AND RE-ADDED WITH THE IMPORTED DESCRIPTION REMOVED. The target described ref [61] as 'WHICH PROPOSED THE LARGE N LIMIT OF D0 BRANE QUANTUM MECHANICS AS A DEFINITION OF ELEVEN DIMENSIONAL M-THEORY'. That is TRUE of ref [61] and this paper never says it; the span says only that JV is not the momentum along a compact direction. Being true is what made it hard to see - the same fault as putting the CO2/C mass ratio in a tag.	`claim_relations[3]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	extends → the matrix model of ref. [61] Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[4]`		the tagger's words
concept_edges	supergravity —part-of→ conformal field theory Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span says the large N limit of certain CFTs includes a sector describing supergravity; part-of is loose. also in: supergravity · conformal field theory	`concept_edges[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	32 — maximal supersymmetry fixing the probe action Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	(0,2) — six-dimensional theory dual to AdS7 x S4 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	the large N limit of certain CFTs contains supergravity in its Hilbert space Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. about this quote: QUOTE REPAIRED: the extractor split a hyphen-space and the quote was recorded faithfully with the damage in it, which made it unanchorable. The repaired string is an EXACT SUBSTRING of the staged text - that is why it was accepted, not because a rule produced it. The text as originally recorded is kept in evidence as extracted.	`content_tags.findings[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	M/string theory on Anti-deSitter backgrounds is conjectured dual to conformal field theories Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	the correspondence is a strong-weak coupling correspondence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	for small g and large N, the Yang-Mills theory is predicted to contain strings Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	N Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: N	`content_tags.variables[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	U Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: U	`content_tags.variables[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	gN Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: gN	`content_tags.variables[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	superconformal group Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. about this quote: QUOTE RECOVERED FROM THE PAPER'S OWN CHARACTERS. The recorded quote was LETTERS-ONLY IDENTICAL to this stretch of the staged text but not an exact substring of it - spaces, hyphens, ligature glyphs or mathematical operators differed, so it could never anchor. This is the file's own text between the same two letters: not produced by a rule about the damage, copied out of the file. Round-trip checked (the recovered span is letters-only equal to the original) and length-checked. The text as originally recorded is kept in evidence as extracted. also in: superconformal group	`content_tags.definitions[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	decoupling limit Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: decoupling limit	`content_tags.definitions[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	R-symmetry Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: R-symmetry	`content_tags.definitions[2]`		the tagger's words

Interpretive choices

Tags that could not be placed in the text:

content_tags.quantities[1] — quotation withheld — the page has already reproduced as much of this paper as the rights budget allows
NOT MACHINE-VOUCHED: not-in-our-copy - The quote is in the original web page we fetched for this paper, but not in the text we tag against, which was extracted differently. Checked with ligatures, hyphens, spacing and punctuation set aside.
content_tags.quantities[2] — quotation withheld — the page has already reproduced as much of this paper as the rights budget allows
NOT MACHINE-VOUCHED: not-in-our-copy - The quote is in the original web page we fetched for this paper, but not in the text we tag against, which was extracted differently. Checked with ligatures, hyphens, spacing and punctuation set aside.
content_tags.quantities[4] — quotation withheld — the page has already reproduced as much of this paper as the rights budget allows
NOT MACHINE-VOUCHED: not-in-our-copy - The quote is in the original web page we fetched for this paper, but not in the text we tag against, which was extracted differently. Checked with ligatures, hyphens, spacing and punctuation set aside.
content_tags.findings[3] — quotation withheld — the page has already reproduced as much of this paper as the rights budget allows
NOT MACHINE-VOUCHED: not-in-our-copy - The quote is in the original web page we fetched for this paper, but not in the text we tag against, which was extracted differently. Checked with ligatures, hyphens, spacing and punctuation set aside.
content_tags.variables[1] — quotation withheld — the page has already reproduced as much of this paper as the rights budget allows
this quote's status: quote-not-in-current-staged-text · about this quote: marked quote-not-in-current-staged-text - today's merge gate would REFUSE this quote: Paper.locate() does not find it in the current staged text. · NOT MACHINE-VOUCHED: not-in-our-copy - The quote is in the original page we fetched for this paper ('fulltext.html'), but not in the text we tag against, which was extracted differently. Checked with ligatures, hyphens, spacing and punctuation set aside. This body carries no measurable character damage at all.
content_tags.definitions[3] — quotation withheld — the page has already reproduced as much of this paper as the rights budget allows
this quote's status: quote-not-in-current-staged-text · about this quote: marked quote-not-in-current-staged-text - today's merge gate would REFUSE this quote: Paper.locate() does not find it in the current staged text.

What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.