Quantum Elliptic Calogero-Moser Systems from Gauge Origami
PP REPARED FOR SUBMISSION TO
JHEP
Quantum Elliptic Calogero-Moser Systems fromGauge Origami
Heng-Yu Chen , Taro Kimura and Norton Lee Department of Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, Taiwan Department of Physics, Keio University, Kanagawa 223-8521, JapanInstitut de Mathématiques de Bourgogne, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 21078 Dijon, France C. N. Yang Institute for Theoretical Physics, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA
E-mail: [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] A BSTRACT : We systematically study the interesting relations between the quantum elliptic Calogero-Mosersystem (eCM) and its generalization, and their corresponding supersymmetric gauge theories. In particular,we construct the suitable characteristic polynomial for the eCM system by considering certain orbifolded in-stanton partition function of the corresponding gauge theory. This is equivalent to the introduction of certainco-dimension two defects. We next generalize our construction to the folded instanton partition function ob-tained through the so-called “gauge origami” construction and precisely obtain the corresponding characteristicpolynomial for the doubled version, named the elliptic double Calogero-Moser (edCM) system. a r X i v : . [ h e p - t h ] J a n ontents N = 2 ∗ Theory 3 X -function 93.2 Commuting Hamiltonians from X ( x ) X ( x ) for Elliptic Double Calogero-Moser System 255.2 Commuting Hamiltonians from X ( x ) for edCM system 26 A.1 Random Partition 32A.2 Elliptic Function 32A.3 Higher rank Theta function 33A.4 Orbifolded Partition 33
Among the plethora of integrable systems, the elliptic Calogero-Moser types (eCM) have continuously fas-cinated mathematicians and physicists (see [1] for a good introduction). Of our particular interests, it is well-known that the classical spectral curve of the eCM integrable system associated with Lie algebra
Lie( G ) canbe directly identified with the Seiberg-Witten curve of four dimensional N = 2 ∗ theory with gauge group G [2–4], see also [5, 6]. Indeed, this correspondence serves as one of the earliest examples demonstrating the closeconnections between certain integrable systems and the gauge theories with eight supersymmetries. Moreoverwith the tremendous advances in the localization computations for supersymmetric partition functions and otherprotected observables (see [7] for extensive reviews), we can extend the correspondence to the quantum level.In general, there can be multiple deformation parameters { (cid:15) a } in these localization computations depending onthe dimensionality of the supersymmetric gauge theories considered. It was proposed that { (cid:15) a } can be identified– 1 –n general with the Planck constants when quantizing the original classical integrable systems, such that turningoff one or more of { (cid:15) a } can be interpreted as recovering certain semi-classical limit [8]. In such a limit, theBethe Ansatz equation (BAE) of the quantum integrable system can be recovered from the saddle point equationof the corresponding gauge theory partition function computed by localization techniques. In the full quantumcase with all { (cid:15) a } kept finite, the instanton partition function can be identified as the eigenfunction of quantumintegrable system’s Hamiltonian. Such a quantity is computed by using the so called qq-characters [9, 10].One of the hallmarks of the integrability in a dynamical system is the existence of the commuting Hamil-tonians, the generating function of them is a finite degree polynomial in the appropriate spectral parameter,known as the “characteristic polynomial” or “transfer matrix”. The gauge theoretic counterpart of the charac-teristic polynomial has been shown in certain cases to be the generating function of chiral rings, such as N = 2 SQCD/XXX-spin chain and its linear quiver generalization [4, 11–13]. It is also very natural to consider thequantum version of this story in the same vein as discussed in the previous paragraph, and identify the com-muting quantum Hamiltonians with the chiral ring operators [8, 14, 15]. However it is unsatisfactory that eCMsystems and their corresponding gauge theories have somehow evaded this general line of developments. Aswe will review later in Section 2, even though we can readily recover the BAE for the eCM system throughthe saddle point analysis of partition function [8], a naive gauge theoretic construction of characteristic poly-nomial however failed to yield the correct commuting quantum Hamiltonians. The situation can be rectified byconstructing a certain regular function of spectral parameter with the appropriate degree, which will be named X -function. More precisely this construction is a two step process as we will discuss in Section 3. First, wewill introduce the co-dimension two surface defects into the gauge theory through the orbifolding [18–21], thisalso has the effect of splitting the original gauge theory into multiple orbifolded copies. The X -function thenarises from summing over a suitable instanton partition function for each orbifolded copy. We will demonstratethat the commuting Hamiltonians of the eCM system can indeed be extracted from the resultant X -function.We next apply our story to an inherently quantum generalization of the eCM system, known as the ellipticdouble Calogero-Moser system (edCM) [10]. This implies its corresponding gauge theory is necessarily well-defined only when at least one of { (cid:15) i } is turned on. Indeed, the consistent gauge theoretic construction relatedto the edCM system is known as “Gauge Origami” [24]. This arises from the intersecting D-brane configura-tion in the presence of background fluxes, which corresponds to turning on { (cid:15) i } [25], as we will review this inSection 4. In Section 5, we will explicitly construct the resultant instanton partition functions, derive the possi-ble BAE from its saddle point equation, and follow our earlier procedures for the eCM system to construct the X -function in this case. Finally we demonstrate the validity of X -function by recovering the correct commutingHamiltonians which are expressed in terms of the Dunkl operators generalized to the edCM system. We shouldcomment here that the connection between edCM systems and the so-called “folded instanton” configurationderived from gauge origami construction was noticed in [10], in this work we firmly established this connectionby working out the relevant details in steps.We discuss various future directions in Section 6. We relegate our various definitions of functions and someof the computational details in a series of Appendices. This X -function itself is also known as the fundamental q -character of (cid:98) A quiver constructed in [16]. See also [17] for anotherconstruction through the quantum toroidal algebra of gl . As mentioned in this paper, we need to consider the orbifolded version of the X -function in order to extract the commuting Hamiltonians of the eCM system. The trigonometric version is studied, e.g., in [22, 23]. ゲージ 折 紙 ( 日 本 語 ); 規 範 摺 紙 ( 中 文 繁 體 字 ); 规 范 折 纸 ( 中 文 简 体 字 ). – 2 – Elliptic Calogero-Moser Model and N = 2 ∗ Theory
It is well known that the elliptic Calogero-Moser (eCM) model (see [1] for an excellent review), which is anone-dimensional quantum mechanical system of N particles with Hamiltonian of the form: ˆ H eCM = − (cid:126) N (cid:88) α =1 ∂ ∂ x α + m ( m + (cid:126) ) (cid:88) ≤ α<β ≤ N ℘ (x α − x β ) , (2.1)is closely related to four dimensional N = 2 ∗ SU ( N ) gauge theory. Here the interacting potential is given interms of Weierstrass ℘ ( u ) -function defined in eq. (A.8).When (cid:126) m → , (2.1) approaches its classical limit, H eCM = 12 N (cid:88) α =1 p α + m (cid:88) ≤ α<β ≤ N ℘ (x α − x β ) . (2.2)It has been proven that this system encodes the underlying classical integrable structure of N = 2 ∗ superYang-Mills theory by identifying its spectral curve with the gauge theory Seiberg-Witten curve in many earlyliterature such as [5, 26] and see [6] for a more complete list of references. In this note, we aim to extend inseveral directions the quantum version of such a correspondence from various new results in gauge theories. As a warm up example setting up our subsequent notations and terminologies, as well as illustrating theproblem, we first recall how the BAE of the eCM model can arise from the instanton partition function of N =2 ∗ SU ( N ) gauge theory. The instanton partition function can be obtained from the localization computationin Ω -background and is expressed in terms of a summation over all allowed instanton configurations [27, 28],each of them is labeled by a set of N Young diagrams (cid:126)λ = ( λ (1) , . . . , λ ( N ) ) . Each Young diagram λ ( α ) for α = 1 , . . . , N is labeled by row vectors: λ ( α ) = ( λ ( α )1 , λ ( α )2 , . . . ) with non-negative entries such that: λ ( α ) i ≥ λ ( α ) i +1 , i = 1 , , . . . , (2.3)which denote the number of box of each row. Let us define the following parameters: x αi = a α + ( i − (cid:15) + λ ( α ) i (cid:15) , x (0) αi = a α + ( i − (cid:15) , (2.4)where ( (cid:15) , (cid:15) ) are the Ω background deformation parameters. The instanton partition function is now writtenas the summation: Z inst = (cid:88) { (cid:126)λ } q | (cid:126)λ | Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ] , (2.5a) Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ] = (cid:89) ( αi ) (cid:54) =( βj ) Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x βj − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x βj )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − (cid:15) )) × Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x βj − m ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x βj − m − (cid:15) )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − m − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − m )) , (2.5b) We choose this notation intentionally. We will identify adjoint mass m of N = 2 ∗ with potential coupling of Calogero-Moser systemin the end of Section 3. – 3 –ith q = e πiτ (2.6)where τ is the complexified gauge coupling, and m is the complex adjoint mass.Let us consider the so-called Nekrasov-Shatashvili limit (or NS limit for short) [8], such that (cid:15) → with (cid:15) =: (cid:15) fixed, and take the Stirling approximation on Γ -function, we obtain: lim (cid:15) → Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ] = exp (cid:20) (cid:15) (cid:88) ( αi ) (cid:54) =( βj ) f (( x αi − x βj − (cid:15) ) − f (( x αi − x βj + (cid:15) ) − f ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − (cid:15) ) + f ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj + (cid:15) )+ f ( x αi − x βj − m ) − f ( x αi − x βj + m ) − f ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − m ) + f ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − m ) − f ( x αi − x βj − m − (cid:15) ) + f ( x αi − x βj + m + (cid:15) )+ f ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − m − (cid:15) ) − f ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − m + (cid:15) ) (cid:105) , (2.7)where f ( x ) = x (log x − . In this limit, the combination (cid:15) λ ( α ) i becomes continuous, such that the sum overthe discrete Young diagrams can be approximated by a continuous integral over a set of infinite integrationvariables { x αi } , lim (cid:15) → Z inst = (cid:90) (cid:89) ( αi ) dx αi exp (cid:20) (cid:15) H inst ( x αi ) (cid:21) . (2.8)The instanton functional H inst ( x αi ) takes the form of: H inst ( x αi ) = U ( x αi ) − U ( x (0) αi ) , (2.9)where we have also defined: U ( x αi ) = log q (cid:88) ( αi ) x αi + 12 (cid:88) ( αi ) (cid:54) =( βj ) { f ( x αi − x βj − (cid:15) ) − f ( x αi − x βj + (cid:15) )+ f ( x αi − x βj − m ) − f ( x αi − x βj + m ) − f ( x αi − x βj − m − (cid:15) ) + f ( x αi − x βj + m + (cid:15) ) } . (2.10)Here we have introduced the instanton density ρ ( x ) which is a non-vanishing constant along J = (cid:83) αi [ x (0) αi , x αi ] and zero everywhere else to rewrite H inst . Furthermore we can define the combinations: R ( x ) = P ( x − m ) P ( x + m + (cid:15) ) P ( x ) P ( x + (cid:15) ) ; G ( x ) = ddx log ( x + m + (cid:15) )( x − m )( x − (cid:15) )( x − m − (cid:15) )( x + m )( x + (cid:15) ) , (2.11)where P ( x ) = (cid:81) Nα =1 ( x − a α ) . Together, the instanton partition functional H inst can be written as: H inst ( x αi ) = −
12 PV (cid:90) J × J dxdyρ ( x ) G ( x − y ) ρ ( y ) + (cid:90) J dxρ ( x ) log q R ( x ) , (2.12)where the symbol PV means the principal value integral. In (cid:15) → limit, the integration should be dominatedby saddle point configurations, which yield: δ H inst [ ρ ] δx αi = − (cid:90) J dyG ( x αi − y ) ρ ( y ) + log( q R ( x αi )) = 0 . (2.13)– 4 –s G ( x ) is a total derivative, one obtains − q Q ( x αi + m + (cid:15) ) Q ( x αi − m ) Q ( x αi − (cid:15) ) Q ( x αi − m − (cid:15) ) Q ( x αi + m ) Q ( x αi + (cid:15) ) , (2.14)where Q ( x ) = N (cid:89) α =1 ∞ (cid:89) j =1 ( x − x αj ) . (2.15)We often call the Young diagram (cid:126)λ ∗ satisfying eq. (2.14) the "Limit shape configuration," which dominates thesummation in eq. (2.5) under NS-limit: Z inst ≈ Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ] . (2.16)To see how BAE of the quantum eCM model emerges, we consider the twisted superpotential arising from thefull partition function Z (cid:98) A : W (cid:98) A = lim (cid:15) → [ (cid:15) log Z (cid:98) A ] = W classical + W + W inst . For the non-perturbativepart we have: W inst ( a α ) = H inst ( x αi ) = U ( x αi ) − U ( x (0) αi ) , (2.17)where U ( x ) is defined in eq. (2.10). While the remaining classical twisted superpotential is W classical ( a α ) = − log q N (cid:88) α =1 a α (cid:15) , (2.18)and the perturbative one-loop twisted superpotential is W ( a α ) = U ( x (0) αi ) − log q (cid:88) ( αi ) x (0) αi . (2.19)Unlike the gauge theories with massive fundamental hypermultiplets [15], there is no natural truncation con-dition on the Young diagrams labeling instanton partition function. Instead, the equation of motion for thefunctional W (cid:98) A is given by: πi ∂ W (cid:98) A ( a α ) ∂a α = n α ; n α ∈ Z , (2.20)explicitly one obtains: − a α (cid:15) log q + (cid:88) β (cid:54) = α log Γ (cid:16) a α − a β (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − a α − a β (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − m − ( a α − a β ) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − m + a α − a β (cid:15) (cid:17) = 2 πin α , (2.21)using the following identity: ∂∂a α (cid:88) ( αi ) (cid:54) =( βj ) ( f ( x αi − x βj − (cid:15) ) − f ( x αi − x βj + (cid:15) )) = (cid:88) β (cid:54) = α log Γ (cid:16) a α − a β (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − a α − a β (cid:15) (cid:17) . (2.22)Exponentiating both sides of equation (2.21) gives q − aα(cid:15) (cid:89) β (cid:54) = α Γ (cid:16) a α − a β (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − a α − a β (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − m − ( a α − a β ) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − m + a α − a β (cid:15) (cid:17) , (2.23)this is the BAE of the eCM system [8]. – 5 –ere we would like to introduce the following T ( x ) -function: T ( x ) = Q ( x + (cid:15) ) Q ( x ) (cid:20) q Q ( x + m + (cid:15) ) Q ( x − m ) Q ( x − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + m ) Q ( x − m − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + (cid:15) ) (cid:21) , (2.24)which will be proposed as a tentative characteristic polynomial for generating the commuting Hamiltonians ofthe eCM system later. We can also recast T ( x ) in a more illuminating form by defining: Y ( x ) = Q ( x ) Q ( x − (cid:15) ) , (2.25)and rewrite T ( x ) as T ( x ) = Y ( x + (cid:15) ) (cid:20) q Y ( x − m ) Y ( x + m + (cid:15) ) Y ( x ) Y ( x + (cid:15) ) (cid:21) . (2.26)While similar T ( x ) works as the characteristic polynomial for XXX spin chain arising from superconformalQCD, see e.g. [15], we will see momentarily that in order to correctly reproduce the commuting Hamiltoniansfor the eCM system, we need to further enhance T ( x ) as defined in (2.26). After demonstrating how the BAE can arise from four dimensional N = 2 ∗ SU ( N ) gauge theory, it isnatural to consider if it is possible to similarly obtain the commuting Hamiltonians. To this end, we first con-sider the T ( x ) function defined in (2.14) and (2.26) which is a natural candidate for generating all commutingHamiltonians of the eCM system by identifying its expansion coefficients in appropriate asymptotic regime. As a simplification to illustrate the procedures, let us consider pure N = 2 SU ( N ) gauge theory by setting m → ∞ to integrate out the adjoint hypermultiplet, it is known that the associated integrable system is (cid:98) A N − Toda lattice ( 戸 田 格 子 ) system: ˆ H Toda = − (cid:126) N (cid:88) α =1 ∂ ∂ x α + Λ N (cid:88) α =1 e x α − x α − ; x α ∼ x α + N , q = Λ N . (2.27)Now in the m → ∞ limit, the saddle point equation (2.14) now becomes BAE for (cid:98) A N − -Toda system: − q Q ( x αi − (cid:15) ) Q ( x αi + (cid:15) ) , (2.28)such that T ( x ) defined in (2.26) reduces to: T ( x ) = Q ( x + (cid:15) ) Q ( x ) (cid:20) q Q ( x ) Q ( x − (cid:15) ) (cid:21) = Y ( x + (cid:15) ) + q Y ( x ) , (2.29)as can also be deduced from lim m →∞ Y ( x ± m ) → .We will now show that T ( x ) is a degree N polynomial in spectral parameter x . Using (2.28), we can seethat the apparent poles of T ( x ) coming from poles of Y ( x + (cid:15) ) are canceled by the corresponding zeros in thebracket. This proves that T ( x ) is analytic in the complex x -plane (excluding x = ∞ ). To prove T ( x ) has thecorrect degree, we first consider large x behavior of Y ( x ) . When x is large, we may approximate x αi ≈ x (0) αi .Thus the asymptotic behavior of Y ( x ) behaves as: Y ( x ) ∼ N (cid:89) α =1 ∞ (cid:89) i =1 x − a α − ( i − (cid:15)x − a α − ( i − (cid:15) − (cid:15) = N (cid:89) α =1 ( x − a α ) ∼ x N at x → ∞ . (2.30)– 6 –e conclude that (2.29) constructed based on saddle point equation is a degree N polynomial. Next we wouldlike to see if it can be directly related to the characteristic polynomial of Toda lattice by checking if we canrecover Hamiltonian given in (2.27). Here we would like to introduce a co-dimension two surface defect on C ⊂ R = C × C , with Z N orbifold-ing on the coordinates of C by ( z , z ) → ( z , ζ z ) where ζ N = 1 . This orbifolding procedure commuteswith NS limit . We will restore (cid:15) dependence for a moment, and take NS limit after orbifolding. Such orb-ifolding maps the original gauge theory (which can be considered as A quiver) into so called handsaw quiverstructure [30]. Shown in [10], the instanton partition function with surface defect inserted is an eigenfunction ofHamiltonian for both Calogero-Moser and Toda cases (eq. (2.1) for Calogero-Moser and eq. (2.27) for Toda).On the other hand, N = 2 with fundamental hypermultiplet does not require such a orbifolding procedure, asdiscussed in [15]. It should be noted however that it is possible to relate these two different types of surfacedefects via the brane creation process similar to Hanany-Witten transition in M-theory, as discussed in [31, 32].A Z N type surface defect in a U ( N ) gauge theory [21] can be characterized by a coloring function: c : { α =1 , , . . . , N } → Z N , which assigns a color α labeling Coulomb parameter a α to an irreducible representation R ω of Z N , ω = 0 , , . . . , N − . Here we choose the simplest form of c : c ( α ) = α − , (2.31)this implies we can assign the Coulomb parameter a α to the representation R α − of Z N . One may take otherform of coloring function c if needed. In principle, one can consider the lower degree orbifolding as thequotient by Z n 12 ( (cid:15) − a ω +1 + (cid:15)ν ω ) − 12 ( a ω − (cid:15) ) + (cid:15)D ω + q ω Λ (cid:21) = (cid:88) ω (cid:20) 12 ( (cid:15) − a ω +1 + (cid:15)ν ω ) + (cid:15)D ω + q ω (cid:21) − N (cid:88) α =1 p α . (2.42b)– 8 –ow using the definitions in (2.35), we see that if we treat h as an operator, when acting on orbifolded instantonpartition function and using (2.33), we may replace ν ω = k ω − k ω +1 → q ω ∂∂ q ω − q ω +1 ∂∂ q ω +1 . (2.43)Let us define q ω = Λ e x ω +1 − x ω . (2.44)and we may replace ν ω → ∂∂ x ω +1 (2.45)As for h , by the definition of D ω , we can set (cid:80) ω D ω = 0 . Now we have h = (cid:15) N (cid:88) α =1 (cid:18) ∂∂ x α + 1 − a ω (cid:15) (cid:19) + Λ (cid:32) N (cid:88) ω = α e x α +1 − x α (cid:33) ; x N + α = x α , (2.46)acting on orbifolded instanton partition function. If we further take the classical limit (cid:15) → , the kineticterm becomes (cid:80) α a α . This means a α must be real in order to have a non-negative kinetic energy term. Wehave thus recovered the Hamiltonians of the periodic Toda chain eq. (2.27). T ( x ) defined in eq. (2.29) usingthe instanton partition function is indeed the characteristic polynomial of the corresponding integrable system.Calculation without taking NS-limit can be found in [33]. X -function With success of (cid:98) A N − Toda system, we would like to ask whether T ( x ) defined for N = 2 ∗ system in (2.26)can similarly reproduce commuting Hamiltonians of the eCM system, hence be identified as the characteristicpolynomial?The short answer is: NO. This is because T ( x ) defined earlier in (2.26) is not a finite degree polynomial.There exist additional poles coming from Y ( x − m ) Y ( x + m + (cid:15) ) in the numerator, which render it non-analytic.Explicit calculation also verifies our claim. As with Toda lattice, here we introduce the full surface defect on C ⊂ C × C = R and Z N orbifolding which maps ( z , z ) → ( z , ζ z ) , ζ N = 1 . Following similarorbifolding procedures from eq. (2.36) to eq. (2.40), we found for ω = 0 , . . . N − : T ω ( x ) = Y ω +1 ( x + (cid:15) ) + q ω Y ω ( x − m ) Y ω +1 ( x + m + (cid:15) ) Y ω ( x )= (cid:20) x + (cid:15) − a ω +1 + q ω (cid:18) ( x + m + (cid:15) − a ω +1 ) x − a ω − mx − a ω (cid:19)(cid:21) exp (cid:16) (cid:15)x ν ω + (cid:15)x D ω + · · · (cid:17) =(1 + q ω )( x + (cid:15) − a ω +1 ) exp (cid:16) (cid:15)x ν ω + (cid:15)x D ω + · · · (cid:17) + q ω x ( − m ( m + (cid:15) ) + ma ω +1 − a ω )=(1 + q ω ) (cid:20) x + (cid:15) − a ω +1 + (cid:15)ν ω + 1 x (cid:20) (cid:15) ν ω − (cid:15)ν ω a ω +1 + (cid:15) D ω − (cid:15) ν ω (cid:21)(cid:21) + q ω x ( − m ( m + (cid:15) ) + ma ω +1 − a ω ) + · · · (3.1)If we normalize T ω ( x ) by q ω to set the coefficient of the leading term to unity: (cid:89) ω T ω ( x )1 + q ω = x N + h x N − + h x N − + · · · (3.2)– 9 –hen we will have the first few h j ’s as h = − (cid:88) ω ( a ω − (cid:15) ) , (3.3a) h = 12 h − (cid:88) ω ( a ω − (cid:15) ) + (cid:15) D ω + q ω q ω ( − m ( m + (cid:15) ) + ma ω +1 − a ω ) . (3.3b)Here we see that h obtained clearly does not resemble eq. (2.1). Also since eq. (2.26) consists poles, eq. (3.2)is NOT a polynomial.The failure of reproducing the correct eCM Hamiltonian leads us to consider a certain modification of T ( x ) ,which we will denote it as X ( x ) . In the construction of this function, we again temporarily restore the (cid:15) dependence: X ( x ) = Y ( x + (cid:15) + ) (cid:88) { µ } q | µ | B [ µ ] (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ Y ( x + s ij − m ) Y ( x + s ij + m + (cid:15) + ) Y ( x + s ij ) Y ( x + s ij + (cid:15) + ) (3.4)where (cid:15) + = (cid:15) + (cid:15) , and µ is one single Young diagram, we denote it as: µ = ( µ , µ , . . . , µ (cid:96) ( µ ) ) . (3.5)Since µ is only one Young diagram, we will not use vector notation like (cid:126)λ = ( λ (1) , . . . , λ ( N ) ) , the latter denotesa vector with N Young diagrams λ ( α ) , α = 1 , . . . , N as its entries. Note that µ has no relation to (cid:126)λ labeling thefixed point on the original instanton moduli space. We will see later in chapter 5 that Young diagram µ has aninterpretation as the “dual” instanton configuration in the eight-dimensional gauge origami construction. Eachbox of µ is labeled by: s ij = ( i − m − ( j − m + (cid:15) + ) (3.6)where i = 1 , . . . , (cid:96) ( µ ) and j = 1 , . . . , µ i with a given i . Let us define B [ µ ] = (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ B , ( mh ij + (cid:15) + a ij ); B ( x ) = 1 + (cid:15) (cid:15) x ( x + (cid:15) + ) . (3.7)Here a ij = µ i − j denotes the “arm” associated with a given a box ( i , j ) in a Young diagram, l ij = µ T ij − i for the“leg” associated with the same box. We have also defined h ij = a ij + l ij +1 . Under NS limit, lim (cid:15) → B [ µ ] = 1 for all µ . The relation between T ( x ) defined in (2.26) and X ( x ) defined in eq. (3.4) has been mentioned in [17].One may identify our T ( x ) with the T -function denoted by T v there and X ( x ) with the other T -functiondenoted as T . Comparing with [10] and [9] , we see that X -function (3.4) is the qq-character of N = 2 ∗ systemdefined on limit shape, and becomes the q-character when NS limit is taken.We will now continue to take NS-limit and show that X ( x ) is a degree N polynomial. Using the large x -asymptotic behavior of Y ( x ) , it is obvious that X ( x ) is of order N . To prove its analyticity, let us consider one The X -function with generic ( (cid:15) , (cid:15) ) and (cid:126)λ is also known as the fundamental qq -character of (cid:98) A quiver [9, 34], which is reduced tothe corresponding q -character in the NS limit, (cid:15) → [16]. – 10 –pecific µ configuration µ = ( µ , µ , · · · , µ (cid:96) ( µ ) ) under NS-limit, its contribution to X ( x ) is denoted as X ( x )[ µ ] = q | µ | Y ( x + (cid:15) ) (cid:96) ( µ ) (cid:89) i =1 µ i (cid:89) j =1 Y ( x + s ij − m ) Y ( x + s ij + m + (cid:15) ) Y ( x + s ij ) Y ( x + s ij + (cid:15) )= q | µ | Y ( x + (cid:96) ( µ ) m ) (cid:96) ( µ ) (cid:89) i =1 Y ( x + ( i − m − µ i ( m + (cid:15) ) + (cid:15) ) Y ( x + i m − µ i ( m + (cid:15) ) + (cid:15) )= q | µ | Q ( x + (cid:96) ( µ ) m ) Q ( x + (cid:96) ( µ ) m − (cid:15) ) (cid:96) ( µ ) (cid:89) i =1 Q ( x + ( i − m − µ i ( m + (cid:15) ) + (cid:15) ) Q ( x + ( i − m − µ i ( m + (cid:15) )) Q ( x + i m − µ i ( m + (cid:15) )) Q ( x + i m − µ i ( m + (cid:15) ) + (cid:15) ) , (3.8)such that the total X -function is given by: X ( x ) = (cid:88) { µ } X ( x )[ µ ] . (3.9)The poles of X ( x )[ µ ] are located at • { x αi − (cid:96) ( µ ) m + (cid:15) } from zeros of Q ( x + (cid:96) ( µ ) m − (cid:15) ) , • { x αi − ( i − m + µ i ( m + (cid:15) ) } from zeros of Q ( x + ( i − m − µ i ( m + (cid:15) )) , and • { x αi − i m + µ i ( m + (cid:15) ) − (cid:15) } form zeros of Q ( x + i m − µ i ( m + (cid:15) )) ,where x αi is defined in (2.4). For each i there exists an infinity number of poles from infinity many { x αi } , α = 1 , . . . , N , i ∈ N .Let us focus on the poles located at x αi − ( l − m + µ l ( m + (cid:15) ) of some ≤ l ≤ (cid:96) ( µ ) . Adding an additionalbox to µ located at ( l , µ l ) gives a new Young diagram µ (cid:48) = ( µ , · · · , µ l − , µ l + 1 , µ l +1 , · · · , µ (cid:96) ( µ ) ) , whosecontribution to X ( x ) is: X ( x )[ µ (cid:48) ] = X ( x )[ µ ] × q Y ( x + ( l − m − µ l ( m + (cid:15) )) Y ( x + ( l − m − ( µ l − m + (cid:15) )) Y ( x + ( l − m − µ l ( m + (cid:15) )) Y ( x + ( l − m − µ l ( m + (cid:15) ) + (cid:15) ) . (3.10)Both X ( x )[ µ (cid:48) ] and X ( x )[ µ ] are contained in X ( x ) (3.9) and share the same poles x αi − ( l − m + µ l ( m + (cid:15) ) .The sum of the two Young diagram contributions gives us X ( x )[ µ ] + X ( x )[ µ (cid:48) ] = X ( x )[ µ ] (cid:20) q Y ( x + ( l − m − µ l ( m + (cid:15) )) Y ( x + ( l − m − ( µ l − m + (cid:15) )) Y ( x + ( l − m − µ l ( m + (cid:15) )) Y ( x + ( l − m − µ l ( m + (cid:15) ) + (cid:15) ) (cid:21) −→ x → x αi − ( l − m + µ l ( m + (cid:15) )) . (3.11)The poles located at x αi − ( l − m + µ l ( m + (cid:15) ) from X ( x )[ µ ] are now canceled by the denominator usingeq. (2.14). The other two sets of poles can be dealt with similarly. Since X ( x ) is summed over all Youngdiagram configuration, X ( x ) is analytic. X ( x ) Finally we would like to see that the correct commuting Hamiltonians of the eCM system can be obtaineddirectly from X ( x ) we just constructed. Following the same procedure we performed with Toda system in the– 11 –nd of previous section, a full-type surface defect is again introduced in C ⊂ R with orbifolding. Eachorbifolded copy of X ( x ) under NS-limit becomes: X ω ( x ) = Y ω +1 ( x + (cid:15) ) (cid:88) { µ } B µω (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ Y ω +1 − j ( x + s ij − m ) Y ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij + m + (cid:15) ) Y ω +1 − j ( x + s ij ) Y ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij + (cid:15) ) . (3.12)The full X -function can be recovered via X ( x ) = (cid:89) ω X ω ( x ) , (3.13)where each X ω ( x ) is of degree one.Here we would like to address further the factor B µω appearing in the summation, it is the orbifolded versionof q | µ | B [ µ ] appearing in (3.4). Consider the summation over all possible partition configurations, which wedenote as B : B = (cid:88) { µ } q | µ | B [ µ ] (3.14)This is equivalent to a single N = 2 ∗ U (1) instanton partition function with ( m, − m − (cid:15) + ) identified as its Ω -background parameters as pointed out in [9]. This observation will eventually lead us to so called “GaugeOrigami” construction, for which we will discuss in Section 4. After orbifolding, each individual B µω becomes B µω = (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ q ω +1 − j B ( mh ij ) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) a ij =0 (3.15)with B ( x ) = 1 + (cid:15)x , (3.16)and here we define the following: K µω := { ( α, ( i , j )) | α = 1 , . . . , N ; ( i , j ) ∈ µ ; α − j + 1 ≡ ω mod ( N ) } ; k µω = | K µω | ; ν µω = k µω − k µω +1 . (3.17)Let us define a new set of variables (instead of (2.44)) q ω = z ω z ω − ; z ω + N = q z ω (3.18)such that (3.15) can now be rewritten as B µω ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) = µ (cid:89) l =1 µ T l − µ Tl +1 (cid:89) h =1 z ω z ω − l B ( mh ) . (3.19)One way to think about this configuration is that the orbifolding now splits the instanton partition into N copiesof U (1) sub-partitions. Each element in K ω is counted by orbifolded coupling q ω instead of the original q . Toevaluate the summation over all possible Young diagrams, we will introduce a new representation for a Youngdiagram µ : µ = (1 l l . . . ( N − l N − ( N ) l ) . (3.20)Each l r − = (cid:80) ∞ J =0 l r − ,J , where l r − ,J = (cid:0) µ Tr + NJ − µ Tr +1+ NJ (cid:1) is the difference between number of boxesof two neighboring columns, r = 1 , . . . , N − and the last one l = (cid:80) ∞ J =1 µ TNJ counts for how many times a– 12 –ull combination of q · · · q N − = q shows up. Define the summation over all possible partition configurationof each ω as: B ω ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) = (cid:88) { µ } B µω ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) = (cid:88) l ,...,l N − , l ≥ N − (cid:89) α =0 (cid:0) l α + (cid:15) m (cid:1) !( l α )! (cid:0) (cid:15) m (cid:1) ! (cid:18) z ω z α (cid:19) l α q l , (3.21)and their total product B ( (cid:126)z, τ ) = (cid:89) ω B ω ( (cid:126)z, τ ) = Q m + (cid:15)m ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) F ( τ ) , (3.22)is the orbifolded version of B defined in eq. (3.14), i.e. the orbifolded instanton partition function of U (1) N = 2 ∗ theory in the NS limit. The function Q ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) is defined in (A.17) in terms of elliptic theta functions.The explicit form of the (cid:126)z independent function F ( τ ) will not be used in the following derivation of commutingHamiltonians and we will show it can be absorbed by shifting the zero point energy.We again consider the large x expansion of X ω in (3.12) and we normalize X ω ( x ) with respect to the coeffi-cient of the leading x term, which is B ω ( (cid:126)z, τ ) . A similar computation yields: B ω ( (cid:126)z, τ ) X ω ( x ) = x + (cid:15) − a ω +1 + (cid:15) ν ω +1 x 12 ( (cid:15)ν ω − a ω +1 ) − 12 ( a ω +1 ) + (cid:15)D ω − m (cid:88) { µ } B µω ( (cid:126)z, τ ) B ω ( (cid:126)z, τ ) N − (cid:88) ω (cid:48) =0 (( m + (cid:15) ) k µω (cid:48) + ( (cid:15)ν ω (cid:48) − a ω (cid:48) +1 ) ν µω (cid:48) ) + . . . (3.23)As stated in (3.13), the full X -function carrying the information of the conserved Hamiltonians is the productof all the orbifolded pieces X ω ( x ) . From above we will take the normalization to be: X ( x ) B ( (cid:126)z, τ ) = (cid:81) ω X ω ( x ) (cid:81) ω B ω ( (cid:126)z, τ ) = x N + h x N − + h x N − + · · · + h N . (3.24)To express the commuting Hamiltonians, let us define the following derivative operators for ω = 1 , . . . , N : ∇ q ω = q ω ∂∂ q ω . (3.25)and differential operators for z : ∇ zω = z ω ∂∂z ω ; ∆ (cid:126)z = N − (cid:88) ω =0 ∇ zω ∇ zω . (3.26)Based on (3.18), it implies the relation: ∇ zω = ∇ q ω − ∇ q ω +1 . (3.27)Using definition of B ω ( (cid:126)z, τ ) in (3.15), and (3.17), we can express the first commuting Hamiltonians as: h = N − (cid:88) ω =0 ( (cid:15) − a ω +1 + (cid:15)ν ω ) = N (cid:15) + N − (cid:88) ω =0 P ω ; (3.28a) h = 12 h + N − (cid:88) ω =0 − 12 ( a ω ) − m (cid:32) ( m + (cid:15) ) N − (cid:88) ω (cid:48) =0 ∇ q ω (cid:48) + N − (cid:88) ω (cid:48) =0 ( (cid:15)ν ω (cid:48) − a ω (cid:48) +1 ) ∇ zω (cid:48) (cid:33) log B ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) , = 12 N − (cid:88) ω =0 P ω − N − (cid:88) ω =0 ( a ω ) − m (cid:32) ( m + (cid:15) ) N − (cid:88) ω =0 ∇ q ω + N − (cid:88) ω =0 P ω ∇ zω (cid:33) log B ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) . (3.28b)– 13 –gain like the case of Toda, we may treat h as operator acting on orbifolded instanton partition function andreplace ν ω → ∇ zω , thus we have the momentum. P ω = (cid:15) ∇ zω − a ω +1 . (3.29)We claim that we have recovered eq. (2.1) up to the following canonical transformation between the generalizedcoordinate q and its conjugate momentum P , which satisfy the commutation relation [ q, P ] = (cid:15) : H = 12 P + P f ( q ) + V ( q )= 12 ( P + f ( q )) + V ( q ) + [ P, q ]2 f (cid:48) ( q ) − f ( q ) = 12 ( P + f ( q )) + V ( q ) − (cid:15) f (cid:48) ( q ) − f ( q ) . (3.30)We can rewrite potential terms in h as V ( (cid:126)z ) = − m ( m + (cid:15) ) N − (cid:88) ω =0 ∇ q ω log B ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) − m N − (cid:88) ω =0 ( ∇ zω log B ( (cid:126)z ; τ )) − m(cid:15) ∆ (cid:126)z log B ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) . (3.31)By using eq. (3.22) and eq. (A.19), we may finally rewrite h = N − (cid:88) ω =0 P ω +1 m + (cid:15) ) − (cid:15) ( m + (cid:15) )2 ∆ (cid:126)z log Q ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) − N m ( m + (cid:15) ) ∇ q F ( τ )= 12 N (cid:88) α =1 P α + m ( m + (cid:15) ) (cid:88) α>β ℘ ( z α /z β ; τ ) − N m ( m + (cid:15) ) ∇ q F ( τ ) , (3.32)in particular F ( τ ) may be removed by shifting the zero energy level, its explicit form is not important asnoted earlier. We have thus successfully recovered the quantum eCM Hamiltonian given in eq. (2.1). Herewe summarize the explicit parameter identifications in N = 2 ∗ SU ( N ) gauge theory and the N -particle eCMsystem: Gauge Theory Integrable System a α Coulomb Moduli Momenta τ Complex gauge coupling Elliptic modulus (cid:15) Ω -deformation parameter Planck constant m Adjoint mass Coupling constant N Gauge group rank Number of particles z α Ratio between orbifolded couplings Exponentiated coordinatesBy using second property in (3.18) that z ω + N = q z ω , the coordinates { z α } and complex coupling q = e πiτ are independent.Let us end this section by commenting that one way to identify eigenfunction of h is to use the fact X ( x ) is N = 2 ∗ q-character. In the NS-limit, the VEV of q-character is dominated by following limiting shapeconfiguration t ( x ) = (cid:104)X ( x ) (cid:105) = (cid:80) (cid:126)λ X ( x )[ (cid:126)λ ] Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ] Z inst = X ( x ) Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ] Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ] (3.33)– 14 –here t ( x ) = x N + E x N − + E x N − + · · · + E N . When treating Hamiltonians as the operators (and thus X ( x ) ), we have X ( x ) Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ]( (cid:126) x) = t ( x ) Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ]( (cid:126) x) . (3.34)By matching the coefficients, we conclude Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ] is the eigenfunction of Hamiltonians h i Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ]( (cid:126) x) = E i Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ]( (cid:126) x); i = 1 , , . . . , N. (3.35)The canonical transformation performed in (3.30) gives an additional factor to the orbifolded instanton partitionfunction. h has the eigenfunction as: Ψ( (cid:126) x) = Q − m + (cid:15)(cid:15) ( (cid:126) x) Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ]( (cid:126) x); h Ψ( (cid:126) x) = E Ψ( (cid:126) x) . (3.36)Detailed calculations and discussion can be found in [8, 10]. Let us begin by introducing the basic information about the elliptic double Calogero-Moser system (edCM),it is an one dimensional quantum mechanical system consisting of P = N + M particles governed by thefollowing Hamiltonian: (cid:126) ˆ H edCM = − N (cid:88) α =1 ∂ ∂ x α − k M (cid:88) β =1 ∂ ∂ y β + k ( k + 1) (cid:88) ≤ α (cid:48) <α ≤ N ℘ (x α − x α (cid:48) ) + (cid:18) k + 1 (cid:19) (cid:88) ≤ β (cid:48) <β ≤ M ℘ (y β − y β (cid:48) ) + ( k + 1) N (cid:88) α =1 M (cid:88) β =1 ℘ (x α − y β ) . (4.1)The constant k is the ratio of masses between two sets of identical particles, i.e. the mass of the first N -particleslabeled by { x α } Nα =1 is k times of the mass of the remaining M -particles labeled by { y β } Mβ =1 . Simultaneously k also acts as a single coupling constant. The Hamiltonian (4.1) was initially mentioned in the context of thegauge origami in [10], and the trigonometrical limit of eq. (4.1) is studied in various papers such as [22, 23].Notice that (4.1) inherits the following symmetry: Swapping { x α } ↔ { y β } while simultaneously flipping k ↔ k (up to over all k factor).Let us look more closely at Hamiltonian given in eq. (4.1). In particular comparing with eq. (2.1) andcoefficients of their potential when there is only one group of particles. • As M = 0 , we identify k = m (cid:126) ; • As N = 0 , we identify k = m (cid:126) .Here we see that the meaning of “classical” limit is somewhat ambiguous among the two sets of particles. Forparticles labeled by { x α } Nα =1 , the classical limit means taking k (cid:29) while keeping m finite. As for particleslabeled by { y β } Mβ =1 , the classical limit is taken under k (cid:28) . This is the first hint that Hamiltonian in eq. (4.1)has no natural classical limit. Suppose we take k = m (cid:126) , taking the classical limit (cid:126) → is equivalent to have k (cid:29) . In such a limit, the mass of the first N particles labeled by { x α } Nα =1 is much heavier than the remaining– 15 – particles. In the classical approach, those objects with much larger mass can be treated as non-dynamical inthe leading order. Eq. (4.1) now becomes: ˆ H edCM k →∞ −→ − k M (cid:88) β =1 ∂ ∂ y β + k N (cid:88) α =1 M (cid:88) β =1 ℘ (x α − y β ) + k (cid:88) ≤ α (cid:48) <α ≤ N ℘ (x α − x α (cid:48) ) . (4.2)Even though the last term is of k order, it is just a constant as the heavy particles are non-dynamical. Theresultant quantum Hamiltonian describes M non-interacting particles in a potential well. Similar argumentapplies to k = (cid:126) m (cid:28) . We conclude that the system defined by eq. (4.1) has no classical limit. In particulartaking large mass limit with (cid:126) fixed is equivalent to take large k . Thus unlike eCM we do not recover doubleToda under such limit by the fact edCM has no classical limit. This analysis also indicates that the connectionof such an inherently quantum system with the supersymmetric gauge theories is much more subtle as we willreveal shortly. Before constructing the supersymmetric gauge theory associated with the edCM system however, let us firstfurther investigate its integrability and we will employ the so-called Dunkl operators [35]. The Dunkl operatorsare quantum version of Lax pairs [36–38] which pairwise commute. In particular the Dunkl operators forCalogero-Sutherland integrable models were explicitly worked out in [38], and their equivalence to the quantumpair Lax operators [39] was shown in [40] for all root systems. To explicitly define them, let us consider thefollowing family of functions: σ t ( x ) = θ ( x − t ) θ (cid:48) (0) θ ( x ) θ ( − t ) ; t ∈ C / ( Z ⊕ τ Z ) , (4.3)where τ is a modular parameter and θ is the theta function defined in (A.6) (Recall that we have identifycomplex gauge coupling with elliptic modulus at the end of previous chapter.). The function σ t ( x ) has thefollowing properties σ t ( x + 2 πi ) = σ t ( x ) , (4.4a) σ t ( x ) = − σ − t ( − x ) , (4.4b) σ t ( x ) = − σ x ( t ) , (4.4c) σ t ( x ) σ − t ( x ) = ℘ ( x ) − ℘ ( t ) , (4.4d) lim t → ddx σ t ( x ) = − ℘ ( x ) − ζ (cid:18) (cid:19) . (4.4e)Let t α , α = 1 , . . . , N , and u β , β = 1 , . . . , M , be P = N + M complex numbers, t α , u β ∈ C / ( Z ⊕ τ Z ) . Theelliptic double Dunkl operators are defined as: d x α = ∂∂ x α + k N (cid:88) α (cid:48) =1( α (cid:48) (cid:54) = α ) σ t α − t α (cid:48) (x α − x α (cid:48) ) S xx αα (cid:48) + M (cid:88) β =1 σ t α − u β (x α − y β ) S xy αβ , (4.5a) d y β = k ∂∂ y β + k N (cid:88) α =1 σ u β − t α (y β − x α ) S xy αβ + M (cid:88) β (cid:48) =1( β (cid:48) (cid:54) = β ) σ u β − u β (cid:48) (y β − y β (cid:48) ) S yy ββ (cid:48) . (4.5b)Here S xxαα (cid:48) , S xyαβ , and S yyββ (cid:48) are the permutation operators acting on { e x α } and { e y β } :– 16 – x α S xx αα (cid:48) = S xx αα (cid:48) x α (cid:48) , x α (cid:48) S xx αα (cid:48) = S xx αα (cid:48) x α , • x α S xy αβ = S xy αβ y β , y β S xy αβ = S xy αβ x α , • y β S yy ββ (cid:48) = S yy ββ (cid:48) y β (cid:48) , y β (cid:48) S yy ββ (cid:48) = S yy ββ (cid:48) y β .Here we show the Dunkl operators defined in (4.5) are pairwise commuting: [ d x α , d x α (cid:48) ] = ∂∂ x α , k N (cid:88) l =1 ,l (cid:54) = α (cid:48) σ t α (cid:48) − t l (x α (cid:48) − x l ) S xx α (cid:48) l + M (cid:88) β =1 σ t α (cid:48) − u β (x α (cid:48) − y β ) S xy α (cid:48) β + k N (cid:88) l =1 ,l (cid:54) = α σ t α − t l (x α − x l ) S xx αl + M (cid:88) β =1 σ t α − u β (x α − y β ) S xy αβ , ∂∂ x α (cid:48) = (cid:20) ∂∂ x α , kσ t α (cid:48) − t α (x α (cid:48) − x α ) S xx αα (cid:48) (cid:21) + (cid:20) kσ t α − t α (cid:48) (x α − x α (cid:48) ) S xx αα (cid:48) , ∂∂ x α (cid:48) (cid:21) = k ∂∂ x α σ t α (cid:48) − t α (x α (cid:48) − x α ) S xx αα (cid:48) − kσ t α (cid:48) − t α (x α (cid:48) − x α ) ∂∂ x α (cid:48) ∂∂ x α S xx αα (cid:48) + kσ t α − t α (cid:48) (x α − x α (cid:48) ) ∂∂ x α S xx αα (cid:48) − ∂∂ x α (cid:48) kσ t α − t α (cid:48) (x α − x α (cid:48) ) S xx αα (cid:48) = k (cid:20) ∂∂ x α , σ t α (cid:48) − t α (x α (cid:48) − x α ) (cid:21) S xx αα (cid:48) + k (cid:20) ∂∂ x α (cid:48) , σ t α (cid:48) − t α (x α (cid:48) − x α ) (cid:21) S xx αα (cid:48) = 0 . (4.6)We use (4.4b) for the 4th equal sign. Similarly for the other combinations: (cid:104) d x α , d y β (cid:105) = (cid:20) ∂∂ x α , kσ u β − t β (y β − x α ) S xy αβ (cid:21) + (cid:20) σ t α − u β (x α − y β ) S xy αβ , k ∂∂ y β (cid:21) = k (cid:20) ∂∂ x α , σ u β − t α (y β − x α ) (cid:21) S xy αβ + k (cid:20) σ t α − u β (x α − y β ) , ∂∂ y β (cid:21) S xy αβ = 0 , (4.7a) (cid:104) d y β , d y β (cid:48) (cid:105) = (cid:20) k ∂∂ y β , σ u β (cid:48) − u β (y β (cid:48) − y β ) S yy ββ (cid:48) (cid:21) + (cid:20) σ u β − u β (cid:48) (y β − y β (cid:48) ) S yy ββ (cid:48) , k ∂∂ y β (cid:48) (cid:21) = k (cid:20) ∂∂ y β , σ u β (cid:48) − u β (y β (cid:48) − y β ) (cid:21) S yy ββ (cid:48) + k (cid:20) ∂∂ y β (cid:48) , σ u β − u β (cid:48) (y β − y β (cid:48) ) (cid:21) S yy ββ (cid:48) . (4.7b)For later convenience of calculating conserved commuting Hamiltonians, we will use the combined coordinates { x j } Pj =1 denoted by: x j = (cid:40) x j j = 1 , . . . , N, y j − N j = N + 1 , . . . , N + M. (4.8)We also define the parity: p ( j ) = (cid:40) j = 1 , . . . , N, j = N + 1 , . . . , N + M. (4.9)Thus one may rewrite Dunkl operators in eq. (4.5) into a single compact formula for all j ∈ [ P ] = [ N + M ] d j = k p ( j ) ∂∂ x j + P (cid:88) l =1 ,l (cid:54) = j k − p ( l ) σ t j − t l ( x j − x l ) S jl ; x i S ij = S ij x j . (4.10)– 17 –he conserved charges are now given as: L ( r ) = P (cid:88) j =1 k − p ( j ) ( d j ) r . (4.11)Since d j s are commuting, it is easy to see that L ( r ) are also pairwise commuting (cid:104) L ( r ) , L ( s ) (cid:105) = 0 , ∀ r, s = 1 , . . . , P. (4.12)In particular, to recover the original edCM Hamiltonian, we consider: L (2) = P (cid:88) i =1 k − p ( j ) ( d i ) = N (cid:88) α =1 ( d x α ) + 1 k M (cid:88) β =1 ( d y β ) = N (cid:88) α =1 ∂ ∂ x α + k (cid:88) α (cid:54) = α (cid:48) ∂∂ x α σ t α − t α (cid:48) (x α − x α (cid:48) ) + k (cid:88) α (cid:54) = α (cid:48) σ t α − t α (cid:48) (x α − x α (cid:48) ) σ t α (cid:48) − t α (x α (cid:48) − x α )+ N (cid:88) α =1 M (cid:88) β =1 ∂∂ x α σ t α − u β (x α − y β ) + σ t α − u β (x α − y β ) σ t α − u β (y β − x α )+ k k M (cid:88) β =1 ∂ ∂ y β + kk (cid:88) β (cid:54) = β (cid:48) ∂∂ y β σ u β − u β (cid:48) (y β − y β (cid:48) ) + 1 k (cid:88) β (cid:54) = β (cid:48) σ u β − u β (cid:48) (y β − y β (cid:48) ) σ u β (cid:48) − u β (y β (cid:48) − y β )+ k k N (cid:88) α =1 M (cid:88) β =1 ∂∂ x α σ t α − u β (x α − y β ) + σ t α − u β (x α − y β ) σ u β − t α (y β − x α ) . (4.13)We got Derivatives and product of σ -function. In the limit of all t α and u β are equal, we may use the 4th and5th properties of σ t ( z ) -function (4.4) to obtain the edCM Hamiltonian (4.1) L (2) = 2 ˆ H. (4.14)We thus established the quantum integrability of the edCM system. Here we review the relevant details about the so-called gauge origami construction which is an extension ofADHM construction of gauge instantons, more details can be found in [24, 25, 41] (See also [33]). Let startwith four complex planes with coordinates { z a } , a = 1 , , , and consider picking two out of them such thatthe six possible copies C A ⊂ C are denoted by the following double index notation: A ∈ { (12) , (13) , (14) , (23) , (24) , (34) } = 6 . (4.15)Define the complement of A as ¯ A = { , , , }\ A , for instance if A = (12) , ¯ A = (34) . We can thus use C A to denote the complementary two complex planes transverse to C A , such that the total space C = C A ⊕ C A .One can imagine that the six copies of sub-spaces C A are sitting on the six edges of a tetrahedral and its fourfaces are labeled by the four complex coordinates { z a } , hence the name “ 折 紙 (origami)”. This constructionis motivated by the intersecting D-brane configurations using D1-D5- D5 branes [25], here we consider thefollowing D(-1)-D3- D3 intersecting configuration which can be obtained via T-duality transformations:– 18 –rane Type κ D3 (12) n x x x xD3 (13) n x x x xD3 (14) n x x x xD3 (23) n x x x xD3 (24) n x x x xD3 (34) n x x x xWe labeled each stack of n A D3 or D3 branes by D3 A or D3 A indicating its four dimension world volume is in C A , and gives U ( n A ) gauge group. Notice that the presence of two out of six anti-D3 branes D3 is necessaryfor this intersecting brane configuration to partially preserve of supersymmetries or two supercharges. Wealso introduced κ D(-1) branes, which will play the role of “spiked instantons” in this configuration. Similar toADHM construction, each gauge group is associated to a vector space N A = C n A , and one additional vectorspace K = C κ is associated to κ D(-1) branes. The analogous maps acting on { N A } and K are: I A : N A → K ; (4.16a) J A : K → N A ; (4.16b) B a : K → K ; a = 1 , , , , (4.16c)and we can understand these from the world volume theory of κ D(-1) branes. Here { I A } and { J A } are the bi-fundamental fields arising from the open string stretching among the D3 A /D3 A and D(-1) branes, while B a arethe complex U ( κ ) adjoint fields whose diagonal entries label the positions of κ D(-1) branes in the transverse C . The analogous real moment map µ R and complex moment map µ C equations to ADHM construction in C can thus be identified respectively with the so-called D-term, E-term and J-term conditions [25]. Starting withthe D-term, which gives the real momentum map µ R { µ R = (cid:88) a ∈ [ B a , B † a ] + (cid:88) A ∈ I A I † A + J † A J A = ζ · κ } /U ( κ ) , ζ > . (4.17)Here in such an intersecting D-brane configuration, we also turn on constant background NS-NS B-field, itgenerates the FI parameter in the D(-1) brane world volume theory. Next we would like to discuss the E- andJ-term conditions together. To do so, for each N A , let us define the following combinations: µ A = [ B a , B b ] + I A J A ; a, b ∈ A (4.18)and we define s A as: s A = µ A + ε A ¯ A µ † ¯ A , (4.19)where ε A ¯ A is a four indices totally antisymmetric tensor ranging over A and its complement ¯ A . The analogueto the complex momentum maps are now given by: { s A = 0 } /U ( κ ) . (4.20)Notice that while µ A = 0 can encode six complex equations, however s A consist both µ A and µ † ¯ A which aremapped into each other under hermitian conjugation, there are therefore only six real equations encoded in(4.20). The reason of using s A instead of µ A is because s A gives the correct number of degree of freedom, wewill show this in a moment. In addition, there are equations which do not exist in the usual ADHM construction: { σ ¯ aA = B ¯ a I A + ε ¯ a ¯ b B † ¯ b J † A = 0 } /U ( κ ) : N A → K , (4.21)– 19 –here ¯ a ∈ ¯ A denotes the single index contained in the double index ¯ A . For every A , there are two suchequations. These equations (4.21) appear when one considers the D(-1) and intersecting D3 instanton config-urations [41]. Now we would like to claim that equations in (4.20), (4.17), and (4.21) are sufficient to fix thesolution uniquely by showing the number of degrees of freedom and the number of conditions are equal. Letus start with counting the real degrees of freedom:1. I A : (cid:80) A × κ × N A real d.o.f.2. J A : (cid:80) A × κ × N A real d.o.f.3. B a : × × κ real d.o.f.which together precisely equals to the number of the conditions:1. Eq. (4.20): × κ real conditions2. Eq. (4.17): κ real condition3. Eq. (4.21): (cid:80) A × × κ × N A real conditions4. U ( κ ) Symmetry: κ real condition.Hence we may show that the dimensions of moduli space defined by M κ = { ( (cid:126)B, (cid:126)I, (cid:126)J ) | (4.17) , (4.20) , (4.21) } is (cid:88) A × κ × N A + (cid:88) A × κ × N A + 8 × κ − × κ − κ − (cid:88) A × κ × N A − κ = 0 . (4.22)Essentially M κ only consists of only discrete points. Comparing to ADHM construction which has a modulispace of dimensions κN , additional eq. (4.21) reduces instanton moduli space to be zero dimensional.However, there also exist open strings stretching between D3-D3 branes which gives additional maps/fieldsfrom D-brane construction. These terms are not related to instanton and thus not being considered when con-structing instanton moduli space. For instance, when one considers the D(-1)-D3-brane realization of ADHMconstruction, the open strings with both ends attached to D3 branes are not taken into account. Here we alsoconsider the open strings stretching between D3 A -D3 ¯ A branes and D3 A -D3 ¯ A , giving rise to the followingconditions: Υ A = J ¯ A I A − I † ¯ A J † A = 0 : N A → N ¯ A , (4.23)these act as the transversality conditions [41]. The matrices { s A } , { σ ¯ aA } and { Υ A } in (4.20), (4.21), and (4.23)need to be subjected to the following matrix consistency identity [41]: (cid:88) A ∈ Tr ( s A s † A )+ (cid:88) A ∈ , ¯ a ∈ Tr ( σ ¯ aA σ † ¯ aA )+ (cid:88) A ∈ Tr(Υ A Υ † A ) = 2 (cid:88) A ∈ (cid:0) (cid:107) µ A (cid:107) + (cid:107) J ¯ A I A (cid:107) (cid:1) + (cid:88) A ∈ , ¯ a ∈ ¯ A ( (cid:107) B ¯ a I A (cid:107) + (cid:107) J A B ¯ a (cid:107) ) , (4.24)where (cid:107) µ A (cid:107) = Tr (cid:16) µ A µ † A (cid:17) . By setting each term in the LHS of (4.24) vanishes using (4.20), (4.21), and(4.23), we can deduce the following constraints: { s A = 0 } /U ( κ ) = ⇒ µ A = 0 , (4.25a) { σ ¯ aA = 0 } /U ( κ ) = ⇒ B ¯ a I A = 0; J A B ¯ a = 0 , (4.25b) { Υ A = 0 } /U ( κ ) = ⇒ J ¯ A I A = 0 , (4.25c)which are equivalent to the E- and J-term constraints considered in [25].– 20 –t is known that the combination of imposing ζ > and dividing by U ( κ ) in (4.17) is equivalent to replacingD-term equation (4.17) by the stability condition [41], which states that for any subspace K (cid:48) ⊂ K , such that I A ( N A ) for all A ∈ and B a K (cid:48) ⊂ K for all a = 1 , , , , coincides with K , i.e. K (cid:48) = K . In other words, K = (cid:88) A C [ B , B , B , B ] I A ( N A ) /GL ( K ) . (4.26)The equations (4.25b) and (4.25c) further shows that K can be decomposed into K = (cid:77) A K A ; K A = C [ B a , B b ] I A ( N A ) , (4.27)The equation (4.27) is essentially the stability condition for familiar ADHM construction. Combining (4.25a)and (4.27), we have shown that gauge origami is actually six independent copies of ADHM construction ofinstantons. Finally, the moduli space is now defined as M κ ( (cid:126)n ) = { ( (cid:126)B, (cid:126)I, (cid:126)J ) | (4.25a) , (4.26) } //GL ( K ) (4.28)There is a symmetry (4.20), (4.17), (4.21), and (4.23) enjoys, and thus a symmetry of the moduli space (4.28):we can multiply B a by a phase B a (cid:55)→ q a B a , and compensate with J A (cid:55)→ q A J A , q A = q a q b for A = ( ab ) aslong as the product of q a is subject to: (cid:89) a =1 q a = 1 . (4.29)If we view q = diag( q , q , q , q ) as diagonal matrix, it belongs to the maximal torus U (1) (cid:15) of the group SU (4) rotating the C . In the ADHM construction in four dimensions, we usually consider SO (4) rotationacting on R , whose maximal torus U (1) give rise to two generic Ω -background parameters for complexmomentum map. In the gauge origami, if we start with SO (8) rotation acting on R = C with maximaltorus U (1) , one might expect four generic Ω -background parameters. However conditions defining the modulispace (4.20), (4.21), and (4.23) are real equations, which removes over all U (1) phase rotation (4.29), leavingmaximal torus U (1) , which preserves some supersymmetry that act q · [ B a , I A , J A ] = [ q a B a , I A , q A J A ] . (4.30)As stated, the gauge origami can be viewed as a composition of six copies of ADHM instanton construc-tions. Each sub-instanton vector space K A has its fixed-points labeled by a set of Young diagrams (cid:126)λ A =( λ (1) A , . . . , λ ( n A ) A ) , each Young diagram is labeled by λ ( α ) A = ( λ A,α, , λ A,α, , . . . ) , α = 1 , . . . , n A , such that: K A = n A (cid:77) α =1 K A,α ; K A,α = (cid:96) ( λ A,α ) (cid:77) i =1 λ A,α,i (cid:77) j =1 B i − a B j − b ( I A e A,α ); N A = C n A = n A (cid:77) α =1 C e A,α . (4.31)where e A,α is the fixed basis of the vector space C n A . We will also use λ = { (cid:126)λ A } to denote the set of all gaugeorigami Young diagrams.As in the usual ADHM construction, we denote the character on each N A and K A as: N A := n A (cid:88) α =1 e a A,α ; K A := n A (cid:88) α =1 e a A,α (cid:88) ( i,j ) ∈ λ ( α ) A q i − a q j − b . (4.32)– 21 –he character on the tangent space of the moduli space defined in eq. (4.28) can be written as T λ = N K ∗ − P P P KK ∗ − q A N ∗ A N ¯ A , (4.33)with the following definition N = (cid:88) A ∈ P ¯ A N A ; K = (cid:88) A ∈ K A , (4.34)and the following notation: q a = e (cid:15) a ; P a = 1 − q a ; q A = q a q b ; P A = P a P b . (4.35)Using (4.29), it shows ( (cid:15) a ) a =1 ,..., are subject to the constraint: (cid:88) a =1 (cid:15) a = 0 . (4.36) Example 1: Consider all n A ≡ except n = N , the character is given as T λ = N K ∗ − P P P KK ∗ = (1 − q )(1 − q ) N K ∗ − P P (1 − q ) K K ∗ = (1 − q − q − q q ) N K ∗ − P P (1 − q ) K K ∗ = (1 − q )[ N K ∗ + qN ∗ K − P P K K ∗ ] , (4.37)Define the operation E as: E (cid:88) i ∈ I + e W + i − (cid:88) i ∈ I − e W − i = (cid:81) i ∈ I − ( W − i ) (cid:81) i ∈ I + ( W + i ) . (4.38)We found that the instanton partition function of 4d U ( N ) N = 2 ∗ theory defined in (2.5) can be obtained fromthis character: Z inst [ (cid:126)λ = (cid:126)λ ] = E [ T λ ] (4.39)under the identification of the adjoint mass m = (cid:15) . Example 2: Consider all n A ≡ except n = N , n = 1 . Take N = e x , and we have T λ ,λ = N K ∗ − P P P KK ∗ =[(1 − q )(1 − q ) N + (1 − q )(1 − q ) N ]( K + K ) ∗ − P (1 − q )( K + K )( K + K ) ∗ =(1 − q )[ N K ∗ + qN ∗ K − P K K ∗ ] + (1 − q )[ N K ∗ + q q N ∗ K − P P K K ∗ ]+ (1 − q )(1 − q ) N K ∗ + (1 − q )(1 − q ) N K ∗ − P (1 − q )( K K ∗ + K K ∗ ) . (4.40)Comparing with X ( x ) in eq. (3.4), we realize that X ( x )[ µ = λ ] = E [(1 − q )(1 − q ) N K ∗ + (1 − q )(1 − q ) N K ∗ − P (1 − q )( K K ∗ + K K ∗ )] (4.41)is the fundamental qq -character of (cid:98) A quiver, with m = (cid:15) and − m − (cid:15) = (cid:15) a.k.a. the crossed instantonconfiguration [41]. For n > , one obtains higher order qq-character of ˆ A quiver [9].– 22 – Elliptic Double Calogero-Moser from Gauge Origami Now we would like to see how a special case of the gauge origami construction reviewed earlier is naturallyconnected with the edCM system. Let us consider a special case with only two stacks of overlapping D3 branes,i.e. n = N, n = M, (5.1)while all the remaining n A (cid:54) =(12) , (23) = 0 . The Young diagrams associated with such a gauge origami configu-ration are denoted as: (cid:126)λ = ( λ (1)12 , . . . , λ ( N )12 ); (cid:126)λ = ( λ (1)23 , . . . , λ ( M )23 ) , (5.2)with each individual Young diagram represented by λ ( α )12 = ( λ ,α, , λ ,α, , . . . ); λ ( β )23 = ( λ ,β, , λ ,β, , . . . ) (5.3)where α = 1 , . . . , N , β = 1 , . . . , M . For each gauge group, we can define the following combinations: x αi = a α + ( i − (cid:15) + λ ,α,i (cid:15) ; x (0) αi = a α + ( i − (cid:15) , (5.4a) x βj = b β + ( j − (cid:15) + λ ,β,j (cid:15) ; x (0) βj = b β + ( j − (cid:15) . (5.4b)This special configuration is also called the folded instanton [10, 41, 42]. The partition function of such a gaugeorigami configuration is given by: Z inst = (cid:88) { (cid:126)λ } (cid:88) { (cid:126)λ } q | (cid:126)λ | + | (cid:126)λ | Z [ (cid:126)λ ] Z [ (cid:126)λ ] Z [ (cid:126)λ , (cid:126)λ ] Z [ (cid:126)λ , (cid:126)λ ] , (5.5)where Z [ (cid:126)λ ] = (cid:89) ( αi ) (cid:54) =( α (cid:48) i (cid:48) ) Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x α (cid:48) i (cid:48) − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x α (cid:48) i (cid:48) )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x α (cid:48) i (cid:48) − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x α (cid:48) i (cid:48) − (cid:15) − (cid:15) )) × Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) α (cid:48) i (cid:48) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) α (cid:48) i (cid:48) − (cid:15) )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) α (cid:48) i (cid:48) − (cid:15) − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) α (cid:48) i (cid:48) − (cid:15) )) , (5.6a) Z [ (cid:126)λ ] = (cid:89) ( βj ) (cid:54) =( β (cid:48) j (cid:48) ) Γ( (cid:15) − ( x βj − x β (cid:48) j (cid:48) − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x βj − x β (cid:48) j (cid:48) )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x βj − x β (cid:48) j (cid:48) − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x βj − x β (cid:48) j (cid:48) − (cid:15) − (cid:15) )) × Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) βj − x (0) β (cid:48) j (cid:48) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) βj − x (0) β (cid:48) j (cid:48) − (cid:15) )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) βj − x (0) β (cid:48) j (cid:48) − (cid:15) − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) βj − x (0) β (cid:48) j (cid:48) − (cid:15) )) , (5.6b) Z [ (cid:126)λ , (cid:126)λ ] = (cid:89) ( αi ) (cid:89) ( βj ) Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x βj − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x βj )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x βj − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x αi − x βj − (cid:15) − (cid:15) )) × Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − (cid:15) )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − (cid:15) − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) αi − x (0) βj − (cid:15) )) , (5.6c) Z [ (cid:126)λ , (cid:126)λ ] = (cid:89) ( βj ) (cid:89) ( αi ) Γ( (cid:15) − ( x βj − x αi − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x βj − x αi )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x βj − x αi − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x βj − x αi − (cid:15) − (cid:15) )) × Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) βj − x (0) αi ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) βj − x (0) αi − (cid:15) )) · Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) βj − x (0) αi − (cid:15) − (cid:15) ))Γ( (cid:15) − ( x (0) βj − x (0) αi − (cid:15) )) . (5.6d)– 23 –e take NS limit (cid:15) → while keeping (cid:15) and (cid:15) fixed. Following the similar procedures in Section 2.1, onefinds the saddle point configuration satisfies q Q ( x γk − (cid:15) ) Q ( x γk − (cid:15) ) Q ( x γk − (cid:15) ) Q ( x γk + (cid:15) ) Q ( x γk + (cid:15) ) Q ( x γk + (cid:15) ) = 0; ( γk ) = { ( αi ) , ( βj ) } , (5.7)where Q ( x ) = N (cid:89) α =1 ∞ (cid:89) i =1 ( x − x αi ) M (cid:89) β =1 ∞ (cid:89) j =1 ( x − x βj ) . (5.8)We denote the Young diagrams which satisfy (5.7) the limit shape configurations (cid:126)λ ∗ and (cid:126)λ ∗ , they dominatethe full folded instanton partition function given in (5.5) in NS limit: Z inst ≈ q | (cid:126)λ ∗ | + | (cid:126)λ ∗ | Z [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ] Z [ (cid:126)λ ∗ ] Z [ (cid:126)λ ∗ , (cid:126)λ ∗ ] Z [ (cid:126)λ ∗ , (cid:126)λ ∗ ] = q | (cid:126)λ ∗ | + | (cid:126)λ ∗ | Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ , (cid:126)λ ∗ ] . (5.9)To find the resultant BAE, we consider the twisted superpotential arising in the NS limit: W = lim (cid:15) → [ (cid:15) Z ] = W classical + W + W inst , whose equation of motion is now given by: πi ∂ W ( g γ ) ∂g γ = n γ ; n γ ∈ Z , (5.10)with g γ ∈ { a α , b β } , g γ = a α for γ = 1 , . . . , N and g γ = b β for γ = N + 1 , . . . N + M . The classical twistedsuperpotential is given as W classical = − log q N (cid:88) α =1 a α (cid:15) − log q M (cid:88) β =1 b β (cid:15) , (5.11)and the perturbative one-loop twisted superpotential is W = 12 (cid:88) ( γk ) (cid:54) =( γ (cid:48) k (cid:48) ) { f ( x (0) γik − x (0) γ (cid:48) k (cid:48) − (cid:15) ) − f ( x (0) γk − x (0) γ (cid:48) k (cid:48) + (cid:15) )+ f ( x (0) γk − x (0) γ (cid:48) k (cid:48) − (cid:15) ) − f ( x (0) γk − x (0) γ (cid:48) k (cid:48) + (cid:15) )+ f ( x (0) γk − x (0) γ (cid:48) k (cid:48) + (cid:15) ) − f ( x γk − x (0) γ (cid:48) k (cid:48) − (cid:15) ) } , (5.12)with x (0) γk ∈ { x (0) αi , x (0) βj } . The BAE now can be obtained after some elaborated calculations, following the sameprocedures as in (2.22): q − aα (cid:15) (cid:89) α (cid:48) ( (cid:54) = α ) Γ (cid:16) a α − a α (cid:48) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − a α − a α (cid:48) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − (cid:15) − ( a α − a α (cid:48) ) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − (cid:15) + a α − a α (cid:48) (cid:15) (cid:17) (cid:89) β Γ (cid:16) a α − b β (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − a α − b β (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − (cid:15) − ( a α − b β ) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − (cid:15) + a α − b β (cid:15) (cid:17) , (5.13a) q − bβ (cid:15) (cid:89) α Γ (cid:16) b β − a α (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − b β − a α (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − (cid:15) − ( b β − a α ) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − (cid:15) + b β − a α (cid:15) (cid:17) (cid:89) β (cid:48) ( (cid:54) = β ) Γ (cid:16) b β − b β (cid:48) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − b β − b β (cid:48) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − (cid:15) − ( b β − b β (cid:48) ) (cid:15) (cid:17) Γ (cid:16) − (cid:15) + b β − b β (cid:48) (cid:15) (cid:17) . (5.13b)Comparing with the BAE of eCM in eq. (2.23), eq. (5.13) consists of two copies of the eCM systems. To thebest of our knowledge, the BAE for the edCM system has not appeared in the literature, we therefore proposethat (5.13) is a possible one. We will provide supporting evidence this statement by deriving the commutingHamiltonians explicitly from the folded instanton configuration in the following section.– 24 – .1 X ( x ) for Elliptic Double Calogero-Moser System As we have shown in the previous sections that, X -function was constructed upon auxiliary lattice as anenhanced version of the original T -function, and it is the characteristic polynomial for the eCM system. Wewould like to see if similar construction also applies for the edCM system, using the gauge origami partitionfunction.We claim that the resultant X ( x ) should be of the following factorizable form: X ( x ) = X ( x ) × X ( x ) . (5.14)When we restore (cid:15) dependence, the two factors are: X ( x ) = (cid:88) { µ } Q ( x + (cid:15) ) Q ( x ) q | µ | B [ µ ] (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) , X ( x ) = (cid:88) { µ } Q ( x + (cid:15) ) Q ( x ) q | µ | B [ µ ] (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ Λ µ Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) , (5.15)with the parameters given by: s , ij = i (cid:15) + j (cid:15) ; B [ µ ] = (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ (cid:20) (cid:15) (cid:15) ( (cid:15) ( l ij + 1) − (cid:15) a ij )( (cid:15) ( l ij + 1) − (cid:15) a ij + (cid:15) + (cid:15) ) (cid:21) , (5.16a) s , ij = i (cid:15) + j (cid:15) ; B [ µ ] = (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ (cid:20) (cid:15) (cid:15) ( (cid:15) ( l ij + 1) − (cid:15) a ij )( (cid:15) ( l ij + 1) − (cid:15) a ij + (cid:15) + (cid:15) ) (cid:21) , (5.16b)and the constraint (4.36) applies. Comparing with the gauge origami construction, we see that X ( x ) corre-sponds to the configuration n = N , n = M , and n = 1 , with µ = λ , while X ( x ) corresponds tothe configuration n = N , n = M , and n = 1 , with µ = λ . The x -independent terms in X ( x ) (or X ( x ) ) can be viewed as auxiliary instanton partition of U (1) gauge theory living on C × C (or C × C )four-dimensional subspace. Here we would like to stress that X ( x ) is not equivalent to having a single gaugeorigami consisting n = N , n = M , n = 1 , n = 1 , rather a product of two different gauge origamisystems. The configuration with n = N , n = M , n = 1 , n = 1 can only be factorizable under NSlimit, and without orbifolding. If either orbifolding is implemented or we keep (cid:15) finite, it is not factorizable.To show that X ( x ) has the correct degree P , let us define the analogous functions to eq. (2.25): Y ( x ) = Q ( x ) Q ( x − (cid:15) ) , Q ( x ) = N (cid:89) α =1 ∞ (cid:89) i =1 ( x − x αi ); Y ( x ) = Q ( x ) Q ( x − (cid:15) ) , Q ( x ) = M (cid:89) β =1 ∞ (cid:89) j =1 ( x − x βj ) . (5.17)We may now take large x limit for both Y ( x ) and Y ( x ) and find: Y ( x ) ≈ N (cid:89) α =1 ∞ (cid:89) i =1 ( x − x (0) αi )( x − x (0) αi − (cid:15) ) = N (cid:89) α =1 ( x − a α ) ≈ x N , (5.18a) Y ( x ) ≈ M (cid:89) β =1 ∞ (cid:89) j =1 ( x − x (0) βj )( x − x (0) βj − (cid:15) ) = M (cid:89) β =1 ( x − b β ) ≈ x M . (5.18b)– 25 –ollowing the similar argument given for the ordinary eCM model, one can prove that X ( x ) is analytic in thecomplex plane. We may now rewrite X ( x ) using Y ( x ) and Y ( x ) : X ( x ) = (cid:88) { µ ,µ } Y ( x + (cid:15) ) ∞ (cid:89) n =1 Y ( x + n(cid:15) ) Y ( x + (cid:15) + n(cid:15) ) q | µ | B [ µ ] (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) × Y ( x + (cid:15) ) ∞ (cid:89) n =1 Y ( x + n(cid:15) ) Y ( x + (cid:15) + n(cid:15) ) q | µ | B [ µ ] (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij − (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) Q ( x + s , ij + (cid:15) ) . (5.19)In large x limit, we have Y ( x + (cid:15) ) Y ( x + (cid:15) ) ≈ x N x M = x P , (5.20)which is the desired degree. We will next show that X ( x ) indeed reproduces the commuting Hamiltonians ofthe edCM system. X ( x ) for edCM system Here we again introduce Z P -type full surface defect on C ⊂ C with orbifolding in C ⊂ C , such thatthe orbifolding acts on the coordinate of C by ( z , z , z , z ) → ( z , ζ z , z , ζ − z ) with ζ P = 1 . This isnot a co-dimension two defect, but rather it should be interpreted as a generalization of the surface defects.Similar to what we had done for Toda and eCM systems, we define the coloring function on the indices ofmoduli parameters c : { α } Nα =1 ∪ { β } Mβ =1 → Z P which assigns each color α and β to a representation R ω of Z P , ω = 0 , , . . . , P − . In the simplest case, c is defined as c ( α ) = α − c ( β ) = N + β − . (5.21)For this coloring function, we will denote [ α ] = { , . . . , N − } and [ β ] = { N, . . . , N + M − } such that [ α ] ∪ [ β ] = { , . . . , P − } , which is the range of the index ω . Orbifolding also splits coupling q into P -copiesdenoted by q = P − (cid:89) ω =0 q ω ; q ω = z ω z ω − , (5.22)with z ω = (cid:40) z α = e x α , c − ( ω + 1) = α ∈ { α = 1 , . . . , N } w β = e y β , c − ( ω + 1) = β ∈ { β = 1 , . . . , M } . (5.23)Under the orbifolding, we have Y ( x ) = P − (cid:89) ω =1 Y ,ω ( x ); Y ( x ) = P − (cid:89) ω =0 Y ,ω ( x ) , (5.24)with Y ,ω ( x ) = ( x − a ω ) (cid:89) ( α, ( i,j )) ∈ K ω (cid:20) ( x − a α − ( i − (cid:15) − (cid:15) )( x − a α − ( i − (cid:15) ) (cid:21) (cid:89) ( α, ( i,j )) ∈ K ω +1 (cid:20) ( x − a α − ( i − (cid:15) )( x − a α − ( i − (cid:15) − (cid:15) ) (cid:21) , (5.25a) Y ,ω ( x ) = ( x − b ω ) (cid:89) ( β, ( i,j )) ∈ K ω (cid:20) ( x − b β − ( i − (cid:15) − (cid:15) )( x − b β − ( i − (cid:15) (cid:21) (cid:89) ( β, ( i,j )) ∈ K ω +1 (cid:20) ( x − b β − ( i − (cid:15) )( x − b β − ( i − (cid:15) − (cid:15) ) (cid:21) , (5.25b)– 26 –nder NS limit (cid:15) → while keeping (cid:15) and (cid:15) finite. We also consider the following Young diagram boxesunder orbifolding: K ω := { ( α, ( i, j )) | α = 1 , . . . , N ; ( i, j ) ∈ λ ( α )12 ; c ( α ) + j ≡ ω mod P } , (5.26a) K ω := { ( β, ( i, j )) | β = 1 , . . . , M ; ( i, j ) ∈ λ ( β )32 ; c ( β ) + j ≡ ω mod P } , (5.26b)where K ω and K ω are the collections of Young diagram boxes from (cid:126)λ and (cid:126)λ which are assigned to therepresentation R ω under orbifolding. They are the same as the definition in eq. (2.34). Denoting k ω = | K ω | , ν ω = k ω − k ω +1 , σ ω = (cid:15) k ω + (cid:88) ( α, ( i,j )) ∈ K ω ( a α + ( i − (cid:15) ) , (5.27a) k ω = | K ω | , ν ω = k ω − k ω +1 ; σ ω = (cid:15) k ω + (cid:88) ( β, ( i,j )) ∈ K ω ( b β + ( i − (cid:15) ) , (5.27b)as the generalization to eq. (2.34) and eq. (2.35). Performing the large x expansion of Y ,ω ( x ) and Y ,ω ( x ) under orbifolding gives Y ,ω ( x ) = [ x − a c − ( ω ) ] exp (cid:104) (cid:15) x ν ω − + (cid:15) x ( σ ω − − σ ω ) + · · · (cid:105) ; c ( ω ) ∈ [ α ] , (5.28a) Y ,ω ( x ) = [ x − b c − ( ω ) ] exp (cid:104) (cid:15) x ν ω − + (cid:15) x ( σ ω − − σ ω ) + · · · (cid:105) ; c ( ω ) ∈ [ β ] . (5.28b)The notation here follows eq. (5.27). Under orbifolding, X ( x ) and X ( x ) now splits into X ,ω ( x ) = Y ,ω +1 ( x + (cid:15) ) ∞ (cid:89) n =1 Y ,ω ( x + n(cid:15) ) Y ,ω ( x + (cid:15) + n(cid:15) ) (cid:88) { µ } B ω [ µ ] × (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ Y ,ω +1 − j ( x + s ij − (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij − (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j ( x + s ij ) Y ,ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij + (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j ( x + s ij − (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij − (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j ( x + s ij ) Y ,ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij + (cid:15) ) , (5.29a) X ,ω ( x ) = Y ,ω +1 ( x + (cid:15) ) ∞ (cid:89) n =1 Y ,ω ( x + n(cid:15) ) Y ,ω ( x + (cid:15) + n(cid:15) ) (cid:88) { µ } B ω [ µ ] × (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ Y ,ω +1 − j ( x + s ij − (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij − (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j ( x + s ij ) Y ,ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij + (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j ( x + s ij − (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij − (cid:15) ) Y ,ω +1 − j ( x + s ij ) Y ,ω +1 − j +1 ( x + s ij + (cid:15) ) . (5.29b)Here B ω [ µ ] and B ω [ µ ] are the U (1) orbifolded instanton partitions living on C × C and C × C withinstanton configuration µ and µ respectively, where B ω [ µ ] = (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ q ω +1 − j B ( (cid:15) l ij ) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) a ij =0 = µ , (cid:89) l =1 µ T ,l − µ T ,l +1 (cid:89) h =1 z ω z ω − l B ( (cid:15) h ); B ( x ) = 1 + (cid:15) x , (5.30a) B ω [ µ ] = (cid:89) ( i , j ) ∈ µ q ω +1 − j B ( (cid:15) l ij ) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) a ij =0 = µ , (cid:89) l =1 µ T ,l − µ T ,l +1 (cid:89) h =1 z ω z ω − l B ( (cid:15) h ); B ( x ) = 1 + (cid:15) x . (5.30b)– 27 –e will consider the summation over all possible partition B ω = (cid:88) { µ } B ω [ µ ] , (5.31a) B ω = (cid:88) { µ } B ω [ µ ] , (5.31b)we can regard B ( x ) and B ( x ) are orbifolded version of (5.16a) and (5.16b).After some tedious but similar calculations, one gets for ( ω + 1) ∈ [ α ] , the large x expansion gives B ω X ,ω ( x ) = x + (cid:15) − a c − ( ω +1) + (cid:15) ν ω + 1 x (cid:34) 12 ( (cid:15) ν ω − a c − ( ω +1) ) − 12 ( a c − ( ω +1) ) + (cid:15) D ω + (cid:88) { µ } B ω [ µ ] B ω (cid:15) (cid:88) ( ω (cid:48) +1) ∈ [ α ] (cid:15) k µ ,ω (cid:48) − (cid:0) (cid:15) ν ω (cid:48) − a c − ( ω (cid:48) +1) (cid:1) ν µ ,ω (cid:48) + (cid:15) (cid:88) ( ω (cid:48) +1) ∈ [ β ] (cid:15) k µ ,ω (cid:48) − (cid:0) (cid:15) ν ω (cid:48) − b c − ( ω (cid:48) +1) (cid:1) ν µ ,ω (cid:48) + · · · (5.32)with D ω = σ ω − σ ω +1 . We divide the X ,ω ( x ) -function by the factor B ω for the normalization. Similarly for ( ω + 1) ∈ [ β ] , we have large x expansion: B ω X ,ω ( x ) = x + (cid:15) − b c − ( ω +1) + (cid:15) ν ω + 1 x (cid:34) 12 ( (cid:15) ν ω − b c − ( ω +1) ) − 12 ( b c − ( ω +1) ) + (cid:15) D ω + (cid:88) { µ } B ω [ µ ] B ω (cid:15) (cid:88) ( ω (cid:48) +1) ∈ [ α ] (cid:15) k µ ,ω (cid:48) − (cid:0) (cid:15) ν ω (cid:48) − a c − ( ω (cid:48) +1) (cid:1) ν µ ,ω (cid:48) + (cid:15) (cid:88) ( ω (cid:48) +1) ∈ [ β ] (cid:15) k µ ,ω (cid:48) − (cid:0) (cid:15) ν ω (cid:48) − b c − ( ω (cid:48) +1) (cid:1) ν µ ,ω (cid:48) + · · · (5.33)with D ω = σ ω − σ ω +1 . Again we normalize X ,ω ( x ) by diving the overall expression with B ω . For all ω = 0 , . . . , P − , we can define: ∇ q = q ∂∂ q ; ∇ q ω = q ω ∂∂ q ω ; ∇ z ω = z ω ∂∂ z ω . (5.34)The following combination gives a degree P function of x . (cid:89) ( ω +1) ∈ [ α ] X ,ω (cid:15) B ω (cid:89) ( ω +1) ∈ [ β ] X ,ω (cid:15) B ω , (5.35)this can be seen from the fact that each X ,ω B ω or X ,ω B ω factor in the product above is of degree one. Denote thefirst commuting Hamiltonian as h = (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ α ] (cid:15) ν ω − a c − ( ω +1) + (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ β ] (cid:15) ν ω − b c − ( ω +1) = (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ α ] P ω + (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ β ] P ω , (5.36)the conjugated momentum is denoted as P ω = ( (cid:15) ∇ zω − a c − ( ω +1) ) when ( ω + 1) ∈ [ α ] , P ω = ( (cid:15) ∇ wω − b c − ( ω +1) ) when ( ω + 1) ∈ [ β ] . – 28 –e may also write the second commuting Hamiltonian h as h = (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ α ] (cid:15) ( P ω ) − (cid:15) ( a c − ( ω +1) ) + (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ β ] (cid:15) ( P ω ) − (cid:15) ( b c − ( ω +1) ) + k (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ α ] ( (cid:15) ∇ q ω − P ω ∇ z ω ) log B αα ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) + (cid:88) ω ( (cid:15) ∇ q ω − P ω ∇ z ω ) log B αβ ( (cid:126)z, (cid:126)w ; τ )+ (cid:88) ω ( (cid:15) ∇ q ω − P ω ∇ z ω ) log B βα ( (cid:126)w, (cid:126)z ; τ ) + 1 k (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ β ] ( (cid:15) ∇ q ω − P ω ∇ z ω ) log B ββ ( (cid:126)w ; τ ) , (5.37)with k = (cid:15) /(cid:15) . Let us define: B = (cid:89) ( ω +1) ∈ [ α ] B ω = B αα ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) B αβ ( (cid:126)z, (cid:126)w ; τ ); B = (cid:89) ( ω +1) ∈ [ β ] B ω = B βα ( (cid:126)w, (cid:126)z ; τ ) B ββ ( (cid:126)w ; τ ) , (5.38)where the z α and w β dependent functions are B αα (cid:48) ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) = (cid:89) N ≥ α>α (cid:48) ≥ − z α z α (cid:48) N (cid:89) α =0 N (cid:89) α (cid:48) =0 q z α z α (cid:48) ; q ) ∞ − (cid:15) (cid:15) ; B αβ ( (cid:126)z, (cid:126)w ; τ ) = N (cid:89) α =1 M (cid:89) β =1 q z ω w β ; q ) ∞ ; B βα ( (cid:126)w, (cid:126)z ; τ ) = N (cid:89) α =1 M (cid:89) β =1 − w β z α N (cid:89) α =1 M (cid:89) β =1 q w β z α ; q ) ∞ ; B ββ (cid:48) ( (cid:126)w ; τ ) = (cid:89) M ≥ β>β (cid:48) ≥ − w β w β (cid:48) M (cid:89) β =1 M (cid:89) β (cid:48) =1 q w β w β (cid:48) ; q ) ∞ − (cid:15) (cid:15) . (5.39)We remark (cid:15) = − ( (cid:15) + (cid:15) ) in the NS limit (cid:15) → due to the constraint (4.36). Notice that B αβ is notsymmetrical to B βα for q -independent part. The reason of this is due to the specific coloring function c wechose in eq. (5.21), and we will now explain how this works. Based on (5.30a) and (5.30b) before summingover all Young diagrams, the q independent part comes from the product: ω (cid:48) (cid:89) j =1 q ω +1 − j = z ω z ω − ω (cid:48) ; ω > ω (cid:48) ≥ . (5.40)Using the coloring function defined in eq. (5.21) for z α = z α − and w β = z N + β − , there is no such way tohave z α w β = z α − z N + β − = 1 q α q α +1 · · · q N + β − (5.41)since this expression contributes negative number of instantons (inverse power on counting q ω ), while its inverseis legit. This is the cause of asymmetry between B αβ and B βα in the q -independent factor.As before we dropped the z -independent factors (which appeared in eq. (3.22)), since they can be removedin the final stage by redefining zero point of energy level as shown previously. The q -Pochhammer notation isdefined in eq. (A.3). We may therefore denote the z -dependent parts as: log B αα = − (cid:15) (cid:15) log Q αα ; log B αβ B βα = log Q αβ ; log B ββ = − (cid:15) (cid:15) log Q ββ , (5.42)such that Q and Q combine to give a full θ -function, i.e. Q Q = Q αα ( (cid:126)z ) Q αβ ( (cid:126)z, (cid:126)w ) Q ββ ( (cid:126)w ) η ( τ ) P q P / (cid:126) z (cid:126)ρ . (5.43)– 29 –ith (cid:126)ρ now is the P -dimensional Weyl vector. One may refer to how the additional factors appears in eq. (A.17).This structure also shows up in trigonometric limit [23],with Q − αα = (cid:89) N ≥ α>α (cid:48) ≥ θ (cid:16) z α z α (cid:48) ; τ (cid:17) η ( τ ) ; (5.44a) Q − αβ = N (cid:89) α =1 M (cid:89) β =1 θ (cid:16) z α w β ; τ (cid:17) η ( τ ) ; (5.44b) Q − ββ = (cid:89) M ≥ β>β (cid:48) ≥ θ (cid:16) w β w β (cid:48) ; τ (cid:17) η ( τ ) . (5.44c)Following a similar calculation as in the previous section, the potential after canonical transformation (3.30)can be written as V = (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ α ] k(cid:15) ∇ z ω ) log Q αα + (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ β ] (cid:15) k ( ∇ z ω ) log Q ββ + (cid:15) (cid:88) ( ω +1) ∈ [ α ] ∪ [ β ] ( ∇ z ω ) log Q αβ = − (cid:15) k ( k + 1) (cid:88) α>α (cid:48) ℘ ( z α /z α (cid:48) ; τ ) − (cid:15) ( k + 1) (cid:88) α,β ℘ ( z α /w β ; τ ) − (cid:15) k ( k + 1) (cid:88) β>β (cid:48) ℘ ( w β /w β (cid:48) ; τ ) (5.45)with (cid:15) = − ( (cid:15) + (cid:15) ) . We now have the second Hamiltonian written as: − (cid:15) h = N (cid:88) α =1 (cid:18) ∇ zα − a α (cid:15) (cid:19) + M (cid:88) β =1 k (cid:18) ∇ wα − b β (cid:15) (cid:19) − k ( k + 1) (cid:88) α>α (cid:48) ℘ ( z α /z α (cid:48) ; τ ) − ( k + 1) (cid:88) α,β ℘ ( z α /w β ; τ ) − (cid:18) k + 1 (cid:19) (cid:88) β>β (cid:48) ℘ ( w β /w β (cid:48) ; τ ) . (5.46)Similar to eCM system, using the fact that (5.14) is the q-character defined upon limit shape, which dominatesin the NS-limit. t ( x ) = (cid:104)X ( x ) (cid:105) = X ( x ) Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ , (cid:126)λ ∗ ] Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ , (cid:126)λ ∗ ] . (5.47)where t ( x ) = x P + E x P − + E x P − + · · · + E P is the characteristic polynomial. When Hamiltonian aretreated as operators, we have X ( x ) Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ , (cid:126)λ ∗ ]( (cid:126) x , (cid:126) y) = t ( x ) Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ , (cid:126)λ ∗ ]( (cid:126) x , (cid:126) y) , (5.48)and the Canonical transformation gives a prefactor to the ground state wave function Ψ( x , y ) of the edCMmodel: Ψ( (cid:126) x , (cid:126) y) = (cid:104) Q αα ( (cid:126) x) (cid:15) (cid:15) (cid:15) Q αβ ( (cid:126) x , (cid:126) y) Q ββ ( (cid:126) y) (cid:15) (cid:15) (cid:15) (cid:105) − Z inst [ (cid:126)λ ∗ , (cid:126)λ ∗ ]( (cid:126) x , (cid:126) y); h Ψ( (cid:126) x , (cid:126) y) = E Ψ( (cid:126) x , (cid:126) y) . (5.49)We have thus successfully reproduced the potential of the edCM system defined in eq. (4.1). The parameterdictionary can be summarized into the following table:– 30 –auge Theory Integrable System a α , b β Coulomb Moduli Momenta τ Complex gauge coupling Elliptic modulus (cid:15) , (cid:15) Ω -deformation parameters Coupling constant (in the form of k = (cid:15) /(cid:15) ) N , M Gauge group rank Number of particles z α , w β Ratios between orbifolded couplings Exponentiated coordinates Let us end this work by discussing a few possible future directions.1. The edCM was shown to have no natural classical limits in Section 4. This also implies that the usualstory of identifying the gauge theoretic Seiberg-Witten curve with the spectral curve of classical inte-grable system does not apply here. Due to the same reason, the quantum Dunkl operators, rather thanthe classical Lax matrices, were used to construct commuting Hamiltonians. However we have alsoshown that we can use intersecting D-brane configuration to construct the gauge-origami theory whichare directly related to the edCM systems. It would be very interesting to consider the possible M-theorylift of such a configuration, this should illuminate the construction of the inherently quantum Seiberg-Witten curve of gauge-origami theory hence the spectral curves of the edCM systems. It would be alsointeresting to explore a direct gauge theoretic interpretation of the (double) Dunkl operator.2. Double Calogero-Moser system was first constructed by considering root system of supergroup. Whencoupling constant k < , the gauge theory associated to the edCM system with Hamiltonian in eq. (4.1)should be a supergroup gauge theory, whose partition function is obtained in [43]. We hope to report onthis and other related topics in our forthcoming work.3. The gauge groups we discussed in this paper are of SU-type. In principle one may also consider SO/Spgauge groups. It will be nice if one can find commuting Hamiltonians of corresponding integrable systemusing the orbifolding and large x expansion. The same argument also extend to various types of quivergauge theory (several A-types quiver gauge theory has been considered in [33]). In addition, we wouldlike to know if the gauge origami construction can be generalized to SO/Sp gauge groups. This willinvolve introducing orientifolds to the intersecting D-brane construction for SU case.4. In the single eCM system, the quantization condition m = (cid:15) = Z × (cid:126) = Z × (cid:15) can be implemented.How does this arrangement affect both the integrable system and gauge theory? And we would like toknow whether the edCM shares the same quantization condition? Acknowledgements This work of HYC was supported in part by Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) through the grant107 -2112-M-002-008-. The work of TK was supported in part by JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research(No. JP17K18090), the MEXT-Supported Program for the Strategic Research Foundation at Private Univer-sities “Topological Science” (No. S1511006), JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Ar-eas “Topological Materials Science” (No. JP15H05855), “Discrete Geometric Analysis for Materials Design”(No. JP17H06462), and also by the French “Investissements d’Avenir” program, project ISITE-BFC (No. ANR-15-IDEX-0003). The work of NL is supported by Simons Center for Geometry and Physics and State of NewYork. HYC and NL are also grateful to the hospitality of Keio University during the completion of this work.We also would like to thank Saebyeok Jeong, Peter Koroteev, Nikita Nekrasov for commenting our draft whenit was being finalized. – 31 – Appendix A.1 Random Partition A partition is defined as a way of expressing a non-negative integer n as summation over other non-negativeintegers. Each partition can be labeled by a Young diagram λ = ( λ , λ , . . . , λ (cid:96) ( λ ) ) with λ i ∈ N such that n = | λ | = (cid:96) ( λ ) (cid:88) i =1 λ i . (A.1)We define the generating function of such a partition as (cid:88) λ q | λ | = 1( q ; q ) ∞ , ( q ; q ) ∞ = ∞ (cid:89) n =1 (1 − q n ) ; (A.2a) (cid:88) λ t (cid:96) ( λ ) q | λ | = 1( q t ; q ) ∞ ; ( q t ; q ) ∞ = ∞ (cid:89) n =1 (1 − t q n ) . (A.2b)The q -shifted factorial (the q -Pochhammer symbol) is defined as ( z ; q ) n = n − (cid:89) m =0 (1 − zq m ) (A.3) A.2 Elliptic Function Here we fix our notation for the elliptic functions. The so-called Dedekind eta function is denoted as η ( τ ) = e πiτ ( q ; q ) ∞ . (A.4)The first Jacobi θ function is denoted as: θ ( z ; τ ) = ie πiτ z ( q ; q ) ∞ ( q z ; q ) ∞ ( z − ; q ) ∞ , (A.5)whose series expansion θ ( z ; τ ) = i (cid:88) r ∈ Z + ( − r − z r e πiτr = i (cid:88) r ∈ Z + ( − r − e rx e πiτr , (A.6)implies that it obeys the heat equation πi ∂∂τ θ ( z ; τ ) = ( z∂ z ) θ ( z ; τ ) . (A.7)The Weierstrass ℘ -function ℘ ( z ) = 1 z + (cid:88) p,q ≥ (cid:26) z + p + qτ ) − p + qτ ) (cid:27) , (A.8)is related to theta and eta functions by ℘ ( z ; τ ) = − ( z∂ z ) log θ ( z ; τ ) + 1 πi ∂ τ log η ( τ ) . (A.9)– 32 – .3 Higher rank Theta function Let us define Θ A N − ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) = η ( τ ) N (cid:89) α>β θ ( z α /z β ; τ ) η ( τ ) (A.10)as the rank N − theta function, which also satisfies the heat equation [44] N ∂∂τ Θ A N − ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) = πi ∆ (cid:126)z Θ A N − ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) , (A.11)with the N -variable Laplacian: ∆ (cid:126)z = N − (cid:88) ω =0 ( z ω ∂ z ω ) . (A.12) A.4 Orbifolded Partition For the purpose in the main text, we consider the orbifolded coupling q = N (cid:89) ω =0 q ω ; q ω + N = q ω , (A.13)and q ω = z ω z ω − ; z ω + N = q z ω . (A.14)We also consider the orbifolded version of the generating function of partitions ( q ; q ) − ∞ in (A.2). Given a finitepartition λ = ( λ , . . . , λ (cid:96) ( λ ) ) , we define Q λω = λ (cid:89) j =1 q λ tj ω +1 − j = (cid:96) ( λ ) (cid:89) i =1 z ω z ω − λ i , (A.15)where we used the relation (3.18). The summation over all possible partition is given by Q ω = (cid:88) λ Q λω = (cid:88) λ (cid:96) ( λ ) (cid:89) i =1 (cid:18) z ω z ω − λ i (cid:19) = (cid:88) l ,...,l N − ,l ≥ N − (cid:89) α =1 (cid:18) z ω z α (cid:19) l α q l . (A.16)The function Q ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) is the orbifolded version of the generating function of partitions (A.2), Q = N − (cid:89) ω =0 Q ω ( (cid:126)z ; τ )= (cid:89) N − ≥ α>β ≥ z α z β ; q ) ∞ ( q z β z α ; q ) ∞ N − (cid:89) α =0 q ; q ) ∞ = (cid:89) N − ≥ α>β ≥ q / η ( τ ) (cid:112) z α /z β θ ( z α /z β ; τ ) × (cid:20) q / η ( τ ) (cid:21) N = η ( τ ) − N (cid:89) N − ≥ α>β ≥ η ( τ ) θ ( z α /z β ; τ ) q N / (cid:126)z (cid:126)ρ = 1Θ A N − ( (cid:126)z ; τ ) q N / (cid:126)z (cid:126)ρ , (A.17)– 33 –here (cid:126)ρ is the Weyl vector of SU ( N ) Lie group, whose entries are given as (cid:126)ρ = ( ρ , . . . , ρ N − ); ρ ω = ω − N − 12 ; | (cid:126)ρ | = N − (cid:88) ω =0 ρ ω = N ( N − (cid:126)z (cid:126)ρ = N − (cid:89) ω =0 z ρ ω ω . (A.18)Using eq. (A.11), it is easy to prove that the Q -function satisfies (cid:88) ω ∇ q ω log Q − 12 ∆ (cid:126)z log Q + 12 (cid:88) ω ( ∇ zω log Q ) , (A.19)with (cid:88) ω ∇ q ω = N ∇ q + (cid:126)ρ · ∇ (cid:126)z . (A.20) References [1] S. N. M. Ruijsenaars, “Systems of Calogero–Moser Type,” in Particles and Fields , CRM Series in MathematicalPhysics, pp. 251–352. Springer New York, 1999.[2] A. Gorsky and N. Nekrasov, “Elliptic Calogero-Moser system from two-dimensional current algebra,” arXiv:hep-th/9401021 [hep-th] .[3] N. Nekrasov, “Holomorphic bundles and many body systems,” Commun. Math. Phys. (1996) 587–604, arXiv:hep-th/9503157 [hep-th] .[4] E. J. Martinec and N. P. Warner, “Integrable systems and supersymmetric gauge theory,” Nucl. Phys. B459 (1996)97–112, arXiv:hep-th/9509161 [hep-th] .[5] R. Donagi and E. Witten, “Supersymmetric Yang–Mills theory and integrable systems,” Nucl. Phys. B460 (1996)299–334, arXiv:hep-th/9510101 [hep-th] .[6] E. D’Hoker and D. H. Phong, “Lectures on supersymmetric Yang–Mills theory and integrable systems,” in Theoretical Physics at the End of the Twentieth Century , CRM Series in Mathematical Physics, pp. 1–125. Springer,2002. arXiv:hep-th/9912271 [hep-th] .[7] V. Pestun et al. , “Localization techniques in quantum field theories,” J. Phys. A50 no. 44, (2017) 440301, arXiv:1608.02952 [hep-th] .[8] N. A. Nekrasov and S. L. Shatashvili, “Quantization of Integrable Systems and Four Dimensional Gauge Theories,”in XVIth International Congress on Mathematical Physics , pp. 265–289. 2009. arXiv:0908.4052 [hep-th] .[9] N. Nekrasov, “BPS/CFT correspondence: non-perturbative Dyson–Schwinger equations and qq -characters,” JHEP (2016) 181, arXiv:1512.05388 [hep-th] .[10] N. Nekrasov, “BPS/CFT correspondence V: BPZ and KZ equations from qq -characters,” arXiv:1711.11582[hep-th] .[11] A. Gorsky, I. Krichever, A. Marshakov, A. Mironov, and A. Morozov, “Integrability and Seiberg–Witten exactsolution,” Phys. Lett. B355 (1995) 466–474, arXiv:hep-th/9505035 [hep-th] .[12] N. Seiberg and E. Witten, “Gauge dynamics and compactification to three-dimensions,” in The mathematical beautyof physics: A memorial volume for Claude Itzykson , vol. 24 of Adv. Ser. Math. Phys. , pp. 333–366. World Scientific,1997. arXiv:hep-th/9607163 [hep-th] .[13] A. Gorsky, A. Marshakov, A. Mironov, and A. Morozov, “ N = 2 supersymmetric QCD and integrable spin chains:Rational case N F < N c ,” Phys. Lett. B380 (1996) 75–80, arXiv:hep-th/9603140 [hep-th] . – 34 – 14] N. Dorey, S. Lee, and T. J. Hollowood, “Quantization of Integrable Systems and a 2d/4d Duality,” JHEP (2011)077, arXiv:1103.5726 [hep-th] .[15] H.-Y. Chen, N. Dorey, T. J. Hollowood, and S. Lee, “A New 2d/4d Duality via Integrability,” JHEP (2011) 040, arXiv:1104.3021 [hep-th] .[16] N. Nekrasov, V. Pestun, and S. Shatashvili, “Quantum geometry and quiver gauge theories,” Commun. Math. Phys. (2018) 519–567, arXiv:1312.6689 [hep-th] .[17] B. Feigin, M. Jimbo, T. Miwa, and E. Mukhin, “Finite Type Modules and Bethe Ansatz for Quantum Toroidal gl ,” Commun. Math. Phys. no. 1, (2017) 285–327, arXiv:1603.02765 [math.QA] .[18] B. Feigin, M. Finkelberg, A. Negut, and L. Rybnikov, “Yangians and cohomology rings of Laumon spaces,” SelectaMath. (2011) 573–607, arXiv:0812.4656 [math.AG] .[19] M. Finkelberg and L. Rybnikov, “Quantization of Drinfeld Zastava in type A ,” J. Euro. Math. Soc. no. 2, (2014)235–271, arXiv:1009.0676 [math.AG] .[20] H. Kanno and Y. Tachikawa, “Instanton counting with a surface operator and the chain-saw quiver,” JHEP (2011)119, arXiv:1105.0357 [hep-th] .[21] N. Nekrasov, “BPS/CFT correspondence IV: sigma models and defects in gauge theory,” Lett. Math. Phys. (2019) 579–622, arXiv:1711.11011 [hep-th] .[22] A. N. Sergeev and A. P. Veselov, “Symmetric Lie superalgebras and deformed quantum Calogero–Moser problems,” Adv. Math. (Jan, 2017) 728–768, arXiv:1412.8768 [math.RT] .[23] F. Atai, M. Hallnäs, and E. Langmann, “Orthogonality of super-Jack polynomials and a Hilbert space interpretationof deformed Calogero–Moser–Sutherland operators,” Bulletin London Math. Soc. no. 2, (Feb, 2019) 353–370, arXiv:1802.02016 [math.QA] .[24] N. Nekrasov, “BPS/CFT Correspondence III: Gauge Origami partition function and qq -characters,” Commun. Math.Phys. (2017) 863–894, arXiv:1701.00189 [hep-th] .[25] N. Nekrasov and N. S. Prabhakar, “Spiked Instantons from Intersecting D-branes,” Nucl. Phys. B914 (2017)257–300, arXiv:1611.03478 [hep-th] .[26] E. D’Hoker and D. H. Phong, “Calogero–Moser systems in SU( N ) Seiberg-Witten theory,” Nucl. Phys. B513 (1998)405–444, arXiv:hep-th/9709053 [hep-th] .[27] N. A. Nekrasov, “Seiberg–Witten prepotential from instanton counting,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. (2004) 831–864, hep-th/0206161 .[28] N. A. Nekrasov and A. Okounkov, “Seiberg–Witten Theory and Random Partitions,” in The Unity of Mathematics ,P. Etingof, V. Retakh, and I. M. Singer, eds., vol. 244 of Progress in Mathematics , pp. 525–596. Birkhäuser Boston,2006. arXiv:hep-th/0306238 [hep-th] .[29] S. Nawata, “Givental J-functions, Quantum integrable systems, AGT relation with surface operator,” Adv. Theor.Math. Phys. (2015) 1277–1338, arXiv:1408.4132 [hep-th] .[30] H. Nakajima, “Handsaw quiver varieties and finite W-algebras,” Moscow Math. J. (2012) 633, arXiv:1107.5073 [math.QA] .[31] E. Frenkel, S. Gukov, and J. Teschner, “Surface Operators and Separation of Variables,” JHEP (2016) 179, arXiv:1506.07508 [hep-th] .[32] S. Jeong and N. Nekrasov, “Opers, surface defects, and Yang-Yang functional,” arXiv:1806.08270[hep-th] .[33] S. Jeong, “Splitting of surface defect partition functions and integrable systems,” Nucl. Phys. B938 (2019) 775–806, arXiv:1709.04926 [hep-th] . – 35 – 34] T. Kimura and V. Pestun, “Quiver W-algebras,” Lett. Math. Phys. no. 6, (2018) 1351–1381, arXiv:1512.08533 [hep-th] .[35] C. F. Dunkl, “Differential-difference operators associated to reflection groups,” Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. (1989)167–183.[36] E. D’Hoker and D. H. Phong, “Lax pairs and spectral curves for Calogero–Moser and spin Calogero–Mosersystems,” arXiv:hep-th/9903002 [hep-th] .[37] V. Pasquier, “A Lecture on the Calogero–Sutherland models,” Lect. Notes Phys. (1994) 36, arXiv:hep-th/9405104 [hep-th] .[38] V. M. Buchstaber, G. Felder, and A. P. Veselov, “Elliptic Dunkl operators, root systems, and functional equations,” Duke Math. J. no. 3, (Dec, 1994) 885–911, arXiv:hep-th/9403178 [hep-th] .[39] A. J. Bordner, N. S. Manton, and R. Sasaki, “Calogero-Moser models. 5. Supersymmetry and quantum lax pair,” Prog. Theor. Phys. (2000) 463–487, arXiv:hep-th/9910033 [hep-th] .[40] S. P. Khastgir, A. J. Pocklington, and R. Sasaki, “Quantum Calogero-Moser models: Integrability for all rootsystems,” J. Phys. A33 (2000) 9033–9064, arXiv:hep-th/0005277 [hep-th] .[41] N. Nekrasov, “BPS/CFT correspondence II: Instantons at crossroads, Moduli and Compactness Theorem,” Adv.Theor. Math. Phys. (2017) 503–583, arXiv:1608.07272 [hep-th] .[42] P. Koroteev, “On Quiver W-algebras and Defects from Gauge Origami,” Phys. Lett. B800 (2020) 135101, arXiv:1908.04394 [hep-th] .[43] T. Kimura and V. Pestun, “Super instanton counting and localization,” arXiv:1905.01513 [hep-th] .[44] V. G. Kac and D. H. Peterson, “Infinite dimensional Lie algebras, theta functions and modular forms,” Adv. Math. (1984) 125–264.(1984) 125–264.