\section{#1} \setcounter{equation}{0}}

\def\quad{\quad}

\def{1\over 2}{{1\over 2}}
\def\tilde{\tilde}
\def\rightarrow{\rightarrow}
\def\nonumber\\{\nonumber\\}

\let\partial=\partial

\newcommand\blfootnote[1]{%
  \begingroup
  \renewcommand\thefootnote{}\footnote{#1}%
  \addtocounter{footnote}{-1}%
  \endgroup
}

\begin{flushright}
\end{flushright}
\vspace{20mm}
\begin{center}
{\LARGE Lifting at higher levels in the D1D5 CFT}
\\
\vspace{18mm}
{\bf   Bin Guo$^1$\blfootnote{$^{1}$guo.1281@osu.edu} and Samir D. Mathur$^2$\blfootnote{$^{2}$mathur.16@osu.edu}
\\}
\vspace{10mm}
Department of Physics,\\ The Ohio State University,\\ Columbus,
OH 43210, USA\\ \vspace{8mm}

\vspace{8mm}
\end{center}

\vspace{4mm}

\thispagestyle{empty}
\begin{abstract}

The D1D5P system has a large set of BPS states at its orbifold point. Perturbing away from this 'free' point leads to some states joining up into long supermultiplets and lifting, while other states  remain BPS. We consider the simplest orbifold which exhibits this lift: that with $N=2$ copies of the free $c=6$ CFT. We write down the number of lifted and unlifted states implied by the index at all levels upto $6$. We work to second order in the perturbation strength $\lambda$. For levels upto $4$, we find the wavefunctions of the lifted states, their supermultiplet structure and the value of the lift. All states that are allowed to lift by the index are in fact lifted at order $O(\lambda^2)$.  We observe that the unlifted states in the untwisted sector have an  antisymmetry between the copies in the right moving Ramond ground state sector, and extend this observation to find classes of states for arbitrary $N$ that will remain unlifted to $O(\lambda^2)$.

\vspace{3mm}

\end{abstract}
\newpage

\setcounter{page}{1}

\numberwithin{equation}{section}

\tableofcontents

\newpage

\section{Introduction}

Black holes in string theory must be made by taking  bound states of objects -- strings and branes -- present in the theory. The D1D5P system provides a very useful example of such a construction. One finds that   the entropy and the rate of low energy emission from string states matches the expectations from gravitational thermodynamics   \cite{sv, cm, dmcompare, maldastrom}. The D1 and D5 branes form a bound state whose dynamics can be given as an effective $1+1$ dimensional conformal field theory. The momentum charge P is given by the difference in energy between the left moving and right moving excitations in this CFT.

The CFT has a `free point' which is given by a $1+1$ dimensional sigma model whose target space is an orbifold \cite{Vafa:1995bm,Dijkgraaf:1998gf,orbifold2,Larsen:1999uk,Arutyunov:1997gt,Arutyunov:1997gi,Jevicki:1998bm,David:2002wn}. The orbifold theory consists of $N$ copes of a $c=6$ CFT, joined up in different `twist sectors'.  In each twist sector the excitations are just given by free left and right moving bosons and fermions, with an overall symmetry condition to enforce the orbifold symmetry. At this orbifold point,  any state with no right moving oscillator excitations is extremal.

The situation changes as we deform the theory away from the orbifold point. Sets of extremal states can join up into larger multiplets and lift to higher energies, leaving a smaller set of states that remain extremal.  The  count of states that remain unlifted is given by an index. This index was computed in \cite{sv} for the case where the compactification is $K3\times S^1$ and in \cite{mms} for the compactification $T^4\times S^1$.  Our interest is in finding the  actual states that are unlifted, the supermultiplet structure  for groups of states that do lift, and the value of this lift. In particular we are interested in understanding the value of the twist for sectors where typical  lifted and unlifted states arise, since this is relevant for the  physical picture of the extremal hole. States in highly twisted sectors correspond to gravity states with deep throats, while states in sectors with low twist describe shallow throats.
(For constructions of `fuzzball' microstates dual to different CFT states see for example \cite{fuzzballs_i,fuzzballs_ii,fuzzballs_iii,fuzzballs_iv,fuzzballs_v}.)

In \cite{gn} the lift was computed, in a certain  approximation scheme,  for the situation where  most of the CFT copies are in the untwisted sector and one set is in a twisted sector. Low energy excitations of this sector can be mapped, in the gravity dual,  to strings in an $AdS_3\times S^3\times T^4$ spacetime. Apart from a small set of states in the graviton multiplet, these string states are all lifted. On the other hand we know from the index computation of \cite{mms} that if we go to sufficiently high energies and twists to reach black hole states, then a large number of states must remain {\it unlifted}: the index of \cite{mms} agrees with the Bekenstein entropy of extremal holes for large charges. It would be very interesting to understand better what properties of the highly excited states makes them remain `unlifted'.

In this paper, we consider a CFT with $N=2$; this means that the product of the number $N_1$ of D1 branes and $N_5$ of D5 branes is $N_1 N_5\equiv N=2$.  We work to second order in the perturbation off the orbifold point. In \cite{Guo:2019ady} this problem was studied  for the lowest nontrivial amount of momentum charge $P=1$, and the pattern of lifting was found. In the present paper, we will extend the results to $P=4$ and make some observations about the general nature of the unlifted states.

\bigskip

Our steps and results are as follows:

\bigskip

(i) We study the constraints on lifting from the index. We find the number of states that can be lifted upto level $P=6$. We describe the structure of the long supermultiplets which relate these states.
We identify the class of states that can be lowest members of long supermultiplets.

\bigskip

(ii) We give explicitly the wavefunctions for these lowest members of the long supermultiplets,  upto level $P=3$. (The wavefunctions for   $P=4$ is found in a similar way but the expressions are rather unwieldy, so we do not write them down in this paper.) We calculate the lift for all states to level $P=4$  at  $O(\lambda^2)$ in the perturbation. We find that at this order the lift is nonzero for all these states. Thus all states upto this level that are allowed to lift by the index are in fact lifted at order $O(\lambda^2)$.

\bigskip

(iii) We  discuss the general nature of states that remain unlifted at $O(\lambda^2)$. First consider the case $N=2$, and states in the untwisted sector. Let the left and right sectors both be fermionic, so that the overall state of each multiwound copy is bosonic. We observe that if the right moving sector is antisymmetric in the two copies, then the state will remain unlifted at $O(\lambda^2)$. We then extend this observation to the case $N>2$, including the situation  where the component strings that are joined may have windings $k_1, k_2$ greater than unity.

\bigskip

Before proceeding,  we note that there are many earlier works that study conformal perturbation theory, the lifting  of the states, the acquiring of anomalous dimensions, and the issue of operator mixing,   in particular in the context of the D1D5 CFT  see for example \cite{Avery:2010er,Avery:2010hs,Pakman:2009mi,Burrington:2012yq,Burrington:2014yia,Burrington:2017jhh,Carson:2016uwf}. Also, for more computations in  conformal perturbation theory in two and higher dimensional CFTs see, e.g.  \cite{kadanoff,Dijkgraaf:1987jt,Cardy:1987vr,Kutasov:1988xb,Eberle:2001jq,Gaberdiel:2008fn,Berenstein:2014cia,Berenstein:2016avf,gz,hmz,Keller:2019suk,Keller:2019yrr}.

\section{The D1D5 CFT}

In this section, we summarize some properties of the D1D5 CFT at the orbifold point and the deformation operator that we will use to perturb away from the orbifold point. For more details, see \cite{Avery:2010er,Avery:2010hs}.

Consider type IIB string theory, compactified as
\begin{equation}
M_{9,1}\rightarrow M_{4,1}\times S^1\times T^4.
\label{compact}
\end{equation}
Wrap $N_1$ D1 branes on $S^1$, and $N_5$ D5 branes on $S^1\times
T^4$. The bound state of these branes is described by a field
theory. We think of the $S^1$ as being large compared to the $T^4$, so
that at low energies we look for excitations only in the direction
$S^1$.  This low energy limit gives a conformal field theory (CFT) on
the circle $S^1$.

It has been conjectured that we can move in the moduli space of couplings in the string theory to a point called the `orbifold point' where the CFT is particularly simple. At this orbifold point the CFT is
a 1+1 dimensional sigma model. We will work in the Euclidized theory, where
the base space is a cylinder spanned by the coordinates
\begin{equation}
\tau, \sigma: ~~~0\le \sigma<2\pi, ~~~-\infty<\tau<\infty
\end{equation}
The target space of the sigma model is the `symmetrized product' of
$N_1N_5$ copies of $T^4$,
\begin{equation}
(T^4)^{N_1N_5}/S_{N_1N_5},
\end{equation}
with each copy of $T^4$ giving 4 bosonic excitations $X^1, X^2, X^3,
X^4$. It also gives 4 fermionic excitations, which we call $\psi^1,
\psi^2, \psi^3, \psi^4$ for the left movers, and $\bar\psi^1,
\bar\psi^2,\bar\psi^3,\bar\psi^4$ for the right movers. The fermions can be
antiperiodic or periodic around the $\sigma$ circle. If they are
antiperiodic on the $S^1$ we are in the Neveu-Schwarz (NS) sector, and
if they are periodic on the $S^1$ we are in the Ramond (R)
sector. The central charge of the theory with fields
$X^i, \psi^i, ~i=1\dots 4$ is $c=6$.
The total central charge of the entire system is thus
\begin{equation}
c=6 N_1N_5\equiv 6N
\end{equation}

\subsection{Symmetries of the CFT}

The D1D5 CFT has $(4,4)$ supersymmetry, which means that we have
$\mathcal{N}=4$ supersymmetry in both the left and right moving
sectors.
This leads to a superconformal ${\cal N}=4$ symmetry in both
the left and right sectors, generated by operators $L_{n}, G^\pm_{\pm,r},
J^a_n$ for the left movers and $\bar L_{n}, \bar G^\pm_{\pm,r}, \bar
J^a_n$ for the right movers. The full symmetry is actually larger: it is the contracted large $\mathcal{N}=4$ superconformal symmetry \cite{mms,Sevrin:1988ew}. The algebra generators and commutators are given in Appendix~\ref{commutators}.

Each ${\cal N} = 4$ algebra has an internal R symmetry group
$SU(2)$, so there is
a global symmetry group $SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R$.  We denote the
quantum numbers in these two $SU(2)$ groups as
\begin{equation}
SU(2)_L: ~(j, m);~~~~~~~SU(2)_R: ~ (\bar j, \bar m).
\end{equation}
In the geometrical setting of the CFT, this symmetry arises from the
rotational symmetry in the 4 space directions of $M_{4,1}$:  we have $SO(4)_E\simeq SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R$.
Here the subscript $E$ stands for `external', which denotes that these
rotations are in the noncompact directions.  We have another $SO(4)$ symmetry in the four directions
of the $T^4$. This symmetry we call $SO(4)_I$ (where $I$ stands for
`internal'). This symmetry is broken by the compactification of the
torus, but at the orbifold point it still provides a useful organizing
principle. We write $SO(4)_I\simeq SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2$.
We use spinor indices $\alpha, \bar\alpha$ for $SU(2)_L$ and $SU(2)_R$
respectively. We use spinor indices $A, \dot A$ for $SU(2)_1$ and
$SU(2)_2$ respectively.

The 4 real fermions of the left sector can be grouped into complex
fermions $\psi^{\alpha A}$. The right fermions have indices $\bar{\psi}^{\bar\alpha  A}$. The bosons $X^i$ are a vector in the
$T^4$. One can decompose this vector into the $({1\over 2}, {1\over 2})$  representation of $SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2$, which gives  scalars $X_{A\dot A}$.

\subsection{Deformation of the CFT}

The deformation of the CFT off the orbifold point is given by adding a deformation operator $D$ to the Lagrangian
\begin{equation}\label{defor S}
S\rightarrow S+\lambda \int d^2 z D(z, \bar z)
\end{equation}
where $D$ has conformal dimensions $(h, \bar h)=(1,1)$. A choice of $D$ which is a singlet under all the symmetries at the orbifold point is
\begin{equation}\label{D 1/4}
D=\frac{1}{4}\epsilon^{\dot A\dot B}\epsilon_{\alpha\beta}\epsilon_{\bar\alpha \bar\beta} G^{\alpha}_{\dot A, -{1\over 2}} \bar G^{\bar \alpha}_{\dot B, -{1\over 2}} \sigma^{\beta \bar\beta}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma^{\beta\bar\beta}$ is a twist operator of rank $2$ in the orbifold theory. Here $ G$ and $\bar G$ are the left and right moving supercharge operators at the orbifold point.

\section{Computation of the lift using the Gava-Narain method}

We are interested in finding states which have well defined scaling dimensions, and the values of these dimensions, as we move away from the orbifold point. We will work in the Ramond sector.
We measure the dimensions from the Ramond ground state, which is $({c\over 24}, {c\over 24})$.  WE use the term  `level $n$' for the states  with dimensions
\begin{equation}
(h, \bar h)=(n, 0)
\label{sthree}
\end{equation}
Let these states be labelled by  indices $a, b, \dots$, and written as $\Big|O^{(0)}_{a}\Big\rangle$ etc.

 It turns out that while such states receive corrections at first order in $\lambda$, the dimensions get corrections only starting at $O(\lambda^2)$.   The computation involves pulling down two copies of the deformation operator $D$ from the action, and then integrating the positions of these two $D$ operators.  We first compute the matrix elements
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Xamp}
X_{ba}(T)=\Big\langle O^{(0)}_{b}\left(\frac{T}{2}\right)\Big|\left(\int d^{2}w_{1}D(w_{1},\bar w_{1})\right)\left(\int d^{2}w_{2}D(w_{2},\bar w_{2})\right)\Big|O^{(0)}_{a}\left(-\frac{T}{2}\right)\Big\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
Then we compute the matrix
\begin{eqnarray}\label{lift matrix}
E^{(2)}_{ba}=\lim_{T\rightarrow \infty}-\frac{\lambda^2}{2T}e^{E^{(0)}T}X_{ba}(T)
\end{eqnarray}
where $E^{(0)}$ is the energy of the states $|O^{(0)}_{a}\rangle$ at  the orbifold point.  The eigenstates of this matrix then give the linear combinations of the $|O^{(0)}_{a}\rangle$ which have definite dimensions and the eigenvalues give the lift in energy of the corresponding states.

Such $O(\lambda^2)$ corrections were computed for some simple states in \cite{gz,hmz}. In general the computation of a correlation functions with deformation operators involves going to a covering space where the effect of the twists is undone, and one gets a correlator of operators not involving twists on this covering space. But the covering space can be a sphere in some cases, and a torus in other cases. While correlators on a sphere are easy to compute, they can be difficult to find on a torus. (A central reason for this difficulty is that the correlators on the covering space can involve spin fields. On a sphere we can remove these spin fields by spectral flows, but it is not clear how to do this on a higher genus surface.)

If we cannot explicitly compute the amplitudes (\ref{Xamp}), then how can we find the lifting?
In \cite{gn} Gava and Narain gave a method by which amplitudes like  (\ref{Xamp}) could be written as modulus squared of amplitudes involving just {\it one} twist. Computing these one-twist amplitudes always gives a covering space that is a sphere, so the computation is straightforward.

In \cite{Guo:2019pzk} this proposal of \cite{gn} was studied in detail. Let us recall the results of this study. We find
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{\dot A\dot B}\epsilon^{\bar \alpha\bar \beta}E^{(2)}_{ba}=2\lambda^2\Big\langle O^{(0)}_{b}\Big|\Big\{  \bar G^{\bar\alpha(P)}_{\dot A,0},  \bar G^{\bar \beta(P)}_{\dot B,0} \Big\}\Big|O^{(0)}_{a}\Big\rangle
\end{equation}
We will refer to the matrix  $E_{ba}^{(2)}$ as the lifting matrix $E^{(2)}$.
The operators $\bar G^{\bar\alpha(P)}_{\dot A,0}$ are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{GN p s}
\bar G^{\bar \alpha (P)}_{\dot A,0}= \pi \mathcal P G^{+}_{\dot A,-\frac{1}{2}}\sigma^{-\bar \alpha} \mathcal P
\end{eqnarray}
where the  operator $\mathcal P$ is a projection operator, which projects any state to the subspace spanned by the unperturbed states $|O^{(0)}_{a}\rangle$ which have the dimensions (\ref{sthree}).

From the above relation we see that  the lifting matrix (\ref{lift matrix}) can be written using either of  the following two equivalent  expressions
\begin{eqnarray}\label{liftmatrix 1}
E^{(2)}_{ba}=2 \lambda^2
\Big\langle O^{(0)}_{b}\Big|    \Big\{  \bar G^{+(P)\dagger}_{+,0},  \bar G^{+(P)}_{+,0} \Big\} \Big|O^{(0)}_{a}\Big\rangle
=2 \lambda^2
\Big\langle O^{(0)}_{b}\Big|    \Big\{  \bar G^{+(P)\dagger}_{-,0},  \bar G^{+(P)}_{-,0} \Big\} \Big|O^{(0)}_{a}\Big\rangle
\end{eqnarray}

Further, it was noted in  \cite{Guo:2019pzk} that the operators $\bar G^{\bar \alpha (P)}_{\dot A,0}$  give the supersymmetric structure of long multiplets. At the orbifold point the states can be grouped into short multiplets. As we deform away from the orbifold point, four of these short multiplets can join into a long multiplet and lift. The structure of this long multiplet is indicated in the following diagram:
\begin{equation}\label{multiplets diagram}
\begin{tikzcd}
                                                & \phi_{+} \arrow[dr,"\bar G^{+(P)}_{-,0}"]\\
\phi \arrow[ur, "\bar G^{+(P)}_{+,0}"]  \arrow{dr}[swap]{\bar G^{+(P)}_{-,0}}& &  \phi_{+-}
\\
                                                & \phi_{-} \arrow{ur}[swap]{\bar G^{+(P)}_{+,0}}
\end{tikzcd}
~~~~~~~~~
\begin{tikzcd}
                                                & \arrow{dl} [swap]{\bar G^{-(P)}_{-,0}} \phi_{+} \\
\phi   & &  \arrow{ul}[swap]{\bar G^{-(P)}_{+,0}} \phi_{+-} \arrow{dl}{\bar G^{-(P)}_{-,0}}
\\
                                                &
                    \arrow{ul}{\bar G^{-(P)}_{+,0}} \phi_{-}
\end{tikzcd}
\end{equation}
The state $\phi$ is at the bottom of this long multiplet. Note that $\phi$  is a member of a short multiplet created by operators that are not depicted in the diagram.  The operators $\bar G^{+(P)}_{+,0}$ and $\bar G^{+(P)}_{-,0}$ play the role of the two raising operators which take us to states $\phi_+, \phi_-$ which are members of two other short multiplets.  Acting with both these raising operators takes us to the short multiplet represented by the state $\phi_{+-}$.  We can move along this multiplet in the reverse direction using the lowering operators $\bar G^{-(P)}_{+,0}$ and $\bar G^{-(P)}_{-,0}$.

Suppose we have diagonalized the matrix $E^{(2)}$ given in  eq. (\ref{liftmatrix 1}). Let  $|O^{(0)}\rangle$ be an eigenstate of this matrix. Let the corresponding eigenvalue,  which gives the lift of this operator, be called $E^{(2)}_{O}$. Then from (\ref{liftmatrix 1}) we find that $E^{(2)}_O$ can be written as a sum of modulus-squared terms
\begin{equation}\label{lifting norm}
E^{(2)}_O=2 \lambda^2
\Big(\Big|\bar G^{+(P)}_{+,0} |O^{(0)}\rangle\Big|^2+\Big|\bar G^{-(P)}_{-,0} |O^{(0)}\rangle\Big|^2\Big)
=2 \lambda^2
\Big(\Big|\bar G^{+(P)}_{-,0} |O^{(0)}\rangle\Big|^2+\Big|\bar G^{-(P)}_{+,0} |O^{(0)}\rangle\Big|^2\Big)
\end{equation}

In the long multiplet described in (\ref{multiplets diagram}) each of the four states $\phi$, $\phi_{+}$, $\phi_{-}$ and $\phi_{+-}$ have the following property:  if it can be raised by $\bar G^{+(P)}_{+,0}$, then it will be annihilated by the  $\bar G^{-(P)}_{-,0}$; conversely, if it can be lowered by $\bar G^{-(P)}_{-,0}$ then it will be annihilated by  the $\bar G^{+(P)}_{+,0}$.  A similar statement holds for the raising operators $\bar G^{+(P)}_{-,0}$ and the lowering operators $\bar G^{-(P)}_{+,0}$. Thus in each of the two expressions in (\ref{lifting norm}), only one of the two terms is nonzero.

In summary, one can get the value of the lift and the corresponding eigenstates by diagonalizing the lifting matrix $E^{(2)}$ (\ref{liftmatrix 1}).
Four short multiplets join into a long multiplet as shown in eq. (\ref{multiplets diagram}) and the lifting can be calculated from (\ref{lifting norm}).

In the cases that we will encounter below, there is a unique state $|O^{(0)}_{a}\rangle$ with the relevant quantum numbers, so we will not have to diagonalize a matrix $E^{(2)}_{ba}$ to first find the eigenvectors $|O^{(0)}\rangle$.

\section{The character decomposition}

The CFT has a left and a right moving superconformal symmetry, with each of these described by the contracted large $\mathcal{N}=4$ superconformal algebra \cite{mms,Sevrin:1988ew}. The algebra generators and commutation relations are given in Appendix~\ref{commutators}.

These symmetries remain true for all values of the coupling. Thus states related by these symmetries will have the same lift $E^{(2)}$. We would like to group states into multiplets that are related by these symmetries, so that we can reduce the number of independent lifting computations that we have to perform. In this section, we will count the number of multiplets by using the character decompostion (see the related works \cite{b,bh}). The main result of this section is given in Table\,\ref{table chara decomp} below.

In subsection \ref{pf}, we recall the partition function of the orbifold theory.
In subsection \ref{sec chara}, we count the number of multiplets by writing the partition function in terms of characters. In subsection \ref{index}, we consider the constraints on lifting that arise from considering the  index.

\subsection{The partition function}\label{pf}

In this subsection we recall the partition function of the orbifold  CFT.
The partition function for a single $c=6$ copy of the CFT  is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{pf single copy}
Z={\rm Tr} (-1)^{2J^{3}_{0}-2\bar J^{3}_{0}}q^{L_{0}-c/24}\bar q^{\bar L_{0}-c/24} y^{2J^{3}_{0}} \bar y^{2 \bar J^{3}_{0}}\equiv\sum_{h,\bar h,j_3,\bar j_3} c(h,\bar h,j_{3},\bar j_{3})q^{h}\bar q^{\bar h} y^{2j_3} \bar y^{2\bar j_3}
\end{equation}
We work with the case where  the 4-manifold is $T^4$. There are $U(1)$ charges that arise from momentum and winding charges around this $T^4$, but we work in the sector where all such charges have been taken to be zero. For this choice, one finds
\begin{equation}
Z(T^4)=\left(\frac{\theta_{1}}{\eta}\right)^{2}\frac{1}{\eta^4} \overline{\left(\frac{\theta_{1}}{\eta}\right)^{2}\frac{1}{\eta^4}}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\theta_{1}&=&i(y^{1/2}-y^{-1/2})q^{1/8}\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1-q^n)(1-y q^n)(1-y^{-1}q^n)\nonumber\\
\eta&=&q^{1/24}\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1-q^{n})
\end{eqnarray}
Using the above we can find the partition function for the case where the target space of the $1+1$ dimensional CFT is the symmetric product
 $Sym^{N}(T^4)$.  The partition function for a symmetric product target space
 $Z(Sym^{N}(X))$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{partition function}
\mathcal Z (p,q,\bar q, y, \bar y)=\sum^{\infty}_{N=0}p^{N}Z(Sym^{N}(X))= \prod_{n=1}^{\infty} \prod'_{h,\bar h, j_3,\bar j_3} \frac{1}{(1-p^{n}q^{h/n}\bar q^{\bar h/n} y^{2j_3} \bar y^{2\bar j_3})^{c(h,\bar h,j_{3},\bar j_{3})}}
\end{equation}
where $\prod'_{h,\bar h, j_3,\bar j_3}$ is restricted so that $(h-\bar h)/n$ is an integer. The $c(h,\bar h,j_{3},\bar j_{3})$ are the degeneracies appearing in the partition function for the CFT with a single copy of the space $X$.
We write
\begin{equation}\label{expand p f}
\mathcal Z (p,q,\bar q, y, \bar y)=\sum_{N,h,\bar h,j_{3},\bar j_{3}} c(N,h,\bar h,j_{3},\bar j_{3})p^{N} q^{h}\bar q^{\bar h} y^{2j_3} \bar y^{2\bar j_3}
\end{equation}
This yields the degeneracies $c(N,h,\bar h,j_{3},\bar j_{3})$ of the states with total winding of the effective string $N$ and  quantum number $h,\bar h, j_{3},\bar j_{3}$.

\subsection{The character decomposition}\label{sec chara}

We now write the partition function in terms of the characters of the contracted large $\mathcal{N}=4$ superconformal symmetry.
We let the total winding number of the effective string be $N=2$, and consider states with  $\bar h=0$. From (\ref{partition function}) and (\ref{expand p f}), the partition function for this case  is
\begin{equation}\label{expand p f 2}
Z(N=2;\bar h=0)=\sum_{h,j_{3},\bar j_{3}} c(N=2,h,\bar h=0,j_{3},\bar j_{3}) q^{h} y^{2j_3} \bar y^{2\bar j_3}
\end{equation}

There are two different twist sectors for $N=2$: the case of two singly wound copies which we call $N=(1,1)$, and the case of a single doubly wound copy which we call $N=(2)$. The expression (\ref{expand p f 2}) includes the contribution from both these twist sectors. We are however interested in obtaining the contribution separately from these two different twist sectors. It turns out that with a little effort we can separate the two contributions in the expression (\ref{expand p f 2}). This is done as follows:

\bigskip

N=(1,1) sector: In (\ref{partition function}), restrict the  product to terms  with $n=1$  and collect all the terms with dependence $p^2$.

\bigskip

N=(2) sector: In (\ref{partition function}), restrict the  product to terms  with $n=2$  and collect all the terms with dependence $p^2$.

\bigskip

In this way, we can separate the two contributions
\begin{equation}
Z(N=2;\bar h=0)=Z(N=(1,1); \bar h=0)+Z(N=(2); \bar h=0)
\end{equation}
For each of these two sectors, we find  the following character decomposition
\begin{equation}\label{chara decomp}
Z(q, y, \bar y)=\sum_{\substack{j=1/2,1 \\ \bar j_{3}=-1,-1/2,0}}c^s_{j;\bar j_{3}}\chi^{s}_{j}(q,y)\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}}( \bar y)+\sum_{\substack{j=1 \\ \bar j_{3}=-1,-1/2,0}}c^l_{j,h;\bar j_{3}}\chi^{l}_{j,h}(q,y)\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}}( \bar y)
\end{equation}
where $\chi^{s}_{j}$ and $\chi^{l}_{j,h}$ are given in Appendix\,\ref{character}.
They are characters of a left moving contracted large $\mathcal N=4$ algebra.
The $\chi^{s}_{j}$ is the character for a short representation in which the primary has dimension $h=0$.
The $\chi^{l}_{j,h}$ is the character for a long representation in which the primary has dimension $h>0$.
From Appendix\,\ref{character} for $N=2$, we see that the possible values of $j$ for a short representation are $j=1/2,1$ and for a long representation is $j=1$.

For the character $\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}}$ of the right mover, we consider the sub-algebra formed by $\bar d^{\bar\alpha A}_0$.
The lowest weight states
are defined by
\begin{equation}\label{right lowest}
\bar d^{- A}_{0}| \phi\rangle=0
\end{equation}
with  charge
\begin{equation}
\bar J^{3}_{0}| \phi\rangle=\bar j_{3} | \phi\rangle
\end{equation}
There are two fermionic raising operators $\bar d^{+ \pm}_{0}$. Application of these operators once to a lowest weight state, which has charge $\bar j_3$, gives two states with charges $\bar j_{3}+1/2$. Applying again gives a state with charge $\bar j_{3}+1$
\begin{equation}
\bar j_{3} \rightarrow 2(\bar j_{3}+1/2) \rightarrow \bar j_{3}+1
\end{equation}
The character is defined by the trace over the irreducible representation. We find
\begin{equation}
\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}}(\bar y)={\rm Tr} (-1)^{-2\bar J^{3}_{0}} \bar y^{2\bar J^{3}_{0}}
=-(-\bar y)^{2\bar j_{3}+1}(\bar y^{1/2}-\bar y^{-1/2})^2
\end{equation}
The possible values of $\bar j_{3}$ for $N=2$ are $\bar j_{3}=-1,-1/2,0$. The results of the character decomposition (\ref{chara decomp}) of $N=2$ are

\bigskip

(i) For the coefficients $c^s_{j;\bar j_{3}}$ in (\ref{chara decomp}), which tell us the numbers of primaries with dimension $h=0$ and with charges $j$ and $\bar j_3$, the results are
\begin{eqnarray}
(1,1)~&:& 4\chi^{s}_{j=1/2}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}+\chi^{s}_{j=1}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}+\chi^{s}_{j=1}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}\nonumber\\
(2)~~&:& \chi^{s}_{j=1/2}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}
\end{eqnarray}

\bigskip

(ii) For the coefficients $c^l_{j,h;\bar j_{3}}$, which tell us the numbers of primaries with dimension $h>0$ and with charges $j$ and $\bar j_3$, the results are shown in table \ref{table chara decomp}.

\begin{table}[ht!]
\caption{The character decomposition at the orbifold point}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ |c|c|c|c|c|c|c| }
 \hline
level & sector & $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$  & $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}$ & $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}$& sector & $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}$ \\
\hline
 & & $\phi$  & unlifted & $\phi_{+-}$ &    & $\phi_{+}$,$\phi_{-}$,unlifted \\
 \hline
$h=1$ &(1,1)& 3 & 0 & 3 & (2)  & 6 \\
 \hline
$h=2$ &(1,1)& 1 & 16 & 1 & (2)  & 28 \\
 \hline
$h=3$ &(1,1)& 18 & 8 & 18 & (2)  & 98 \\
 \hline
$h=4$ &(1,1)& 15 & 72 & 15 & (2)  & 282 \\
 \hline
$h=5$ &(1,1)& 68 & 80 & 68 & (2)  & 728 \\
\hline
$h=6$ &(1,1)& 89 & 264 & 89 & (2)  & 1734 \\
 \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{table chara decomp}
\end{table}

\subsection{The constraints on lifting from the index}\label{index}

Let us first recall how the index is computed. Consider the  exact supercharge operators $\bar G^{+}_{\dot A}$, $\dot A=+,-$ of the perturbed CFT. These operators are the ones that join four short multiplets  into a long multiplet. Let us see the structure of the set of states that will join into a long multiplet.
Each of the operators $\bar G^{+}_{\dot A}$ increases the $SU(2)_R$ charge by 1/2 and does not change the $SU(2)_L$ charge.
Thus the four short multiplets joining into a long multiplet must have the same left moving character but their right moving characters  will be as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{right chi long}
\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}}~~~~~~2\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}+1/2}~~~~~\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}+1}
\end{equation}
Whenever we can group states in the manner indicated by such a set of characters, then we find a set of states that have the charges to join into a long multiplet. We therefore exclude such sets of states from the index. If there are states left over that {\it cannot} group into a set with characters (\ref{right chi long}), then we count those states in the index, since they cannot possibly join into a long multiplet and lift.

Now let us look at table \ref{table chara decomp}. In the row  $h=1$, it is possible to join
$3\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ and $3\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}$ in the (1,1) sector and $6 \chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}$ in the (2) sector into 3 long multiplets.
In second order perturbation theory, they indeed join into 3 long multiplets \cite{Guo:2019ady}.
In the row  $h=2$, it is possible to join  $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ and $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}$ in (1,1) sector and $2\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}$ into a long multiplet. The $2$ of $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}$ can come from the $16$ in the (1,1) sector or the $28$ in the (2) sector. In  second order perturbation theory, it should come from the (2) sector because the operators (\ref{GN p s}) joining short multiplets into long multiplets change the twist sector.

In general, in second order perturbation theory for any level $h>0$, the operators (\ref{GN p s}) join $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ and $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}$ in the (1,1) sector and $2\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}$ in the (2) sector into a long multiplet. In  Table \ref{table chara decomp}, the number in the column $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}$ in the (2) sector grows faster than twice of the number in the column $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ or $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}$ in the (1,1) sector. Thus it is possible that all the states in the columns $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ and $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}$ in the (1,1) sector will be lifted by pairing with states in the (2) sector. In the following, we will find that states in these two columns with dimension up to $h=4$ are indeed lifted.

\section{The method for finding the lifted primaries}

The primaries and their descendents have same lift. Thus we can focus on the primaries, which are counted in table \ref{table chara decomp}. To find all the lifted primaries, we need to construct the primaries in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column explicitly. Then applying the two raising operators $\bar G^{+ (P)}_{\pm ,0}$ gives all the four lifted primaries in a long multiplet as in (\ref{multiplets diagram}).

In subsection \ref{primaries right}, we will construct the right movers of all the primaries explicitly.
In subsection \ref{primaries left}, we will construct the left movers of the primaries in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column up to level $h=4$.

\subsection{Right movers}\label{primaries right}
The right movers of primaries satisfying (\ref{right lowest}) with total winding $N=2$ were found in \cite{Guo:2019ady}. There are two classes:

\bigskip

(i) The following set of right moving states  can join into a long multiplet and  lift at second order in perturbation theory
\begin{eqnarray}\label{right mover}
(1,1)~~\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}~:~~~~~~~~~~~~
|\phi^{R}\rangle&=&|\bar 0^{-}_{R}\rangle|\bar 0^{-}_{R}\rangle\nonumber\\
(2)~~\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}~:~~
|\phi^{R}_{+}\rangle=|\phi^{R}_{-}\rangle&=&|\bar 0^{2-}_{R}\rangle\nonumber\\
(1,1)~~\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}~~~:~~~~~~~~~~
|\phi^{R}_{+-}\rangle&=&\frac{1}{2}(\bar d_0^{++(1)}-\bar d_0^{++(2)})(\bar d_0^{+-(1)}-\bar d_0^{+-(2)})|\bar 0^{-}_{R}\rangle|\bar 0^{-}_{R}\rangle
\end{eqnarray}

\bigskip

(ii) The following right moving state cannot join with other states into a long multiplet and thus states of this type cannot lift at second order in perturbation theory
\begin{equation}\label{r mover zero lifting}
(1,1)~~\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}~~~:~~~~~~~~~~(\bar d_0^{+A(1)}-\bar d_0^{+A(2)})|\bar 0^{-}_{R}\rangle|\bar 0^{-}_{R}\rangle
\end{equation}

\bigskip
The first and third right movers in (\ref{right mover}) and the right mover in (\ref{r mover zero lifting}) are the three right moving primaries listed for  the (1,1) sector in table \ref{table chara decomp}. The second right mover in (\ref{right mover}) is the right mover of the primary in the (2) sector in table \ref{table chara decomp}.

The right mover of the operator $\bar G^{\bar \alpha (P)}_{\dot A,0}$ is
$\mathcal P \bar \sigma^{\bar \alpha}$.
Thus the long multiplet structure (\ref{sthree}) for the right movers is as given in the following diagram:

\begin{equation}\label{multiplets diagram right}
\begin{tikzcd}
                                                & \phi^R_{+} \arrow[dr,"\mathcal P\bar \sigma^{+}"]\\
\phi^R \arrow[ur, "\mathcal P\bar \sigma^{+}"]  \arrow{dr}[swap]{\mathcal P\bar \sigma^{+}}& &  \phi^R_{+-}
\\
                                                & \phi^R_{-} \arrow{ur}[swap]{\mathcal P\bar \sigma^{+}}
\end{tikzcd}
~~~~~~~~~
\begin{tikzcd}
                                                & \arrow{dl} [swap]{\mathcal P\bar \sigma^{-}} \phi^R_{+} \\
\phi^R   & &  \arrow{ul}[swap]{\mathcal P\bar \sigma^{-}} \phi^R_{+-} \arrow{dl}{\mathcal P\bar \sigma^{-}}
\\
                                                &
                    \arrow{ul}{\mathcal P\bar \sigma^{-}} \phi^R_{-}
\end{tikzcd}
\end{equation}

The states in class (i) satisfy the properties in (\ref{multiplets diagram right}). Thus they can join into a long multiplet and have nonzero lifting.
The states in class (ii) are annihilated by $\mathcal P \bar \sigma^{\bar \alpha}$. Thus states who have right mover (\ref{r mover zero lifting}) have zero lift at $O(\lambda^2)$.

\subsection{Left movers}\label{primaries left}

In this subsection, we will explain how to find the left movers of primaries in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column in Table\,\ref{table chara decomp}.

In the $(1,1)$ sector, the global modes (\ref{global modes app}) are defined as
\begin{equation}
O^{(g)}_{n}=O^{(1)}_n+O^{(2)}_n
\end{equation}
Thus these modes are applied symmetrically to the two copies of the CFT. The primaries $\phi$ with dimensions $h>0$ of the contracted large $\mathcal N=4$ superconformal algebra are defined by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{def primary 1}
L^{(g)}_{n}|\phi\rangle= G^{+(g)}_{\dot A,n}|\phi\rangle= J^{3(g)}_{n}|\phi\rangle=J^{+(g)}_{n}|\phi\rangle=0~~~~~~~n>0\nonumber\\
G^{-(g)}_{\dot A,n}|\phi\rangle=J^{-(g)}_{n}|\phi\rangle=0~~~~~~~n\geq 0
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{equation}\label{def primary 2}
\alpha^{(g)}_{A\dot A,n}|\phi\rangle= d^{\alpha A(g)}_{n}|\phi\rangle=0~~~~~~~n>0
\end{equation}
From the algebra in Appendix \ref{commutators},  all the conditions in eq.\,(\ref{def primary 1}) follow from the conditions
\begin{eqnarray}\label{primary check}
J^{-(g)}_{0}|\phi\rangle= J^{+(g)}_{1}|\phi\rangle=G^{-(g)}_{\dot A,0}|\phi\rangle=0
\end{eqnarray}
To find all states satisfying the relations (\ref{def primary 2}), we define operators that are  antisymmetric  between the two copies:
\begin{equation}\label{def anti}
O^{(\mathcal{A})}_{n}=O^{(1)}_n-O^{(2)}_n
\end{equation}
From the algebra in Appendix \ref{commutators}, one finds
\begin{eqnarray}
[\alpha^{(g)}_{A\dot A,n},\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{B\dot B,m} ]=0,~~~~~~~~
\{d^{\alpha A(g)}_{n},d^{\beta B(\mathcal A)}_{m}\}=0
\end{eqnarray}
Thus the states satisfying  eq.\,(\ref{def primary 2}) are the states built by acting with the antisymmetric operators $\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{A\dot A,n}$ and $d^{\alpha A(\mathcal A)}_{n}$ on the Ramond ground state $|0^-_R\rangle|0^-_R\rangle$.

Therefore, to find the primaries in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column, we can first build states using the antisymmetric operators $\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{A\dot A,n}$ and $d^{\alpha A(\mathcal A)}_{n}$. Then on this space of states we find the solutions of eq.\,(\ref{primary check}). This procedure gives the required primaries. The results are described  in section \ref{sec lift} below.

\section{Long multiplets and lifting}\label{sec lift}

In this section, we will find the long multiplets and their lift up to level-4.
For each level, we will first construct the primaries in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column. Then we will apply the two raising operators $\bar G^{+ (P)}_{\pm ,0}$ to get all the four primaries in a long multiplet. Because the four primaries in a long multiplet have the same lift, we will only calculate the lift of the primaries in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column. For these states, the lift (\ref{lifting norm}) becomes
\begin{equation}\label{lifting phi}
E^{(2)}_{\phi}=2 \lambda^2
\Big|\bar G^{+(P)}_{+,0} |\phi\rangle\Big|^2
=2 \lambda^2
\Big|\bar G^{+(P)}_{-,0} |\phi\rangle\Big|^2
\end{equation}

In the following, we will organize primaries into $A$ and $\dot A$ charge multiplets, which will be labeled by $(j_{A},j_{\dot A})$. We will only write the result of the lowest weight states explicitly for each $A$ and $\dot A$ charge multiplet.

We find that up to level-4 all states that can lift do actually lift at second order. The lifts are listed in  table \ref{table lift}.
\begin{table}[ht!]
\caption{The energy lift at second order}
\begin{center}\label{table lift}
\begin{tabular}{ |c|c|c|c|c|c|c| }
 \hline
level & number of long multiplets  & $(j_{A},j_{\dot A})$ & $E^{(2)}/\pi^2 \lambda^2$ \\
 \hline
$h=1$ & 3  & $(1,0)$ & 1  \\
 \hline
$h=2$ & 1  & $(0,0)$ & 15/8  \\
 \hline
$h=3$ & 18 &$(2,1)$, $(1,0)$  & 3, 64/39 \\
 \hline
$h=4$ & 15 &$(1,1)$, $(2,0)$, $(0,0)$ & 3, 5/2, 2695/1024 \\
 \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{table lift}
\end{table}

\subsection{Level-1}

The 3 primaries in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column can be organized into a $A$ charge triplet and $\dot A$ charge singlet; we label this as $(1,0)$.

For the lowest weight state of the $(1,0)$ multiplet, the normalized left movers of the long multiplet are
\begin{eqnarray}\label{left movers}
|\phi^{L}\rangle=|\phi^{L}_{+-}\rangle
&=&\frac{1}{2}d_{-1}^{--(\mathcal A)}d_0^{+-(\mathcal A)}|0^{-}_{R}\rangle|0^{-}_{R}\rangle\nonumber\\
|\phi^{L}_{+}\rangle&=&\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} d^{--}_{-1/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}|0^{2-}_{R}\rangle\nonumber\\
|\phi^{L}_{-}\rangle&=&\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} d^{--}_{-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}|0^{2-}_{R}\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
while the normalized right movers are in eq.\,(\ref{right mover}).
Applying (\ref{lifting phi}) to the primary $\phi$, one finds the lift
\begin{eqnarray}
E^{(2)}_{1,(1,0)}= \pi^2 \lambda^2
\end{eqnarray}

\subsection{Level-2}

The one primary in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column is a $A$ charge singlet and $\dot A$ charge singlet; thus we have the representation  $(0,0)$.

The normalized left movers of the long multiplet are
\begin{eqnarray}
|\phi^{L}\rangle=|\phi^{L}_{+-}\rangle
&=&\frac{1}{2\sqrt{10}}\Big[d^{-+(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{0}d^{++(\mathcal A)}_{0}\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~+d^{-+(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{-1}+d^{++(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-1}
-d^{-+(\mathcal A)}_{-2}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{0}+d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-2}d^{++(\mathcal A)}_{0}\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~-\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{++,-1}\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{--,-1}+\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{-+,-1}\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{+-,-1}\Big]|0^{-}_{R}\rangle|0^{-}_{R}\rangle\nonumber\\
|\phi^{L}_{+}\rangle&=&\frac{1}{4\sqrt{6}}\sum_{A=+,-}\Big[\alpha_{A+,-3/2}d^{-A}_{-1/2}
-3\alpha_{A+,-1/2}d^{-A}_{-3/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{2cm}-\frac{3}{2}\alpha_{A+,-1/2}d^{+A}_{-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+(\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}-\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2})\alpha_{A+,-1/2}d^{-A}_{-1/2}
\Big]|0^{2-}_{R}\rangle\nonumber\\
|\phi^{L}_{-}\rangle&=&\frac{1}{4\sqrt{6}}\sum_{A=+,-}\Big[\alpha_{A-,-3/2}d^{-A}_{-1/2}
-3\alpha_{A-,-1/2}d^{-A}_{-3/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{2cm}-\frac{3}{2}\alpha_{A-,-1/2}d^{+A}_{-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+(\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}-\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2})\alpha_{A-,-1/2}d^{-A}_{-1/2}
\Big]|0^{2-}_{R}\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
Applying (\ref{lifting phi}) to the primary $\phi$, one finds the lift
\begin{eqnarray}
E^{(2)}_{2,(0,0)}=\frac{15}{8}\pi^2\lambda^2
\end{eqnarray}

\subsection{Level-3}

The 18 primaries in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column can be organized into a A charge quintet and $\dot A$ charge triplet and a $A$ charge triplet and $\dot A$ charge singlet; thus the representations are $(2,1)$ and $(1,0)$.

For the lowest weight state of the $(2,1)$ multiplet, the normalized left movers of the long multiplet are
\begin{eqnarray}
|\phi^{L}\rangle=|\phi^{L}_{+-}\rangle
&=&\frac{1}{4}\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{+-,-1}\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{+-,-1}d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{0}|0^{-}_{R}\rangle|0^{-}_{R}\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
|\phi^{L}_{+}\rangle&=&\frac{1}{2\sqrt{6}}\Big[
\alpha_{+-,-3/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}
-\frac{1}{2}\alpha_{++,-3/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{--}_{-3/2}d^{+-}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}
+\frac{1}{2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{--}_{-3/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}-\frac{1}{2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{1}{2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{1}{4}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{+-}_{-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}
\Big]|0^{2-}_{R}\rangle
\end{eqnarray}

\begin{eqnarray}
|\phi^{L}_{-}\rangle&=&\frac{1}{2\sqrt{6}}\Big[\frac{1}{2}
\alpha_{+-,-3/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}
+\frac{1}{2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{--}_{-3/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}-\frac{1}{2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{1}{2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{1}{4}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{+-}_{-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}
\Big]|0^{2-}_{R}\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
Applying (\ref{lifting phi}) to the primary $\phi$, one finds the lift
\begin{eqnarray}
E^{(2)}_{3,(2,1)}=3\pi^2\lambda^2
\end{eqnarray}

For the lowest weight state of the $(1,0)$ multiplet, the normalized left movers of the long multiplet are
\begin{eqnarray}
|\phi^{L}\rangle=|\phi^{L}_{+-}\rangle
&=&\frac{1}{2\sqrt{46}}\Big[d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-3}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_0-2d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-2}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{-1}-d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{-2}d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-1}\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~+\frac{3}{2}d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-2}d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{++(\mathcal A)}_{0}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{0}
-\frac{3}{2}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{-+(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{0}\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~+\frac{3}{2}(\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{++,-1}\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{--,-1}-\alpha^{(A)}_{+-,-1}\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{-+,-1})d^{--(\mathcal A)}_{-1}d^{+-(\mathcal A)}_{0}\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~+\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{++,-2}\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{+-,-1}-\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{+-,-2}\alpha^{(\mathcal A)}_{++,-1}\Big]|0^{-}_{R}\rangle|0^{-}_{R}\rangle
\end{eqnarray}

\begin{eqnarray}
|\phi^{L}_{+}\rangle&=&\frac{1}{\sqrt{897}}\Big[\frac{15}{16}\alpha_{++,-5/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}
-\frac{29}{8}\alpha_{++,-3/2}d^{--}_{-3/2}+\frac{75}{16}\alpha_{++,-1/2}d^{--}_{-5/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{27}{16}\alpha_{--,-3/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}-\frac{27}{16}\alpha_{-+,-3/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}-\frac{43}{16}\alpha_{+-,-3/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}-\alpha_{+-,-3/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{21}{8}\alpha_{++,-3/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}+\frac{1}{16}\alpha_{++,-3/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\alpha_{++,-3/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}-\frac{21}{8}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}d^{--}_{-3/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{21}{8}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2}d^{--}_{-3/2}-\frac{29}{16}\alpha_{++,-3/2}d^{+-}_{-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}-\frac{21}{4}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}d^{--}_{-3/2}d^{+-}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}-\frac{3}{16}\alpha_{++,-1/2}d^{--}_{-3/2}d^{+-}_{-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}-\frac{81}{32}\alpha_{++,-1/2}d^{--}_{-3/2}d^{++}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}-\frac{81}{32}\alpha_{++,-1/2}d^{-+}_{-3/2}d^{+-}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{75}{32}\alpha_{++,-1/2}d^{+-}_{-3/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}-\frac{21}{16}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}d^{+-}_{-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{21}{16}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2}d^{+-}_{-1/2}d^{-+}_{-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{21}{16}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}-\frac{21}{8}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{+-,-1/2}\alpha_{-+,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1cm}+\frac{21}{16}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{++,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2}\alpha_{--,-1/2}d^{--}_{-1/2}
\Big]|0^{2-}_{R}\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
Because $\phi^{L}$ is a $\dot A$ charge singlet, $\phi^{L}_{-}$ is given by doing the following replacement in  $\phi^{L}_{+}$.
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{A\pm,n}\rightarrow i\alpha_{A\mp,n}
\end{equation}
Applying (\ref{lifting phi}) to the primary $\phi$, one finds the lift
\begin{eqnarray}
E^{(2)}_{3,(1,0)}=\frac{64}{39}\pi^2\lambda^2
\end{eqnarray}

\subsection{Level-4}

The 15 primaries in the $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ column can be organized into a $A$ charge triplet and $\dot A$ charge triplet $(1,1)$, a $A$ charge quintet and $\dot A$ charge singlet $(2,0)$
and a $A$ charge singlet and $\dot A$ charge singlet $(0,0)$. Their lifts are
\begin{eqnarray}
E^{(2)}_{4,(1,1)}&=&3\pi^2\lambda^2\nonumber\\
E^{(2)}_{4,(2,0)}&=&\frac{5}{2}\pi^2\lambda^2\nonumber\\
E^{(2)}_{4,(0,0)}&=&\frac{2695}{1024}\pi^2\lambda^2
\end{eqnarray}
Since the states are very complicated, we will not write them explicitly here.

\subsection{Properties of lifting at $O(\lambda^2)$}\label{subsection unlifted}
In this subsection, we summarize the properties of the lift at $O(\lambda^2)$ for primaries in the theory with total winding $N=2$.

\bigskip

(i) From the index, we expect that primaries in the columns $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ and $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}$ are lifted. At order $O(\lambda^2)$, we find that primaries up to level-4 are all lifted. They are the states $\phi$ and $\phi_{+-}$ in the long multiplet (\ref{multiplets diagram}).

From eq. (\ref{right mover}) we see that the right movers of primaries in these two columns are  symmetric between the two copies. In the orbifold CFT the overall state of each string must be symmetric between the copies.
Thus primaries in these two columns must be symmetric between the copies in both the left and  right sectors separately.

\bigskip

(ii) From the index, we expect that primaries in the column $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1/2}$ in the $(1,1)$ sector are unlifted. At order $O(\lambda^2)$, we find that primaries at any level in this column are unlifted. The reason is the following. The right moving state is (\ref{r mover zero lifting}), which is antisymmetric between the two copies. Thus primaries in this column are antisymmetric in the left and right sectors separately.
Because the projection operator (\ref{GN p s}) treats the left mover and right mover of the two copies symmetrically in the lifting computation, antisymmetry in both the left and right sectors leads to zero lift.

\bigskip

(iii) The lifting properties of primaries in the $(2)$ sector determined by the details of operator (\ref{GN p s}). Because number of primaries in the $(2)$ sector grows faster than the numbers of primaries in the columns $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=-1}$ and $\chi^{l}_{j=1,h}\bar \chi_{\bar j_{3}=0}$ in the $(1,1)$ sector, most of the primaries in the $(2)$ sector will be unlifted. The lifted states are the $\phi_{+}$ and $\phi_{-}$ in the long multiplet (\ref{multiplets diagram}).

\section{Unlifted states in the untwisted sector}

In section \ref{sec lift}, we found that in our study upto level-4, the unlifted states in the $(1,1)$ sector  are  states that have  a right moving sector that is antisymmetric between the two copies. In this section, we will study the consequences of this antisymmetry in more detail, and generalize it to the situation where the component strings have higher twists.

 In section \ref{unlifted right 1,1}, we study the antisymmetry of the right movers for two singly wound strings. In section \ref{more general}, we generalize this antisymmetry to the situation where we have   many singly wound strings. In section \ref{strings M N}, we generalize this discussion to the case where we have two component strings with winding numbers $k_1$ and $k_2$.

\subsection{Right movers for the $(1,1)$ sector}\label{unlifted right 1,1}

Consider the case where $N=2$ and we have two singly wound strings. Let us focus on the right movers. We have used the fact that we can write the right movers on the two strings using the sum and difference of the oscillators on the two strings. Thus we get the global modes
\begin{equation}\label{1 1 global}
\bar d_0^{+A(1)}+\bar d_0^{+A(2)}
\end{equation}
which are symmetric between the two copies, and the antisymmetric modes
\begin{equation}\label{1 1 anti}
\bar d_0^{+A(1)}-\bar d_0^{+A(2)}
\end{equation}
which are antisymmetric between the two copies. We have seen that states where the right moving sector contains one antisymmetric mode are unlifted, while those containing zero or two antisymmetric modes are lifted. Thus unlifted states have an antisymmetric right sector while lifted states have a symmetric right sector. For example, the right moving states
\begin{equation}\label{anti example 1}
\bar d^{+\pm(1)}_0\bar d^{+\pm(2)}_0
|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(1)}|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(2)}
=\frac{1}{2}(\bar d^{+\pm(1)}_0\bar d^{+\pm(2)}_0-\bar d^{+\pm(2)}_0\bar d^{+\pm(1)}_0)
|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(1)}|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(2)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
(\bar d^{++(1)}_0\bar d^{+-(2)}_0-\bar d^{++(2)}_0\bar d^{+-(1)}_0)
|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(1)}|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(2)}
\end{equation}
are antisymmetric and thus lead to zero lift.

\subsection{More general states}\label{more general}

Let us now consider the case $N>2$. We will see that we can use the above notion of antisymmetrization of the right sector to make a large class of states that are unlifted at $O(\lambda^2)$.

We first illustrate the idea by a simple example. Consider $3$ singly wound strings. Let the left and right sectors of each string be fermionic, so that each string is overall in a bosonic state.  Let the left sides of each string be in a different excited state:
\begin{equation}
|\psi_L^1\rangle, ~~|\psi_L^2\rangle, ~~|\psi_L^3\rangle
\end{equation}
Let the right sides be given by
\begin{equation}
\bar d^{+A_1(1) }_0|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(1)}, ~~\bar d^{+A_2(2) }_0|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(2)}, ~~\bar d^{+A_3(3) }_0|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(3)}
\end{equation}
Thus the overall state is
\begin{equation}
|\Psi\rangle=-[\bar d^{+A_1(1) }_0\bar d^{+A_2(2) }_0\bar d^{+A_3(3) }_0]~|\psi_L^1\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(1)}\, |\psi_L^2\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(2)}\, |\psi_L^3\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(3)}
\end{equation}
We now look at different cases

\bigskip

(i) {All $A_i$ are the same:} ~Let us set $A_i=+$  for all $i$. Thus the state is
\begin{equation}
|\Psi\rangle=-[\bar d^{++(1) }_0\bar d^{++(2) }_0\bar d^{++(3) }_0]~|\psi_L^1\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(1)}\, |\psi_L^2\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(2)}\, |\psi_L^3\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(3)}
\end{equation}
As shown in (\ref{anti example 1}), the right mover is antisymmetric between any two copies.
If we twist any two strands together, then we get zero, so this state is unlifted to  $O(\lambda^2)$.

\bigskip

(ii) {One $A_i$ is different:}~Let us set $A_1=+, \, A_2=+,\, A_3=-$. The state is
\begin{equation}
|\Psi_1\rangle
=
-[\bar d^{++(1) }_0\bar d^{++(2) }_0\bar d^{+-(3) }_0]~|\psi_L^1\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(1)}\, |\psi_L^2\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(2)}\, |\psi_L^3\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(3)}
\end{equation}
There is no lift if we twist together strands $1,2$. But there is a lift for strands $2,3$. Thus let us take instead the antisymmetrized state
\begin{eqnarray}
|\Psi_2\rangle&=&-[\bar d^{++(1) }_0\bar d^{++(2) }_0\bar d^{+-(3) }_0-\bar d^{++(1) }_0\bar d^{++(3) }_0\bar d^{+-(2) }_0-\bar d^{++(3) }_0\bar d^{++(2) }_0\bar d^{+-(1) }_0]\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|\psi_L^1\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(1)}\, |\psi_L^2\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(2)}\, |\psi_L^3\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(3)}\nonumber\\
&=&-[\bar d^{++(1) }_0\bar d^{++(2) }_0\bar d^{+-(3) }_0+\bar d^{++(1) }_0\bar d^{+-(2) }_0\bar d^{++(3) }_0+\bar d^{+-(1) }_0\bar d^{++(2) }_0\bar d^{++(3) }_0]\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|\psi_L^1\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(1)}\, |\psi_L^2\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(2)}\, |\psi_L^3\rangle|\bar 0^-_R\rangle^{(3)}
\end{eqnarray}
Now we find that there is no lift at $O(\lambda^2)$ from twisting any pair of strings.

We can now see that the above example is easily generalized. We can take any set of states with arbitrary left excitations, and antisymmetrize the right movers.  This will make the states unlifted at $O(\lambda^2)$.
Note that when two strings have the same bosonic right movers, their antisymmetrization will lead to a vanishing of the state. Thus this method of making unlifted states can only be used when we have  fermionic right movers.

\subsection{Strings with winding numbers $k_1$ and $k_2$}
\label{strings M N}

In section \ref{unlifted right 1,1}, we had considered the case where two singly wound strings joined to a doubly wound string. In this subsection, we consider the analogous problem for the situation where a string with winding $k_1$ and a string with winding $k_2$ join to a string with winding $k_1+k_2$.

Right movers in the $(k_1,k_2)$ sector can be built by the global modes
\begin{equation}\label{M N global}
\bar d_0^{+A(k_1)}+\bar d_0^{+A(k_2)}
\end{equation}
and the modes
\begin{equation}\label{M N anti}
\frac{1}{k_1}\bar d_0^{+A(k_1)}-\frac{1}{k_2}\bar d_0^{+A(k_2)}
\end{equation}
acting on the ground state
\begin{equation}
|\bar 0^{k_1-}_R\rangle |\bar 0^{k_2-}_R\rangle
\end{equation}
The global modes (\ref{M N global}) do not contribute to the lift. In  Appendix \ref{appmn}, we find that the operators $\bar G^{\bar \alpha (P)}_{\dot A,0}$ annihilate the right moving states containing one operator of type (\ref{M N anti}); the operators $\bar G^{\bar \alpha (P)}_{\dot A,0}$ do not annihilate the right moving states containing zero or two operators of (\ref{M N anti}).

Thus the contribution to the lift from the interaction joining together strings with winding numbers $k_1$ and $k_2$ is zero for states with right movers containing one operator of (\ref{M N anti}).

Note that the twist interaction can also break the strings of winding  $k_1$ or $k_2$  into shorter strings. But we do not consider this effect here; if the windings $k_1,k_2$ are much smaller than the total number $N$ of component strings, then combinatorical factors suppress the interactions where one strand of the string twists together with another strand of the same string.

The modes (\ref{M N global}) and (\ref{M N anti}) are the analogues of the symmetric and antisymmetric modes (\ref{1 1 global}) and (\ref{1 1 anti}). However, they do not have definite symmetry properties.

Now let us consider states with a fermionic right moving sector for each string.
Consider the right moving states
\begin{eqnarray}\label{M N example 1}
&&\bar d^{+\pm(k_1)}_0\bar d^{+\pm(k_2)}_0
|\bar 0^{k_1-}_R\rangle|\bar 0^{k_2-}_R\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&-\frac{k_1k_2}{k_1+k_2}(\bar d^{+\pm(k_1)}_0+\bar d^{+\pm(k_2)}_0)(\frac{1}{k_1}\bar d^{+\pm(k_1)}_0-\frac{1}{k_2}\bar d^{+\pm(k_2)}_0)
|\bar 0^{k_1-}_R\rangle|\bar 0^{k_2-}_R\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{M N example 2}
&&\bar d^{++(k_1)}_0\bar d^{+-(k_2)}_0-\bar d^{++(k_2)}_0\bar d^{+-(k_1)}_0\nonumber\\
&=&
-\frac{k_1k_2}{k_1+k_2}\Big[(\bar d^{++(k_1)}_0+\bar d^{++(k_2)}_0)(\frac{1}{k_1}\bar d^{+-(k_1)}_0-\frac{1}{k_2}\bar d^{+-(k_2)}_0)\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~~+(\bar d^{+-(k_1)}_0+\bar d^{+-(k_2)}_0)(\frac{1}{k_1}\bar d^{++(k_1)}_0-\frac{1}{k_2}\bar d^{++(k_2)}_0)\Big]
|\bar 0^{k_1-}_R\rangle|\bar 0^{k_2-}_R\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
States with right movers (\ref{M N example 1}) and (\ref{M N example 2}) will be unlifted because each term contains only one mode of (\ref{M N anti}). Note that these two right moving states are antisymmetric under the change $k_1\leftrightarrow k_2$.
If we consider other possible right moving states that lead to zero lift, then we find that  there is no definite symmetric property of such states in general; what we have noted here is that in  the case where we have  fermionic right movers for each string the state is antisymmetric under the change $k_1\leftrightarrow k_2$.

Thus, we can generalize the discussion in subsection \ref{more general}. We take states with arbitrary winding numbers, arbitrary left excitations and only fermionic right movers.  Antisymmetrizing the fermionic right movers will make the states unlifted at $O(\lambda^2)$, in the approximation  where we only consider the effect of twisting two strings into a longer string and ignore the breaking of the strings to shorter strings.

\section{Discussion}

To understand the AdS/CFT correspondence we need to match quantities between the gravity and field theory descriptions. The principal difficulty in this match is the fact that one of these descriptions is weakly coupled, then the other is strongly coupled. There have been much progress  in understanding black holes  by comparing quantities in the free CFT to results with  weakly coupled gravity; however a more detailed comparison will necessarily need us to perturb the CFT away from its free (i.e. orbifold) point. The most basic quantity we can study under such a perturbation is the energy levels of states in the CFT as a function of the perturbation parameter $\lambda$.

In this paper we have considered states which are BPS at the orbifold point, and asked which states are lifted and by how much as we perturb away from this point. For most of this paper we worked with the simplest system which allows a computation of the lift: the case $N=2$ where we have $2$ copies of the basic $c=6$ CFT making up the orbifold theory. The lifted states must join into a supermultiplet in which all members will have the same lift; we found this multiplet structure and the value of the lift to order $O(\lambda^2)$ for the first $4$ levels above the Ramond ground state. For the first $3$ levels we also explicitly write down the wavefunctions of the lifted states. We found that all the states that are allowed to lift by the index are in fact lifted at $O(\lambda^2)$.

We observed that the unlifted states in the untwisted sector have a right moving sector which was antisymmetric between the two copies of the $c=6$ CFT. We then extended this observation to the case  $N>2$, where we found states which would remain unlifted to order $O(\lambda^2)$ by using a feature similar to this antisymmetry.

For large $N$, one can consider the gravity dual. In this gravity description a large class of supergravity states called `superstrata' were found in  \cite{Bena:2015bea,Bena:2016agb,Bena:2016ypk,Bena:2017xbt,Ceplak:2018pws,Heidmann:2019zws}. These are extremal states that describe fully backreacted solutions arising from massless string quanta placed in the $AdS_3\times S^3\times T^4$ geometry.
The analysis of lifting  carried out in the present paper may help us to understand the nature of the CFT states that are dual to these BPS gravity solutions.
We hope to return to this issue in a future work.

\section*{Acknowledgements}

We would like to thank Nathan Benjamin, Stefano Giusto, Shaun Hampton, Rodolfo Russo, David Turton,  Ida Zadeh and  Xinan Zhou, for many helpful discussions.  This work is supported in part by DOE grant de-sc0011726.


\section{Introduction}
X-ray baggage security screening is widely used to maintain aviation security. Currently, multi-view X-ray is predominantly used in aviation security for cabin baggage screening. This traditional baggage screening process, using 2D X-ray scanners, has the disadvantage of both inter-object occlusion and clutter within any given image projection of the scanned baggage item. As a result, it poses a considerably challenging visual search task for the human operators to discover the prohibited items (e.g., liquids, firearms, knives, etc.) overlapped with other benign items (e.g., electronic devices) within a constrained time frame. For this reason, passengers are currently required to divest large electronic devices and liquids which decreases checkpoint throughput significantly. Furthermore, human operator performance can be subjective and is heavily affected by many factors such as the experience, fatigue, monotony and concentration, although many successful measures have been taken to alleviate the problem in practice (e.g., Threat Image Projection (TIP) \cite{bhowmik2019good,wang2020reference} and shorter shift rotations \cite{meuter2016and}).

By leveraging recent advances in object classification and detection, significant progress has been made in automatic prohibited item detection within 2D X-ray imagery \cite{akcay2018using}. The use of deep learning techniques allows real-time and accurate detection of prohibited items even in cluttered X-ray images \cite{gaus2019evaluating,gaus19firearms,bhowmik19subcomponent,bhowmik19electronics}. However, performance can be affected when the baggage contains significant clutter and inter-object occlusion due to the fundamental limitation of projected 2D X-ray imagery.
To improve the detection rate without affecting the checkpoint throughput, airports are currently increasing the use of 3D CT screening which does not require the removal of electronic devices and liquids during baggage screening. The reconstructed 3D CT images provide more information and make it possible for the human operators to inspect the 3D CT images from differing views. However, current technology does not facilitate the automatic detection of (non-explosive) prohibited items such as prohibited items and liquid containers.
In the prior work \cite{wang2020evaluation}, it has shown the possibility of using deep 3D CNN models for object classification and detection within baggage security imagery.
However, the study was limited to the detection of only one specific object category (i.e. either bottles or handguns) by one model. It is unknown \textit{how the detection performance will be affected for multi-class object detection in a unified framework} and \textit{which strategies are beneficial to the enhancement of detection performance in 3D CT baggage security screening imagery?}

To answer the above questions, in this paper we extend the prior work \cite{wang2020evaluation} in single-class object detection to a more challenging multi-class object detection problem in a unified framework and propose a viable solution to this problem. The proposed approach is evaluated in real volumetric 3D CT baggage security screening imagery to get insightful observations and conclusions for this emerging research topic. Specifically, we investigate different CNN architectures (i.e. ResNet \cite{he2016deep}) with variable depths under the RetinaNet object detection framework \cite{lin2017focal}. We also evaluate the effectiveness of data augmentation techniques including 3D volume flipping and rotation.

The contributions of this work are summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
    \item[--] a unified framework using deep CNN models for multi-class prohibited item detection within volumetric 3D CT baggage imagery;
    \item[--] an evaluation of different 3D CNN models in the detection of prohibited items within volumetric 3D CT baggage imagery and the effect of data/feature augmentation.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work}\label{sec:related}
In this section, we briefly review existing works related to ours in \textit{3D object detection} and \textit{baggage security screening}.

\subsection{3D Object Detection}
In many real-world applications, the task of object detection is needed within 3D data modalities such as RGBD, point cloud, 3D Computed Tomography (CT) and 3D MRI. In this section, we aim to review the advances of 3D object detection using 3D Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) in the applications of autonomous driving, medical image processing and beyond. We demonstrate the success of 3D object detection in these areas has inspired the application of 3D CNN in prohibited item detection within 3D baggage screening imagery in this work.
\subsubsection{3D Object Detection in Autonomous Driving}
Object detection is one of the core techniques enabling autonomous driving. 3D CNN models are widely used for this purpose using data from multiple sensors such as LiDAR \cite{maturana2015voxnet,zhou2018voxelnet} and RGB-Depth cameras \cite{qi2018frustum}.

VoxelNet \cite{zhou2018voxelnet} is an end-to-end 3D object detector specially designed for LiDAR data. It consists of three modules: feature learning network (subdivide the point cloud into many subvolumes/voxels, feature engineering + fully connected neural network), convolutional middle layer (3D convolution applied to the stacked voxel feature volumes, each subvolume/voxel is a feature vector) and region proposal networks.
VoxNet \cite{maturana2015voxnet} in a more generic model being able to handle different types of 3D data including LiDAR point cloud, CAD and RGBD data.
Qi et al. \cite{qi2016volumetric} improved the performance of VoxNet by introducing the auxiliary subvolume supervision to alleviate the overfitting issue.

RGB-Depth data can also be processed using 3D CNN by firstly extracting proposals from 2D RGB images using a 2D object detector and transforming the proposals and corresponding depth information into 3D point clouds \cite{qi2018frustum}. The generated 3D point clouds can be further explored by 3D CNN models such as PointNet \cite{qi2017pointnet}.

One essential distinction of 3D object detection in autonomous driving and baggage security screening is that the objects of interest for autonomous driving have fixed sizes and orientations (e.g., vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, etc.). This prior knowledge can be considered for bounding box proposal and reduce the false positives. For example, the 3D bounding boxes for pedestrians should have similar dimension ratios across different scenarios since a pedestrian must be standing rather than lying on the street. By contrast, such prior knowledge does not exist in baggage object detection and prohibited objects can have arbitrary sizes, orientations and locations in a baggage CT scanning.

\subsubsection{3D Detection in Medical Images}
3D detection has been applied in medical image processing for automatic early diagnosis and screening based on 3D CT and MRI imagery\cite{zhu2018deeplung,xie2019automated}. Hu et al. \cite{hu2018deep} reviewed recent works on medical image based cancer detection and diagnosis most of which have employed 3D CNN schemes for detection.  Monkam et al. \cite{monkam2019detection} reviewed the advancement of detection and classification of pulmonary nodules using 3D CNN in CT imagery. 3D CNN frameworks such as 3D U-Net and 3D DenseNet, 3D Faster R-CNN have been employed for nodule detection and the ensemble of multiple CNN models (e.g., checkpoints, varying input sizes, multiple CNN) is used to reduce the false positive.

One of the limitations of 3D CNN based object detection in medical imagery is the lack of sufficient training data. When compared with datasets in 2D imagery, 3D data are more difficult to collect, store and annotate and hence the existing datasets are relatively small for deep model learning. Chen et al. \cite{chen2019med3d} attempted to combine multiple 3D CT datasets to address the data sparsity issue and explored the capability of transfer learning to boost the object detection tasks in medical imagery. Although it has proved promising to transfer knowledge among different medical datasets and varying medical tasks, it is much more challenging to take advantage of these existing medical data in our study due to the big gap between these two domains.

From the reviews of existing works on 3D CNN based detection, 3D extensions of the off-the-shelf objection detection frameworks such as Faster R-CNN and RetinaNet generally outperform others \cite{monkam2019detection}. As a result, we extend the RetinaNet to 3D in our work for multi-class object detection within 3D CT baggage screening imagery. Our approach is built on the framework of medical object detection in \cite{jaeger2019retina} but has been adapted to the particular application of baggage security screening where the objects of interests can have arbitrary sizes, orientations and locations in the baggage CT volumes.

\subsection{Baggage Security Screening}
Automatic object detection and recognition algorithms have been proposed and evaluated for baggage aviation security screening based on 2D X-ray images \cite{akcay2018using,gaus19firearms,bhowmik2019good}. The use of CNN architectures and object detection frameworks boosts the performance with a high detection rate and a low false positive rate. For instance, Gaus et al. \cite{gaus2019evaluation} evaluate the effectiveness of Faster R-CNN \cite{ren2015fasterrcnn}, Mask R-CNN \cite{he2017maskrcnn} and RetinaNet \cite{lin2017focal} in detecting six different objects (i.e. bottle, hairdryer, iron, toaster mobile and laptop) in 2D X-ray baggage images.

To enable automatic baggage screening using 3D CT imagery, a variety of studies have been carried out in recent years \cite{wiley2012automatic,flitton20123d,mouton20143d,jin2015joint,flitton2015object,mouton2015materials,mouton2015review,wang2019approach,wang2020reference}.

One research direction is object segmentation based on the material and morphological structure \cite{wiley2012automatic,mouton2015materials,wang2019approach}. Specifically, Mouton et al. \cite{mouton2015materials} propose a two-stage approach for object segmentation within 3D CT imagery. A CT volume is firstly coarsely segmented based on the voxel intensity ranges of pre-defined materials. Subsequently, a variety of shape descriptors are computed as features for the random forest classifier to determine a segment resulted from the first stage is good (containing only one object) or bad (containing multiple objects and hence need further segmentation). Wang et al. \cite{wang2019approach} studied the issue of object segmentation and classification in 3D CT imagery and focused mainly on the material characteristics without considering any specific prohibited item (e.g., firearm, knife, etc.). An approach to 3D segmentation is proposed based on recursive morphological operations and the Support Vector Machines (SVM) were employed for the classification of three types of materials.

\begin{figure*}
    \centering
    {\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{3D_RetinaNet_Arc.jpg}}
    {\caption{3D RetinaNet object detection framework with ResNet \cite{he2016deep} as the backbone model. }
        \label{fig:retinanet}}
\end{figure*}

3D object detection within 3D CT baggage security screening imagery has been studied in \cite{megherbi2010classifier,flitton2013comparison,wang2020evaluation}. Flitton et al. \cite{flitton2013comparison} evaluate the effectiveness of different 3D descriptors in a search-based detection approach. Their approach is limited to detect known objects for which the reference data are assumed to be available. Such an assumption hinders its application in practice when the reference data are usually unavailable. Wang et al. \cite{wang2020evaluation} use contemporary object detection frameworks based on 3D CNN and evaluate its performance on individual object detection independently. Based on this work, we present a unified framework for multi-class object detection within 3D CT imagery for baggage security screening.

\section{Method} \label{sec:method}
RetinaNet is employed in this study since it has proved better than its counterpart Faster R-CNN in the prior work \cite{wang2020evaluation}. We extend the RetinaNet framework to the 3D version used for 3D object detection in our study. Subsequently, data augmentation is described as a favourable technique to boost detection performance.

\subsection{3D RetinaNet} \label{sec:retinanet}
RetinaNet \cite{lin2017focal} is one of the most successful object detection frameworks designed for 2D natural images. Follow the same spirit, we extend it for 3D object detection within 3D CT imagery. As shown in Figure \ref{fig:retinanet}, our 3D RetinaNet consists of a feature pyramid network (FPN) implemented by ResNet \cite{he2016deep} and a 3D bounding box regression and classification module which is implemented by a few 3D convolutional layers.

The ResNet based FPN is formed by four ResNet blocks and the 3D feature volumes (corresponding to the feature maps in 2D) output from these four blocks are considered as \{C2, C3, C4, C5\} which have strides of \{4,8,16,32\} voxels with respect to the input volume. The top-down pathway and lateral connections are used to enhance the features generated in the bottom-up pathway (i.e. C2-5). The top-down feature volumes corresponding to C2-C5 are denoted as P2-P5. The highest-level feature volumes P5 are generated by a 3D convolutional layer with the stride of 1 and the kernel size of 3 from input C5. The feature volumes P4 are the summation of upsampled P5 and the output of a 3D convolutional layer with C4 as the input. Similarly, the feature volumes P3 and P2 are calculated.

Multi-scale feature volumes \{P2, P3, P4, P5\} are fed into the bounding box regression and classification module. The module consists of a branch for 3D bounding box regression and a branch for classification. These two branches have the same architecture with four 3D convolutional layers and an output layer. The output of the regression branch is a 3D volume with $6\times n_a$ channels corresponding to the bounding box biases with respect to the pre-defined anchor in a specific location. $n_a$ denotes the number of anchors pre-defined in each location. The output of the classification is a 3D volume with $6\times n_a$ channels corresponding to one background class and five foreground object classes under consideration in this study for each pre-defined anchor in a specific location.

The cross-entropy loss and smooth $L_1$ loss are used for the classification and regression respectively. The positive targets are calculated by comparing the pre-defined anchors against the ground truth bounding boxes with the Intersection Over Union (IOU) threshold of 0.1 which is also used as the threshold for detection during testing.

\subsection{Data Augmentation}\label{sec:method_det}
We investigate data augmentation for 3D volumetric CT data to enhance the object detection performance in our study. The 3D data augmentation strategies considered in this study are 3D threat image projection (TIP), data flipping and data rotation.

\subsubsection{Threat Image Projection}
Threat image projection is a technique used in baggage security screening for training human screeners and automatic threat recognition algorithms \cite{bhowmik2019good}. Specifically, TIP approaches superimpose a threat item signature onto a benign baggage image to generate a realistic synthetic baggage image containing threat objects. Recently, the technique has been extended to 3D volumetric CT imagery \cite{wang2020reference}. We employ the approach presented in \cite{wang2020reference} to generate synthetic 3D volumes containing objects of interest. The isolated objects are first extracted from a CT volume and then inserted to other target CT volumes to generate more volumes with the objects of interest.
As illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:3dtip}, we use 3D TIP techniques to insert a signature of \textit{binocular} into a baggage CT volume. We use this technique to address the issue of training data sparsity.

\begin{figure}
    \centering
    {\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{3DTIP.pdf}}
    {\caption{An illustration of 3D threat image projection for synthetic CT image generation (a signnature of \textit{binocular} is inserted into the bottom part of the baggage CT volume). }
        \label{fig:3dtip}}
\end{figure}

\subsubsection{3D Volume Flipping and Rotation}
To alleviate the overfitting issue in training, we employ volume flipping and rotation to augment training data randomly. For 3D volumetric CT data, the flipping can be conducted in three planes (i.e. \textit{x-y}, \textit{y-z} and \textit{x-z}). The rotation of a 3D volume is limited to 90 degrees around a specific axis which can be easily implemented by swapping axes. Each type of flipping and rotation ($6+6$) has a probability of $p$ to be activated during training so that the training data can be diversified significantly to alleviate the overfitting issue. We will investigate how the use of data augmentation and the value of $p$ can affect detection performance.

\section{Experimental Setup}\label{sec:experiments}
In this section, we describe the experimental setup for the evaluation of multi-class object detection within baggage CT volumes. We describe the dataset used in our experiments and implementation details of the detection methods.

\subsection{Dataset}
We create a dataset for experimental evaluation with data collected from a CT80-DR dual-energy baggage-CT scanner manufactured by Reveal Imaging Inc. Five object categories (i.e. {\it bottle, handgun, binocular, glock frame and iPod}) are considered in our experiments to simulate a multi-class 3D object detection problem. Due to the limited number of instances of {\it binocular, glock frame} and {\it iPod} (i.e. 16, 29 and 12 respectively) in the original CT volume data, we use the 3D Threat Image Projection (TIP) technique proposed in \cite{wang2020reference} to generate synthetically composited 3D CT volumes containing these object signatures of interest. As a result, the dataset is a combination of 478 real CT volumes and 287 synthetically composited ones generated by the TIP algorithm. The dataset is randomly divided into two subsets for training (70\%) and testing (30\%) respectively. Three random splits are used throughout our experiments. The detailed numbers of different object signatures within the dataset and three splits are shown in Table \ref{table:dataset}.

\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\caption{Statistics of the dataset and data splits.}\label{table:dataset}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline
 \multirow{2}{*}{Object} & Split 1 & Split 2  & Split 3  & \multirow{2}{*}{Total} \\
 &  (train/test) &  (train/test) & (train/test) \\ \hline \hline
\rowcolor{gray!20}
Bottle & 483/223 & 501/205 & 498/208 & 706\\
\rowcolor{gray!10}
Handgun & 269/108 & 263/114 & 267/110 & 377\\
\rowcolor{gray!20}
Binocular & 86/33 & 83/36 & 86/33 & 119\\
\rowcolor{gray!10}
Glock frame & 81/40 & 82/39 & 80/41 & 121\\
\rowcolor{gray!20}
iPod & 77/39 & 80/36 & 81/35 & 116 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}

\begin{table*}[ht]
\centering
\caption{Multi-Class Prohibited Object Detection Results (P: precision; R: recall; mAP: mean Average Precision).}
\label{table:resnet}
\newsavebox{\tablebox}
\begin{lrbox}{\tablebox}
\begin{tabularx}{1.14\textwidth}{c|cc|cc|cc|cc|cc|c}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Model} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Bottle}& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Handgun}& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Binocular} &\multicolumn{2}{c|}{GlockFrame} &\multicolumn{2}{c|}{iPod} & \multirow{2}{*}{mAP (\%)} \\ \cline{2-11}
 &  P (\%) & R (\%) &  P (\%) & R (\%)&  P (\%) & R (\%)&P (\%) & R (\%)&P (\%) & R (\%)& \\ \hline \hline
ResNet-10 & 80.2 $\pm$ 1.4 &70.9 $\pm$ 3.6& 77.5 $\pm$ 3.7 &83.1 $\pm$ 1.9& 75.4 $\pm$ 5.0 &84.3 $\pm$ 5.0& 72.3 $\pm$ 3.3 &44.1 $\pm$ 7.0& 29.4 $\pm$ 1.8 &37.6 $\pm$ 7.2& 58.2 $\pm$ 4.2 \\
ResNet-18 & 81.6 $\pm$ 3.6 &68.0 $\pm$ 4.0& 78.4 $\pm$ 0.6 &81.9 $\pm$ 1.1 &\bf 81.4 $\pm$ 3.4 &86.3 $\pm$ 8.7& 69.7 $\pm$ 8.9 &46.7 $\pm$ 7.0& 28.3 $\pm$ 3.8 &49.3 $\pm$ 6.1& 57.3 $\pm$ 4.4 \\
ResNet-34 &\bf 84.8 $\pm$ 2.8 &68.2 $\pm$ 2.9 &\bf 80.8 $\pm$ 7.4 &81.3 $\pm$ 1.2& 80.9 $\pm$ 2.0 &86.5 $\pm$ 7.9&\bf 78.5 $\pm$ 9.6 &36.5 $\pm$ 10.5& \bf 33.1 $\pm$ 4.4 &47.3 $\pm$ 1.9& 57.7 $\pm$ 3.8 \\
ResNet-50 & 81.0 $\pm$ 2.2 &\bf 74.0 $\pm$ 3.1& 74.8 $\pm$ 2.4 &\bf 91.0 $\pm$ 1.1& 78.4 $\pm$ 4.8 &\bf 87.3 $\pm$ 5.0& 63.9 $\pm$ 7.7 & \bf 53.5 $\pm$ 7.9& 32.8 $\pm$ 2.3 &\bf 56.6 $\pm$ 6.2& \bf 65.3 $\pm$ 3.6 \\
ResNet-101 & 80.6 $\pm$ 1.6 &71.1 $\pm$ 2.8& 71.3 $\pm$ 4.7 &89.8 $\pm$ 0.5& 75.5 $\pm$ 3.5 &85.1 $\pm$ 6.8& 70.6 $\pm$ 9.7 &51.8 $\pm$ 4.9& 30.2 $\pm$ 4.1 &53.6 $\pm$ 1.7& 62.8 $\pm$ 4.3 \\
\hline
\end{tabularx}
\end{lrbox}
\scalebox{0.9}{\usebox{\tablebox}}
\end{table*}

\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Experimental Results of Multi-Class Object Detection with Different Data Augmentation Strategies.}\label{table:result_da}
\begin{tabular}{cc|ccccc|c}
\hline
 \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Data Augmentation} & \multicolumn{5}{c|}{Average Precision (\%)} & \multirow{2}{*}{mAP (\%)} \\ \cline{1-7}
Flipping & Rotation & Bottle & Handgun & Binocular & GlockFrame & iPod  \\  \hline \hline
 \xmark & \xmark & 65.3 $\pm$ 1.5& 79.7 $\pm$ 1.5& 69.2 $\pm$ 3.1& 32.5 $\pm$ 3.8& 28.2 $\pm$ 10.0& 55.0 $\pm$ 1.2 \\
 0.2 & \xmark & 67.5 $\pm$ 3.0& 84.5 $\pm$ 0.3& 81.5 $\pm$ 1.9& 48.3 $\pm$ 4.8& 37.6 $\pm$ 4.6& 63.9 $\pm$ 2.6 \\
 \xmark & 0.2 & \bf 70.1 $\pm$ 2.2& 77.8 $\pm$ 1.4& 74.9 $\pm$ 8.3& 43.0 $\pm$ 10.2& 28.1 $\pm$ 6.1& 58.8 $\pm$ 5.0 \\
 0.2 & 0.2 & \bf 70.0 $\pm$ 3.6& 84.9 $\pm$ 0.3& 83.7 $\pm$ 4.5& \bf 48.9 $\pm$ 7.1& \bf 38.9 $\pm$ 4.3& \bf 65.3 $\pm$ 3.6 \\
 0.5 & 0.5 & 62.8 $\pm$ 2.1& \bf 85.6 $\pm$ 2.2& \bf 84.6 $\pm$ 3.0& 41.4 $\pm$ 8.7& 27.0 $\pm$ 8.5& 60.3 $\pm$ 2.6 \\

\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}

\subsection{Implementation Detail}
The detection models evaluated in this work are implemented in PyTorch \cite{paszke2019pytorch} based on the work in \cite{jaeger2019retina}. In the experiments, we use the Adam \cite{kingma2015adam} optimiser with an initial learning rate of $1e-3$ for the first 100 epochs followed by a decreased learning rate of $1e-4$ for 100 epochs and $1e-5$ for last 100 epochs. This learning rate scheduler has been used throughout our experiments if not otherwise specified since it has been proved effective empirically in most cases.
All experiments are conducted on a GTX 1080Ti GPU.

\section{Experimental Results}\label{sec:results}
Thorough experiments are conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed approach to multi-class object detection in 3D CT baggage security screening imagery. Specifically, we evaluate varying ResNet \cite{he2016deep} architectures as the backbone FPN models, the effectiveness of data augmentation strategies, varying anchor sizes and scaling factors.

\subsection{On the Backbone Networks} \label{sec:res_backbone}
ResNet architectures \cite{he2016deep} with variant depths are employed as the backbones for FPN in the RetinaNet. We investigate the effect of different backbone models (i.e. ResNet10, ResNet18, ResNet34, ResNet50 and ResNet101) in this experiment. The experimental results are shown in Table \ref{table:resnet}. The precision and recall are reported for each object category with the mean and standard deviation over three splits. In addition, we also report the mean Average Precision (mAP) as the overall evaluation metric in Table \ref{table:resnet}. We can see ResNet50 performs the best overall with a mAP of 65.3\% over five object categories, followed by ResNet101 with a slightly lower mAP of 62.8\%. The other three architectures with less depth perform comparably with one another with the mAP around 57-58\%. Although ResNet50 achieves the best overall performance and the best recall rates, ResNet34 always results in better precision for all five object classes. By comparing the results of different object classes, we can see that \textit{Glock Frames} and \textit{iPods} have lower precision and recall than other three objects. This is due to the fact that {\it glock frames} are plastic hence more challenging to distinguish from background clutter within the baggage CT imagery whilst {\it iPods}, as a piece of electronic device, have less salient features to detect. In conclusion, the proposed approach, an extension of RetinaNet to 3D CT imagery, has the capability of detecting different objects within 3D CT baggage screening imagery but the performance varies across different object categories.

\subsection{On the Data Augmentation}
This experiment aims to investigate the effect of data augmentation strategies (i.e. volume flipping and rotation). It has shown using ResNet50 as the backbone network for FPN gives the best overall performance in the previous experiments, we use ResNet50 in this experiment. We compare the detection performance when no data augmentation is used and the performance when data augmentation is applied with different values of $p$ (i.e. 0.5 and 0.2).

The experimental results are presented in Table \ref{table:result_da}. When the data augmentation strategies are not used, a mAP of 55\% is achieved which can be boosted by the use of either random flipping or random rotation of the training data during training. The combination of two data augmentation strategies generates the best performance with the mAP of 65.3\% over five object categories. By increasing the probability of random flipping and rotation from 0.2 to 0.5, the overall performance degrades by a significant margin (as shown in the last row of Table \ref{table:result_da}). These results provide evidence that data augmentation is beneficial to the performance when properly used.

\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Experimental Results on volume scaling and anchor size.}\label{table:result_scaling}
\begin{tabular}{cc|ccccc|c}
\hline
 \multirow{2}{*}{Scaling factor} &\multirow{2}{*}{Anchor size} & \multicolumn{5}{c|}{Average Precision (\%)} & \multirow{2}{*}{mAP (\%)} \\ \cline{3-7}
 &  & Bottle & Handgun & Binocular & GlockFrame & iPod  \\  \hline \hline

 2 & 8-16-32-64 & 52.0 $\pm$ 1.5& 72.0 $\pm$ 4.8& 64.0 $\pm$ 4.3& 22.1 $\pm$ 7.0& 30.2 $\pm$ 6.2& 48.1 $\pm$ 4.3 \\
 3 & 4-8-16-32 & 61.0 $\pm$ 2.6& 81.7 $\pm$ 0.7& 77.0 $\pm$ 8.7& 32.8 $\pm$ 4.5& 19.3 $\pm$ 7.5& 54.4 $\pm$ 4.1 \\
 3 & 8-16-32-64 & \bf 70.0 $\pm$ 3.6& \bf 84.9 $\pm$ 0.3& \bf 83.7 $\pm$ 4.5& \bf 48.9 $\pm$ 7.1& \bf 38.9 $\pm$ 4.3& \bf 65.3 $\pm$ 3.6 \\

 4 & 4-8-16-32 & 61.2 $\pm$ 0.4& 74.1 $\pm$ 2.3& 57.3 $\pm$ 8.2& 28.4 $\pm$ 2.6& 18.5 $\pm$ 7.8& 47.9 $\pm$ 1.9 \\
 4 & 8-16-32-64 & 64.2 $\pm$ 3.0& 81.7 $\pm$ 1.5& 76.1 $\pm$ 3.8& 36.3 $\pm$ 7.2& 10.6 $\pm$ 4.4& 53.8 $\pm$ 3.0 \\

\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}

\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Experimental Results on High and Low Energy Data}\label{table:energy}
\begin{tabular}{c|ccc|ccc|c}
\hline
 \multirow{2}{*}{Data} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Bottle} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Handgun} & \multirow{2}{*}{mAP (\%)} \\ \cline{2-7}
 & Precision (\%) & Recall (\%)  & AP (\%) & Precision (\%) & Recall (\%)  & AP (\%)   \\  \hline \hline

 Low & 89.7 $\pm$ 2.1 &70.8 $\pm$ 2.6 &68.7 $\pm$ 2.7& 82.5 $\pm$ 1.5 &94.5 $\pm$ 2.4 &85.7 $\pm$ 3.7& 77.2 $\pm$ 3.0 \\
High & 90.4 $\pm$ 1.0 &68.5 $\pm$ 0.8 &66.3 $\pm$ 1.3& 83.6 $\pm$ 3.9 &92.6 $\pm$ 1.7 &85.7 $\pm$ 3.0& 76.0 $\pm$ 2.0 \\
High+Low & 90.2 $\pm$ 2.1 &71.0 $\pm$ 2.7 &68.9 $\pm$ 2.7& 82.9 $\pm$ 2.0 &92.9 $\pm$ 3.1 &84.0 $\pm$ 2.0& 76.4 $\pm$ 2.3 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}

\begin{figure*}
    \centering
    {\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{goodResults.pdf}}
    {\caption{Detection results using the 3D RetinaNet with ResNet50 as the backbone network (the 3D bounding boxes for {\it bottles, handguns, binoculars, glockframes and iPods} are represented by blue, red, magenta, yellow and black colours respectively). }
        \label{fig:goodResults}}
\end{figure*}

\begin{figure}
    \centering
    {\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{badResults.pdf}}
    {\caption{Exemplar false positive and false negative detection results (the false detection are emphasized with red arrows). }
        \label{fig:badResults}}
\end{figure}

\subsection{On the Anchor Size and Scaling Factor}
It is observed during the experiments that input CT volume scaling and anchor sizes have a significant effect on the performance of detection. We investigate how these two factors affect the detection results in this experiment. The scaling factor $s$ is a parameter used to down-sample the input CT volumes so that the down-sampled volumes will have $1/s$ of the original sizes in all three dimensions. The anchor size is the other crucial factor affecting the detection performance. Proper anchor sizes should be comparable with the ground truth bounding box sizes. It is easy to understand the anchor sizes should be adaptive to values of scaling factor $s$ for optimal detection performance. To these ends, in this experiment, we investigate different values of scaling factor $s$ as well as the anchor sizes.

The experimental results are displayed in Table \ref{table:result_scaling}. The best performance is achieved when the input CT volumes are down-scaled by a factor of 3 with an appropriate combination of anchor sizes for features in different pyramid levels. When the input CT volumes have higher or lower resolutions (i.e. scaling factor of 2 or 4), performance can be degraded significantly as shown in Table \ref{table:result_scaling} even the anchor sizes are adaptively adjusted. This observation may be caused by the fixed convolution kernel sizes and network architectures of the FPN which is worth further investigating in our future work.

\subsection{On the Raw Data}
We investigate how low- and high-energy raw data affect the object detection performance in this experiment. The CT volumes are reconstructed from raw CT slices generated by low or high energy X-ray. We also combine low and high energy data as two channels before feeding them into the 3D object detection networks.
We use the optimal experimental settings derived from previous experimental findings and the results are shown in Table \ref{table:energy}. We use {\it Bottles} and {\it Handguns} as two representative prohibited items in this experiment since there are the most numbers of instances of them in the dataset (Table \ref{table:dataset}). It is demonstrated the low-energy and high-energy data lead to comparable object detection performance and the combination of them does not improve the performance. As a result, either low- or high-energy data from a dual-energy machine
is necessary for the purpose of automatic object detection.

\subsection{Qualitative Evaluation}
To give qualitative evaluations of the proposed approach to 3D object detection within 3D CT baggage imagery, we present exemplar detection results in Figures \ref{fig:goodResults} - \ref{fig:badResults}. Figure \ref{fig:goodResults} list the detection results of eight typical CT volumes containing bottles, handguns or binoculars. The detected 3D bounding boxes are shown in different colours (i.e. blue, red, magenta, yellow and black for {\it bottles, handguns, binoculars, glock frames and iPods} respectively). The visualization in Figure \ref{fig:goodResults} demonstrates that the proposed approach can detect objects in varying orientations with relatively high localization accuracy. On the other hand, the approach also suffers from false positives and false negatives as shown in Figure \ref{fig:badResults}. False positives can be caused by misclassification of the target objects or non-target objects (i.e. background clutter having similar appearance characteristics to the target objects). False negatives can be caused by cluttered background or over-compact objects in the real baggage images. Overall, the poor detection performance of {\it glock frames} and {\it iPods} are caused by the high number of false positives and hence a low precision rate. It is also frequently observed that two predicted bounding boxes corresponding two different object categories (especially for binocular and iPods) overlap with each other with a high IOU value. This phenomenon can be caused by the artefacts introduced by 3D TIP in the synthetic CT volumes. Specifically, the artefacts rather than the real characteristics of the objects have been learned by the model for classification. This needs to be further investigated in future work with more real data available.

\section{Conclusion}
We address the multi-class object detection problem within volumetric 3D baggage security screening CT imagery. 3D RetinaNet is employed as the detector incorporated with different FPN architectures. 3D TIP and data augmentation techniques are employed to generate a synthetic dataset to alleviate the data sparsity issue. Experimental results validate the effectiveness of the proposed approach to the detection of five object categories in baggage CT volumes and also disclose the limitations of the current study (e.g., the lack of real data).

A few research directions following this work will be considered in our future work. Firstly, it is essential to scale up the dataset used for experiments in terms of both CT volumes and prohibited item types. Secondly, it is interesting to compare the effectiveness of 3D and 2D (slice based) CNN models in object detection within CT imagery. Finally, it is of great value to complement current approach by enabling the detection of material based prohibited items without specific shapes and appearances (e.g., explosive materials).
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
  \newpage
\fi

\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}