the area of the minimal surface in the graph metric is in fact a signature that the random
tensor construction deviates from the holographic theory. The holographic calculation
of the second R´enyi entropy amounts to evaluating the Euclidean action of the two-fold
replica geometry, which satisfies the Einstein equation everywhere in the bulk. Thus, in
general, the second R´enyi entropy does not exactly correspond to the area of the minimal
surface in the original geometry. Due to the back-reaction of the gravity theory, the n-fold
replica geometry is in general different from the geometry constructed by simply gluing
n copies of the original geometry around the minimal surfaces, the discrepancy between
which can be seen manifestly from the n-dependence of the holographic R´enyi-n entropy.
We will see in section 5 that our random tensor model can reproduce the correct R´enyi
entropies for a single boundary region if we replace the bond states |xyi by appropriate
short-range entangled states with non-trivial entanglement spectrum. However, this does
not resolve the problem for multiple boundary regions, for which we will have a more
detailed discussion in section 5.
To compare with the RT formula defined on a continuous manifold, one can consider a
triangulation of a given spatial manifold and define a random tensor network on the graph
of the triangulation. (See [22, appendix A] for further discussion of the construction of
the triangulation graph.) Denoting by l
g
the length scale of the triangulation (the average
distance between neighboring triangles), the area |γ
A
| in our formula is dimensionless and
the area |γ
c
A
| defined on the continuous Riemann manifold is given by |γ
c
A
| = l
d−1
g
|γ
A
|
(when the spatial dimension of bulk is d). Therefore S(A) = l
1−d
g
log D |γ
c
A
|, and we see
that l
1−d
g
log D corresponds to the gravitational coupling constant
1
4G
N
.
Compared to previous results about the RT formula in tensor networks [6, 8], our proof
of RT formula has the following advantages: firstly, our result does not require the boundary
region A to be a single connected region on the boundary. Since the entropy in the large D
limit is always given by the Ising spin configuration with minimal energy, the result applies
to multiple boundary regions. Secondly, our result does not rely on any property of the
graph structure, except for the uniqueness of the geodesic surface (if this is not satisfied
then the entropy formula acquires corrections as discussed above; cf. section 9). If we
obtain a graph by triangulation of a manifold, our formula applies to manifolds with zero
or positive curvature, even when the standard AdS/CFT correspondence does not apply.
In addition to these two points, we will also see in later discussions that our approach
allows us to study corrections to the RT formula systematically. Notice that we are not
limited to two-dimensional manifolds. One can consider a higher dimensional manifold and
construct a graph approximating its geometry. It follows from our results that the entropy
of a subregion of the boundary state is given by the size of the minimum cut on the graph,
i.e., the area of the minimal surface in the bulk homologous to the boundary region.
3.2 Ryu-Takayanagi formula with bulk state correction
If we do not assume the bulk state to be a pure direct-product state, the bulk entropy term
in eq. (2.13) is nonzero. If we still take the D → ∞ limit, the Ising model free energy is
still determined by the minimal energy spin configuration, which is now determined by a
balance between the area law energy log D |Σ| for a domain wall Σ, and the energy cost from
– 11 –