AG-2025.12-1198·hep-th
Why Indices Count the Total Number of Black Hole Microstates (at large N)
Authors
- Alejandro Cabo-Bizet
Abstract
Using supersymmetric localization, we show that the partition function of four-dimensional superconformal gauge theories - computed as a trace over BPS states without the insertion of $(-1)^F$ - is perturbatively protected and piecewise independent of the gauge coupling. We derive a matrix-integral representation of this observable at $g_{\text{YM}}=0$ for generic four-dimensional superconformal gauge theories. For $U(N)$ maximally supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory we study such a matrix integral and show that, even at finite $N$, it localizes to ensembles of superconformal indices near its essential singularities. The latter asymptotic localization projects out any potential discontinuity of the perturbatively protected partition function from zero to strong coupling and explains why single microcanonical indices reproduce the growth of the total number of BPS states in co-dimension one regions of large charges, up to large oscillations due to the insertion of $(-1)^F$. To compute quantum corrections to entropy at finite $N$ and small charges, the correct observable is the perturbatively protected partition function, which by definition is a positive quantity. We propose and test an improvement of the Cardy-like method that allows us to identify and compute perturbatively exact expressions for the leading large-$N$ on-shell action of eigenvalue configurations that we call orbifold, dressed orbifold, and eigenvalue-instanton saddles. These are also saddle points of large-charge expansions at finite $N$. We test the conclusions obtained from such large-charge saddle-point analysis at $N=2$ using explicit Cauchy-residue evaluation.
Submitted
23 December 20254 months ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2512.19946
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.