A calculation of the Weyl anomaly for 6D Conformal Higher Spins

TL;DR

This paper computes the Weyl anomaly for 6D conformal higher spin fields, extending previous work to non-conformally flat boundaries, and explores holographic dualities with bulk higher spin theories, revealing both matches and discrepancies.

Contribution

It advances the calculation of Weyl anomalies for 6D conformal higher spins, including type-B anomalies, and investigates holographic correspondence beyond conformally flat boundaries.

Findings

Matched UV and IR divergences in specific boundary conditions.

Derived two of the three type-B anomaly coefficients in terms of the third.

Identified a mismatch in boundary and bulk computations for spins higher than two.

Abstract

In this work we continue the study of the one-loop partition function for higher derivative conformal higher spin (CHS) fields in six dimensions and its holographic counterpart given by massless higher spin Fronsdal fields in seven dimensions. In going beyond the conformal class of the boundary round 6-sphere, we start by considering a Ricci-flat, but not conformally flat, boundary and the corresponding Poincar\'e-Einstein spacefilling metric. Here we are able to match the UV logarithmic divergence of the boundary with the IR logarithmic divergence of the bulk, very much like in the known 4D/5D setting, under the assumptions of factorization of the higher derivative CHS kinetic operator and WKB-exactness of the heat kernel of the dual bulk field. A key technical ingredient in this construction is the determination of the fourth heat kernel coefficient b6 for Lichnerowicz Laplacians on both 6D and 7D Einstein manifolds. These results allow to obtain, in addition to the already known type-A Weyl anomaly, two of the three independent type-B anomaly coefficients in terms of the third, say c_3 for instance. In order to gain access to c_3, and thus determine the four central charges independently, we further consider a generic non Ricci-flat Einstein boundary. However, in this case we find a mismatch between boundary and bulk computations for spins higher than two. We close by discussing the nature of this discrepancy and perspectives for a possible amendment.