string theory is a strong candidate for a unified theory including quantum gravity .
however , it still does not have a constructive , nonperturbative definition .
the main reason is the lack of our understanding on the real fundamental dynamical variables of string theory .
in fact , since the advent of d - branes and the discovery of string dualities , the idea has widely spread that the fundamental dynamical variables need not be strings and can be other types of extended objects .
m - theory @xcite is a description of string theory , where membranes are believed to play an important role .
the worldvolume theory of membranes is equivalent to a three - dimensional gravity theory , where the target space coordinates of an embedded membrane are expressed as scalar fields in three - dimensional worldvolume ( see @xcite for a review ) .
however , the analytic understanding of three - dimensional quantum gravity is still not sufficient , as compared to that of two - dimensional quantum gravity @xcite .    here
, the roles played by matrix models in string theory should be suggestive , where the feynman diagrams of matrix models are interpreted as triangular ( or polygonal ) discretization of string worldsheets ( see @xcite for reviews ) .
furthermore , by introducing the degrees of freedom corresponding to matters on worldsheets or by considering a matrix field theory , one can define various kinds of string theory in terms of matrix models @xcite .
the @xmath2 expansion of matrix models , where @xmath1 is the size of matrix , corresponds to the genus expansion of string worldsheets as in @xcite .
moreover , the double scaling limit enables us to study the nonperturbative aspects of string theory @xcite as well as their integrable structure @xcite .
tensor models @xcite or group field theory @xcite are natural generalizations of matrix models to three ( and higher ) dimensions . for three - dimensional models ,
the perturbative expansion generates random tetrahedral decompositions of three - dimensional objects . unlike the two - dimensional case , however , these objects are not always manifolds or not even pseudomanifolds .
recently the situation was drastically improved by the colored tensor models ( see , e.g. , @xcite for a review ) .
it is shown that the colored tensor models admit a large @xmath1 expansion and the leading contributions represent higher dimensional sphere @xcite .
moreover , it is claimed that one can take a double scaling limit in the tensor models @xcite .
thus , the colored tensor models give a fascinating formulation of higher dimensional quantum gravity .
nevertheless , the analytic treatment of tensor models is still not so easy as that of matrix models .
for example , tensors can not be diagonalized as matrices can , and an analogue of saddle point method has not been found yet .    in the present paper , we propose a new class of models which generate three - dimensional random volumes , by regarding each random diagram as a collection of triangles glued together along multiple hinges as in @xcite .
our models have real symmetric matrices as the dynamical variables and are characterized by semisimple associative algebras @xmath0 .
although most of the diagrams represent configurations which are not manifolds , .
see , e.g. , @xcite for the rigorous definition .
] we show that the set of possible diagrams can be drastically reduced such that only ( and all of the ) three - dimensional manifolds with tetrahedral decompositions appear , by introducing a color structure and taking an appropriate limit of parameters existing in the models .    since our models are written with matrices , there should be a chance that various techniques in matrix models can be applied and the dynamics of random volumes can be understood more analytically .
we show that our models have a novel strong - weak duality which interchanges the roles of triangles and hinges when @xmath0 is a matrix ring .
this duality may suggest the analytic solvability of the models .
this paper is organized as follows . in section [ def_of_model ] , we first define our models and show that the models are characterized by semisimple associative algebras @xmath0 .
we then give a few examples of the feynman diagrams , and show that some diagrams are not manifolds . from the examples , we deduce a strategy to restrict the models so that only ( and all of the ) three - dimensional manifolds are generated
. this strategy is implemented in section [ hm2mr ] , where matrix rings are taken as the defining associative algebras .
we explicitly construct models that generate only manifolds as feynman diagrams , by introducing a color structure to the models and letting the associative algebras have centers whose dimensions play the role of free parameters . in section [ hm2gr ]
we investigate the models where @xmath0 is set to be a group ring @xmath3 $ ] , and demonstrate how the models depend on details of the group structure of @xmath4 .
section [ conclusion ] is devoted to conclusion and discussions .
we list some of the future directions for further study of the models , and give a brief comment on the relationship of our models with the colored tensor models .
in this section we define a class of models which have matrices as the dynamical variables and generate feynman diagrams consisting of triangles glued together along multiple hinges .
we show that the models can be defined by semisimple associative algebras .
we then give a few examples of the feynman diagrams , and show that some diagrams are not manifolds .
we will conclude the section by giving a strategy to restrict the models so that only three - dimensional manifolds are generated .
this strategy will be implemented in the next section , where matrix rings are taken as the defining associative algebras .
we first explain the diagrams we are concerned with and give the rule to assign a boltzmann weight to each diagram .
we then write down the action which generates such diagrams as feynman diagrams .
we consider a set of diagrams , @xmath5 , consisting of triangles glued together along multiple hinges as in @xcite . in order to assign a boltzmann weight to diagram @xmath6 , we first decompose @xmath6 to a set of triangles and a set of multiple hinges ( see fig .  [
fig : decomposition ] ) .    for each edge of a triangle , we draw an arrow and assign an index from a finite set @xmath7 .
we repeat the same procedure for the hinges .
we then assign the real numbers @xmath8 and @xmath9 to the indexed triangles and hinges , respectively , as in fig .
[ fig : tri - hinge ] .
we require that @xmath8 and @xmath9 be cyclically symmetric .    then
, we glue the triangles and hinges to reconstruct the original diagram in such a way that the identified edges have the same index . in doing this
, there may appear the case where the arrows of a triangle and a hinge have opposite directions . to treat such cases
, we introduce a tensor @xmath10 which reverses the direction of an arrow ( see fig .  [
fig : t - tensor ] ) .
note that the tensor @xmath11 should be involutory because the direction of an arrow comes back to the original one after @xmath10 is applied twice : @xmath12 furthermore , the following relations should hold since a hinge ( or a triangle ) whose arrows are all flipped is equivalent to a hinge ( or a triangle ) with indices in reverse order : @xmath13    we define the boltzmann weight @xmath14 of diagram @xmath6 to be the product of @xmath8 and @xmath9 followed by the summation over the indices on the edges : @xmath15 here , @xmath16 are the indices on the edges , and @xmath17 is the symmetry factor of the diagram .
the indices in @xmath8 and @xmath18 are contracted when the corresponding edges are identified ( with @xmath10 inserted appropriately if necessary ) .
the above diagrams with the prescribed boltzmann weights can be generated as feynman diagrams from the action , the introduction of color structure excludes all such diagrams except for a tetrahedron , which is then interpreted as representing three - sphere @xmath19 obtained by gluing two tetrahedra face to face . ]
@xmath20 = \frac{1}{2 } a_i b^i -\frac{\lambda}{6 } c^{ijk } a_i a_j a_k   - \sum_{k \geq 2}^{\infty } \frac{\mu_k}{2k } b^{i_1 } \cdots b^{i_k } y_{i_1 \ldots i_k } , \label{hm1_action}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the dynamical variables @xmath21 and @xmath22 satisfy the relations @xmath23 we have included the coupling constants @xmath24 and @xmath25 @xmath26 to count the numbers of triangles and @xmath27-hinges , respectively . in order to specify the directions of arrows , the index line will be a double line by setting index @xmath28 to be double index @xmath29 .
it may be already clear , but we here explain how the action generates the diagrams we are concerned with .
there are two kinds of interaction terms , one corresponding to triangles @xmath8 and the other to @xmath27-hinges @xmath9 @xmath30 . the kinetic term @xmath31 yields a propagator that glues an edge of a triangle and that of a hinge .
note that two triangles can not be glued to each other without an intermediate hinge , and two hinges can not be glued to each other without an intermediate triangle . in order to handle the case where the tensor @xmath10 needs to be inserted
, we should multiply every leg of interaction terms by the factor @xmath32 . however , this is equivalent to inserting the projector @xmath33 in every propagator , which in turn is equivalent to requiring that the dynamical variables be invariant under the action of @xmath10 .    in summary ,
our model is characterized by the data @xmath34 that satisfy the constraints . in the next subsection we show that most of the constraints can be solved by considering semisimple associative algebras .      in this subsection
, we give an algebraic construction of the model data @xmath34 ( see @xcite and also @xcite for a related idea ) .
let @xmath35 be a real semisimple associative algebra .
that is , @xmath35 is a linear space over @xmath36 with multiplication ( denoted by @xmath37 ) that satisfies the associativity , @xmath38 .
if one introduces a basis @xmath39 as @xmath40 , the multiplication is expressed in the form @xmath41 , where the structure constants @xmath42 satisfy the relations @xmath43 due to associativity .
the @xmath27-hinge tensor @xmath9 can then be constructed from @xmath42 as @xmath44 it is easy to see that @xmath9 are cyclically symmetric .- hinge tensor can also be expressed as @xmath45 , where @xmath46 are the representation matrix of the basis @xmath39 in the regular representation of @xmath35 ; @xmath47 @xcite . ]
the two - hinge tensor @xmath48 is called the _
metric _ of @xmath35 and will often be denoted by @xmath49 ; @xmath50 .
it is known @xcite that the associative algebra @xmath35 is semisimple ( i.e. , isomorphic to a direct sum of matrix rings ) if and only if @xmath51 has its inverse @xmath52 .
the constraints and can be solved if there exists an involutory _ anti_automorphism @xmath53 .
in fact , the coefficients @xmath10 in @xmath54 satisfies when @xmath55 is involutory .
furthermore , when @xmath55 is an antiautomorphism : @xmath56 , we have the relations @xmath57 , which ensure to hold .
such an antiautomorphism can be naturally constructed when we set the index @xmath28 to be a double index @xmath29 @xmath58 in order to assign arrows to the edges of triangles and hinges . to see this
, we let @xmath35 take the form @xmath59 where @xmath0 and @xmath60 are linear spaces of the same dimension @xmath1 .
we fix an isomorphism from @xmath0 to @xmath60 and denote it by @xmath61 .
can be taken arbitrarily because it can be absorbed into an automorphism of @xmath0 or @xmath62 .
] we assume that @xmath0 is a semisimple associative algebra with multiplication @xmath37 .
we introduce a multiplication ( also denoted by @xmath37 ) to @xmath60 such that @xmath63 is an algebra _
anti_automorphism , @xmath64 @xmath65 .
] then @xmath66 naturally becomes an associative algebra as the tensor product of two associative algebras .
the antiautomorphism @xmath53 now can be defined such as to map an element @xmath67 to @xmath68 one can easily show that @xmath55 is certainly an antiautomorphism .
we thus find that the constraints and can be solved by giving an associative algebra @xmath0 .
note that @xmath35 can also be thought of as the set of algebra endomorphisms of @xmath0 by regarding @xmath60 as the dual linear space of @xmath0 : @xmath69 one then can also define an antiautomorphism @xmath70 for the dual of @xmath35 , @xmath71 , such that the following relation holds : @xmath72 where @xmath73 is the paring between @xmath74 ( the dual of @xmath35 ) and @xmath35 .
we rephrase the above construction in terms of the bases @xmath75 and @xmath76 of @xmath0 and @xmath60 : @xmath77 we first represent the isomorphism @xmath61 as @xmath78 and write the structure constants of the multiplication on @xmath0 as @xmath79
. then those of @xmath60 ( appearing in @xmath80 ) are determined from the requirement of antihomomorphism , @xmath81 , to be @xmath82 if we take the basis of @xmath35 to be @xmath83 , then the structure constants @xmath84 are given by @xmath85 from which the @xmath27-hinge tensor is given by @xmath86 with @xmath87 in particular , the metric of @xmath35 takes the form @xmath88 where @xmath89 and @xmath90 are the metrics of @xmath0 and @xmath60 , respectively ; @xmath91 , @xmath92 .
can also be written as @xmath93 ] we easily see that @xmath35 is semisimple if @xmath0 is , because @xmath94 has its inverse when @xmath89 does ( and so does @xmath90 ) .    the antiautomorphism @xmath95 is now expressed as @xmath96 , that is , @xmath97 for the dual algebra @xmath98 , regarding @xmath76 as the dual basis of @xmath75 , we set a basis of @xmath74 to be @xmath99 , which leads to the pairing @xmath100 .
then the antiautomorphism @xmath70 on @xmath74 is expressed as @xmath101 .    the dynamical variables @xmath21 and @xmath22 in can be regarded as elements of @xmath74 and @xmath35 , respectively : @xmath102 the condition is then expressed as @xmath103 , @xmath104 . with these double indices ,
the action is written as @xmath105 where the tensor @xmath106 is arbitrary as long as it satisfies the condition .
it is often convenient to use @xmath107 , @xmath108 , and @xmath109 .
then the conditions and can be rewritten to the form where @xmath61 does not appear : @xmath110 the action then becomes @xmath111 thus , a set of models can be defined by giving semisimple associative algebras @xmath0 and the tensors @xmath112 satisfying . the isomorphism @xmath113 can be taken arbitrarily and is regarded as a sort of gauge freedom in choosing the basis of @xmath0 or @xmath62 .
as stated in the last subsection , the tensor @xmath112 in can be chosen arbitrarily as long as it satisfies the condition .
in this paper , we set it to be @xmath114 which one can easily show to satisfy .
then the feynman rules of the action become @xmath115{fig2 - 05.eps }    \end{array }    + \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[height = 1.2cm]{fig2 - 06.eps }   \end{array }     \sim \langle a_{ij}b^{kl } \rangle = \delta_i^{\phantom{i}k } \delta_j^{\phantom{j}l }   + \delta_i^{\phantom{i}l } \delta_j^{\phantom{j}k } , \label{hm2_propagator }   \\   { \rm triangle}&:\ \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[width = 2.0cm]{fig2 - 07.eps }   \end{array }   \sim \lambda \ , g^{j_1i_2}\,g^{j_2i_3}\,g^{j_3i_1 } , \label{hm2_triangle }   \\   \mbox{$k$-hinge}&:\ \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[width = 2.0cm]{fig2 - 08.eps }   \end{array } \sim \mu_k \ , y_{i_1 \ldots i_k } \ ,
y_{j_k \ldots j_1 }   .
\label{hm2_hinge}\end{aligned}\ ] ] recall that the arrows are now expressed with double lines , and thus , when the first ( or second ) term of the propagator is used the edges are glued in the same ( or opposite ) direction .
the free energy of this model takes the form @xmath116 here , the sum @xmath117 is taken over all possible connected feynman diagrams @xmath5 , and @xmath17 is the symmetry factor of diagram @xmath6 .
@xmath118 is the number of triangles , and @xmath119 the number of @xmath27-hinges .
@xmath120 denotes the product of @xmath121 and @xmath122 with the indices contracted according to a given wick contraction , and we call @xmath120 the _ index function of diagram _ @xmath6 . we here regard two diagrams as being the same if the indices are contracted in the same manner . the numerical coefficients in the action
are chosen such that independent diagrams give only the symmetry factors to the free energy , by taking into account the symmetry ( rotation and flip ) of triangles and hinges .
we stress that the free energy will have a different form from if we make a different choice for @xmath112 other than .
we now show that the index function @xmath120 can be expressed as the product of the contributions from _ two - dimensional _ surfaces , each surface enclosing a vertex of diagram @xmath6 . to see this , we first note from the feynman rules  that even a connected feynman diagram generally gives disconnected networks of index lines .
this is because each hinge has a pair of junction points as for index lines and two index lines out of the same edge of a hinge can enter two different hinges after passing through an adjacent triangle ( see fig .
[ fig : part_of_index_network ] ) .
we further note that the index lines on two different hinges can be connected ( through an intermediate triangle ) if and only if the hinges share the same vertex of @xmath6 .
this means that the _ connected _ index networks have a one - to - one correspondence to the vertices of @xmath6 .
we thus find that the index function @xmath120 of diagram
@xmath6 is the product of the contributions from connected index networks ( each assigned to a vertex of @xmath6 ) and has the form @xmath123 we also call @xmath124 the index function ( more precisely , the _ index function of vertex _
@xmath125 ) .
note that every connected index network takes the form of a polygonal decomposition of a closed surface ( not necessarily a sphere and may include monogons or digons ) , where a @xmath27-valent junction ( or @xmath27-junction ) corresponds to a @xmath27-hinge where @xmath27 index lines meet ( see fig .  [
fig : index_network ] ) .
we here make a few comments .
the first comment is on the uniqueness in interpreting an index network as a polygonal decomposition of a closed surface .
in fact , if one regards an index network simply as a wire frame ( i.e. , as a collection of segments ) , then it is not a unique procedure to assign polygonal faces in the frame such that the resulting configuration forms a closed surface .- simplex ( @xmath126 ) which can be constructed from triangles and multiple hinges .
[ fn : higher - dimensional - simplex ] ] however , our index network is not simply a wire frame , and has the information on how the indices are contracted .
we thus can uniquely assign faces to the holes of the index network by carefully following the contraction of indices .
we will see in section [ hm2mr ] that the assignment is straightforward when models are given by matrix rings as the defining associative algebras .
the second comment is on the manifoldness of a diagram @xmath6 .
since there is a two - dimensional surface around each vertex of @xmath6 , we can say that there is a three - dimensional cone at each vertex , the base and apex of a cone being the connected index network around a vertex and the vertex itself , respectively .
for example , if an index network has the topology of two - sphere @xmath127 , then the corresponding cone is a 3-dimensional ball @xmath128 .
these cones characterize the neighborhoods of the vertices of the diagram @xmath6 . )
may be better regarded as being a higher dimensional object . in this case , the above three - dimensional cone will be treated as a part of the neighborhood of a vertex in the higher dimensional object . ]
note that @xmath6 represents a three - dimensional ( combinatorial ) manifold if @xmath6 gives a tetrahedral decomposition and the neighborhood of every vertex is homeomorphic to @xmath128 . in section [ hm2mr ] , by taking @xmath0 to be a matrix ring and introducing a color structure to the models , we show that the set of possible feynman diagrams can be drastically reduced such that only ( and all of the ) manifolds are generated .
the index function @xmath120 can be easily evaluated by deforming each connected index network with the use of the associativity of @xmath129 @xcite : @xmath130{fig2 - 11.eps } \end{array }    = y_{ij}^{\phantom{ij}l}y_{lkm }   = y_{ilm } y_{jk}^{\phantom{jk}l }   = \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[height = 2cm]{fig2 - 12.eps}\end{array } .
\label{2 - 2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] in deformation there may appear two kinds of index loops : @xmath131{fig2 - 13.eps } \end{array }   & = y_{ik}^{\phantom{ik}l}\,y_{jl}^{\phantom{jl}k }   ~~\bigl(\ ,   = g_{ij }    = \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[width = 1.75cm]{fig2 - 14.eps } \end{array }   \bigr ) ,   \label{2d - bubble } \\
\begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[width = 4cm]{fig2 - 15.eps } \end{array }   & = y_{ik}^{\phantom{ik}l}\,y_{lj}^{\phantom{lj}k }   ~~\bigl(\ ,   \equiv p_{ij }    \bigr ) .
\label{proj_p}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the former index loop diagram can be replaced by a single solid line , while the loop in the latter index diagram can not be removed .
actually @xmath132 ( or more precisely , @xmath133 ) is a projector to the center of algebra @xmath0 , @xmath134 , as can be checked easily @xcite .
if a given connected index network does not produce a projector @xmath132 in the process of deformation , the index network can always be deformed to a single circle after repeatedly using and and gives the value @xmath135 , where @xmath1 is the dimension of @xmath0 .
on the other hand , if a given connected index network admits the appearance of a projector @xmath132 , the value of the index network is generally less than @xmath1 .
gives the linear dimension of @xmath134 . ]    note that the two deformations and are actually the local moves of two - dimensional surfaces .
therefore , the index function @xmath124 of vertex @xmath125 gives a two - dimensional topological invariant defined by the associative algebra @xmath0 @xcite , and thus has the form @xmath136 , where @xmath137 is the genus of the network .
, @xmath138 . ]
thus the index function of diagram @xmath6 is expressed as @xmath139      in this subsection we give a few examples of the diagrams generated in our models . if our aim is to apply the models to three - dimensional gravity , we should be able to assign three - dimensional volume to each diagram , and thus it is preferable that the diagrams can be regarded as collections only of tetrahedra .
however , as we see in the examples below , there arise a lot of undesired diagrams .
we will show in the next section that such undesired diagrams can be automatically excluded by taking specific associative algebras and modifying the form , with an appropriate limit of parameters .
first we consider a diagram which represents a tetrahedral decomposition of three - dimensional sphere @xmath19 ( see fig .  [ 5-cells ] ) .
this is the boundary of the so - called 5-cell or a 4-simplex and can be constructed from five tetrahedra .
note that the diagram has ten triangles , ten 3-hinges and five vertices .
all the index networks around vertices have the same topology and give triangular decompositions of @xmath127 as in fig .
[ fig : s^2 ] .
the neighborhood of each vertex is homeomorphic to @xmath128 .
since every index network can be deformed to a single circle , the index function of each vertex takes the value @xmath1 ; @xmath140 .
thus , the contribution from this diagram to the free energy is given by @xmath141 where @xmath142 is the symmetry factor of the diagram .
the next example is a diagram which represents a tetrahedral decomposition of three - dimensional torus @xmath143 ( see fig .
[ t^3 ] ) .
the diagram has twelve triangles , four 4-hinges and three 6-hinges .
it has only a single vertex due to the identification in the diagram .
the index network around the vertex also represents @xmath127 as in the previous example for @xmath19 .
thus , the contribution from this diagram is given by @xmath144    we can easily generalize the above results to such diagrams that represent tetrahedral decompositions of three - dimensional closed manifolds .
since the neighborhood of every vertex is homeomorphic to @xmath128 , the contribution from such a diagram to the free energy is given by @xmath145 where @xmath146 , @xmath147 and @xmath148 represent , respectively , the number of triangles , @xmath27-hinges and vertices of the diagram . note that since the topology of three - dimensional manifolds can not be distinguished by @xmath146 , @xmath147 and @xmath148 alone , , since the euler characteristic of three - dimensional closed manifold is zero , @xmath149 .
] it can happen that topologically different manifolds give contributions of the same form .
however , we in principle can distinguish the topology by carefully looking at the way of tetrahedral decompositions , although this is usually a tedious task .
another way to examine the topology of diagrams is to evaluate a set of topological invariants of each diagram as in @xcite .
this prescription will be further studied in our future paper @xcite .
our models also generate diagrams that have vertices whose neighborhoods are not three - dimensional ball @xmath128 .
one of such diagrams is depicted in fig .
[ t^2cone ] , which consists of four tetrahedra , eight triangles , five edges and three vertices .
the neighborhood of vertex 3 is homeomorphic to @xmath128 , but that of vertex 1 ( and also that of vertex 2 ) has the topology of cone over @xmath150
. in fact , the index network around vertex 1 gives a polygonal decomposition of two - dimensional torus @xmath150 .
one can check that the euler characteristic of the diagram is not zero .
thus , this diagram should not give a manifold ( but still gives a pseudomanifold ) . the contribution from this diagram to the free energy
can be evaluated to be @xmath151 where @xmath152 comes from the index network around vertex 3 and equals @xmath135 . by contrast ,
two of @xmath153 come from vertices 1 and 2 , and have the value @xmath154 , which is the linear dimension of the center of @xmath0
.      there also arise diagrams which do not give tetrahedral decompositions .
a few simple diagrams are depicted in fig .  [
3_triangles ] .
although they have the topology of @xmath19 , it is not suitable to assign three - dimensional volume .
we close this section by giving a strategy to choose the parameters in our models such that only tetrahedral decompositions of three - dimensional manifolds are generated as feynman diagrams .
as we will show in the proof of the theorem in subsection [ tetrahedron ] , one can ensure a diagram to be a tetrahedral decomposition if the index network around every vertex is a _ triangular _ decomposition of two - dimensional surface .
this condition can be realized by introducing a color structure to the models , as we will carry out in subsection [ intro_color ] .
furthermore , the manifoldness of the resulting diagrams can be ensured by appropriately choosing the defining associative algebra @xmath0 such that the following two conditions are realized : ( i ) the number of vertices can be fixed by using free parameters in @xmath0 , and ( ii ) @xmath155 for @xmath156 .
in fact , due to the expression @xmath157 [ see ] , the dominant contributions come from the diagrams whose index networks all have the topology of two - sphere ( and thus the neighborhood of every vertex has the topology of three - ball ) , namely , from the diagrams that represent ( combinatorial ) manifolds .
if @xmath0 does not have free parameters to fix the number of vertices , we extend @xmath0 as needed .
this extension will be carried out for matrix rings in subsection [ center ] .
note that our models also generate nonorientable diagrams .
however , such diagrams always have an index network _ not _ homeomorphic to @xmath127 and thus are also decoupled in the program described in the previous paragraph .
in this section , we consider matrix rings as the defining associative algebras of the models .
we show that such models can be constructed that generate only manifolds as feynman diagrams , by introducing a color structure to the models and letting the associative algebras have centers whose dimensions play the role of free parameters ( to count the number of vertices ) .
matrix ring @xmath158 is the set of real - valued matrices of size @xmath159 .
this is an associative algebra with the same rules of addition , scalar product and multiplication as those of matrices .
note that @xmath0 has the linear dimension @xmath160 .
matrix ring is one of the simplest semisimple associative algebras because any semisimple associative algebra is isomorphic to a direct sum of matrix rings . in this section
we analyze a model where @xmath0 is set to be a matrix ring @xmath158 .
we take its basis to be @xmath161 ( @xmath162 ) , where @xmath163 is a matrix unit whose @xmath164 element is given by @xmath165 .
the structure constants can be read from the multiplication rule of matrices : @xmath166 we stress that the double index @xmath167 corresponds to the single index @xmath168 @xmath169 in the previous section . in subsection
[ subsec : general ] thus becomes a quadruple index as @xmath170 .
] one can compute @xmath171 and @xmath172 as @xmath173 by setting the tensor @xmath112 as in : @xmath174 the action has the form @xmath175 where @xmath176 and @xmath177 satisfy the following relations because of the symmetry property : @xmath178    the feynman rules for the action can be expressed with quadruple lines as follows : @xmath179{fig3 - 01.eps } \end{array }    + \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[height = 1.5cm]{fig3 - 02.eps } \end{array } \nonumber \\    & \qquad\qquad \sim \langle a_{abcd}b^{efgh } \rangle    = \delta_a^{\phantom{a}e } \delta_{b}^{\phantom{b}f }   \delta_c^{\phantom{c}g } \delta_d^{\phantom{d}h }    + \delta_a^{\phantom{a}g } \delta_{b}^{\phantom{b}h }   \delta_c^{\phantom{c}e } \delta_d^{\phantom{d}f } , \label{hm2mr_propagator }   \\   { \rm triangle}&:\ \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[width = 3.3cm]{fig3 - 03.eps } \end{array }    \sim \frac{\lambda}{n^3 } \,\delta^{d_1a_2 } \delta^{c_1b_2 } \ldots   \delta^{d_3a_1 } \delta^{c_3b_1 } , \label{hm2mr_triangle }   \\
\mbox{$k$-hinge}&:\ \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[width = 2.6cm]{fig3 - 04.eps } \end{array }    \sim n^2 \mu_k \ , \delta_{b_1 a_2 } \delta_{c_1d_2 } \ldots \delta_{b_ka_1 } \delta_{c_kd_1 } .
\label{hm2mr_hinge}\end{aligned}\ ] ] note that each of the index lines in  becomes a double line .
moreover , the index line dose not have branch points in this case due to the index structure of hinges [ see ] .
thus , as depicted in fig .
[ fig : index_network_matrix ] , the identification of the index network with a polygonal decomposition of two - dimensional surface can be done automatically ( and uniquely ) . ]
[ although this identification can also be carried out uniquely even when @xmath0 is not a matrix ring , as argued in the first comment following ] .
the contribution from each index network to the free energy can be calculated just as in the standard matrix model . to see this
, we first note that each polygon gives a factor of @xmath159 because each index loop ( i.e.  the index contraction with respect to one of the double index ) gives @xmath180 .
we also see from the coefficients in and that each segment in the polygonal decomposition gives @xmath181 ( one - third contribution from a triangle ) and each junction gives @xmath159 ( one - half contribution from a hinge ) . in total ,
the contribution from the index network around vertex @xmath125 in the original diagram is given by @xmath182 , where @xmath137 is the genus of the index network around @xmath125 .
one can easily see that an insertion of the projector @xmath132 , , into the diagram corresponds to attaching a handle to the index network ( as in @xcite ) and decreases the power of @xmath159 by two .
in subsection [ ex_not_tetra ] we argued that undesired diagrams appear in our models . in this subsection
we show that they can be excluded by introducing a `` color structure '' to our models .
let the size @xmath159 of matrices be a multiple of three , @xmath183 .
we then modify the tensor to @xmath184 where @xmath185 is a permutation matrix of the form @xmath186 this modification , we can also introduce the color structure to other algebras by taking the tensor product of the form @xmath187 note that @xmath188 . then , the variables @xmath176 and @xmath177 are expressed as @xmath189 and @xmath190 , and the action has the form @xmath191 ] corresponds to inserting @xmath185 and @xmath192 in a pair into two index lines on every segment in each index network ( see fig .  [
fig : triangle_color ] ) .
note that only @xmath185 ( not @xmath193 ) are accumulated when following the arrows in each index line .
thus , the value of a closed index loop forming @xmath194-gon changes from @xmath195 to @xmath196 we thus see that the index function of a diagram gives a nonvanishing value only when the index network around every vertex has a polygonal decomposition where the number of segments of each polygon is a multiple of three .
note that such polygonal decompositions with nonvanishing index functions have the following dependence on the coupling constants .
suppose that the index network around vertex @xmath125 has @xmath197 polygons , @xmath198 segments and @xmath199 junctions . here , @xmath200 with @xmath201 the number of @xmath194-gons , and @xmath202 with @xmath203 the number of @xmath27-junctions .
it is easy to see that the function @xmath204 can be expressed as @xmath205 .
thus @xmath206 is nonnegative for the @xmath207 s in because monogons and digons are excluded due to the color structure [ i.e. , @xmath208 . recalling that the contribution from each diagram is given by @xmath209 and noting that the identification rule of the polygonal decompositions gives the relations @xmath210 we find another expression of : @xmath211   \bigl ( \frac{n}{\lambda } \bigr)^{2 - 2g(v ) }    \bigl ( \frac{1}{\lambda } \bigr)^{\frac{1}{3}d(v ) }    \biggr ] .
\label{hm2mr_colored_diag_value } \end{aligned}\ ] ] therefore , if we expand the free energy around @xmath212 with @xmath213 and @xmath214 being fixed , the leading contribution comes from such diagrams that satisfy @xmath215 for every vertex @xmath125 , namely , from the diagrams where every index network forms a _ triangular _ decomposition .
one may think from that it would be possible by taking a limit @xmath216 to single out the diagrams where the index networks are all homeomorphic to two - sphere @xmath127 .
however , this is not the case .
for example , let us consider a diagram which includes an index network forming a two - torus @xmath150 . since the index network gives the contribution of @xmath217 , we can not distinguish a diagram whose vertices all give index networks homeomorphic to @xmath127 from a diagram which has the same number of such vertices whose index networks are homeomorphic to @xmath127 but also has extra vertices whose index networks are homeomorphic to @xmath150 , because the contributions from the two diagrams to the free energy have the same form .
this problem comes from the fact that we can not control the number of vertices only with the coupling constants existing in the model with @xmath218 .
however , this can be remedied by setting the algebra @xmath0 to be the direct sum of @xmath219 copies of matrix ring @xmath220 , . ]
@xmath221 in fact , the index function of a diagram with @xmath148 vertices becomes proportional to @xmath222 since the index network around each vertex gives a factor of @xmath219 independently , and thus changes to equals the linear dimension of @xmath134 . ]
@xmath223    \bigl ( \frac{n}{\lambda } \bigr)^{2 - 2g(v ) }    \bigl ( \frac{1}{\lambda } \bigr)^{\frac{1}{3}d(v ) }   \biggr].\end{aligned}\ ] ] therefore , we can single out the diagrams where every index network is homeomorphic to @xmath127 , by picking out only the diagrams whose index function gives the values with the same power of @xmath219 as that of @xmath224 .      combining the results in subsections [ intro_color ] and [ center ] , we can reduce the set of possible diagrams to those whose index networks all give triangular decompositions of two - sphere @xmath127 .
we then can apply the following theorem to conclude that these diagrams represent tetrahedral decompositions of three - dimensional manifolds :    * theorem . *
_ assume that the index network around every vertex in diagram @xmath6 gives a triangular decomposition of two - sphere .
then , @xmath6 represents a tetrahedral decomposition of a three - dimensional manifold .
_    we label the vertices , triangles and hinges of diagram @xmath6 as @xmath125 @xmath225 , @xmath226 @xmath227 and @xmath228 @xmath229 , respectively .
let @xmath230 denote the index network around vertex @xmath125 , which we assume to have a form of triangular decomposition of two - sphere .
note that every corner of a triangle in @xmath6 corresponds to a segment of the index network around some vertex ( see fig .
[ proof_fig ] ) .
we denote by @xmath231 the segment which is lying on triangle @xmath226 and is placed in the corner at vertex @xmath125 .
we choose a vertex ( say @xmath232 ) and focus on an `` index triangle '' formed by three segments @xmath233 in @xmath234 . here
, @xmath235 are the triangles on which the three segments live . since all the edges of each triangle are attached to hinges , there are hinges @xmath236 , @xmath237 , @xmath238 , @xmath239 , @xmath240 , @xmath241 as in fig .
[ proof_fig ] . may represent the same vertex because the index triangles around them may belong to the same connected component of an index network .
] as is depicted there , the three index triangles @xmath242 , @xmath243 and @xmath244 ensure the existence of the corresponding triangles @xmath245 , @xmath246 and @xmath247 , respectively .
we are now going to give a detailed description of these triangles and show that they all coincide , @xmath248 .
we first take a look at hinge @xmath236 .
we assume that @xmath249 is the positive direction of hinge @xmath176 and label the triangles such that triangle @xmath27 is to the immediate left of @xmath168 when seen from vertex 1 ( see fig .
[ proof_fig ] ) .
this means that triangle @xmath27 is to the immediate right of @xmath168 when seen from vertex 2 , so that @xmath250 and @xmath251 are two segments of an index triangle around vertex 2 , which will be complemented by the third segment @xmath252 as in fig .
[ proof_fig ] .
the triangle @xmath245 on which the segment @xmath252 lives is glued to triangle @xmath168 along hinge @xmath241 , and must be to the immediate left of @xmath168 when seen from vertex 2 in the direction of @xmath253 .
we repeat the same argument for hinge @xmath237 . there
, triangle @xmath254 is to the immediate right of @xmath168 when seen from vertex 1 .
this means that triangle @xmath254 is to the immediate left of @xmath168 when seen from vertex 3 , so that @xmath255 and @xmath256 are two segments of an index triangle around vertex 3 , which will be complemented by the third segment @xmath257 as in fig .
[ proof_fig ] .
the triangle @xmath246 on which the segment @xmath257 lives is glued to triangle @xmath168 along hinge @xmath241 , and must be to the immediate right of @xmath168 when seen from vertex 3 in the direction of @xmath253 .
however , this means that @xmath246 is to the immediate left of @xmath168 when seen from vertex 2 , and thus two triangles @xmath245 and @xmath246 must be the same .
the same argument can also be made for hinge @xmath238 , and we obtain @xmath248 , from which we see that there exists a tetrahedron surrounded by four triangles @xmath168 , @xmath254 , @xmath27 , @xmath245 . by repeating the same arguments for all the index triangles around every vertex , we conclude that diagram @xmath6 gives a tetrahedral decomposition .
furthermore , since the index network around every vertex represents a triangular decomposition of @xmath127 , the neighborhood of every vertex is homeomorphic to @xmath128 . therefore , the diagram @xmath6 gives a tetrahedral decomposition of a three - dimensional manifold .
we have shown that a class of our models allow us to single out the diagrams which represent tetrahedral decompositions of three - dimensional manifolds .
such models can be used to define discretized three - dimensional euclidean gravity .
in fact , we only need to follow the arguments given in @xcite .
the action of three - dimensional euclidean gravity is given by @xmath258 where @xmath259 corresponds to the bare gravitational coupling and @xmath260 to the bare cosmological constant .
this can be discretized by using regular tetrahedra with fixed spacing @xmath261 as @xmath262s_3.\end{aligned}\ ] ] here , @xmath148 and @xmath263 denote the number of vertices and tetrahedra , respectively , and @xmath264 is the angle between two neighboring triangles in a regular tetrahedron .
the free energy of this action is then given by @xmath265 where @xmath142 is the symmetry factor .    in our models , on the other hand , each diagram representing a tetrahedral decomposition contributes to the free energy as @xmath266 here we have set @xmath267 @xmath268 .
since the relations @xmath269 and @xmath270 hold for tetrahedral decompositions of a three - dimensional manifold , the contribution takes the form @xmath271 comparing and , we obtain the relations between the coupling constants of the two models , @xmath272      we conclude this section by commenting that there exists a novel strong - weak duality which interchanges the roles of triangles and hinges when @xmath0 is a matrix ring .
we expect this duality to play an important role when we further study the analytic properties of the models in the future .
we first recall that one has two choices when introducing a structure of associative algebra to the tensor product of linear spaces , @xmath273 [ see ] .
the first is the algebra structure as the tensor product of two associative algebras @xmath0 and @xmath62 .
this is the structure we have used exclusively so far , and gives the multiplication ( denoted by @xmath37 ) , which can also be written as @xmath274 the second is the algebra structure as the set of endomorphisms of @xmath0 ; @xmath275 .
the multiplication is defined as the composition of two linear operators acting on @xmath0 and will be denoted by dot `` @xmath276 '' : @xmath277 which can also be written as @xmath278 we will show that there is a duality between the two algebra structures when @xmath0 is a matrix ring .
we first set @xmath279 .
this is possible because @xmath61 can be chosen in an arbitrary way [ see a comment following ] .
then , when @xmath280 , the multiplications are represented as @xmath281 we now introduce the dual variables @xmath282 to @xmath177 as @xmath283 which satisfy the symmetry property @xmath284 due to
. then one can easily show from and that the two multiplications are interchanged for the dual variables : @xmath285 we further introduce the variables @xmath286 dual to @xmath176 as @xmath287 then the action can be rewritten in terms of the dual variables @xmath286 and @xmath282 to the form @xmath288 note that the way to contract the indices of @xmath286 ( or @xmath282 ) in the dual action is the same as that of @xmath177 ( or @xmath176 ) in the original action .
this means that a triangle for the original variables , , now plays the role of a 3-hinge for the dual variables , and a @xmath27-hinge for the original variables , , plays the role of a @xmath27-gon for the dual variables .
we thus find that the action for the dual variables generates the dual diagrams to the original ones , consisting of @xmath289-hinges ( dual to original triangles ) and polygons ( dual to original hinges).-gons to appear in the original action for all @xmath290 . ]
note that the large @xmath1 limit in ( @xmath291 with @xmath292 and @xmath214 being fixed ) gives @xmath293 and @xmath294 .
since @xmath24 and @xmath295 are interchanged in the duality transformation , one sees that this duality is actually a strong - weak duality .
in this section , we investigate the models where @xmath0 is set to be a group ring @xmath3 $ ] , and demonstrate how the models depend on details of the group structure of @xmath4 .
we assume that @xmath4 is a finite group with order @xmath296 in order to avoid introducing regularizations , although most of the relations below can be applied to continuous compact groups .
the action can be rewritten to a form similar to that of matrix ring , by expressing everything in terms of the irreducible representations of @xmath4 . to show this , we first write the delta function as @xmath308 where the sum is taken over all the irreducible representations @xmath309 of @xmath4 with the representation matrix @xmath310 @xmath311 , and @xmath312 is the dimension of representation @xmath309 , @xmath313 .
then , the action can be rewritten to the form @xmath314 where @xmath315 this action gives the following feynman rules : @xmath316{fig4 - 01.eps }   \end{array }   + \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[height = 1.5cm]{fig4 - 02.eps }   \end{array }   \nonumber   \\   & \quad \sim \langle a^{rs}_{abcd}b^{r^\prime s^\prime}_{efgh }
\rangle    = \frac{1}{d_r d_s}(\delta_{ae } \delta_{bf } \delta_{cg }   \delta_{dh } \delta^{rr^\prime } \delta^{ss^\prime }    +   \delta_{ag } \delta_{bh } \delta_{ce } \delta_{df } \delta^{rs^\prime }   \delta^{sr^\prime } ) , \label{hm2gr_propagator }   \\   { \rm triangle}&:\ \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[width = 4cm]{fig4 - 03.eps }   \end{array }    \sim \lambda\ , d_{r_1 } d_{r_2 } d_{r_3 } \delta_{a_1d_2 } \delta_{c_1b_2 }   \ldots \delta_{a_kd_1 } \delta_{c_kd_1 } , \label{hm2gr_triangle }   \\   \mbox{$k$-hinge}&:\ \begin{array}{l } \includegraphics[width = 3cm]{fig4 - 04.eps }   \end{array }    \sim \mu_k\ , d_r\ , d_s\ , \delta_{a_1 b_2 } \delta_{d_1 c_2 } \ldots   \delta_{a_k b_1 } \delta_{d_k c_1 } . \label{hm2gr_hinge}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we thus see that the index network around every vertex is again expressed as a closed surface with double index lines , and its index function is determined only by the euler characteristics of the polygonal decomposition : is regarded as the real sector of the index function for the complexified algebra @xmath317 $ ] , because the group ring @xmath318 $ ] can be expressed as the direct sum of @xmath319 over @xmath309 , @xmath318 = \bigoplus_r m_{d_r}(\mathbb{c})$ ] . ]
@xmath320 .\end{aligned}\ ] ] here , elementary group theory shows that @xmath321 , and @xmath322 gives the number of irreducible representations which equals that of conjugate classes .
for example , when @xmath4 is the symmetric group @xmath323 , we have @xmath324 where @xmath325 denotes the number of partitions of @xmath159 . therefore ,
if @xmath4 admits the relations @xmath326 @xmath327 , the index networks of spherical topology have a large value of index function compared to those of higher genera .
we also can introduce a color structure as in subsection [ intro_color ] and can control the number of vertices by considering the direct sum of @xmath219 copies of group ring as in subsection [ center ] .
therefore , we can again single out the diagrams which give tetrahedral decompositions of three - dimensional manifolds .
in this paper we construct a class of models that generate random diagrams consisting of triangles and multiple hinges .
the models are completely characterized by semisimple associative algebras @xmath0 and tensors @xmath112 .
when @xmath112 are chosen as in or , each feynman diagram can be expressed as a collection of index networks around vertices .
the contribution @xmath120 from each diagram @xmath6 to the free energy is expressed as the product of the index functions @xmath124 of vertices @xmath125 of @xmath6 , and @xmath124 depends only on the topology of the index network around @xmath125 besides the structure of the defining associative algebra .
although most of the feynman diagrams do not represent three - dimensional manifolds , we give a general prescription to automatically reduce the set of possible diagrams such that only ( and all of the ) manifolds are generated .
we implement the strategy for the models with @xmath0 set to matrix rings , by introducing a color structure and taking the direct sum of @xmath219 copies of matrix ring .
we show that every diagram actually gives a tetrahedral decomposition where each vertex has a neighborhood homeomorphic to @xmath128 ( ensured by the statement that the index network around each vertex has the topology of @xmath127 ) .
we further demonstrate that there is a novel strong - weak duality in the models which interchanges the roles of triangles and hinges .
we also investigate the models where the defining associative algebras are group rings , and show that most of their analytic properties can be understood as a straightforward generalization of those for matrix rings .
we now list some of the future directions for further study of the models .
the first is about the topology summation .
our models actually give a summation over all topologies of three - dimensional manifolds .
it seems that we can not distinguish the topology of the feynman diagrams if the tensor @xmath112 has the form or as we took in this paper , because topologically different diagrams can give contributions of the same form to the free energy .
one can optimistically think that this represents membrane instability ( see , e.g. , @xcite ) .
however , it may also happen that configurations of some specific topology entropically dominate in a critical region , although we have not fully evaluated the numerical coefficients in the free energy and their dependence on topology .
another way to investigate the topologies of diagrams is to change the tensor @xmath112 to other forms .
in fact , this change significantly modifies the dependence of the index function on the associative algebra @xmath0 .
the change of @xmath112 and its effect on topological invariants will be studied in our future paper @xcite .    the second direction for further study is about the continuum limit .
although we have not fully studied the continuum limit yet , and @xmath328 @xmath30 , since the dependence of @xmath148 and @xmath263 disappear from [ or ] .
these values of coupling constants may correspond to a certain ( possibly uninteresting ) critical point because the models are not only diffeomorphism invariant but also weyl invariant .
] there may be a chance to analytically solve the models in the large @xmath1 limit and to determine the critical behaviors , because the dynamical variables of our models are given by symmetric matrices @xmath329 and @xmath330 .
the third direction is about the introduction of matters to our models .
we expect that extra degrees of freedom representing matter fields can be introduced by making copies of the variables @xmath329 and @xmath330 as in matrix models @xcite
. it should be particularly interesting to introduce matter fields corresponding to the target space coordinates of embedded membranes and to study the critical behaviors .
it would then be important to investigate if there is an analogue of the so - called `` @xmath331 barrier '' in the models and how the situation is modified when supersymmetry is introduced .
we close this section with a brief comment on the relationship of our models with the colored tensor models .
it is worth noting that our models ( with a color structure and an appropriate limit of parameters as in subsection [ tetrahedron ] ) generate _ all _ of the possible tetrahedral decompositions of three - dimensional manifolds , and thus should have more configurations than those of the colored tensor models .
for example , the colored tensor models do not generate such tetrahedral decompositions where odd number of triangles are glued together along a hinge .
since the colored tensor models introduce a pair of tensors as in two - matrix models , they may correspond to three - dimensional gravity with specific matters . in this sense
, our models with minimum fine tunings may give a continuum theory ( if exists ) closer to pure gravity .
it should be interesting to investigate whether colored tensor models can be obtained by adding some ( not necessarily unitary ) matters to our models .    in a remarkable paper @xcite
, it is shown that the free energy of three - dimensional colored tensor models depend on the size of tensor , @xmath332 , as @xmath333 where we have suppressed other coupling constants .
@xmath334 denotes a colored graph which is dual to a tetrahedral decomposition of three - dimensional pseudomanifold , and @xmath335 is the degree of @xmath334 ( see @xcite for details ) .
thus , in the large @xmath332 limit , the leading contribution comes from colored graphs with @xmath336 .
it is also shown that if @xmath336 then @xmath334 is dual to a three - sphere @xcite .
therefore , the leading order graphs are homeomorphic to @xmath19 .
we can say the same thing for our models if we confine our attention to only the diagrams that have tetrahedral decompositions dual to colored graphs .
the degree @xmath185 of such a diagram can be evaluated as in @xcite and becomes @xmath337 with which the contribution to the free energy can be rewritten to the form @xmath338 thus , if we take a limit @xmath339 with @xmath340 kept finite , the leading contribution comes from configurations with @xmath341 , that is , tetrahedral decompositions of @xmath19 .
it is interesting to study the meaning of the degree for general tetrahedral decompositions which are not dual to colored graphs .
the authors thank hikaru kawai for stimulating discussions .
mf is supported by mext ( grant no.23540304 ) .
ss is supported by the jsps fellowship .
= 0.83                                  s.  h.  shenker , `` the strength of nonperturbative effects in string theory , '' in `` cargse 1990 , proceedings , random surfaces and quantum gravity '' 191200 .
m.  r.  douglas , `` strings in less than one dimension and the generalized kdv hierarchies , '' phys .  lett .
b * 238 * ( 1990 ) 176 .