Introduction to Quantum Fields on a Lattice
Quantum ﬁeld theory, our description of the fundamental forces in
nature, was originally formulated in continuous space–time, where it
leads to embarrassing inﬁnities which have to be eliminated by a process
called renormalization. A simple but rigorous formulation can be ob
tained by replacing continuous space–time by a discrete set of points on a
lattice. This clariﬁes the essentials of quantum ﬁelds using concepts such
as universality of critical phenomena and the renormalization group.
This book provides a clear and pedagogical introduction to quantum
ﬁelds on a lattice. The path integral on the lattice is explained in concrete
examples using weak and strongcoupling expansions. Fundamental
concepts, such as ‘triviality’ of Higgs ﬁelds and conﬁnement of quarks
and gluons into hadrons, are described and illustrated with the results of
numerical simulations. The book also provides an introduction to chiral
symmetry and chiral gauge theory. Based on the lecture notes of a course
given by the author, this book contains many explanatory examples and
exercises, and is suitable as a textbook for advanced undergraduate and
graduate courses.
Jan Smit holds a position at the Institute of Theoretical Physics of
the University of Amsterdam and, since 1991, he has been Professor
of Theoretical Physics at Utrecht University. He is well known for his
fundamental contributions to lattice gauge theory. His current interests
are lattice methods for quantum gravity, applications to cosmology and
the creation of the quark–gluon plasma in the laboratory.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CAMBRIDGE LECTURE NOTES IN PHYSICS 15
General Editors: P. Goddard, J. Yeomans
1. Clarke: The Analysis of Space–Time Singularities
2. Dorey: Exact sMatrices in Two Dimensional Quantum Field Theory
3. Sciama: Modern Cosmology and the Dark Matter Problem
4. Veltman: Diagrammatica – The Path to Feynman Rules
5. Cardy: Scaling and Renormalization in Statistical Physics
6. Heusler: Black Hole Uniqueness Theorems
7. Coles and Ellis: Is the Universe Open or Closed?
8. Razumov and Saveliev: Lie Algebras, Geometry, and Todatype
Systems
9. Forshaw and Ross: Quantum Chromodynamics and the Pomeron
10. Jensen: Selforganised Criticality
11. Vandezande: Lattice Models of Polymers
12. Esposito: Dirac Operators and Spectral Geometry
13. Kreimer: Knots and Feynman Diagrams
14. Dorfman: An Introduction to Chaos in Nonequilibrium Statistical
Mechanics
15. Smit: Introduction to Quantum Fields on a Lattice
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Introduction to Quantum Fields on a Lattice
‘a robust mate’
JAN SMIT
University of Amsterdam
PUBLISHED BY CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS (VIRTUAL PUBLISHING)
FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
CAMBRIDGE
The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 IRP
40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 100114211, USA
477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia
http://www.cambridge.org
© Jan Smit 2002
This edition © Jan Smit 2003
First published in printed format 2002
A catalogue record for the original printed book is available
from the British Library and from the Library of Congress
Original ISBN 0 521 89051 9 paperback
ISBN 0 511 02078 3 virtual (netLibrary Edition)
Contents
Preface page xi
1 Introduction 1
1.1 QED, QCD, and conﬁnement 1
1.2 Scalar ﬁeld 5
2 Pathintegral and lattice regularization 8
2.1 Path integral in quantum mechanics 8
2.2 Regularization by discretization 10
2.3 Analytic continuation to imaginary time 12
2.4 Spectrum of the transfer operator 13
2.5 Latticization of the scalar ﬁeld 15
2.6 Transfer operator for the scalar ﬁeld 18
2.7 Fourier transformation on the lattice 20
2.8 Free scalar ﬁeld 22
2.9 Particle interpretation 25
2.10 Back to real time 26
2.11 Problems 28
3 O(n) models 32
3.1 Goldstone bosons 32
3.2 O(n) models as spin models 34
3.3 Phase diagram and critical line 36
3.4 Weakcoupling expansion 39
3.5 Renormalization 46
3.6 Renormalizationgroup beta functions 48
3.7 Hopping expansion 51
3.8 L¨ uscher–Weisz solution 55
3.9 Numerical simulation 60
vii
viii Contents
3.10 Realspace renormalization group and universality 67
3.11 Universality at weak coupling 71
3.12 Triviality and the Standard Model 74
3.13 Problems 79
4 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice 83
4.1 QED action 83
4.2 QCD action 85
4.3 Lattice gauge ﬁeld 90
4.4 Gaugeinvariant lattice path integral 95
4.5 Compact and noncompact Abelian gauge theory 97
4.6 Hilbert space and transfer operator 99
4.7 The kineticenergy operator 102
4.8 Hamiltonian for continuous time 105
4.9 Wilson loop and Polyakov line 107
4.10 Problems 112
5 U(1)and SU(n) gauge theory 115
5.1 Potential at weak coupling 115
5.2 Asymptotic freedom 121
5.3 Strongcoupling expansion 125
5.4 Potential at strong coupling 129
5.5 Conﬁnement versus screening 132
5.6 Glueballs 135
5.7 Coulomb phase, conﬁnement phase 136
5.8 Mechanisms of conﬁnement 138
5.9 Scaling and asymptotic scaling, numerical results 140
5.10 Problems 144
6 Fermions on the lattice 149
6.1 Naive discretization of the Dirac action 149
6.2 Species doubling 151
6.3 Wilson’s fermion method 156
6.4 Staggered fermions 160
6.5 Transfer operator for Wilson fermions 161
6.6 Problems 165
7 Lowmass hadrons in QCD 170
7.1 Integrating over the fermion ﬁelds 170
7.2 Hopping expansion for the fermion propagator 171
7.3 Meson and baryon propagators 173
7.4 Hadron masses at strong coupling 177
Contents ix
7.5 Numerical results 179
7.6 The parameters of QCD 188
7.7 Computing the gauge coupling from the masses 190
7.8 Problems 190
8 Chiral symmetry 193
8.1 Chiral symmetry and eﬀective action in QCD 193
8.2 Pseudoscalar masses and the U(1) problem 199
8.3 Chiral anomalies 202
8.4 Chiral symmetry and the lattice 204
8.5 Spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry 212
8.6 Chiral gauge theory 217
8.7 Outlook 223
8.8 Problems 223
Appendix A SU(n) 229
A.1 Fundamental representation of SU(n) 229
A.2 Adjoint representation of SU(n) 231
A.3 Left and right translations in SU(n) 234
A.4 Tensor method for SU(n) 236
Appendix B Quantization in the temporal gauge 239
Appendix C Fermionic coherent states 242
Appendix D Spinor ﬁelds 253
Notes 258
References 261
Index 267
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Preface
She [ﬁeld theory] is not a robust mate ready to
pitch in and lend a helping hand. She is a haunting
mistress, reﬁned, and much too beautiful for hard
work. She is at her best in formal dress, and thus
displayed in this book, where rigor will be found to
be absolutely absent. Bryce S. DeWitt
Since the above characterization appeared [1] in 1965 we have witnessed
great progress in quantum ﬁeld theory, our description of fundamental
particles and their interactions. This book displays her in informal dress,
robust and ready to give results, rigorous, while at a pedestrian mathe
matical level. By approximating space–time by a collection of points on
a lattice we get a number of beneﬁts:
• it serves as a precise but simple deﬁnition of quantum ﬁelds, which
has its own beauty;
• it brings to the fore and clariﬁes essential aspects such as renormal
ization, scaling, universality, and the role of topology;
• it makes a fruitful connection to statistical physics;
• it allows numerical simulations on a computer, giving truly non
perturbative results as well as new physical intuition into the behavior
of the system.
This book is based on notes of a lecture course given to advanced
undergraduate students during the period 1984–1995. An eﬀort was
made to accomodate those without prior knowledge of ﬁeld theory. In the
present version, examples from numerical simulations have been replaced
xi
xii Preface
by more recent results, and a few sections (8.3–8.6) on lattice aspects of
chiral symmetry have been added. The latter notoriously complicated
topic was not dealt with in the lectures, but for this book it seemed
appropriate to give an introduction.
An overview of the research area in this book is given by the pro
ceedings of the yearly symposia ‘Lattice XX’, which contain excellent
reviews in which the authors tried hard to make the material accessible.
These meetings tend to be dominated by QCD, which is understandable,
as many of the physical applications are in the sphere of the strong
interactions, but a lot of exciting developments usually take place ‘on the
fringe’, in the parallel sessions. In fact, Lattice XX may be considered as
the arena for nonperturbative ﬁeld theory. The appropriate papers can
be retrieved from the eprint archive http://arXiv.org/ and its mirrors,
or the SPIRES website http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/hep/
I would like to thank my students, who stumbled over my mistakes, for
their perseverance and enthusiasm, and my colleagues for collaborations
and for sharing their insight into this eversurprising research ﬁeld.
Amsterdam, November 2001
1
Introduction
We introduce here quarks and gluons. The analogy with electrodynamics
at short distances disappears at larger distances with the emergence
of the string tension, the force that conﬁnes the quarks and gluons
permanently into bound states called hadrons.
Subsequently we introduce the simplest relativistic ﬁeld theory, the
classical scalar ﬁeld.
1.1 QED, QCD, and conﬁnement
Quantum electrodynamics (QED) is the quantum theory of photons
(γ) and charged particles such as electrons (e
±
), muons (µ
±
), protons
(p), pions (π
±
), etc. Typical phenomena that can be described by
perturbation theory are Compton scattering (γ + e
−
→ γ + e
−
), and
pair annihilation/production such as e
+
+e
−
→µ
+
+µ
−
. Examples of
nonperturbative phenomena are the formation of atoms and molecules.
The expansion parameter of perturbation theory is the ﬁnestructure
constant
1
α = e
2
/4π.
Quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is the quantum theory of quarks
(q) and gluons (g). The quarks u, d, c, s, t and b (‘up’, ‘down’, ‘charm’,
‘strange’, ‘top’ and ‘bottom’) are analogous to the charged leptons ν
e
, e,
ν
µ
, µ, ν
τ
, and τ. In addition to electric charge they also carry ‘color
charges’, which are the sources of the gluon ﬁelds. The gluons are
analogous to photons, except that they are selfinteracting because they
also carry color charges. The strength of these interactions is measured
by α
s
= g
2
/4π (alpha strong), with g analogous to the electromagnetic
charge e. The ‘atoms’ of QCD are q¯ q (¯ q denotes the antiparticle of q)
1
2 Introduction
Fig. 1.1. Intuitive representation of chromoelectric ﬁeld lines between a static
quark–antiquark source pair in QCD: (a) Coulomblike at short distances;
(b) stringlike at large distances, at which the energy content per unit length
becomes constant.
bound states called mesons† (π, K, η, η
, ρ, K
∗
, ω, φ, . . . ) and 3q bound
states called baryons (the nucleon N, and furthermore Σ, Λ, Ξ, ∆, Σ
∗
,
Λ
∗
, . . .). The mesons are bosons and the baryons are fermions. There
may be also multiquark states analogous to molecules. Furthermore,
there are expected to be glueballs consisting mainly of gluons. These
bound states are called ‘hadrons’ and their properties as determined by
experiment are recorded in the tables of the Particle Data Group [2].
The way that the gluons interact among themselves has dramatic
eﬀects. At distances of the order of the hadron size, the interactions are
strong and α
s
eﬀectively becomes arbitrarily large as the distance scale
increases. Because of the increasing potential energy between quarks at
large distances, it is not possible to have single quarks in the theory:
they are permanently conﬁned in bound states.
For a precise characterization of conﬁnement one considers the theory
with gluons only (no dynamical quarks) in which static external sources
are inserted with quark quantum numbers, a distance r apart. The
energy of this conﬁguration is the quark–antiquark potential V (r). In
QCD conﬁnement is realized such that V (r) increases linearly with r as
r →∞,
V (r) ≈ σr, r →∞. (1.1)
The coeﬃcient σ is called the string tension, because there are eﬀective
string models for V (r). Such models are very useful for grasping some
of the physics involved (ﬁgure 1.1).
Because of conﬁnement, quarks and gluons cannot exist as free parti
† The quark content of these particles is given in table 7.1 in section 7.5.
1.1 QED, QCD, and conﬁnement 3
Fig. 1.2. Shape of the static q¯ q potential and the force F = ∂V/∂r.
cles. No such free particles have been found. However, scattering exper
iments at high momentum transfers (corresponding to short distances)
have led to the conclusion that there are quarks and gluons inside the
hadrons. The eﬀective interaction strength α
s
is small at short distances.
Because of this, perturbation theory is applicable at short distances or
large momentum transfers. This can also be seen from the force derived
from the q¯ q potential, F = ∂V/∂r. See ﬁgure 1.2. Writing conventionally
F(r) =
4
3
α
s
(r)
r
2
, (1.2)
we know that α
s
→0 very slowly as the distance decreases,
α
s
(r) ≈
4π
11 ln(1/Λ
2
r
2
)
. (1.3)
This is called asymptotic freedom. The parameter Λ has the dimension
of a mass and may be taken to set the dimension scale in quarkless
‘QCD’. For the glueball mass m or string tension σ we can then write
m = C
m
Λ,
√
σ = C
σ
Λ. (1.4)
Constants like C
m
and C
σ
, which relate shortdistance to longdistance
properties, are nonperturbative quantities. They are pure numbers
whose computation is a challenge to be met by the theory developed
in the following chapters.
The value of the string tension σ is known to be approximately
(400 MeV)
2
. This information comes from a remarkable property of the
hadronic mass spectrum, the fact that, for the leading spin states, the
spin J is approximately linear in the squared mass m
2
,
J = α
0
+α
m
2
. (1.5)
See ﬁgure 1.3. Such approximately straight ‘Regge trajectories’ can be
4 Introduction
Fig. 1.3. Plot of spin J versus m
2
(GeV
2
) for ρ and πlike particles. The dots
give the positions of particles, the straight lines are ﬁts to the data, labeled
by their particles with lowest spin. The line labeled ‘pot’ is L versus H
2
for
the solution (1.10), for clarity shifted upward by two units, for m
q
= m
ρ
/2,
σ = 1/8α
ρ
.
understood from the following simple eﬀective Hamiltonian for binding
of a q¯ q pair,
H = 2
m
2
q
+p
2
+σr. (1.6)
Here m
q
is the mass of the constituent quarks, taken to be equal for
simplicity, p = [p[ is the relative momentum, r = [r[ is the relative
separation, and the spin of the quarks is ignored. The potential is taken
to be purely linear, because we are interested in the largemass bound
states with large relative angular momentum L, for which one expects
that only the longdistance part of V (r) is important.
For such states with large quantum number L the classical approx
imation should be reasonable. Hence, consider the classical Hamilton
equations,
dr
k
dt
=
∂H
∂p
k
,
dp
k
dt
= −
∂H
∂r
k
. (1.7)
and the following Ansatz for a circular solution:
r
1
= a cos(ωt), r
2
= a sin(ωt), r
3
= 0,
p
1
= −b sin(ωt), p
2
= b cos(ωt), p
3
= 0. (1.8)
1.2 Scalar ﬁeld 5
Substituting (1.8) into (1.7) we get relations among ω, a, and b, and
expressions for p and r, which can be written in the form
p = b = σω
−1
, r = a = 2s
−1
σ
−1
p, s ≡
1 +m
2
q
/p
2
, (1.9)
such that L and H can be written as
L = rp = 2s
−1
σ
−1
p
2
, H = 2(s +s
−1
)p. (1.10)
For p
2
m
2
q
, s ≈ 1, L ∝ p
2
and H ∝ p. Then L ∝ H
2
and, because
H = m is the mass (rest energy) of the bound state, we see that
α
≡
LH
−2
p/m
q
→∞
= (8σ)
−1
. (1.11)
It turns out that L is approximately linear in H
2
even for quite small
p
2
, such that L < 1, as shown in ﬁgure 1.3. Of course, the classical
approximation is suspect for L not much larger than unity, but the same
phenomenon appears to take place quantum mechanically in nature,
where the lower spin states are also near the straight line ﬁtting the
higher spin states.
2
With α
= 1/8σ, the experimental value α
≈ 0.90 GeV
−2
gives
√
σ ≈
370 MeV. The eﬀective string model (see e.g. [3] section 10.5) leads
approximately to the same answer: α
= 1/2πσ, giving
√
σ ≈ 420 MeV.
The string model is perhaps closer to reality if most of the boundstate
energy is in the stringlike chromoelectric ﬁeld, but it should be kept in
mind that both the string model and the eﬀective Hamiltonian give only
an approximate representation of QCD.
1.2 Scalar ﬁeld
We start our exploration of ﬁeld theory with the scalar ﬁeld. Scalar
ﬁelds ϕ(x) (x = (x, t), t ≡ x
0
) are used to describe spinless particles.
Particles appearing elementary on one distance scale may turn out to be
be composite bound states on a smaller distance scale. For example,
protons, pions, etc. appear elementary on the scale of centimeters,
but composed of quarks and gluons on much shorter distance scales.
Similarly, ﬁelds may also be elementary or composite. For example, for
the description of pions we may use elementary scalar ﬁelds ϕ(x), or
composite scalar ﬁelds of the schematic form
¯
ψ(x)γ
5
ψ(x), where ψ(x)
and
¯
ψ(x) are quark ﬁelds and γ
5
is a Dirac matrix. Such composite ﬁelds
can still be approximately represented by elementary ϕ(x), which are
then called eﬀective ﬁelds. This is useful for the description of eﬀective
6 Introduction
interactions, which are the result of more fundamental interactions on a
shorter distance scale.
A basic tool in the description is the action S =
dt L, with L the
Lagrangian. For a nonrelativistic particle described by coordinates q
k
,
k = 1, 2, 3, the Lagrangian has the form kinetic energy minus potential
energy, L = ˙ q
k
˙ q
k
/2m − V (q).† For the anharmonic oscillator in three
dimensions the potential has the form V (q) = ω
2
q
2
/2 + λ(q
2
)
2
/4, q
2
≡
q
k
q
k
. In ﬁeld theory a simple example is the action for the ϕ
4
theory,
S =
M
d
4
xL(x), d
4
x = dx
0
dx
1
dx
2
dx
3
, (1.12)
L(x) =
1
2
∂
t
ϕ(x)∂
t
ϕ(x)−
1
2
∇ϕ(x) ∇ϕ(x)−
1
2
µ
2
ϕ(x)
2
−
1
4
λϕ(x)
4
, (1.13)
Here M is a domain in space–time, ϕ(x) is a scalar ﬁeld, L(x) is the
action density or Lagrange function, and λ and µ
2
are constants (λ is
dimensionless and µ
2
has dimension (mass)
2
= (length)
−2
). Note that
the index x is a continuous analog of the discrete index k: ϕ(x, t) ↔q
k
(t).
Requiring the action to be stationary under variations δϕ(x) of ϕ(x),
such that δϕ(x) = 0 for x on the boundary of M, leads to the equation
of motion:
δS =
d
4
x
−∂
2
t
ϕ(x) +∇
2
ϕ(x) −µ
2
ϕ(x) −λϕ(x)
3
δϕ(x)
= 0 ⇒ (∂
2
t
−∇
2
+µ
2
)ϕ +λϕ
3
= 0. (1.14)
In the ﬁrst step we made a partial integration. In classical ﬁeld theory the
equations of motion are very important (e.g. Maxwell theory). In quan
tum ﬁeld theory their importance depends very much on the problem
and method of solution. The action itself comes more to the foreground,
especially in the pathintegral description of quantum theory.
Various states of the system can be characterized by the energy H =
d
3
xH. The energy density has the form kinetic energy plus potential
energy, and is given by
H =
1
2
˙ ϕ
2
+
1
2
(∇ϕ)
2
+U, (1.15)
U =
1
2
µ
2
ϕ
2
+
1
4
λϕ
4
. (1.16)
The ﬁeld conﬁguration with lowest energy is called the ground state. It
has ˙ ϕ = ∇ϕ = 0 and minimal U. We shall assume λ > 0, such that H is
† Unless indicated otherwise, summation over repeated indices is implied, ˙ q
k
˙ q
k
≡
¸
k
˙ q
k
˙ q
k
.
1.2 Scalar ﬁeld 7
Fig. 1.4. The energy density for constant ﬁelds for µ
2
< 0.
bounded from below for all ϕ. From a graph of U(ϕ) (ﬁgure 1.4) we see
that the cases µ
2
> 0 and µ
2
< 0 are qualitatively diﬀerent:
µ
2
> 0: ϕ
g
= 0, U
g
= 0;
µ
2
< 0: ϕ
g
= ±v, v
2
= −
µ
2
λ
, U
g
= −
1
4
µ
2
λ
. (1.17)
So the case µ
2
< 0 leads to a doubly degenerate ground state. In this case
the symmetry of S or H under ϕ(x) →−ϕ(x) is broken, because a non
zero ϕ
g
is not invariant, and one speaks of spontaneous (or dynamical)
symmetrybreaking.
Small disturbances away from the ground state propagate and dis
perse in space and time in a characteristic way, which can be found
by linearizing the equation of motion (1.14) around ϕ = ϕ
g
. Writing
ϕ = ϕ
g
+ϕ
and neglecting O(ϕ
2
) gives
(∂
2
t
−∇
2
+m
2
)ϕ
= 0, (1.18)
m
2
= U
(ϕ
g
) =
µ
2
, µ
2
> 0;
µ
2
+ 3λv
2
= −2µ
2
, µ
2
< 0.
(1.19)
Wavepacket solutions of (1.18) propagate with a group velocity v =
∂ω/∂k, where k is the average wave vector and ω =
√
m
2
+k
2
. In
the quantum theory these wavepackets are interpreted as particles with
energy–momentum (ω, k) and mass m. The particles can scatter with an
interaction strength characterized by the coupling constant λ. For λ = 0
there is no scattering and the ﬁeld is called ‘free’.
2
Pathintegral and lattice regularization
In this chapter we introduce the pathintegral method for quantum
theory, make it precise with the lattice regularization and use it to
quantize the scalar ﬁeld. For a continuum treatment of path integrals in
quantum ﬁeld theory, see for example [8].
2.1 Path integral in quantum mechanics
To see how the path integral works, consider ﬁrst a simple system with
one degree of freedom described by the Lagrange function L = L(q, ˙ q),
or the corresponding Hamilton function H = H(p, q),
L =
1
2
m˙ q
2
−V (q), H =
p
2
2m
+V (q), (2.1)
where p and q are related by p = ∂L/∂ ˙ q = m˙ q. In the quantum theory p
and q become operators ˆ p and ˆ q with [ˆ q, ˆ p] = i (we indicate operators
in Hilbert space by a caret ˆ). The evolution in time is described by the
operator
ˆ
U(t
1
, t
2
) = exp[−i
ˆ
H(t
1
−t
2
)/], (2.2)
with
ˆ
H the Hamilton operator,
ˆ
H = H(ˆ p, ˆ q). Instead of working with
qnumbers (operators) ˆ p and ˆ q we can also work with time dependent
cnumbers (commuting numbers) q(t), in the pathintegral formalism.
(Later we shall use anticommuting numbers to incorporate Fermi–Dirac
statistics.) In the coordinate basis [q` characterized by
ˆ q[q` = q[q`, (2.3)
'q
[q` = δ(q
−q),
dq [q`'q[ = 1, (2.4)
8
2.1 Path integral in quantum mechanics 9
Fig. 2.1. Illustration of two functions q(t) contributing to the path integral.
we can represent the matrix element of
ˆ
U(t
1
, t
2
) by a path integral
'q
1
[
ˆ
U(t
1
, t
2
)[q
2
` =
Dq exp[iS(q)/]. (2.5)
Here S is the action functional of the system,
S(q) =
t
1
t
2
dt L(q(t), ˙ q(t)), (2.6)
and
Dq symbolizes an integration over all functions q(t) such that
q(t
1
) = q
1
, q(t
2
) = q
2
, (2.7)
as illustrated in ﬁgure 2.1. The path integral is a summation over
all ‘paths’ (‘trajectories’, ‘histories’) q(t) with given end points. The
classical path, which satisﬁes the equation of motion δS(q) = 0, or
∂L
∂q
−
∂
∂t
∂L
∂ ˙ q
= 0, (2.8)
is only one out of inﬁnitely many possible paths. Each path has a ‘weight’
exp(iS/). If is relatively small such that the phase exp(iS/) varies
rapidly over the paths, then a stationaryphase approximation will be
good, in which the classical path and its small neighborhood give the
dominant contributions. The other extreme is when the variation of S/
is of order one. In the following we shall use again units in which = 1.
A formal deﬁnition of
Dq is given by
Dq =
¸
t
2
<t<t
1
dq(t), (2.9)
10 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
i.e. for every t ∈ (t
2
, t
1
) we integrate over the domain of q, e.g. −∞ <
q < ∞. The deﬁnition is formal because the continuous product
¸
t
still
has to be deﬁned. We shall give such a deﬁnition with the help of a
discretization procedure.
2.2 Regularization by discretization
To deﬁne the path integral properly we discretize time in small units a,
writing t = na, q(t) = q
n
, with n integer. For a smooth function q(t) the
time derivative ˙ q(t) can be approximated by ˙ q(t) = (q
n+1
−q
n
)/a, such
that the discretized Lagrange function may be written as†
L(t) =
m
2a
2
(q
n+1
−q
n
)
2
−
1
2
V (q
n+1
) −
1
2
V (q
n
), (2.10)
where we have divided the potential term equally between q
n
and q
n+1
.
We deﬁne a discretized evolution operator
ˆ
T by its matrix elements as
follows:
'q
1
[
ˆ
T[q
2
` = c exp
ia
¸
m
2a
2
(q
1
−q
2
)
2
−
1
2
V (q
1
) −
1
2
V (q
2
)
, (2.11)
where c is a constant to be speciﬁed below. Note that the exponent is
similar to the Lagrange function. The operator
ˆ
T is called the transfer
operator, its matrix elements the transfer matrix. In terms of the transfer
matrix we now give a precise deﬁnition of the discretized path integral:
'q
[
ˆ
U(t
, t
)[q
` =
dq
1
dq
N−1
'q
[
ˆ
T[q
N−1
`
'q
N−1
[
ˆ
T[q
N−2
` 'q
1
[
ˆ
T[q
`
= c
¸
c dq
exp
¸
im
2a
(q
−q
N−1
)
2
−
ia
2
V (q
) −iaV (q
N−1
) +
im
2a
(q
N−1
−q
N−2
)
2
−iaV (q
N−2
) + +
im
2a
(q
1
−q
)
2
−
ia
2
V (q
)
≡
Dq e
iS
. (2.12)
Here the discretized action is deﬁned by
S = a
N−1
¸
n=0
L(na), (2.13)
† For notational simplicity we shall denote the discretized forms of L, S, . . ., by the
same symbols as their continuum counterparts.
2.2 Regularization by discretization 11
where q
N
≡ q
and q
0
≡ q
. In the limit N →∞ this becomes equal to
the continuum action, when we substitute smooth functions q(t). Since
the q
n
are integrated over on every ‘time slice’ n, such smoothness is not
typically present in the integrand of the path integral (typical paths q
n
will look like having a very discontinuous derivative) and a continuum
limit at this stage is formal.
It will now be shown that, with a suitable choice of the constant c,
the transfer operator can be written in the form
ˆ
T = e
−iaV (ˆ q)/2
e
−iaˆ p
2
/2m
e
−iaV (ˆ q)/2
. (2.14)
Taking matrix elements between 'q
1
[ and [q
2
` we see that this formula
is correct if
'q
1
[e
−iaˆ p
2
/2m
[q
2
` = ce
im(q
1
−q
2
)
2
/2a
. (2.15)
Inserting eigenstates [p` of the momentum operator ˆ p using
'q[p` = e
ipq
,
dp
2π
[p`'p[ = 1, (2.16)
we ﬁnd that (2.15) is true provided that we choose
c =
m
2πia
=
m
2πa
e
−iπ/4
. (2.17)
The transfer operator
ˆ
T is the product of three unitary operators, so
we may write
ˆ
T = e
−ia
ˆ
H
. (2.18)
This equation deﬁnes a Hermitian Hamiltonian operator
ˆ
H modulo
2π/a. For matrix elements between eigenstates with energy E < 2π/a
the expansion
ˆ
T = 1 −ia
ˆ
H +O(a
2
) (2.19)
leads to the identiﬁcation
ˆ
H =
ˆ p
2
2m
+V (ˆ q) +O(a
2
), (2.20)
in which we recognize the usual Hamilton operator. It should be kept
in mind though that, as an operator equation, the expansion (2.19)
is formal: because ˆ p
2
is an unbounded operator there may be matrix
elements for which the expansion does not converge.
12 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
2.3 Analytic continuation to imaginary time
It is very useful in practice to make an analytic continuation to imaginary
time according to the substitution t → −it. This can be justiﬁed if the
potential V (q) is bounded from below, as is the case, for example, for
the anharmonic oscillator
V (q) =
1
2
mω
2
q
2
+
1
4
λq
4
. (2.21)
Consider the discretized path integral (2.12). The integration over the
variables q
n
continues to converge if we rotate a in the complex plane
according to
a = [a[e
−iϕ
, ϕ: 0 →
π
2
. (2.22)
The reason is that, for all ϕ ∈ (0, π/2], the real part of the exponent in
(2.12) is negative:
i
[a[e
−iϕ
=
1
[a[
(−sinϕ +i cos ϕ), −i[a[e
−iϕ
= [a[(−sinϕ −i cos ϕ).
(2.23)
The result of this analytic continuation in a is that the discretized path
integral takes the form
'q
[
ˆ
U
(t
, t
)[q
` = [c[
¸
n
[c[dq
n
e
S
,
S
= −[a[
N−1
¸
n=0
¸
m
2[a[
2
(q
n+1
−q
n
)
2
+
1
2
V (q
n+1
) +
1
2
V (q
n
)
. (2.24)
Here the subscript · denotes the imaginarytime versions of U and S.
The integrand in the imaginarytime path integral is real and bounded
from above. This makes numerical calculations and theoretical analysis
very much easier. Furthermore, in the generalization to ﬁeld theory there
is a direct connection to statistical physics, which has led to many fruitful
developments. For most purposes the imaginarytime formulation is
suﬃcient to extract the relevant physical information such as the energy
spectrum of a theory. If necessary, one may analytically continue back to
real time, by implementing the inverse of the rotation (2.22). (This can
be done only in analytic calculations, since statistical errors in e.g. Monte
Carlo computations have the tendency to blow up upon continuation.)
In the following the subscript · will be dropped and we will redeﬁne
[a[ →a, with a positive.
2.4 Spectrum of the transfer operator 13
After transformation to imaginary time the transfer operator takes
the Hermitian form
ˆ
T = e
−aV (ˆ q)/2
e
−aˆ p
2
/2m
e
−aV (ˆ q)/2
. (2.25)
This is a positive operator, i.e. all its expectation values and hence all
its eigenvalues are positive. We may therefore redeﬁne the Hamiltonian
operator
ˆ
H according to
ˆ
T = e
−a
ˆ
H
. (2.26)
A natural object in the imaginarytime formalism is the partition
function
Z = Tr e
−
ˆ
H(t
+
−t
−
)
=
dq 'q[e
−
ˆ
H(t
+
−t
−
)
[q` = Tr
ˆ
T
N
, (2.27)
where we think of t
+
(t
−
) as the largest (smallest) time under consid
eration, with t
+
− t
−
= Na. From quantum statistical mechanics we
recognize that Z is the canonical partition function corresponding to
the temperature
T = (t
+
−t
−
)
−1
(2.28)
in units such that Boltzmann’s constant k
B
= 1. The pathintegral
representation of Z is obtained by setting in (2.24) q
N
= q
0
≡ q
(q
= q
≡ q) and integrating over q:
Z =
pbc
Dq e
S
. (2.29)
Here ‘pbc’ indicates the fact that the integration is now over all dis
cretized functions q(t), t
−
< t < t
+
, with ‘periodic boundary conditions’
q(t
+
) = q(t
−
).
2.4 Spectrum of the transfer operator
Creation and annihilation operators are familiar from the theory of the
harmonic oscillator. Here we shall use them to derive the eigenvalue
spectrum of the transfer operator of the harmonic oscillator, for which
V (q) =
1
2
mω
2
q
2
. (2.30)
For simplicity we shall use units in which a = 1 and m = 1, which may
be obtained by transforming to variables q
= q/a, p
= ap, m
= am,
14 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
and ω
= aω, then to q
= q
√
m
and p
= p
/
√
m
, such that (omitting
the primes) [ ˆ p, ˆ q] = −i and
ˆ
T = e
−ω
2
ˆ q
2
/4
e
−ˆ p
2
/2
e
−ω
2
ˆ q
2
/4
. (2.31)
Using the representation ˆ q → q, ˆ p → −i ∂/∂q or viceversa one obtains
the relation
ˆ
T
ˆ p
ˆ q
= M
ˆ p
ˆ q
ˆ
T, (2.32)
where the matrix M is given by
M =
1 +
1
2
ω
2
i
−i(2 +
1
2
ω
2
)
1
2
ω
2
1 +
1
2
ω
2
. (2.33)
We want to ﬁnd linear combinations κˆ q +λˆ p such that
ˆ
T(κˆ q +λˆ p) = µ(κˆ q +λˆ p)
ˆ
T, (2.34)
from which it follows that (κ, λ) have to form an eigenvector of M
T
(the
transpose of M) with eigenvalue µ. The eigenvalues µ
±
of M can be
expressed as
µ
±
= e
±˜ ω
, cosh ˜ ω = 1 +
1
2
ω
2
, (2.35)
and the linear combinations sought are given by
ˆ a = ν[sinh(˜ ωˆ q) +iˆ p],
ˆ a
†
= ν[sinh(˜ ωˆ q) −iˆ p], (2.36)
where ν is a normalization constant. The ˆ a and ˆ a
†
are the annihilation
and creation operators for the discretized harmonic oscillator. They
satisfy the usual commutation relations
[ˆ a, ˆ a
†
] = 1, [ˆ a, ˆ a] = [ˆ a
†
, ˆ a
†
] = 0, (2.37)
provided that
ν =
1
√
2 sinh ˜ ω
, (2.38)
and furthermore
ˆ
Tˆ a = e
˜ ω
ˆ a
ˆ
T,
ˆ
Tˆ a
†
= e
−˜ ω
ˆ a
†
ˆ
T. (2.39)
2.5 Latticization of the scalar ﬁeld 15
The ground state [0` with the highest eigenvalue of
ˆ
T satisﬁes ˆ a[0` = 0,
from which one ﬁnds (using for example the coordinate representation)
'q[0` = e
−
1
2
sinh ˜ ω q
2
,
ˆ
T[0` = e
−E
0
[0`,
E
0
=
1
2
˜ ω. (2.40)
The groundstate energy is E
0
=
1
2
˜ ω and using (2.39) one ﬁnds that the
excitation energies occur in units of ˜ ω, for example
ˆ
Tˆ a
†
[0` = e
−˜ ω
ˆ a
†
ˆ
T[0` = e
−(3/2) ˜ ω
ˆ a
†
[0`. (2.41)
Hence, the energy spectrum is given by
E
n
=
n +
1
2
˜ ω, (2.42)
which looks familiar, except that ˜ ω = ω.
We now can take the continuum limit a →0 in the physical quantities
E
n
. Recalling that ω is really aω, and similarly for ˜ ω, we see by expanding
(2.35) in powers of a, i.e. cosh(a˜ ω) = 1 + a
2
˜ ω
2
/2 + a
4
˜ ω
4
/24 + =
1 +a
2
ω
2
/2, that
˜ ω = ω +O(a
2
). (2.43)
Note that the corrections are O(a
2
), which is much better than O(a) as
might be expected naively. This is the reason for the symmetric division
of the potential in (2.11).
2.5 Latticization of the scalar ﬁeld
We now transcribe these ideas to ﬁeld theory, taking the scalar ﬁeld as
the ﬁrst example. The dynamical variables generalize as
q(t) →ϕ(x, t) (2.44)
(i.e. there is a q for every x). The coordinate representation is formally
characterized by
ˆ ϕ(x)[ϕ` = ϕ(x)[ϕ`, (2.45)
[ϕ` =
¸
x
[ϕ
x
`, (2.46)
'ϕ
[ϕ` =
¸
x
δ(ϕ
(x) −ϕ(x)), (2.47)
¸
x
∞
−∞
dϕ(x) [ϕ`'ϕ[ = 1. (2.48)
16 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
The evolution operator is given by
'ϕ
1
[
ˆ
U(t
1
, t
2
)[ϕ
2
` =
Dϕe
S(ϕ)
, (2.49)
where the integral is over all functions ϕ(x, t) with ϕ(x, t
1,2
) = ϕ
1,2
(x).
The theory is speciﬁed furthermore by the choice of action S. For the
standard ϕ
4
model
S(ϕ) = −
t
1
t
2
dx
4
d
3
x
¸
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ(x)∂
µ
ϕ(x) +
µ
2
2
ϕ
2
(x) +
λ
4
ϕ
4
(x)
,
(2.50)
where x = (x, x
4
) and x
4
= t. Note that in the imaginarytime formalism
the symmetry between space and time is manifest, since the metric
tensor is simply equal to the Kronecker δ
µν
. Consequently, we shall not
distinguish between upper and lower indices µ, ν, . . .. One often speaks of
the Euclidean formalism, since the space–time symmetries of the theory
consist of Euclidean rotations, reﬂections and translations.
The partition function is given by
Z =
Dϕe
S(ϕ)
, (2.51)
where the integral is over all functions periodic in the time direction,
ϕ(x, t +β) = ϕ(x, t), with β = T
−1
the inverse temperature.
The path integral Z will be given a precise deﬁnition with the lattice
regularization, by a straightforward generalization of the example of
quantum mechanics with one degree of freedom. Let x
µ
be restricted
to a fourdimensional hypercubic lattice,
x
µ
= m
µ
a, m
µ
= 0, 1, . . ., N −1, (2.52)
where a is the lattice distance. The size of the hypercubic box is L = Na
and its space–time volume is L
4
. The notation
¸
x
≡ a
4
N−1
¸
m
1
=0
N−1
¸
m
4
=0
≡ a
4
¸
m
(2.53)
will be used in this book. For smooth functions f(x) we have in the
continuum limit
¸
x
f(x) →
L
0
d
4
xf(x), N →∞, a = L/N →0, L ﬁxed. (2.54)
We have put x = 0 at the edge of the box. If we want it in the middle
of the box we can choose m
µ
= −N/2 +1, −N/2 +2, . . ., N/2. Below we
2.5 Latticization of the scalar ﬁeld 17
shall choose such a labeling for Fourier modes and we shall assume N
to be even in the following.
The scalar ﬁeld on the lattice is assigned to the sites x, we write ϕ
x
.
The part of the action without derivatives is transcribed to the lattice
as
¸
x
(µ
2
ϕ
2
x
/2 +λϕ
4
x
/4).
Derivatives can be replaced by diﬀerences. We shall use the notation
∂
µ
ϕ
x
=
1
a
(ϕ
x+aˆ µ
−ϕ
x
), (2.55)
∂
µ
ϕ
x
=
1
a
(ϕ
x
−ϕ
x−aˆ µ
), (2.56)
where ˆ µ is a unit vector in the µ direction. For smooth functions f(x),
∂
µ
f(x), ∂
µ
f(x) →
∂
∂x
µ
f(x), a →0. (2.57)
It is convenient to use periodic boundary conditions (such that the lattice
has no boundary), which are speciﬁed by
ϕ
x+Naˆ µ
= ϕ
x
, (2.58)
and, for example,
∂
4
ϕ
x,(N−1)a
=
1
a
(ϕ
x,0
−ϕ
x,(N−1)a
). (2.59)
With periodic boundary conditions the derivative operators ∂
µ
and ∂
µ
are related by ‘partial summation’ (the analog of partial integration)
¸
x
ϕ
1x
∂
µ
ϕ
2x
= −
¸
x
∂
µ
ϕ
1x
ϕ
2x
. (2.60)
In matrix notation,
∂
µ
ϕ
x
= (∂
µ
)
xy
ϕ
y
, (2.61)
∂
µ
is minus the transpose of ∂
µ
, ∂
µ
= −∂
T
µ
:
(∂
µ
)
xy
=
1
a
(δ
x+aˆ µ,y
−δ
x,y
), (2.62)
(∂
µ
)
xy
=
1
a
(δ
x,y
−δ
x−aˆ µ,y
) = −(∂
µ
)
yx
= −(∂
T
µ
)
xy
. (2.63)
After these preliminaries, the path integral will now be deﬁned by
Z =
Dϕe
S(ϕ)
, (2.64)
Dϕ =
¸
x
c
∞
−∞
dϕ
x
,
¸
x
≡
¸
m
, (2.65)
18 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
S(ϕ) = −
¸
x
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ
x
∂
µ
ϕ
x
+
µ
2
2
ϕ
2
x
+
λ
4
ϕ
4
x
, (2.66)
c = a/
√
2π. (2.67)
Note that cϕ is dimensionless. The dimension of ϕ follows from the
requirement that the action S is dimensionless. In d space–time dimen
sions,
[ϕ] = a
−(d−2)/2
, c = a
(d−2)/2
. (2.68)
The factor 1/
√
2π is an inessential convention, chosen such that there
is no additional factor in the expression for the transfer operator (2.74)
below, which would lead to an additional constant in the Hamiltonian
(2.80).
The lattice action was chosen such that for smooth functions f(x),
S(f) → S
cont
(f) in the classical continuum limit a → 0. However, it is
useful to keep in mind that typical ﬁeld conﬁgurations ϕ
x
contributing to
the path integral are not smooth at all on the lattice scale. The previous
sentence is meant in the following sense. The factor Z
−1
expS(ϕ) can be
interpreted as a normalized probability distribution for an ensemble of
ﬁeld conﬁgurations ϕ
x
. Drawing a typical ﬁeld conﬁguration ϕ from
this ensemble, e.g. one generated by a computer with some Monte
Carlo algorithm, one ﬁnds that it varies rather wildly from site to site
on the lattice. This has the consequence that diﬀerent discretizations
(e.g. diﬀerent discrete diﬀerentiation schemes) may lead to diﬀerent
answers for certain properties, although this should not be the case for
physically observable properties. The discussion of continuum behavior
in the quantum theory is a delicate matter, which involves concepts like
renormalization, scaling and universality.
2.6 Transfer operator for the scalar ﬁeld
The derivation of the transfer operator for the scalar ﬁeld on the lattice
follows the steps made earlier in the example with one degree of freedom.
For later use we generalize to diﬀerent lattice spacings for time and space,
a
t
and a, respectively. We use the notation x
4
= t = na
t
, ϕ
x
= ϕ
n,x
,
with n = 0, 1, . . ., N−1 and ϕ
N,x
= ϕ
0,x
. Then the action can be written
as
S(ϕ) = −a
t
¸
n
¸
x
1
2a
2
t
(ϕ
n+1,x
−ϕ
n,x
)
2
−a
t
¸
n
V (ϕ
n
), (2.69)
2.6 Transfer operator for the scalar ﬁeld 19
V (ϕ
n
) =
¸
x
1
2
3
¸
j=1
∂
j
ϕ
n,x
∂
j
ϕ
n,x
+
µ
2
2
ϕ
2
n,x
+
λ
4
ϕ
4
n,x
¸
¸
. (2.70)
The transfer operator
ˆ
T is deﬁned by its matrix elements
'ϕ
n+1
[
ˆ
T[ϕ
n
` = c
N
3
exp
¸
−a
t
¸
x
1
2a
2
t
(ϕ
n+1,x
−ϕ
n,x
)
2
¸
exp
¸
−a
t
1
2
(V (ϕ
n+1
) +V (ϕ
n
))
, (2.71)
such that
Z =
¸
x
dϕ
x
'ϕ
N
[
ˆ
T[ϕ
N−1
` 'ϕ
1
[
ˆ
T[ϕ
0
` (2.72)
= Tr
ˆ
T
N
. (2.73)
The transfer operator
ˆ
T can be written in the form
ˆ
T = exp
¸
−a
t
1
2
V ( ˆ ϕ)
exp
¸
−a
t
1
2
¸
x
ˆ π
2
x
¸
exp
¸
−a
t
1
2
V ( ˆ ϕ)
, (2.74)
where ˆ π
x
is the canonical conjugate operator of ˆ ϕ
x
, with the property
[ ˆ ϕ
x
, ˆ π
y
] = ia
−3
δ
x,y
. (2.75)
To check (2.74) we take matrix elements between [ϕ
n
` and 'ϕ
n+1
[ and
compare with (2.71). Using
e
−a
t
1
2
V ( ˆ ϕ)
[ϕ
n
` = e
−a
t
1
2
V (ϕ
n
)
[ϕ
n
`, (2.76)
we see that (2.74) is correct provided that
'ϕ
n+1
[e
−a
t
1
2
¸
x
ˆ π
2
x
[ϕ
n
` = c
N
3
exp
¸
−a
t
¸
x
(ϕ
n+1,x
−ϕ
n,x
)
2
/2a
2
t
¸
.
(2.77)
This relation is just a product over x of relations of the onedegreeof
freedom type
'q
1
[e
−ˆ p
2
/2ξ
[q
2
` =
ξ
2π
e
−ξ(q
1
−q
2
)
2
/2
, (2.78)
with the identiﬁcation, for given x, q = aϕ, ˆ p = a
2
ˆ π → −i ∂/∂q, and
[ϕ` =
√
a[q` (such that 'ϕ
[ϕ` = a'q
[q` = aδ(q
− q) = δ(ϕ
− ϕ)). It
follows that
c = a
ξ
2π
, ξ =
a
a
t
. (2.79)
20 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
Fig. 2.2. Shortest wave length of a lattice ﬁeld.
Making the formal continuoustime limit by letting a
t
→ 0 and ex
panding
ˆ
T = 1−a
t
ˆ
H+ , we ﬁnd a conventionallooking Hamiltonian
1
on a spatial lattice,
ˆ
H =
¸
x
1
2
ˆ π
2
x
+
1
2
∂
j
ˆ ϕ
x
∂
j
ˆ ϕ
x
+
1
2
µ
2
ˆ ϕ
2
x
+
1
4
λˆ ϕ
4
x
+O(a
2
). (2.80)
2.7 Fourier transformation on the lattice
We record now some frequently used formulas involving the Fourier
transform. The usual plane waves in a ﬁnite volume with periodic
boundary conditions are given by
e
ipx
, p
µ
= n
µ
2π
L
, (2.81)
where the n
µ
are integers. We want to use these functions for (Fourier)
transformations of variables. On the lattice the x
µ
are restricted to x
µ
=
m
µ
a, m
µ
= 0, . . ., N − 1, L = Na. There should not be more p
µ
than
x
µ
; we take
n
µ
= −N/2 + 1, −N/2 + 2, . . ., N/2. (2.82)
Indeed, the shortest wave length and largest wave vector are given by
(cf. ﬁgure 2.2)
λ
min
= 2a, p
max
=
π
a
=
N
2
2π
L
. (2.83)
2.7 Fourier transformation on the lattice 21
Apart from these intuitive arguments, the reason for (2.82) is the fact
that (in d dimensions, mn = m
µ
n
µ
)
U
mn
≡ N
−d/2
e
i2πmn/N
≡ N
−d/2
e
ipx
mn
(2.84)
is a unitary matrix,
U
mn
U
∗
mn
= δ
n,n
. (2.85)
We check this for the onedimensional case, d = 1:
U
mn
U
∗
mn
=
1
N
N−1
¸
m=0
r
m
=
1
N
1 −r
N
1 −r
=
¯
δ
n,n
, (2.86)
r ≡ e
i2π(n−n
)/N
, (2.87)
where
¯
δ
n,n
≡ 0, n = n
mod N (2.88)
= 1, n = n
mod N. (2.89)
We shall use this result in the form
¸
x
e
−i(p−p
)x
=
¯
δ
p,p
≡
¸
µ
N[a
µ
[
¯
δ
m
µ
,m
µ
, (2.90)
¸
p
e
ip(x−x
)
=
¯
δ
x,x
≡
¸
µ
[a
µ
[
−1
¯
δ
n
µ
,n
µ
, (2.91)
¸
x
≡
¸
µ
¸
[a
µ
[
¸
m
µ
¸
, (2.92)
¸
p
≡
¸
µ
¸
1
N[a
µ
[
¸
n
µ
¸
, (2.93)
where [a
µ
[ is the lattice spacing in the µ direction (unless stated other
wise, [a
µ
[ = a). With this notation we can write the Fourier transfor
mation of variables (‘from position space to momentum space’) and its
inverse as
˜ ϕ
p
=
¸
x
e
−ipx
ϕ
x
, (2.94)
ϕ
x
=
¸
p
e
ipx
˜ ϕ
p
. (2.95)
22 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
For smooth functions f(p) we have, in the inﬁnitevolume limit L =
Na →∞,
¸
p
f(p) =
(∆p)
4
(2π)
4
¸
n
f
2πn
Na
(2.96)
→
π/a
−π/a
d
4
p
(2π)
4
f(p), N →∞, a ﬁxed, (2.97)
where ∆p = 2π/Na.
2.8 Free scalar ﬁeld
For λ = 0 we get the free scalar ﬁeld action. For this case the path
integral can be done easily. Assuming µ
2
≡ m
2
> 0, we write
S = −
¸
x
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ
x
∂
µ
ϕ
x
+
1
2
m
2
ϕ
2
x
(2.98)
=
1
2
¸
xy
S
xy
ϕ
x
ϕ
y
, (2.99)
where
S
xy
= −
¸
z
¸
¸
µ
(
¯
δ
z+aˆ µ,x
−
¯
δ
z,x
)(
¯
δ
z+aˆ µ,y
−
¯
δ
z,y
) +m
2
¯
δ
z,x
¯
δ
z,y
¸
.
(2.100)
It is useful to introduce an external source J
x
, which can be chosen as
we wish. The partition function with an external source is deﬁned as
Z(J) =
Dϕ exp
S +
¸
x
J
x
ϕ
x
. (2.101)
The transformation of variables
ϕ
x
→ϕ
x
+
¸
y
G
xy
J
y
, (2.102)
with G
xy
minus the inverse of S
xy
,
S
xy
G
yz
= −
¯
δ
x,z
, (2.103)
brings Z(J) into the form
Z(J) = Z(0) exp
1
2
G
xy
J
x
J
y
. (2.104)
2.8 Free scalar ﬁeld 23
The integral Z(0) is just a multiple Gaussian integral,
Z(0) =
Dϕ exp
−
1
2
G
−1
xy
ϕ
x
ϕ
y
=
1
√
det G
−1
= exp
1
2
ln det G
. (2.105)
There is ﬁnitetemperature physics that can be extracted from the
partition function Z(0), but here we shall not pay attention to it.
The propagator G can be easily found in ‘momentum space’. First we
determine the Fourier transform of S
xy
, using lattice units a = 1,
S
p,−q
≡
¸
xy
e
−ipx+iqy
S
xy
(2.106)
= −
¸
z
¸
¸
µ
(e
−ipˆ µ
−1)(e
iqˆ µ
−1) +m
2
¸
e
−ipz+iqz
= S
p
¯
δ
p,q
, (2.107)
−S
p
= m
2
+
¸
µ
(2 −2 cos p
µ
) (2.108)
= m
2
+
¸
µ
4 sin
2
p
µ
2
. (2.109)
Since S
p,−q
is diagonal in momentum space, its inverse is given by
G
p,−q
= G
p
¯
δ
p,q
, G
p
=
1
m
2
+
¸
µ
(2 −2 cos p
µ
)
. (2.110)
From this we can restore the lattice distance by using dimensional
analysis: p →ap, m →am and G
p
→a
2
G(p). This gives
G(p) =
1
m
2
+a
−2
¸
µ
(2 −2 cos ap
µ
)
, (2.111)
and in the continuum limit a →0,
G(p) =
1
m
2
+p
2
+O(a
2
)
, (2.112)
which is the usual covariant expression for the scalar ﬁeld propagator.
It is instructive to check that the corrections to the continuum form are
already quite small for ap
µ
<
1
2
.
24 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
From the form (2.104) we calculate the correlation function of the free
theory,
'ϕ
x
` =
¸
∂ lnZ
∂J
x
J=0
= 0, (2.113)
'ϕ
x
ϕ
y
` =
¸
∂ lnZ
∂J
x
∂J
y
J=0
= G
xy
. (2.114)
Hence, the propagator G is the correlation function of the system (cf.
problem (v)).
We now calculate the time dependence of G
xy
, assuming that the
temporal extent of the lattice is inﬁnite (zero temperature),
G(x −y) ≡ G
xy
=
π
−π
dp
4
2π
¸
p
e
ip(x−y)
G(p), (2.115)
G(x, t) =
¸
p
e
ipx
π
−π
dp
4
2π
e
ip
4
t
2b −2 cos p
4
, (2.116)
b = 1 +
1
2
¸
m
2
+
3
¸
j=1
4 sin
2
p
j
2
¸
, (2.117)
where we reverted to lattice units. The integral over p
4
can be done by
contour integration. We shall take t > 0. Note that, in lattice units, t is
an integer and b > 1. With z = exp(ip
4
) we have
I ≡
π
−π
dp
4
2π
e
ip
4
t
2b −2 cos p
4
(2.118)
= −
dz
2πi
z
t
z
2
−2bz + 1
, (2.119)
where the integration is counter clockwise over the contour [z[ = 1, see
ﬁgure 2.3. The denominator has a pole at z = z
−
within the unit circle,
z
2
−2bz + 1 = (z −z
+
)(z −z
−
),
z
±
= b ±
b
2
−1, z
+
z
−
= 1, z
+
> 1, z
−
< 1,
z
−
= e
−ω
, cosh ω = b, ω = ln
b +
b
2
−1
. (2.120)
The residue at z = z
−
gives
I =
e
−ωt
2 sinhω
, (2.121)
2.9 Particle interpretation 25
Fig. 2.3. Integration contour in the complex z = e
ip
4
plane. The crosses
indicate the positions of the poles at z = z
±
.
and it follows that (ω depends on p)
G(x, t) =
¸
p
e
ipx−ωt
2 sinhω
. (2.122)
Notice that the pole z = z
−
corresponds to a pole in the variable p
4
at
p
4
= iω.
In the continuum limit (m → am, p
j
→ ap
j
, ω → aω, a → 0) we get
the familiar Lorentz covariant expression,
ω →
m
2
+p
2
. (2.123)
The form (2.122) is a sum of exponentials exp(−ωt). For large t the
exponential with the smallest ω, ω = m, dominates,
G ∝ e
−mt
, t →∞, (2.124)
and we see that the correlation length of the system is 1/m.
2.9 Particle interpretation
The free scalar ﬁeld is just a collection of harmonic oscillators, which
are coupled by the gradient term ∂
j
ϕ∂
j
ϕ in the action or Hamiltonian
(2.80). We can diagonalize the transfer operator explicitly by taking
similar steps to those for the harmonic oscillator. One then ﬁnds (cf.
problem (iii)) creation and annihilation operators ˆ a
†
p
and ˆ a
p
, which are
indexed by the Fourier label p. The ground state [0` has the property
ˆ a
p
[0` = 0 with energy E
0
=
¸
p
ω
p
/2. The elementary excitations [p` =
26 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
ˆ a
†
p
[0` are interpreted as particles with momentum p and energy ω
p
. This
interpretation is guided by the fact that these states are eigenstates of
the translation operators in space and time, namely, exp(
ˆ
Ht) (eigenvalue
exp[(ω
p
+ E
0
)t]), and the spatial translation operator
ˆ
U
x
(eigenvalue
exp(−ipx), see problem (vii) for its deﬁnition).
In the continuum limit we recover the relativistic energy–momentum
relation ω(p) =
m
2
+p
2
. The mass (rest energy) of the particles is ev
idently m. They have spin zero because they correspond to a scalar ﬁeld
under rotations (there are no further quantum numbers to characterize
their state). They are bosons because the (basis) states are symmetric in
interchange of labels: [p
1
p
2
` ≡ ˆ a
†
p
1
ˆ a
†
p
2
[[0` = ˆ a
†
p
2
ˆ a
†
p
1
[[0` = [p
2
p
1
`. The
ground state is usually called ‘the vacuum’.
For interacting ﬁelds the above creation and annihilation operators no
longer commute with the Hamiltonian – they are said to create ‘bare’
particles. The ‘dressed’ particle states are the eigenstates of the Hamil
tonian, but only the singleparticle states have the simple free energy–
momentum relation ω(p) =
m
2
+p
2
. Multiparticle states have in
general interaction energy, unless the particles (i.e. their wavepackets)
are far apart.
Using the spectral representation (cf. problem (viii))
'ϕ
x
ϕ
y
` −'ϕ`
2
=
¸
p,γ=0
['0[ ˆ ϕ
0
[p, γ`[
2
exp[−ω
p,γ
[x
4
−y
4
[ +ip(x −y)],
ω
p,γ
= E
p,γ
−E
0
, (2.125)
the particle properties can still be deduced from the correlation func
tions, e.g. by studying their behavior at large time diﬀerences, for which
the states with lowest excitation energies (i.e. the particles) ω
p
dominate.
Alternatively, one can diagonalize the transfer operator by variational
methods.
These methods are very general and also apply to conﬁning theories
such as QCD. The quantum numbers of the particles excited by the ﬁelds
out of the vacuum match those of the ﬁelds chosen in the correlation
functions.
2.10 Back to real time
In (2.22) we analytically continued the lattice distance in the time
direction a
t
to imaginary values. If we want to go back to real time
we have to keep track of a
t
. For instance, the action (2.70) may be
2.10 Back to real time 27
rewritten in lattice units as
S = −ξ
¸
x
1
2
∂
4
ϕ
x
∂
4
ϕ
x
−
1
ξ
¸
x
¸
1
2
∂
j
ϕ
x
∂
j
ϕ
x
+
m
2
2
ϕ
2
x
+
λ
4
ϕ
4
, ξ =
a
a
t
, (2.126)
which leads to the correlation function in momentum space
G
p
=
ξ
m
2
+
¸
j
(2 −2 cos p
j
) +ξ
2
(2 −2 cos p
4
)
. (2.127)
We have to realize that the symbol a
t
in the Euclidean notation was
really [a
t
[ (cf. below (2.24)) and that [a
t
[ = ia
t
= i[a
t
[ exp(−iϕ), ϕ =
π/2, according to (2.22). Hence, restoring the ϕ dependence of ξ means
ξ →[ξ[(−ie
iϕ
). (2.128)
Rotating back to real time, we keep ϕ inﬁnitesimally positive in order
to avoid singularities in G
p
, ϕ: π/2 →, > 0 inﬁnitesimal. This gives
G →
−i[ξ[
m
2
+
¸
j
(2 −2 cos p
j
) −[ξ[
2
(2 −2 cos p
4
) −i
, (2.129)
where we freely rescaled the inﬁnitesimal by positive values,
[−i exp(i)]
2
= (−i +)
2
= −1 −i; (2 −2 cos p
4
) is also positive.
In the continuum limit m → am, p
j
→ ap
j
, p
4
→ [ξ[
−1
ap
4
, G
p
→
a
−2
ξG(p), a →0 we obtain the Feynman propagator
G(p) →
−i
m
2
+p
2
−p
2
4
−i
≡ −iG
M
(p). (2.130)
In continuum language the rotation to imaginary time is usually called
a Wick rotation:
x
0
→−ix
4
, p
0
→−ip
4
, p
0
→ip
4
, (2.131)
where −i is meant to represent the rotation exp(−iϕ), ϕ: 0 → π/2 in
the complex plane. For instance, one continues the Minkowski space
propagator to the Euclideanspace correlation function
G
M
(x) =
dp
0
d
3
p
(2π)
4
e
ipx
m
2
+p
2
−p
2
0
−i
(2.132)
→i
dp
4
d
3
p
(2π)
4
e
ipx
m
2
+p
2
+p
2
4
(2.133)
= iG(x), (2.134)
28 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
without encountering the singularities at p
0
= ±
m
2
+p
2
∓i. Notice
that exp(ipx) is invariant under the rotation:
¸
3
µ=0
p
µ
x
µ
→
¸
4
µ=1
p
µ
x
µ
.
In (2.130) the timelike momentum is still denoted by p
4
instead of p
0
,
because the p
µ
(and x
µ
) in lattice units are just dummy indices denoting
lattice points. The actual values of G in the scaling region [x[ a are
the same as in the continuum.
2.11 Problems
We use lattice units a = 1 unless indicated otherwise.
(i) Restoration of rotation invariance
Consider the free scalar ﬁeld propagator in two dimensions
G
xy
=
d
2
p
(2π)
2
e
ip(x−y)
m
2
+ 4 −2 cos p
1
−2 cos p
2
. (2.135)
Let x − y → ∞ along a lattice direction, or along the diagonal:
x − y = nt, t → ∞, n = (1, 0) or n = (1, 1)/
√
2. The correlation
length ξ(n) in direction n is identiﬁed by G ∝ exp(−t/ξ(n)). Use
the saddlepoint technique to show that, along a lattice direction,
ξ
−1
= ω, cosh ω = 1 +m
2
/2, (2.136)
whereas along the diagonal
ξ
−1
=
√
2ω
, cosh ω
= 1 +m
2
/4. (2.137)
Discuss the cases m < 1 and m 1. In particular show that in
the ﬁrst case
ξ
/ξ = 1 −m
2
/48 +O(m
4
). (2.138)
In nonlattice units m → am, and we see restoration of rotation
invariance, ξ
/ξ →1 as a →0. Corrections are of order a
2
m
2
.
(ii) Real form of the Fourier transform
Consider for simplicity one spatial dimension. Since ϕ
x
is real,
˜ ϕ
∗
p
= ˜ ϕ
−p
. Let ˜ ϕ
p
= ˜ ϕ
p
+ i ˜ ϕ
p
. The real and imaginary parts ˜ ϕ
p
and ˜ ϕ
p
satisfy ˜ ϕ
p
= ˜ ϕ
−p
and ˜ ϕ
p
= −˜ ϕ
−p
. The ˜ ϕ
p
, p ≥ 0, and
˜ ϕ
−p
, p < 0, may be considered independent variables equivalent
to ϕ
x
. Expressing ϕ
x
in these variables gives the real form of the
2.11 Problems 29
Fourier transform, and the matrix O given by
O
mn
=
1
√
N
, n = 0,
=
2
N
cos
2πmn
N
, n = 1, . . .,
N
2
−1,
=
1
√
N
, n =
N
2
,
= −
2
N
sin
2πmn
N
, n = −
N
2
+ 1, . . ., −1,
(2.139)
where m = 0, . . ., N −1, is orthogonal: OO
T
= 11.
Similar considerations apply to canonical conjugate π
x
and ˜ π
p
.
Verify that the operators
ˆ
˜ ϕ
p
and
ˆ
˜ π
p
satisfy the commutation
relations
[
ˆ
˜ ϕ
p
,
ˆ
˜ π
†
q
] = i
¯
δ
p,q
, [
ˆ
˜ ϕ
p
,
ˆ
˜ π
q
] = 0, [
ˆ
˜ ϕ
†
p
,
ˆ
˜ π
†
q
] = 0, [
ˆ
˜ ϕ
†
p
,
ˆ
˜ π
q
] = i
¯
δ
p,q
,
(2.140)
in addition to [
ˆ
˜ ϕ
p
,
ˆ
˜ ϕ
q
] = [
ˆ
˜ ϕ
p
,
ˆ
˜ ϕ
†
q
] = [
ˆ
˜ π
p
,
ˆ
˜ π
q
] = [
ˆ
˜ π
p
,
ˆ
˜ π
†
q
] = 0.
(iii) Creation and annihilation operators
For a free scalar ﬁeld show that
ˆ
T = e
−
¸
p
m
2
p

ˆ
˜ ϕ
p

2
/4
e
−
¸
p

ˆ
˜ π
p

2
/2
e
−
¸
p
m
2
p

ˆ
˜ ϕ
p

2
/4
,
m
2
p
= m
2
+ 2(1 −cos p), (2.141)
where [
ˆ
˜ ϕ
p
[
2
=
ˆ
˜ ϕ
†
p
ˆ
˜ ϕ
p
, etc. Hence, the transfer operator has the
form
ˆ
T =
¸
p
ˆ
T
p
.
Obtain the commutation relations of the creation (ˆ a
†
p
) and
annihilation (ˆ a
p
) operators deﬁned by
ˆ a
p
=
1
2 sinhω
p
[sinh(ω
p
)
ˆ
˜ ϕ
p
+i
ˆ
˜ π
†
p
]. (2.142)
Using the results derived for the harmonic oscillator, show that
the energy spectrum is given by
E = L
¸
p
N
p
+
1
2
ω
p
, cosh ω
p
= 1 +
1
2
m
2
p
. (2.143)
where N
p
is the occupation number of the mode p (recall that in
our notation L
¸
p
=
¸
n
, p = 2πn/L).
30 Pathintegral and lattice regularization
Verify that
ˆ ϕ
x
=
¸
p
1
2 sinhω
p
e
ipx
ˆ a
p
+e
−ipx
ˆ a
†
p
. (2.144)
(iv) Groundstate wave functional
For the free scalar ﬁeld, write down the wave function for the
ground state in the coordinate representation, Ψ
0
(ϕ) = 'ϕ[0`.
(v) Correlation functions
We deﬁne expectation values
'ϕ
x
1
ϕ
x
n
` =
1
Z(J)
Dϕe
S(ϕ)+J
x
ϕ
x
ϕ
x
1
ϕ
x
n
, (2.145)
and correlation functions (connected expectation values)
G
x
1
···x
n
= 'ϕ
x
1
ϕ
x
n
`
conn
=
∂
∂J
x
1
∂
∂J
x
1
lnZ(J). (2.146)
Verify that
G
x
= 'ϕ
x
`, (2.147)
G
x
1
x
2
= 'ϕ
x
1
ϕ
x
2
` −'ϕ
x
1
`'ϕ
x
2
`. (2.148)
Give similar expressions for the three and fourpoint functions
G
x
1
x
2
x
3
and G
x
1
x
2
x
3
x
4
. Note that 'ϕ
x
` may be nonzero in cases
of spontaneous symmetry breaking even when J
x
= 0.
(vi) Groundstate expectation values of Heisenberg operators
On an L
3
β space–time lattice, verify that
'ϕ
x
ϕ
y
` =
Tr e
−(β−x
4
+y
4
)
ˆ
H
ˆ ϕ
x
e
−(x
4
−y
4
)
ˆ
H
ˆ ϕ
y
Tr e
−β
ˆ
H
, (2.149)
where x
4
> y
4
and J = 0.
Let [n` be a complete set of energy eigenstates of the Hamilto
nian,
ˆ
H[n` = E
n
[n`. (2.150)
The ground state [0` has lowest energy, E
0
. Show that for β →∞
(zero temperature)
'ϕ
x
ϕ
y
` = '0[T ˆ ϕ
x
ˆ ϕ
y
[0`, (2.151)
where T is the time ordering ‘operator’ and ˆ ϕ
x
is the Heisenberg
operator
ˆ ϕ
x,x
4
= e
x
4
ˆ
H
ˆ ϕ
x,0
e
−x
4
ˆ
H
. (2.152)
2.11 Problems 31
(vii) Translation operator
The translation operator
ˆ
U
x
may be deﬁned by
ˆ
U
x
[ϕ
y
` = [ϕ
x−y
`, (2.153)
with [ϕ
y
` the factor in the tensor product [ϕ` =
¸
y
[ϕ
y
`. This
operator has the properties
ˆ
U
†
x
ˆ ϕ
y
ˆ
U
x
= ˆ ϕ
x−y
, (2.154)
ˆ
U
†
x
ˆ π
y
ˆ
U
x
= ˆ π
x−y
, (2.155)
such that the expectation value of e.g. ˆ ϕ
x
in an actively translated
state [ψ
` ≡
ˆ
U
z
[ψ` behaves in a way to be expected intuitively:
'ψ
[ ˆ ϕ
x
[ψ
` = 'ψ[ ˆ ϕ
x−z
[ψ`.
Verify that for periodic boundary conditions the Hamiltonian
is translation invariant,
ˆ
U
†
x
ˆ
H
ˆ
U
x
=
ˆ
H. (2.156)
(viii) Spectral representation
Let [p, γ` be simultaneous eigenvectors of
ˆ
H and
ˆ
U
x
(γ is some
label needed to specify the state in addition to p),
ˆ
H[p, γ` = E
p,γ
[p, γ`,
ˆ
U
x
[p, γ` = e
−ipx
[p, γ` (2.157)
Derive the spectral representation for zero temperature:
'ϕ
x
ϕ
y
` −'ϕ`
2
=
¸
p,γ=0
['0[ ˆ ϕ
0
[p, γ`[
2
exp[−ω
p,γ
[x
4
−y
4
[ +ip(x −y)],
ω
p,γ
= E
p,γ
−E
0
, (2.158)
where γ = 0 indicates that the ground state is not included.
3
O(n) models
In this chapter we study scalar ﬁeld models with O(n) symmetry de
scribed by the Euclidean action
S = −
d
4
x
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ
α
∂
µ
ϕ
α
+
1
2
µ
2
ϕ
α
ϕ
α
+
1
4
λ(ϕ
α
ϕ
α
)
2
, (3.1)
where ϕ
α
(x) = α = 0, . . ., n − 1 is an nvector in ‘internal space’. The
action is invariant under O(n), the group of orthogonal transformations
in n dimensions. For n = 4 this action describes the scalar Higgs sector of
the Standard Model. It can also be used as an eﬀective lowenergy action
for pions. Since the models are relatively simple they serve as a good
arena for illustrating scaling and universality, concepts of fundamental
importance in quantum ﬁeld theory.
It turns out that scalar ﬁeld models (in four dimensions) become
‘trivial’ in the sense that the interactions disappear very slowly when
the lattice distance is taken to zero. The interpretation and implication
of this interesting phenomenon will be also be discussed.
3.1 Goldstone bosons
We have seen in section 1.2 that the onecomponent classical scalar ﬁeld
(i.e. n = 1) can be in two diﬀerent phases, depending on the sign of
µ
2
, namely a ‘broken phase’ in which the groundstate value ϕ
g
= 0,
and a ‘symmetric phase’ in which ϕ
g
= 0. For n > 1 there are also two
phases and we shall see that in the case of continuous internal symmetry
the consequence of spontaneous symmetry breaking is the appearance
of massless particles, called Goldstone bosons.†
† Actually, this is true in space–time dimensions ≥ 3. In one and two space–
time dimensions spontaneous breaking of a continuous symmetry is not possible
(Merwin–Wagner theorem, Coleman’s theorem).
32
3.1 Goldstone bosons 33
Fig. 3.1. Shape of U for n = 2 for µ
2
< 0.
The potential
U =
1
2
µ
2
ϕ
2
+
1
4
λ(ϕ
2
)
2
(3.2)
has a ‘winebottlebottom’ shape, also called ‘Mexicanhat’ shape, if
µ
2
< 0 (ﬁgure 3.1). It is clear that for µ
2
> 0 the ground state is unique
(ϕ
g
= 0) but that for µ
2
< 0 it is inﬁnitely degenerate. The equation
∂U/∂ϕ
k
= 0 for the minima, (µ
2
+λϕ
2
)ϕ
α
= 0, has the solution
ϕ
α
g
= vδ
α,0
, v
2
= −µ
2
/λ (µ
2
< 0), (3.3)
or any O(n) rotation of this vector. To force the system into a deﬁnite
ground state we add a symmetrybreaking term to the action (the same
could be done in the onecomponent ϕ
4
model),
∆S =
dx ϕ
0
(x), > 0. (3.4)
The constant has the dimension of (mass)
3
. The equation for the
stationary points now reads
(µ
2
+λϕ
2
)ϕ
α
= δ
α0
. (3.5)
With the symmetry breaking (3.4) the ground state has ϕ
α
g
pointing in
the α = 0 direction,
ϕ
α
g
= vδ
α0
, (µ
2
+λv
2
)v = . (3.6)
Consider now small ﬂuctuations about ϕ
g
. The equations of motion
(ﬁeld equations) read
(−∂
2
+µ
2
+λϕ
2
)ϕ
α
= δ
α0
, ∂
2
≡ ∇
2
−∂
2
t
. (3.7)
34 O(n) models
Linearizing around ϕ = ϕ
g
, writing
ϕ
0
= v +σ, ϕ
k
= π
k
, k = 1, . . ., n −1, (3.8)
we ﬁnd
(−∂
2
+m
2
σ
)σ = 0, (−∂
2
+m
2
π
)π
k
= 0, (3.9)
with
m
2
σ
= µ
2
+ 3λv
2
= 2λv
2
+/v, (3.10)
m
2
π
= µ
2
+λv
2
= /v. (3.11)
For µ
2
> 0, v = 0 and m
2
σ
= m
2
π
= µ
2
, whereas for µ
2
< 0, v > 0 and
the σ particle is heavier than the π particles. For → 0 the π particles
become massless,
m
2
π
≈ /v
0
→0, v
0
= v
=0
. (3.12)
The simple eﬀective O(n) model reproduces the important features
of Goldstone’s theorem: spontaneous symmetry breaking of a contin
uous symmetry leads to massless particles, the Goldstone bosons. For
small explicit symmetry breaking the Goldstone bosons get a squared
mass proportional to the strength of the breaking. The massless modes
correspond to oscillations along the vacuum valley of the ‘Mexican hat’.
As mentioned earlier, the O(4) model is a reasonable model for the
eﬀective lowenergy interactions of pions amongst themselves. The par
ticles π
±
and π
0
are described by the ﬁelds π
k
(x). The σ ﬁeld (after
which the model is named the σ model) corresponds to the very broad σ
resonance around 900 MeV. The model loses its validity at such energies,
for example the ρ mesons with mass 770 MeV are completely neglected.
3.2 O(n) models as spin models
We continue in the quantum theory. The lattice regularized action will
be taken as
S = −
¸
x
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ
α
x
∂
µ
ϕ
α
x
+
1
2
m
2
0
ϕ
α
x
ϕ
α
x
+
1
4
λ
0
(ϕ
α
x
ϕ
α
x
)
2
. (3.13)
We have changed the notation for the parameters: µ
2
→ m
2
0
, λ → λ
0
.
The subscript 0 indicates that these are ‘bare’ or ‘unrenormalized’ pa
rameters that diﬀer from the physical ‘dressed’ or ‘renormalized’ values
which are measured in experiments.
3.2 O(n) models as spin models 35
We shall mostly use lattice units, a = 1. Using ∂
µ
ϕ
α
x
= ϕ
α
x+ˆ µ
− ϕ
α
x
,
the action can be rewritten in the form
S =
¸
xµ
ϕ
α
x
ϕ
α
x+ˆ µ
−
¸
x
1
2
(2d +m
2
0
)ϕ
2
+
1
4
λ
0
(ϕ
2
)
2
, (3.14)
where d is the number of space–time dimensions. Another standard
choice of parameters is obtained by writing
ϕ
α
=
√
2κφ
α
, m
2
0
=
1 −2λ
κ
−2d, λ
0
=
λ
κ
2
, (3.15)
which brings S into the form
S = 2κ
¸
xµ
φ
α
x
φ
α
x+ˆ µ
−
¸
x
φ
α
x
φ
α
x
+λ(φ
α
x
φ
α
x
−1)
2
. (3.16)
The partition function is given by
Z =
¸
xα
∞
−∞
dφ
α
x
expS ≡
Dµ(φ) exp
2κ
¸
xµ
φ
x
φ
x+ˆ µ
, (3.17)
where we have introduced an integration measure Dµ(φ), which is the
product of probability measures dµ(φ) for a single site,
Dµ(φ) =
¸
x
dµ(φ
x
), dµ(φ) = d
n
φ exp[ −φ
2
−λ(φ
2
−1)
2
]. (3.18)
Note that λ has to be positive in order that the integrations
dµ(φ)
make sense.
The second form in (3.17) shows Z as the partition function of a
generalized Ising model, a typical model studied in statistical physics.
For λ →∞ the distribution dµ(φ) peaks at φ
2
= 1,
dµ(φ) f(φ)
dµ(φ)
→
dΩ
n
f(φ)
dΩ
n
, (3.19)
where
dΩ
n
is the integral over the unit sphere S
n
in n dimensions. In
particular, for n = 1,
dµ(φ) f(φ)
dµ(φ)
→
1
2
[f(1) +f(−1)]. (3.20)
Hence, for n = 1 and λ → ∞ we get precisely the Ising model in d
dimensions. For n = 3, d = 3 the model is called the Heisenberg model
for a ferromagnet. The O(n) models on the lattice are therefore also
called (generalized) spin models.
36 O(n) models
3.3 Phase diagram and critical line
The spin model aspect makes it plausible that the models can be in a
broken (ferromagnetic) or in a symmetric (paramagnetic) phase, such
that in the thermodynamic limit and for zero temperature
'φ
α
x
` ≡ v
α
= 0, κ > κ
c
(λ), (3.21)
= 0, κ < κ
c
(λ). (3.22)
Here κ
c
(λ) is the boundary line between the two phases in the λ–κ plane.
We can give a meanﬁeld estimate of κ
c
as follows. Consider a site x.
The probability for φ
α
x
is proportional to dµ(φ
x
) exp[ 2κφ
α
x
¸
µ
(φ
α
x+ˆ µ
+
φ
α
x−ˆ µ
) ]. Assume that we may approximate φ
α
at the 2d neighbors of x
by their average value,
¸
µ
(φ
α
x+ˆ µ
+ φ
α
x−ˆ µ
) → 2dv
α
. Then the average
value of φ
α
x
can be written as
'φ
α
x
` =
dµ(φ) φ
α
exp(4κdφ
β
v
β
)
dµ(φ) exp(4κdφ
β
v
β
)
. (3.23)
By consistency we should have 'φ
α
x
` = v
α
, or
v
α
=
1
z(J)
∂
∂J
α
z(J)
J=4κdv
, (3.24)
z(J) =
dµ(φ) exp(J
α
φ
α
). (3.25)
The integral z(J) can be calculated analytically in various limits, nu
merically otherwise. The basics are already illustrated by the Ising case
n = 1, λ = ∞,
z(J) = z(0) cosh(J), (3.26)
v = tanh(4κdv), n = 1, λ = ∞. (3.27)
The equation for v can be analyzed graphically, see ﬁgure 3.2. As κ `κ
c
,
evidently v →0. Then we can expand
v = tanh(4κdv) = 4κdv −
1
3
(4κdv)
3
+ , (3.28)
κ
c
=
1
4d
, (3.29)
v
2
∝ (κ −κ
c
), κ `κ
c
. (3.30)
Analysis for arbitrary n and λ leads to similar conclusions,
z(J) = z(0)'1 +φ
α
J
α
+
1
2
φ
α
φ
β
J
α
J
β
+ `
1
(3.31)
= z(0)
¸
1 +
1
2
'φ
2
`
1
n
J
α
J
α
+
, (3.32)
3.3 Phase diagram and critical line 37
Fig. 3.2. Meanﬁeld equation u/4dκ = tanhu, u = 4dκv, for n = 1, λ = ∞.
Fig. 3.3. Critical lines in the λ–κ plane and the m
2
0
–λ
0
plane (qualitative).
where we used the notation
'F`
1
=
dµ(φ) F(φ)
dµ(φ)
, (3.33)
and
'φ
α
φ
β
`
1
= δ
αβ
'φ
2
`
1
n
, (3.34)
for the onesite averages. So we ﬁnd
κ
c
(λ) =
n
4d'φ
2
`
1
=
n
4d
, λ = ∞, (3.35)
=
1
2d
, λ = 0. (3.36)
The behavior v
2
∝ (κ − κ
c
) is typical for a secondorder phase
transition in the meanﬁeld approximation. The line κ = κ
c
(λ) is a
critical line in parameter space where a secondorder phase transition
takes place. Note that in general m
2
0
is negative at the phase boundary
38 O(n) models
(cf. (3.15) and ﬁgure 3.3). The critical exponent β in
v ∝ (κ −κ
c
)
β
(3.37)
diﬀers in general from the meanﬁeld value β =
1
2
. This is the subject of
the theory of critical phenomena, and indeed, that theory is crucial for
quantum ﬁelds. In four dimensions, however, it turns out that there are
only small corrections to meanﬁeld behavior.
We have restricted ourselves here to the region κ > 0. For κ < 0
the story more or less repeats itself, we then get an antiferromag
netic phase for κ < −κ
c
(λ). The region with negative κ can be
mapped onto the region of positive κ by the transformation φ
α
x
→
(−1)
x
1
+x
2
+···+x
d
φ
α
x
.
It is important that the phase transition is of second order rather than,
for example, of ﬁrst order. In a secondorder transition the correlation
length diverges as a critical point is approached. The correlation length ξ
can then be interpreted as the physical length scale and, when physical
quantities are expressed in terms of ξ, the details on the scale of the
lattice distance become irrelevant. The correlation length is deﬁned in
terms of the longdistance behavior of the correlation function,
G
αβ
xy
≡ 'φ
α
x
φ
β
y
` −'φ
α
x
`'φ
β
y
` (3.38)
∝ [x −y[
2−d−η
e
−x−y/ξ
, [x −y[ →∞. (3.39)
Here ξ may in principle depend on the direction we take [x−y[ to inﬁnity,
but the point is that it becomes independent of that direction (a lattice
detail) as ξ →∞. In the symmetric phase ξ is independent of α and β.
The exponent η is another critical exponent.
The correlation length is the inverse mass gap, the Compton wave
length of the lightest particle, in lattice units,
ξ = 1/am. (3.40)
This can be understood from the spectral representation
G
αβ
xy
=
¸
p,γ=0
'0[φ
α
0
[pγ`'pγ[φ
β
0
[0`e
ip(x−y)−ω
pγ
x
4
−y
4

, (3.41)
where [0` is the ground state (vacuum), [pγ` are states with total
momentum p, distinguished by other quantum numbers γ, and ω
pγ
=
E
p,γ
− E
0
is the diﬀerence in energy from the ground state. This
representation is obtained by writing the path integral in terms of the
transfer operator and its eigenstates in the limit of zero temperature,
3.4 Weakcoupling expansion 39
using translation invariance (cf. problem (viii) in chapter 2). Expres
sion (3.41) is a sum of exponentials exp(−ωt), t = [x
4
− y
4
[. For
large t the exponential with smallest ω dominates, G ∝ exp(−ω
min
t),
hence ξ = 1/ω
min
, with ω
min
= m the minimum energy or mass
gap.
In the broken phase we expect Goldstone bosons (section 3.1). If these
are made suﬃciently heavy by adding an explicit symmetrybreaking
term
¸
x
ϕ
n
x
to the action (cf. equation (3.11)), we can expect two
mass gaps: m
σ
for the components of G
αβ
parallel to v
α
and m
π
for the
components perpendicular to v
α
. When the explicit symmetry breaking
is diminished, 2m
π
becomes less than m
σ
and the σ particle becomes
unstable, σ →2π. Then the largedistance behavior for the σ correlation
function is controlled by 2m
π
rather than by the mass m
σ
of the unstable
particle. Since m
π
is expected to be zero in absence of explicit symmetry
breaking, the transverse correlation length will be inﬁnite in this case
(for inﬁnite volume).
The region near the phase boundary line where ξ 1 is called the
scaling region. In this region, at large distances [x − y[, the correlation
function G
xy
is expected to become a universal scaling function (inde
pendent of lattice details, with 1/m as the only relevant length scale
rather than a).
3.4 Weakcoupling expansion
Expansion of the pathintegral expectation value
'F(ϕ)` =
1
Z
Dϕe
S(ϕ)
F(ϕ), (3.42)
S(ϕ) = −
¸
x
¸
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ
α
∂
µ
ϕ
α
+
1
2
m
2
0
ϕ
2
+
1
4
λ
0
(ϕ
2
)
2
, (3.43)
in powers of λ
0
leads to Feynman diagrams in terms of the free propaga
tor and vertex functions. For simplicity we shall deal with the symmetric
phase, which starts out with m
2
0
> 0 in the weakcoupling expansion.
The free propagator is given by
0
G
αβ
xy
= δ
αβ
¸
p
e
ip(x−y)
1
m
2
0
+
¸
µ
(2 −2 cos p
µ
)
, (3.44)
40 O(n) models
Fig. 3.4. Diagrams for
0
G,
0
Γ
(2)
and
0
Γ
(n)
. Notice the convention of attaching
a small circle at the end of external lines that represent propagators; without
this ◦ the external line does not represent a propagator.
which is minus the inverse of the free secondorder vertex function
δ
αβ
S
xy
(recall (2.99) and (2.108)), which we shall denote here by
0
Γ
(2)
.
In momentum space
0
Γ
αβ
(p) = −δ
αβ
¸
m
2
0
+
¸
µ
(2 −2 cos p
µ
)
¸
. (3.45)
The bare (i.e. lowestorder) vertex functions
0
Γ
(n)
are deﬁned by the
expansion of the action S around the classical minimum ϕ
α
x
= v
α
,
S(ϕ) =
¸
n
1
n!
0
Γ
x
1
···x
n
α
1
···α
n
(ϕ
α
1
x
1
−v
α
1
) (ϕ
α
n
x
n
−v
α
n
). (3.46)
Since they correspond to a translationally invariant theory, their Fourier
transform contains a
¯
δ function expressing momentum conservation
modulo 2π (cf. (2.90)),
¸
x
1
···x
n
e
−ip
1
x
1
···−ip
n
x
n
0
Γ
x
1
···x
n
α
1
···α
n
=
0
Γ
α
1
···α
n
(p
1
p
n
)
¯
δ
p
1
+···+p
n
,0
. (3.47)
In the symmetric phase (v
α
= 0) there is only one interaction vertex
3.4 Weakcoupling expansion 41
function, the fourpoint function
0
Γ
wxyz
αβγδ
= −2λ
0
(δ
αβ
δ
γδ
+δ
αγ
δ
βδ
+δ
αδ
δ
βγ
)δ
wx
δ
wy
δ
wz
,
0
Γ
α
1
···α
n
(p
1
p
n
) = −2λ
0
s
αβγδ
, (3.48)
s
αβγδ
≡ δ
αβ
δ
γδ
+δ
αγ
δ
βδ
+δ
αδ
δ
βγ
. (3.49)
The free propagators and vertex functions are illustrated in ﬁgure 3.4.
It can be shown that disconnected subdiagrams without external
lines (‘vacuum bubbles’) cancel out between the numerator and the
denominator in the above expectation values. The expectation values
can be rewritten in terms of vertex functions, which are simpler to study
because they have fewer diagrams in a given order in λ
0
. The two and
fourpoint functions can be expressed as
'ϕ
α
1
x
1
ϕ
α
2
x
2
` = G
α
1
α
2
x
1
x
2
≡ G
12
, (3.50)
'ϕ
α
1
x
1
ϕ
α
2
x
2
ϕ
α
3
x
3
ϕ
α
4
x
4
` = G
12
G
34
+G
13
G
24
+G
14
G
23
+G
1234
, (3.51)
and the vertex functions Γ
(2)
and Γ
(4)
can be identiﬁed by writing
G
12
= −Γ
−1
12
, (3.52)
G
1234
= G
11
G
22
G
33
G
44
Γ
1
2
3
4
, (3.53)
where as usual repeated indices are summed. Notice that Γ
123
is zero in
the symmetric phase.
To oneloop order Γ
12
and Γ
1234
are given by the connected diagrams
in ﬁgure 3.5,
Γ
12
=
0
Γ
12
+
1
2
0
Γ
1234
0
G
34
, (3.54)
Γ
1234
=
0
Γ
1234
+
1
2
0
Γ
1256
0
G
55
0
G
66
0
Γ
5
6
34
+ two permutations. (3.55)
In momentum space, we have conservation of momentum modulo 2π at
each vertex. This may be replaced by ordinary momentum conservation
because all functions in momentum space have period 2π anyway. We
ﬁnd for the twopoint vertex function
Γ
α
1
α
2
(p) = −(m
2
0
+ ˆ p
2
)δ
α
1
α
2
+
1
2
(−2λ
0
)s
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
δ
α
3
α
4
¸
l
1
m
2
0
+
ˆ
l
2
(3.56)
≡ −δ
α
1
α
2
[ m
2
0
+ ˆ p
2
+λ
0
(n + 2)I(m
0
) ], (3.57)
42 O(n) models
Fig. 3.5. Diagrams for Γ
12
and Γ
1234
to oneloop order.
and for the fourpoint vertex function
Γ
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
(p
1
p
2
p
3
p
4
) = −2λ
0
s
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
+
1
2
(2λ
0
)
2
s
α
1
α
2
α
5
α
6
s
α
3
α
4
α
5
α
6
¸
l
1
m
2
0
+
ˆ
l
2
1
m
2
0
+ 2
¸
µ
(1 −cos(l +p
1
+p
2
)
µ
)
+ two permutations (3.58)
≡ −2λ
0
s
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
+ 2λ
2
0
t
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
J(m
0
, p
1
+p
2
)
+ two permutations.
Here
ˆ
l
2
= 2
¸
µ
(1 −cos l
µ
), (3.59)
and similarly for ˆ p
2
, and (using the condensed notation δ
12
= δ
α
1
α
2
etc.)
s
1234
= δ
12
δ
34
+δ
13
δ
24
+δ
14
δ
23
, (3.60)
t
1234
= s
1256
s
3456
= δ
12
δ
34
(n + 4) + 2δ
13
δ
24
+ 2δ
14
δ
23
. (3.61)
3.4 Weakcoupling expansion 43
Fig. 3.6. Momentum ﬂow.
The functions I and J are given by
I(m
0
) =
π
−π
d
4
l
(2π)
4
1
m
2
0
+
ˆ
l
2
, (3.62)
J(m
0
, p) =
π
−π
d
4
l
(2π)
4
1
¦m
2
0
+
ˆ
l
2
¦¦m
2
0
+ 2
¸
µ
(1 −cos(l +p)
µ
)¦
.
We assumed an inﬁnite lattice,
¸
l
→
d
4
l/(2π)
4
. The momentum ﬂow
in the second term in (3.58) is illustrated in ﬁgure 3.6
We are interested in the scaling forms of I and J. Let us therefore
restore the lattice distance a. The functions I and J have dimensions a
−2
and a
0
, respectively. We are interested in a
−2
I(am
0
) and J(am
0
, ap), for
a → 0. This suggests expanding in powers of a and keeping only terms
nonvanishing as a → 0. For I we need terms of order a
0
and a
2
, for
J only terms of order a
0
. Consider ﬁrst I. A straightforward expansion
1/(a
2
m
2
0
+
ˆ
l
2
) =
¸
n
(−a
2
m
2
0
)
n
/(
ˆ
l
2
)
n+1
leads to divergences in the loop
integrals at the origin l = 0. There are various ways to deal with this
situation. Here we shall give just one. Intuitively we know that the region
near the origin in momentum space corresponds to continuum physics.
Let us split the integration region into a ball round the origin with radius
δ and the rest, with a < δ. The radius δ is sent to zero, such that, for
the integrand in the region [l[ < δ, we may use the continuum form l
2
for
ˆ
l
2
. Then
I = I
l<δ
+I
l>δ
, (3.63)
I
l<δ
(am
0
) =
l<δ
d
4
l
(2π)
4
1
a
2
m
2
0
+l
2
=
2π
2
(2π)
4
δ
0
l
3
dl
1
a
2
m
2
0
+l
2
44 O(n) models
=
1
16π
2
¸
δ
2
−a
2
m
2
0
ln
a
2
m
2
0
+δ
2
a
2
m
2
0
=
1
16π
2
[ −a
2
m
2
0
lnδ
2
+a
2
m
2
0
ln(a
2
m
2
0
)] +O(a
4
, δ
2
).
(3.64)
With symbols like O(a
2
) we shall mean terms proportional to a
2
or
a
2
lna
2
. Note that expressing also l in physical units, l → al, would
bring a
−2
I
l<δ
into continuum form with a spherical cutoﬀ δ/a. The
integral I
l>δ
can be expanded in a
2
without encountering ln(a
2
m
2
0
)
terms,
I
l>δ
(am
0
) = I
l>δ
(0) +I
l>δ
(0)a
2
m
2
0
+O(a
4
)
= I(0) +I
l>δ
(0)a
2
m
2
0
+O(a
4
, δ
2
). (3.65)
where I
≡ ∂I/∂(a
2
m
2
0
). Instead, we encounter lnδ
2
terms in I
l>δ
(0).
However, these cancel out against the ln δ
2
term in (3.64) because the
complete integral is independent of δ. So we get
I(am
0
) = C
0
−C
2
a
2
m
2
0
+
1
16π
2
a
2
m
2
0
ln(a
2
m
2
0
), (3.66)
C
0
= I(0) = 0.154933 . . . (3.67)
C
2
= lim
δ→0
¸
π
−π,l>δ
d
4
l
(2π)
4
1
(
ˆ
l
2
)
2
+
1
16π
2
lnδ
2
¸
(3.68)
= 0.0303457. . .. (3.69)
The function J can be evaluated in similar fashion. We need
J(am
0
, ap) for a → 0. For a = 0 the integral for J is logarithmically
divergent at the origin. To deal with this we use the same procedure,
J = J
l<δ
+J
l>δ
, (3.70)
J
l<δ
=
l<δ
d
4
l
(2π)
4
1
[a
2
m
2
0
+l
2
][a
2
m
2
0
+ (l +ap)
2
]
, (3.71)
J
l>δ
=
−π
π,l>δ
d
4
l
(2π)
4
1
(
ˆ
l
2
)
2
+O(a
2
) (3.72)
(J
l>δ
can be expanded in powers of a, the term linear in a vanishes).
With the help of the identity
1
[a
2
m
2
0
+l
2
][a
2
m
2
0
+ (l +ap)
2
]
=
1
0
dx
1
¦x[a
2
m
2
0
+l
2
] + (1 −x)[a
2
m
2
0
+ (l +ap)
2
]¦
2
(3.73)
3.4 Weakcoupling expansion 45
and the transformation of variable l
= l + (1 − x)ap we get for the
innerregion integral
J
l<δ
=
1
0
dx
D
d
4
l
(2π)
4
1
[a
2
m
2
0
+l
2
+x(1 −x)a
2
p
2
]
2
. (3.74)
Here the domain of integration D is obtained from the ball with radius δ
by shifting it over (1−x)ap. Replacing D by the original ball with radius
δ leads to an error of order a, which may be neglected. (The diﬀerence
between the two integration regions has a volume O(apδ
3
), the integrand
is O(δ
−4
).) Then
J
l<δ
=
1
0
dx
2π
2
(2π)
4
δ
0
l
3
dl
1
[a
2
m
2
0
+l
2
+x(1 −x)a
2
p
2
]
2
=
1
16π
2
1
0
dx
¸
ln(a
2
∆ +δ
2
) −ln(a
2
∆) −
δ
2
a
2
∆ +δ
2
=
1
16π
2
¸
lnδ
2
−
1
0
dx ln(a
2
∆) −1
+O(a
2
), (3.75)
∆ ≡ m
2
+x(1 −x)p
2
. (3.76)
Combining the term lnδ
2
/16π
2
with J
l>δ
as in (3.68) we get
J(am
0
, ap) = −
1
16π
2
1
0
dx ln[ a
2
(m
2
0
+x(1−x)p
2
)]+C
2
−
1
16π
2
+O(a
2
).
(3.77)
(We expect errors O(a
2
), i.e. not O(a): a will appear together with the
external momentum as ap
µ
or as a
2
m
2
0
, and there will not be odd powers
of p
µ
because of cubic symmetry, including reﬂections.)
Summarizing, we have obtained the following continuum forms for the
vertex functions (in physical units):
Γ
αβ
(p) = −δ
αβ
m
2
0
+p
2
+λ
0
(n + 2)
¸
C
0
a
2
−C
2
m
2
0
+
1
16π
2
m
2
0
ln(a
2
m
2
0
)
, (3.78)
Γ
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
(p
1
p
2
p
3
p
4
) = −2λ
0
s
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
+ 2λ
2
0
t
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
C
2
−
1
16π
2
−
1
16π
2
1
0
dx ln[a
2
(m
2
0
+x(1 −x)(p
1
+p
2
)
2
)]
+ two permutations, (3.79)
46 O(n) models
We see that Γ
(2)
and Γ
(4)
are, respectively, quadratically and logarith
mically divergent as a →0.
3.5 Renormalization
Perturbative renormalization theory tells us that, when we rescale the
correlation functions G
(n)
by a suitable factor Z
−n/2
and express them in
terms of a suitable renormalized mass parameter m
R
and renormalized
coupling constant λ
R
, the result is ﬁnite as a → 0. The renormalized
G
(n)
R
= Z
−n/2
G
(n)
are the correlation functions of renormalized ﬁelds
ϕ
R
= Z
−1/2
ϕ. From (3.53) we see that the renormalized vertex functions
are then given by
Γ
R
(n)
= Z
n/2
Γ
(n)
. (3.80)
The wave function renormalization constant Z and the renormalized
mass parameter m
R
may be deﬁned by the ﬁrst two terms of the
expansion
Γ
αβ
(p) = −Z
−1
(m
2
R
+p
2
+O(p
4
))δ
αβ
. (3.81)
Since the oneloop diagram for Γ
(2)
is momentum independent, the order
λ contribution to Z vanishes in the O(n) model,
Z = 1 +O(λ
2
). (3.82)
For m
R
we ﬁnd from (3.78)
m
2
R
= m
2
0
+λ
0
(n + 2)
¸
C
0
a
−2
−C
2
m
2
0
+
1
16π
2
m
2
0
ln(a
2
m
2
0
)
. (3.83)
A renormalized coupling constant λ
R
may be deﬁned in terms of Γ
(4)
at
zero momentum, by writing
Γ
R
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
(0, 0, 0, 0) = −2λ
R
s
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
. (3.84)
From the result (3.79) for the fourpoint function, using (3.82) and
t
1234
+t
1324
+t
1423
= (n + 8)s
1234
, (3.85)
we ﬁnd
λ
R
= λ
0
+λ
2
0
n + 8
16π
2
[ln(a
2
m
2
0
) +c], (3.86)
c = −
16π
2
n + 8
C
2
−
1
16π
2
. (3.87)
3.5 Renormalization 47
To express the correlation functions in terms of m
R
and λ
R
we consider
λ
R
as an expansion parameter and invert (3.83), (3.86),
m
2
0
= m
2
R
−λ
R
(n + 2)
¸
C
0
a
−2
−C
2
m
2
R
+
1
16π
2
m
2
R
ln(a
2
m
2
R
)
+O(λ
2
R
), (3.88)
λ
0
= λ
R
−λ
2
R
n + 8
16π
2
[ln(a
2
m
2
R
) +c] +O(λ
3
R
). (3.89)
Inserting these relations into (3.78), (3.79) gives the renormalized vertex
functions
Γ
R
αβ
(p) = −δ
αβ
(m
2
R
+p
2
) +O(λ
2
R
), (3.90)
Γ
R
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
(p
1
p
2
p
3
p
4
) = −2λ
R
s
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
−2λ
2
R
t
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
1
16π
2
1
0
dx ln
m
2
R
+x(1 −x)(p
1
+p
2
)
2
m
2
R
+ two permutations +O(λ
3
R
), (3.91)
which are indeed independent of the lattice spacing a. Notice that the
constants C
0
, C
1
and C
2
are absent: all reference to the lattice has
disappeared from the renormalized vertex functions.
To this order the mass m of the particles is equal to m
R
. The mass m
is given by the value of −p
2
where Γ
(2)
is zero and G
(2)
has a pole. In
higher orders the mass m will be diﬀerent from the renormalized mass
parameter m
R
: m = m
R
(1 +O(λ
2
R
)).
The O(n) tensor structure in (3.84) is the general form of Γ
(4)
at
a symmetry point where (p
1
+ p
2
)
2
= (p
1
+ p
3
)
2
= (p
1
+ p
4
)
2
≡ µ
2
.
We can therefore also deﬁne a ‘running renormalized coupling’
¯
λ(µ) at
momentum scale µ by
Γ
R
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
(p
1
p
2
p
3
p
4
) = −2
¯
λ(µ)s
α
1
α
2
α
3
α
4
, symmetry point µ, (3.92)
which gives
¯
λ(µ) = λ
0
+λ
2
0
n + 8
16π
2
1
0
dx ln[a
2
m
2
0
+x(1 −x)a
2
µ
2
] +c
. (3.93)
Expressing the running coupling in terms of λ
R
and m
R
leads to
¯
λ(µ) = λ
R
+λ
2
R
n + 8
16π
2
1
0
dxln[1 +x(1 −x)µ
2
/m
2
R
] +O(λ
3
R
)
= λ
R
, µ = 0, (3.94)
≈ λ
R
+λ
2
R
n + 8
16π
2
[ln(µ
2
/m
2
R
) −2], µ
2
m
2
R
. (3.95)
48 O(n) models
The running coupling indicates the strength of the interactions at
momentum scale µ. Expressing the vertex function (3.91) in terms of
this running coupling shows that, at large momenta, terms of the type
λ
2
R
ln[(p
1
+ p
2
)
2
/m
2
R
] are replaced by
¯
λ
2
(µ) ln[(p
1
+ p
2
)
2
/µ
2
]. So, on
choosing µ
2
equal to values of (p
i
+p
j
)
2
that typically occur in a given
situation, the logarithms are generically not large and the strength of
the fourpoint vertex on this momentum scale is expressed by
¯
λ(µ).
3.6 Renormalizationgroup beta functions
The renormalized quantities do not depend explicitly on the lattice
distance, all dependence on a is absorbed by the relations between m
0
,
λ
0
and m
R
, λ
R
. Thus it seems that we can take the continuum limit
a →0 in the renormalized quantities. Changing a while keeping m
R
and
λ
R
ﬁxed implies that m
0
and λ
0
must be chosen to depend on a, as given
by (3.88) and (3.89). We see that a
2
m
2
0
decreases and becomes negative
as a decreases, even in the symmetric phase. This we found earlier in the
meanﬁeld approximation. However, the bare λ
0
increases as a decreases
and beyond a certain value we can no longer trust perturbation theory
in λ
0
. Neither can we trust (3.89) if a becomes too small, since then the
coeﬃcient of λ
2
R
blows up.
Let us look at the problem in another way. Consider what happens
to λ
R
as we approach the phase boundary at ﬁxed λ
0
. In (3.86) we may
replace to this order m
0
by m
R
,
λ
R
= λ
0
+λ
2
0
n + 8
16π
2
[ln(a
2
m
2
R
) +c] +O(λ
3
0
). (3.96)
We see that λ
R
decreases as a decreases, but when the logarithm becomes
too large the perturbative relation breaks down. We can extract more
information by diﬀerentiating with respect to a and writing the result
in terms of λ
R
,
β
R
(λ
R
) =
¸
a
∂λ
R
∂a
λ
0
=
¸
am
R
∂λ
R
∂am
R
λ
0
= β
1
λ
2
0
+O(λ
3
0
) (3.97)
= β
1
λ
2
R
+β
2
λ
3
R
+ , (3.98)
β
1
=
n + 8
8π
2
. (3.99)
The function β
R
(λ
R
) is one of the renormalizationgroup functions
introduced by Callan and by Symanzik. For a clear derivation of the
3.6 Renormalizationgroup beta functions 49
Callan–Symanzik equations in our context see [20]. They are dimen
sionless functions which may be expressed in terms of renormalized
vertex functions and are given by renormalized perturbation theory as
a series
¸
k
β
k
λ
k
R
. This means that the higherorder terms of the form
λ
k
0
[ln(am
R
)]
l
can be rearranged in terms of powers of λ
R
with coeﬃcients
that do not depend any more on ln(am
R
). This is the justiﬁcation for
rewriting (3.97) in terms of λ
R
.
Integration of ∂λ
R
/∂t = −β
1
λ
2
R
gives
λ
R
=
λ
1
1 +λ
1
β
1
t
, t ≡ −[ln(am
R
) +c/2], (3.100)
where λ
1
is an integration constant, λ
1
= λ
0
+O(λ
2
0
). As a →0, t →∞
and we see that λ
R
approaches zero. The approximation of using only
the lowestorder approximation to the beta function is therefore self
consistent.
Let us try the betafunction trick on λ
0
to see whether we can
determine how it depends on a if we keep λ
R
ﬁxed. From (3.89) we
ﬁnd
¸
a
∂λ
0
∂a
λ
R
≡ −β
0
(λ
0
) = −β
1
λ
2
0
+ . (3.101)
Note the change of sign compared with (3.98). Integrating this equation
gives
λ
0
=
λ
2
1 −λ
2
β
1
t
, (3.102)
where λ
2
= λ
R
+O(λ
2
R
). We see that λ
0
blows up at the ‘Landau pole’
t = 1/λ
2
β
1
, but, of course, before reaching this value the ﬁrstorder
approximation to β
0
(λ
0
) breaks down.
Consider next the beta function
¯
β(
¯
λ) for the running coupling
¯
λ(µ)
on momentum scale µ. From (3.95) we see that, for large µ m
R
,
¸
µ
∂
¯
λ(µ)
∂µ
λ
R
,m
R
≡
¯
β(
¯
λ) = β
1
¯
λ
2
+ , µ m
R
, (3.103)
again with the same universal coeﬃcient for the ﬁrstorder term in its
expansion. The solution is similar to that for λ
0
,
¯
λ =
λ
3
1 −λ
3
β
1
ln(µ/m
R
)
. (3.104)
The eﬀective coupling
¯
λ increases with momentum scale µ. To see if it
can become arbitrarily large we need to go beyond the weakcoupling
expansion.
50 O(n) models
Fig. 3.7. Two possible shapes of β
0
(λ
0
). The arrows denote the ﬂow of λ
0
for
increasing t = −ln(am
R
) + constant.
We end this section by speculating about diﬀerent shapes of the beta
function β
0
for the bare coupling constant. Two typical possibilities are
shown in ﬁgure 3.7. In case (a) there is a ﬁxed point λ
∗
that attracts
the ﬂow of λ
0
for increasing ‘time’ t. Near λ
∗
we can linearize
∂λ
0
∂t
= −A(λ
0
−λ
∗
), (3.105)
λ
0
−λ
∗
= C exp(−At), t →∞, (3.106)
where C is an integration constant. The larget behavior can be rewritten
in the form
ξ =
1
am
R
∝ (λ
∗
−λ
0
)
−ν
, ν = 1/A, (3.107)
which shows that the critical exponent ν is determined by the slope of
the beta function at the ﬁxed point. Since t can go to inﬁnity without a
problem, a continuum limit a →0 is possible for case (a).
In case (b) the beta function does not have a zero, apart from the
origin λ
0
= 0. Supposing a behavior
∂λ
0
∂t
= Aλ
α
0
, λ
0
→∞, α > 0, A > 0, (3.108)
leads to the asymptotic solution
λ
−(α−1)
0
= −A(α −1)(t −t
1
), (3.109)
where we assumed α > 1. In this case λ
0
becomes inﬁnite in a ﬁnite
‘time’ t = t
1
. Since λ
0
= ∞ is the largest value λ
0
can take, t cannot go
beyond t
1
, a cannot go to zero and a continuum limit is not possible.
3.7 Hopping expansion 51
A similar discussion can be given for the running coupling
¯
λ. Cases
(a) and (b) also illustrate possible behaviors of the running coupling for
large momentum scales µ. In case (a) the running coupling approaches
λ
∗
as µ → ∞, whereas in case (b)
¯
λ goes to inﬁnity on some large but
ﬁnite momentum scale µ
1
.
A ﬁxed point like λ
∗
is called ultraviolet stable as it attracts the
running coupling when µ → ∞, while the ﬁxed point at the origin is
called infrared stable as it attracts the running coupling for µ →0. Case
(a) is like the situation in three Euclidean dimensions (with a reﬂection
about the horizontal axis), whereas we shall see in the following that in
four dimensions the situation is like case (b).
The main conclusion in this section is that λ
R
→ 0 as we approach
the phase boundary at ﬁxed suﬃciently small λ
0
. To see whether we can
avoid a noninteracting theory in the continuum limit, we need to be able
to investigate large λ
0
. This can be done with the hopping expansion
and with numerical simulations.
3.7 Hopping expansion
Consider the partition function in the form
Z =
Dµ(φ)
¸
xµ
exp(2κφ
α
x
φ
α
x+ˆ µ
), (3.110)
where Dµ(φ) =
¸
x
dµ(φ
x
) is the product of onesite measures deﬁned in
(3.18). Expansion in κ (hopping expansion) leads to products of onesite
integrals of the form
Dµ(φ) ≡ Z
0
=
dµ(φ)
#sites
, (3.111)
Dµ(φ) φ
α
x
φ
β
y
= δ
xy
Z
0
'φ
α
φ
β
`
1
, (3.112)
Dµ(φ) φ
α
x
φ
β
y
φ
γ
z
= 0, (3.113)
Dµ(φ) φ
α
x
φ
β
x
φ
γ
x
φ
δ
x
= Z
0
'φ
α
φ
β
φ
γ
φ
δ
`
1
, (3.114)
etc., where #sites is the total number of lattice sites. Odd powers of φ
vanish in the onesite average
'F`
1
=
dµ(φ) F(φ)
dµ(φ). (3.115)
52 O(n) models
Fig. 3.8. Diagrams in the expansion of exp(2κ
¸
xµ
φ
α
x
φ
α
x+ˆ µ
).
Fig. 3.9. The diagrams of ﬁgure 3.8 after integration over φ. The fat dot
denotes the fourpoint vertex γ
4
.
Before integration over φ, each term in the expansion can be represented
by a dimer diagram ‘on the lattice’, as illustrated in ﬁgure 3.8. The dots
indicate the ﬁelds φ. The integration over φ leads to diagrams as shown
in ﬁgure 3.9.
The onesite integrals can be treated as a mini ﬁeld theory, with
propagators g
αβ
and vertex functions γ
α
1
···α
4
, γ
α
1
···α
6
, . . .. For instance,
γ
αβγδ
can be deﬁned by
'φ
α
φ
β
`
1
= g
αβ
, (3.116)
'φ
α
φ
β
φ
γ
φ
δ
`
1
= g
αβ
g
γδ
+g
αγ
g
βδ
+g
αδ
g
βγ
+g
αβγδ
, (3.117)
g
αβγδ
= g
αα
g
ββ
g
γγ
g
δδ
γ
α
β
γ
δ
, (3.118)
analogously to (3.53). By O(n) symmetry we have
g
αβ
= δ
αβ
g, g =
'φ
2
`
1
n
, (3.119)
g
αβγδ
= s
αβδγ
'(φ
2
)
2
`
1
n
2
+ 2n
, (3.120)
γ
αβγδ
= s
αβδγ
γ
4
, γ
4
=
n
3
n + 2
'(φ
2
)
2
`
1
'φ
2
`
4
1
−
n
2
'φ
2
`
2
1
, (3.121)
where s
αβδγ
= δ
αβ
δ
γδ
+ has been deﬁned in (3.49). For small λ,
γ
4
∝ λ, whereas for λ →∞, γ
4
→−2n
4
/(n + 2).
As usual, one expects that disconnected diagrams cancel out in ex
pressions for the vertex functions, and that the twopoint function,
G
αβ
xy
= 'φ
α
x
φ
β
y
`, can be expressed as a sum of connected diagrams. It
3.7 Hopping expansion 53
Fig. 3.10. Randomwalk contribution to the propagator.
is instructive to make an approximation for the twopoint function in
which the vertex functions γ
(4)
, γ
(6)
, . . ., are neglected at ﬁrst. This
leads to the randomwalk approximation
G
αβ
xy
= δ
αβ
∞
¸
L=0
(2κ)
L
g
L+1
(H
L
)
xy
+ ‘interactions’, (3.122)
illustrated in ﬁgure 3.10. Here ‘interactions’ denote the neglected con
tributions proportional to γ
(4)
, γ
(6)
, . . ., and we introduced the hopping
matrix
H
uv
=
¸
µ
(δ
u+ˆ µ−v,0
+δ
v+ˆ µ−u,0
). (3.123)
Applying this matrix e.g. to the vector δ
v,x
gives a nonzero answer only
for u’s that are nearest neighbors of x, i.e. all sites that can be reached
from x in ‘one step’. Applying H once more corresponds to making one
more step in all possible directions, etc. In this way a random walk
is built up by successive application of H. Each link in the expansion
contributes a factor 2κ, and each site a factor g. In momentum space we
get
G
αβ
xy
= δ
αβ
π
−π
d
4
p
(2π)
4
e
ip(x−y)
g
¸
L
(2κg)
L
H(p)
L
(3.124)
= δ
αβ
π
−π
d
4
p
(2π)
4
e
ip(x−y)
g
1 −2κgH(p)
, (3.125)
where
H(p) =
¸
x
e
−ipx
H
x,0
=
¸
µ
2 cos p
µ
. (3.126)
In the randomwalk approximation the twopoint correlation function
has the freeﬁeld form. For small momenta we identify the mass param
54 O(n) models
Fig. 3.11. Four random walks correlated by the one site γ
4
.
eter m
R
and the wavefunctionrenormalization constant Z
φ
,
G
αβ
(p) = δ
αβ
Z
φ
m
2
R
+p
2
+O(p
4
)
, (3.127)
Z
φ
= (2κ)
−1
, m
2
R
= (2gκ)
−1
−2d. (3.128)
This Z
φ
corresponds to Z
ϕ
= 1 (cf. (3.15)). When m
R
→ 0 we enter
the scaling region. In the randomwalk approximation this occurs at
κ = κ
c
= 1/4gd, which is the meanﬁeld value (3.36). This is not so
surprising as the meanﬁeld approximation is good for d → ∞, when
also the randomwalk approximation is expected to be good, because
the chance of selfintersections in the walk, where γ
(4)
, γ
(6)
, . . . come
into play, goes to zero. Notice that κ
c
is also the radius of convergence
of the expansion (3.124).
Within the randomwalk approximation we have the estimate for the
renormalized coupling (cf. (3.80)) as illustrated in ﬁgure 3.11,
−2λ
R
= Z
2
γ
4
=
γ
4
4κ
2
c
, (3.129)
λ
R
→λ
0
, λ →0, (3.130)
→
2d
n
2
n
2
n + 2
=
32
3
, λ →∞, d = 4, n = 4. (3.131)
This indicates already that λ
R
is not inﬁnite at λ = ∞.
The partition function and expectation values can be expressed as a
systematic expansion in κ. This is called the hopping expansion because
the randomwalk picture suggests propagation of particles by ‘hopping’
from one site to the next. By the analogy of κ with the inverse tempera
ture in the Ising model, the expansion is known in statistical physics as
the hightemperature expansion, or, with increasing sophistication, the
linkedcluster expansion. Using computers to help with the algebra, the
expansion can be carried out to high orders (see e.g. [22] and references
therein).
3.8 L¨ uscher–Weisz solution 55
A good property of the hopping expansion is that it has a nonzero
radius of convergence, for any ﬁxed λ ∈ (0, ∞). This is in contrast to
the weakcoupling expansion, which is an asymptotic expansion (as is
typical for saddlepoint expansions) with zero radius of convergence (see
for example [13]). An expansion f(x) =
¸
∞
k=0
f
k
x
k
is called asymptotic
if
f(x) −
N
¸
k=0
f
k
x
k
= O(x
N+1
). (3.132)
For ﬁxed ﬁnite N the sum gives an accurate approximation to f(x), for
suﬃciently small x. The expansion need not converge as N → ∞ and
for a given x there is an optimum N beyond which the approximation
becomes worse.
3.8 L¨ uscher–Weisz solution
Using the hopping expansion in combination with the Callan–Symanzik
renormalizationgroup equations, L¨ uscher and Weisz showed how the
O(n) models in four dimensions can be solved to a good approximation
[20, 21, 22, 23]. The coeﬃcients of the hopping series were calculated
to 14th order and the Callan–Symanzik beta functions were used to
threeloop order. The cases n = 1 [20, 21] and n = 4 [23] were worked
out in detail. The interested reader is urged to study these lucid papers
which contain a lot of information on ﬁeld theory. We shall review the
highlights for the O(4) model.
The critical κ
c
(λ) is estimated from the radius of convergence of the
hopping expansion to be monotonically increasing from κ
c
=
1
8
at λ = 0
to κ
c
= 0.304 11(6) at λ = ∞. An important aspect of the results is the
carefully estimated errors in various quantities. For simplicity, we shall
not quote the errors anymore in the following. Along the line κ = 0.98 κ
c
in the κ–λ plane the hopping expansion still converges well, with the
mass parameter m
R
decreasing from 0.40 to 0.28 and the renormalized
coupling λ
R
increasing from 0 to 3.2 as λ increases from 0 to ∞. At a
slightly smaller κ < κ
c
such that m
R
= 0.5, λ
R
= 4.3 for λ = ∞.
Remarkably, λ
R
= 3.2 may be considered as relatively weak coupling.
Let us rewrite the beta function
m
R
∂λ
R
∂m
R
= β
R
(λ
R
) = β
1
λ
2
R
+β
2
λ
3
R
+ , (3.133)
56 O(n) models
in terms of a natural variable
˜
λ ≡ β
1
λ
R
,
m
R
∂
˜
λ
∂m
R
=
˜
λ
2
+
β
2
β
2
1
˜
λ
3
+ . (3.134)
The results
β
1
=
n + 8
8π
2
, β
2
= −
9n + 42
(8π
2
)
2
, (3.135)
give β
2
/β
2
1
≈ −0.54. Then λ
R
= 3.2 means
˜
λ ≈ 0.41 and the twoloop
term in (3.134) is only about 20% of the oneloop term. This indicates
that renormalized perturbation theory may be applicable for these cou
plings. The next (threeloop) term in the series is again positive and
L¨ uscher and Weisz reason that the true beta function in this coupling
region may be between the two and threeloop values.
A basic assumption made in order to proceed is that renormalized
perturbation theory is valid for suﬃciently small λ
R
, even if the bare λ
is inﬁnite. This may seem daring if one thinks of deriving renormalized
perturbation theory from the bare weakcoupling expansion. However,
it appears natural from the point of view of Wilson’s renormalization
theory in terms of an eﬀective action with an eﬀective cutoﬀ, or from the
point of view of eﬀective actions, or Schwinger’s Source Theory, which
uses unitarity to obtain higherorder approximations in an expansion in
a physical coupling parameter (e.g. λ
R
).
Using the beta function calculated in renormalized perturbation the
ory, L¨ uscher and Weisz integrate the Callan–Symanzik equations toward
the critical point m
R
= 0. (The variable κ is traded for m
R
.) As we
have seen in (3.100) this leads to the conclusion that the renormalized
coupling vanishes at the phase boundary, which is thus established even
for bare coupling λ = ∞ (!).
The integration is done numerically, using (3.133). Suﬃciently deep
in the scaling region we may integrate by expansion,
∂λ
R
∂ lnm
R
= β
R
(λ
R
), (3.136)
lnm
R
=
λ
R
dx
β
R
(x)
, (3.137)
=
λ
R
dx
¸
1
β
1
x
2
−
β
2
β
2
1
x
+O(1)
, (3.138)
= −
1
β
1
λ
R
−
β
2
β
2
1
ln(β
1
λ
R
) + lnC
1
+O(λ
R
). (3.139)
3.8 L¨ uscher–Weisz solution 57
Here C
1
is an integration constant, which becomes dependent on the
bare λ once the solution is matched to the hopping expansion. (Part
of the integration constant is written as −(β
2
/β
2
1
) lnβ
1
.) Notice that
knowledge of β
2
is needed in order to be able to deﬁne C
1
(λ) as λ
R
→0.
Eq. (3.139) can also be written as
m
R
= C
1
(β
1
λ
R
)
−β
2
/β
2
1
e
−1/β
1
λ
R
[1 +O(λ
R
)], (3.140)
which shows that m
R
depends nonanalytically on λ
R
for λ
R
→ 0.
L¨ uscher and Weisz show that similarly
Z = C
2
[1 +O(λ
R
)], (3.141)
κ
c
−κ = C
3
m
2
R
(λ
R
)
δ
1
/β
1
[1 +O(λ
R
)], (3.142)
where δ
1
is a Callan–Symanzik coeﬃcient similar to the β’s.
From these equations follow the scalings laws, τ = 1 −κ/κ
c
→0:
m
R
→C
4
τ
1/2
[ lnτ[
δ
1
/2β
1
, (3.143)
λ
R
→
2
β
1
[ lnτ[
−1
, (3.144)
Z →C
2
. (3.145)
We recognize that the behavior (3.144) follows from (3.100). Note that
(3.143) shows that the correlationlength critical exponent ν has almost
the meanﬁeld value ν =
1
2
: it is modiﬁed only by a power of lnτ.
In the scaling limit all information about the renormalized coupling
coming from the hopping expansion is contained in C
1
(λ), which in
creases monotonically with decreasing λ. For small bare coupling C
1
can be calculated with the weakcoupling expansion. In fact, inserting
the expansion (3.86) for λ
R
into (3.140) and expanding in λ
0
leads
to
lnC
1
(λ) =
1
β
1
λ
0
+
β
2
β
2
1
ln(β
1
λ
0
) −
c
2
+O(λ
0
). (3.146)
For inﬁnite bare coupling L¨ uscher and Weisz ﬁnd C
1
(∞) = exp(1.5). The
fact that C
1
(λ) decreases as λ increases corresponds to the intuition that
for given m
R
, the renormalized coupling increases with λ. Conversely,
for given λ
R
, the smallest lattice spacing (smallest m
R
) is obtained with
the largest λ, i.e. λ = ∞.
The hopping expansion holds in the region of the phase diagram
connected to the line κ = 0, i.e. the symmetric phase. L¨ uscher and
Weisz extended these results into the physically relevant broken phase,
where relations similar to (3.140)–(3.145) were obtained with coeﬃcients
58 O(n) models
C
(the Callan–Symanzik coeﬃcients are the same in both phases). They
considered the critical theory at κ = κ
c
and used perturbation theory
in κ − κ
c
, or equivalently m
2
R
, to connect the symmetric and broken
phases. This is done again using renormalized perturbation theory with
the results
C
1
(λ) = 1.435 C
1
(λ), C
2,3
(λ) = C
2,3
(λ). (3.147)
Another deﬁnition was chosen for the renormalized coupling in the
broken phase, which is very convenient:
λ
R
=
m
2
R
2v
2
R
, v
R
≡ Z
−1/2
π
v = Z
−1/2
π
'φ`, (3.148)
where Z
π
is the wavefunction renormalization constant of the Goldstone
bosons. This choice is identical in form to the classical relation between
the coupling, mass and vacuum expectation value (cf. (3.10)). The
renormalized coupling in the broken phase cannot be deﬁned at zero
momentum, as in the symmetric phase, because the massless Goldstone
bosons would lead to infrared divergences (in absence of explicit symme
try breaking). Using Z
π
in the deﬁnition of v
R
allows the identiﬁcation
of v
R
with the pion decay constant f
π
in the application of the O(4)
model to lowenergy pion physics, or with the electroweak scale of 246
GeV in the application to the Standard Model.
The renormalizationgroup equations were numerically integrated
again in the broken phase, this time for increasing m
R
, until the renor
malized λ
R
became too large and the perturbative beta function could
no longer be trusted. We mention here the result λ
R
< 3.5 for m
R
< 0.5,
at λ = ∞. Hence, also in the broken phase the renormalized coupling is
relatively small even at the edge of the scaling region, taken somewhat
arbitrarily to be at m
R
= 0.5, and the renormalized coupling goes to
zero in the continuum limit m
R
→0.
Figure 3.12 shows lines of constant renormalized coupling with varying
κ/κ
c
for the case n = 1 [21]. For a given λ
R
we can go deeper into the
scaling region, i.e. approach the critical line κ/κ
c
= 1 by increasing
the bare coupling λ. This behavior was also found in the weakcoupling
expansion, but the results there became invalid as λ grew too big. Here
we see that the behavior continues for large λ and that the line λ =
∞ is reached before reaching the critical line. The critical line can be
approached arbitrarily closely only for arbitrarily small renormalized
coupling. It follows that the beta function of the model has to correspond
to case (b) in ﬁgure 3.7.
3.8 L¨ uscher–Weisz solution 59
Fig. 3.12. Lines of constant renormalized coupling for the case n = 1 deter
mined by L¨ uscher and Weisz. The lines are labeled by the value of g
R
≡ 6λ
R
.
The bare coupling λ increases from 0 to ∞ as the LW parameter
¯
λ goes from
0 to 1. From [21].
For the O(4) model, the ﬁgure corresponding to 3.12 is similar, except
that the values of λ
R
at a given am
R
are smaller [23]. The ﬁrst beta
function coeﬃcient increases with n, so one expects the renormalization
eﬀects to be larger than for n = 1.
Let us recall here another wellknown criterion for a coupling being
small or large: the unitarity bound. This is the value of the renormalized
coupling at which the lowestorder approximation to the elastic scatter
ing amplitude T becomes larger than a bound deduced from the unitarity
of the scattering matrix S. In a partial wave state of deﬁnite angular
momentum (e.g. the swave) the scattering matrix is ﬁnite dimensional,
its eigenvalues are phase factors S = exp(i2δ), with δ the standard
phase shifts. Since the lowestorder (Born) approximation is real and
T = (S − 1)/i = 2 exp(iδ) sinδ has a real part ∈ (−1, 1), one requires
the Born approximation for [T[ to be smaller than 1. This gives an
upper bound on λ
R
: the unitarity bound. The maximum values of the
renormalized coupling at m
R
= 0.5 turn out to be smaller than the
unitarity bound (in the broken phase the maximum λ
R
is only about
two thirds of this bound).
Summarizing, the results show that the O(n) models (in particular
the cases n = 1 and 4) in four dimensions are ‘trivial’: the renormalized
coupling vanishes in the continuum limit. Since we want of course an
60 O(n) models
interacting model we cannot take the lattice distance to zero. The model
is to be interpreted as an eﬀective model that is valid at momenta much
smaller than the cutoﬀ π (π/a in physical units). For not too large
renormalized coupling the cutoﬀ can be huge and lattice artifacts very
small. At the scale of the cutoﬀ the model loses its validity, and in
realistic applications new physical input is needed. Where this happens
depends on the circumstances. The relevance of these results for the
Standard Model will be discussed later.
3.9 Numerical simulation
With numerical simulations we get nonperturbative results albeit on
ﬁnite lattices. Simulations provide furthermore a valuable kind of insight
into the properties of the systems, which is complementary to expansions
in some parameter.
The lattice is usually taken of the form N
3
N
t
, with N = 4, 6, 8, . . .,
and N
t
of the same order. For simplicity we shall assume that N
t
= N in
the following. For the O(4) model sizes 10
4
–16
4
are already very useful.
Expectation values
'O` =
1
Z
Dφ exp[S(φ)] O(φ) (3.149)
are evaluated by producing a set of ﬁeld conﬁgurations ¦φ
α
x
¦
j
, j =
1, . . ., K, which is distributed according to the weight factor expS(φ),
giving the approximate result
'O` ≈ O ≡
1
K
K
¸
j=1
O(φ
j
), (3.150)
with a statistical error ∝ 1/
√
K. The ensemble is generated with a
stochastic process, e.g. using a Metropolis or a Langevin algorithm. We
shall give only a brief description of the Monte Carlo methods and the
analysis of the results. Monte Carlo methods are described in more detail
in [4, 6, 10].
For example, a Langevin simulation produces a sequence φ
α
x,n
, n =
1, 2, . . ., by the rule
φ
α
x,n+1
= φ
α
x,n
+δ
∂S(φ
n
)
∂φ
α
x,n
+
√
2δ η
α
x,n
, (3.151)
3.9 Numerical simulation 61
where η
α
x,n
are Gaussian pseudorandom numbers with unit variance and
zero mean,
'η
α
x,n
` = 0, 'η
α
x,n
η
α
x
,n
` = δ
αα
δ
xx
δ
nn
, (3.152)
and δ is a step size related to the Langevin time t by t = δn. It can
be shown that as t → ∞, the φ’s become distributed according to the
desired expS(φ), up to terms of order δ (cf. problem (viii)). Using a
small δ such as 0.01, the system reaches equilibrium after some time, in
units related to the mass gap of the model, and conﬁgurations φ
j
may
be recorded every ∆t = 1, say. The ﬁnite δ produces a systematic error,
which can be reduced by taking δ suﬃciently small, or by using several
δ’s and extrapolating to δ = 0. The conﬁgurations j and j +1 are usually
correlated, such that the true statistical error is larger than the naive
standard deviation
1
K
K
¸
j=1
O(φ
j
) −O
2
(3.153)
but there are methods to take care of this.
The Metropolis algorithm is often preferred over the Langevin one,
since it does not suﬀer from systematic stepsize errors ∝ δ and it is
often more eﬃcient. Research into eﬃcient algorithms is fascinating and
requires good insight into the nature of the system under investigation.
New algorithms are being reported every year in the ‘Lattice proceed
ings’.
Since the lattices are ﬁnite, we have to take into account systematic
errors due to scaling (O(a)) violations and ﬁnitesize (L) eﬀects (L =
Na). It is important to determine these systematic errors and check that
they accord with theoretical scaling and ﬁnitesize formulas. We can then
attempt to extrapolate to inﬁnite volume and zero lattice spacing.
Typical observables O for the O(n) models are the average ‘magnetiza
tion’
¯
φ
α
=
¸
x
φ
α
x
/N
4
, the average ‘energy’ −S/N
4
, which reduces to the
average ‘link’
¸
xµ
φ
α
x
φ
α
x+ˆ µ
/4N
4
in the limit λ → ∞, and products like
φ
α
x
φ
β
y
giving correlation functions upon averaging. The free energy F =
−lnZ itself cannot be obtained directly by Monte Carlo methods, but
may be reconstructed, e.g. by integrating ∂F/∂κ = −2'
¸
xµ
φ
α
x
φ
α
x+ˆ µ
`.
The correlation function G
αβ
xy
= 'φ
α
x
φ
β
y
` − 'φ
α
x
`'φ
β
y
` is used to de
termine the masses of particles. With periodic boundary conditions it
depends only on the diﬀerence x − y. For example, in the symmetric
62 O(n) models
phase the spectral representation can be written as
¸
x
e
−ipx
G
αα
x,t;0,0
=
¸
γ
['0[φ
α
[p, γ`[
2
e
−ω
p,γ
t
+e
−ω
p,γ
(N
t
−t)
, (3.154)
where ﬁnitetemperature (ﬁnite N
t
) corrections of the form ∝
'p
γ
[φ
α
x
[pγ` have been neglected. Choosing zero momentum p, one may
ﬁt the propagator data for large t and N
t
−t to
Rcosh
¸
m
t −
N
t
2
, R = ['0[φ
α
[0α`[
2
exp
−m
N
t
2
, (3.155)
where m = ω
min
is the mass of the particle with the quantum numbers of
φ
α
. It is assumed that the contributions of the next energy levels ω
with
the same quantum numbers (such as three particle intermediate states),
which have relative size exp[−(ω
−m)t], can be neglected for suﬃciently
large times. Alternatively, one can try to determine the renormalized
mass and wavefunction renormalization constant in momentum space
from eq. (3.81), but this does not give the particle mass directly. Only
when the particle is weakly coupled is m
R
≈ m. The higherorder
correlation functions (such as the fourpoint functions) require in general
much better statistics than do the propagators.
For illustration we show ﬁrst some early results in the symmetric
phase. Figure 3.13 shows the particle mass and the renormalized coupling
g
R
= 6λ
R
as functions of the spatial size N in a simulation at inﬁnite bare
coupling [24]. We see that the interactions cause the ﬁnitevolume mass
to increase over the inﬁnitevolume value (the linear extent in physical
units, Lm, changes by roughly a factor of two). The results for the
coupling constant roughly agree within the errors with those obtained
by L¨ uscher and Weisz using the hopping expansion. Figure 3.14 shows
a result [25] for the dressed propagator (correlation function) analyzed
in momentum space. The fact that the propagator resembles so closely
a free propagator, apart from renormalization, is an indication that the
eﬀective interactions are not very strong, despite the large bare coupling.
The broken phase is physically more interesting. Although there is
rigorously no phase transition in a ﬁnite volume, the diﬀerence between
the symmetric and brokenphase regions in parameter space is clear
in the simulations. The phase boundary is somewhat smeared out by
ﬁnitevolume eﬀects. In the broken phase of the O(n) model for n > 1,
there is a preferred direction, along 'φ
α
` = v
α
= 0, and one con
siders the longitudinal and transverse modes G
σ
= v
−2
v
α
v
β
G
αβ
and
G
π
= (δ
αβ
−v
−2
v
α
v
β
)G
αβ
/(n −1). The latter correspond to the Gold
3.9 Numerical simulation 63
Fig. 3.13. Finitesize dependence of m and g
R
= 6λ
R
in a simulation in the
symmetric phase (L = N, λ = ∞). The full circles correspond to a ﬁnitesize
dependence expected from renormalized perturbation theory. From [24].
stone bosons. The σ particle can decay into the π particles, which leads
to complications in the analysis of the numerical data. The Goldstone
bosons lead to strong ﬁnitesize eﬀects. Finitesize eﬀects depend on the
range of the interactions, the correlation length, which is inﬁnite for the
Goldstone bosons. However, the ﬁnite size also gives a nonzero mass
to the Goldstone bosons. These eﬀects have to be taken into account in
the analysis of the simulation results. The theoretical analysis is based
on eﬀective actions, using ‘chiral perturbation theory’ or ‘renormalized
perturbation theory’.
Consider the magnetization observable
¯
φ
α
=
¸
x
φ
α
x
/N
4
. An im
pression of its typical distribution is illustrated in ﬁgure 3.15. The
diﬀerence between the symmetric and broken phase is clear, yet the
ﬁgure suggests correctly that the angular average leads to '
¯
φ
α
` = 0 also
in the brokenphase region. In a ﬁnite volume there is no spontaneous
64 O(n) models
Fig. 3.14. Dressed propagator in momentum space plotted as a function of
¸
µ
4 sin
2
(p
µ
/2), at m
2
0
= −24.6, λ
0
= 100. From [25].
Fig. 3.15. Qualitative illustration of the probability distribution of
¯
φ
α
at ﬁnite
volume for n = 2 in the symmetric phase (left) and the broken phase (right).
symmetry breaking. To formulate a precise deﬁnition of v
α
, we introduce
an explicit symmetrybreaking term into the action, which ‘pulls’ the
spins along a direction, say 0,
∆S =
¸
x
φ
0
x
, (3.156)
3.9 Numerical simulation 65
and deﬁne
v
α
= lim
→0
lim
L→∞
'φ
α
x
`, (3.157)
where the order of the limits is crucial. To understand this somewhat
better, one introduces the constrained eﬀective potential V
L
(
¯
φ), which is
obtained by integrating over all ﬁeld conﬁgurations with the constraint
¯
φ
α
=
¸
x
φ
α
x
/L
4
,
exp(−L
4
V
L
(
¯
φ)) =
Dφ exp[S(φ)] δ
¯
φ
α
−
¸
x
φ
α
x
/L
4
, (3.158)
such that
Z =
d
n
¯
φ exp
−L
4
V
L
(
¯
φ)
, (3.159)
and
'
¯
φ
α
` =
d
n
¯
φ exp
−L
4
V
L
(
¯
φ)
¯
φ
α
d
n ¯
φ exp
−L
4
V
L
(
¯
φ)
. (3.160)
The fact that the eﬀective potential comes with a factor L
4
is easily
understood from the lowestorder approximation in λ → 0, which is
obtained by simply inserting the constant
¯
φ
α
for φ
α
x
in the classical
action,
S(
¯
φ) = −L
4
V
L
(
¯
φ) = −N
4
[(1 −8κ)
¯
φ
2
+λ(
¯
φ
2
−1)
2
−
¯
φ
0
], (3.161)
where we used the form (3.16) of the action in lattice units. In this
classical approximation the constraint eﬀective potential is independent
of L. The exact constraint eﬀective potential is only weakly dependent
on L, for suﬃciently large L, and as L increases the integrals in (3.160)
are accurately given by the saddlepoint approximation, i.e. by the sum
over the minima of V
L
(
¯
φ). In absence of the term there is a continuum
of saddle points and '
¯
φ
α
` = 0 even in the broken phase. A unique saddle
point is obtained, however, for nonzero . If we let go to zero after the
inﬁnitevolume limit, '
¯
φ
α
` remains nonzero. For more information on
the constraint eﬀective potential, see e.g. [26].
This technique of introducing explicit symmetry breaking is used in
simulations [27] as shown in ﬁgure 3.16. A simpler estimate of the
inﬁnitevolume value v of the magnetization is obtained with the ‘ro
tation method’, in which the magnetization of each individual conﬁgu
ration is rotated to a standard direction before averaging. The resulting
'[
¯
φ[` can be ﬁtted to a form v + constant N
−2
.
66 O(n) models
Fig. 3.16. Plots of
¯
φ
4
as a function of j = in the O(4) model for various
lattice sizes. The data are ﬁtted to the theoretical behavior (curves) and
extrapolated to inﬁnitevolume and = 0, giving the full circle in the upper
lefthand corner. From [27].
Fig. 3.17. Results on m
σ
/F = m
σ
/v
R
as a function of the correlation length
1/m
σ
, for the ‘standard (usual) action’ (lower data) and a ‘Symanzikimproved
action’ (upper data). The crosses are results of L¨ uscher and Weisz obtained
with the hopping expansion. The bare coupling λ = ∞. The curves are
interpolations based on renormalized perturbation theory. From [28].
3.10 Realspace renormalization group and universality 67
As a last example we show in ﬁgure 3.17 results on the renormalized
coupling
√
2λ
R
= m
R
/v
R
[28]. Data are shown for the action considered
here (the ‘standard action’) and for a ‘Symanzikimproved action’. We
see that the data for the standard action agree with the results obtained
with the hopping expansion in the previous section, within errors. The
Symanzikimproved action has nexttonearestneighbor couplings such
that the O(a
2
) errors are eliminated in the classical continuum limit.
It is not clear a priori that this leads to better scaling in the quantum
theory, because the scalar ﬁeld conﬁgurations that contribute to the path
integral are not smooth on the lattice scale, but it is interesting that the
diﬀerent regularization leads to somewhat larger renormalized couplings
for a given correlation length.
In conclusion, the numerical simulations have led to accurate results
which fully support the theoretical understanding that the O(n) models
are ‘trivial’.
3.10 Realspace renormalization group and universality
One of the cornerstones of quantum ﬁeld theory is universality: the
physical properties emerging in the scaling region are to a large extent
independent of the details of formulating the theory on the scale of the
cutoﬀ. The physics of the O(n) models is expected to be independent
of the lattice shape, the addition of nextnearestneighbor couplings,
nextnextnearestneighbor couplings, . . ., or higherorder terms (φ
2
)
k
,
k = 3, 4, . . . (of course, in its Ising limit or nonlinear sigma limit where
φ
2
= 1 such higherorder terms no longer play a role). More precisely, the
physical outcome of the models falls into universality classes, depending
on the symmetries of the system and the dimensionality of space–time.
Our understanding of universality comes from the renormalization group
`a la Wilson [29, 30] (‘block spinning’, see e.g. [11]), and from the weak
coupling expansion. We shall sketch the ideas using the onecomponent
scalar ﬁeld as an example, starting with the block spinning approach
used in the theory of critical phenomena.
In the realspace renormalizationgroup method one imagines inte
grating out the degrees of freedom with wave lengths of order of the
lattice distance and expressing the result in terms of an eﬀective action
for the remaining variables. On iterating this procedure one obtains the
eﬀective action describing the theory at physical (a) distance scales.
68 O(n) models
Let
¯
φ
¯ x
be the average of φ
x
over a region of linear size s around ¯ x,
¯
φ
¯ x
=
¸
x
B
¯ x,x
φ
x
. (3.162)
The averaging function B(¯ x, x) is concentrated near sites ¯ x on a coarser
lattice that are a distance s apart in units of the original lattice. We could
simply take values ¯ x
µ
= 2x
µ
with B
x,¯ x
= z
¸
µ
δ
¯ x±ˆ µ,x
(‘blocking’), or a
smoother Gaussian average B = z
¸
x
exp(−(x − ¯ x)
2
/2s), with suitable
normalization factors z. The eﬀective action
¯
S is deﬁned by
e
¯
S(
¯
φ)
=
Dφe
S(φ)
¸
¯ x
δ
¯
φ
¯ x
−
¸
x
B
¯ x,x
φ
x
, (3.163)
and it satisﬁes
D
¯
φe
¯
S(
¯
φ)
=
Dφe
S(φ)
. (3.164)
After a few iterations the eﬀective action has many types of terms, so
one is led to consider general actions of the form
S(φ) =
¸
α
K
α
O
α
(φ). (3.165)
Here O
α
denotes terms of the schematic form (∂
µ
φ∂
µ
φ)
k
, (φ
2
)
k
, . . . (k =
1, 2, . . .). The new eﬀective action can then again be written in the form
¯
S(
¯
φ) =
¸
α
¯
K
α
O
α
(
¯
φ). (3.166)
The scale factor z in the deﬁnition of the averaging function B is chosen
such that the coeﬃcient of ∂
µ
¯
φ∂
µ
¯
φ is equal to
1
2
, in lattice units of
the coarse ¯ x lattice, in order that the new coeﬃcients
¯
K
α
do not run
away after many iterations. Because of the locality of the averaging
function one expects the action
¯
S to be local too, i.e. the range of the
couplings in
¯
S is eﬀectively ﬁnite, and one expects the dependence of
the coeﬃcients
¯
K
α
on K
α
to be analytic. One iteration thus constitutes
a renormalizationgroup transformation
¯
K
α
= T
α
(K). (3.167)
We can still calculate correlation functions and quantities of physical
interest with the new ﬁelds
¯
φ. For these the highestmomentum contribu
tions are suppressed by the averaging, as can be seen by expressing them
in terms of the original ﬁelds φ, but contributions from physical momenta
which are low compared to the cutoﬀ are unaﬀected. In particular the
3.10 Realspace renormalization group and universality 69
correlation length in units of the original lattice distance is unchanged.
However, in units of the ¯ x lattice distance the correlation length is
smaller by a factor 1/s. Each iteration the correlation length is shortened
by a factor 1/s and when it is of order one we imagine stopping the
iterations. We can then still extract the physics on the momentum scales
of order of the mass scale. If we want to discuss scales ten times higher,
we can stop iterating when the correlation length is still of order ten.
In the inﬁnite dimensional space of coupling constants K
α
there is a
hypersurface where the correlation length is inﬁnite, the critical surface.
We want to start our iterations very close to the critical surface because
we want a large correlation length on the original lattice, which means
that we are able to do many iterations before the correlation length is
of order unity. If there is a ﬁxed point K
∗
,
T
α
(K
∗
) = K
∗
α
, (3.168)
then we can perform many iterations near such a point without changing
the K
α
very much. At such a ﬁxed point the correlation length does not
change, so it is either zero or inﬁnite. We are of course particularly
interested in ﬁxed points in the critical surface. Linearizing about such
a critical ﬁxed point (on the critical surface),
¯
K
α
−K
∗
α
= M
αβ
(K
β
−K
∗
β
), M
αβ
=[∂T
α
/∂K
β
]
K=K
∗
, (3.169)
it follows that the eigenvalues λ
i
of M
αβ
determine the attractive (λ
i
<
1) or repulsive (λ
i
> 1) directions of the ‘ﬂow’. These directions are given
by the corresponding eigenvectors e
α
i
, which determine the combinations
e
α
i
O
α
.
One expects only a few repulsive eigenvalues, called ‘relevant’, while
most of them are attractive and called ‘irrelevant’. Eigenvalues λ
i
= 1
are called marginal. Further away from the ﬁxed point the attractive and
repulsive directions will smoothly deform into attractive and repulsive
curves. The marginal directions will also turn into either attractive or
repulsive curves.
Let us start the iteration somewhere on the critical surface. Then
the ﬂow stays on the surface. Suppose that the ﬂow on the surface is
attracted to a critical ﬁxed point K
∗
. Next let us start very close to
the critical surface. Then the ﬂow will at ﬁrst still be attracted to K
∗
,
but, since with each iteration the correlation length decreases by a factor
1/s, the ﬂow moves away from the critical surface and eventually turns
away from the ﬁxed point. Hence the critical ﬁxed point has at least one
relevant direction away from the critical surface.
70 O(n) models
Suppose there is only one such relevant direction (and its opposite
on the other side of the critical surface). Then, after many iterations
the ﬂow just follows the ﬂowline through this relevant direction. The
physics is then completely determined by the ﬂowline through the
relevant direction: the physical trajectory (also called the renormalized
trajectory). To the relevant direction there corresponds the only free
parameter we end up with: the ratio cutoﬀ/mass, Λ/m (where Λ = π/a).
This ratio is determined by the initial distance to the critical surface,
or equivalently, by the number of iterations and the ﬁnal distance to
the critical surface where we stop the iterations. However, the mass just
sets the dimensional scale of the theory and there is no physical free
parameter at all under these circumstances. All the physical properties
(e.g. the renormalized vertex functions and the renormalized coupling
λ
R
) are ﬁxed by the properties of the physical trajectory. On the other
hand, each additional relevant direction oﬀers the possibility of an
additional free physical parameter, which may be tuned by choosing
appropriate initial conditions.
Many years of investigation have led to the picture that there is only
one type of critical ﬁxed point in the O(n) symmetric models, which
has only one relevant direction corresponding to the mass as described
above, and one marginal but attractive direction corresponding to the
renormalized coupling. This means that eventually the renormalized
coupling will vanish after an inﬁnite number of iterations (triviality).
This is the reason that the ﬁxed point is called ‘Gaussian’, for the
corresponding eﬀective action is quadratic. However, because the renor
malized coupling is marginal and therefore changes very slowly near the
critical point, it can still be substantially diﬀerent from zero even after
very many iterations (very large Λ/m ratios). With a given number of
iterations we can imagine maximizing the renormalized coupling over
all possible initial actions parameterized by K
α
, giving an upper bound
on the renormalized coupling. Within its upper bound the renormalized
coupling is then still a free parameter in the models. The situation is
illustrated in ﬁgure 3.18.
For the massless theory the correlation length is inﬁnite, so we start
on the critical surface. The ﬂow is attracted to K
∗
, which determines
the physics outcome. The marginally attractive direction corresponds in
the massless case to the running renormalized coupling
¯
λ(µ) at some
physical momentum scale µ. Each iteration the maximum momentum
scale is lowered by a factor 1/s and, after many iterations, the ratio
(maximum momentum scale)/cutoﬀ is very small. We stop the iteration
3.11 Universality at weak coupling 71
Fig. 3.18. Renormalization groupﬂow in φ
4
theory. The line C represents the
‘canonical surface’ of actions of the standard form S = 2κ
¸
xµ
φ
x
φ
x+ˆ µ
−
¸
x
[φ
2
x
+λ(φ
2
x
−1)
2
]. The line P represents the physical trajectory. Direction
1 is an irrelevant direction, direction 2 represents the marginal direction
corresponding to the renormalized coupling. Shown are two ﬂows starting from
a point in C, one near the critical surface and on this surface.
when the maximum momentum scale is of order µ. For a given number
of iterations the running coupling can still vary within its upper bound.
As the number of iterations goes to inﬁnity, µ has to go to zero and
¯
λ(µ) → 0 because the ﬂow along the marginal direction is attracted
to zero coupling. So the massless theory can be deﬁned by taking the
number of iterations (∝ Λ/µ) large but ﬁnite, and
¯
λ(µ) →0 as µ →0.
The critical ﬁxed points of the realspace renormalizationgroup trans
formation give a very attractive explanation of universality.
3.11 Universality at weak coupling
To formulate a general action at weak coupling we start with the form
(3.16) and ﬁrst make a scale transformation φ = φ
/
√
λ, which brings
the action into the form
S(φ
) =
1
λ
¸
x
¸
2κ
¸
µ
φ
x
φ
x+ˆ µ
−φ
2
x
−(φ
2
x
−1)
2
¸
. (3.170)
We see that λ appears as a natural expansion parameter for a saddle
point expansion, while the other coeﬃcients in the action are of order
72 O(n) models
one in lattice units. A natural generalization is given by
S(φ
) =
1
λ
¸
x
¸
2κ
¸
µ
φ
x
φ
x+ˆ µ
+κ
¸
µ<ν
φ
x
φ
x+ˆ µ+ˆ ν
(3.171)
+κ
¸
µ
φ
x
φ
x+2ˆ µ
+κ
¸
µ
φ
2
x
φ
2
x+ˆ µ
+ −
∞
¸
k=1
v
2k
φ
2k
x
¸
,
which still has the symmetry φ →−φ. The coeﬃcients in this expression
are supposed to be of order 1.
The parameter λ enters in the same place as Planck’s constant when
we introduced the pathintegral quantization method, before we set it
equal to 1. It can be shown that the expansion in powers of corresponds
to an expansion in the number of loops in Feynman diagrams. For this
reason the weakcoupling expansion is called the semiclassical expansion.
For convenience in the following we shall use the original continuum
motivated parameterization (3.13) with the ﬁeld ϕ = φ/
√
2κ and rewrite
(3.171) in the form
S = −
1
λ
0
¸
x
¸
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ
x
∂
µ
ϕ
x
+z∂
µ
ϕ
2
x
∂
µ
ϕ
2
x
+ +
¸
k
u
2k
ϕ
2k
x
¸
= −
¸
x
¸
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ
x
∂
µ
ϕ
x
+λ
0
z∂
µ
ϕ
2
x
∂
µ
ϕ
2
x
+ +
¸
k
λ
k−1
0
u
2k
ϕ
2k
x
¸
,
(3.172)
where ϕ
=
√
λ
0
ϕ. Here again the coeﬃcients z, . . ., and u
2k
are supposed
to be dimensionless numbers of order unity, with the exception of u
2
which becomes m
2
0c
= O(λ
0
) at the phase boundary (this is special to
the continuum parameterization). It is instructive to rewrite the generic
action (3.172) in physical units,
S = −
¸
x
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ
x
∂
µ
ϕ
x
+a
2
λ
0
z∂
µ
ϕ
2
x
∂
µ
ϕ
2
x
+
+
¸
k
a
2k−4
λ
k−1
0
u
2k
ϕ
2k
x
, (3.173)
where now ∂
µ
ϕ
x
= (ϕ
x+a
µ
− ϕ
x
)/a and
¸
x
contains a factor a
4
. The
higherdimensional operators are accompanied by powers of the lattice
distance a such that the action is dimensionless.
In the classical continuum limit a → 0 we end up with just the ϕ
4
theory, with u
2
chosen such that m
2
= 2u
2
a
−2
remains ﬁnite. In other
3.11 Universality at weak coupling 73
Fig. 3.19. Contribution of the bare sixpoint vertex to Γ
(4)
.
words, the bare two and fourpoint vertex functions take their usual
continuum limits and the higherorder bare vertex functions vanish. In
nontrivial orders of the semiclassical expansion, the powers of a in the
bare vertex functions can be compensated by the divergences in the loop
diagrams. For example, consider the eﬀect of the term −
¸
x
λ
2
0
u
6
a
2
ϕ
6
x
on the fourpoint vertex at oneloop order as given by the diagram in
ﬁgure 3.19. The bare vertex function in momentum space is −6! λ
2
0
u
6
a
2
and the contribution to Γ
(4)
is given by
−
1
2
6! λ
2
0
u
6
a
2
π/a
−π/a
d
4
l
(2π)
4
1
m
2
0
+a
−2
¸
µ
(2 −2 cos al
µ
)
= −
1
2
6!λ
2
0
u
6
C
0
,
(3.174)
in the limit a →0 (the constant C
0
was deﬁned in (3.67)).
By looking at more examples one may convince oneself that the higher
order bare vertex functions just lead to new expressions for the vertex
functions in terms of the coeﬃcients in the action, which have, however,
the same momentum dependence as before. All lattice artifacts end up
in constants like C
0
, and in the relation between λ
R
and m
2
R
to λ
0
and
m
2
0
, such that the renormalized vertex functions, once expressed in terms
of the renormalized coupling λ
R
and renormalized mass parameter m
R
,
are universal, order by order in perturbation theory.
There is one aspect worth mentioning: the eﬀect of the lattice symme
tries. Consider the twopoint vertex function in oneloop order, which has
the form Γ
(2)
(p) = a
−2
f(ap, am
0
) on dimensional grounds. For a → 0
this takes the form a
−2
(τa
2
m
2
0
+ τ
µν
a
2
p
µ
p
ν
) + logarithms. We have
seen in section 3.4 how the logarithms emerge from the integration over
the loop variable near the origin in momentum space where the lattice
expressions take their classical continuum form: the terms containing
logarithms are covariant under continuous rotations. What about the
polynomial τ
µν
p
µ
p
ν
? Its coeﬃcient τ
µν
depends on lattice details, the
loop integrations over the cosines near the edge of the Brillouin zone
in momentum space. Here the lattice symmetries come to help. The
74 O(n) models
polynomial has to be invariant under the cubic rotations
R
(ρσ)
: x
ρ
→x
σ
, x
σ
→−x
ρ
, x
µ=ρ,σ
→x
µ
(3.175)
and axis reversals
I
(ρ)
: x
ρ
→−x
ρ
, x
µ=ρ
→x
µ
. (3.176)
There is only one such polynomial: p
2
= p
2
1
+ + p
2
4
. So the lat
tice symmetries and dimensional eﬀects are important in order to get
covariant renormalized vertex functions. Dimensional analysis showed
that the above polynomial is at most of second order and even in
p
µ
→ −p
µ
because of axisreversal symmetry. Note that there is more
than one fourthorder polynomial τ
κλµν
p
κ
p
λ
p
µ
p
ν
that is invariant under
the lattice symmetries. Such polynomials go together with dimensional
couplings, such as cutoﬀ eﬀects ∝ a
2
. The polynomials are called contact
terms, because they correspond in position space to Dirac delta functions
and derivatives thereof.
If we destroy the space–time symmetry of the lattice, e.g. by having
diﬀerent couplings in the space and time directions, then we may have
to tune the couplings in the action to regain covariance in the scaling
region.
3.12 Triviality and the Standard Model
Arguments that scalar ﬁeld models are trivial in the sense that they be
come noninteracting when the regularization is removed were ﬁrst given
by Wilson, using his formulation of the renormalization group [29, 30].
The arguments imply that triviality should hold within a universality
class of bare actions, e.g. nexttonearestneighbor couplings, . . .. In the
previous sections we reviewed some calculations and numerical simula
tions leading to accurate determination of the renormalized coupling in
the O(4) model in the broken phase. The O(4) model may be identiﬁed
with the scalar Higgs sector of the Standard Model, and we shall now
review the implications and applications of triviality.
First we review how the O(4) model is embedded in the Standard
Model. The action for the Higgs ﬁeld is given by
S
H
= −
d
4
x[(D
µ
ϕ)
†
D
µ
ϕ +m
2
0
ϕ
†
ϕ +λ
0
(ϕ
†
ϕ)
2
], (3.177)
D
µ
ϕ =
∂
µ
−ig
1
1
2
B
µ
−ig
2
W
k
µ
τ
k
2
ϕ, (3.178)
3.12 Triviality and the Standard Model 75
where τ
k
are the Pauli matrices, ϕ = (ϕ
u
, ϕ
d
)
T
is the complex Higgs
doublet and B
µ
, and W
k
µ
are the U(1) SU(2) electroweak gauge ﬁelds.
Setting the gauge couplings to zero, the action becomes equivalent to
the O(4) model,
S
g=0
= −
d
4
x[∂
µ
ϕ
†
∂
µ
ϕ +m
2
0
ϕ
†
ϕ +λ
0
(ϕ
†
ϕ)
2
] (3.179)
= −
d
4
x
¸
1
2
∂
µ
ϕ
α
∂
µ
ϕ
α
+
m
2
0
2
ϕ
α
ϕ
α
+
λ
0
4
(ϕ
α
ϕ
α
)
2
,
ϕ
u
=
1
√
2
(ϕ
2
+iϕ
1
), ϕ
d
=
1
√
2
(ϕ
0
−iϕ
3
). (3.180)
The Higgs ﬁeld enters also in Yukawa couplings with the fermions. In
terms of a matrix ﬁeld φ deﬁned by
φ ≡
√
2
ϕ
∗
d
ϕ
u
−ϕ
∗
u
ϕ
d
, (3.181)
= ϕ
0
+iϕ
k
τ
k
= ρV, V ∈ SU(2), ρ > 0, (3.182)
the Yukawa couplings to the quarks can be expressed as
S
Y
= −
d
4
x
¯
ψ
cg
(P
R
φy
g
+y
g
P
L
φ
†
)ψ
cg
. (3.183)
Here P
L,R
= (1 ∓γ
5
)/2 are the projectors on the left and righthanded
fermion ﬁelds and the summation is over the QCD colors c and gener
ations g. The Yukawa couplings y are diagonal in SU(2) doublet space,
y = y
u
(1+τ
3
)/2+y
d
(1−τ
3
)/2. The Yukawa couplings to the leptons are
similar (in the massless neutrino limit the righthanded neutrino ﬁelds
decouple).
If we insert the vacuum expectation value of the scalar ﬁeld
ϕ =
1
√
2
0
v
, (3.184)
φ = v11, (3.185)
in the action, we ﬁnd the masses of the vector bosons W and Z and
the photon A, from the terms quadratic in the gauge ﬁelds, and the
masses of the fermions from the Yukawa couplings. Choosing renormal
ization conditions such that the ‘treegraph’ relations remain valid after
renormalization, we have
m
2
W
=
1
4
g
2
2R
v
2
R
, m
2
Z
=
1
4
(g
2
1R
+g
2
2R
) v
2
R
, m
A
= 0, (3.186)
m
f
= y
Rf
v
R
, m
2
H
= 2λ
R
v
2
R
, (3.187)
76 O(n) models
where f denotes the fermion. From experiment we know
v
R
= 246 GeV, g
1R
= 0.34, g
2R
= 0.64. (3.188)
The electroweak gauge couplings are eﬀectively quite small (recall the
typical factors of g
2
/π
2
that occur in perturbative expansions). The
Yukawa couplings are generally much smaller, as follows from (3.187)
and the fact that the fermion masses are generally small (< 5 GeV)
on the electroweak scale. Even the much heavier top quark, which has
a mass of about 175 GeV has a Yukawa coupling y
t
≈ 0.71, which is
not very large either. The (running) QCD gauge coupling of the strong
interactions is also relatively small on the electroweak scale of 100 GeV:
g
3R
≈ 1.2.
To discuss the implications of triviality of the O(4) model, let us
assume for the moment that all the gauge and Yukawa couplings can
be treated as perturbations on scales v
R
or higher. Furthermore, assume
that the Higgs mass is nonzero (we shall comment on these assump
tions below). It then follows from the triviality of the O(4) model that
the Standard Model itself must be ‘trivial’. Because a nonzero Higgs
mass implies λ
R
= 0, the triviality leads to the conclusion that the
regularization cannot be removed completely. Consequently the model
must lose its validity on the regularization scale. New physical input is
required on this momentum or equivalent distance scale.
It would obviously be very interesting if we could predict at which scale
new physics has to come into play. To some extent this can be done as
follows. If the Higgs mass is not too large such that λ
R
= m
2
H
/2v
R
is in
the perturbative domain, we can use eq. (3.140) to calculate the cutoﬀ
Λ = π/a in the lattice regularization,
Λ = m
H
C(β
1
λ
R
)
β
2
/β
2
1
exp(1/β
1
λ
R
)[1 +O(λ
R
)], (3.189)
where C = π/C
1
(λ
0
). The constant C
1
is minimal, hence Λ maximal,
for inﬁnite bare coupling λ
0
. We shall assume this in the following, with
C
1
(∞) = 6.4 (the value obtained by L¨ uscher and Weisz). As an example,
m
H
= 100 GeV gives λ
R
= 0.083 and Λ = 710
36
GeV. This value for Λ
is far beyond the Planck mass O(10
19
) GeV for which gravity cannot be
neglected. Certainly new physics comes into play at the Planck scale, so
eﬀectively the regulator scale for m
H
= 100 GeV may be considered to
be irrelevantly high. On the other hand, when m
H
increases, Λ decreases.
When λ
R
becomes too large eq. (3.189) can no longer be trusted, but
we still have nonperturbative results for λ
R
and the corresponding
Λ/m
H
anyhow. For example, for m
H
= 615 GeV (m
H
/v
R
= 2.5) ﬁgure
3.12 Triviality and the Standard Model 77
3.17 shows that 1/am
H
≈ 3; hence Λ ≈ 3πm
H
= 5800 GeV, for
the standard action. For the Symanzikimproved action this would be
Λ ≈ 8300 GeV.
So we can compute a cutoﬀ scale Λ from knowledge of the Higgs
mass, but this Λ is clearly regularization dependent (the dependence
of C in (3.189) on λ
0
also indicates a regularization dependence, cf. c
in eq. (3.146)). For values of m
H
deep in the scaling regime Λ is very
sensitive to changes in m
H
, but at the edge of the scaling region, e.g. for
Λ/m
H
≈ 6, this dependence is greatly reduced.
This supports the idea of establishing an upper bound on the Higgs
mass: given a criterion for allowed scaling violations, there is an upper
bound on m
H
[31]. For example, requiring Λ/m
H
> 2π (am
H
<
1
2
), we
get an upper bound on m
H
from results like ﬁgure 3.17. This should
then be maximized over all possible regularizations. Figure 3.17 shows
that the standard and Symanzikimproved actions give the bounds
m
H
/v
R
2.7 and 3, respectively. A way to search through regularization
space systematically has been advocated especially by Neuberger [32]. To
order 1/Λ
2
all possible regularizations (including ones formulated in the
continuum) can be represented by a threeparameter action on the F
4
lattice, which has more rotational symmetry than does the hypercubic
lattice. It is believed that the results of this program will not lead to
drastic changes in the above result m
H
/v
R
3.
The Pauli–Villars regularization in the continuum appears to give
much larger Λ’s than the lattice [33]. The problem with relating various
regularization schemes lies in the fact that it is not immediately clear
what the physical implications of a requirement like Λ/m
H
> 2π are. One
may correlate Λ to regularization artifacts (mimicking ‘new physics’) in
physical quantities, such as the scattering amplitude for the Goldstone
bosons. Requiring, in a given regularization, that such an amplitude
diﬀers by less than 5%, say, from the value obtained in renormalized
perturbation theory, would determine Λ and the corresponding upper
bound on m
H
in that regularization. The signiﬁcance of such criteria is
unclear, however.
At this point it is useful to recall one example in which nature (QCD)
introduces ‘new physics’. The O(4) model may also be interpreted as
giving an eﬀective description of the three pions, which are Goldstone
bosons with masses around 140 MeV due to explicit symmetry break
ing. The expectation value v
R
is equal to the pion decay constant,
v
R
= f
π
= 93 MeV. The analog of the Higgs particle is the very
broad σ resonance around 900 MeV. The lowenergy pion physics is
78 O(n) models
approximately described by the O(4) model. However, since m
σ
/v
R
≈ 10
is far above the upper bounds found above, the cutoﬀ needed in this
application of the O(4) model is very low, probably even below m
σ
, and
the model is not expected to describe physics at the σ scale. Indeed,
there is ‘new physics’ in the form of the wellknown ρ resonance with a
mass of 770 MeV and width of about 150 MeV.
Let us now discuss the assumptions of neglecting the eﬀect of the gauge
and Yukawa couplings. The gauge couplings g
2,3
are asymptotically free
and their eﬀective size is even smaller on the scale of the cutoﬀ. So it
seems reasonable that their inclusion will not cause large deviations from
the above results. The U(1) coupling g
1
is not asymptotically free and
its eﬀective strength grows with the momentum scale. However, its size
on the Planck scale is still small. If we accept not putting the cutoﬀ
beyond the Planck scale anyway, then also the gauge coupling g
1
may
be expected to have little inﬂuence. The same can be said about the
Yukawa couplings, which are also not asymptotically free (possibly with
the exception of the topquark coupling).
These expectations have been studied in some detail. An important
result based on O(4) Ward identities is that relations like m
2
W
= g
2
2
v
2
R
/4
are still valid to ﬁrst order in g
2
2
on treating the Higgs selfcoupling
nonperturbatively [31, 34]. This may be seen as justifying a deﬁnition
of the g
R
such that (3.186) is exact.
Of course, it is desirable to verify the above expectations nonpertur
batively. A lattice formulation of the Standard Model is diﬃcult because
of problems with fermions on a lattice (cf. section 8.4). However, lattice
formulations of gaugeHiggs systems and to a certain extent Yukawa
models are possible and have been much studied over the years. The
lattice formulation of gaugeHiggs systems has interesting aspects having
to do with the gaugeinvariant formulation of the Higgs phenomenon,
presentation and discussion of which here would lead too far [35].
It turns out that the Yukawa couplings are also ‘trivial’ and that the
maximum renormalized coupling is also relatively weak, see for example
[36]. Numerical simulations have set upper bounds on the masses of
possible hitherto undiscovered generations of heavy fermions (including
heavy neutrinos), as well as the inﬂuence of such generations on the
Higgsmass bound.
Finally, the assumption made above, namely that m
H
= 0, is justiﬁed
by theoretical arguments for a lower bound on m
H
, which are based
on the eﬀect that the fermions and gauge bosons induce on the Higgs
selfcouplings (for reviews, see [37, 38]).
3.13 Problems 79
3.13 Problems
(i) Sixpoint vertex
Determine the Feynman diagrams for the sixpoint vertex func
tion in the ϕ
4
theory in the oneloop approximation. For one
of these diagrams, write down the corresponding mathematical
expression in lattice units (a = 1) and in physical units (a = 1).
Show that it converges in the limit a →0, to the expression one
would write down directly in the continuum.
(ii) Renormalized coupling for mass zero
In the massless O(n) model λ
R
is ill deﬁned. In this case
¯
λ(µ) is
still a good renormalized coupling. Give the renormalized four
point vertex function Γ
R
α
1
···α
4
(p
1
p
4
) in terms of
¯
λ(µ).
(iii) Critical κ and m
0
at weak coupling
What are the critical values of the bare mass m
2
0c
(in lattice units)
and the hopping parameter κ
c
to ﬁrst order in λ
0
in the weak
coupling expansion?
(iv) Minimal subtraction
To obtain renormalized vertex functions in the weakcoupling ex
pansion, wavefunction, mass, and couplingconstant renormaliza
tions are needed. Here we concentrate on the latter. We substitute
the bare λ
0
for a series in terms of a renormalized λ (not to be
confused with the λ in the lattice parameterization (3.15)),
λ
0
= λZ
λ
(λ, lnaµ),
Z
λ
(λ, lnaµ) = 1 +
∞
¸
n=1
n
¸
k=0
Z
nk
λ
n
(lnaµ)
k
=
∞
¸
k=0
Z
k
(λ)(lnaµ)
k
. (3.190)
Terms vanishing as a → 0 have been neglected, order by order
in perturbation theory. From the point of view of obtaining ﬁnite
renormalized vertex functions we can be quite liberal and allow
any choice of the coeﬃcients Z
nk
leading to a series in λ for
physical quantities for which the a dependence cancels out.
The renormalized λ depends on a physical scale µ but not on
a, it is a ‘running coupling’, whereas λ
0
is supposed to depend on
a but not on µ. Introducing a reference mass µ
1
, we write
λ
0
(t) = λ(s)Z
λ
(λ(s), s −t), t = −ln(aµ
1
), s = ln(µ/µ
1
).
(3.191)
80 O(n) models
From 0 = dλ
0
/ds we ﬁnd
∂
∂s
+β
∂
∂λ
λZ
λ
(λ, s −t) = 0, (3.192)
where
β =
∂λ
∂s
. (3.193)
Using the above expansion for Z
λ
in terms of powers (ln aµ)
k
=
(t −s)
k
, show that
(k + 1)Z
k
(λ) +β
∂
∂λ
(λZ
k
(λ)) = 0, k = 0, 1, 2, . . ., (3.194)
and hence that the β function is given by
β(λ) = −
Z
1
(λ)
∂(λZ
0
(λ))/∂λ
. (3.195)
In a minimal subtraction scheme one does not ‘subtract’ more
than is necessary to cancel out the ln(aµ)’s, and one chooses
Z
0
(λ) ≡ 1. Notice that there is a whole class of minimal subtrac
tion schemes: we may replace ln(aµ) by ln(aµ) + c, with c some
numerical constant, since such a c is equivalent to a redeﬁnition
of µ. It follows that the beta function in a minimal subtraction
scheme can be read oﬀ from the coeﬃcients of the terms involving
only a single power of lnaµ:
β(λ) = −Z
1
(λ). (3.196)
Show that in minimal subtraction the beta function β
0
(λ
0
) for
λ
0
is identical to β(λ
0
).
Assuming that the beta function is given, solve eq. (3.192) with
the boundary condition Z
λ
(λ, 0) = Z
0
(λ) = 1.
(v) Mass for small κ
The hopping result (3.128) shows that the mass parameter m
R
is inﬁnite for κ = 0. For small κ we see from (3.122) that
G
xy
∝ (2gκ)
L
xy
= exp(−m
xy
[x − y[), where L
xy
is the mini
mal number of steps between x and y. We can identify a mass
m
xy
= −ln(2gκ) (L
xy
/[x−y[). For small κ, compare m
xy
for x, y
along a lattice direction and along a lattice diagonal with the
results of problem (i) in chapter 2. Compare also with equations
(2.117), (2.120) and (2.122), for the case that x and y are along
a timelike direction in the lattice.
3.13 Problems 81
(vi) An example of a divergent expansion
Instructive examples of convergent and divergent expansions, in
κ and λ, are given by
z(κ, λ) =
∞
−∞
dφexp(−κφ
2
−λφ
4
) (3.197)
=
λ
−1/4
2
∞
¸
k=0
Γ(k/2 + 1/4)
k!
(−κλ
−1/2
)
k
(3.198)
= κ
−1/2
∞
¸
k=0
Γ(2k + 1/2)
k!
(−λκ
−2
)
k
. (3.199)
Verify.
(vii) A dimensionsix fourpoint vertex
Show that the dimensionsix term −
¸
x
a
2
λ
0
z∂
µ
ϕ
2
x
∂
µ
ϕ
2
x
in the
general action (3.173) corresponds to the vertex function
0
Γ(p
1
p
4
) = −8a
2
λ
0
z(−i)
2
K
∗
µ
(p
1
+p
2
)K
∗
µ
(p
3
+p
4
)
+ two permutations, (3.200)
K
µ
(p) =
1
ia
(e
iap
µ
−1). (3.201)
In the classical continuum limit this vertex vanishes but in
oneloop order it contributes to the twopoint function Γ(p) (cf.
ﬁgure 3.5). Show that this contribution is given by
+4λ
0
z
2a
−2
+p
2
C
0
−
1
8
+O(a
2
)
, (3.202)
where C
0
is given in (3.67) and we used (2π)
−4
π
−π
d
4
l
ˆ
l
2
µ
/
ˆ
l
2
=
1
4
,
independent of µ = 1, . . ., 4.
(viii) Langevin equation and Fokker–Planck Hamiltonian
Consider a probability distribution P(φ) for the ﬁeld φ
x
. One
Langevin time step changes φ into φ
according to
φ
x
= φ
x
+
√
2δ η
x
+δ
∂S(φ)
∂φ
x
. (3.203)
This corresponds to P(φ) → P
(φ). The new P
(φ) may be
determined as follows. Let O(φ) be an arbitrary observable, with
average value
DφP(φ)O(φ). After a Langevin time step the
new average value is
DφP(φ)'O(φ
(φ))`
η
, where ' `
η
denotes
the average over the Gaussian random numbers η
x
. By deﬁnition
this new average value is equal to
DφP
(φ)O(φ), i.e.
DφP
(φ)O(φ) =
DφP(φ)'O(φ
(φ))`
η
. (3.204)
82 O(n) models
By expansion in
√
δ, show that
'O(φ
)`
η
= O(φ) +δ
¸
x
¸
∂O(φ)
∂φ
x
∂S(φ)
∂φ
x
+
∂
2
O(φ)
∂φ
x
∂φ
x
+O(δ
2
),
(3.205)
and consequently that
P
−P
δ
=
¸
x
∂
∂φ
x
¸
∂
∂φ
x
−
∂S
∂φ
x
P (3.206)
≡ −H
FP
P. (3.207)
The partial diﬀerential operator in φspace, H
FP
, is called the
Fokker–Planck Hamiltonian. Using
∂
∂φ
x
e
S/2
= e
S/2
∂
∂φ
x
+
1
2
∂S
∂φ
x
, (3.208)
show that
˜
P deﬁned by P = e
S/2
˜
P satisﬁes
˜
P
−
˜
P
δ
= −
˜
H
˜
P +O(δ), (3.209)
˜
H =
¸
x
−
∂
∂φ
x
−
1
2
∂S
∂φ
x
∂
∂φ
x
−
1
2
∂S
∂φ
x
.
Show that
˜
H is a Hermitian positive semideﬁnite operator, which
has one eigenvalue equal to zero with eigenvector exp(S/2). Give
arguments showing that, as δ →0 and the number n of iterations
goes to inﬁnity, with t = nδ → ∞, P will tend to the desired
distribution expS.
4
Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
Gauge invariance is formulated in position space (as opposed to momen
tum space), which makes the lattice very well suited as a regulator for
gauge theories. In this chapter we shall ﬁrst review the classical QED and
QCD actions, then put these theories on the lattice and deﬁne gauge
invariant path integrals. Subsequently a natural quantummechanical
Hilbertspace interpretation will be given. Gaugeinvariant couplings to
external sources will be shown to correspond to Wilson loops.
4.1 QED action
The QED action for electrons is given by
S =
dx L(x), (4.1)
L(x) = −
1
4
F
µν
(x)F
µν
(x) −
¯
ψ(x)γ
µ
[∂
µ
+ieA
µ
(x)] ψ(x) −m
¯
ψ(x)ψ(x),
(4.2)
where ψ is the electron ﬁeld, A
µ
the photon ﬁeld and
F
µν
(x) = ∂
µ
A
ν
(x) −∂
ν
A
µ
(x) (4.3)
is the electromagnetic ﬁeldstrength tensor. The γ
µ
are Dirac matrices
(cf. appendix D) acting on the ψ’s, e is the elementary charge (e > 0)
and m is the electron mass. It can be useful to absorb the coupling
constant e in the vector potential:
A
µ
→
1
e
A
µ
. (4.4)
83
84 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
Then L takes the form
L = −
1
4e
2
F
µν
F
µν
−
¯
ψγ
µ
(∂
µ
−iqA
µ
)ψ −m
¯
ψψ, (4.5)
q = −1, for the electron, (4.6)
in which the function of e as a coupling constant (characterizing the
strength of the interaction) is separated from the charge q, which char
acterizes the behavior under gauge transformations.
The action is invariant under gauge transformations,
ψ
(x) = e
iω(x)q
ψ(x),
¯
ψ
(x) = e
−iω(x)q
¯
ψ(x), (4.7)
A
µ
(x) = A
µ
(x) +∂
µ
ω(x), (4.8)
S(
¯
ψ, ψ, A) = S(
¯
ψ
, ψ
, A
), (4.9)
where ω(x) is real. The phase factors
Ω(x) = e
iω(x)
(4.10)
form a group, for each x: the gauge group U(1). We may rewrite (4.7)
and (4.8) entirely in terms of Ω(x),
ψ
(x) = Ω(x)
q
ψ(x),
¯
ψ
(x) =
¯
ψ(x)Ω
∗
(x)
q
, (4.11)
A
µ
(x) = A
µ
(x) +iΩ(x)∂
µ
Ω
∗
(x). (4.12)
The covariant derivative
D
µ
≡ ∂
µ
−iA
µ
q (4.13)
has the property that D
µ
ψ(x) transforms just like ψ(x) under gauge
transformations:
D
µ
ψ
(x) ≡ [∂
µ
−iqA
µ
(x)]ψ
(x) = Ω(x)
q
D
µ
ψ(x), (4.14)
such that
¯
ψγ
µ
D
µ
ψ =
¯
ψ
γ
µ
D
µ
ψ
.
Above we have interpreted the gauge transformations as belonging to
the group U(1). We may also interpret (4.10) as a unitary representation
of the group (under addition) of real numbers, R:
ω(x) →e
iω(x)q
, ω(x) ∈ R. (4.15)
4.2 QCD action 85
Another unitary representation of R could be
ω →e
iωT
(4.16)
where T is a real number. For the group U(1), however, the mapping
Ω = e
iω
→D(Ω) = e
iωT
(4.17)
is a representation only if T is an integer. If T is not an integer, D(Ω) =
Ω
T
is not single valued as a function of Ω. Even if we restrict e.g. ω ∈
[−π, π] to make Ω → e
iωT
unique, the product rule would be violated
for some Ω’s. (For example, for T =
1
2
, Ω
1
Ω
2
= Ω
3
with ω
1,2
= 0.9 π,
ω
3
= 1.8 π −2π = −0.2 π would result in e
iω
1
T
e
iω
2
T
= e
i0.9 π
= e
iω
3
T
=
e
−i0.1 π
.)
If the gauge group were necessarily U(1), charge would have to be
quantized. Suppose there are ﬁelds ψ
r
transforming with the represen
tations T = q
r
= integer:
ψ
r
(x) = D
r
(x)ψ
r
(x), D
r
(x) = Ω(x)
q
r
. (4.18)
Then we have to use a corresponding covariant derivative D
r
µ
,
D
r
µ
= ∂
µ
−iq
r
A
µ
(x), (4.19)
such that the action density
L = −
1
4e
2
F
µν
F
µν
−
¸
r
¯
ψ
r
γ
µ
D
r
µ
ψ
r
−
¸
r
m
r
¯
ψ
r
ψ
r
(4.20)
is U(1)gauge invariant. It follows that the charges eq
r
are a multiple
of the fundamental unit e, which is called charge quantization. If the
gauge group were R, there would be no need for charge quantization. In
Grand Uniﬁed Theories the gauge group of electromagnetism is a U(1)
group which is embedded as a subgroup in the Grand Uniﬁed gauge
group. This could provide the explanation for the quantization of charge
observed in nature.
4.2 QCD action
The QCD action has the form
S = −
d
4
x
1
4g
2
G
k
µν
G
kµν
+
¯
ψγ
µ
D
µ
ψ +
¯
ψmψ
. (4.21)
86 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
The gauge group is SU(3), the group of unitary 3 3 matrices with
determinant equal to 1. An element of SU(3) can be written as
Ω = exp(iω
k
t
k
), (4.22)
where the t
k
, k = 1, . . ., 8, are a complete set of Hermitian traceless 3
3 matrices. Then Ω
−1
= Ω
†
and
Tr t
k
= 0 ⇒det Ω = exp(Tr ln Ω) = 1. (4.23)
The t
k
are the generators of the group in the deﬁning representation.
A standard choice for these matrices is patterned after the SU(2) spin
matrices
1
2
σ
k
in terms of the Pauli matrices
σ
1
=
0 1
1 0
, σ
2
=
0 −i
i 0
, σ
3
=
1 0
0 −1
, (4.24)
namely,
t
k
=
1
2
λ
k
, (4.25)
with
λ
k
=
¸
σ
k
0
0
0 0 0
¸
, k = 1, 2, 3, λ
8
=
1
√
3
¸
1 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 −2
¸
,
λ
4
=
¸
0 0 1
0 0 0
1 0 0
¸
, λ
5
=
¸
0 0 −i
0 0 0
i 0 0
¸
,
λ
6
=
¸
0 0 0
0 0 1
0 1 0
¸
, λ
7
=
¸
0 0 0
0 0 −i
0 i 0
¸
. (4.26)
These λ’s are the wellknown GellMann matrices. They have the prop
erties
Tr (t
k
t
l
) =
1
2
δ
kl
, (4.27)
[t
k
, t
l
] = if
klm
t
m
, (4.28)
where the f
klm
are the real structure constants of SU(3), totally anti
symmetric in k, l and m (cf. appendix A.1).
4.2 QCD action 87
The quark ﬁelds ψ and
¯
ψ are in the deﬁning representation of SU(3).
They carry three discrete indices,
ψ
αaf
:
α = 1, . . ., 4, Dirac index;
a = 1, 2, 3 (or red, white, blue), color index;
f = 1, . . ., n
f
(or u, d, s, c, b, t), ﬂavor index.
(4.29)
The gauge transformations and the covariant derivative D
µ
act on a, the
Dirac gamma matrices act on α and the diagonal mass matrix m acts
on f,
m = diag(m
u
, m
d
, m
s
, . . .). (4.30)
We shall now explain the covariant derivative D
µ
and the gaugeﬁeld
term G
µν
G
µν
. It is instructive to assume for the moment that the ψ
ﬁelds transform under some arbitrary unitary irreducible representation
of the color group SU(3), not necessarily the deﬁning representation.
For notational convenience we shall still denote the matrices by Ω; they
can be written as
Ω = e
iω
k
T
k
, (4.31)
with T
k
the generators in the chosen representation, which satisfy
[T
k
, T
l
] = if
klm
T
m
, (4.32)
Tr (T
k
T
l
) = ρ δ
kl
. (4.33)
For the deﬁning representation ρ =
1
2
, for the adjoint representation
ρ = 3 (an expression for ρ is given in (A.47) in appendix A.2).
We assume that D
µ
has a form similar to (4.13). However, here it is
a matrix,
D
µab
= δ
ab
∂
µ
−iG
µ
(x)
ab
, or D
µ
= ∂
µ
−iG
µ
. (4.34)
The matrix gauge ﬁeld G
µ
(x) should transform such that, under the
gauge transformation
ψ
(x) = Ω(x)ψ(x),
¯
ψ
(x) =
¯
ψ(x)Ω
†
(x), (4.35)
D
µ
ψ transforms just like ψ,
D
µ
ψ
(x) = Ω(x)D
µ
ψ(x) = Ω(x)D
µ
Ω
†
(x)ψ
(x)
. (4.36)
Treating ∂
µ
as an operator gives the requirement
D
µ
= ΩD
µ
Ω
†
, (4.37)
88 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
or more explicitly
∂
µ
−iG
µ
= Ω(∂
µ
−iG
µ
)Ω
†
= Ω∂
µ
Ω
†
+∂
µ
−iΩG
µ
Ω
†
. (4.38)
It follows that G
µ
has to transform as
G
µ
= ΩG
µ
Ω
†
+iΩ∂
µ
Ω
†
. (4.39)
Note that this reduces to (4.12) for an Abelian group.
What is the general form of G
µ
(x)? How to parameterize this matrix
ﬁeld? Suppose G
µ
= 0. Then G
µ
= iΩ∂
µ
Ω
†
, so the parameterization
of G
µ
must at least incorporate the general form of iΩ∂
µ
Ω
†
. We shall
now show that the latter can be written as a linear superposition of the
generators T
m
. We write
iΩ∂
µ
Ω
†
= iΩ
∂
∂ω
k
Ω
†
∂
µ
ω
k
= S
k
∂
µ
ω
k
, (4.40)
where
S
k
(ω) = iΩ(ω)
∂
∂ω
k
Ω
†
(ω). (4.41)
Let ω +ε be a small deviation of ω and consider
Ω(ω)Ω
†
(ω +ε) = Ω(ω)
¸
Ω
†
(ω) +ε
k
∂
∂ω
k
Ω
†
(ω) +O(ε
2
)
= 1 −iε
k
S
k
(ω) +O(ε
2
). (4.42)
The lefthand side of this equation is only a small deviation of the unit
matrix, so it is possible to write it as 1 − iϕ
m
(ω, ε)T
m
, where ϕ
m
is of
order ε, so ϕ
m
(ω, ε) = S
km
(ω)ε
k
. Hence, S
k
(ω) can be written as
S
k
(ω) = S
km
(ω)T
m
. (4.43)
It will be shown in appendix A.2 (eq. (A.43)) that the coeﬃcients S
km
(ω)
are independent of the representation chosen for Ω. It follows from (4.41)
and (4.43) that the Ansatz
G
µ
(x) = G
m
µ
(x)T
m
(4.44)
incorporates the general form of iΩ∂
µ
Ω
†
. Furthermore, since the gener
ators T
m
transform under the adjoint representation of the group (cf.
appendix A.2)
ΩT
m
Ω
†
= R
−1
mn
T
n
, (4.45)
4.2 QCD action 89
the form (4.44) is preserved under the gauge transformation (4.39):
ΩG
m
µ
T
m
Ω
†
+iΩ∂
µ
Ω
†
=
G
m
µ
R
−1
mn
+S
kn
∂
µ
ω
k
T
n
,
G
n
µ
= R
nm
G
m
µ
+S
kn
∂
µ
ω
k
, (4.46)
where we used R
−1
= R
T
. The R
nm
, S
nm
and ω
k
are real, so we may
take (4.44) as the parameterization of G
µ
(x) with real ﬁelds G
m
µ
(x).
Note that the transformation law for G
m
µ
(x) depends only on the group
(its adjoint representation), not on the particular representation chosen
for Ω.
The gaugeﬁeld G
µ
transforms inhomogeneously under the gauge
group. The ﬁeld tensor G
µν
is constructed out of G
µ
such that it
transforms homogeneously,
G
µν
= ΩG
µν
Ω
†
. (4.47)
Analogously to the electrodynamic case (4.3), G
µν
can be written as
G
µν
= D
µ
G
ν
−D
ν
G
ν
= ∂
µ
G
ν
−∂
ν
G
µ
−i[G
µ
, G
ν
]. (4.48)
Using operator notation, this can also be written as
G
µν
= [D
µ
, D
ν
]. (4.49)
Indeed, using (4.37) we have
[D
µ
, D
ν
] = D
µ
D
ν
−(µ ↔ν) = ΩD
µ
D
ν
Ω
†
−(µ ↔ν) = Ω[D
µ
, D
ν
]Ω
†
,
(4.50)
which veriﬁes the transformation rule (4.47). The matrix ﬁeld G
µν
(x)
can be written in terms of G
m
µ
(x), using (4.44) and (4.32):
G
µν
= G
k
µν
T
k
, (4.51)
G
k
µν
= ∂
µ
G
k
ν
−∂
ν
G
k
µ
+f
kmn
G
m
µ
G
n
ν
. (4.52)
According to (4.45) and (4.47), G
k
µν
transforms in the adjoint represen
tation of the group. The combination
G
k
µν
G
kµν
=
1
ρ
Tr (G
µν
G
µν
) (4.53)
is gauge invariant (ρ has been deﬁned in (4.33)). Notice that the right
hand side does not depend on the representation chosen for Ω.
The action (4.21) can now be written in more detail,
S = −
d
4
x
¸
1
4g
2
G
k
µν
G
kµν
+
¯
ψγ
µ
∂
µ
−iT
m
G
m
µ
ψ +
¯
ψmψ
. (4.54)
90 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
Since G
k
µν
G
kµν
contains terms of higher order than quadratic in G
m
µ
,
the nonAbelian gauge ﬁeld is selfcoupled. The coupling to the ψ ﬁeld
is completely determined by the generators T
m
, i.e. by the representation
Ω under which the ψ’s transform. For the quark ﬁelds, Ω is the deﬁning
representation T
m
→t
m
.
4.3 Lattice gauge ﬁeld
We shall mimic the steps leading to the QCD action (4.54) with lattice
derivatives,
1
except for choosing to work in Euclidean space–time. The
QCD action has a straightforward generalization to SU(n) gauge groups
with n = 3. We shall assume the gauge group ( = U(1) or SU(n). The
case of the noncompact group ( = R will be discussed later.
Let the fermion ﬁeld ψ
x
be associated with the sites x
µ
= m
µ
a of the
lattice, analogously to the scalar ﬁeld. Under local gauge transformations
it transforms as
ψ
x
= Ω
x
ψ
x
, (4.55)
where as before Ω
x
is an irreducible representation of the gauge group
(. Since the lattice derivative
∂
µ
ψ
x
= (ψ
x+aˆ µ
−ψ
x
)/a (4.56)
contains ψ both at x and at x +aˆ µ, we try a covariant derivative of the
form
D
µ
ψ
x
=
1
a
(ψ
x+aˆ µ
−ψ
x
) −i(
˜
C
µx
ψ
x
+C
µx
ψ
x+aˆ µ
). (4.57)
Here C
µx
and
˜
C
µx
are supposed to compensate for the lack of gauge
covariance of the lattice derivative, analogously to the matrix gauge
potential G
µ
(x). The covariant derivative has to satisfy
D
µ
ψ
x
= Ω
x
D
µ
ψ
x
, (4.58)
or
1
a
(ψ
x+aˆ µ
−ψ
x
) −i(
˜
C
µx
ψ
x
+C
µx
ψ
x+aˆ µ
)
= Ω
x
¸
1
a
(ψ
x+aˆ µ
−ψ
x
) −i(
˜
C
µx
ψ
x
+C
µx
ψ
x+aˆ µ
)
(4.59)
= Ω
x
¸
1
a
(Ω
†
x+aˆ µ
ψ
x+aˆ µ
−Ω
†
x
ψ
x
0 −i(
˜
C
µx
Ω
†
x
ψ
x
+C
µx
Ω
†
x+aˆ µ
ψ
x+aˆ µ
)
.
4.3 Lattice gauge ﬁeld 91
Comparing coeﬃcients of ψ
x
and ψ
x+aˆ µ
gives
˜
C
µx
= Ω
x
˜
C
µx
Ω
†
x
, (4.60)
C
µx
= Ω
x
C
µx
Ω
†
x+aˆ µ
+
i
a
(Ω
x
Ω
†
x+aˆ µ
−1) (4.61)
= Ω
x
C
µx
Ω
†
x+aˆ µ
+ Ω
x
i∂
µ
Ω
†
x
. (4.62)
It is consistent to set
˜
C
µx
≡ 0. (4.63)
For C
µx
we then ﬁnd the transformation rule (4.62), which resembles the
transformation behavior of the continuum gauge potentials quite closely.
By analogy with the continuum theory we try for the ﬁeld strength the
form
C
µνx
= D
µ
C
νx
−D
ν
C
µx
=
1
a
(C
ν,x+aˆ µ
−C
νx
) −iC
µx
C
ν,x+aˆ µ
−(µ ↔ν). (4.64)
We ﬁnd that C
µνx
indeed transforms homogeneously,
C
µνx
= Ω
x
C
µνx
Ω
†
x+aˆ µ+aˆ ν
, (4.65)
and consequently Tr (C
µνx
C
†
µνx
) is gauge invariant ((4.62) implies that
C
µνx
cannot be Hermitian in general).
The question is now that of how to parameterize the matrix C
µx
in a
way consistent with the transformation rule (4.62). This can be answered
by looking at the case C
µx
= 0, as in the continuum in the previous
section. Then
C
µx
= Ω
x
i∂
µ
Ω
†
x
=
i
a
(Ω
x
Ω
†
x+aˆ µ
−1), (4.66)
which suggests that we write
C
µx
=
i
a
(U
µx
−1), (4.67)
where U
µx
is a unitary matrix of the same form as Ω
x
, i.e. it is a
group element in the same representation of the gauge group (. This
parameterization of C
µx
is indeed consistent with the transformation
rule (4.62), since it gives
U
µx
= Ω
x
U
µx
Ω
†
x+aˆ µ
. (4.68)
To connect with the gauge potentials G
k
µ
(x) in the continuum we write
U
µx
= e
−iaG
µx
, G
µx
= G
k
µx
T
k
, (4.69)
92 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
and identify
G
k
µx
= G
k
µ
(x). (4.70)
More precisely, let G
k
µ
(x) be smooth gauge potentials in the continuum
which we evaluate at the lattice points x
µ
= m
µ
a. Then aG
µ
(x) →0 as
a →0, and by construction
C
µx
→G
µ
(x), C
µνx
→G
µν
(x), (4.71)
where G
µν
(x) is the continuum form (4.48).
A possible latticeregulated gaugetheory action is now given by
S = −
¸
x
¸
1
2
(
¯
ψ
x
γ
µ
D
µ
ψ
x
−
¯
ψ
x
γ
µ
D
†
µx
ψ
x
) +
¯
ψ
x
mψ
x
+
1
4ρg
2
Tr (C
µνx
C
†
µνx
)
, (4.72)
with ρ the representationdependent constant deﬁned in (4.33). Evi
dently, upon inserting ψ
x
= ψ(x),
¯
ψ
x
=
¯
ψ(x) and G
k
xµ
= G
k
µ
(x) with
smooth functions ψ(x),
¯
ψ(x) and G
k
µ
(x), this action reduces to the
continuum form (4.54) in the limit a → 0. The action (4.72) is not yet
satisfactory in its fermion part: it describes too many fermions in the
scaling region – this is the notorious phenomenon of ‘fermion doubling’.
We shall come back to this in a later chapter.
The transformation property (4.68) can be written in a more sugges
tive form by using the notation
U
x,x+aˆ µ
≡ U
µx
, U
x+aˆ µ,x
≡ U
†
µx
, (4.73)
because then
U
x,y
= Ω
x
U
x,y
Ω
†
y
, y = x +aˆ µ. (4.74)
This notation suggests that it is natural to think of U
x,x+aˆ µ
as belonging
to the link (x, x+aˆ µ) of the lattice, rather than having four U
1x
, . . ., U
4x
belonging to the site x, as illustrated in ﬁgure 4.1.
In fact, there is a better way of associating U
x,y
with the continuum
gauge ﬁeld G
µ
(x): by identifying U
x,y
with the parallel transporter from
y to x along the link (x, y). The parallel transporter U(C
xy
) along a
path C
xy
from y to x is deﬁned by the pathordered product (in the
continuum)
U(C
xy
) = P exp
¸
−i
C
xy
dz
µ
G
µ
(z)
¸
, (4.75)
4.3 Lattice gauge ﬁeld 93
Fig. 4.1. Illustration of U
µx
and U
†
µx
.
where P denotes the path ordering. The pathordered product can
be deﬁned by dividing the path into N segments (z
n
, z
n
+ dz
n
), n =
0, . . ., N −1, and taking the ordered product,
U(C
xy
) = lim
N→∞
exp
¸
−i
x
z
N−1
dz
µ
G
µ
(z)
¸
exp
¸
−i
z
n+1
z
n
dz
µ
G
µ
(z)
exp
¸
−i
z
1
y
dz
µ
G
µ
(z)
= lim
N→∞
[1 −i dz
0µ
G
µ
(z
0
)] [1 −i dz
N−1 µ
G
µ
(z
N−1
)]. (4.76)
Under a gauge transformation G
µ
(z) = Ω(z)G
µ
(z)Ω
†
(z) +Ω(z)i∂
µ
Ω
†
(z)
we have
1 −i dz
nµ
G
µ
(z
n
) = Ω(z
n
)[Ω
†
(z
n
) −i dz
nµ
G
µ
(z
n
)Ω
†
(z
n
)
+dz
nµ
∂
µ
Ω
†
(z
n
)] (4.77)
= Ω(z
n
)[1 −i dz
nµ
G
µ
(z
n
)]Ω
†
(z
n+1
) +O(dz
2
),
such that all the Ω’s cancel out in U(C
xy
) except at the end points,
U
(C
xy
) = Ω(x)U(C
xy
)Ω
†
(y). (4.78)
Hence, U(C
xy
) parallel transports vectors under the gauge group at y
to vectors at x along the path C
xy
. It is known that this way of associ
ating U
x,y
with the continuum gauge ﬁeld via U(C
xy
) leads to smaller
discretization errors in the action than does use of (4.69) and (4.70). For
our lattice theory, however, the basic variables are the U
x,x+aˆ µ
≡ U
µx
,
one for each link (x, x +aˆ µ).
Expressing everything in terms of U
x,x+aˆ µ
simpliﬁes things and makes
the transformation properties more transparent:
D
µ
ψ
x
=
1
a
(U
x,x+aˆ µ
ψ
x+aˆ µ
−ψ
x
), (4.79)
C
µνx
=
i
a
2
(U
x,x+aˆ µ
U
x+aˆ µ,x+aˆ µ+aˆ ν
−U
x,x+aˆ ν
U
x+aˆ ν,x+aˆ µ+aˆ ν
),
94 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
Fig. 4.2. Illustration of the terms in the action Tr U
µνx
(a),
¯
ψ
x
U
µx
ψ
x+aˆ µ
(b)
and
¯
ψ
x+aˆ µ
U
†
µx
ψ
x
(c).
Tr (C
µνx
C
†
µνx
) =
1
a
4
Tr (2 −U
µνx
−U
†
µνx
),
U
µνx
= U
†
νµx
= U
x,x+aˆ µ
U
x+aˆ µ,x+aˆ µ+aˆ ν
U
x+aˆ µ+aˆ ν,x+aˆ ν
U
x+aˆ ν,x
.
We see in (4.79) how the covariant derivative involves parallel transport.
The action can be written as
S = −
¸
xµν
1
2g
2
ρa
4
Tr (1 −U
µνx
)
−
¸
xµ
1
2a
(
¯
ψ
x
γ
µ
U
µx
ψ
x+aˆ µ
−
¯
ψ
x+aˆ µ
γ
µ
U
†
µx
ψ
x
), (4.80)
which is illustrated in ﬁgure 4.2. The arrows representing U
µx
and
U
†
µx
are chosen such that they ﬂow from ψ to
¯
ψ, which conforms to
a convention for the Feynman rules in the weakcoupling expansion.
We continue with the theory without fermions. The elementary square
of a hypercubic lattice is called a plaquette. It may be denoted by p
(p = (x, µ, ν; µ < ν) and the product of the U’s around p is denoted by
U
p
. The gaugeﬁeld part of the action can then be written as
S(U) =
1
g
2
ρ
¸
p
Re Tr U
p
+ constant, (4.81)
in lattice units (a = 1). This action depends on the representation of the
gauge group chosen for the U’s, which in our derivation was dictated by
the representation carried by ψ and
¯
ψ. This is in contrast to the classical
action which is independent of the group representation, as we saw in
the previous section (below (4.46)).
To make the representation dependence explicit, we will from now
on assume U to be in the deﬁning representation of the gauge group.
4.4 Gaugeinvariant lattice path integral 95
Supposing that (4.81) refers to representation D
r
(U), we replace ρ →ρ
r
and Tr U
p
→χ
r
(U
p
), with χ
r
the character (trace) in the representation
r. A more general lattice action may involve a sum over representations
r,
S(U) =
¸
p
¸
r
β
r
Re χ
r
(U
p
)
χ
r
(1)
, (4.82)
χ
r
(U) ≡ Tr [D
r
(U)], (4.83)
which reduces to the classical gaugeﬁeld action in the classical contin
uum limit, with
1
g
2
=
¸
r
β
r
ρ
r
d
r
, d
r
= χ
r
(1), (4.84)
where d
r
is the dimension of representation r. For example, in an action
containing both the fundamental irrep f and the adjoint irrep a of the
gauge group SU(n), we have d
f
= n, ρ
f
= 1/2, ρ
a
= n, d
a
= n
2
−1 (cf.
appendices A.1 and A.2), and
1/g
2
= β
f
/2n +β
a
n/(n
2
−1). (4.85)
The simplest lattice formulation of QCD has a plaquette action with only
the fundamental representation. It is usually called the Wilson action
[39].
4.4 Gaugeinvariant lattice path integral
We continue with a pure gauge theory (i.e. containing only gauge ﬁelds).
The dynamical variables U
µx
are in the fundamental representation of
the gauge group ( and the system is described by the gaugeinvariant
action S(U). If the gauge group is compact we can deﬁne a lattice path
integral by
Z =
DU exp[S(U)], DU =
¸
xµ
dU
µx
. (4.86)
Here dU for a given link is a volume element in group space. For a
compact group the total volume of group space is ﬁnite and therefore Z
is well deﬁned for a ﬁnite lattice. We want Z to be gauge invariant, so
we want the integration measure DU to satisfy
DU = DU
Ω
, U
Ω
µx
= Ω
x
U
µx
Ω
†
x+aˆ µ
. (4.87)
96 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
On a given link with link variable U, gauge transformations U
= Ω
1
UΩ
†
2
are combinations of left and right translations in group space:
U
= ΩU, left, (4.88)
U
= UΩ, right. (4.89)
A measure that is invariant under such translations in group space is
well known: the Hurewicz or Haar measure. It can be written in a form
familiar from general relativity,
dU = ν
det g
¸
k
dα
k
, (4.90)
where the α
k
are coordinates on group space, U = U(α), and g
kl
is a
metric on this space, of the form
g
kl
=
1
ρ
Tr
∂U
∂α
k
∂U
†
∂α
l
, ρ =
1
2
. (4.91)
The normalization constant ν will be chosen such that
dU = 1. (4.92)
The metric (4.91) is covariant under coordinate transformations α
k
=
f
k
(α
),
g
kl
= g
mn
∂α
m
∂α
k
∂α
n
∂α
l
. (4.93)
The Jacobian factors of coordinate transformations cancel out in (4.90),
such that dU
= dU. Since left and right translations are special cases
of coordinate transformations, e.g. U = Ω
†
U
corresponds to U(α) =
Ω
†
U(α
), the measure is again invariant, dU
= dU, or
d(ΩU) = d(UΩ) = dU. (4.94)
The above may be illustrated by the exponential parameterization.
For the onedimensional group U(1) we have
U = exp(iα), g
kl
= 1,
dU =
π
−π
dα
2π
= 1. (4.95)
For the (n
2
−1)dimensional group SU(n) we have
U = exp(iα
k
t
k
), g
kl
= S
km
S
lm
, (4.96)
where we used (4.41), (4.43) and ∂U
†
/∂α
k
= −U
†
∂U/∂α
k
U
†
, which
follows from diﬀerentiating UU
†
= 1. An explicit form for S
km
is given
in (A.43) in appendix A.2.
4.5 Compact and noncompact Abelian gauge theory 97
This completes the deﬁnition of the partition function Z. We shall
introduce gaugeinvariant observables later. One such object we know
already: the plaquette ﬁeld Tr U
µνx
, or more simply Tr U
p
. It is a
composite ﬁeld in QCD, which will later be seen to describe ‘bound
states of glue’ – glueballs. Expectation values are deﬁned as usual, for
example
'Tr U
p
Tr U
p
` = Z
−1
DU exp[S(U)] Tr U
p
Tr U
p
. (4.97)
We stress at this point that gauge ﬁxing (which is familiar in the formal
continuum approach) is not necessary with the nonperturbative lattice
regulator, for a compact gauge group. The need for gauge ﬁxing shows
up again when we attempt to make a weakcoupling expansion.
4.5 Compact and noncompact Abelian gauge theory
Let us write the formulas obtained so far more explicitly for U(1):
U
µx
= exp(−iaA
µx
), (4.98)
U
µνx
= exp[−ia(A
µx
+A
νx+aˆ µ
−A
µx+aˆ ν
−A
νx
)] (4.99)
= exp(−ia
2
F
µνx
), (4.100)
F
µνx
= ∂
µ
A
νx
−∂
ν
A
µx
, (4.101)
S = −
1
4g
2
a
4
¸
xµν
[2 −2 cos(a
2
F
µνx
)], (4.102)
DU =
¸
xµ
π
−π
d(aA
µx
)
2π
. (4.103)
Gauge transformations Ω = exp(iω
x
) are linear for the gauge potentials,
U
µx
= Ω
x
U
µx
Ω
†
x+aˆ µ
, (4.104)
aA
µx
= aA
µx
+ω
x+aˆ µ
−ω
x
, mod(2π), (4.105)
except for the mod(2π).
We used the fundamental representation in S. The more general form
(4.82) is a sum over irreps r = integer, with D
r
(U) = exp(−iraA) =
χ
r
(U), d
r
= 1, and ρ
r
= r
2
, which takes the form of a Fourier series:
S =
1
2a
4
¸
xµν
¸
r
β
r
cos(ra
2
F
µνx
) + constant, (4.106)
1
g
2
=
∞
¸
r=−∞
β
r
r
2
. (4.107)
98 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
We could for example choose the β
r
such that
S = −
1
4g
2
¸
xµν
F
2
µνx
mod(2π/a
2
)
. (4.108)
The above is called the compact U(1) gauge theory. It is clear that
there is also a noncompact version of the Abelian gauge theory, with
gauge transformations ω
x
∈ R acting on A
µx
as in (4.105), but without
the mod(2π), aA
µx
= aA
µx
+ω
x+aˆ µ
−ω
x
, with F
µνx
as in (4.101), and
the simple action
S(A) = −
1
4g
2
¸
xµν
F
2
µνx
. (4.109)
In this case the gaugeinvariant measure is given by
DA =
¸
xµ
∞
−∞
d(aA
µx
). (4.110)
However, the path integral
Z =
DA exp[S(A)] (4.111)
is ill deﬁned because it is divergent. The reason is that
DA con
tains also an integration over all gauge transformations, which are
unrestrained by the gaugeinvariant weight expS(A). As a consequence
Z is proportional to the volume of the gauge group
DΩ. For the
noncompact group ( = R this is
¸
x
∞
−∞
dω
x
, which is inﬁnite. On the
other hand, this divergence formally cancels out in expectation values of
gaugeinvariant observables and e.g. Monte Carlo computations based
on (4.111) still make sense.
To deﬁne (4.111) for the noncompact formulation, gauge ﬁxing is
needed. A suitable partition function is now given by
Z =
DA exp
¸
S(A) −
1
2g
2
ξ
¸
xµ
(∂
µ
A
µx
)
2
¸
, (4.112)
where ∂
µ
= −∂
†
µ
is the backward derivative, ∂
µ
A
µx
= (A
µx
−A
µx−aˆ µ
)/a.
See problem 5(i) for more details.
4.6 Hilbert space and transfer operator 99
4.6 Hilbert space and transfer operator
We shall show here that the path integral
Z =
¸
xµ
dU
µx
e
S(U)
(4.113)
can be expressed as the trace of a positive Hermitian transfer operator
ˆ
T in Hilbert space,
Z = Tr
ˆ
T
N
, (4.114)
where N is the number of time slices, thus providing the quantum
mechanical interpretation.
This Hilbert space is set up in the coordinate representation. The
coordinates are U
mx
, m = 1, 2, 3, corresponding to the spatial link
variables. A state [ψ` has a wavefunction ψ(U) = 'U[ψ` depending on
the U
mx
. The basis states [U` are eigenstates of operators (
ˆ
U
mx
)
ab
, where
a and b denote the matrix elements (a, b = 1, . . ., n for SU(n)):
(
ˆ
U
mx
)
ab
[U` = (U
mx
)
ab
[U`. (4.115)
In a parameterization U = U(α) with real parameters α
k
one may
think of the usual coordinate representation for Hermitian operators ˆ α
k
:
ˆ α
k
[α` = α
k
[α`,
ˆ
U
ab
= U(ˆ α)
ab
, and [U` ≡ [α`. The Hermitian conjugate
matrix U
†
corresponds to the operator
ˆ
U
†
ba
= U
∗
ba
(ˆ α). We continue with
the notation [U` for the basis states. The basis is orthonormal and
complete
'U
[U` =
¸
x,m
δ(U
mx
, U
mx
), (4.116)
1 =
¸
x,m
dU
mx
[U`'U[, (4.117)
such that
'ψ
1
[ψ
2
` =
¸
x,m
dU
mx
ψ
∗
1
(U)ψ
2
(U). (4.118)
The delta function δ(U
, U) corresponds to the measure dU such that
dU δ(U, U
) = 1, which can of course be made explicit in a parameter
ization U(α).
100 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
After this speciﬁcation of Hilbert space the trace in Z = Tr
ˆ
T
N
can
be written more explicitly as
Tr
ˆ
T
N
=
N−1
¸
n=0
¸
¸
x,m
dU
mxn
'U
n+1
[
ˆ
T[U
n
`
¸
, (4.119)
where n indicates the U variables in time slice n. Notice that the timelike
link variables U
4xn
are not indicated explicitly in (4.119); these are
hidden in
ˆ
T.
We now have to work the path integral (4.113) into the form (4.119).
It is useful for later to allow for diﬀerent lattice spacings in time and
space, a
t
and a. Using a notation in which the x
µ
are in lattice units
(i.e. x and x
4
= n become integers), but keeping the a’s, the pure
gauge part of the action (4.80),
¸
xµν
Tr U
µνx
/2g
2
ρa
4
, takes the form
a
3
a
t
¸
x,n
[
¸
j
2 Re Tr U
4jxn
/g
2
a
2
t
+
¸
i<j
2 Re Tr U
ijxn
/g
2
a
2
] (ρ = 1/2
in the fundamental representation), or
S =
2
g
2
a
a
t
¸
p
t
Re Tr U
p
t
+
a
t
a
¸
p
s
Re Tr U
p
s
, (4.120)
where p
s
and p
t
are spacelike and timelike plaquettes, U
p
s
= U
ijxn
,
U
p
t
= U
4jxn
. All the latticedistance dependence is in the ratio a
t
/a.
This dependence is really a couplingconstant dependence, one coupling
g
2
a/a
t
for the timelike plaquettes and another g
2
a
t
/a for the spacelike
plaquettes. Inspection of (4.113) with action (4.120) shows that
ˆ
T can
be identiﬁed in the form
ˆ
T = e
−
1
2
a
t
ˆ
W
ˆ
T
K
e
−
1
2
a
t
ˆ
W
, (4.121)
ˆ
W =
−2
g
2
a
¸
p
s
Re Tr
ˆ
U
p
s
, (4.122)
with the operator
ˆ
T
K
given by the matrix elements
'U
[
ˆ
T
K
[U` =
¸
x,m
dU
4x
exp
¸
2a
g
2
a
t
Re Tr (U
mx
U
4x+ˆ m
U
†
mx
U
†
4x
)
.
(4.123)
The way the U
4x
enter in (4.123) can be viewed as a gauge transforma
tion on U
mx
,
U
Ω
mx
= Ω
x
U
mx
Ω
†
x+ˆ m
, (4.124)
with Ω
x
= U
†
4x
. Equivalently we can view this as a gauge transforma
tion on U
mx
. There is an integral over all such gauge transformations.
4.6 Hilbert space and transfer operator 101
We can write this in operator notation as follows. Deﬁne the gauge
transformation operator
ˆ
D(Ω) by
ˆ
D(Ω)[U` = [U
Ω
†
`. (4.125)
Then
'U[
ˆ
D(Ω)[ψ` = 'U
Ω
[ψ` = ψ(U
Ω
). (4.126)
This operator is a unitary representation of the gauge group of time
independent gauge transformations in Hilbert space. Deﬁne furthermore
ˆ
P
0
by
ˆ
P
0
=
¸
x
dΩ
x
ˆ
D(Ω). (4.127)
It follows that
ˆ
T
K
can be written as
ˆ
T
K
=
ˆ
T
K
ˆ
P
0
=
ˆ
P
0
ˆ
T
K
, (4.128)
with
ˆ
T
K
given by
'U
[
ˆ
T
K
[U` =
¸
x,m
exp
¸
2a
g
2
a
t
Re Tr (U
mx
U
†
mx
)
. (4.129)
The operator
ˆ
P
0
is the projector onto the gaugeinvariant subspace of
Hilbert space. This follows from the fact that
ˆ
D(Ω) is a representation
of the gauge group,
ˆ
D(Ω
1
)
ˆ
D(Ω) =
ˆ
D(Ω
1
Ω), (4.130)
ˆ
D(Ω
1
)
ˆ
P
0
=
¸
x
dΩ
x
ˆ
D(Ω
1
Ω) =
¸
x
d(Ω
1x
Ω
x
)
ˆ
D(Ω
1
Ω)
=
ˆ
P
0
(4.131)
=
ˆ
P
0
ˆ
D(Ω
1
), (4.132)
ˆ
P
2
0
=
ˆ
P
0
. (4.133)
We used the invariance of the integration measure in group space and
the normalization
dΩ
x
= 1. It follows that a state [ψ` of the form
[ψ` =
ˆ
P
0
[φ` is gauge invariant,
ˆ
D(Ω)[ψ` = [ψ`. It also follows easily by
taking matrix elements that
ˆ
P
0
commutes with
ˆ
W.
We shall show in the next section that
ˆ
T
K
is a positive operator. It
can therefore be written in the from
ˆ
T
K
= e
−a
t
ˆ
K
, (4.134)
102 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
with
ˆ
K a Hermitian operator.
Summarizing, the path integral leads naturally to a quantummech
anical Hilbert space and a transfer operator
ˆ
T =
ˆ
P
0
e
−
1
2
a
t
ˆ
W
e
−a
t
ˆ
K
e
−
1
2
a
t
ˆ
W
= e
−
1
2
a
t
ˆ
W
e
−a
t
ˆ
K
e
−
1
2
a
t
ˆ
W
ˆ
P
0
, (4.135)
which is positive and deﬁnes therefore a Hermitian Hamiltonian
ˆ
H,
ˆ
T =
ˆ
P
0
e
−a
t
ˆ
H
= e
−a
t
ˆ
H
ˆ
P
0
. (4.136)
We recognize a kinetic part (
ˆ
K) and potential part (
ˆ
W), analogously to
the example of the scalar ﬁeld. The form (4.129) for the matrix elements
of
ˆ
T
K
shows a plaquette in the temporal gauge U
4x
= 1. The path integral
has automatically provided the supplementary condition that has to be
imposed in this ‘gauge’: physical states must be gauge invariant (i.e.
invariant under timeindependent gauge transformations),
[phys` =
ˆ
P
0
[phys`,
ˆ
D(Ω)[phys` = [phys`. (4.137)
In the continuum this corresponds to the ‘Gauss law’ condition (cf.
appendix B).
4.7 The kineticenergy operator
As we can see from its deﬁnition (4.129), the kineticenergy transfer op
erator
ˆ
T
K
is a product of uncoupled link operators. So let us concentrate
on a single link (x, x+ ˆ m) and simple states [ψ` for which ψ(U) depends
only on U
mx
. To simplify the notation we write U = U
mx
. Then the
singlelink kinetic transfer operator is given by
'U
[
ˆ
T
K1
[U` = exp
κRe Tr (UU
†
)
, (4.138)
κ =
2a
g
2
a
t
, (4.139)
where the subscript 1 reminds us of the fact that we are dealing with a
single link.
Realizing that Re Tr (UU
†
) may be taken as the distance between
the points U and U
in group space, we note that (4.138) is analogous
to the expression (2.15) in quantum mechanics, which also involved a
translation in the coordinates. So we may expect to gain understanding
here too by introducing translation operators. Left and right translations
ˆ
L(V ) and
ˆ
R(V ) can be deﬁned by
ˆ
L(V )[U` = [V
†
U`, (4.140)
ˆ
R(V )[U` = [UV `. (4.141)
4.7 The kineticenergy operator 103
By comparing matrix elements we see that
ˆ
T
K1
can be written as
ˆ
T
K1
=
dV exp[κRe Tr V ]
ˆ
L(V ), (4.142)
=
dV exp[κRe Tr V ]
ˆ
R(V ). (4.143)
The eigenstates of the translation operators can be found among the
eigenstates of the Laplacian on group space, as summarized in appendix
A.3 (eq. (A.76)). The eigenfunctions are the ﬁnitedimensional unitary
irreducible representations (irreps) D
r
mn
(U) of the group,
U →D
r
mn
(U) = 'U[rmn`. (4.144)
Here r labels the irreps and m and n label the matrix elements. These
unitary matrices form a complete orthogonal set of basis functions,
dU D
r
m
n
(U)
∗
D
r
mn
(U) = δ
r
r
δ
m
m
δ
n
n
1
d
r
, (4.145)
¸
rmn
d
r
D
r
mn
(U) D
r
mn
(U
)
∗
= δ(U, U
), (4.146)
where d
r
is the dimension of the representation (D
r
(U) is a d
r
d
r
matrix). A function ψ(U) can be expanded as
ψ(U) = 'U[ψ` =
¸
rmn
ψ
rmn
d
r
D
r
mn
(U), (4.147)
with the inversion
ψ
rmn
= 'rmn[ψ` =
dU D
r
mn
(U)
∗
ψ(U). (4.148)
The action of
ˆ
T
K1
on [ψ` now follows from
'U[
ˆ
T
K1
[ψ` =
dV exp(κRe Tr V ) 'U[
ˆ
L(V )[ψ` (4.149)
=
¸
rmn
ψ
rmn
d
r
dV exp(κRe Tr V ) D
r
(V U)
mn
.
Using the grouprepresentation property D
r
(V U) = D
r
(V )D
r
(U), the
integral in the above expression, i.e. the complex conjugate of
c
rmn
≡
dV D
r
mn
(V )
∗
exp(κRe Tr V ), (4.150)
is the coeﬃcient for the expansion of the exponential in irreps,
exp(κRe Tr V ) =
¸
rmn
d
r
c
rmn
D
r
mn
(V ), (4.151)
104 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
as follows from the orthogonality of the irreps. A change of variables
V → V
†
in (4.150) shows that c
rmn
= c
∗
rnm
. Making a transformation
of variables V → WV W
†
, with arbitrary group element W, gives the
relation
c
rmn
= D
r
mm
(W)c
rm
n
D
r
n
n
(W
†
). (4.152)
Using Schur’s lemma it follows that c
rmn
can be written in the form
c
rmn
= c
r
δ
mn
, (4.153)
with real c
r
. Returning to (4.149) we get
'U[
ˆ
T
K1
[ψ` =
¸
rmn
ψ
rmn
d
r
c
r
D
r
(U)
mn
. (4.154)
Every irrep r is just multiplied by the number c
r
. The irrep states [rmn`
are eigenstates of
ˆ
T
K1
with eigenvalue c
r
,
ˆ
T
K1
[rmn` = c
r
[rmn`. (4.155)
The relation (4.153) holds generally for expansion coeﬃcients of func
tions on the group which are invariant under V → WV W
†
, i.e. class
functions. These have a character expansion,
exp(κRe Tr V ) =
¸
r
d
r
c
r
χ
r
(V ), (4.156)
with
χ
r
(V ) = Tr D
r
(V ) = D
r
mm
(V ) (4.157)
the character in the representation r. The characters are orthonormal,
dV χ
r
(V )
∗
χ
s
(V ) = δ
rs
, (4.158)
as follows from (4.145). Writing
d
r
c
r
=
dV exp
κ
2
χ
f
(V ) +
κ
2
χ
f
(V )
∗
χ
r
(V )
∗
, (4.159)
where f is the fundamental (deﬁning) representation, we can show that
the c
r
are positive. Expansion of the righthand side of (4.159) in powers
of κ leads to
c
r
=
∞
¸
n=0
(κ/2)
n
n!
n
¸
k=0
n!
k!(n −k)!
dV χ
f
(V )
∗k
χ
f
(V )
n−k
χ
r
(V )
∗
.
(4.160)
4.8 Hamiltonian for continuous time 105
Reducing the tensor product representation D
r
1
D
r
k
to irreducible
components, we see that
dV χ
r
1
(V ) χ
r
k
(V ) = n(r
1
, . . ., r
k
) (4.161)
is the number of times the singlet irrep occurs. Since κ is positive the c
r
are positive.
It follows that the eigenvalues of
ˆ
T
K1
are positive, i.e.
ˆ
T
K1
is a positive
operator. The full kinetic transfer operator
ˆ
T
K
, being the product of
singlelink operators
ˆ
T
K1
, is also positive.
4.8 Hamiltonian for continuous time
In the Hamiltonian approach to lattice gaugetheory time is kept contin
uous while space is replaced by a lattice. Taking the formal limit a
t
→0
we get the appropriate Hamiltonian from
ˆ
T =
ˆ
P
0
exp
−a
t
ˆ
H +O(a
2
t
)
. (4.162)
Some work is required for
ˆ
T
K
as a
t
→ 0 since it depends explicitly on
a/a
t
through κ = 2a/g
2
a
t
. Consider again the form (4.142) for one link,
ˆ
T
K1
=
dV exp[κRe Tr V ]
ˆ
L(V ). (4.163)
Since κ →∞as a
t
→0 we can evaluate this expression with the saddle
point method. The highest saddle point is at V = 1. It is convenient to
use the exponential parameterization,
V = exp(iα
k
t
k
), (4.164)
Re Tr V = d
f
−
1
4
α
k
α
k
+O(α
4
), (4.165)
dV =
¸
k
dα
k
[1 +O(α
2
)], (4.166)
ˆ
L(V ) = 1 +iα
k
ˆ
X
k
(L) −
1
2
α
k
α
l
ˆ
X
k
(L)
ˆ
X
l
(L) +O(α
3
), (4.167)
where we have written the left translator
ˆ
L in terms of its generators
ˆ
X
k
(L) (cf. appendix A.3). Gaussian integration over α
k
gives
ˆ
T
K1
= constant
1 −
1
κ
ˆ
X
2
+
, (4.168)
ˆ
X
2
=
ˆ
X
k
(L)
ˆ
X
k
(L) =
ˆ
X
k
(R)
ˆ
X
k
(R), (4.169)
constant =
¸
k
dα
k
exp[κ(d
f
−α
2
/4)]. (4.170)
106 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
Here the constant could have been avoided by changing the measure in
the path integral by an overall constant.
The Hamiltonian can be written as
ˆ
H =
ˆ
K +
ˆ
W (4.171)
=
1
a
¸
g
2
2
¸
l
s
ˆ
X
2
l
s
+
2
g
2
¸
p
s
Re Tr (1 −
ˆ
U
p
s
)
¸
+ constant,
where the l
s
denote the spatial links and p
s
the spatial plaquettes. In
the coordinate representation
ˆ
U → U and
ˆ
X
2
becomes the covariant
Laplacian on group space. The above Hamiltonian is known as the
Kogut–Susskind Hamiltonian [40].
It is good to keep in mind that, with continuous time and a lattice in
space, the symmetry between time and space is broken. It is necessary
to renormalize the velocity of light, which amounts to introducing dif
ferent couplings g
2
K
and g
2
W
for the kinetic and potential terms in the
Hamiltonian (4.171).
The formal continuum limit a → 0, U
µx
= exp(−iaG
µx
) → 1 −
iaG
µ
(x)+ leads to the formal continuum Hamiltonian in the temporal
gauge:
H =
d
3
x
g
2
2
Π
p
k
Π
p
k
+
1
4g
2
G
p
lm
G
p
lm
=
d
3
x
1
2
E
2
+
1
2
B
2
,
(4.172)
where
Π
p
k
= −i
δ
δG
p
k
, p = 1, . . ., n
2
−1, k = 1, 2, 3, (4.173)
G
p
lm
= ∂
l
G
p
m
−∂
m
G
p
l
+f
pqr
G
q
l
G
r
m
, (4.174)
and the conventional ‘electric’ and ‘magnetic’ ﬁelds are given by
E
p
k
= −gΠ
p
k
, B
p
k
=
1
g
klm
G
p
lm
. (4.175)
In the continuum the canonical quantization in the temporal gauge is
often lacking in text books, because it is less suited for weakcoupling
perturbation theory. A brief exposition is given in appendix B.
4.9 Wilson loop and Polyakov line 107
4.9 Wilson loop and Polyakov line
In the classical Maxwell theory an external current J
µ
enters in the
weight factor in the realtime path integral as
e
iS
→e
iS+i
d
4
x J
µ
A
µ
. (4.176)
For a line current along a path z
µ
(τ),
J
µ
(x) =
dτ
dz
µ
(τ)
dτ
δ
4
(x −z(τ)), (4.177)
the phase exp(i
J
µ
A
µ
) takes the form
exp
¸
i
dz
µ
A
µ
(z)
, (4.178)
where the integral is along the path speciﬁed by z(τ). The current is
‘conserved’ (i.e. ∂
µ
J
µ
= 0) for a closed path or a neverending path. In
classical electrodynamics one thinks of z
µ
(τ) as the trajectory of a point
charge. Then dz
µ
/dτ is timelike. For a positive static point charge at
the origin the phase is
exp
¸
i
dz
0
A
0
(0, z
0
)
. (4.179)
We may however choose the external current as we like and use also
spacelike dz/dτ. For a line current running along the coordinate 3axis
the phase is
exp
¸
i
dz
3
A
3
(0, 0, z
3
, 0)
. (4.180)
The Euclidean form is obtained from the Minkowski form by the
substitution J
0
= −iJ
4
, dz
0
= −i dz
4
, A
0
= iA
4
. The phase remains
a phase,
exp
¸
i
4
¸
µ=1
dz
µ
A
µ
(z)
¸
. (4.181)
The source aﬀects the places where the time components enter in the
action and we have to take a second look at the derivation of the transfer
operator. Consider therefore ﬁrst in the compact U(1) theory the path
integral
Z(J) =
DU exp
¸
S(U) +
¸
xµ
J
µx
A
µx
¸
, (4.182)
108 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
Fig. 4.3. A contour C specifying a line current or Wilson loop.
S(U) =
1
4g
2
¸
xµν
U
µνx
, (4.183)
U
µx
= exp(−iA
µx
), (4.184)
U
µνx
= exp[i(A
µx+ˆ ν
−A
µx
−A
νx+ˆ µ
+A
νx
)]. (4.185)
We have written the source term in conventional Euclidean form as a
reallooking addition to S(U), but the current J
µ
is purely imaginary.
For a line current of unit strength over a closed contour C as illustrated
in ﬁgure 4.3 we have
J
µx
= −i for links (x, x + ˆ µ) ∈ C
= +i for links (x + ˆ µ, x) ∈ C
= 0 otherwise. (4.186)
This current is ‘conserved’,
∂
µ
J
µx
=
¸
µ
(J
µx
−J
µx−ˆ µ
) = 0, (4.187)
and the integrand of the path integral is gauge invariant. The phase
factor associated with the current can be written in another way,
exp
¸
xµ
J
µx
A
µx
=
¸
l∈C
U
l
≡ U(C), (4.188)
where l denotes a directed link, U
l
= U
µx
for l = (x, x + ˆ µ). Such a
product U(C) of U’s around a loop C is called a Wilson loop [39]. It is
gauge invariant. The simplest Wilson loop is the plaquette U
µνx
.
The Wilsonloop form of the interaction with an external line source
generalizes easily to nonAbelian gauge theories. For a source in irrep r
we have
Tr D
r
(U(C)) = χ
r
(U(C)), (4.189)
with D
r
(U(C)) the ordered product of the link matrices D
r
(U
l
) along
the loop C. Denoting the links l by the pair of neighbors (x, y), we have
4.9 Wilson loop and Polyakov line 109
for example in the fundamental representation
U(C) = Tr (U
x
1
x
2
U
x
2
x
3
U
x
n
x
1
). (4.190)
The gauge invariance is obvious: the gauge transformations cancel out
pairwise in the product along the closed loop.
Consider now the derivation of the transfer operator. For the parts
of C where it runs in spacelike directions it represents an operator in
Hilbert space through U
l
→
ˆ
U
l
as before. What about the timelike links?
Suppose that between two time slices there are only two such links, say
the links (y, y +
ˆ
4) and (z +
ˆ
4, z). Then, for these time slices, (4.123) is
modiﬁed to
'U
[
ˆ
T
K
[U` =
¸
x,m
dU
4x
exp[ ] D
r
mn
(U
4y
)D
r
pq
(U
†
4z
), (4.191)
where exp[ ] is the same as in (4.123) and the indices m, n, p, q hook
up to the other D
r
’s of the Wilson loop. We see that the operator
ˆ
P
0
deﬁned in (4.127) is replaced by
ˆ
P
0
→
¸
x
dV
x
ˆ
D(V )D
r
mn
(V
y
)D
r
pq
(V
†
z
), (4.192)
where we used the notation Ω
†
x
= V
x
= U
4x
, dΩ = dV . The gauge
transformation operator
ˆ
D(V ) is the product of operators
ˆ
D(V
x
) at sites
x. With the notation
ˆ
P
rx
mn
=
dV
x
D
r
mn
(V
x
)
ˆ
D(V
x
), (4.193)
the righthand side of (4.192) can be written as
ˆ
P
0
ˆ
P
ry
mn
ˆ
P
¯ rz
pq
, (4.194)
with
ˆ
P
0
=
¸
x=y,z
ˆ
P
0x
(4.195)
the projector onto the gaugeinvariant subspace except at y and z.
The irrep ¯ r is the Hermitian conjugate of the irrep r. The operator
ˆ
P
rx
mn
projects onto the subspace transforming at x in the irrep r in the
following way. Let [skl` be an irrep state for some link (u, v),
'U[skl` = D
s
kl
(U), U = U
u,v
; (4.196)
110 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
Fig. 4.4. A rectangular timelike Wilson loop.
then, for x = u,
¸
n
'U[
ˆ
P
ru
mn
[snl` =
dV D
r
mn
(V )D
s
nl
(V U) = δ
r¯ s
D
s
ml
(U),
¸
n
ˆ
P
¯ su
mn
[snl` = [sml`; (4.197)
similarly, for x = v,
¸
m
'U[
ˆ
P
rv
mn
[skm` =
dV D
r
mn
(V )D
s
km
(UV
†
) = δ
rs
D
s
kn
(U),
¸
m
ˆ
P
sv
mn
[skm` = [skn`. (4.198)
The
ˆ
P
r
are Hermitian projectors in the following sense:
(
ˆ
P
rx
mn
)
†
=
ˆ
P
rx
nm
, (4.199)
¸
n
ˆ
P
rx
mn
ˆ
P
rx
nq
=
ˆ
P
rx
mq
. (4.200)
Consider next a Wilson loop of the form shown in ﬁgure 4.4. In
the U(1) case this corresponds to two charges that are static at times
between t
1
and t
2
, a charge +1 at z and a charge −1 at y:
J
4
(x, x
4
) = −i[δ
x,y
−δ
x,z
], t
1
< x
4
< t
2
. (4.201)
In the SU(n) case the interpretation is evidently that we have a source in
irrep ¯ r at y and a source in irrep r at z. If r is the deﬁning representation
of the gauge group SU(3) we say that we have a static quark at z and
an antiquark at y. The pathintegral average of this Wilson loop
W(C) =
1
Z
DU exp[S(U)] χ
r
(U(C)), (4.202)
4.9 Wilson loop and Polyakov line 111
Z =
DU exp[S(U)] = Tr
ˆ
T
N
, (4.203)
can be expressed as
W(C) =
1
Z
Tr
ˆ
T
N−t
D
r
kl
(
ˆ
U
†
) (
ˆ
T
)
t
ˆ
P
¯ rz
lm
D
r
mn
(
ˆ
U)
ˆ
P
ry
nk
. (4.204)
Here C is the rectangular loop shown in ﬁgure 4.4, t = t
2
−t
1
,
ˆ
U is the
operator corresponding to the product of U’s at time t
1
and similarly
for
ˆ
U
†
at t
2
, and
ˆ
T
is the transfer operator with
ˆ
P
0
(cf. (4.195)). In
the zerotemperature limit N → ∞, the trace in (4.204) is replaced
by the expectation value in the ground state [0`,
ˆ
T[0` = exp(−E
0
) [0`.
Inserting intermediate states [n`, which are eigenstates of
ˆ
T
ˆ
P
¯ rz
lm
ˆ
P
ry
nk
with eigenvalues exp(−E
n
), gives the representation
W(C) =
¸
n
R
n
e
−(E
n
−E
0
)t
, N = ∞, (4.205)
where R
n
and E
n
depend on y and z. For large times t the lowest energy
level E
0
will dominate. This is the energy of the ground state [0
rmn`
in that sector of Hilbert space which corresponds to the static sources
at y and z. By deﬁnition, the diﬀerence E
0
−E
0
is the potential V :
W(C)
t→∞
→ R
0
e
−V t
, V = V
r
(y, z), R
0
= R
0
(y, z), (4.206)
R
0
=
¸
mn
'0[D
r
mn
(
ˆ
U
†
)[0
rmn`'0
rmn[D
r
mn
(
ˆ
U)[0`.
Hence, we have found a formula for the static potential (e.g. for a quark–
antiquark pair) in terms of the expectation value of a Wilson loop.
Another interesting quantity is the Polyakov line [41], which is a string
of U’s closed by periodic boundary conditions in the Euclidean time
direction. (In case of closure by periodic boundary conditions in the
spatial direction, this is often called a Wilson line.) For example, the
situation illustrated in ﬁgure 4.5 corresponds to a single static quark, a
source which is always switched on. The expectation value W(L) of the
Polyakov line operator at x, e.g. in the deﬁning representation
Tr U(L) = Tr (U
4x,0
U
4x,1
U
4x,N−1
), (4.207)
can be written as
W(L) = 'Tr U(L)` =
1
Z
Tr
¸
(
ˆ
T
)
N
¸
m
ˆ
P
rx
mm
¸
. (4.208)
112 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
Fig. 4.5. A Polyakov line.
It is the free energy of a static quark at inverse temperature N. For
temperature going to zero it behaves as
W(L) ∝ e
−N
, N →∞, (4.209)
with the selfenergy of a static quark.
4.10 Problems
(i) The case SU(2)
(a) Work out the metric g
kl
= 2 Tr [(∂U/∂α
k
) (∂U
†
/∂α
l
)] using
the exponential parameterization U = exp(iα
k
τ
k
/2).
(b) Determine the normalization constant ν in
dU = ν
√
det g dα
1
dα
2
dα
3
such that
dU = 1.
(c) Find the characters χ
j
(U) = Tr D
j
(U) as a function of α
k
(j =
1
2
, 1,
3
2
, . . .).
(d) Check the orthogonality relation
dU χ
j
(U)χ
∗
j
(U) = δ
jj
.
(e) Verify for a onelink state that
1
'U[
ˆ
X
k
(L)[ψ`
1
= X
k
(L)ψ
1
(U).
(f) Verify that X
2
(L) = X
2
(R).
(ii) Twodimensional SU(n) gaugeﬁeld theory
Consider twodimensional SU(n) gauge theory with action
S =
¸
p
L(U
p
), (4.210)
L(U) =
1
g
2
¸
r
κ
r
Re χ
r
(U), (4.211)
¸
r
κ
r
ρ
r
= 1, (4.212)
and periodic boundary conditions in space. In ordinary units g has
the dimension of mass (in two dimensions), such that in lattice
4.10 Problems 113
units g →0 in the continuum limit. The transfer operator is given
by
ˆ
T =
ˆ
T
K
ˆ
P
0
,
ˆ
T
K
=
¸
l
ˆ
T
Kl
, (4.213)
where l, l = 0, . . ., N − 1 labels the spatial links (x, x + 1),
x = 0, . . ., N −1. Since there is only one space direction, the link
variables in the spatial direction may be denoted by U
x
. Consider
the wavefunction
ψ
{r,m,n}
(U) =
¸
x
D
r
x
m
x
n
x
(U
x
), (4.214)
which is just a product of irreps r
x
at each x.
(a) Show that
P
0
ψ
{r,m,n}
(U) ≡ 'U[
ˆ
P
0
[ψ` (4.215)
= d
−N
r
0
Tr [D
r
0
(U
0
)D
r
1
(U
1
) D
r
N−1
(U
N−1
)]
δ
r
0
r
1
δ
r
N−1
r
0
δ
n
0
m
1
δ
n
1
m
2
δ
n
N−1
m
0
.
Hence, the gaugeinvariant component is nonzero only if all irreps
are equal, say r, and it is a Wilson line in the spatial direction.
(b) Show that the energy spectrum of the system is given by
E
r
= −N
¸
lna
0
+ ln
'χ
r
`
1
d
r
, (4.216)
where
'χ
r
`
1
=
dU e
L(U)
χ
r
(U)
dU e
L(U)
. (4.217)
(c) Show for g →0, using a saddlepoint expansion about U = 1,
that
'χ
r
`
1
d
r
→1 −
1
2
C
r
2
g
2
+O(g
4
), (4.218)
where C
r
2
is the value of the quadratic Casimir operator in the
representation r. This result holds independently of the detailed
choice of κ
r
’s, as long as they satisfy the constraint (4.212),
(d) Restoring the lattice spacing a, L = Na, deduce from the
result above that, in the continuum limit, the energy spectrum
takes the universal form
E
r
−E
0
=
1
2
g
2
C
r
2
L. (4.219)
114 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice
(iii) Glueball masses and string tension
Simple glueball operators may be deﬁned in terms of the plaquette
ﬁeld Tr U
p
, where p = (x, m, n) denotes a spacelike plaquette.
When this operator acts on the ground state (vacuum state)
it creates a state with the quantum numbers of the plaque
tte. Similarly, a string state may be created by the operator
U
x,y
=
¸
l∈C
U
l
, where the links l belong to an open contour from
x to y. The string state deﬁned this way is not gauge invariant at
x and y; it has to be interpreted as a state with external sources
at these points.
Using the transferoperator formalism, derive to leading order
a strongcoupling formula for the glueball mass corresponding to
the plaquette, and for the string mass corresponding to U
x,y
.
Use lattice units a = a
t
= 1. Note that the potentialenergy
factors exp(−a
t
ˆ
W/2) in the transfer operator may be neglected
to leading order in 1/g
2
.
5
U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
In this chapter we make a ﬁrst exploration of U(1) and SU(n) ‘pure
gauge theories’ (i.e. without electrons or quarks etc.), the static potential
and the glueball masses.
5.1 Potential at weak coupling
According to (4.206) the static potential V (r) in a gauge theory is given
by the formula
V (r) = − lim
t→∞
1
t
lnW(r, t), (5.1)
where W(r, t) is a rectangular r t Wilson loop in a lattice of inﬁnite
extent in the time direction (ﬁgure 5.1). We shall ﬁrst evaluate this
formula for free gauge ﬁelds and then give the results of the ﬁrst non
trivial order in the weakcoupling expansion. This will illustrate that
(5.1) indeed gives the familiar Coulomb potential plus corrections.
Fig. 5.1. A rectangular Wilson loop for the evaluation of the potential.
115
116 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
First we consider the compact U(1) gauge theory (4.182), in which the
external source J
µ
(x) speciﬁed in (4.186) serves to introduce the Wilson
loop. In this case (5.1) can be rewritten as
V (r) = − lim
t→∞
1
t
ln
¸
Z(J)
Z(0)
. (5.2)
The weakcoupling expansion can be obtained by substituting U
µ
(x) =
exp[−igaA
µ
(x)] into the action,
S = −
¸
xµν
1
4
[F
µνx
]
2
−
1
48
g
2
a
2
[F
µνx
]
4
+
, (5.3)
F
µνx
= ∂
µ
A
νx
−∂
ν
A
µx
, (5.4)
and expanding the path integral in the gauge coupling g. The ﬁrst term
in (5.3) is the usual free Maxwell action (noncompact U(1) theory). The
other terms are interaction terms special to the compact U(1) theory.
As usual, gauge ﬁxing is necessary in the weakcoupling expansion.
This can be done on the lattice in the same way as in the continuum
formulation. We shall not go into details here (cf. problem (i)), and just
state that the free part of S (the part quadratic in A
µ
) leads in the
Feynman gauge to the propagator
D
µν
(p) = δ
µν
a
2
¸
µ
(2 −2 cos ap
µ
)
,
= δ
µν
1
p
2
, ap →0. (5.5)
This is similar to the boson propagator (2.111). In position space
D
µν
(x −y) ≡ D
µν
xy
= δ
µν
π/a
−π/a
d
4
p
(2π)
4
e
ip(x−y)
a
2
¸
µ
(2 −2 cos ap
µ
)
→δ
µν
1
4π
2
(x −y)
2
, (x −y)
2
/a
2
→∞. (5.6)
The largex behavior of D
µν
(x) corresponds to the smallp behavior of
D
µν
(p). This can be shown with the help of the saddlepoint method for
evaluating the largex behavior.
To leading order in g
2
, Z(J) is given by
Z(J) = e
1
2
g
2
¸
xy
J
µ
(x)D
µν
(x−y)J
ν
(y)
Z(0), (5.7)
and
V (r) = −
1
t
1
2
g
2
¸
xy
J
µ
(x)D
µν
(x −y)J
ν
(y), t →∞. (5.8)
5.1 Potential at weak coupling 117
Fig. 5.2. Diagram illustrating
1
2
g
2
¸
J DJ.
Fig. 5.3. Typical contributing diagrams.
This expression leads to the diagram in ﬁgure 5.2. With the currents J
ﬂowing according to ﬁgure 5.1, the following types of contributions can
be distinguished (ﬁgure 5.3). Diagram (d) is a selfenergy contribution,
1
2
g
2
¸
(d)
J DJ =
1
2
g
2
(i)
2
t/2
¸
x
4
,y
4
=−t/2
D
44
(0, x
4
−y
4
), (5.9)
where the times t
1
and t
2
in ﬁgure 5.1 have been taken as ±t/2. We
may ﬁrst sum over y
4
. For t →∞ this summation converges at large y
4
and becomes independent of x
4
. The summation over y
4
sets p
4
in the
Fourier representation for D to zero (cf. (2.90)),
1
2
g
2
¸
(d)
J DJ ∼ −
1
2
g
2
t
∞
¸
y
4
=−∞
D
44
(0, x
4
−y
4
)
= −
1
2
g
2
t
π/a
−π/a
d
4
p
(2π)
4
e
ip
4
(x
4
−y
4
)
a
2
¸
µ
(2 −2 cos ap
µ
)
= −
1
2
g
2
t
π/a
−π/a
d
3
p
(2π)
3
a
2
¸
3
j=1
(2 −2 cos ap
j
)
= −
1
2
g
2
tv(0), (5.10)
118 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Fig. 5.4. Vertices in the compact U(1) theory.
where
v(x) =
π/a
−π/a
d
3
p
(2π)
3
e
ipx
a
2
¸
3
j=1
(2 −2 cos ap
j
)
(5.11)
is the latticeregularized Coulomb potential. Its numerical value at the
origin is given by
av(0) = 0.253 . (5.12)
The contribution of type (e) is given by
1
2
g
2
¸
(e)
J DJ ∼
1
2
g
2
i(−i)
t/2
−t/2
dx
4
dy
4
1
4π
2
[(x
4
−y
4
)
2
+r
2
]
, (5.13)
where we assumed r/a 1 such that the asymptotic form (5.6) is valid
and the summations over x
4
and y
4
may be replaced by integrations.
Proceeding as for diagram (d) we get
1
2
g
2
¸
(e)
J DJ ∼
1
2
g
2
t
∞
−∞
dy
4
1
4π
2
[(x
4
−y
4
)
2
+r
2
]
=
1
2
g
2
t
1
4πr
. (5.14)
From these example calculations it is clear that the diagrams of types
(a), (b) and (c) do not grow linearly with t. Remembering that there are
two contributions of types (d) and (e) (related by interchanging x and
y) we ﬁnd for the potential to order g
2
V (x) = g
2
[v(0) −v(x)], (5.15)
as expected.
Let us now brieﬂy consider higherorder corrections in the compact
U(1) theory. The series (5.3) for S leads to interaction vertices of the
type shown in ﬁgure 5.4, which are proportional to (ag)
n−2
. Their eﬀect
vanishes in the continuum limit, unless the powers of a are compensated
5.1 Potential at weak coupling 119
Fig. 5.5. A selfenergy diagram in the compact U(1) theory.
by powers of a
−1
coming from divergent loop diagrams. An example
of this is the selfenergy diagram ﬁgure 5.5, which leads to a ‘vacuum
polarization tensor’ (cf. problem (ii))
Π
µν
(p) = −
1
4
g
2
(δ
µν
p
2
−p
µ
p
ν
) +O(a
2
), (5.16)
and a modiﬁed propagator
D
−1
µν
= p
2
δ
µν
+O(a
2
) + Π
µν
(p), (5.17)
D
µν
(p) = Z(g
2
)δ
µν
1
p
2
+ terms ∝ p
µ
p
ν
, (5.18)
Z(g
2
) = [1 −
1
4
g
2
+O(g
4
)]
−1
. (5.19)
The terms ∝ p
µ
p
ν
do not contribute to the Wilson loop because of gauge
invariance, as expressed by ‘current conservation’ ∂
µ
J
µx
= 0. Further
analysis leads to the conclusion that there are no other eﬀects of the
selfinteraction in the weakcouplingexpansion continuum limit. Note
that Z(g
2
) is ﬁnite, i.e. it does not diverge as a →0.
We conclude that in the compact U(1) theory the potential is given
by
V (r) = −g
2
Z(g
2
)
1
4πr
+ constant +O(a
2
), →∞, (5.20)
which is just a Coulomb potential. To make contact with the free
Maxwell theory we identify the ﬁnestructure constant α,
α =
e
2
4π
=
g
2
Z(g
2
)
4π
. (5.21)
The compact U(1) theory is equivalent to the free Maxwell ﬁeld at weak
coupling.
120 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Fig. 5.6. Gluon selfenergy contribution to the Wilson loop.
We now turn to the SU(n) gauge theory. A calculation to order
g
4
gives in this case the result for the magnitude of the force, F(r),
neglecting O(a
2
):
F(r) =
∂V (r)
∂r
=
1
4πr
2
C
2
g
2
+
11n
48π
2
g
4
¸
ln
r
2
a
2
+c
+O(g
6
)
.
(5.22)
Here C
2
is the value of the quadratic Casimir operator in the representa
tion of the Wilson loop and c is a numerical constant which depends on
lattice details. Some aspects of the calculation are described in [43]. The
logarithm in (5.22) comes from the Feynman gauge selfenergy contri
bution shown in ﬁgure 5.6, which is not present in the U(1) theory. The
formula (5.22) exhibits the typical divergencies occuring in perturbation
theory. It diverges logarithmically as a → 0. This problem is resolved
by expressing physically measurable quantities in terms of each other.
Here we shall choose an intuitive deﬁnition of a renormalized coupling
constant g
R
at some reference length scale d, by writing
F(d) =
C
2
g
2
R
4πd
2
. (5.23)
This g
R
is deﬁned independently of perturbation theory. Its expansion
in g
2
follows from (5.22),
g
2
R
= g
2
+
11n
48π
2
¸
ln
d
2
a
2
+c
g
4
+ , (5.24)
which may be inverted,
g
2
= g
2
R
−
11n
48π
2
¸
ln
d
2
a
2
+c
g
4
R
+ . (5.25)
The original parameter g in the action has to depend on a if we want to
get a g
R
independent of a. This dependence is here known incompletely:
we cannot take the limit a →0 in (5.25) because then the coeﬃcient of
g
4
R
blows up (and similarly for the higherorder coeﬃcients). The limit
5.2 Asymptotic freedom 121
a → 0 will be discussed in the following sections. Insertion into (5.22)
leads to the form
F(r) =
1
4πr
2
C
2
¸
g
2
R
+
11n
48π
2
g
4
R
ln
r
2
d
2
+O(g
6
R
)
, (5.26)
from which all dependence on a has disappeared to this order in g
R
. The
renormalizability of QCD implies that all divergences can be removed in
this way to all orders in perturbation theory.
5.2 Asymptotic freedom
The perturbative form (5.26) is useless for r →0 or r →∞, since then
the logarithm blows up. It is useful only for r of order d, the distance
scale used in the deﬁnition of the renormalized coupling constant g
R
. So
let us take d = r from now on. Then g
R
= g
R
(r). We can extract
more information from the weakcoupling expansion by considering
renormalizationgroup beta functions, deﬁned by
β
R
(g
R
) = −r
∂
∂r
g
R
, (5.27)
β(g) = −a
∂
∂a
g. (5.28)
It is assumed here that g
R
can be considered to depend only on r and
not on a – its dependence on a is compensated by the dependence on a
of g. Then the r and adependence on the righthand side of (5.27) and
(5.28) can be converted into a g
R
 and gdependence, respectively, using
(5.25) and (5.24), giving
β
R
(g
R
) = −
11n
48π
2
g
3
R
+ , (5.29)
β(g) = −
11n
48π
2
g
3
+ . (5.30)
Actually the ﬁrst two terms in the expansions
β(g) = −β
1
g
3
−β
2
g
5
−β
2
g
7
− , (5.31)
β
R
(g
R
) = −β
R1
g
3
R
−β
R2
g
5
R
−β
R3
g
7
R
− (5.32)
of the two beta functions are equal. The argument for this is as follows.
Let
g
R
= F(t, g), (5.33)
t = ln
r
2
a
2
, g = g(a), g
R
= g
R
(r), (5.34)
122 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Make a scale transformation a → λa, r → λr, which does not aﬀect
t, and diﬀerentiate with respect to λ, setting λ = 1 afterwards. Then
∂/∂λ = a ∂/∂a = r ∂/∂r, and
−β
R
(g
R
) =
∂g
R
∂λ
=
∂F
∂g
∂g
∂λ
= −
∂F
∂g
β(g). (5.35)
Inserting the expansions for β(g) and
g
R
= g +F
1
(t)g
3
+F
2
(t)g
5
+ , (5.36)
g = g
R
−F
1
(t)g
3
R
+ , (5.37)
gives
−β
R
(g
R
) = [1 + 3F
1
g
2
+O(g
4
)][β
1
g
3
+β
2
g
5
+O(g
7
)]
= [1 + 3F
1
g
2
R
+O(g
4
R
)][β
1
g
3
R
−3β
1
F
1
g
5
R
+β
2
g
5
R
+O(g
7
R
)]
= β
1
g
3
R
+β
2
g
5
R
+O(g
7
R
). (5.38)
Any coupling constant related to g by a series of the type (5.36) has the
same beta function, so we may take the coeﬃcient β
2
from calculations
in the continuum using dimensional regularization,†
β
2
=
102
121
β
2
1
, β
1
=
11n
48π
2
. (5.39)
The remarkable fact in these formulas is that the beta functions are
negative in a neighborhood of the origin, implying that the couplings
become smaller as the length scale decreases. This property is called
asymptotic freedom. As we shall see, it implies that g → 0 in the
continuum limit. We come back to this in a later section. It suggests
furthermore that perturbation theory in the renormalized coupling g
R
becomes reliable at short distances, provided that a ‘running g
R
’ can be
used at the appropriate length or momentum scale. In the case of the
potential V (r) there is only one relevant length scale, r, and we can use
the rdependence of g
R
(r) to our advantage, as will now be shown.
The precise dependence of g
R
(r) for small r follows by integrating the
diﬀerential equation (5.27),
∂g
R
∂ lnr
= −β
R
(g
R
),
−lnr =
g
R
dx
β
R
(x)
† Other authors write β
0,1
for our β
1,2
.
5.2 Asymptotic freedom 123
=
g
R
dx
¸
−1
β
1
x
3
+
β
2
β
2
1
x
+O(x)
=
1
2β
1
g
2
R
+
β
2
β
2
1
lng
R
+ constant +O(g
2
R
). (5.40)
The integration constant can be partially combined with lnr to form a
dimensionless quantity ln(rΛ
V
) in a way that has become standard:
−ln(r
2
Λ
2
V
) =
1
β
1
g
2
R
+
β
2
β
2
1
ln(β
1
g
2
R
) +O(g
2
R
). (5.41)
Note the ‘lnβ
1
convention’. Note also that Λ
V
can be deﬁned precisely
only if the β
2
term is taken into account – the O(g
2
R
) term no longer
involves a constant term. This formula can be inverted so as to give g
R
as a function of r,
β
1
g
2
R
=
1
s
−
β
2
β
2
1
1
s
2
lns +O(s
−3
lns), (5.42)
s = −ln(r
2
Λ
2
V
). (5.43)
Inserting this into the force formula (5.23) for d = r gives
F(r) =
C
2
4πr
2
β
−1
1
s + (β
2
/β
2
1
)s
−1
lns +O(s
−2
lns)
. (5.44)
So the shortdistance behavior of the potential can be reliably com
puted (‘renormalizationgroup improved’) in QCD by means of the weak
coupling expansion. However, this expansion tells us nothing about the
longdistance behavior, because g
R
(r) increases as r increases, making
the ﬁrst few terms of the weakcoupling expansion irrelevant in this
regime.
A second important implication of asymptotic freedom is the appli
cation of the renormalizationgroup equation to the bare coupling g.
Integration of (5.28) leads to the analog of (5.41) for the bare coupling,
−ln(a
2
Λ
2
L
) =
1
β
1
g
2
+
β
2
β
2
1
ln(β
1
g
2
) +O(g
2
), (5.45)
where we introduced the ‘lattice lambda scale’ Λ
L
. The analog of (5.42),
β
1
g
2
≈ 1/[ ln(a
2
Λ
2
L
)[, (5.46)
shows that the bare coupling vanishes in the continuum limit a →0. This
means that the critical point of the theory (the one that is physically
relevant, in case there is more than one) is known: it is g = 0.
124 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
The inverse of (5.45) can be written as
Λ
2
L
=
1
a
2
(β
1
g
2
)
−β
2
/β
2
1
e
−1/β
1
g
2
[1 +O(g
2
)]. (5.47)
This equation is sometimes accompanied by the phrase ‘dimensional
transmutation’: the pure gauge theory has no dimensional parameters
(such as mass terms) in its classical action and we may think of trans
forming the bare coupling g into the dimensional lambda scale via the
arbitrary regularization scale 1/a. As we shall see later, all physical
quantities with a dimension are proportional to the appropriate power
of Λ
L
(as in (1.4)).
The Λ
V
and Λ
L
are examples of the QCD lambda scales which set the
physical scale of the theory. They are all proportional and their ratios
can be calculated in oneloop perturbation theory. Let us see how this is
done for the ratio Λ
V
/Λ
L
. The oneloop relation (5.25) can be rewritten
as
1
β
1
g
2
=
1
β
1
g
2
R
+
¸
ln
d
2
a
2
+c
+O(g
2
R
). (5.48)
Inserting this relation into (5.47) and letting a and d go to zero with
d/a ﬁxed, such that g and g
R
go to zero, gives
Λ
2
L
=
e
−c
d
2
(β
1
g
2
R
)
−β
2
/β
2
1
e
−1/β
1
g
2
R
[1 +O(g
2
R
)] (5.49)
= Λ
2
V
e
−c
. (5.50)
Hence the ratio is determined by the constant c, which depends on the
details of the regularization.
A comparison of lambda scales on the lattice and in the continuum
was done some time ago [45, 46, 47]. The relation with the popular
MSbar scheme (modiﬁed minimal subtraction scheme) in dimensional
renormalization is
Λ
MS
Λ
L
= exp[(1/16n −0.0849780 n)/β
1
] (5.51)
= 19.82, SU(2) (5.52)
= 28.81, SU(3). (5.53)
5.3 Strongcoupling expansion 125
A calculation [48] of the constant c in the MSbar scheme then gave the
relation to the potential scheme Λ
V
, (γ = 0.57 is Eulers’s constant)
Λ
V
Λ
L
= exp[γ −1 −(1/16n −0.095884 n)/β
1
] (5.54)
= 20.78, for SU(2) (5.55)
= 30.19 for SU(3). (5.56)
5.3 Strongcoupling expansion
The strongcoupling expansion is an expansion in powers of 1/g
2
. It has
the advantage over the weakcoupling expansion that it has a nonzero
radius of convergence. A lot of eﬀort has been put into using it as a
method of computation, similarly to the hightemperature or hopping
expansion for scalar ﬁeld theories, see e.g. [6, 44]. One has to be able to
match on to coupling values where the theory exhibits continuum be
havior. This turns out to be diﬃcult for gauge theories. However, a very
important aspect of the strongcoupling expansion is that it gives insight
into the qualitative behavior of the theory, such as conﬁnement and the
particle spectrum. There are sophisticated methods for organizing the
strongcoupling expansion, but here we give only a minimal outline of
the basic ideas.
We start again with the compact U(1) theory. Let p be the plaquette
(x, µ, ν), µ < ν. We write the compact U(1) action in the form
S =
¸
p
L(U
p
) + constant, (5.57)
L(U
p
) =
1
2g
2
(U
p
+U
∗
p
), (5.58)
U
p
= U
µν
(x) = U
νµ
(x)
∗
. (5.59)
In the path integral we expand expS in powers of 1/g
2
. First consider
exp
¸
1
2g
2
(U
p
+U
∗
p
)
=
∞
¸
m,n=0
1
m!n!
1
2g
2
m+n
U
m
p
U
∗n
p
. (5.60)
126 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Since U
∗
p
= U
−1
p
we put m = n + k and sum over n and k, k =
0, ±1, ±2, . . ., which gives
∞
¸
n=0
1
n!
2
1
2g
2
2n
+ (U
p
+U
−1
p
)
∞
¸
n=0
1
(n + 1)!n!
1
2g
2
2n+1
+ + (U
k
p
+U
−k
p
)
∞
¸
n=0
1
(n +k)!n!
1
2g
2
2n+k
+ . (5.61)
Recognizing the modiﬁed Bessel function I
k
,
I
k
(x) = I
−k
(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
1
(n +k)!n!
x
2
2n+k
, (5.62)
we ﬁnd
e
L(U
p
)
=
∞
¸
k=−∞
I
k
1
g
2
U
k
p
. (5.63)
This is actually an expansion of expL(U
p
) in irreducible representations
of the group U(1), labeled by the integer k. It is useful to extract an
overall factor,
e
L(U
p
)
= f
¸
k
a
k
U
k
p
, (5.64)
a
k
(1/g
2
) =
I
k
(1/g
2
)
I
0
(1/g
2
)
, (5.65)
f(1/g
2
) = I
0
(1/g
2
). (5.66)
The coeﬃcients a
k
are of order (1/g
2
)
k
.
Consider now the expansion of the partition function Z =
DU expS.
Using (5.57) and (5.64) we get a sum of products of U
k
p
’s,
Z =
DU
¸
(coeﬃcient)
¸
U
k
p
. (5.67)
Each U
k
p
is a product U
k
1
U
k
2
U
−k
3
U
−k
4
of the four link variables U
1
, . . ., U
4
of the plaquette p, raised to the power k. A given link variable belongs
to 2d plaquettes (in d dimensions). For each link there is an integration
dU over the group manifold, which for the group U(1) is simply given
by
dU U
r
=
2π
0
dθ
2π
e
irθ
= δ
r,0
, (5.68)
5.3 Strongcoupling expansion 127
Fig. 5.7. Simple diagrams contributing to the partition function. The hatched
area in (b) belongs to the closed surface. Diagram (c) is disconnected.
Fig. 5.8. Conservation of ﬂux in three dimensions: k +l +m = 0.
where r is an integer. Hence the group integration projects out the trivial
(r = 0) representation. Now r is the sum of the k’s belonging to the
plaquettes impinging on the link under consideration. It follows that,
after integration, the nonvanishing terms in (5.67) can be represented by
diagrams consisting of plaquettes forming closed surfaces, as in ﬁgure 5.7.
We can interpret this as follows. Each plaquette carries an amount of
electric or magnetic ﬂux (depending on its being timelike or spacelike;
recall that it corresponds to a miniature line current), labeled by k.
The integration over the link variables enforces conservation of ﬂux, as
illustrated in ﬁgure 5.8. If the surface is not closed, then
dU
r
= 0 along
each link of its boundary.
Diagram (a) in ﬁgure 5.7 represents the leading contribution to Z,
Z = f
V d(d−1)/2
1 +
1
3!
V d(d −1)(d −2)
¸
k=0
(a
k
)
6
+
¸
¸
, (5.69)
where V is the number of lattice sites, V d(d − 1)/2 is the number of
plaquettes, V d(d − 1)(d − 2)/3! is the number of ways the cube can be
embedded in the ddimensional hypercubic lattice (d ≥ 3) and 6 is the
number of faces of the cube.
128 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
The expansion can be arranged as an expansion for lnZ containing
only connected diagrams, called polymers.
For a general gauge theory the derivation of the strongcoupling
expansion is similar. One writes
L(U
p
) =
β
χ
f
(1)
Re χ
f
(U
p
), (5.70)
where χ
f
(U
p
) is the character of U
p
in the fundamental representation.
Recall (we encountered this before in section 4.7) that these characters
are orthonormal,
dU χ
r
(U)χ
s
(U)
∗
= δ
rs
, (5.71)
and complete for class functions F(U) (which satisfy F(U) =
F(V UV
−1
)). Next expL is written as a character expansion,
e
L(U
p
)
= f +f
¸
r=0
d
r
a
r
χ
r
(U
p
), (5.72)
where r = 0 denotes the trivial representation U
p
→ 1 and d
r
= χ
r
(1)
is the dimension of the representation r. The expansion coeﬃcients are
given by
f =
dU e
L(U)
, (5.73)
d
r
a
r
=
dU e
L(U)
χ
∗
r
dUe
L(U)
. (5.74)
For the group U(1), r = 0, ±1, ±2, . . ., β = 1/g
2
, χ
r
(U) = exp(irθ)
and we recover (5.65) from the integral representation of the Bessel
functions
I
r
(x) =
1
π
π
0
dθ cos(kθ) e
x cos θ
. (5.75)
For the group SU(n), χ
f
(1) = n and
β = 2n/g
2
. (5.76)
The leading βdependence of a
f
(β) is easily found,
f(β) =
dU e
(β/2n)(χ
f
+χ
∗
f
)
= 1 +O(β
2
), (5.77)
na
f
(β) = f(β)
−1
dU e
(β/2n)(χ
f
+χ
∗
f
)
χ
∗
f
5.4 Potential at strong coupling 129
Fig. 5.9. A small Wilson loop with compensating plaquettes.
=
β
2n
+O(β
2
), n > 2 (5.78)
=
β
n
+O(β
2
), n = 2. (5.79)
For SU(2) the characters are real. In terms of g
2
,
a
f
=
1
g
2
+ , n = 2, (5.80)
=
1
ng
2
+ , n = 3, 4, . . .. (5.81)
Up to grouptheoretical complications (which can be formidable) the
strongcoupling expansion for general gauge groups follows that of the
U(1) case. The graphs are the same, but the coeﬃcients diﬀer.
5.4 Potential at strong coupling
We now turn to the expectation value of the rectangular Wilson loop
'U(C)`, from which the potential can be calculated. The links on the
curve C contain explicit factors of U that have to be compensated by
plaquettes from the expansion of expS, otherwise the integration over U
gives zero. Figure 5.9 shows a simple example. The contribution of this
diagram is (the Wilson loop is taken in the fundamental representation
of U(1))
[a
1
(1/g
2
)]
4
, (5.82)
which is the leading contribution for this curve C. Recall that a
1
is given
by
a
1
(1/g
2
) =
I
1
(1/g
2
)
I
0
(1/g
2
)
=
1
2g
2
−
1
2
1
2g
2
3
+ . (5.83)
In higher orders disconnected diagrams appear. It can be shown,
however, that disconnected diagrams may be discarded: they cancel out
130 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Fig. 5.10. Leading diagrams for a large Wilson loop.
between the numerator and denominator of 'U(C)`. The expansion can
be rewritten as a sum of connected diagrams. Figure 5.10 illustrates the
leading terms for a large Wilson loop,
W(r, t) = a
A
1
+ 2(d −2)Aa
A+4
1
+ , (5.84)
where A is the area of the loop, in lattice units A = rt. Boundary correc
tions are also in the . The higher orders correspond to ‘decorations’
of the minimal surface.
The potential V (r) follows now from (5.1) and A = rt,
V (r) =
1
t
lnW(r, t)
= −[lna
1
+ 2(d −2)a
4
1
+ ] r. (5.85)
For r → ∞, A → ∞ and the boundary corrections become negligible.
Hence, the potential is linearly conﬁning at large distances,
V (r) ≈ σr, r →∞, (5.86)
σ = −lna
1
−2(d −2)a
4
1
+ . (5.87)
At strong coupling the compact U(1) theory is conﬁning.
For other gauge theories the calculation of the leading contribution to
a Wilson loop in the fundamental representation goes similarly. A useful
formula here is
dU χ
r
(UV )χ
s
(W
†
U
†
) =
δ
rs
d
r
χ
r
(V W
†
), (5.88)
which follows from
dU T
r
mn
(U)T
r
m
n
(U)
∗
= δ
rr
δ
mm
δ
nn
1
d
r
, (5.89)
seen earlier in (4.145). The use of this formula is illustrated in ﬁgure 5.11.
Successive integration in the simple Wilsonloop example in ﬁgure 5.9 is
illustrated in ﬁgure 5.12. Each arrow in ﬁgure 5.12 denotes the result of
‘integrating out a link’. The equality signs symbolize UU
†
= 1. Note
that the factors d
r
in (5.88) cancel out with those in (5.72). Hence
5.4 Potential at strong coupling 131
Fig. 5.11. Integration of a link variable.
Fig. 5.12. Integrating the leading contribution to a 2 ×2 Wilson loop.
the numerical value of the diagram is d
r
a
r
(β)
4
, for a Wilson loop in
representation r.
Another way to see this is as follows: in ﬁgure 5.9 there are n
l
= 12
links, n
p
= 4 plaquettes and n
s
= 9 sites. Integrating over each link
gives a factor d
−n
l
r
by (5.89) and contracting the Kronecker deltas at
each site gives a factor d
n
s
r
. Each plaquette has a factor d
n
p
r
by (5.72).
For a simple surface without handles, the Euler number is
−n
l
+n
s
+n
p
= 1
⇒leading contribution = (d
r
)
−n
l
+n
s
[d
r
a
r
(β)]
n
p
= d
r
a
r
(β)
n
p
. (5.90)
For a Wilson loop in the fundamental representation of the SU(n)
theory the ﬁrst few terms in the expansion for the string tension
σ = −lna
f
(β) −2(d −2)a
f
(β)
4
+ . (5.91)
are similar to the U(1) result (5.87). In higher orders the a
r
(β) corre
sponding to other irreps enter. The ﬁnal result may then be reexpressed
by expansion in powers of 1/ng
2
.
132 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Fig. 5.13. Flux lines for sources in the fundamental (a) and the adjoint (b)
representation.
5.5 Conﬁnement versus screening
In the previous section we saw that the U(1) and SU(n) potentials are
conﬁning in the strongcoupling region. From the derivation we can see
that this is true for external charges (Wilson loops) in the fundamental
representation of any compact gauge group. However, external charges in
the adjoint representation of SU(n) are not conﬁned. This is because the
charges in the adjoint representation can be screened by the gauge ﬁeld.
A adjoint source is like a quark–antiquark pair, as illustrated intuitively
in ﬁgure 5.13. We now show how this happens at strong coupling.
Let U denote the fundamental representation (as before) and R the
adjoint representation. The latter can be constructed from U and U
†
,
R
kl
= 2 Tr (U
†
t
k
Ut
l
), (5.92)
where the t
k
are the generators in the fundamental representation. Since
R is an irrep,
dU R
kl
(U) = 0. (5.93)
To compensate the R’s on the links of the adjoint Wilson loop
Tr R(C) = Tr
¸
l∈C
R
l
(5.94)
by the plaquettes from the expansion of expS, we may draw a Wilson
surface and ﬁnd in the same way as in the previous section the seemingly
leading contribution
d
a
a
a
(β)
A
, d
a
= n
2
−1, (5.95)
with A the minimal surface spanned by C. However, there is a more
economical possibility for large A, illustrated in ﬁgure 5.14. The tube
of plaquettes is able to screen the adjoint loop. To evaluate this con
tribution we unfold the tube as in ﬁgure 5.15. The links in the interior
5.5 Conﬁnement versus screening 133
Fig. 5.14. Diagram contributing to a Wilson loop in the adjoint representation;
(b) is a close up of a piece of the circumference in (a). The wavy line indicates
the adjoint representation.
Fig. 5.15. Unfolding the tube of plaquettes. The horizontal and vertical bound
aries are to be identiﬁed.
Fig. 5.16. Integrating out the interior.
can be integrated out as in ﬁgure 5.12, as illustrated in ﬁgure 5.16.
The ﬁrst step gives a factor d
f
a
f
(β)
N
p
with N
p
the number of plaquettes
(d
f
= n). The second step gives an additional factor 1/d
f
. There remains
the integration over the links of the Wilson loop, which leads to integrals
of the type (for n ≥ 3) (cf. (A.93) in appendix A.4)
dU U
a
b
U
q†
p
R
kl
=
1
d
a
2(t
k
)
a
p
(t
l
)
q
b
, n > 2, (5.96)
as illustrated in ﬁgure 5.17. So we get a trace of the form
2d
−1
a
(t
k
)
a
p
(t
l
)
q
b
2d
−1
a
(t
l
)
b
q
(t
m
)
r
c
(t
k
)
p
a
= 1, (5.97)
since 2 Tr (t
k
t
k
) = n
2
−1 = d
a
. This leads to a factor
a
f
(β)
4P
, (5.98)
where P is the perimeter of the (large) adjoint loop in lattice units:
134 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Fig. 5.17. Link variables on the adjoint loop.
P = 2(r + t), and the factor 4 in the exponent reﬂects the fact that
there are four plaquettes per unit length.
The leading contributions of the perimeter and area type in the SU(n)
theory are given by
W
a
(r, t) ∼ (n
2
−1)(a
a
)
rt
+ + 2(d −1)(d −2)(a
f
)
8(r+t)
+ , (5.99)
which by (5.1) leads to a potential
V (r) = σ
eﬀ
r, r ≤
V (∞)
σ
eﬀ
= V (∞), r ≥
V (∞)
σ
eﬀ
, (5.100)
with
σ
eﬀ
= −lna
a
+ , (5.101)
V (∞) = −8 lna
f
+ , (5.102)
a
f
= (ng
2
)
−1
+ ,
a
a
=
n
2
n
2
−1
(ng
2
)
−2
+ . (5.103)
(This behavior of a
a
follows easily from (5.74) and (5.96).)
At large distances the potential approaches a constant. The sharp
crossover from linear to constant behavior (at r ≈ 4) is an artifact of
our simplistic strongcoupling calculation. Still, the calculation suggests
that there is an intermediate region where the potential is approximately
linear with some eﬀective string tension σ
eﬀ
, although strictly speaking
the string tension, deﬁned by σ = V (r)/r, r →∞, vanishes for adjoint
sources.
To decide whether static charges in an irreducible representation r can
be screened by the gauge ﬁeld, we consider the generalization of (5.96),
I =
dU T
s
mn
(U) T
s
m
n
(U)
∗
T
r
kl
(U), (5.104)
5.6 Glueballs 135
where s denotes the irreps of the two screening plaquettes. If the integral
I is zero, the source cannot be screened, and viceversa. Let Z
k
denote
an element of the center of SU(n), i.e. Z
k
∈ SU(n) commutes with all
group elements and it is represented in the fundamental representation
as a multiple of the identity matrix,
(Z
k
)
a
b
= e
ik2π/n
δ
a
b
, k = 0, 1, . . ., n −1. (5.105)
Irreps r can be constructed from a tensor product U ⊗U U ⊗U
†
⊗
U
†
, say p times U and q times U
†
, so r can be assigned an integer
ν(r) = p −q mod n, from the way it transforms under U →Z
1
U:
T
r
kl
(Z
1
U) →e
iν(r)2π/n
T
r
kl
(U). (5.106)
The integer ν(r) is called the nality of the representation (triality for
n = 3). Making the change of variables U →Z
1
U in (5.104) gives
I = e
iν(r)2π/n
I, (5.107)
and we conclude that I = 0 if the nality ν(r) = 0. Sources with nonzero
nality are conﬁned; sources with zero nality are not conﬁned. In QCD,
static quarks have nonzero triality and are conﬁned.
5.6 Glueballs
The particles of the pure gauge theory are called glueballs. They may
be interpreted as bound states of gluons. Gluons appear as a sort of
photons in the weakcoupling expansion and, because of asymptotic
freedom, they manifest themselves as eﬀective particlelike excitations
at high energies. However, gluons do not exist as free particles because
of conﬁnement, as we shall see.
Masses of particles can be calculated from the longdistance behavior
of suitable ﬁelds. These are gaugeinvariant ﬁelds constructed out of the
link variables U
µx
, such as Wilson loops, with the quantum numbers of
the particles being studied. The transfermatrix formalism shows that
an arbitrary state can be created out of the vacuum by application of
a suitable combination of spacelike Wilson loops. The simplest of these
is the plaquette ﬁeld Tr U
mnx
, m, n = 1, 2, 3. The plaquette–plaquette
expectation value (4.97) can be calculated easily at strong coupling. The
relevant diagrams consist of tubes of plaquettes, as in ﬁgure 5.18. Since
there are four plaquettes per unit of time, the glueball mass is given
by m = −4 lna
f
(β) + . The higherorder corrections correspond to
136 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Fig. 5.18. The leading strongcoupling diagram for the plaquette–plaquette
correlator. Time runs horizontally.
diagrams decorating the basic tube of ﬁgure 5.18, which will also cause
the tube to perform random walks.
The plaquette can be decomposed into operators with deﬁnite quan
tum numbers under the symmetry group of the lattice, and such oper
ators can in turn be embedded into representations of the continuum
rotation group of spin zero, one and two. To be more precise, the
quantum numbers J
PC
(J = spin, P = parity, C = chargeconjugation
parity) excited by the plaquette are 0
++
, 1
+−
and 2
++
, which may
be called scalar (S), axial vector (A) and tensor (T). The description
of glueballs with other quantum numbers requires more complicated
Wilson loops. The terms in the strongcoupling series
m
j
= −4 lnu +
¸
k
m
k
j
u
k
, j = S, A, T, u ≡ a
f
(β), (5.108)
have been calculated to order u
8
for gauge groups SU(2) and SU(3)
[91, 92]. See [10] for details.
Since the strongcoupling diagrams are independent of the (compact)
gauge group (but their numerical values are not), also the U(1) and e.g.
Z(n) gauge theories† have a particle content at strong coupling similar
to that of glueballs.
5.7 Coulomb phase, conﬁnement phase
We have seen that all gauge theories with a compact gauge group such as
U(1), SU(n) and Z(n) have the property of conﬁnement at strong cou
pling, and the emerging particles are ‘glueballs’. On the other hand, we
have also given arguments, for U(1) and SU(n), that the weakcoupling
expansion on the lattice gives the usual universal results for renormalized
quantities found with perturbation theory in the continuum.
In particular the compact U(1) theory at weak coupling is not con
ﬁning and it contains no glueballs but simply the photons of the free
† Z(n) is the discrete group consisting of the center elements (5.105) of SU(n).
5.7 Coulomb phase, conﬁnement phase 137
Fig. 5.19. Phase diagram of the compact U(1) gauge theory (a) and the SU(n)
gauge theory, n = 2, 3 (b).
Maxwell theory. The physics of the compact U(1) theory is clearly
diﬀerent in the weak and strongcoupling regions. This can be un
derstood from the fact that there is a phase transition as a function
of the bare coupling constant (ﬁgure 5.19). One speaks of a Coulomb
phase at weak coupling and a conﬁning phase at strong coupling. In
the Coulomb phase the static potential has the standard Coulomb form
V = −g
2
R
/4πr+constant, whereas in the conﬁnement phase the potential
is linearly conﬁning at large distances, V ≈ σr. There is a phase
transition at a critical coupling β
c
≡ 1/g
2
c
≈ 1.01, at which the string
tension σ(β) vanishes; see for example [95].
The Wilson loop serves as an order ﬁeld in pure gauge theories.
Consider a rectangular r t Wilson loop C, with perimeter P = 2(r +t)
and area A = rt. When the loop size is scaled up to inﬁnity, the dominant
behavior is a decay according to a perimeter law or an area law:
W(C) ∼ e
−P
, Coulomb phase, (5.109)
W(C) ∼ e
−σA
, conﬁnement phase. (5.110)
Here may be interpreted as the selfenergy of a particle tracing out
the path C in (Euclidean) space–time, and σ is the string tension
experienced by a particle.
There is no phase transition in the SU(2) and SU(3) models with
the standard plaquette action in the fundamental representation in the
whole region 0 < β < ∞(β = 2n/g
2
). This conclusion is based primarily
on numerical evidence (see e.g. the collection of articles in [5]) and it
is also supported by analytic meanﬁeld calculations (see e.g. [6] for a
review). The absence of a phase transition, combined with conﬁnement
at strong coupling, may be interpreted as evidence for conﬁnement also
in the weakcoupling region.
138 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Fig. 5.20. Qualitative phase diagram of mixedaction SU(n) gauge theory for
n = 2, 3.
It should be kept in mind that the phase structure of a theory is not
universal and depends on the action chosen. Only the scaling region near
a critical point is supposed to have universal properties. For example,
in SU(n) gauge theory with an action consisting of a term in the
fundamental representation and a term in the adjoint representation,
S =
¸
p
[β
f
d
−1
f
Re Tr U
p
+β
a
d
−1
a
Re Tr D
a
(U
p
)], (5.111)
the phase diagram in the β
f
–β
a
coupling plane looks schematically like
ﬁgure 5.20. This ﬁgure shows two connected phase regions; the one
relevant for QCD is the region connected to the weakcoupling region
β
f
/2n + β
a
n/(n
2
−1) = 1/g
2
→ ∞ (recall (4.85)). For n > 3 the phase
boundary going downward in the southeast direction crosses the β
f
axis.
This implies that, for n > 3, the model with only the standard plaquette
action in the fundamental representation shows a phase transition. It
is, however, not a deconﬁning transition because we can go around it
continuously through negative values of the adjoint coupling β
a
.
The phase structure of lattice gauge theories is rich subject and for
more information we refer the reader to [5] and [6], and [10].
5.8 Mechanisms of conﬁnement
As we have seen in section 5.1, the calculation of the static potential
from a Wilson loop to lowest order of perturbation in g
2
gives a Coulomb
potential. In the compact U(1) theory, higher orders did not change this
result qualitatively, whereas in SU(n) gauge theory, there are logarith
mic corrections, that can be interpreted in terms of asymptotic freedom.
5.8 Mechanisms of conﬁnement 139
However, there is no sign of conﬁnement in weakcoupling perturbation
theory. This can be understood from the fact that we expect the string
tension to depend on the bare coupling g
2
as
√
σ = C
σ
Λ
L
= C
σ
1
a
(β
1
g
2
)
−β
2
/2β
2
1
e
−1/β
1
g
2
[1 +O(g
2
)], (5.112)
which has no weakcoupling expansion (all derivatives ∂/∂g
2
vanish at
g = 0). The physical region is at weak coupling, where the lattice spacing
is small, so how can we understand conﬁnement in this region?
Nonperturbative ﬁeld conﬁgurations have long been suspected to
do the job. Such conﬁgurations are fundamentally diﬀerent from mere
ﬂuctuations on a zero or puregauge background. We mention here in
particular magneticmonopole conﬁgurations envisioned by Nambu [49],
’t Hooft [50], and Polyakov [41], and Z(n) vortex conﬁgurations put
forward by ’t Hooft [51] and Mack [52].
It can be shown that the conﬁnement of the compact U(1) theory
is due to the fact that it is really a theory of photons interacting with
magnetic monopoles (see e.g. the ﬁrst reference in [53] for a review).
These monopoles condense in the conﬁnement phase in which the model
behaves like a dual superconductor. In a standard typeII superconduc
tor, electrically charged Cooper pairs are condensed in the ground state,
which phenomenon causes magneticﬁeld lines to be concentrated into
linelike structures, called Abrikosov ﬂux tubes. Magnetic monopoles,
if they were to exist, would be conﬁned in such a superconductor,
because the energy in the magnetic ﬂux tube between a monopole and an
antimonopole would increase linearly with the distance between them.
In a dual superconductor electric and magnetic properties are inter
changed. The compact U(1) model is a dual superconductor in the
strongcoupling phase, in which the magnetically charged monopoles
condense and the electricﬁeld lines are concentrated in tubes, such that
the energy between a pair of positively and negatively charged particles
increases linearly with distance. In this way the model is an illustration
of the dualsuperconductor hypothesis as the explanation of conﬁnement
in QCD.
At weak coupling the monopoles decouple in the compact U(1) model,
because they are point particles that acquire a Coulomb selfmass of
order of the inverse lattice spacing a
−1
. However, in SU(2) gauge theory,
according to [53], there are ‘fat’ monopoles that have physical sizes and
masses, and do not decouple at weak bare gauge coupling g
2
. They
remain condensed as g
2
→0 and continue to produce a nonzero string
140 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
tension for all values of g
2
. A similar mechanism is supposed to take
place in SU(n) gauge theory for n > 2.
The mechanism for conﬁnement in SU(n) gauge theory proposed by
Mack is condensation of fat Z(n) vortices. The latter cause an areatype
decay of large Wilson loops in much the same way as in the Z(n) gauge
theory at strong coupling.
There seems to be more than one explanation of conﬁnement, depend
ing on the gauge one chooses to work in. This may seem disturbing,
but, e.g. also in scattering processes, diﬀerent reference frames (such
as ‘center of mass’ or ‘laboratory’) lead to diﬀerent physical pictures.
Numerical simulations oﬀer a great help in studying these fundamental
questions. Lattice XX reviews are in [54], see also [55, 56, 57, 58, 59].
5.9 Scaling and asymptotic scaling, numerical results
We say that relations between physical quantities scale if they become
independent of the correlation length ξ as it increases toward inﬁnity.
In practice this means once ξ is suﬃciently large. In pure SU(n) gauge
theory the correlation length is given by the mass in lattice units of the
lightest glueball, ξ = 1/am. For instance, glueballmass ratios m
i
/m
j
are said to scale when they become approximately independent of ξ.
Typically one expects corrections of order a
2
,
m
i
/m
j
= r
ij
+r
ij
a
2
m
2
+O(a
4
). (5.113)
For the usual plaquette action am is only a function of the bare gauge
coupling g
2
. We can write m = C
m
Λ
L
, with Λ
L
the lambda scale
introduced in (5.45) and C
m
a numerical constant characterizing the
glueball. The correlation length is then related to the gauge coupling by
ξ
−2
m
= a
2
m
2
= C
2
m
a
2
Λ
2
L
= C
2
m
(β
1
g
2
)
−β
2
/β
2
1
e
−1/β
1
g
2
[1 +O(g
2
)],
(5.114)
for suﬃciently small g
2
. Neglecting the O(g
2
), this behavior as a function
of g
2
is called asymptotic scaling.
It turns out that asymptotic scaling is a much stronger property than
scaling, in the sense that scaling may set in when the correlation length
is only a few lattice spacings, whereas asymptotic scaling is not very
well satisﬁed yet. In the usual range of couplings, which are of order
β = 2n/g
2
= 6 for SU(3) gauge theory with the plaquette action in the
fundamental representation, once β ≥ 5.7 or so, the correlation length
appears to be suﬃciently large and the O(a
4
) corrections small enough
5.9 Scaling and asymptotic scaling, numerical results 141
for scaling corrections to be under control. However, asymptotic scaling
does not hold very well yet in this region. Apparently the O(g
2
) correc
tions in (5.114) cannot be neglected. This has led to a search for ‘better’
expansion parameters, i.e. ‘improved’ deﬁnitions of a bare coupling that
may give better convergence, see e.g. [60]. Note that exp(−1/β
1
g
2
) is a
rapidly varying function of g
2
because β
1
= 11n/48π
2
≈ 0.070 (n = 3)
is so small. Typically ∆β ≈ 0.48 corresponds to a reduction of a
2
by a
factor of four near β = 6.
The potential V (r) is a good quantity to test for scaling because it is
relatively easy to compute and there are many values V (r). As a measure
of the correlation length we may take
ξ
σ
(β) = 1/a
√
σ, (5.115)
where a
2
σ is the string tension in lattice units, which goes to zero as β
approaches inﬁnity. Assuming
√
σ = 400 MeV, for example (cf. section
1.1), the value of a
√
σ give us the lattice distance a in units (MeV)
−1
.
This can be used to express the potential in physical units as follows.
The potential in lattice units can be written as
aV = v
r
a
, β
, (5.116)
where v is a function of the dimensionless variables r/a and β. Recall that
V contains the unphysical selfenergy of the sources, which is distance
independent. Expressing the potential in physical units, as set by the
string tension, gives
V
√
σ
= ξ
σ
(β) v
r
√
σ
ξ
σ
(β)
, β
≡
˜
V (r
√
σ, β) +v
0
(β). (5.117)
These relations ‘scale’ when
˜
V becomes independent of β. Here v
0
(β)
is the selfenergy, which can be ﬁxed by a suitable choice of the zero
point of energy, e.g.
˜
V (1) = 0. In practice, after computing σ from the
longdistance behavior V ≈ σr + constant +O(r
−1
), the data points at
various β ≥ 6 can be made to form a single scaling curve by plotting
V/
√
σ versus r
√
σ with a suitable vertical shift corresponding to v
0
(β).
However, the accuracy of such scaling tests is limited by the fact that
σ is an asymptotic quantity deﬁned in terms of the behavior of the po
tential at inﬁnity. This problem may be circumvented by concentrating
on the force F = ∂V/∂r, in terms of which we can deﬁne a reference
distance r
0
by
r
2
0
F(r
0
) = 1.65. (5.118)
142 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Fig. 5.21. Scaling of the SU(3) force and the continuum limit at x = r/r
0
=
0.4, 0.5, and 0.9 (left), and x = r/r
c
= 0.5, 0.6, and 1.5 (right) from top to
bottom. The stronger/weaker dependence on a corresponds to r
1
deﬁned in
(5.119)/(5.120). From [62].
The choice 1.65 turns out to give r
0
≈ 1/
√
σ, which is in the
intermediatedistance regime within which the potential and force can
be computed accurately [61]. The force may be computed as
F(r
1
) = [V (r +a) −V (r)]/a, r
1
= r −a/2, (5.119)
and scaling tests can then be performed as above with
√
σ →1/r
0
. There
is another choice for r
1
that gives an improved deﬁnition of the force,
leading to much smaller scaling violations in the small and intermediate
distance region [61], namely
(4πr
1
)
−2
= [v(r
1
, 0, 0) −v(r
1
−a, 0, 0)]/a, (5.120)
where v(x, y, z) is the lattice Coulomb potential (5.11). The scaling test
for the force avoids ambiguities from the Coulomb selfenergy in the
potential. Writing r = xr
0
, or r = xr
c
, where r
c
is deﬁned as in (5.118)
with 1.65 → 0.65, a scaling analysis is carried out in [62] in the form
r
2
0
F(xr
0
) = f
0
(x) + f
0
(a/r
0
)
2
+ O(a
4
), or with r
0
→ r
c
, as shown in
ﬁgure 5.21. The values of (a/r
0,c
)
2
correspond to β in the interval [5.7,
6.92].
5.9 Scaling and asymptotic scaling, numerical results 143
Fig. 5.22. The running coupling α
q¯ q
(µ) = g
2
R
(µ)/4π, µ = 1/r plotted versus
r/r
0
and compared with the dependence on r as predicted by the weak
coupling expansion for the renormalizationgroup beta function (the curves
labeled RGE; dotted lines correspond to 1 σ uncertainties of Λ
MS
(r
0
). From
[64].
In the smalldistance regime the running of the coupling (5.23), i.e.
g
2
R
(µ) = 4πr
2
F(r)/C
2
, µ = 1/r, can be compared with the prediction of
the perturbative beta function, which is known to threeloop order. One
could use the perturbative expansion (5.41) in which Λ
V
, or equivalently
Λ
MS
, appears as an integration constant. This scale in units of r
0
,
i.e. r
0
Λ
MS
, has been determined independently in an elaborate non
perturbative renormalizationgroup computation [63]. Instead of using
the perturbative expansion it is more accurate to integrate the two
or threeloop renormalizationgroup equation numerically. The result
is shown in ﬁgure 5.22, where we see that perturbation theory works
surprisingly well, when it is implemented in this way, up to quite large
α’s. In physical units r
0
≈ 1/
√
σ ≈ 0.5 fm.
Note that knowledge of a nonperturbative Λ scale allows the predic
tion of α
s
. Such a program has been pursued in full QCD in various ways
[66] and the resulting α
s
agrees well with the experimentally measured
values, see also the review in [2].
144 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
Fig. 5.23. The potential from two values of β. The curve labeled ‘Cornell’ is
a ﬁt of the form −
4
3
α/r + constant +σr with constant α. From [65].
An overview of numerically computed potential is given in ﬁgure 5.23.
Glueball masses have by now also been computed with good accuracy
in the SU(n) models, using variational methods for determining the
eigenvalues of the transfer matrix. It is particularly interesting to do
this for varying n, since the theory simpliﬁes in the largen limit in the
sense that only planar diagrams contribute [67]. The same is true in
the strongcoupling expansion [68]. Figure 5.24 shows recent results for
various n. We see that ratios with
√
σ do indeed behave smoothly as a
function of 1/n
2
all the way down to n = 2.
Last, but not least, analytic computations in ﬁnite volume are theo
retically very interesting and a comparison with numerical data is very
rewarding. For a review, see [18].
5.10 Problems
(i) Gauge ﬁxing and the weakcoupling expansion
Consider a partition function for a U(1) or SU(n) lattice gauge
5.10 Problems 145
Fig. 5.24. Ratios of glueball masses with
√
σ, extrapolated to a → 0 and
inﬁnite volume, as a function of 1/n
2
, for n = 2, 3, 4, 5. From [69].
ﬁeld theory with gaugeinvariant action S(U),
Z =
DU exp[S(U)]. (5.121)
The action may be the standard plaquette action
S(U) = −
1
2ρg
2
¸
xµν
Tr (1 −U
µνx
), (5.122)
it may also contain the eﬀect of dynamical fermions in the form
ln det A(U), with A the ‘fermion matrix’, cf. section 7.1. Let O(U)
be a gaugeinvariant observable, O(U) = O(U
Ω
),
U
Ω
µx
= Ω
x
U
µx
Ω
†
x+ˆ µ
, (5.123)
and
'O` =
DU exp[S(U)] O(U)
Z
. (5.124)
be the average of O.
We want to evaluate the path integrals in the weakcoupling
expansion and expect to have to use gauge ﬁxing, as in the
146 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
continuum. We can try to restrict the implicit integration over
all gauge transformations in 'O`, loosely called gauge ﬁxing, by
adding an action S
gf
(U) to S(U) that is not invariant under gauge
transformations. For example,
S
gf
(U) = −
1
ξ
¸
x
1
2g
2
ρ
Tr (∂
µ
ImU
µx
)
2
, ImU ≡
U −U
†
2i
,
(5.125)
with ∂
µ
= −∂
†
µ
the backward derivative, ∂
µ
f
x
= f
x
− f
x+ˆ µ
. Let
∆(U) be deﬁned by
∆(U)
−1
=
DΩexp[S
gf
(U
Ω
)], (5.126)
where
DΩ is the integration over all gauge transformations. It
is assumed that ∆(U)
−1
= 0.
(a) Show that the Faddeev–Popov measure factor ∆(U) is gauge
invariant.
We insert 1 = ∆(U)
DΩexp[S
gf
(U
Ω
)] into the integrands in
the above pathintegral expression for 'O` and make a transfor
mation of variables U →U
Ω
†
. Using the gauge invariance of S(U),
O(U), and ∆(U) we get
'O` =
DΩ
DU ∆(U) exp[S(U) +S
gf
(U)] O(U)
DΩ
DU ∆(U) exp[S(U) +S
gf
(U)]
=
DU ∆(U) exp[S(U) +S
gf
(U)] O(U)
DU ∆(U) exp[S(U) +S
gf
(U)]
. (5.127)
In the weakcoupling expansion we expand about the saddle
points with maximum action. We assume this maximum to be
given by U
µx
= 1. There will in general be more maxima. For
example, without dynamical fermions, U
µx
= U (i.e. independent
of x and µ) and U
µx
= Z
µ
, with Z
µ
an element of the center
of the gauge group, give the same value of the plaquette action
as does U
µx
= 1. Intuitively we expect constant modes to be
important for ﬁnitesize eﬀects, but not important in the limit
that the space–time volume goes to inﬁnity. Restricting ourselves
here to the latter case, we shall not integrate over constant modes
and expand about U
µx
= 1, writing
U
µx
= exp(−igA
k
µx
t
k
). (5.128)
The evaluation of the integral (5.126) deﬁning ∆(U) is also
done perturbatively. Because of the factor 1/g
2
in the gaugeﬁxing
5.10 Problems 147
action, we only need to know ∆(U) for small ∂
µ
ImTr U
µx
. The
integral (5.126) has a saddle point at Ω
x
= 1, but there are in
general many more saddle points Ω
x
, called Gribov copies, with
S
gf
(U
Ω
) = S
gf
(U). The study of Gribov copies is complicated.
One can give arguments that the correct weakcoupling expansion
is obtained by restriction to the standard choice Ω
x
= 1, and this
is what we shall do in the following. This means that, for the
perturbative evaluation of ∆(U), we can write
Ω
x
= exp(igω
k
x
t
k
) (5.129)
and expand in gω
x
. In perturbation theory we may just as well
simplify the gaugeﬁxing action and use
S
gf
= −
1
2ξ
2
¸
x
∂
µ
A
k
µx
∂
ν
A
k
νx
. (5.130)
(In the neighborhood of the identity, A
k
µx
and ω
k
x
are well deﬁned
in terms of U
µx
and Ω
x
.)
We extend the initially compact integration region over A
k
µx
and ω
k
x
to the entire real line (−∞, ∞). The error made in doing
so is expected to be of order exp(−constant/g
2
), and therefore
negligible compared with powers of g, as g →0. A typical example
is given by
π
−π
dxe
−x
2
/g
2
=
∞
−∞
dxe
−x
2
/g
2
+O(e
−π
2
/g
2
). (5.131)
(b) For a U(1) gauge theory show that (5.130) leads to a Faddeev–
Popov factor that is independent of U,
∆(U) = constant det(),
xy
= ∂
µ
∂
µ
¯
δ
xy
, (5.132)
with the constant independent of A
µ
.
(ii) Weakcoupling expansion in compact QED
We consider ﬁrst the bosonic theory given by the action
S(U) = −
1
2g
2
¸
xµν
(1 −U
µνx
) (5.133)
and use (5.130) for gauge ﬁxing. The bare vertex functions −V
are given by
S
A
+S
gf
= −
¸
n
1
n!
¸
x
1
···x
n
V
x
1
···x
n
µ
1
···µ
n
A
µ
1
x
1
A
µ
n
x
n
. (5.134)
148 U(1) and SU(n) gauge theory
(a) Show that, in momentum space, for even n ≥ 2 (by convention
the momentumconserving periodic delta function is omitted in
the deﬁnition of the Fourier transform of V
x
1
···x
n
µ
1
···µ
n
),
V
µ
1
···µ
n
(k
1
k
n
) = −
1
2
(g
2
)
n/2−1
¸
αβ
T
αβ
µ
1
(k
1
) T
αβ
µ
n
(k
n
)
−δ
n,2
1
ξ
K
µ
1
(k
1
)K
µ
2
(k
2
), (5.135)
where
K
µ
(k) =
1
i
(e
ik
µ
−1), K
∗
µ
(k) = −K
µ
(−k), (5.136)
T
αβ
µ
(k) = K
∗
α
(k)δ
βµ
−K
∗
β
(k)δ
αµ
. (5.137)
(b) Show that the photon propagator D
µν
(k) is given by
D
µν
(k) =
δ
µν
−
K
µ
(k)K
∗
ν
(k)
[K(k)[
2
1
[K(k)[
2
+ξ
K
µ
(k)K
∗
ν
(k)
[K(k)[
4
.
(5.138)
The Feynman gauge corresponds to ξ = 1.
(c) Derive (5.19), for arbitrary ξ.
6
Fermions on the lattice
In this chapter we introduce the path integral for Fermi ﬁelds. We
shall discuss the speciesdoubling phenomenon – the fact that a naively
discretized Dirac fermion ﬁeld leads to more particle excitations than
expected and desired, two remedies for this, which go under the names
‘Wilson fermions’ and ‘staggered fermions’, the interpretation of the path
integral in Hilbert space, and the construction of the transfer operator.
Integration over ‘anticommuting numbers’, the ‘Grassmann variables’
and the relation with creation and annihilation operators in fermionic
Hilbert space is reviewed in appendix C.
6.1 Naive discretization of the Dirac action
In continuous Minkowski space–time the action for a free fermion ﬁeld
can be written as (see appendix D for an introduction)
S = −
d
4
x
1
2
(
¯
ψ(x)γ
µ
∂
µ
ψ(x) −∂
µ
¯
ψ(x)γ
µ
ψ(x)) +m
¯
ψ(x)ψ(x)
, (6.1)
or, exhibiting the Dirac indices α, β, . . . (but suppressing the label x for
brevity),
S = −
d
4
x
(γ
µ
)
αβ
1
2
(
¯
ψ
α
∂
µ
ψ
β
−∂
µ
¯
ψ
α
ψ
β
) +m
¯
ψ
α
ψ
α
. (6.2)
The ψ and
¯
ψ are anticommuting objects, socalled Grassmann variables,
e.g. ψ
α
(x)
¯
ψ
β
(y) = −
¯
ψ
β
(y)ψ
α
(x). The integrand in (6.1) is Hermitian,
treating ψ and ψ
+
,
ψ
+
=
¯
ψβ, β = iγ
0
, (6.3)
as Hermitian conjugates, e.g. (ψ
α
(x)ψ
+
β
(y))
†
= ψ
+
β
(y)ψ
α
(x). Note, how
ever, that ψ and ψ
+
are independent ‘variables’ (which is why we use
149
150 Fermions on the lattice
the superscript + instead of †). The Dirac matrices have the following
properties:
γ
0
= −γ
0
, γ
0
= −γ
†
0
, γ
2
0
= −1, (6.4)
γ
k
= γ
k
= γ
†
k
, γ
2
k
= 1, k = 1, 2, 3. (6.5)
implying that β = β
†
and β
2
= 1.† Replacing the derivative operators
by discrete diﬀerences,
∂
µ
ψ(x) →
1
a
µ
[ ψ(x +a
µ
ˆ µ) −ψ(x) ], (6.6)
we obtain from (6.1) a lattice version
S = −
¸
x,µ
1
2a
µ
[
¯
ψ(x)γ
µ
ψ(x+a
µ
ˆ µ)−
¯
ψ(x+a
µ
ˆ µ)γ
µ
ψ(x)]−m
¸
x
¯
ψ(x)ψ(x).
(6.7)
Recall that a
µ
is the lattice spacing in the µ direction. We shall occa
sionally only need the spacing in the time direction, a
0
, to be diﬀerent
from the spatial lattice spacing a
k
= a, k = 1, 2, 3.
The path integral for free fermions with anticommuting external
sources η and ¯ η is now tentatively deﬁned by
Z(η, ¯ η) =
D
¯
ψ Dψ e
i[S+
¸
x
(¯ ηψ+
¯
ψη)]
, (6.8)
where
D
¯
ψ Dψ =
¸
x,α
d
¯
ψ
xα
dψ
xα
=
¸
xα
dψ
+
xα
dψ
xα
. (6.9)
We assumed the action to be rewritten in terms of dimensionless ψ
x
and
¯
ψ
x
,
ψ
x
= a
3/2
ψ(x),
¯
ψ
x
= a
3/2
¯
ψ(x), (6.10)
and similarly the symbols dψ
+
xα
and dψ
xα
are dimensionless. The last
equality in (6.9) follows from the rule d(Tψ) = (det T)
−1
dψ (cf. ap
pendix C) and det β = 1. The ψ
xα
and ψ
+
xα
are independent generators
of a Grassmann algebra. We recall also the deﬁnition of fermionic inte
gration (cf. appendix C),
db = 0,
db b = 1, (6.11)
where b is any of the ψ
xα
or ψ
+
xα
. Before making the transition to
imaginary time we need to make the dependence on a
0
explicit. So let n
µ
† We usually write just 1 for the unit matrix 11.
6.2 Species doubling 151
be the integers specifying the lattice site x, x
0
= n
0
a
t
, x = na, and let
ψ
n
≡ ψ
x
and
¯
ψ
n
≡
¯
ψ
x
. Recalling that
¸
x
= a
0
a
3
¸
n
in our notational
convention, the lattice action reads more explicitly
S = −
¸
n
¸
1
2
(
¯
ψ
n
γ
0
ψ
n+
ˆ
0
−
¯
ψ
n+
ˆ
0
γ
0
ψ
n
)
+
3
¸
k=1
a
0
2a
(
¯
ψ
n
γ
k
ψ
n+
ˆ
k
−
¯
ψ
n+
ˆ
k
γ
k
ψ
n
) + (a
0
m)
¯
ψ
n
ψ
n
¸
. (6.12)
Furthermore
¸
x
(¯ ηψ +
¯
ψη) ≡
a
0
a
¸
n
(¯ η
αn
ψ
αn
+
¯
ψ
αn
η
αn
), (6.13)
with dimensionless η
αn
and ¯ η
αn
.
It follows from the rules of fermionic integration that the path integral
for a ﬁnite space–time volume is a polynomial in a
0
m and a
0
/a. Hence,
an analytic continuation to ‘imaginary time’ poses no problem:
a
0
= [a
0
[ exp(−iϕ), ϕ: 0 →π/2, a
0
→−ia
4
, (6.14)
with a
4
= [a
0
[. This transforms the path integral into its Euclidean
version (iS →S
, dropping the ·),
Z =
D
¯
ψDψ e
S+
¸
n
(¯ ηψ+
¯
ψη)
, (6.15)
S = −
¸
n
¸
¸
µ
a
4
2a
µ
(
¯
ψ
n
γ
µ
ψ
n+ˆ µ
−
¯
ψ
n+ˆ µ
γ
µ
ψ
n
) +a
4
m
¯
ψ
n
ψ
n
¸
,
where µ now runs from 1 to 4 (with n
4
≡ n
0
,
ˆ
4 ≡
ˆ
0), and
γ
4
= iγ
0
= β. (6.16)
6.2 Species doubling
It turns out that the model described by the action in (6.15) yields
2
4
= 16 Dirac particles (fermions with two charge and two spin states)
instead of one. This is the speciesdoubling phenomenon. We shall infer
it in this section from inspection of the fermion propagator and the
excitation energy spectrum.
Using a matrix notation, writing
Z(η, ¯ η) =
D
¯
ψDψ e
−
¯
ψAψ+¯ ηψ+
¯
ψη
, (6.17)
152 Fermions on the lattice
where (in lattice units, a = a
4
= 1)
A
xy
=
¸
zµ
γ
µ
1
2
(
¯
δ
x,z
¯
δ
y,z+ˆ µ
−
¯
δ
x,z+ˆ µ
¯
δ
y,z
) +m
¸
z
¯
δ
x,z
¯
δ
y,z
, (6.18)
the path integral is easily integrated (appendix C) to give
Z(η, ¯ η) = det Ae
¯ ηA
−1
η
. (6.19)
Here A
−1
xy
≡ S
xy
is the fermion propagator. It can be evaluated in
momentum space, assuming inﬁnite space–time,
A(k, −l) =
¸
xy
e
−ikx+ily
A
xy
= S(k)
−1
¯
δ(k −l), (6.20)
S(k)
−1
=
¸
µ
iγ
µ
sink
µ
+m, (6.21)
S(k) =
m−iγ
µ
s
µ
m
2
+s
2
, s
µ
= sink
µ
. (6.22)
Reverting to nonlattice units the propagator becomes
S(k) =
m−i
¸
µ
γ
µ
sin(ak
µ
)/a
m
2
+
¸
µ
sin
2
(ak
µ
)/a
2
, (6.23)
for which the limit a →0 gives the continuum result
S(k) =
m−iγk
m
2
+k
2
+O(a
2
). (6.24)
The propagator has a pole at k
4
= iω = i
√
k
2
+m
2
corresponding to
a Dirac particle. The pole is near the zeros of the sine functions at
the origin ak
µ
= 0. However, there are 15 more regions in the four
dimensional torus −π < ak
µ
≤ π where the sine functions vanish, 16 in
total:
S(k) =
m−iγ
(A)
µ
p
µ
m
2
+p
2
+O(a), k = k
A
+p (6.25)
where the k
A
is one of the 16 fourvectors
k
A
=
π
A
a
, mod 2π (6.26)
with
π
0
= (0, 0, 0, 0), π
1234
= (π, π, π, π),
π
1
= (π, 0, 0, 0), π
2
= (0, π, 0, 0), . . ., π
4
= (0, 0, 0, π),
π
12
= (π, π, 0, 0), . . ., π
34
= (0, 0, π, π),
π
123
= (π, π, π, 0), . . ., π
234
= (0, π, π, π), (6.27)
6.2 Species doubling 153
and
γ
(A)
µ
= γ
µ
cos π
Aµ
= ±γ
µ
. (6.28)
Since the γ
A
µ
diﬀer only by a sign from the original γ
µ
, they are equivalent
to these by a unitary transformation. This transformation is easy to
build up out of products of γ
ρ
γ
5
, where γ
5
= iγ
0
γ
1
γ
2
γ
3
= −γ
1
γ
2
γ
3
γ
4
is the Hermitian and unitary matrix which anticommutes with the γ
µ
:
γ
µ
γ
5
= −γ
5
γ
µ
. So let
¦S
A
¦ = ¦11, S
ρ
, S
ρ
S
σ
, S
ρ
S
σ
S
τ
, S
1
S
2
S
3
S
4
¦, S
ρ
= iγ
ρ
γ
5
, (6.29)
where ρ = σ = τ = ρ and A ↔π
A
↔S
A
, e.g. π
23
↔S
23
= S
2
S
3
. Then
γ
(A)
µ
= S
†
A
γ
µ
S
A
, (6.30)
and we have
S(k
A
+p) = S
†
A
m−iγ
µ
p
µ
m
2
+p
2
S
A
+O(a
2
). (6.31)
The transformations S
A
are useful for the detailed interpretation of the
zeros of the sine functions near k
A
= 0 in terms of genuine particles [70].
Here we shall support the interpretation of the 15 additional particles
– the species doublers – by deriving the spectrum of excitation energies
above the energy of the ground state.
The excitationenergy spectrum is conveniently obtained from the
time dependence of the propagator, analogously to the boson case:
S(x, t) =
π
−π
d
3
k
(2π)
3
e
ikx
π
−π
dk
4
2π
e
ik
4
t
m−iγs −iγ
4
sink
4
m
2
+s
2
+ sin
2
k
4
, (6.32)
where we reverted to lattice units and used the notation s
µ
= sink
µ
.
The k
4
integral can be performed by changing variables to
z = e
ik
4
, (6.33)
in terms of which s
2
4
= 1 −(z
2
+z
−2
+ 2)/4, and
S(x, t) = −4
d
3
k
(2π)
3
e
ikx
dz
2πi
z
t
z(m−iγs) −γ
4
(z
2
−1)/2
z
4
−2fz
2
+ 1
,
f = 1 + 2(m
2
+s
2
). (6.34)
The integral over z is over the unit circle in the complex plane, as shown
in ﬁgure 6.1. The denominator of the integrand has four zeros, at ±z
+
and ±z
−
, where z
±
are given by
(z
±
)
2
= f ±
f
2
−1, z
±
= e
±ω
, (6.35)
cosh(2ω) = f, sinhω =
m
2
+s
2
. (6.36)
154 Fermions on the lattice
Fig. 6.1. Contour integration in the complexz plane.
For t > 0 (t = integer) the two poles at z = ±z
−
contribute, giving
S(x, t) =
d
3
k
(2π)
3
e
ikx−ωt
sinh(2ω)
(m−iγs +γ
4
sinhω)
+ (−1)
t
d
3
k
(2π)
3
e
ikx−ωt
sinh(2ω)
(m−iγs −γ
4
sinhω). (6.37)
Before interpreting this result we want to summarize it in terms of the
variable k
4
, for later use. In terms of k
4
the zeros of the denominator
m
2
+ s
2
+ sin
4
k
4
at z = z
±
are at k
4
= ∓iω, and for z = −z
±
at
k
4
= ∓iω + π (mod 2π). The k
4
= −iω, −iω + π poles are relevant for
t < 0. The residues of the other poles are given by
e
ik
4
t
(m−iγs −iγ
4
s
4
)
= e
−ωt
(m−iγs +γ
4
sinhω), k
4
= iω,
= (−1)
t
e
−ωt
(m−iγs −γ
4
sinhω), k
4
= iω +π,
= e
ωt
(m−iγs −γ
4
sinhω), k
4
= −iω,
= (−1)
t
e
ωt
(m−iγs +γ
4
sinhω), k
4
= −iω +π. (6.38)
We see that we cannot blindly perform the inverse Wick rotation on the
lattice k
4
→ ik
0
and look for particle poles at k
0
= ±ω. We have to
let k
4
→ ik
0
+ ϕ, ϕ ∈ [0, 2π): then k
0
= ±ω corresponds to e
∓ωt
e
iϕt
,
t
>
< 0. In this case we have have poles at ϕ = 0 and ϕ = π. Recall that
the Boseﬁeld denominator m
2
+ 2
¸
µ
(1 −cos k
µ
) gives only a pole for
ϕ = 0.
6.2 Species doubling 155
Fig. 6.2. Excitationenergy spectra for bosons (upper curve) and fermions
(lower curve) on the lattice, in lattice units (m = 0.2).
We now interpret the result (6.37). From the time dependence of the
propagator we identify the energy spectrum ω(k). Since there are two
poles contributing for t > 0, there must be two fermion particles for every
k. One of them (the pole at z = z
−
) has the usual e
−ωt
factor. The other
(at −z
−
) has in addition the rapidly oscillating factor (−1)
t
. Apparently,
to obtain smooth behavior at large times (in lattice units) we have to
take two lattice units as our basic time step. This is in accordance with
the transfer operator interpretation of the path integral, in which in
general two adjacent time slices are identiﬁed with the fermion Hilbert
space [78, 79, 89], in which two independent operator Dirac ﬁelds
ˆ
ψ
1,2
act, corresponding to the two particle poles. An exception is Wilson’s
fermion method [86, 87], which has no fermion doubling (for r = 1, see
below).
So there is a doubling of fermion species due to the discretization of
time. There is a further proliferation of particles due to the discretization
of space. In ﬁgure 6.2 we compare the boson and fermion excitation
energy spectra
cosh ω = 1 +
1
2
m
2
+ 2
3
¸
j=1
(1 −cos k
j
)
¸
¸
, boson; (6.39)
sinhω =
m
2
+
3
¸
j=1
sin
2
k
j
, fermion. (6.40)
156 Fermions on the lattice
We deﬁne a particle state to correspond to a local minimum of the energy
surface ω(k). The minima are at k = k
A
, k
A
= 0, π
1
, π
2
, π
3
, π
12
, π
23
,
π
31
, π
123
, with rest energy given by ω
A
≡ ω(k
A
), sinhω
A
= m. For
m →0 (in lattice units) the spectrum is relativistic near k = k
A
,
ω →
m
2
+p
2
, m →0, p = k −k
A
→0, (6.41)
and p can be interpreted as the momentum of the particle. From the
time and space ‘doubling’ we count 2
4
= 16 particles. Note that the
wave vector k is just a label to identify the states and that the physical
momentum interpretation has to be supplied separately.
One may wish to ignore the k
A
= 0 particles. However, in an inter
acting theory this is not possible, because k
µ
is conserved only modulo
2π. For example, two k
A
= 0 particles may collide and produce two
k
A
= π
1
= (π, 0, 0, 0) particles: p
1
+ p
2
= p
3
+ π
1
+ p
4
+ π
1
= p
3
+ p
4
(mod 2π).
The phenomena related to fermions on a lattice touch on deep issues
involving anomalies and topology. This is a vast and technically diﬃcult
subject and we shall give only a brief review in sections 8.4 and 8.6. In a
ﬁrst exploration we shall describe two important methods used for ame
liorating the eﬀects of species doubling in QCDlike theories: Wilson’s
method [71] and the method of Kogut–Susskind [72, 40] (in the Hamil
tonian formulation). The latter is also known as the staggeredfermion
method, in its generalization to Euclidean space–time (see for example
[79, 74, 80]). For the hypercubic lattice the staggeredfermion method
is equivalent to the ‘geometrical’ or Dirac–K¨ ahler fermion method of
Becher and Joos [81], provided that an appropriate choice is made of
the couplings to the gauge ﬁelds.
We shall ﬁrst describe Wilson’s method and then brieﬂy introduce the
staggeredfermion method.
6.3 Wilson’s fermion method
Wilson’s method can be viewed as adding a momentumdependent ‘mass
term’ to the fermion action, which raises the masses of the unwanted
doublers to values of the order of the cutoﬀ, thereby decoupling them
from continuum physics. For free fermions we replace the mass term in
6.3 Wilson’s fermion method 157
the action as follows,
m
¸
x
¯
ψ
x
ψ
x
→m
¸
x
¯
ψ
x
ψ
x
+
ar
2
¸
xµ
∂
µ
¯
ψ
x
∂
µ
ψ
x
(6.42)
= m
¸
x
¯
ψ
x
ψ
x
+
ar
2
¸
xµ
1
a
2
(
¯
ψ
x+aˆ µ
−
¯
ψ
x
)(ψ
x+aˆ µ
−ψ
x
)
=
m+
4r
a
¸
x
¯
ψ
x
ψ
x
−
r
2a
¸
xµ
(
¯
ψ
x+aˆ µ
ψ
x
+
¯
ψ
x
ψ
x+aˆ µ
).
The has the eﬀect of replacing the mass m in the inverse propagator in
momentum space by
m+r
¸
µ
(1 −cos k
µ
) ≡ ´(k), (6.43)
in lattice units. The propagator is then given by
S(k) =
´(k) −iγ
µ
sink
µ
´
2
(k) +
¸
µ
sin
2
k
µ
. (6.44)
For k = k
A
+p and small p in lattice units this takes the form
S(p) =
m
A
−iγ
(A)
µ
p
µ
m
2
A
+p
2
, (6.45)
m
A
= m+ 2n
A
r, n
A
= 0, 1, . . ., 4, (6.46)
where n
A
is the number of π’s in k
A
.
Hence, the mass parameters of the doubler (n
A
> 0) fermions are of
order one in lattice units as long as r = 0. These mass parameters m
A
may be identiﬁed with the fermion masses if they are small in lattice
units, i.e. for small m and r. For general r and momenta p the fermion
energies diﬀer from
m
2
A
+p
2
and it is interesting to see what they
actually are. We therefore look for the poles of the propagator as a
function of k
4
and identify the energy ω from k
4
= iω or k
4
= iω + π,
as explained below (6.37). For simplicity we shall use the notation
s
µ
= sink
µ
, c
µ
= cos k
µ
, s
2
= s
µ
s
µ
. (6.47)
Separating the k
4
dependence, the denominator of the propagator can
be written as
´
2
+s
2
= 1 +s
2
+ Σ
2
−2rΣc
4
−(1 −r
2
)c
2
4
, (6.48)
Σ = m+r +r
3
¸
j=1
(1 −c
j
), (6.49)
158 Fermions on the lattice
which denominator vanishes for
cosh ω
±
=
Σ
2
+ (1 −r
2
)(1 +s
2
) ±rΣ
1 −r
2
. (6.50)
Here the plus sign corresponds to k
4
= iω + π and the minus sign to
k
4
= iω. The rest energies of the particles at k = k
A
follow from s = 0
and
Σ = m+r + 2nr, n = 0, 1, 2, 3 for k
A
= 0, π
j
, π
jk
, π
123
. (6.51)
For m = 0 the particles have rest energy ω
n
given by
cosh ω
±
n
=
r
2
(1 + 2n)
2
+ 1 −r
2
±r
2
(1 + 2n)
1 −r
2
. (6.52)
Hence, only the wanted (n = 0, − sign) fermion has rest energy zero
and the doubler fermions have rest energies of order 1 in lattice units
(energies of order of the cutoﬀ). For r → 1 the rest energies of the
timedoublers (for which the + sign applies) become inﬁnite, ω
+
→∞.
The nontimedoubler rest energies become ω
−
n
= ln(1 + 2n) at r =
1. Actually, as r increases from 0 to 1 the doublers disappear before
reaching r = 1 in the sense that the local minima of the energy surface
at k
A
= 0 disappear.
Wilson’s choice is r = 1. It can be seen directly from (6.48) that in
this case there is no species doubling because the inverse propagator is
linear in cos k
4
. Reinstalling the lattice spacing a, the particle energy
can be found to contain errors of order a, to be compared with O(a
2
)
for naive/staggered fermions or bosons,
ω = ω
−
0
=
m
2
+p
2
+O(a). (6.53)
The special signiﬁcance of r = 1 can be seen in another way from the
complete action, which has the form
S =
¸
xµ
¯
ψ
x
r −γ
µ
2
ψ
x+ˆ µ
+
¯
ψ
x+ˆ µ
r +γ
µ
2
ψ
x
−M
¸
x
¯
ψ
x
ψ
x
,
M = m+ 4r. (6.54)
The combinations
P
±
µ
=
r ±γ
µ
2
, (6.55)
become orthogonal projectors for r = 1,
(P
±
µ
)
2
= P
±
µ
, P
+
µ
P
−
µ
= 0, P
+
µ
+P
−
µ
= 1. (6.56)
6.3 Wilson’s fermion method 159
Replacing derivatives by covariant derivatives we obtain the expression
for the fermion action coupled to a lattice gauge ﬁeld U
µx
,
S
F
=
¸
xµ
(
¯
ψ
x
P
−
µ
U
µx
ψ
x+ˆ µ
+
¯
ψ
x+ˆ µ
P
+
µ
U
†
µx
ψ
x
) −
¸
x
¯
ψ
x
Mψ
x
, (6.57)
or, temporarily reintroducing the lattice spacing a,
S
F
= −
¸
x
¸
1
2
(
¯
ψγ
µ
D
µ
ψ −D
µ
¯
ψγ
µ
ψ) +
¯
ψmψ +a
r
2
D
µ
¯
ψD
µ
ψ
, (6.58)
where D
µ
¯
ψ(x) = [
¯
ψ(x + ˆ µa)U
†
µx
−
¯
ψ(x)]/a, etc., we rearranged the
summation over x, and m = M − 4r/a is sometimes called the bare
fermion mass.
In the QCD case M is a diagonal matrix in ﬂavor space and r is usually
chosen ﬂavorindependent, mostly r = 1. A parameterization introduced
by Wilson follows from rescaling ψ → M
−1/2
ψ,
¯
ψ →
¯
ψM
−1/2
. For one
ﬂavor this gives the form
S = −
¸
x
¯
ψ
x
ψ
x
+κ
¸
xµ
[
¯
ψ
x
(r −γ
µ
)U
µx
ψ
x+ˆ µ
+
¯
ψ
x+ˆ µ
(r +γ
µ
)U
†
µx
ψ
x
],
(6.59)
where
κ =
1
2M
, (6.60)
is Wilson’s hopping parameter (it is ﬂavor dependent). This κ is anal
ogous to the hopping parameter in the scalar ﬁeld models. We may
interpret −
¸
x
¯
ψ
x
ψ
x
as belonging to the integration measure in the path
integral.
For free fermions the continuum limit means m → 0 in lattice units,
which implies a critical value for the hopping parameter
κ →κ
c
= 1/8r, M →M
c
= 4r. (6.61)
At this critical value there is somehow a cancellation of the
¯
ψψlike
terms, such that the fermions acquire zero mass. With the gauge ﬁeld
present the eﬀective strength of the hopping term is reduced by the
‘ﬂuctuating’ unitary U
µx
. We then expect M
c
< 4 and κ
c
> 1/8r, for
given gauge coupling g. However, in the QCD case we know already that
g itself should go to zero in the continuum limit, because of asymptotic
freedom, implying U
µx
→1 in a suitable gauge and (6.61) should still be
valid (κ
c
is of course gauge independent). However, at gauge coupling
of order one we can be deep in the scaling region of QCD and we may
expect an eﬀective κ
c
substantially larger than 1/8r. Since there are no
160 Fermions on the lattice
free quarks in QCD we cannot deﬁne κ
c
as the value at which the quark
mass vanishes. We shall see later that it may be deﬁned as the value at
which the pion mass vanishes.
6.4 Staggered fermions
Starting with the naive fermion action we make the unitary transforma
tion of variables (in lattice units)
ψ
x
= γ
x
χ
x
,
¯
ψ
x
= ¯ χ
x
(γ
x
)
†
, (6.62)
γ
x
≡ (γ
1
)
x
1
(γ
2
)
x
2
(γ
3
)
x
3
(γ
4
)
x
4
. (6.63)
Because
(γ
x
)
†
γ
µ
γ
x+ˆ µ
αβ
=
γ
x
γ
µ
(γ
x+ˆ µ
)
†
αβ
= η
µx
δ
αβ
, (6.64)
where
η
1 x
= 1, η
2 x
= (−1)
x
1
, η
3 x
= (−1)
x
1
+x
2
, η
4 x
= (−1)
x
1
+x
2
+x
3
,
(6.65)
this transformation has the eﬀect of removing the gamma matrices from
the naive fermion action, which acquires the form
S = −
4
¸
α=1
¸
¸
xµ
η
µx
1
2
( ¯ χ
α
x
χ
α
x+ˆ µ
− ¯ χ
α
x+ˆ µ
χ
α
x
) +m
¸
x
¯ χ
α
x
χ
α
x
¸
. (6.66)
In this representation the Dirac spinor labels α on ¯ χ and χ are like
internal symmetry labels and the action is just a sum of four identical
terms, one for each value of the Dirac index. Hence, one of these should
suﬃce in describing fermion particles. It can indeed be shown that taking
χ and ¯ χ as onecomponent ﬁelds leads to 16/4 = 4 Dirac particles in
the continuum limit. In QCD all these fermions are interpreted as quark
ﬂavors. Inserting the ‘parallel transporters’ U
µx
then leads to a gauge
invariant staggeredfermion action
S
F
= −
¸
xµ
η
µx
1
2
¯ χ
ax
(U
µx
)
ab
χ
bx+ˆ µ
− ¯ χ
ax+µ
(U
†
µx
)
ab
χ
bx
−
¸
x
m¯ χ
ax
χ
ax
,
(6.67)
where we have made all indices on χ and ¯ χ explicit (a and b are color
indices) – there are e.g. no spin or ﬂavor indices for χ and ¯ χ. Analysis in
weakcoupling perturbation theory leads to the conclusion that this ac
tion describes QCD with four massdegenerate ﬂavors in the continuum
limit [73, 74] (the mass degeneracy of the quarks can be lifted by adding
6.5 Transfer operator for Wilson fermions 161
other terms to the action). The action has an interesting symmetry
group [76], which is important for the construction of composite ﬁelds
with the quantum numbers of hadrons [75, 77]. In the scaling region
this symmetry group enlarges to the group in the continuum (including
‘anomalies’).
A further reduction by a factor of two is possible by assigning ¯ χ
x
only
to the even sites and χ
x
only to the odd sites [78, 79, 80]. Even and odd
sites are deﬁned by
x
= 1 and −1, respectively, with
x
= (−1)
x
1
+x
2
+x
3
+x
4
. (6.68)
In this formulation we may as well omit the bar on ¯ χ
x
since no confusion
between even and odd sites is possible. Then a minimal action with only
one Grassmann variable per site is given by
S = −
¸
xµ
η
µx
1
2
χ
x
χ
x+ˆ µ
, (6.69)
in case of zero fermion mass. This method leads essentially to four
Majorana fermions, which are equivalent to two Dirac fermions or eight
Weyl fermions. Nonzero mass requires onelink or multilink couplings,
since χ
2
x
= 0.
Staggered fermions are technically rather specialized and we shall not
emphasize them in this book. For an application of the method (6.69)
to numerical simulations of the Higgs–Yukawa sector of the Standard
Model see [36].
6.5 Transfer operator for Wilson fermions
It will now be shown that the fermion partition function with Wilson
fermions can for r = 1 be written in the form
Z = Tr
ˆ
T
N
, (6.70)
where
ˆ
T is a positive transfer operator in Hilbert space and N is the
number of time slices. A transfer operator was ﬁrst given by Wilson [86]
and a study of its properties was presented in [87]. The construction
below is slightly diﬀerent. (A general construction for r = 1 is sketched
in [89], which is easily adapted to naive or staggered fermions. See
also [79, 88, 90] and references therein.) To identify
ˆ
T we ﬁrst assume
that the gauge ﬁeld is external and and write Tr
ˆ
T
N
in the Grassmann
162 Fermions on the lattice
representation,
Tr
ˆ
T
N
=
da
+
1
da
1
da
+
N
da
N
e
−a
+
N
a
N
T(a
+
N
, a
N−1
) e
−a
+
N−1
a
N−1
T(a
+
N−1
, a
N−2
) T(a
+
k+1
, a
k
) e
−a
+
k
a
k
T(a
+
k
, a
k−1
)
e
−a
+
2
a
2
T(a
+
2
, a
1
) e
−a
+
1
a
1
T(a
+
1
, −a
N
). (6.71)
The minus sign in the last factor corresponds to the same sign in (C.68)
in appendix C. It implies that there are antiperiodic boundary conditions
in the path integral, i.e. there is a change of sign in the couplings in the
action between time slices 0 and N − 1. The expression above is to be
compared with
Z
F
=
D
¯
ψDψ expS
F
, (6.72)
where S
F
is the fermion part of the action. We have seen in the pure
gauge case that the integration over the timelike links U
4x
leads to the
projector on the gaugeinvariant subspace of Hilbert space, together with
a transfer operator in the temporal ‘gauge’ U
4x
= 1. We therefore set
U
4x
= 1 and write the fermion action in the form (using lattice units,
t ≡ x
4
and x are integers)
S
F
=
¸
t
−ψ
+
t
1 −β
2
ψ
t+1
+ψ
+
t+1
1 +β
2
ψ
t
−
¸
t
ψ
+
t
βA
t
ψ
t
−
¸
t
ψ
+
t
D
t
ψ
t
. (6.73)
Here a matrix notation is used with
A
xy,t
= Mδ
x,y
−
3
¸
j=1
1
2
(U
xy,t
δ
x+
ˆ
j,y
+x ↔y), (6.74)
D
xy,t
=
3
¸
j=1
α
j
1
2i
(U
xy,t
δ
x+
ˆ
j,y
−x ↔y), (6.75)
and α
j
= iγ
4
γ
j
and β = γ
4
are Dirac’s matrices, and furthermore
= a
4
/a. (6.76)
We recognize the projectors
P
±
≡ P
±
4
= (1 ±β)/2 (6.77)
for Wilson parameter r = 1. They reduce the number of ψ
+
t±1
ψ
t
couplings
by a factor of two compared with the naive fermion action.
6.5 Transfer operator for Wilson fermions 163
Fig. 6.3. The association of time slices with Hilbert space for Wilson fermions
(r = 1).
The association of time slices t with Hilbertspace slices k is as follows
(for each x, T denotes transposition):
P
+
ψ
t
= (a
+
k
P
+
)
T
, ψ
+
t
P
−
= a
+
k
P
−
, (6.78)
P
−
ψ
t+1
= P
−
a
k
, ψ
+
t+1
P
+
= (P
+
a
k
)
T
, (6.79)
A
t
= A
k
, D
t
= D
k
(6.80)
as illustrated in ﬁgure 6.3. With this notation the action can be written
as
S
F
= −
¸
k
a
+
k
a
k
+
¸
k
a
+
k
A
k
a
k−1
−
¸
k
(a
k−1
P
+
D
k
P
−
a
k−1
+a
+
k
P
−
D
k
P
+
a
+
k
). (6.81)
Here we have used βD = −Dβ, such that
D = (P
+
+P
−
)D(P
+
+P
−
) = P
+
DP
−
+P
−
DP
+
, (6.82)
and abused the notation by leaving out the transposition symbol T.
Comparison with Tr
ˆ
T
N
in the form (6.71) gives the (Grassmannian)
transfermatrix elements
T
F
(a
+
k
, a
k−1
) = exp(−a
+
k
P
−
D
k
P
+
a
+
k
) exp(a
+
k
A
k
a
k−1
)
exp(−a
k−1
P
+
D
k
P
−
a
k−1
). (6.83)
Using the rules listed above (C.68) in appendix C this translates into
operator form as
ˆ
T
F
= e
−ˆ a
†
P
−
DP
+
ˆ a
†
e
ˆ a
†
ln(A)ˆ a
e
−ˆ aP
+
DP
−
ˆ a
. (6.84)
Here D and A depend in general on the gaugeﬁeld conﬁguration in a
time slice.
Consider now ﬁrst the case of free fermions, U
xy
= 1. Then
ˆ
T is
clearly a positive operator provided that A is positive, i.e. a Hermitian
164 Fermions on the lattice
matrix with only positive eigenvalues. In momentum space we get the
eigenvalues
A(p) = M −
3
¸
j=1
cos p
j
, (6.85)
which shows that A > 0 for
M > 3. (6.86)
With dynamical gauge ﬁelds we have to take into account in (6.84) the
transfer operator for the gauge ﬁeld
ˆ
T
U
. The complete transfer operator
can be taken as
ˆ
T =
ˆ
T
1/2
F
ˆ
T
U
ˆ
T
1/2
F
ˆ
P
0
, (6.87)
ˆ
T
F
= e
−ˆ a
†
P
−
ˆ
DP
+
ˆ a
†
e
ˆ a
†
ln
ˆ
Aˆ a
e
−ˆ aP
+
ˆ
DP
−
ˆ a
(6.88)
where we have also put in the projector P
0
on the gaugeinvariant
subspace. Since A has lowest eigenvalues when the link variables are
unity, the condition (6.86) remains suﬃcient in general for positivity of
ˆ
T
F
.
We can now use (6.80) in reverse and deﬁne operator ﬁelds
ˆ
ψ and
ˆ
ψ
†
,
for each spatial site x, by
P
+
ˆ
ψ = (ˆ a
†
P
+
)
T
,
ˆ
ψ
†
P
−
= ˆ a
†
P
−
, (6.89)
P
−
ˆ
ψ = P
−
ˆ a,
ˆ
ψ
†
= (P
+
ˆ a)
T
. (6.90)
In terms of these ﬁelds the fermion transfer operator takes the explicitly
chargeconserving form
ˆ
T
F
= e
−
ˆ
ψ
†
P
−
ˆ
DP
+
ˆ
ψ
e
−
ˆ
ψ
†
β ln
ˆ
A
ˆ
ψ
e
Tr P
+
ln
ˆ
A
e
−
ˆ
ψ
†
P
+
DP
−
ˆ
ψ
. (6.91)
Notice the Diracsea factor exp(Tr P
+
lnA).
The continuous time limit
ˆ
T = 1 −
ˆ
H +O(
2
) can be taken if we let
M depend on →0 according to
M = 1 +M
3
, (6.92)
such that A takes the form
A(U) = 1 +´
3
(U) (6.93)
´
3
= M
3
−
3
¸
j=1
1
2
(U
x,y
δ
x+
ˆ
j,y
+x ↔y), (6.94)
6.6 Problems 165
and we get the fermion Hamiltonian
ˆ
H
F
=
ˆ
ψ
†
[´
3
(
ˆ
U)β +D(
ˆ
U)]
ˆ
ψ. (6.95)
This may be called a Wilson–Dirac Hamiltonian on a spatial lattice.
In summary, we conclude that the Euclideanlattice formulation of
QCD using Wilson’s fermion method has a good Hilbertspace interpre
tation, with a positive transfer operator.
6.6 Problems
The following exercises serve to clarify the continuum limit in QED
and the phenomenon of species doubling by calculation of the photon
selfenergy at one loop in the weakcoupling expansion.
(i) Vertex functions
Consider the naive fermion action in QED
S
F
= −
¸
xµ
1
2
(
¯
ψ
x
γ
µ
e
−igA
µx
ψ
x+ˆ µ
−
¯
ψ
x+ˆ µ
γ
µ
e
igA
µx
ψ
x
). (6.96)
The bare fermion–photon vertex functions are the derivatives of
the action with respect to the ﬁelds. Taking out a minus sign and
the momentumconserving delta functions, let the vertex function
V
µ
1
···µ
n
(p, q; k
1
k
n
) be deﬁned by
S
F
= −
¸
uvx
1
···x
n
1
n!
¯
ψ
u
V
µ
1
···µ
n
(u, v; x
1
x
n
)ψ
v
A
µ
1
x
1
A
µ
n
x
n
,
(6.97)
¸
uvx
1
···x
n
e
−ipu+iqv−ik
1
x
1
···−ik
n
x
n
V
µ
1
···µ
n
(u, v; x
1
x
n
)
= V
µ
1
···µ
n
(p, q; k
1
k
n
)
¯
δ(p −q +k
1
+ k
n
).
(6.98)
Show that (p −q +k
1
+ k
n
= 0)
V
µ
1
···µ
n
(p, q; k
1
k
n
) =
¸
µ
γ
µ
1
2
[(−ig)
n
e
iq
µ
−(ig)
n
e
−ip
µ
]
δ
µµ
1
δ
µµ
n
, (6.99)
as illustrated in ﬁgure 6.4. The fermion propagator is given by
S(p)
−1
= V (p, p), S(p) =
m−iγ
µ
sinp
µ
m
2
+ sin
2
p
. (6.100)
166 Fermions on the lattice
Fig. 6.4. Fermion vertex function −V
µ
1
···µ
n
(p, q; k
1
, . . ., k
n
).
(ii) Ward–Takahashi identities
The gauge invariance of S
F
implies certain properties of the
vertex functions, called Ward–Takahashi identities. Consider a
small gauge transformation ψ
x
= (1 + iω
x
+ O(ω
2
))ψ
x
,
¯
ψ
x
=
(1−iω
x
+O(ω
2
))
¯
ψ
x
, A
µx
= A
µx
+(1/g)∂
µ
ω
x
(recall the deﬁnition
of the forward and backward lattice derivatives, ∂
µ
ω
x
= ω
x+ˆ µ
−ω
x
and ∂
µ
ω
x
= ω
x
− ω
x−ˆ µ
). Collect the linear terms in ω
x
in the
invariance relation 0 = S
F
(ψ
,
¯
ψ
, A
) − S
F
(ψ,
¯
ψ, A) and derive
the Ward identities
0 =
1
g
i∂
µ
V
νµ
1
···µ
n
(u, v; x, x
1
, . . ., x
n
)
+δ
ux
V
µ
1
···µ
n
(u, v; x
1
, . . ., x
n
)
−δ
vx
V
µ
1
···µ
n
(u, v; x
1
, . . ., x
n
), (6.101)
and the momentumspace version
0 =
1
g
K
∗
µ
(k)V
µµ
1
···µ
n
(p, q; k, k
1
, . . ., k
n
)
+V
µ
1
···µ
n
(p +k, q; k
1
, . . ., k
n
)
−V
µ
1
···µ
n
(p, q −k; k
1
, . . ., k
n
), (6.102)
where K
µ
(k) = (e
ik
µ
−1)/i. In particular, for n = 0 and 1,
K
∗
µ
(k)V
µ
(p, q; k) = S(p)
−1
−S(q)
−1
, (6.103)
K
∗
µ
(k)V
µν
(p, q; k, l) = V
µ
(p, p +l; l) −V
ν
(q −l, q; l)
(p −q +k = 0, p −q +k +l = 0).
(iii) Photon selfenergy
We study the ‘vacuumpolarization’ diagrams in ﬁgure 6.5, which
describe the photon selfenergy vertex function Π = Π
(a)
+ Π
(b)
6.6 Problems 167
Fig. 6.5. Vacuumpolarization diagrams for −Π
µν
(p).
given by
Π
(a)
µν
(p) = −g
2
π
−π
d
4
l
(2π)
4
Tr [V
µν
(l, −l, p, −p)S(l)], (6.104)
Π
(b)
µν
(p) = g
2
π
−π
d
4
l
(2π)
4
Tr [V
µ
(l, l +p)S(l +p)V
ν
(l +p, l)S(l)].
Use the identities (6.103) to show that the sum Π
µν
= Π
(a)
µν
+
Π
(b)
µν
satisﬁes the Ward identity
K
∗
µ
(p)Π
µν
(p) = 0. (6.105)
(Note that the loop integrals in the lattice regularization are
invariant under translation of the integration variable.)
(iv) Continuum region and latticeartifact region
The calculation of the continuum limit of Π
µν
(p) can be done in
the same way as for the scalar ﬁeld in section 3.4 We split the
integration region into a ball of radius δ around the origin l = 0
and the rest, where δ is so small that we may use the continuum
form of the propagators and vertex functions.
Going over to physical units, p → ap, m → am, Π → Πa
−2
,
show that in the scaling region limit a → 0, δ → 0, am/δ → 0,
ap/δ →0 the contribution of this ball can be written as
−
g
2
2π
2
(δ
µν
p
2
−p
µ
p
ν
)
1
0
dxx(1 −x) ln[a
2
(m
2
+x(1 −x)p
2
)]
(6.106)
up to a seconddegree polynomial in p.
Verify that the 15 fermion doublers in similar balls around
nonzero l = π
A
give identical contributions, up to possible
arbitrariness in the polynomials.
The region outside the 16 balls can contribute only a second
degree polynomial T
µν
(p) in a
−1
, m and p in the continuum
168 Fermions on the lattice
limit, because possible infrared divergences cannot develop in the
outside regions.
Note that Π
(a)
µν
contributes only to the polynomial part of Π
µν
in the continuum limit (it is just a constant ∝ δ
µν
). The reason
is that there is no logarithmic contribution from the balls around
l = π
A
because the vertex function V
µν
vanishes in the classical
continuum limit.
(v) Lattice symmetries
The polynomial has to comply with the symmetries of the model,
in particular cubic rotations R
(ρσ)
in a plane (ρ, σ),
(R
(ρσ)
p)
µ
≡ R
(ρσ)
µν
p
ν
,
(R
(ρσ)
p)
ρ
= p
σ
, (R
(ρσ)
p)
σ
= −p
ρ
,
(R
(ρσ)
p)
µ
= p
µ
, µ = ¦ρ, σ¦ (6.107)
and inversions I
(ρ)
,
(I
(ρ)
p)
ρ
= −p
ρ
, (I
(ρ)
p)
µ
= p
µ
, µ = ρ. (6.108)
The polynomial T
µν
(p) has to be a tensor under these transfor
mations,
T
µν
(R
(ρσ)
p) = R
(ρσ)
µµ
R
(ρσ)
νν
T
µ
ν
(p), (6.109)
T
µν
(I
(ρ)
p) = I
(ρ)
µµ
I
(ρ)
νν
T
µ
ν
(p). (6.110)
Show using the lattice symmetries that the form of the polynomial
is limited to
c
1
a
−2
δ
µν
+c
2
m
2
+c
3
p
2
µ
δ
µν
+c
4
p
µ
p
ν
+c
5
p
2
δ
µν
. (6.111)
(In the third term there is of course no summation over µ.)
(vi) Constraints from the Ward identity
Use the continuum limit of the Ward identity (6.105) to show
ﬁnally that Π
µν
(p) has the continuum covariant form,
Π
µν
(p) = −16
g
2
2π
2
(δ
µν
p
2
−p
µ
p
ν
)
1
0
dxx(1 −x) ln[a
2
(m
2
+x(1 −x)p
2
)]
+c(p
2
δ
µν
−p
µ
p
ν
). (6.112)
Note that the coeﬃcient c
1
of the quadratic divergence is zero.
This can of course also be veriﬁed by an explicit calculation, e.g.
6.6 Problems 169
for p = 0. In nonAbelian gauge theory such quadratic diver
gences are also absent, provided that the contribution from the
integration (Haar) measure in the path integral is not forgotten.
Note also that the coeﬃcient c
3
, of the term that is lattice covari
ant but not covariant under continuous rotations, is zero. Such
cancellations will not happens in models in which vector ﬁelds
are not gauge ﬁelds (no Ward identities). Then counterterms are
needed in order to ensure covariance.
The numerical constant c can be obtained by a further careful
analysis and numerical integration. It determines e.g. the ratio
of lambda scales Λ
MS
/Λ
L
in the theory with (naive) dynamical
fermions. On dividing by a factor of four we get the analogous
result for fourﬂavor staggered fermions described by the U(1)
version of the action (6.67).
7
Lowmass hadrons in QCD
In this chapter we address the calculation of the properties of hadrons
composed of the light quarks u, d and s.
7.1 Integrating over the fermion ﬁelds
The partition function for a fermion gauge theory
Z =
DU D
¯
ψDψ exp(S
U
+S
F
) (7.1)
can be expressed in an alternative form involving only the gauge ﬁelds
by ﬁrst integrating out the fermion ﬁelds. We shall use Wilson fermions
as an example. We can write S
F
in matrix notation,
S
F
= −
¸
xµ
1
2
(
¯
ψ
x
γ
µ
U
µx
ψ
x+ˆ µ
−
¯
ψ
x+ˆ µ
γ
µ
U
†
µx
ψ
x
)
−
¸
x
¯
ψ
x
Mψ
x
+
¸
xµ
r
2
(
¯
ψ
x
U
µx
ψ
x+ˆ µ
+
¯
ψ
x+ˆ µ
U
†
µx
ψ
x
) (7.2)
≡ −
¯
ψAψ, (7.3)
A = D/ +M −W. (7.4)
The matrix A = A(U) is called the fermion matrix. Its inverse is the
fermion propagator S(U) in a given gaugeﬁeld conﬁguration,
S
xy
(U) ≡ A
−1
xy
(U) =
¸
1
M −W(U) +D/(U)
xy
. (7.5)
Since ψ and
¯
ψ occur only bilinearly in the action, we can perform
the integration over these variables and evaluate fermion correlation
170
7.2 Hopping expansion for the fermion propagator 171
functions explicitly:
Z =
DU det[A(U)] exp(S
U
)
'ψ
x
¯
ψ
y
` = Z
−1
DU det[A(U)] e
S
U
S
xy
(U)
≡ 'S
xy
`
U
,
'ψ
u
¯
ψ
v
ψ
x
¯
ψ
y
` = 'S
uv
S
xy
−S
uy
S
xv
`
U
,
'ψ
u
ψ
v
ψ
w
¯
ψ
x
¯
ψ
y
¯
ψ
z
` = 'S
ux
S
vy
S
wz
+ 5 permutations`
U
, (7.6)
etc. For clarity we indicated only the space–time indices x, . . . and
suppressed the color, Dirac, and ﬂavor indices a, α, and f of the fermion
ﬁelds ψ
aαf
x
.
7.2 Hopping expansion for the fermion propagator
For Wilson fermions an expansion in the hopping parameter κ = 1/2M
has given useful results. Here we describe it for the propagator, for which
it gives an intuitive representation in terms of a summation over random
paths. We have seen this earlier for the scalar ﬁeld in section 3.7. Let us
deﬁne the hopping matrix H by
H
xaα,ybβ
=
¸
µ
[(P
−
µ
)
αβ
(U
xy
)
ab
δ
x+ˆ µ,y
+ (P
+
µ
)
αβ
(U
yx
)
ab
δ
y+ˆ µ,x
], (7.7)
in terms of which
A
xaαf,ybβg
= M
f
δ
fg
[1 −2κ
f
H
xaα,ybβ
]. (7.8)
For a given ﬂavor we have
S
xy
= M
−1
1
1 −2κH
xy
= M
−1
∞
¸
L=0
(2κ)
L
(H
L
)
xy
, (7.9)
where we suppressed again the nonspace–time indices. The successive
terms in this series can be represented as a sum over paths of length L,
as illustrated in ﬁgure 7.1. The diagrams for L + 1 are obtained from
those for L by application of H (by attaching the L = 1 diagrams). To
each path C there corresponds a color factor U
xy
(C) and a spin factor
Γ(C) =
¸
l∈C
P
l
, (7.10)
P
l
= P
−
µ
, l = (x, x + ˆ µ) (7.11)
= P
+
µ
, l = (x + ˆ µ, x). (7.12)
172 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
Fig. 7.1. Illustration of the terms in the hopping expansion of the propagator.
Note that, for r = 1, there are no paths with backtracking because then
P
+
µ
P
−
µ
= P
−
µ
P
+
µ
= 0.
For free fermions we can perform the summation in momentum space,
(H
L
)
xy
=
¸
p
e
ip(x−y)
H(p)
L
, (7.13)
H(p)
¯
δ
pq
=
¸
xy
e
−ipx+iqy
H
xy
, (7.14)
H(p) =
¸
µ
(e
ip
µ
P
−
µ
+e
−ip
µ
P
+
µ
)
=
¸
µ
(r cos p
µ
−iγ
µ
sinp
µ
), (7.15)
S(p) =
1
M −
¸
µ
(r cos p
µ
−iγ
µ
sinp
µ
)
. (7.16)
So the summation over random paths with the particular weight factor
(7.10) leads to the free Wilson fermion propagator. The maximum eigen
value of H(p) is 4r at p = 0, which means that the radius of convergence
of the hopping expansion for free fermions is given by [κ[ < 1/8r.
For ﬁxed κ and complex p the expansion diverges at the position of
the particle pole in the propagator. In the interacting case the unitary
U
µx
tend to reduce the maximum eigenvalue of H and the convergence
radius is generically larger than 1/8r, depending on the conﬁguration
of U’s.
7.3 Meson and baryon propagators 173
The hopping expansion for the propagator leads to an expansion of
the fermion determinant in terms of closed paths,
det A →det(1 −2κH) = exp[Tr ln(1 −2κH)]
= exp
¸
−
¸
L
(2κ)
L
L
Tr H
L
¸
. (7.17)
With each closed path C there is associated a Wilson loop Tr U(C) and
a spin loop Tr Γ(C).
7.3 Meson and baryon propagators
The expressions (7.6) are well deﬁned without gauge ﬁxing. Since
DU contains an implicit integration over all gauge transformations,
it projects on the gaugeinvariant content of the integrand. Under a
gauge transformation
U
Ω
µx
= Ω
x
U
µx
Ω
†
x+ˆ µ
, (7.18)
A(U
Ω
)
xy
= Ω
x
A(U)
xy
Ω
†
y
, (7.19)
A
−1
(U
Ω
)
xy
= Ω
x
A
−1
(U)
xy
Ω
†
y
, (7.20)
or
S(U
Ω
)
xy
= Ω
x
S(U)
xy
Ω
†
y
. (7.21)
Since
dΩ
x
Ω
x
= 0, the gaugeinvariant content of Ω
x
is zero and it
follows that the expectation value of the gaugeﬁelddependent fermion
propagator is zero, unless x = y,
'S
xaαf,ybβg
`
U
∝ δ
xy
δ
ab
δ
fg
. (7.22)
The fermions cannot propagate ‘on their own’ without gauge ﬁxing. Of
course, this does not mean that fermion propagation is a nongauge
invariant phenomenon and it is also not an expression of conﬁnement.
It forces us to consider carefully what the gaugeinvariant description of
propagation means.
A simple gaugeinvariant correlation function is of the type
'
¯
ψ
x
ψ
x
¯
ψ
y
ψ
y
`. In QCD we call these mesonic, since
¯
ψγψ combinations
carry mesonic quantum numbers. More explicitly, we can deﬁne gauge
174 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
invariant meson and baryon ﬁelds
´
αf
xβg
= δ
b
a
ψ
aαf
x
¯
ψ
xbβg
, (7.23)
B
α
1
f
1
α
2
f
2
α
3
f
3
x
=
a
1
a
2
a
3
ψ
a
1
α
1
f
1
x
ψ
a
2
α
2
f
2
x
ψ
a
3
α
3
f
3
x
, (7.24)
¯
B
xα
1
f
1
α
2
f
2
α
3
f
3
=
a
1
a
2
a
3 ¯
ψ
xa
1
α
1
f
1
¯
ψ
xa
2
α
2
f
2
¯
ψ
xa
3
α
3
f
3
. (7.25)
The gauge invariance of the meson ﬁelds is obvious. For the baryon ﬁelds
the eﬀect of a gauge transformation is given by (suppressing noncolor
indices)
abc
ψ
a
ψ
b
ψ
c
→
abc
Ω
a
a
Ω
b
b
Ω
c
c
ψ
a
ψ
b
ψ
c
= (det Ω)
a
b
c
ψ
a
ψ
b
ψ
c
, (7.26)
and invariance follows from det Ω = 1.
By taking special linear combinations, we can construct from ´, B,
and
¯
B ﬁelds with the required quantum numbers. For example, for π
+
(which has spin zero) we can use the scalar ﬁeld combination
¯
d
x
iγ
5
u
x
,
¯
d
x
iγ
µ
γ
5
u
x
, (7.27)
where we made ﬂavor explicit according to
u
aα
x
= ψ
aαu
x
, d
aα
x
= ψ
aαd
x
, (7.28)
etc. For the ρ
+
particle (which has spin one) we can use the vector and
tensor ﬁelds (both containing spin 1)
¯
d
x
iγ
µ
u
x
,
¯
d
x
i[γ
µ
, γ
ν
]u
x
. (7.29)
An example for the proton (spin
1
2
) is given by
abc
(C
†
γ
5
)
βγ
u
aα
x
(u
bβ
x
d
cγ
x
−d
bβ
x
u
cγ
x
), (7.30)
and for the ∆
++
(spin
3
2
),
abc
(C
†
γ
µ
)
βγ
u
aα
x
u
bβ
x
u
cγ
x
. (7.31)
Here C is the chargeconjugation matrix;
¯
ψ
(c)
= −(C
†
ψ)
T
is the charge
conjugate of
¯
ψ (cf. (D.27) in appendix D). For example, for the ∆
++
the last two u ﬁelds combine to give a vector (containing spin 1) of
the form
¯
ψ
(c)
γ
µ
ψ, which, together with the ﬁrst u ﬁeld, contains spin
3
2
. More examples are in [10]; [82] gives grouptheoretical details of the
spin–ﬂavor content of the baryon ﬁelds.
7.3 Meson and baryon propagators 175
Fig. 7.2. Meson (a) and (b), and baryon (c) propagators.
Putting these hadron ﬁelds in the form (A = ¦aαf¦)
´
x
(Φ) = Φ
A
B
´
B
xA
, (7.32)
B
x
(Φ) =
¯
Φ
ABC
B
ABC
x
, (7.33)
¯
B
x
(Φ) =
¯
B
xABC
Φ
ABC
, (7.34)
where Φ speciﬁes the spin–ﬂavor structure, we can write gaugeinvariant
meson correlation functions as
'´
x
(Φ)´
x
(Φ
)` = −'Tr (ΦS
xx
Φ
S
x
x
`
U
) +'Tr (ΦS
xx
) Tr (Φ
S
x
x
)`
U
,
(7.35)
and the baryon correlation function
'B
x
(Φ)
¯
B
x
(Φ
)` =
¯
Φ
ABC
'S
A
A
xx
S
B
B
xx
S
C
C
xx
`
U
Φ
A
B
C
, (7.36)
as illustrated in ﬁgure 7.2. The contribution (b) to the meson correlation
function is nonzero only for ﬂavorneutral ﬁelds, i.e. ﬁelds of the form
¯
fγf, f = u, d, c, s, t, b.
These composite ﬁeld correlation functions describe bound states,
the mesons and baryons; for this reason we also call them meson and
baryon propagators. Consider ﬁrst the meson propagator in ﬁgure 7.2(a).
It is a sum over Wilson loops going through x and x
. This follows
from the hopping expansion of the quark propagator which expresses
S
xx
as a sum over random paths C weighted by the Wilson line
U
xx
(C) and the spinor factor associated with the path. We can now
intuitively understand the implication of conﬁnement as expressed by
the area law for Wilson loops. The exponential falloﬀ in the area law
greatly suppresses the contribution of widely separated paths of the two
propagators in ﬁgure 7.2(a). Contributions in which the two paths stay
together dominate and, when they are together, they make a random
walk, which implies the formation of a bound state. A similar story can
be told for the baryon propagator in ﬁgure 7.2(c); the combined random
176 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
Fig. 7.3. Diagrams for ﬂavorneutral mesons with seaquark loops and gluon
lines also indicated.
Fig. 7.4. Mesonloop corrections to the baryon propagator. The closeness of
lines is to suggest binding by ‘glue’.
walk of the threequark propagators leads to a pole in momentum space
corresponding to a bound baryon state.
So far we have concentrated on the fermion lines related to the hadron
ﬁelds (the ‘valencequark’ lines) and ignored the eﬀect of the fermion
determinant. Its hopping expansion leads to a sum of closed fermion lines
called ‘seaquark’ loops or ‘vacuum loops’, and we have to imagine such
seaquark loops everywhere in ﬁgure 7.2. This is particularly relevant
for the case of ﬂavorneutral mesons for which diagram (b) contributes.
Figure 7.3 shows diagrams (a) and (b) as the ﬁrst two terms in an inﬁnite
series with the seaquark loops included one by one. As a reminder of the
presence of ‘glue’ implied by the average ' `
U
we have also shown some
gluon lines in this ﬁgure. Figure 7.4 illustrates a mesonloop contribution
to a baryon propagator: (a) uses a seaquark loop but not (b), which is
already included in diagram (c) of ﬁgure 7.2.
We were led by conﬁnement to the intuitive picture of random walks
for the composite hadron propagators. In a theory without conﬁnement,
such as QED, there is no area law and there will be relatively large con
tributions in the fermion–antifermion correlation function also for widely
separated fermion paths. These will correspond to fermions propagating
almost freely at large distances from each other. Of course, they will feel
7.4 Hadron masses at strong coupling 177
Fig. 7.5. Hopping matrix for the mesons and baryons at strong coupling.
the long range electromagnetic interactions, which may but need not
lead to bound states. This is the gaugeinvariant description of fermion
propagation in QED.
7.4 Hadron masses at strong coupling
At bare gauge coupling g = ∞ the string tension diverges and there
are only contributions to the Wilson paths with zero area. Neglecting
vacuum fermion loops, it is an interesting approximation to take into
account only simultaneous quark–antiquark hopping for mesons and
threequark hopping for baryons, as illustrated in ﬁgure 7.5. The inverse
propagators can be written down explicitly and solved for the position
of the pole in p
4
= im at p = 0, which determines the mass of the bound
state, m. We can even derive eﬀective actions describing the coupling
constants [83, 84, 85, 109, 82] in terms of the meson and baryon ﬁelds
(7.23)–(7.25). For example, the meson eﬀective action has the form
S
eﬀ
= n
c
¸
x
Tr
¸
−ln´
x
+M´
x
−
¸
µ
´
x
P
−
µ
´
x+ˆ µ
P
+
µ
+O(´
4
)
¸
.
(7.37)
where n
c
is the number of colors and now ´ is an eﬀective ﬁeld. For
r = 1 it turns out that the lowlying states are the pions, rho mesons,
nucleons, and deltas (m
π
≈ 140, m
ρ
≈ 770, m
N
≈ 940 and m
∆
≈ 1232
MeV). In the ﬂavordegenerate case M
u
= M
d
= M the masses are given
by
cosh m
π
= 1 +
(M
2
−4)(M
2
−1)
2M
2
−3
, (7.38)
cosh m
ρ
= 1 +
(M
2
−3)(M
2
−2)
2M
2
−3
, (7.39)
178 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
expm
∆
=
(M
3
−3/2)(M
3
−1/2)
M
3
−5/4
, (7.40)
expm
N
=
M
3
(M
3
−2)
M
3
−5/4
. (7.41)
On decreasing M from inﬁnity toward zero or equivalently increasing
the hopping parameter κ from zero upward we see that the pion mass
vanishes at M = M
c
= 2, whereas the other masses stay nonzero. At
strong coupling the critical hopping parameter is κ
c
= 1/2M
c
=
1
4
. For
weak coupling one can calculate M
c
(g) = 4 + O(g
2
), and κ
c
as deﬁned
by the vanishing of m
π
will decrease toward
1
8
as g
2
→0.
Although we know that the scaling region of QCD is at weak cou
pling, it is still interesting to compare these strongcoupling results with
experiment. For small M −M
c
,
m
2
π
= 4.8m
q
, m
q
≡ M −M
c
, (7.42)
m
ρ
= 0.894 + 1.97m
q
. (7.43)
We can choose M such that m
π
/m
ρ
takes the experimental value 140
MeV/770 MeV, which gives m
q
= 0.0055. This may be compared with
m
ρ
= 0.894 at M = M
c
. Introducing the lattice distance, am
ρ
= 0.994,
means that the lattice cutoﬀ is 1/a = 770/0.894 = 860 MeV and the
quark mass m
q
= 0.0055/a = 4.7 MeV, which is remarkably close to the
up–down quark mass found in numerical simulations (m
ud
≈ 4.5 MeV
(quenched), see section 7.5). Mass ratios not involving the pion can be
approximated by taking M = M
c
. Then we have the strongcoupling
predictions
m
N
m
ρ
= 1.7 (1.21),
m
∆
m
N
= 1.01 (1.31), M = M
c
, (7.44)
where the experimental values are given in parentheses. For M →∞the
baryon/meson mass ratio would be
3
2
. The results are not improved much
by including O(1/g
2
) corrections, which are already hard to calculate
[82]. The idea of using the strongcoupling expansion as a method for
calculating the properties of hadrons has failed up to now because of its
great complexity.
Other quantities such as the decay constants f
π
and f
ρ
, the π–π
scattering amplitudes, and the splitting m
2
η
− (m
2
η
+ m
2
π
0
)/2 in the
neutral pseudoscalar meson sector, which is related to the notorious U(1)
problem, have also been calculated at strong coupling. Quantitatively
these predictions are wrong of course, but they present an interesting
caricature of hadron physics.
7.5 Numerical results 179
Table 7.1. Lowmass hadrons: the baryon octet (N, Σ, Λ, Ξ), the
baryon decuplet (∆, Σ
∗
, Ξ
∗
, Ω) and the mesons
State Spin Mass (MeV) Valencequark content
N 1/2 940 uud, udd
Σ 1/2 1193 uus, (ud +du)s, dds
Λ 1/2 1116 (ud −du)s
Ξ 1/2 1315 uss, dss
∆ 3/2 1232 uuu, uud, udd, ddd
Σ
∗
3/2 1384 uus, uds, dds
Ξ
∗
3/2 1532 uss, dss
Ω 3/2 1673 sss
π 0 135 u
¯
d, d¯ u
K 0 498 u¯ s, d¯ s, s¯ u, s
¯
d
ρ 1 768 u
¯
d, d¯ u
K
∗
1 896 u¯ s, d¯ s, s¯ u, s
¯
d
π
0
0 135 u¯ u −d¯ u (& s¯ s)
η 0 547 u¯ u +d¯ u −2s¯ s
η
0 958 u¯ u +d¯ u +s¯ s
ρ
0
1 768 u¯ u −d¯ u (& s¯ s)
ω 1 783 u¯ u +d
¯
d (& s¯ s)
φ 1 1019 s¯ s (& u¯ u & d
¯
d)
7.5 Numerical results
In table 7.1 the lowmass hadrons found experimentally are listed, with
their valencequark contents indicated. The electric charge of a state
is just the sum of the charges of the quarks, which is +
2
3
for u, −
1
3
for d and s, and the opposite for the antiquarks indicated by a ‘bar’.
The ﬂavorneutral mesons (π
0
, . . ., φ) have mixed quark content, ap
proximately as indicated (with small ‘contaminations’ in parentheses).
The decuplet baryons are symmetric in their ﬂavor content, whereas
the octet has mixed symmetry. The neutral octet members Σ and
Λ diﬀer in the symmetry properties of their u, d ﬂavor content. The
primary aim of the numerical simulations is to recover this spectrum of
hadron masses with essentially only three parameters: the Λ scale which
corresponds to the gauge coupling and which sets the overall mass scale,
the nonstrangequark mass in the approximation m
u
= m
d
and the
strangequark mass m
s
.
180 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
In numerical simulations the fermion determinant det A poses the
greatest problem. The quenched approximation consists of the replace
ment det A → 1, while taking its eﬀect on the eﬀective gauge coupling
into account by a change in the bare coupling. This means that only
the valencequark propagators are taken into account and the seaquark
loops are neglected. For this reason the approximation is also called the
valence approximation.
The reliability of this approximation (which destroys the Hilbertspace
interpretation of the fermion path integral) is hard to establish a priori.
It helps to consider the generalization of the SU(3) gauge group to
SU(n
c
), with n
c
→ ∞ [67]. Then the contribution of each seaquark
loop to a mesonic correlation function is down by a factor 1/n
c
. For
mesons the largen
c
limit corresponds to the quenched approximation.
Baryons, however, have n
c
valence quarks and the baryon mass becomes
proportional to n
c
as n
c
→ ∞ [96]. Yet, as we have seen in section 5.6
for the glueballs, ordering various nonbaryonic quantities according to
powers of 1/n
c
is quite illuminating even for values of n
c
as low as 2
and 3.
Simulations with dynamical fermions (‘unquenched’) are very time
consuming and for illustration we shall now describe the results of a
computation with only two dynamical fermion species [97]. An improved
action is used, for which larger lattice spacings can be used without
discretization errors blowing up. The dynamical fermions are assumed
to be the lightest sea quarks, u and d, and their masses are taken to be
equal. This is not the actual situation, m
d
is roughly twice m
u
, both
being of the order of 5 MeV.† However, the hadron masses are generally
much larger and, neglecting such small O(5 MeV) eﬀects, one may as well
take m
(u)
sea
= m
(d)
sea
= m
sea
(recall that m ≡ M − M
c
). The pseudoscalar
mesons require special attention in this respect, as will be discussed
in the next chapter, but even these depend primarily on the average
quark mass (m
u
+ m
d
)/2. The other sea quarks in the simulation have
eﬀectively inﬁnite mass. The masses in the valencequark propagators
can still be chosen at will; they do not have to be equal to the masses of
the sea quarks, so we have m
(ud)
val
, and m
(s)
val
as valence mass parameters
for the hadrons composed of u, d and s. Such computations in which
the seaquark masses diﬀer from the valencequark masses are called
‘partially quenched’.
In the simulations one ﬁrst produces gaugeﬁeld conﬁgurations and
† This is the reason, for example, why the neutron is 1.3 MeV heavier than the
proton, despite the Coulomb selfenergy of the proton.
7.5 Numerical results 181
Fig. 7.6. m
2
PS
as a function of 1/κ
val
for β = 2.1 and four values of κ
sea
. From
[97].
then computes the average of the hadronﬁeld correlators built from
valencequark propagators. Only valence diagrams of the type (a) in
ﬁgure 7.2 are computed in this numerical study, since quark propagators
corresponding to type (b) are much harder to evaluate. This means an
approximation for the masses of mesons with quark–antiquarks of the
same ﬂavor (those below the second double line in table 7.1), which
makes sense only if one sets m
u
= m
d
(this follows from the discussion to
be given in section 8.2). Diagrams of type (b) cause mixing of the ﬂavor
content of the mesons, which is expected to aﬀect the vector mesons less
than it does the pseudoscalars. For the η
mass diagrams of type (b) are
essential.
Each choice of seaquark mass implies a separate costly generation
of gaugeﬁeld conﬁgurations, whereas the computation of valencequark
propagators is less expensive, so typically one has many more valence
quark masses than seaquark masses available for analysis. However, by
ﬁtting suitable functions of all the masses involved, it is possible to ob
tain the desired mass combinations by interpolation and extrapolation.
The latter is needed because the simulations need more time as the
182 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
Fig. 7.7. m
V
versus m
2
PS
for β = 1.8. From [97].
seaquark masses are reduced and their small physical values cannot be
simulated yet. So this introduces some uncertainty.
It turns out that the dependence of the squared pseudoscalar masses
on the quark masses is almost linear, which can be understood as the
result of chiralsymmetry breaking (see chapter 8), and the data can be
ﬁtted well by a quadratic polynomial in the quark masses. This is done
in [97] as follows. For mesons composed of valence quarks 1 and 2 the
average valencequark mass is given by
m
val
=
1
2
m
(1)
val
+m
(2)
val
, m = M −M
c
=
1
2κ
−
1
2κ
c
, (7.45)
where κ is Wilson’s hopping parameter (r = 1). In terms of these the
pseudoscalar masses are parameterized as
m
2
PS
κ
sea
; κ
(1)
val
, κ
(2)
val
= b
s
m
sea
+b
v
m
val
+c
s
m
2
sea
+c
v
m
2
val
+c
sv
m
sea
m
val
+c
vv
m
(1)
val
m
(2)
val
. (7.46)
In ﬁgure 7.6 results for the squared pseudoscalar masses are shown as
7.5 Numerical results 183
Fig. 7.8. Baryon decuplet masses versus m
2
PS
for β = 1.8. From [97].
a function of the average valencequark mass, for one of the four values
¦1.8, 1.95, 2.1, 2.2¦ of the gauge coupling β used in the simulation.
Results at the other β values look similar except for a change of vertical
scale (the mass in lattice units being smaller at larger β). The labels
‘SS’, ‘SV’ and ‘VV’ mean the following.
VV: m
(1)
val
= m
(2)
val
= m
val
;
SV: m
(2)
val
= m
sea
; then m
(1)
val
can be written as m
(1)
val
= 2m
val
−m
sea
;
SS: m
(1)
val
= m
(2)
val
= m
sea
.
The lines VV and SV almost coincide and they are almost parallel for
diﬀerent κ
sea
, so the line SS crosses all the others.
Note that M
c
= 1/2κ
c
is also a free parameter in the ﬁtting formula
(7.46). If we read the righthand side of (7.46) as a function of the
inverse κ’s, changing κ
c
merely shifts all curves in ﬁgure 7.6 horizontally;
1/κ
c
is then the value at which m
2
PS
(κ
crit
; κ
crit
, κ
crit
) = 0. Knowing the
parameters b
s
, . . ., c
sv
and κ
c
from the ﬁt determines m
2
PS
for every
combination of the κ’s and quark masses.
A similar procedure could be followed for the other hadron masses.
Alternatively one can plot them as a function of m
2
PS
, the procedure
184 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
followed in [97]. The vector meson masses can be ﬁtted to a quadratic
polynomial in m
2
PS
,
m
V
κ
sea
; κ
(1)
val
, κ
(2)
val
= A
V
+B
V
s
µ
sea
+B
V
v
µ
val
+C
V
s
µ
2
sea
+C
V
v
µ
2
val
+C
V
sv
µ
sea
µ
val
, (7.47)
with
µ
i
= m
2
PS
κ
sea
; κ
(i)
val
, κ
(i)
val
, µ
val
=
1
2
(µ
1
+µ
2
), (7.48)
µ
sea
= m
2
PS
(κ
sea
; κ
sea
, κ
sea
) (7.49)
(the data show no need for a term C
V
vv
µ
1
µ
2
). A corresponding plot is
shown in ﬁgure 7.7. Note the shift in vertical scale relative to ﬁgure 7.6.
Next the baryon masses are analyzed. The simplest are the decuplet
states which are symmetric in the ﬂavor indices. Writing µ
val
= (µ
1
+µ
2
+
µ
3
)/3, the decuplet masses can be ﬁtted by a formula similar to (7.47),
see ﬁgure 7.8. The octet baryons have a more complicated quarkmass
dependence because they have a mixed ﬂavor symmetry; we shall not go
into details here (see [97]), but the corresponding ﬁgures look roughly
similar to ﬁgure 7.8.
The gross features of the mass spectrum are that, for the pseu
doscalars, the squared mass is approximately linear in the quark masses
(and vanishing at m
val
= m
sea
= 0), whereas for the other hadrons the
mass itself is approximately linear.
Having obtained the coeﬃcients from the ﬁts, the physical value of
the seaquark mass can be determined for each β. Ideally this could be
done by ﬁxing the computed pion–nucleon mass ratio at the physical
value, but in this case there are good reasons to believe that the nucleon
mass suﬀers from ﬁnitevolume eﬀects (based on experience in previous
computations). A good alternative is to use the pion–rho mass ratio.
Setting µ
val
= µ
sea
= m
2
π
in (7.47) the equation
m
π
A
V
+ (B
V
s
+B
V
v
)m
2
π
+ (C
V
s
+C
V
v
+C
V
sv
)m
4
π
=
¸
m
π
m
ρ
phys
= 0.176
(7.50)
can be solved for m
π
.
Using m
ρ
= 768 MeV, one can then introduce the lattice spacing a by
putting am
ρ
= denominator in (7.50), and ﬁnd the value of 1/a in MeV
units at each β. Knowing the physical values of m
ud
and the value of
1/a, the masses of the nucleon and delta can be evaluated from the ﬁts
and expressed in MeV units. Linear extrapolation to zero lattice spacing
7.5 Numerical results 185
Fig. 7.9. Meson masses as a function of lattice spacing. The linear ﬁt to a = 0
uses only the data at the three largest lattice spacings. Experimental values
are indicated with diamonds. From [97].
(cf. ﬁgures 7.10 and 7.11) gives the results m
N
= 1034(36) MeV and
m
∆
= 1392(58) MeV. These ‘predictions’ are to be compared with the
experimental values of 940 and 1232 MeV (recall that in this simulation
the physical volume is assumed to be somewhat small for these baryons).
Next the mass of the strange quark can be determined by ﬁtting the
kaon–rho mass ratio to the experimental value, m
2
PS
(κ
ud
; κ
ud
, κ
s
)/m
2
ρ
=
m
2
K
/m
2
ρ
= (498/768)
2
(note that m
K
is of the type SV). The masses of
other hadrons containing strange valence quarks are then ‘predictions’.
Alternatively, the φ–ρ mass ratio was used in [97], the φ being of type
VV, m
V
(κ
ud
; κ
s
, κ
s
)/m
ρ
= 1019/768. The two ways of determining the
valence mass of the strange quark are denoted by ‘K input’ and ‘φ
input’. Figure 7.9 shows such a ‘prediction’ for mesons as a function of
the lattice spacing together with the continuum extrapolation. Examples
for the baryon masses are shown in ﬁgures 7.10 and 7.11. The improved
action allows rather large lattice spacings to be used. It can be seen that
186 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
Fig. 7.10. Baryon decuplet masses as functions of a. From [97].
the adependence is consistent with ‘linear’, for the three larger lattice
spacings, despite the fact that the baryon masses in lattice units are
above 1 for the largest lattice spacing (cf. ﬁgure 7.8), which reduces by
a factor of about two for the smallest lattice spacing.
The meson masses in the continuum limit are close to experiment
at the level of 1%. The masses of baryons with three or two strange
valence quarks are also close to experiment, but the discrepancy increases
with only one or zero strange valence quarks. This is interpreted as
ﬁnitesize eﬀects being smaller for the hadrons involving the heavier
strange valence quark (the lattice size in physical units is about 2.5 fm).
It is also of considerable phenomenological interest to determine the
quark masses in physical units. In QCD the renormalized mass parame
ters are ‘running’ with the renormalization scale, similarly to the gauge
coupling. An analysis of the quark masses in this simulation leads to the
result m
MS
ud
≈ 3.4 MeV and m
MS
s
≈ 90 MeV, at the scale 2 GeV.
7.5 Numerical results 187
Fig. 7.11. Baryon octet masses as functions of a. From [97].
Comparing with the results of simulations in the quenched approxi
mation, [97] ﬁnds that the inclusion of dynamical u and d quarks has
improved agreement with experiment. Figure 7.12 shows a comparison;
N
f
= 2 indicates the simulation discussed above while ‘N
f
= 0 Improved’
denotes a quenched simulation using the same gaugeﬁeld action; ‘N
f
= 0
Standard’ shows the results of an earlier simulation [98] using the
standard Wilson action. It is surprising how good the quenched approx
imation actually is for the hadron spectrum. The eﬀect of dynamical
fermions on various physical quantities is not easily established, see e.g.
[99]. One may expect that results will further improve with simulations
including also a dynamical strange quark, as well as including larger
volumes.
188 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
Fig. 7.12. A comparison with the quenched approximation. From [97].
7.6 The parameters of QCD
The parameters in the Wilson action (r = 1) are g
2
and m
f
= M
f
−
M
c
, the critical value M
c
= 1/2κ
c
being determined completely by the
gauge coupling. We have seen in the previous sections how these may
be determined by the hadron spectrum. In particular, g
2
determines the
overall scale, say the proton mass m
p
at m
u
= m
d
= m
s
= 0, while
the quark masses determine the ratios m
2
PS
/m
2
p
. Roughly speaking, m
p
,
m
π
+, m
K
+, and m
0
K
are the free parameters of threeﬂavor QCD.
The renormalized masses and coupling depend in general on the
renormalization scheme. In a massindependent scheme such as minimal
subtraction (cf. problem (iii) for a perturbative lattice deﬁnition), we
get renormalized running coupling and masses at momentum scale µ,
¯ g(µ) and ¯ m
f
(µ). They satisfy the renormalizationgroup equations
µ
d¯ g
dµ
= β(¯ g), µ
d ¯ m
f
dµ
= γ(¯ g) ¯ m, (7.51)
7.6 The parameters of QCD 189
with†
β(¯ g) = −β
1
¯ g
3
−β
2
¯ g
5
− , (7.52)
γ(¯ g) = −γ
1
¯ g
2
−γ
2
¯ g
4
− . (7.53)
Here β
1
, β
2
and γ
1
are universal and given by
β
1
=
1
16π
2
11
3
n
c
−
2
3
n
f
, (7.54)
β
2
=
1
(16π)
2
¸
34
3
n
2
c
−
10
3
n
c
n
f
−
(n
2
c
−1)n
f
n
c
, (7.55)
γ
1
=
1
16π
2
3(n
2
c
−1)
n
c
, (7.56)
where n
c
is the number of colors and n
f
the number of dynamical ﬂavors.
We have already seen in section 5.2 how an overall scale Λ may be
deﬁned in terms of the gauge coupling,
Λ = µ(β
1
¯ g
2
)
−β
2
/2β
2
1
e
−1/2β
1
¯ g
2
exp
−
¯ g
0
dg
¸
1
β(g)
+
1
β
1
g
3
−
β
2
β
2
1
g
. (7.57)
This scale is renormalizationgroup invariant, i.e. dΛ(µ, ¯ g(µ))/d lnµ = 0.
Similarly one deﬁnes renormalizationgroupinvariant quark masses
m
rgi
f
= ¯ m
f
(µ)(2β
1
¯ g
2
)
−γ
1
/2β
1
exp
−
¯ g
0
dg
¸
γ(g)
β(g)
−
γ
1
β
1
g
, (7.58)
which satisfy dm
rgi
f
(µ, ¯ g(µ))/d lnµ = 0. As we have seen in section 5.2,
the scale Λ depends on the renormalization scheme; however, using
similar arguments it follows that the m
rgi
f
are schemeindependent. In
[63] special techniques are used to compute the renormalizationgroup
functions β(g) and γ(g) nonperturbatively.
Asymptotic freedom (β
1
> 0) is guaranteed for n
f
< 11n
c
/2, or
n
f
≤ 16 for QCD. We also see from the µindependence of ¯ m
rgi
f
that
the running mass ¯ m
f
(µ) goes to zero ∝ (¯ g
2
)
γ
1
/2β
1
as µ → ∞. The
same is true for the bare quark mass m
f
as the lattice spacing a → 0
(in minimal subtraction the bare parameters run in the same way the
renormalized ones, cf. problem (iv)).
† The subscript k of β
k
and γ
k
indicates that the coeﬃcient corresponds to diagrams
with k loops. Another notation, often used, is β
k
→ β
k−1
, γ
k
→ γ
k−1
, and [63]
β
k
→b
k−1
, k = 1, 2, . . ., γ(¯ g) →τ(¯ g) = −d
0
¯ g
2
−d
1
¯ g
4
−· · ·.
190 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
7.7 Computing the gauge coupling from the masses
At long distances the nonperturbative methods of lattice gauge theory
allow us to compute the properties of hadrons. At short distances
we know that weakcoupling perturbation theory works well. Many
physical properties have been successfully related with the methods
of perturbative QCD. The essential parameter in these calculations is
the renormalized coupling constant g
R
. A useful characterization of the
coupling strength is the value of the running coupling g
MS
(µ) in the
MS scheme, which is customarily taken at the scale set by the mass of
the Zboson, µ = m
Z
, or rather the value of the ‘strong ﬁnestructure
constant’ α
s
(m
Z
) = g
2
MS
(m
Z
)/4π. It is not a free parameter; its value
can be predicted just like other physical quantities such as mass ratios.
Let us see in more detail how this can be done.
Suppose that we compute the static quark–antiquark potential V at
short distances. From the force
F(r) =
∂V
∂r
= C
2
g
2
V
(1/r)
4πr
2
, (7.59)
we know g
2
V
(1/r) at some distance r/a in lattice units, for some bare g
and quarkmass parameters aM, chosen such that m
π
/m
p
, m
K
/m
p
, . . .
have the experimental values to reasonable accuracy. From the value of
the proton mass in lattice units, am
p
, we then also know the distance
r in units of m
p
, rm
p
. Provided that rm
p
is small enough, we can then
use the perturbative renormalization group
µdg
V
dµ
= β(g
V
), β(g
V
) = −β
1
g
3
V
−β
2
g
5
V
+ , µ = 1/r, (7.60)
to relate the computed g
2
V
(1/r) to g
2
V
at higher µ. At suﬃciently large
µ we can use the perturbative connection between g
2
V
and g
2
MS
parame
terized by the ratio of the scales Λ
MS
/Λ
V
.
This program is diﬃcult to implement because the lattices for sim
ulations with dynamical fermions in spectrum computations tend to
be small. Other renormalized coupling constants have been proposed
in place of g
V
, which are useful for numerical computations, e.g. the
‘Schr¨ odinger functional method’ [94].
7.8 Problems
(i) Eﬀective action
The exponent in (7.17) can be interpreted as an eﬀective action
7.8 Problems 191
for the gauge ﬁeld. Calculate the contribution of the smallest
closed loop (around a plaquette). Show that it corresponds to an
decrease (i.e. increase of the eﬀective β = 6/g
2
) of the eﬀective
gauge coupling.
(ii) Three ﬂavors
Devise a method for analyzing numerical hadronmass data with
dynamical up, down and strange quarks, with m
u
= m
d
= m
s
.
(iii) Minimal subtraction revisited
In the following g
0
and m
0
denote the bare gauge coupling and
quark masses, and g and m the renormalized ones (we suppress
the ﬂavor label f). For Wilson fermions m
0
≡ M − M
c
(g
0
, r).
For staggered fermions we may think of m
0
simply being the
parameter appearing in the action (see [73] for more details).
The critical mass M
c
is linearly divergent and the bare m
0
has
to absorb the remaining logarithmic divergences as the lattice
spacing a → 0. The coupling g
0
is logarithmically divergent. We
shall now follow similar steps to those in problem 3(iv) for the
QCD case.
Both g
0
and m
0
are multiplicatively renormalized,
g
0
= gZ
g
(g, lnaµ), (7.61)
m
0
= mZ
m
(g, lnaµ), (7.62)
Z
g
(g, lnaµ) = 1 +
∞
¸
n=1
n
¸
k=0
Z
g
nk
g
2n
(lnaµ)
k
=
∞
¸
k=0
Z
g
k
(g)(lnaµ)
k
, (7.63)
and similarly for Z
m
,
Z
m
(g, lnaµ) =
∞
¸
k=0
Z
m
k
(g)(lnaµ)
k
. (7.64)
Terms vanishing as a →0 have been neglected, order by order in
perturbation theory. In principle we can allow any choice of the
coeﬃcients Z
g,m
nk
which lead to a series in g
2
for the renormalized
vertex functions in which the dependence on a cancels out. In
minimal subtraction one chooses
Z
g
0
(g) ≡ 1, Z
m
0
(g) ≡ 1. (7.65)
The renormalized g and m depend on the physical scale µ but
not on a whereas g
0
and m
0
are supposed to depend on a but not
192 Lowmass hadrons in QCD
on µ. Then
0 =
¸
µ
∂
∂µ
+β(g)
∂
∂g
gZ
g
(g, lnaµ), (7.66)
0 =
¸
µ
∂
∂µ
+β(g)
∂
∂g
+γ(g)
Z
m
(g, lnaµ), (7.67)
where
β(g) = µ
dg
dµ
, γ(g) =
µ
m
dm
dµ
. (7.68)
By going through similar arguments to those in problem 3(iv),
show that in minimal subtraction
β(g) = −Z
g
1
(g), γ(g) = −Z
m
1
(g). (7.69)
Verify that, in minimal subtraction, the renormalizationgroup
functions for the bare parameters are identical to those for the
rernormalized ones, β
0
(g
0
) = β(g
0
) and γ
0
(g
0
) = γ(g
0
). Verify
the RGindependence of Λ and m
rgi
in (7.57) and (7.58).
8
Chiral symmetry
In this chapter we pay attention to a very important aspect of QCD and
the Standard Model: chiral symmetry. It is a symmetry that is natural
in the continuum but it poses special problems for regularizations,
including the lattice. We review ﬁrst some aspects of chiral symmetry in
QCD, then discuss chiral aspects of QCD on a lattice, and ﬁnally give a
brief introduction to chiral gauge theories, of which the Standard Model
is an example.
8.1 Chiral symmetry and eﬀective action in QCD
Consider the mass terms in the QCD action,
S
mass
= −
d
4
x
¯
ψmψ, (8.1)
where m = diag (m
u
, m
d
, m
s
, ) is the diagonal matrix of mass param
eters. We know that the ﬁrst three quarks u, d and s have relatively
small masses compared with a typical hadronic scale such as the Regge
slope (α
)
−1/2
≈ 1100 MeV or the string tension
√
σ ≈ 400 MeV. (Recall
that m
ud
= 4.4 MeV and m
s
≈ 90 MeV in section 7.5.) Suppose we set
the ﬁrst n
f
quarkmass parameters to zero. In that case the QCD action
has U(n
f
) U(n
f
) symmetry, loosely called chiral symmetry, in which
the left and righthanded components of the Dirac ﬁeld are subjected
to independent ﬂavor transformations V
L,R
∈ U(n
f
),
ψ →V ψ, V = V
L
P
L
+V
R
P
R
,
¯
ψ →
¯
ψ
¯
V ,
¯
V = V
†
L
P
R
+V
†
R
P
L
= βV
†
β,
P
L
=
1
2
(1 −γ
5
), P
R
=
1
2
(1 +γ
5
). (8.2)
193
194 Chiral symmetry
Here V
L,R
act only on the ﬁrst n
f
ﬂavor indices of the quark ﬁeld. The
matrix γ
5
≡ iγ
0
γ
1
γ
2
γ
3
= −γ
1
γ
2
γ
3
γ
4
has the properties γ
†
5
= γ
5
, γ
2
5
= 1
and it anticommutes with the γ
µ
, i.e. γ
5
γ
µ
= −γ
µ
γ
5
. The P
L,R
are
orthogonal projectors, P
2
L
= P
L
, P
2
R
= P
R
, P
L
P
R
= 0, P
L
+ P
R
=
1. Because of these properties the derivative terms in the action are
invariant,
¯
ψγ
µ
D
µ
ψ →
¯
ψ
¯
V γ
µ
V D
µ
ψ =
¯
ψγ
µ
(V
†
L
V
L
+V
†
R
V
R
)D
µ
ψ =
¯
ψγ
µ
D
µ
ψ. (8.3)
The mass terms transform as
¯
ψmψ →ψ
¯
V mV ψ =
¯
ψ(V
†
R
mV
L
P
L
+V
†
L
mV
R
P
R
)ψ, (8.4)
so they break the symmetry. A ﬂavorsymmetric mass term has m ∝ 11.
Such a mass term is invariant under ﬂavor transformations, for which
V
L
= V
R
. However, it is not invariant under transformations with V
L
=
V
R
. A special case of these are chiral transformations in the narrow
sense,
1
for which V
L
= V
†
R
. For m = 0 in the n
f
n
f
subspace the action
is invariant under chiral U(n
f
) U(n
f
) transformations.
In the quantum theory the U(n
f
) U(n
f
) symmetry is reduced to
SU(n
f
) SU(n
f
) U(1) by socalled anomalies (this will be reviewed
in section 8.4). Here U(1) is the group of ordinary (Abelian) phase
transformations ψ → e
iω
ψ,
¯
ψ → e
−iω
¯
ψ. Furthermore, the dynamics
is such that the SU(n
f
) SU(n
f
) symmetry is spontaneously broken.
An informative way to exhibit the physics of this situation is by using
an eﬀective action. We have met already in chapter 3 the O(4) model for
pions (which can be extended to include nucleons, cf. problem (i)). This
illustrates the case n
f
= 2 (the group SO(4) is equivalent to SU(2)
SU(2)/Z
2
, cf. (D.19) in appendix D). One introduces eﬀective ﬁelds φ
which transform in the same way as the quark bilinear scalar ﬁelds
¯
ψ
g
ψ
f
and pseudoscalar ﬁelds
¯
ψ
g
iγ
5
ψ
f
, f, g = 1, . . ., n
f
. We start with
Φ
fg
≡
¯
ψ
g
P
L
ψ
f
, (8.5)
which transforms as
Φ
fg
→(V
L
)
ff
(V
†
R
)
g
g
Φ
f
g
, (8.6)
or, in matrix notation,
Φ →V
L
ΦV
†
R
. (8.7)
The other possibility leads to Φ
†
:
¯
ψ
g
P
R
ψ
f
= (ψ
+
f
P
R
βψ
g
)
∗
= (
¯
ψ
f
P
L
ψ
g
)
∗
= (Φ
gf
)
∗
(8.8)
≡ (Φ
†
)
fg
. (8.9)
8.1 Chiral symmetry and eﬀective action in QCD 195
Under parity Φ and Φ
†
are interchanged,
Φ(x
0
, x)
P
→Φ
†
(x
0
, −x). (8.10)
Ignoring the symmetry breaking due to anomalies, the eﬀective action
for the eﬀective ﬁeld φ ↔Φ has the same chiral transformation proper
ties as the QCD action. We shall ﬁrst examine the form of this eﬀective
action and derive some consequences, and later take into account that
anomalies reduce the U(n
f
)U(n
f
) symmetry to SU(n
f
)SU(n
f
)U(1).
For m = 0 we want an invariant action. The combination Tr[(φφ
†
)
k
]
is invariant under (8.7). An invariant action is given by
S = −
d
4
xTr(F
2
∂
µ
φ
†
F
1
∂
µ
φ +G), (8.11)
where F
1,2
and G have the forms
F
1
=
¸
k
f
1k
(φφ
†
)
k
, F
2
=
¸
k
f
2k
(φ
†
φ)
k
, (8.12)
G =
¸
k
g
k
(φφ
†
)
k
. (8.13)
Reality of the action requires the coeﬃcients f
1k
, f
2k
and g
k
to be real.
Invariance under parity requires
f
1k
= f
2k
. (8.14)
The action might also contain terms of the type
Tr[(φφ
†
)
k
] Tr[(φφ
†
)
l
]. (8.15)
At this point we assume such terms to be absent and come back to them
later.
There may also be higher derivative terms. Their systematic inclusion
is part of chiral perturbation theory, see e.g. [19]. For slowly varying ﬁelds,
which is all we need for describing physics on the lowenergy–momentum
scale, we may assume such higher derivative terms to be negligible.
The classical ground state will be characterized by ∂
µ
φ = 0 and
correspond to a minimum of Tr G. Let λ
1
, . . ., λ
n
f
be the eigenvalues of
the Hermitian matrix φφ
†
. Then
Tr G =
¸
k
g
k
(λ
k
1
+ +λ
k
n
f
). (8.16)
A stationary point of Tr G has to satisfy
0 =
∂
∂λ
j
Tr G =
¸
k
g
k
kλ
k−1
j
, (8.17)
196 Chiral symmetry
which is the same equation for each j. Hence, the solution is
λ
1
= = λ
n
f
≡ λ, φφ
†
= λ11. (8.18)
Since φφ
†
≥ 0 (i.e. all eigenvalues are ≥ 0), λ ≥ 0.
We shall now assume that λ = 0 at the minimum of Tr G. The
symmetry is then spontaneously broken, because a nonzero φ in the
ground state is not invariant under U(n
f
) U(n
f
) transformations. It is
helpful to use a generalized polar decomposition for φ,
φ = HU, H = H
†
, U
†
= U
−1
. (8.19)
The H and U can be found as follows: H can be calculated from H =
±
φφ
†
and then U = H
−1
φ. In the ground state H = ±
√
λ11. The
degeneracy of the ground state is described by U, which is an element
of U(n
f
). It transforms as U → V
L
UV
†
R
. Without loss of generality we
may assume that U = 11 and H = −
√
λ11 (the minus sign becomes
natural on taking into account the explicit symmetry breaking due to
the quark masses). This exhibits clearly the residual degeneracy of the
ground state: it is invariant under the diagonal U(n) subgroup, for which
V
L
= V
R
. The pattern of spontaneous symmetry breaking is
U(n
f
) U(n
f
) →U(n
f
). (8.20)
The variables of U (e.g. using the exponential parameterization) are
analogous to angular variables for the O(n)vector ﬁeld ϕ
α
in the O(n)
model. We expect these to correspond to Nambu–Goldstone bosons.
Let us linearize the eﬀective action about the ground state, writing
H = −v +h, U = exp(iα),
φ = (−v +h)
1 +iα −
1
2
α
2
+
, v =
√
λ > 0 (8.21)
(from now on we no longer distinguish between 1 and 11). We keep only
terms up to second order in h and α. Since ∂
µ
φ is of ﬁrst order, we may
replace φ by v in F
1,2
in (8.12),
F
1
= F
2
≡ F, for φ = −v, (8.22)
and obtain
S = −
d
4
xTr (F
2
v
2
∂
µ
α∂
µ
α +F
2
∂
µ
h∂
µ
h +r h
2
) + . (8.23)
8.1 Chiral symmetry and eﬀective action in QCD 197
The also include the groundstate value of S. The coeﬃcient r follows
from
Tr G =
¸
k
g
k
v
2k
Tr [(−1 +h/v)
2k
] (8.24)
=
¸
k
g
k
v
2k
[n
f
+k(2k −1)v
−2
Tr h
2
+ ], (8.25)
where the term linear in h vanishes because Tr G is stationary at h = 0.
Since we expand around a minimum of Tr G, the coeﬃcient
r =
¸
k
g
k
k(2k −1)v
2k−2
(8.26)
is positive. The form (8.23) shows that the α ﬁelds have zero mass
parameter – they correspond to n
2
f
Nambu–Goldstone bosons. The h
ﬁelds have a mass given by
m
2
h
= r/F
2
. (8.27)
At this point we shall make the useful approximation of ‘freezing’
the ‘radial’ degrees of freedom H to their groundstate value H = −v,
or h = 0. This approximation is justiﬁed when m
h
is suﬃciently large
compared with the momenta of interest (cf. problem (i) for numbers)
and it simpliﬁes the derivations to follow. Thus we get
φ(x) = −v U(x), (8.28)
S = −
d
4
x
f
2
4
Tr (∂
µ
U
†
∂
µ
U), f
2
= 4F
2
v
2
, (8.29)
where we omitted a constant term.
We now comment on the terms of the form (8.15). When these are
included the uniqueness of the form (8.18) is no longer compelling and
other solutions with λ
j
= λ
k
are also possible. This depends on the de
tails of the action. However, arguments based on the largen
c
behavior of
the generalization of QCD to an SU(n
c
) gauge theory suggest that terms
of the form (8.15) are subdominant [100]. The groundstate solution of
the complete eﬀective action including terms of the form (8.15) is still
expected to have the symmetric form (8.18), and the symmetrybreaking
pattern is still expected to be U(n
f
) U(n
f
) →U(n
f
).
198 Chiral symmetry
The quarkmass terms in the QCD action explicitly break chiral
symmetry. They have the form of an external source coupled to quark
bilinears,
S
mass
= −
d
4
x
¯
ψm(P
L
+P
R
)ψ (8.30)
=
d
4
xTr (J
†
Φ + Φ
†
J), J = −m. (8.31)
Hence, we can absorb the quarkmass terms in the coupling to such
an external source. The total eﬀective action including this source has
the form lnZ(J) = S(φ) +
d
4
xTr (J
†
φ + φ
†
J), where φ is again the
eﬀective ﬁeld. Setting J = −m thus leads to an addition ∆S in the
eﬀective action
∆S = −
d
4
xTr [m(φ +φ
†
)]. (8.32)
Expanding† φ = −vU = −v exp(iα) to second order in α gives
∆S = −
d
4
xv Tr (mα
2
) + = −
d
4
xv
¸
fg
m
f
α
fg
α
gf
+ .
(8.33)
Since U is unitary, α
gf
= α
∗
fg
. Taking α
fg
with f ≤ g as independent
variables leads to
∆S = −
d
4
xv
¸
f<g
(m
f
+m
g
)α
fg
α
∗
fg
+
¸
f
m
f
α
2
ff
+
¸
¸
. (8.34)
Similarly, expanding the gradient term (8.29) gives
S = −
d
4
x
f
2
4
¸
2
¸
f<g
∂
µ
α
∗
fg
∂
µ
α
fg
+
¸
f
∂
µ
α
ff
∂
µ
α
ff
+
¸
.
(8.35)
As expected from the O(4) model, ∆S gives a mass to the Goldstone
bosons, which for small m is linear in m,
m
2
fg
= B(m
f
+m
g
), B = 2v/f
2
. (8.36)
In the next section we shall confront these mass relations with experi
ment.
By coupling the eﬀective action to the electroweak gauge ﬁelds it
can be shown that the constant f determines the leptonic decays
† We neglect here the eﬀect of the quark masses on the groundstate value of φ.
8.2 Pseudoscalar masses and the U(1) problem 199
of the pseudoscalar mesons. It is known as the pion decay constant,
f = f
π
≈ 93 MeV. This constant also determines the size of the swave
pi–pi scattering lengths in good agreement with experiment.
To end this section we note a relation between the pion decay con
stant f, the unrenormalized chiral condensate '
¯
ψψ` =
¸
f
'
¯
ψ
f
ψ
f
` =
2
¸
f
'φ
ff
` = −2n
f
v, and the wavefunction renormalization constant Z
of the pseudoscalar ﬁelds P
fg
≡ i(φ
†
− φ)
fg
↔
¯
ψ
g
iγ
5
ψ
f
. The constant
Z can be read oﬀ from S = −
d
4
xZ
−1
¸
f<g
∂
µ
P
∗
fg
∂
µ
P
fg
+ , using
U = −φ/v and (8.29) and (8.35): Z
−1
= f
2
/8v
2
. Hence, f is given by
the renormalized chiral condensate '
¯
ψψ`/
√
Z,
f =
2
√
2v
√
Z
=
−
√
2'
¯
ψψ`
n
f
√
Z
. (8.37)
8.2 Pseudoscalar masses and the U(1) problem
The candidate Nambu–Goldstone (NG) bosons and their masses are
π
±
: m
2
π
+
= m
2
ud
= 0.0195 GeV
2
K
±
: m
2
K
+
= m
2
us
= 0.244 GeV
2
K
0
,
¯
K
0
: m
2
K
0
= m
2
ds
= 0.248 GeV
2
π
0
: m
2
π
0
= 0.0182 GeV
2
η: m
2
η
= 0.301 GeV
2
η
: m
2
η
= 0.917 GeV
2
(8.38)
For the unequalﬂavor particles (f = g) we have indicated the quark
labels. For the neutral π
0
, η and η
the quark assignment turns out to
be less straightforward.
Consider two light ﬂavors, n
f
= 2. The mass formula (8.36) with
f = u, d and g = u, d predicts four NG bosons in this case. The obvious
candidates are π
±
, π
0
and η, with
m
2
π
+
= m
2
ud
= B(m
u
+m
d
). (8.39)
According to (8.36), the other eigenstates are ¯ uu and
¯
dd. If we try to
assign π
0
↔ ¯ uu, η ↔
¯
dd, the relation
m
2
ud
=
1
2
(m
2
uu
+m
2
dd
) (8.40)
cannot be fulﬁlled at all. If we assume that m
u
≈ m
d
and π
0
is an equal
mixture of ¯ uu and
¯
dd to get m
2
π
0
≈ m
2
π
+
, the orthogonal combination of
200 Chiral symmetry
¯ uu and
¯
dd should have approximately the same mass as π
0
: the η does
not ﬁt in.
Consider next three light ﬂavors, n = 3. The mass formulas now
predict nine NG bosons. We ﬁnd
m
u
+m
d
m
u
+m
s
=
m
2
π
+
m
2
K
+
≡ R
1
,
m
u
+m
s
m
d
+m
s
=
m
2
K
+
m
2
K
0
≡ R
2
, (8.41)
and from this
m
s
m
u
=
R
2
(R
1
−1)
1 −R
2
−R
1
R
2
= 31,
m
s
m
d
=
R
2
1 −R
2
+m
u
/m
s
= 20. (8.42)
Hence m
u
: m
d
: m
s
≈ 1 : 1.5 : 30. The eﬀective action furthermore pre
dicts particles with masses
m
2
uu
=
2m
u
m
u
+m
d
m
2
π
+
= 0.0155 GeV
2
, (8.43)
m
2
dd
=
2m
d
m
u
+m
d
m
2
π
+
= 0.0235 GeV
2
, (8.44)
m
2
ss
=
2m
s
m
u
+m
s
m
2
K
+
= 0.473 GeV
2
. (8.45)
The candidates π
0
, η and η
do not ﬁt into the n = 3 formulas either.
The eﬀective action obtained so far must be wrong.
This is an aspect of the notorious U(1) problem. The problem is
the chiral U(1) invariance contained in U(n
f
) U(n
f
). These are the
transformations of the type V
L
= V
†
R
= exp(iω) 11, or more generally,
transformations V
L
= V
†
R
with det V
L
= 1. We know that this invariance
of the classical QCD action is broken in the quantum theory by ‘anoma
lies’: QCD has only approximate SU(n
f
) SU(n
f
) chiral symmetry,
plus the ﬂavor U(1) symmetry V
L
= V
R
= exp(iω) 11 corresponding to
quarknumber conservation.
The resolution of the U(1) problem through ‘anomalies’ turned out to
be a diﬃcult but very interesting task. Here we shall simply add terms to
the action that break the chiral U(1) symmetry and see what this implies
for the mass formulas. We need to introduce terms of the type det U,
which is invariant under SU(n
f
) SU(n
f
) but not under U(n
f
) U(n
f
):
det U →det(V
L
UV
†
R
) = det(U) det(V
L
V
†
R
) = det U, (8.46)
for V
L,R
∈ SU(n). A term like
∆
S =
d
4
xc (det U + det U
†
) (8.47)
8.2 Pseudoscalar masses and the U(1) problem 201
would do, but considerations of the largen
c
behavior of ‘n
c
color QCD’
suggest using instead the form
∆
S =
d
4
xc (Tr lnU −Tr lnU
†
)
2
. (8.48)
In fact, c ∝ 1/n
c
. (Both choices for ∆
S lead to the same form of the
mass matrix for the neutral pseudoscalar mesons to be derived below.)
Writing U = exp(iα) gives
∆
S = −
dx4c
¸
¸
f
α
ff
¸
2
. (8.49)
Hence, the masses of α
fg
, f < g, are unaﬀected, but the α
ff
modes are
now coupled by a mass matrix of the form
m
2
ff,gg
= 2Bm
f
δ
fg
+λ, λ = 16c/f
2
, (8.50)
or
m
2
= 2B
¸
m
u
0 0
0 m
d
0
0 0 m
s
¸
+λ
¸
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
¸
. (8.51)
We shall treat the quarkmass term as a perturbation to the λ term. For
m
f
= 0 we have the eigenvectors and eigenvalues
φ
0
=
1
√
3
(1, 1, 1), m
2
= 3λ, (8.52)
φ
3
=
1
√
2
(1, −1, 0), m
2
= 0, (8.53)
φ
8
=
1
√
6
(1, 1, −2), m
2
= 0. (8.54)
Using m
u,d,s
as a perturbation (in the way familiar from quantum
mechanics) leads to the following mass formulas:
m
2
η
= 3λ +B(
2
3
m
u
+
2
3
m
d
+
2
3
m
s
), (8.55)
m
2
π
0
= B(m
u
+m
d
), (8.56)
m
2
η
= B(
1
3
m
u
+
1
3
m
d
+
4
3
m
s
), (8.57)
which hold for the mass ratios (8.42) up to tiny corrections. The eigen
vectors are also interesting, but here we merely mention that π
0
and η
are mainly φ
3
and φ
8
, whereas the η
is predominantly φ
0
. From (8.55)
we can determine the chiral U(1) breaking strength λ,
3λ = m
2
η
−
1
2
(m
2
π
0
+m
2
η
) = 3(0.252) GeV
2
. (8.58)
202 Chiral symmetry
The mass terms in the eﬀective action depend on four parameters,
Bm
u
, Bm
d
, Bm
s
and λ. Hence we have two predictions for the ﬁve
pseudoscalar masses:
m
2
π
0
= m
2
π
+
, (8.59)
m
2
η
=
1
6
(m
2
uu
+m
2
dd
) +
2
3
m
2
ss
= 0.322 GeV
2
, (8.60)
which agree reasonably well with experiment. It should be kept in
mind that electromagnetic corrections, which aﬀect in particular the
electrically charged particles, are neglected.
In the early days the near equality of m
π
0 and m
π
+ was interpreted
as an aspect of approximate ﬂavor symmetry, m
u
≈ m
d
. Now we
know that m
d
is substantially larger than m
u
and that the approxi
mate ﬂavor symmetry is due to approximate chiral symmetry, m
u,d
<
√
σ, the spontaneoussymmetrybreaking pattern U(n
f
) U(n
f
) →
U(n
f
)
ﬂavor
, and the ﬂavorsinglet character of the chiralanomaly term
∆
S.
8.3 Chiral anomalies
The Noether argument tells us that to each continuous symmetry of the
action corresponds a ‘conserved current’ j
µ
, ∂
µ
j
µ
= 0, and a conserved
‘charge’ Q =
d
3
xj
0
(x), ∂
0
Q = 0. This is true in the classical theory but
not necessarily in the quantum theory, which needs more speciﬁcation
than merely giving the action, such as the precise deﬁnition of the path
integral. In case the quantum analog of j
µ
is not conserved, one speaks
of an anomaly / ≡ ∂
µ
j
µ
. In four space–time dimensions / is typically
∝
κλµν
Tr (G
κλ
G
µν
), where G
µν
is a gaugeﬁeld tensor. Relations like
∂
µ
j
µ
= / can be found in perturbation theory by studying correlation
functions of j
µ
and / with other ﬁelds.
Chiral anomalies correspond to diagrams of the type shown in ﬁgure
8.1, and related diagrams, in which one vertex corresponds to a (polar)
vector current,
¯
ψiγ
µ
ψ, or an axial vector current,
¯
ψiγ
µ
γ
5
ψ, and the
other two vertices to gauge ﬁelds. There must be an odd number of γ
5
’s
in the trace over the Dirac indices (Tr (γ
5
γ
κ
γ
λ
γ
µ
γ
ν
) = 4i
κλµν
), hence
the name ‘chiral anomalies’. These γ
5
may come from the gaugeﬁeld
vertices or from the current.
In QCD there is no γ
5
associated with the gaugeﬁeld vertices and only
axial vector currents can have an anomaly. In the Euclidean formulation
8.3 Chiral anomalies 203
Fig. 8.1. Triangle diagram in which chiral anomalies show up.
their divergence reads†
∂
µ
(
¯
ψ
f
iγ
µ
γ
5
ψ
g
) = (m
f
+m
g
)
¯
ψ
f
iγ
5
ψ
g
+δ
fg
2iq, (8.61)
q =
g
2
32π
2
κλµν
Tr (G
κλ
G
µν
). (8.62)
For zero quark masses the righthand side of (8.61) is the anomaly. The
vector currents have no such anomaly. Their divergence reads
∂
µ
(
¯
ψ
f
iγ
µ
ψ
g
) = i(m
f
−m
g
)
¯
ψ
f
ψ
g
, (8.63)
which is zero in the symmetry limit m
f
= m
g
, hence also in the chiral
limit m
f
= m
g
= 0. The righthand sides of the divergence equations
(8.61) and (8.63) are zero for the currents corresponding to SU(n
f
)
SU(n
f
) symmetry, obtained by contraction of
¯
ψ
f
iγ
µ
P
L,R
ψ
g
with the
n
2
f
−1 ﬂavor SU(n
f
) generators (λ
k
)
fg
/2, Tr λ
k
= 0. Hence, the anomaly
in (8.61) breaks only chiral U(1) invariance corresponding to λ
0
∝ 11 with
∂
µ
¸
f
¯
ψ
f
iγ
µ
γ
5
ψ
f
= 2n
f
iq.
The quantity q is called the topological charge density. Continuum
gauge ﬁelds on topologically nontrivial manifolds (such as the torus T
4
which corresponds to periodic boundary conditions) fall into socalled
Chern classes characterized by an integer, the Pontryagin index or
† The gauge ﬁelds are normalized here according to S = −
d
4
xG
k
µν
G
k
µν
/4 + · · ·
with G
k
µν
= ∂
µ
G
k
ν
−∂
ν
G
k
µ
+gf
klm
G
l
µ
G
m
ν
.
204 Chiral symmetry
topological charge Q
top
:
Q
top
=
d
4
xq(x). (8.64)
An important example of conﬁgurations with topological charge is given
by superpositions of (anti)instantons. The latter are solutions of the Eu
clidean ﬁeld equations (hence they are saddle points in the path integral)
with localized action density, nonperturbative action S = 8π
2
/g
2
and
topological charge ±1. In this context we mention also the Atiyah–Singer
index theorem:
Q
top
= n
+
−n
−
, (8.65)
where n
±
are the numbers of zero modes (eigenvectors with zero eigen
value) of the Dirac operator γ
µ
D
µ
with chirality γ
5
= ±1 (cf. problem
(iii)).
The signiﬁcance of all this for our pseudoscalar particle mass spectrum
is that the phenomenologically required chiral U(1) breaking is present
indeed in quantum chromodynamics, provided that gaugeﬁeld conﬁgu
rations with topological charge density give suﬃciently important con
tributions to the path integral. The analysis of this is complicated [101]
but fortunately there is a simple approximate formula which expresses
the eﬀect of the chiral anomaly on the neutral pseudoscalar masses, the
Witten–Veneziano formula [102, 103]:
λ ≈
1
2f
2
π
χ
top
, no quarks. (8.66)
Here λ is the U(1)breaking mass term introduced in (8.50) and χ
top
is
the topological susceptibility,
χ
top
=
d
4
x'q(x)q(0)`. (8.67)
Note that in (8.66) χ
top
is to be computed in the pure gauge theory with
out quarks, although it can of course also be evaluated in the full theory
with dynamical fermions. From (8.58) we have χ
top
≈ (180 MeV)
4
.
8.4 Chiral symmetry and the lattice
With Wilson’s fermion method chiral symmetry is explicitly broken by
two large mass terms ∝ M and r/a in the action. With staggered
fermions there are not even any ﬂavor indices to act on with chiral
8.4 Chiral symmetry and the lattice 205
transformations (cf. (6.67)). So we have a problem translating the con
tinuum lore in the previous section to the lattice using these fermion
formulations. As will be mentioned at the end of this section, this
problem can be avoided or at least ameliorated with formulations of
the ‘Ginsparg–Wilson variety’, but an introduction in terms of Wilson
fermions is instructive and this will be the focus of our immediate
attention.
Let us ﬁrst derive the Noether currents of chiral symmetry. Consider
the fermion part of the action,
S
F
=
¸
xµf
1
2
¯
ψ
fx
(r −γ
µ
)U
µx
ψ
fx+ˆ µ
+
¯
ψ
fx+ˆ µ
(r +γ
µ
)U
†
µx
ψ
fx
−
¸
xf
M
f
¯
ψ
fx
ψ
fx
, (8.68)
where we have explicitly indicated the ﬂavor index f in addition to x.
We make a variation of ψ and
¯
ψ that looks like a chiral transformation,
ψ
fx
= V
fgx
ψ
gx
,
¯
ψ
fx
=
¯
ψ
gx
¯
V
gxf
, (8.69)
in which V has been generalized to depend on the space–time point x:
V
fgx
= δ
fg
+iω
L
fgx
P
L
+iω
R
fgx
P
R
+O(ω
2
) (8.70)
≡ δ
fg
+iω
V
fgx
+iω
A
fgx
γ
5
+ , (8.71)
¯
V
fgx
= δ
fg
−iω
V
fgx
+iω
A
fgx
γ
5
+ , (8.72)
where ω
fg
= ω
∗
gf
for L, R, V and A. The variation of the action can be
written for inﬁnitesimal ω’s as
δS
F
= S
F
(ψ
,
¯
ψ
) −S
F
(ψ,
¯
ψ)
= −
¸
x
V
µ
fgx
∂
µ
ω
V
fgx
+A
µ
fgx
∂
µ
ω
A
fgx
+D
V
fgx
ω
V
fgx
+D
A
fgx
ω
A
fgx
+O(ω
2
)
(8.73)
=
¸
x
(∂
µ
V
µ
fgx
−D
V
fgx
)ω
V
fgx
+ (∂
µ
A
µ
fgx
−D
A
fgx
)ω
A
fgx
.
(8.74)
We recall that ∂
µ
and ∂
µ
denote the forward and backward lattice
derivatives, ∂
µ
ω
x
= ω
x+ˆ µ
− ω
x
and ∂
µ
ω
x
= ω
x
− ω
x−ˆ µ
. In (8.73), the
terms without derivatives of ω are due to symmetry breaking, while the
terms containing ∂
µ
ω are a consequence of the fact that ω depends on x
– they serve to identify the vector (V
µ
) and axialvector (A
µ
) currents.
The classical Noether argument can be given as follows: if ψ and
¯
ψ
206 Chiral symmetry
satisfy the equations of motion, the action is stationary, δS
F
= 0, and
consequently
∂
µ
V
µ
fg
= D
V
fg
, ∂
µ
A
µ
fg
= D
A
fg
. (8.75)
Explicitly we have
V
µ
fgx
=
1
2
¯
ψ
fx
i(γ
µ
−r)U
µx
ψ
gx+ˆ µ
+
¯
ψ
fx+ˆ µ
i(γ
µ
+r)U
†
µx
ψ
gx
, (8.76)
A
µ
fgx
=
1
2
¯
ψ
fx
iγ
µ
γ
5
U
µx
ψ
gx+ˆ µ
+
¯
ψ
fx+ˆ µ
iγ
µ
γ
5
U
†
µx
ψ
gx
, (8.77)
D
V
fgx
= i(M
f
−M
g
)
¯
ψ
fx
ψ
gx
, (8.78)
D
A
fgx
= (M
f
+M
g
)
¯
ψ
fx
iγ
5
ψ
gx
−
r
2
¸
µ
¯
ψ
fx
iγ
5
(U
µx
ψ
gx+ˆ µ
+U
†
µx−ˆ µ
ψ
gx−ˆ µ
)
+ (
¯
ψ
fx+ˆ µ
U
†
µx
+
¯
ψ
fx−ˆ µ
U
µx−ˆ µ
)iγ
5
ψ
gx
. (8.79)
We see that, in the ﬂavorsymmetry limit M
f
= M
g
= M, the vector
current divergence D
V
= 0. For the axialvector divergence the story is
more subtle: we can set all mass parameters M
f
and r to zero, in which
case D
A
= 0, but then we get back the species doublers, which is not
Wilson’s method. To get chiral symmetry without fermion doubling, we
have to take the continuum limit. In the classical continuum limit we
expect D
A
fg
to be proportional to the quark masses because then the
mass terms in the action reduce to
d
4
x
¯
ψmψ, by construction (recall
(6.58)):
2
D
A
fg
(x) = (m
f
+m
g
)
¯
ψ
f
(x)iγ
5
ψ
g
(x) +O(a). (8.80)
Hence, the classical D
A
vanishes in the chiral limit, which is ‘Noether’s
theorem’ for Wilson fermions.
In the quantum theory the ﬁelds become operators. Their correlation
functions can be obtained with the path integral. Consider the expec
tation value of an arbitrary set of ﬁelds φ
1
φ
n
≡ F, composed of the
fermion ﬁelds and/or gauge ﬁelds,
'F` =
1
Z
D
¯
ψDψ DU e
S
F, Z =
D
¯
ψDψ DU e
S
, (8.81)
8.4 Chiral symmetry and the lattice 207
and let us make the transformation of variables (8.69). A transformation
of variables cannot change the integrals, so Z
= Z and 'F`
= 'F`.
However, by following how the pathintegral measure and the integrant
transform we can derive useful relations, called Ward–Takahashi identi
ties. The pathintegral measure is invariant,
D
¯
ψ
Dψ
≡
¸
xaαf
d
¯
ψ
xaαf
dψ
xaαf
=
¸
xaαf
d
¯
ψ
xaαf
dψ
xaαf
(det V
x
det
¯
V
x
)
−1
= D
¯
ψDψ, (8.82)
because det V det
¯
V = det(V
¯
V ) = det(V
L
V
†
R
P
L
+V
R
V
†
L
P
R
) = det(V
L
V
†
R
)
det(V
R
V
†
L
) = det(V
L
V
†
R
V
R
V
†
L
) = det 11 = 1. On the other hand, the
change in the action is given in (8.74) and the ﬁelds in F may also
change, F
= F +
¸
fgx
ω
A
fgx
∂F/∂
A
fgx
+ + A → V . So we get the
identity, e.g. for a chiral transformation,
0 =
∂
∂ω
A
fgx
'F`
=
∂
∂ω
A
fgx
1
Z
D
¯
ψ
Dψ
DU e
S
F
=
1
Z
D
¯
ψDψ DU
∂
∂ω
A
fgx
e
S
F
=
∂S
∂ω
A
fgx
F +
∂F
∂ω
A
fgx
¸
=
(∂
µ
A
µ
fgx
−D
A
fgx
) F +
∂F
∂ω
A
fgx
¸
. (8.83)
The content of such relations may be studied in perturbation theory. To
oneloop order this can be done in the way seen in section 3.4 and the
problems in section 6.6. A crucial example is the case F = G
κx
G
λy
, for
which ∂F/∂ω
A
fg
= 0 since F consists only of gluon ﬁelds, which leads to
trianglediagram contributions of the type shown in ﬁgure 8.1. A calcu
lation [70] shows that, for this case, D
A
fg
→(m
f
+m
g
)
¯
ψ
f
iγ
5
ψ
g
+δ
fg
2iq
in the continuum limit. The topologicalchargedensity contribution is
due to the Wilson mass term and the coeﬃcient of q is formally ∝ r,
but actually independent of r, provided that it is nonzero.
Another example is F = ψ
fx
¯
ψ
gy
, which leads to the conclusion that,
for this case, D
A
fg
→(m
f
+m
g
)κ
P
¯
ψ
f
iγ
5
ψ
g
−(κ
A
−1)∂
µ
A
µ
fg
, where κ
P
and
κ
A
are ﬁnite renormalization constants of order g
2
(cf. [70, 109, 104]).
The topological charge density does not contribute here in this order
because it is already of order g
2
.
At oneloop order we get the same contributions as those found in
continuum perturbation theory because the bare vertex functions reduce
to the continuum ones (in the balls around the origin of the loop
momentum integration) in the classical continuum limit. There are also
208 Chiral symmetry
diﬀering contributions, which are, however, only contact terms.† These
translate into the ﬁnite renormalization constants κ.‡ The anomaly is a
singlet under ﬂavor transformations (i.e. ∝ δ
fg
) because the rmass term
is a ﬂavor singlet. Note that, by a global ﬁnite chiral transformation, we
could transform rδ
fg
→ r(
¯
V V )
fg
, implying that M
c
∝
¯
V V . However,
this is merely a change of reference frame and the physics cannot depend
on it. The quark masses have to be identiﬁed as the mismatch between
M and M
c
.
The above examples show the phenomenon of operator mixing: opera
tors (ﬁelds) with the same quantum numbers tend to go over into linear
combinations of each other in the continuum limit (the scaling region).
Such mixing is restricted by the symmetries of the model and there
is more mixing on the lattice than there is in the continuum because
there is less symmetry on the lattice. The κ’s above are due to the
chiralsymmetry breaking of the Wilson mass term at nonzero lattice
spacing. On general grounds of scaling and universality one assumes
these results to be qualitatively valid also nonperturbatively. One in
troduces renormalized ﬁeld combinations that are ﬁnite as a → 0 that
satisfy some standard normalization conditions. Before writing these
down, let us introduce a lattice ﬁeld that reduces to the topological
charge density q in the classical continuum limit. There are many of
course, as usual, e.g. the one introduced in [105],
q
x
= −
1
32π
2
¸
κλµν
κλµν
Tr (U
κλx
U
µνx
)
¸
¸
symmetrized
, (8.84)
where the symmetrization is such that q
x
transform as a scalar under
lattice rotations. Denoting the renormalized ﬁelds by a ‘bar’, they can
be written as [104]
¯
A
µ
fg
= κ
A
A
µ
fg
+δ
fg
(Z
A
−1)κ
A
1
2n
f
¸
f
∂
µ
A
µ
ff
, (8.85)
¯
D
A
fg
= D
A
fg
+ (κ
A
−1)∂
µ
A
µ
fg
+δ
fg
(Z
A
−1)κ
A
1
2n
f
¸
f
∂
µ
A
µ
ff
, (8.86)
† Recall that contact corresponds in momentum space to polynomials in the mo
menta, of degree less than or equal to the mass dimension of the vertex function
under consideration.
‡ In the literature these κ’s are often denoted by Z, which notation we have reserved
for renormalizations diverging when a →0.
8.4 Chiral symmetry and the lattice 209
∂
µ
¯
A
µ
fg
=
¯
D
A
fg
, (8.87)
¯ q = κ
q
q −i(Z
A
−1)κ
A
1
2n
f
¸
f
∂
µ
A
µ
ff
, (8.88)
where Z
A
is a diverging renormalization constant of order g
4
. The
operator subtractions ∝ (Z
A
−1) are suggested by analysis at twoloop
order in the continuum [106]. In the quenched approximation Z
A
= 1.
In the scaling region
¯
D
A
fg
= (m
f
+m
g
)κ
P
¯
ψ
f
iγ
5
ψ
g
+δ
fg
2i¯ q +O(a), (8.89)
with m
f
= M
f
− M
c
. Similar analysis of Ward–Takahashi identities
shows that the vector currents V
µ
fg
need no ﬁnite renormalization,
¯
V
µ
fg
=
V
µ
fg
, κ
V
= 1. The reason is that they are conserved if m
f
= m
g
even for
a = 0.
The implications of the lattice Ward–Takahashi identities can of
course be studied also nonperturbatively. As a ﬁrst step one can use only
external gauge ﬁelds with F = 1 and test the index theorem (8.65), using
topologically nontrivial gauge ﬁelds transcribed from the continuum to
the lattice [107, 108]. Adding dynamical gauge ﬁelds, we can then also
use the Ward–Takahashi identities to determine the renormalization con
stants κ in the quenched approximation [104, 70, 109]. The computation
of the topological susceptibility turns out to be complicated by the fact
that '¯ q
x
¯ q
y
` has divergent contact terms that severely inﬂuence the value
of
¸
x
'¯ q
x
¯ q
0
`. One can try to subtract this contribution,
χ
top
=
1
V
¸
xy
'¯ q
x
¯ q
y
`
U
−contact contribution (8.90)
(assuming periodic boundary conditions, space–time volume V → ∞),
but it is hard to deﬁne it unambiguously [110]. In practice it appears
to work well [111]. By ‘cooling’ the gauge ﬁelds after they have been
generated by a Monte Carlo process this problem can be reduced further
(see e.g. [112] and also [108]).
A diﬀerent approach to the topological susceptibility is to accept
that the conﬁgurations in the path integral are inherently not smooth
functions of space–time and to avoid deﬁning a topological integer
from a collection of wildly ﬂuctuating lattice variables. Instead, one
can return to the physical role played by χ
top
and derive the Witten–
Veneziano formula entirely within the lattice formulation. This can be
done by studying the pseudoscalar meson contribution in the '
¯
A
µ
¯
A
ν
`
210 Chiral symmetry
Fig. 8.2. Correlation between ‘fermionic’ and ‘cooling’ topological charge as
signments for 32 SU(3) gaugeﬁeld conﬁgurations at β = 6.0. From [117].
and '
¯
D
A
¯
D
A
` correlators. The analysis is subtle [104] but results in the
simple formula
χ
top
=
κ
2
P
m
2
f
V
'Tr [γ
5
S
ff
(U)] Tr [γ
5
S
ff
(U)]`
U
. (8.91)
Here S
ff
(U) is the fermion propagator in the gauge ﬁeld U and the
trace is over all nonﬂavor indices (x, a and α). The largen
c
limit is
not taken in this derivation, only the quenched approximation. From
this, the formula in terms of ¯ q can be understood from (8.87), (8.89),
and
¸
x
∂
µ
¯
A
µ
= 0 for periodic boundary conditions. A derivation for
staggered fermions can also be given [113]. The limit m
f
→0 is needed
in order to avoid divergences (this limit must be carefully controlled by
taking m
f
at the lower end of a scaling window that extends to zero as
a →0).
In the twodimensional U(1) model the properties of (8.91) have been
studied and compared with the index theorem as well as with deﬁnitions
of χ
top
in terms of the gauge ﬁeld only [114, 115]. The staggered form
was explored in numerical SU(3) simulations [116, 117]. Figure 8.2 shows
that the individual topological charges obtained with this ‘fermionic
method’ are at β = 6/g
2
= 6.0 already quite correlated to the charges
obtained with the cooling method. This is expected to improve at higher
β but at lower β the gauge ﬁelds are too ‘rough’ on the lattice scale for
8.4 Chiral symmetry and the lattice 211
notions of topology to make sense (also, the staggeredfermion renor
malization factor κ
P
becomes uncannily very large [116]). The resulting
χ
top
≈ (154±17 MeV)
4
seems a bit low compared with the experimental
value following from the Witten–Veneziano formula (180 MeV)
4
, but
this may be due to the somewhat low value a
−1
= 1900 MeV used for
conversion to physical units. Using a
−1
= 2216 MeV inferred from the
values 1934 MeV (β = 5.9) and 2540 MeV (β = 6.1) recorded in [98]
would give χ
top
≈ (180 ±20 MeV)
4
.
By contracting the currents with the n
2
f
−1 SU(n
f
) generators λ
k
fg
/2,
we can form the left and righthanded currents j
L,R
µk
= (
¯
V
µ
fg
±
¯
A
µ
fg
)
(λ
k
)
fg
/4. According to (8.78) and (8.89), these currents and the U(1)
vector current V
µ
=
¸
f
V
µ
ff
are conserved in the limit m
f
→ 0.
Further Ward–Takahashi identities can be derived to ﬁx renormalization
constants and ensure that the currents satisfy ‘current algebra’ [118].
The corresponding charges would then satisfy the algebra of generators
of SU(n
f
) SU(n
f
), were it not that the symmetry is supposed to be
broken spontaneously. It should also be possible to introduce the QCD
theta parameter (cf. problem (iv)).
From the chiralsymmetry point of view there are now much better
lattice fermion methods. Ginsparg and Wilson made a renormalization
group ‘blockspin’ transformation for fermions from the continuum to the
lattice, paying special attention to chiral symmetry [124]. More recently
such transformations were studied in search of ‘perfect actions’ [125].
The continuum action is chirally symmetric for zero mass parameters
but this symmetry is hidden in the resulting lattice action, because the
blocking transformation to the lattice breaks chiral symmetry to avoid
fermion doubling. Writing the massless fermion action as S
F
= −
¯
ψDψ,
chiral symmetry in the continuum can be expressed as γ
5
D +Dγ
5
= 0.
On the lattice there is a remnant of this: the blocked D satisﬁes the
Ginsparg–Wilson relation
γ
5
D +Dγ
5
= aD2Rγ
5
D, (8.92)
where we used matrix notation also for the space–time indices; R is
a matrix commuting with γ
5
that enters in the renormalizationgroup
blocking transformation. It is local, which means that R
xy
falls oﬀ
exponentially fast as [x − y[ → ∞ (on the lattice scale, in physical
units it resembles a delta function). So D
xy
practically anticommutes
with γ
5
for physical separations, provided that it is itself local, as it
should be (this is a basic requirement for universality). Taking (8.92) as
a starting point, one can take R
xy
=
1
2
δ
xy
. Dirac matrices D
xy
satisfying
212 Chiral symmetry
(8.92) are complicated, because for given x all y contribute, albeit with
exponentially falling magnitude as [x−y[ increases. An explicit solution
[126], arrived at via the ‘overlap’ approach to chiral gauge theories (see
the next section), has the form
aD = 1 −A(A
†
A)
−1/2
, A = 1 −aD
W
, R =
1
2
, (8.93)
where D
W
is Wilson’s lattice Dirac operator with zero bare mass (r = 1,
M = 4/a). Adding mass terms the resulting lattice QCD action has very
nice properties with respect to broken chiral symmetry and topology,
which can be studied again by deriving Ward–Takahashi identities [130].
Moreover, the resulting action has (for m = 0) an exact chiral sym
metry [131] under
δψ = iωγ
5
1 −
1
2
aD
ψ, δ
¯
ψ = i
¯
ψ
1 −
1
2
aD
ω, (8.94)
with inﬁnitesimal ω
fg
. (Note that such a ﬁnite chiral transformation is
nonlocal as it involves arbitrarily high powers of D.) The chiral anomaly
in this formulation comes from a noninvariance of the fermion measure
[131], similar to continuum derivations [132]. Domainwall fermions [128,
129] are closely related. At the time of writing the research into these
directions is very active; for a review, see [135]. Applications to the
topological susceptibility can be found in [136, 137].
8.5 Spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry
We now turn to the question of spontaneous chiralsymmetry breaking.
One would like to compute the expectation value of the order ﬁeld
¯
ψ
f
P
L
ψ
g
at vanishing quark masses and verify that SU(n
f
) SU(n
f
)
symmetry is broken spontaneously to SU(n
f
). As for the O(n) model (cf.
(3.157)), this could be done by introducing explicit symmetrybreaking
quark masses and studying the inﬁnitevolume limit.
However, with Wilson fermions we cannot simply use
¯
ψ
f
P
L
ψ
g
as
an order ﬁeld because the cancellation of the chiralsymmetry break
ing by the M and r terms is a subtle issue. Even for free fermions
'
¯
ψ
f
P
L
ψ
g
` = 0 at m
f
= M
f
− 4r/a = 0: it diverges in the con
tinuum limit (cf. problem (ii)). The chiralsymmetry breaking causes
¯
ψ
f
P
L
ψ
g
to mix with the unit operator, with a coeﬃcient c(g
2
, m) δ
fg
=
[c
0
(g
2
)a
−3
+ c
1
(g
2
)ma
−2
+ c
2
(g
2
)m
2
a
−1
] δ
fg
that diverges in the limit
a → 0 (for simplicity we assume here all quark masses to be equal).
The identiﬁcation of c(g
2
, m), and a computation of the subtracted
expectation value '
¯
ψ
f
P
L
ψ
g
`−c(g
2
, m)δ
fg
in the limit of zero quark mass
8.5 Spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry 213
is a hazardous endeavor, because several powers of a
−1
have to cancel
out, and, moreover, because the gauge coupling g
2
also depends on a.
On the other hand, we have seen (section 7.5) that the relation
(8.36), i.e. m
2
fg
≈ B(m
f
+ m
g
), B = 2v/f
2
π
, is borne out by the
numerical results when f = g. So, using this relation, we could deﬁne
'
¯
ψψ` by
¸
f
'
¯
ψ
f
ψ
f
` = −n
f
Bf
2
π
, with m
u
= m
d
≡ m
ud
→ 0, or
'
¯
ψ
u
ψ
u
` = −f
2
π
m
2
π
/2m
ud
. Using renormalized quark masses instead of
the bare m
ud
would give a renormalized B and a correspondingly renor
malized '
¯
ψ
f
ψ
f
`. Note that m
ud
'
¯
ψ
u
ψ
u
` should be renormalizationgroup
invariant. Using e.g. m
ud
= 3.4 MeV (the result of [97]), the value
of '
¯
ψ
u
ψ
u
` is about (290 MeV)
3
in the MSbar scheme on the scale
µ = 2 GeV.
We may appeal to continuity at any ﬁxed gauge coupling 0 < g < ∞
by sending the symmetrybreaking parameters M and r to zero and
studying spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry there. Actually, at
r = M = 0 the staggeredfermion form (6.66) of the action is more
appropriate and it shows that the Dirac labels are to be interpreted as
ﬂavor indices. At M = r = 0 the symmetry of the action enlarges to
U(4n
f
) U(4n
f
). Combining the Dirac (α) and ﬂavor (f) indices into
one label A = (α, f) the transformation is
χ
Ax
→
1
L
AB
1 −
x
2
+1
R
AB
1 +
x
2
χ
Bx
,
¯ χ
Ax
→ ¯ χ
Bx
1
R†
BA
1 −
x
2
+1
L†
BA
1 +
x
2
(8.95)
with
x
= (−1)
x
1
+···x
4
. Moreover, in the scaling region at weak coupling
the staggeredfermion ﬂavors also emerge, implying a further multipli
cation of the number of ﬂavors by four. With such a large number of
ﬂavors (i.e. 16n
f
) and only three colors, asymptotic freedom is lost as
soon as n
f
> 1 (recall (7.54)) and we can expect continuity in M, r →0
only if we consider a suﬃciently large number of colors n
c
. Assuming
this to be the case, we can get analytic insight at strong coupling
[119, 120, 83, 84, 82, 121].
At strong gauge coupling and for a large number of colors the ex
act continuous symmetry breaks spontaneously as U(4n
f
) U(4n
f
) →
U(4n
f
), resulting in 16n
2
f
NG bosons. The baryons acquire a mass
∝ n
c
from the spontaneous symmetry breaking. Suppose now n
f
= 3.
Turning on the symmetrybreaking parameters M and r, it is possible
to keep the pions, kaons and eta massless by choosing M = M
c
(g, r)
and in the process all other NG bosons become massive. We need to
214 Chiral symmetry
keep M −M
c
(g, r) inﬁnitesimally positive to let the order ﬁeld
¯
ψ
f
P
L
ψ
g
acquire its expectation value in the direction −vδ
fg
, with real positive
v. Otherwise we might induce complex v, which corresponds to nonzero
'
¯
ψ
f
iγ
5
ψ
g
` and spontaneous breaking of parity [119, 122]. The situa
tion is similar in the model using continuous time (the Hamiltonian
method), in which the symmetry breaking at strong coupling is actually
U(4n
f
) →U(2n
f
)U(2n
f
). At nonzero r the U(1) problem is also qual
itatively resolved by giving the ﬂavorsinglet boson a (small) nonzero
mass [119, 122, 123].
So in this way, connecting with M = r = 0, we can understand
spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry in multicolor QCD with Wilson
fermions. However, it is conceptually simpler to study the corresponding
order ﬁeld for staggered fermions.
The staggeredfermion action (6.67) has for m = 0 a chiral U(1)U(1)
symmetry, which is (8.95) with phase factors 1
L,R
(since there is no
spin–ﬂavor index A to act on). The axial U(1) transformation contained
in this U(1) U(1), i.e. 1
L
= 1
R∗
= exp(iω
A
), is in the staggered
fermion interpretation [74] a ﬂavornonsinglet transformation, of the
form exp(iω
A
ξ
5
) with Tr ξ
5
= 0. In the scaling region, where the symme
try enlarges to SU(4)SU(4)U(1)
V
, this ξ
5
is a linear combination of
the generators of SU(4). So it is natural to study spontaneous breaking
of this U(1) remnant of SU(4) SU(4) chiral symmetry. A suitable
order ﬁeld for this symmetry is the coeﬃcient of the quark mass m in
the action, i.e. ¯ χ
x
χ
x
, which together with
x
¯ χ
x
χ
x
forms a doublet under
the chiral U(1). In the scaling region ¯ χ
x
χ
x
→
¸
4
f=1
¯
ψ
f
(x)ψ
f
(x) and
x
¯ χ
x
χ
x
→
¸
fg
¯
ψ
f
(x)ξ
5fg
γ
5
ψ
g
(x).
A deﬁnition of Σ ≡ −' ¯ χχ` in which the quark mass is introduced
as a symmetry breaker, which is to be taken to zero after taking the
inﬁnitevolume limit, as in (3.157) for the O(n) model, is hard to
implement in practice. This can be circumvented by using a method
based on the eigenvalues of the Dirac operator, which we shall denote
by D(U), where U is a given gaugeﬁeld conﬁguration. In the continuum
D is antiHermitian, D(U) = −D(U)
†
, and therefore its eigenvalues are
purely imaginary. On the lattice the staggeredfermion Dirac matrix
D(U)
xa,yb
=
¸
µ
η
µx
[(U
xy
)
ab
δ
x+ˆ µ,y
−(U
yx
)
ab
δ
y+ˆ µ,x
] (8.96)
has the same property (unlike the Wilson–Dirac operator D(U) =
D/(U)+M−W(U) which is the sum of an antiHermitian and a Hermitian
matrix). Let u
r
denote the complete orthonormal set of eigenvectors with
8.5 Spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry 215
eigenvalues iλ
r
,
Du
r
= iλ
r
u
r
, u
†
r
u
s
= δ
rs
,
¸
r
u
r
u
†
r
= 11. (8.97)
The matrix
xy
=
x
δ
xy
anticommutes with D, D = −D, so
Du
r
= −iλ
r
u
r
, (8.98)
and for every eigenvalue λ
r
there is also an eigenvalue −λ
r
. The expec
tation value of the order ﬁeld at ﬁnite quark mass, Σ ≡ −' ¯ χ
x
χ
x
`, can
be written as
Σ =
1
V
¸
x
'χ
x
¯ χ
x
` =
1
V
'Tr [(D +m)
−1
]`
U
=
1
V
¸
r
1
iλ
r
+m
Tr (u
r
u
†
r
)
¸
U
=
1
V
¸
r
1
iλ
r
+m
¸
U
=
1
V
¸
r
m
λ
2
r
+m
2
¸
U
. (8.99)
In terms of the spectral density ρ(λ),
ρ(λ) =
1
V ∆λ
'n(λ + ∆λ, λ)`
U
, ∆λ →0, (8.100)
where n(λ + ∆λ, λ) =
¸
r
θ((λ + ∆λ − λ
r
)θ(λ
r
− λ) is the number of
eigenvalues of D(U) in the interval (λ, λ + ∆λ), this can be written as
[138]
Σ = lim
m→0
lim
V →∞
dλρ(λ)
m
λ
2
+m
2
(8.101)
= πρ(0). (8.102)
Here we used the identity lim
→0
/(x
2
+
2
) = πδ(x). Note that ρ(λ)
depends on the gauge coupling, the dynamical quark mass and the
volume V ; it furthermore satisﬁes ρ(λ) = ρ(−λ) because of (8.98).
The spectral density can be computed numerically by counting the
number of eigenvalues in small bins and ﬁgure 8.3 shows an example for
the gauge group SU(2) in the quenched approximation. The quantity
ρ(λ)/V in the plot is our density ρ(λ) in lattice units, i.e. a
3
ρ(λ). The
value ρ(0) may be determined by extrapolating λ →0, it is nearly equal
to the value in the ﬁrst bin. The resulting a
3
Σ drops rapidly from the
value 0.1247(22) to 0.00863(48) as β is increased from 2.0 to 2.4 and the
lattice spacing decreases accordingly. Actually, the value β = 2.0 is near
216 Chiral symmetry
Fig. 8.3. The quenched spectral density in lattice units of the SU(2) staggered
fermion matrix for two values of β = 4/g
2
and lattice volumes V = L
4
. The
number of gaugeﬁeld conﬁgurations used is also indicated. From [142].
the edge of the scaling region on the strongcoupling side, while β = 2.4
is more properly in the scaling region
3
(see e.g. ﬁgure 8 in [69]).
The volume dependence of Σ obtained this way is expected to be
small. This can be made more precise by using scaling arguments based
on a remarkable connection with randommatrix theory (for a review
see [140]). From (8.100) and (8.102) we see that, in the neighborhood
of the origin, ρ(λ) behaves like 1/[V Σd(λ)], with d(λ) the average
distance between two eigenvalues. This observation leads one to deﬁne
the microscopic spectral density [141]
ρ
s
(ζ) =
1
Σ
ρ
ζ
ΣV
, (8.103)
in which the region around the origin is blown up by the factor ΣV .
The function ρ
s
(ζ) is predicted to be a universal function in random
matrix theory depending only on the gauge group and the representation
carried by the fermions, provided that it is evaluated for gauge ﬁelds with
ﬁxed topological charge Q
top
= ν. For example for SU(n
c
> 2) and n
f
8.6 Chiral gauge theory 217
dynamical fermions it is given by
ρ
(ν)
s
(ζ) =
ζ
2
J
n
f
+ν
(ζ)
2
−J
n
f
+ν−1
(ζ)J
n
f
+ν+1
(ζ)
, (8.104)
where J is the Bessel function. So, by ﬁtting ρ
(ν)
(λ) according to (8.103)
and (8.104) with only one free parameter (Σ), one obtains the inﬁnite
volume value of Σ.
Zero modes corresponding to the index theorem should be ignored
here. This is not easy with staggered fermions as the wouldbe zero
modes ﬂuctuate away from zero and can be identiﬁed only by the
expectation value of the ‘staggered γ
5
’ (cf. (8.134) and (8.135)) [107,
113, 114, 116].
The prediction (8.104) works well using staggered fermions and SU(2)
[142] or SU(3) [143] quenched (n
f
= 0) gaugeﬁeld conﬁgurations at
relatively strong gauge coupling and selecting
4
ν = 0. The dependence on
the fermion representation and the pattern of chiralsymmetry breaking
is studied for various gauge groups in [144]. A (ﬁnitetemperature) study
with n
f
= 2 dynamical fermions is given in [145].
A recent study [146] using related ﬁnitesize techniques with Neu
berger’s Dirac operator (8.93) in quenched SU(3) at β = 5.85 gave
the result a
3
Σ = 0.0032(4). A further nonperturbative computation
[147] of the appropriate multiplicative renormalization factor then allows
conversion value Σ
MS
(µ = 2 GeV) ≈ (270 MeV)
3
in the MSbar scheme.
8.6 Chiral gauge theory
In QED and QCD the representation of the gauge group carried by
all left and righthanded ﬁelds is real up to equivalence. For example,
in QCD, let Ω be the fundamental representation of SU(3). The left
handed ﬁelds are ψ
L
= P
L
ψ and (
¯
ψ
R
C)
T
= P
L
(
¯
ψC)
T
, with C the charge
conjugation matrix (cf. appendix D), while the righthanded ﬁelds are
ψ
R
= P
R
ψ and (
¯
ψ
L
C)
T
= P
R
(
¯
ψC)
T
. The ﬁelds transform as
ψ
L
→Ωψ
L
, (
¯
ψ
R
C)
T
→Ω
∗
(
¯
ψ
R
C)
T
, left; (8.105)
ψ
R
→Ωψ
R
, (
¯
ψ
L
C)
T
→Ω
∗
(
¯
ψ
L
C)
T
, right. (8.106)
Taking ψ
L
and
¯
ψ
R
in pairs, the representation of the gauge group has
the form of a direct sum Ω ⊕ Ω
∗
, which is real up to the equivalence
transformation Ω ⊕Ω
∗
→Ω
∗
⊕Ω.
The fundamental representation of U(1), a phase factor, is evidently
complex, but the fundamental representation of SU(2) is real up to
218 Chiral symmetry
equivalence: Ω
∗
= exp(iω
k
1
2
σ
k
)
∗
= σ
2
Ωσ
2
. It is not diﬃcult to see, e.g.
by looking at the element exp(iω
8
1
2
λ
8
), that the fundamental represen
tation of SU(3) is complex. The adjoint representation of SU(n) is real
for all n.
Chiral gauge theories are models in which the representation of the
gauge group is truly complex (no reality up to equivalence). The Stan
dard Model, which has the gauge group U(1) SU(2) SU(3), is a
chiral gauge theory, as can be seen by looking at the U(1) charges of
the left and righthanded ﬁelds. Since this model is able to describe
all known interactions up till now, it is evidently desirable to give it a
nonperturbative lattice formulation.† This turns out to be very diﬃcult.
To get a glimpse of the problem, consider a U(1) model with contin
uum action
S
F
= −
d
4
x
¯
ψ
L
γ
µ
(∂
µ
−igq
L
A
µ
)ψ
L
+ L →R, (8.107)
assuming for the moment no further quantum numbers (no ‘ﬂavors’).
The ﬁelds transform as
ψ
L
→e
iωq
L
ψ
L
,
¯
ψ
R
→e
−iωq
R ¯
ψ
R
, left; (8.108)
ψ
R
→e
iωq
R
ψ
R
,
¯
ψ
L
→e
−iωq
L ¯
ψ
L
, right, (8.109)
and we see, e.g. from the pair ψ
L
and
¯
ψ
R
, that the model is chiral if the
charges q
R
and q
L
are not equal. Assuming this to be the case, it follows
that
¯
ψψ =
¯
ψ
R
ψ
L
+
¯
ψ
L
ψ
R
is not gauge invariant. Consequently there
can be no mass term for the fermions. We also cannot use P
L
+P
R
= 1
and eliminate γ
5
from the action. So the gaugeﬁeld couples also to an
axialvector current (there is a term
¯
ψiγ
µ
γ
5
ψA
µ
in the action), instead of
only to vector currents as in QED and QCD. These features are generic
for chiral gauge theories: no mass terms and axialvector currents that
are dynamical (rather than being just symmetry currents of global chiral
symmetry). With γ
5
prominent in the vertex functions we may expect
chiral anomalies to play a role. This has been analyzed in perturbation
theory in the continuum, with the conclusion that the above model is
unsatisfactory because gauge invariance is spoilt by anomalies due to
contributions involving triangle diagrams (cf. ﬁgure 8.1). These problems
can be avoided by extending the model to contain more than one ‘ﬂavor’,
with charges q
Lf
and q
Rf
, such that the anomalies cancel out between
the diﬀerent ﬂavors, which requires
¸
f
(q
3
Lf
− q
3
Rf
) = 0. The model
† We consider U(1)neutral righthanded neutrino ﬁelds ψ
R
(and
¯
ψ
R
) as part of the
Standard Model.
8.6 Chiral gauge theory 219
and its representation of the gauge group are then called ‘anomalyfree’.
Such considerations played an important role in the construction of the
Standard Model. It was noticed that the anomalies in the lepton sector
could cancel out against those in the quark sector [148, 151]. This is how
the Standard Model is anomalyfree.
We continue with the choice of integer q
L
= q, q
R
= 0. With just one
ﬂavor the continuum model is then anomalous. Let us see what happens
if we put the above model naively on the lattice.
A Euclidean naive lattice action is easy to write down:
S
F
= −
¸
xµ
1
2
¯
ψ
x
γ
µ
(U
µx
P
L
+P
R
)ψ
x+ˆ µ
−
¯
ψ
x+µ
γ
µ
(U
µx
P
L
+P
R
)ψ
x
,
(8.110)
with a path integral
Z =
D
¯
ψDψ DU e
S
, (8.111)
in which S = S
F
+ S
U
with S
U
the usual plaquette action. The lattice
action and measure are gauge invariant (for the fermion measure this
follows from (8.82) with V
Lx
= exp(iω
x
), V
Rx
= 1). In this model
the righthanded ψ
R
and the lefthanded (
¯
ψ
R
C)
T
are just free ﬁelds,
they are not coupled to the gauge ﬁelds. However, the speciesdoubling
phenomenon induces 16 fermion ﬂavors in the scaling region. What are
the charges of these fermions?
To answer this question consider a fermion line in a diagram with a
gaugeﬁeld line attached to it. The corresponding mathematical expres
sion is
S(p)V
µ
(p, q; k)S(q) , (8.112)
where S(p) is the massless naive fermion propagator and V
µ
(p, q; k) the
bare vertex function for the model (p = q+k). Such vertex functions have
been determined in problem (i) in section 6.6 for the case of QED, and
to get these for the present case we only have to make the substitution
gγ
µ
→gγ
µ
P
L
in (6.99), giving
V
µ
(p, q; k) = igγ
µ
P
L
1
2
e
iaq
µ
+e
iap
µ
. (8.113)
To interpret this expression in the scaling region for fermion species A
we use (6.26) and (6.31) and substitute p →k
A
+p and q →k
A
+q into
220 Chiral symmetry
(8.112) (k
A
= π
A
/a),
S(k
A
+p)V
µ
(k
A
+p, k
A
+q; k)S(k
A
+q) (8.114)
= S
†
A
¸
−iγ
κ
p
κ
p
2
giγ
µ
1
2
(1 −
A
γ
5
)
−iγ
λ
q
λ
q
2
+O(a)
S
A
,
where we used (6.30) and (6.28) for the terms not involving γ
5
and
A
γ
µ
γ
5
= S
A
γ
µ
γ
5
S
†
A
cos(π
Aµ
). (8.115)
Using (6.29) we ﬁnd
A
= +1 for π
A
= π
0
,
A
= −1 for π
A
= π
1
, . . .,
π
4
,
A
= +1 for π
A
= π
12
, . . ., π
34
,
A
= −1 for π
A
= π
123
, . . ., π
234
and
A
= +1 for π
A
= π
1234
, such that
¸
A
A
= 1 −4 + 6 −4 + 1 = 0. (8.116)
From (8.114) we conclude that in the scaling region we have eight contin
uum ﬁelds with q
cont
L
= 1 (
A
= 1), and eight with q
cont
R
= 1 (
A
= −1),
in addition to the uncharged ﬁelds: the lattice has produced ﬂavors (the
species doublers) such that the anomalies cancel out.
5
However, since
all the q
cont
L
and q
cont
R
are equal, the model is not a chiral gauge theory!
It is just QED with eight equalmass Dirac fermions (plus eight neutral
Dirac fermions).
A natural suggestion for a lattice formulation of the Standard Model is
to give the doubler fermions masses of order of the lattice cutoﬀ through
Wilsontype Yukawa couplings with the Higgs ﬁeld [119, 149, 150].
Because the Standard Model is anomalyfree the set of doublers in
such a formulation is anomalyfree too: the set of 15 doublers of some
fermion contributes to anomalies with the same strength as this fermion
(opposite in sign,
¸
16
A=2
A
= −1). Insofar as anomalies are concerned
there is no objection to the decoupling of the doublers. Other objec
tions [151, 152], namely that masses of the order of the cutoﬀ might
not be possible because renormalized couplings cannot be arbitrarily
strong (triviality is expected to play a role here), do not apply if
new phases come into play. This is indeed the case. On turning on
the Wilson–Yukawa couplings one runs into a new phase, called the
paramagnetic strongcoupling (PMS) phase [153]. Unfortunately, in this
phase the doublers bind with the Higgs ﬁeld to give righthanded ﬁelds
transforming in the same representation as the lefthanded ﬁelds, or
viceversa, and the result is a nonchiral (vector) gauge theory in the
scaling region [154, 155]. Other models [156] (see also [157]) which can
be put into this Wilson–Yukawa framework have been argued to fare
8.6 Chiral gauge theory 221
the same fate [158]. Another approach is to keep the doublers as heavy
physical particles in mirror fermion models [159].
How to formulate a lattice chiral gauge model? This problem is diﬃ
cult because of the peculiar symmetry breaking of chiral anomalies. We
want them to be there without interfering with gauge invariance. Nielson
and Ninomiya [160] formulated a nogo theorem that has to be overcome
ﬁrst. They used a Hamiltonian description (continuous time and spatial
lattice), and, loosely speaking, the theorem states that, under cherished
conditions such as translation invariance, locality and Hermiticity, a
freefermion lattice model with a U(1) invariance has always an equal
number of left and righthanded fermions of a given U(1) charge. The
U(1) is supposed to be contained in the gauge group and the implication
is that the model can be extended only into an interacting gauge theory
that is ‘vector’ and not chiral. A simpler Euclidean formulation is given
in [161]. An extension to an eﬀective action formulation is given in [129].
The Euclidean reasoning runs as follows. Suppose that we replace
sink
µ
→ F
µ
(k) in the naive fermion propagator. This corresponds to
the translationinvariant action of the form (ignoring possible neutral
ﬁelds)
S
F
= −
¸
xyµ
¯
ψ
x
γ
µ
P
L
˜
F
µ
(x −y)ψ
y
, iF
µ
(k) =
¸
x
exp(−ikx)
˜
F
µ
(x),
(8.117)
which has a U(1) invariance ψ → exp(iωq) ψ,
¯
ψ → exp(−iωq)
¯
ψ.
Hermiticity is easy to state in the Hamiltonian formulation:
ˆ
H
†
=
ˆ
H.
In the Euclidean formulation we require the spatial part of the action
(µ = 1, 2, 3) to be Hermitian and extend this to µ = 4 by covariance.
Then Hermiticity means that F
µ
(x)
∗
= −F
µ
(−x), so F
µ
(k) is real.
Locality means that
˜
F
µ
(x) approaches zero suﬃciently fast as [x[ →∞.
This implies that its Fourier transform is not singular and we shall
assume F
µ
(k) to be smooth, i.e. it and all its derivatives are continuous.
If F
µ
(k) has isolated zeros of ﬁrst order then the model has a particle
interpretation. Near a zero at k =
¯
k,
F
µ
(k) = Z
µν
(k
ν
−
¯
k
ν
) +O((k −
¯
k)
2
), (8.118)
with coeﬃcients Z
µν
forming a matrix Z with det Z = 0. We write
Z = RP, (8.119)
with R an orthogonal matrix and P a symmetric positive matrix. The
222 Chiral symmetry
matrix R can be absorbed in a unitary transformation,
γ
µ
(1 −γ
5
)R
µν
= Λ
†
γ
ν
(1 −γ
5
)Λ, = det R = ±1. (8.120)
For = 1, Λ is a rotation exp(
1
2
ϕ
µν
[γ
µ
, γ
ν
]), for = −1, Λ is e.g. γ
4
times
a rotation (cf. appendix D). So for k near
¯
k the fermion propagator is
equivalent to the continuum expression
S(k) ≈
−iγ
µ
p
µ
p
2
1 −γ
5
2
, p
µ
≡ P
µν
(k −
¯
k)
ν
, (8.121)
which corresponds to a left ( = +1) or righthanded ( = −1) fermion
ﬁeld.
Now comes input from topology: is the index of the vector ﬁeld
F
µ
(k) of its zero at k =
¯
k, i.e. the degree of the mapping F
µ
/[F[ =
R
µν
p
ν
/[p[ onto S
4
. The Poincar´e–Hopf theorem states that the global
sum of the indices equals the Euler characteristic χ
E
of the manifold on
which the vector ﬁeld is deﬁned:
¸
= χ
E
. In our case this manifold is
the momentumspace torus T
4
, for which χ
E
= 0. Hence, there must be
an even number of zeros and in the continuum limit we have an equal
number of left and righthanded fermion ﬁelds with the same charge.
The naive U(1) model above is a typical illustration of the theorem.
To avoid these theorems we have to avoid some of their assumptions
(including hidden assumptions). Giving up translation invariance (e.g.
using a random lattice), Hermiticity (e.g. S
F
= −
¸
xµ
¯
ψ
x
γ
µ
∂
µ
ψ
x
, which
gives the complex F
µ
(k) = (e
ik
µ
− 1)/i), or locality (e.g. the discon
tinuous F
µ
(k) = 2 sin(k
µ
/2) (mod 2π) has only a zero at the origin
but corresponds to F
µ
(x) falling only like [x[
−1
) tends to lead to other
trouble (for a review, see [162]). The basic reason is that, with an exactly
gaugeinvariant action and fermion measure, there can be no anomaly,
which means that it cancels out in one way or another, generically
without the desired particle interpretation.
One line of approach is to give up gauge invariance at ﬁnite lattice
spacing by working in a ﬁxed gauge and adding counterterms such that
gauge invariance is restored in the continuum limit [163, 164]. How
ever, nonperturbative gauge ﬁxing has its own complications, not least
the existence of Gribov copies, i.e. conﬁgurations diﬀering by a gauge
transformation satisfying the same gauge condition. A gaugeﬁxed U(1)
model appears to have passed basic tests [166]. For a review see [168].
One may try to keep the fermions in the continuum, or on a ﬁner lattice
than the gaugeﬁeld lattice, and invoking restoration of gauge symmetry
by the mechanism of [167]. See [168] for a review. Gaugesymmetry
8.7 Outlook 223
restoration was also invoked in models gauging noninvariant models,
using Wilson fermions or gauging the staggered ﬂavors [162, 169] but it
failed in its simplest realization [170]. Further information can be found
in the reviews presented at the Lattice meetings [171].
New developments that constitute a major advancement can be clas
siﬁed under the heading ‘overlap’ and ‘Ginsparg–Wilson’ fermions. The
orems of the Nielson–Ninomiya type are avoided by having an inﬁnite
number of fermion ﬁeld components (‘overlap’), and changing the deﬁ
nition of γ
5
, such that it is as usual for
¯
ψ but for ψ it involves replacing
γ
5
by
ˆ γ
5
= γ
5
(1 −aD), (8.122)
where D is a Ginsparg–Wilson Dirac operator, together with an elabo
rate deﬁnition of the fermion measure in the path integral (apparently
giving up Hermiticity on the lattice) [172]. The subject is beautiful
and erudite and the reader is best introduced by the reviews [173, 174]
(‘overlap’) and [175] (‘Ginsparg–Wilson’). One may feel uncomfortable,
though, about using formulations with an inﬁnite number of ﬁeld com
ponents; it runs contrary to the basic idea of being able to approach
inﬁnity from the ﬁnite.
8.7 Outlook
There is of course a lot more to lattice ﬁeld theory than has been
presented here. An introduction to ﬁnite temperature can be found in
[9]. Simulation algorithms are introduced in [4, 10]; improved actions
and electroweak matrix elements are discussed in [14, 15]. See also
[16] for advanced material. For an introduction to simplicial gravity
6
see [17]. Nonperturbative lattice formulations of quantum ﬁelds out of
equilibrium are still in their infancy.
7
For the current status of all this,
see the proceedings of the ‘Lattice’ meetings.
8.8 Problems
(i) The pion–nucleon σ model
Consider an eﬀective nucleon ﬁeld N that is a doublet in terms
of Dirac proton (p) and neutron (n) ﬁelds
N(x) =
p(x)
n(x)
. (8.123)
224 Chiral symmetry
The eﬀective action of the pion–nucleon sigma model is given by
S
eﬀ
= −
d
4
x[
¯
Nγ
µ
∂
µ
N+G
¯
N(φP
R
+φ
†
P
L
)N] +S
O(4)
, (8.124)
where S
O(4)
is the scalar ﬁeld action of the O(4) model (equations
(3.1) and (3.4)) and φ is a matrix ﬁeld constructed out of the
scalar ﬁelds,
φ = ϕ
0
11 +i
3
¸
k=1
ϕ
k
τ
k
. (8.125)
The τ
k
are the three Pauli matrices, which act on the p and n
components of N and G is the pion–nucleon coupling constant.
Show that the action is invariant under SU(2) SU(2) trans
formations
N →V N,
¯
N →
¯
N
¯
V , φ →V
L
φV
†
R
, V
L,R
∈ SU(2). (8.126)
Verify that the transformation on the matrix scalar ﬁeld φ is
equivalent to an SO(4) rotation on the ϕ
α
. Hint: check that φ
†
φ =
ϕ
2
11, det φ = ϕ
2
; and hence that φ may be written as φ =
ϕ
2
U,
U ∈ SU(2).
This chiral invariance of the sigmamodel action is a nice
expression of the symmetry properties of the underlying quark–
gluon theory. When the symmetry is spontaneously broken, such
that the groundstate value of the scalar ﬁeld is φ
g
= f11, f = ϕ
0
g
,
the action acquires a mass term Gf
¯
NN: the nucleon gets its mass
from spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry, m
N
= Gf. This
relation is in fair agreement with experiment. On introducing
the weak interactions into the model one ﬁnds that f equals the
pion decay constant, f = f
π
≈ 93 MeV, while G ≈ 13 from
pion–nucleonscattering experiments, so with m
N
= 940 MeV we
have to compare m
N
/f ≈ 10 with 13.
The ﬁeld ϕ
0
is often denoted by σ, and ϕ
k
by π
k
, the sigma and
pion ﬁelds. The pions are stable within the strong interactions but
the σ is a very unstable particle with mass m
σ
in the range 600–
1200 MeV. Given m
π
= 140 MeV and m
σ
= 900 MeV, determine
the other parameters in the action.
Reanalyze the model in ‘polar coordinates’ φ = ρU, U ∈ SU(2)
with ρ a singlecomponent scalar ﬁeld. Note that ρ plays the role
of the matrix ﬁeld H introduced in (8.19). What is its mass?
8.8 Problems 225
In sections 8.1 the eﬀective ﬁeld φ is a general complex 4 4
matrix, which has eight independent real parameters, whereas the
above φ has only the four real ϕ
α
, which cannot incorporate chiral
U(1) transformations. Verify this, and work out a generalization
in which φ has the general form. (Include in the action terms that
break chiral U(1).)
(ii) Free fermion '
¯
ψψ`
Consider free ‘naive’ fermions on the lattice (one ﬂavor). Show
that
Σ ≡ −'
¯
ψψ` = a
−3
π
−π
d
4
k
(2π)
4
4am
a
2
m
2
+
¸
µ
sin
2
k
µ
, (8.127)
and that it has the expansion
Σ = c
1
ma
−2
+m
3
[c
3
ln(am) +c
3
] + , (8.128)
where the vanish as a →0. Hint: use (3.66).
Now consider free Wilson fermions. Show that for this case the
expansion takes the form
Σ = c
0
a
−3
+c
1
ma
−2
+c
2
m
2
a
−1
+m
3
[c
3
ln(am) +c
3
] + ,
(8.129)
where m = M −4r/a. Find expressions for the coeﬃcients c
k
.
(iii) Research project: the index theorem
Go through the following formal arguments.
In the continuum, let D = γ
µ
[∂
µ
−iG
µ
(x)] be the Dirac opera
tor in an external gauge ﬁeld G
µ
in a ﬁnite volume with periodic
(up to gauge transformations) boundary conditions. Consider the
divergence equation for the ﬂavorsinglet axial current
∂
µ
¯
ψiγ
µ
γ
5
ψ = 2m
¯
ψiγ
5
ψ + 2iq, (8.130)
where we assumed that there is only one ﬂavor. Taking the
fermionic average and integrating over (Euclidean) space–time
gives
0 = −2mTr [γ
5
(m+D)
−1
] + 2iν, (8.131)
where the trace is over space–time and Dirac indices and ν = Q
top
is the topological charge.
Verify that iD is a Hermitian operator, (iD)
†
= iD.
226 Chiral symmetry
Let f
s
be the eigenvectors of D with (purely imaginary) eigen
values iλ
s
,
Df
s
= iλ
s
f
s
, Dγ
5
f
s
= −iλ
s
γ
5
f
s
, (8.132)
and assume the eigenvectors to be orthogonal and complete,
f
†
s
f
t
= δ
st
,
¸
s
f
s
f
†
s
= 1. (8.133)
Because f
s
and γ
5
f
s
correspond generically to diﬀerent eigen
values,
f
†
s
γ
5
f
s
= 0, λ
s
= 0. (8.134)
For λ
s
= 0, [D, γ
5
]f
s
= 0, so in this subspace we can look for
simultaneous eigenvectors of D and γ
5
. The eigenvalues of γ
5
are
±1,
γ
5
f
s
= ±f
s
, λ
s
= 0. (8.135)
It follows that
ν = m
¸
s
Tr (γ
5
f
s
f
†
s
)
m+iλ
s
=
¸
s, λ
s
=0
f
†
s
γ
5
f
s
= n
+
−n
−
, (8.136)
with n
±
the number of zero modes with chirality γ
5
= ±1.
Periodicity modulo gauge transformations is needed in order to
allow nonzero topological charge. For the proper mathematical
setting in the continuum, see e.g. [12]. Lattice studies using
Wilson and staggered fermions are in [107, 108, 114, 115, 90],
while [135] gives an introduction to Ginsparg–Wilson fermions.
Choose one of these studies and reproduce (and possibly extend)
its results.
(iv) Research project: the theta parameter of QCD
Consider the QCD action with generalized mass term
d
4
x
¯
ψ
mψ
, m = m
L
P
L
+m
†
L
P
R
, (8.137)
in which m
L
is a fairly arbitrary complex matrix. Assume that it
can be transformed into a diagonal matrix by the transformation
V
†
L
m
L
V
R
= m
diag
= diagonal with entries ≥ 0. (8.138)
Suppose this transformation is the result of a chiral transforma
tion on the fermion ﬁelds (cf. (8.2)),
ψ
= V ψ,
¯
ψ
=
¯
ψ
¯
V . (8.139)
8.8 Problems 227
In continuum treatments the fermion measure is not invariant
under such a transformation, but is produces the chiral anomaly
in the form [132]
D
¯
ψ
Dψ
= D
¯
ψDψ e
iθ
d
4
x q(x)
, θ = arg(det m
L
). (8.140)
So in terms of the unprimed fermion ﬁelds we have an addi
tional term in the (Euclidean) action proportional to the topo
logical charge,
S = −
d
4
x
¸
1
2g
2
Tr (G
µν
G
µν
) +
¯
ψγ
µ
D
µ
ψ +
¯
ψm
diag
ψ −iθq
.
(8.141)
The original mass m may be the result of electroweak symmetry
breaking. Experiments constrain the value of θ, which violates
CP invariance, to be less than 10
−9
in magnitude.
Our problem is to give a rigorous version of the above reasoning
using the lattice regularization. With Wilson’s fermion method
the following steps get us going.
Consider the fermion determinant exp[Tr ln(D/ − W + M)],
where M is arbitrary. In the scaling region M is close to the
critical value M
c
; if not, then there is no continuum physics. So
assume that M = M
c
+m, with M
c
∝ r11 and m arbitrary as in
the above continuum outline. With Wilson’s fermion method the
fermion measure is invariant under chiral transformations and the
anomaly comes from the noninvariant term
¯
ψ(W −M
c
)ψ in the
action. So we have
Tr [ln(D/ −W +M
c
+m)] = Tr ¦ln[D/ +
¯
V (M
c
−W)V +m
diag
]¦.
(8.142)
To evaluate this consider a change δV of V . Then the above
expression changes by
Tr ¦[δ
¯
V (M
c
−W)V +
¯
V (M
c
−W) δV ]
[D/ +
¯
V (M
c
−W)V +m
diag
]
−1
¦. (8.143)
Expanding this expression in terms of the gauge ﬁeld leads to an
inﬁnite number of diagrams with external gaugeﬁeld lines im
pinging upon a closed fermion loop. The crucial point is now that
the factor M
c
−W in the numerator above suppresses the region
of loopmomentum integration where m
diag
has any inﬂuence.
For example in momentum space at lowest order, M
c
− W →
228 Chiral symmetry
ra
−1
¸
µ
[1 −cos(ak
µ
)], and we therefore need a loop momentum
k of order a
−1
m
diag
to give a nonvanishing contribution.
See [70] for an explicit computation of the trianglediagramlike
contributions. So we may as well set m
diag
= 0 in (8.143). Then
(8.143) can be rewritten in the form
Tr [
¯
V
−1
δ
¯
V (M
c
−W)(D/ +M
c
−W)
−1
+ δV V
−1
(D/ +M
c
−W)
−1
(M
c
−W)]
= Tr [(V
L
δV
−1
L
−V
R
δV
−1
R
) γ
5
(M
c
−W)(D/ +M
c
−W)
−1
],
(8.144)
where we used the fact that D/, M
c
and W are all ﬂavor diagonal,
and the cyclic property of the trace. Denoting the trace over
space–time plus Dirac indices (excluding the ﬂavor indices) by
Tr
st
we have the result [70, 133, 134]
Tr
st
[γ
5
(M
c
−W)(D/ +M
c
−W)
−1
] = Q
top
, a →0. (8.145)
Note that this result is independent of the r parameter [70], as
long as it is nonzero. The coeﬃcient of Q
top
is given by
Tr
ﬂavor
(V
L
δV
−1
L
−V
R
δV
−1
R
)=δln[det(V
R
V
−1
L
)] =i δarg(det m
L
).
(8.146)
So one concludes that, in the continuum limit,
exp¦Tr [ln(D/ +M
c
−W +m)]¦
= e
iθQ
top
exp¦Tr [ln(D/ +M
c
−W +m
diag
)]¦, (8.147)
θ = arg(det m
L
), (8.148)
which is equivalent to the continuum result.
By taking the continuum limit we have happily been able to
ignore ﬁnite renormalization factors κ (κ = 1 +O(g
2
) →1, g
2
is
the bare gauge coupling).
The problem with the above reasoning, taken from [149], is how
to improve it such that it applies in a practical scaling region with
g
2
not much less than 1.
Appendix A
SU(n)
A.1 Fundamental representation of SU(n)
In the following appendices we record some properties of the representa
tions of the group SU(n). First we review the construction of a complete
basis set of Hermitian traceless n n matrices, similar to the n = 2, 3
examples. We shall denote these matrices by λ
k
, k = 1, 2, . . ., n
2
− 1.
The symmetric oﬀdiagonal matrices have the form
(λ
k
)
ab
= δ
am
δ
an
+δ
bm
δ
an
k ↔¦m, n¦ (A.1)
and the antisymmetric matrices are given by
(λ
k
)
ab
= i(δ
am
δ
an
−δ
bm
δ
an
), (A.2)
where a, b, m, n = 1, 2, . . ., n, m > n. The nonzero elements of the
diagonal matrices may be taken as
(λ
k
)
aa
=
2
m+m
2
a = 1, . . ., m, (A.3)
= −m
2
m+m
2
a = m+ 1, (A.4)
where m = 1, 2, . . ., n −1. We add the multiple of the unit matrix
λ
0
=
2
n
11, (A.5)
such that the k = 0, 1, . . ., n
2
−1 matrices form a complete set of n n
matrices. They satisfy
λ
k
= λ
†
k
, (A.6)
Tr (λ
k
λ
l
) = 2δ
kl
, (A.7)
229
230 Appendix A. SU(n)
and either λ
k
= λ
T
k
= λ
∗
k
or λ
k
= −λ
T
k
= −λ
∗
k
. An arbitrary matrix X
can be written as a superposition of the λ’s,
X = X
k
λ
k
, (A.8)
X
k
=
1
2
Tr (Xλ
k
). (A.9)
For instance
λ
k
λ
l
= Λ
klm
λ
m
, (A.10)
Λ
klm
=
1
2
Tr (λ
k
λ
l
λ
m
). (A.11)
Let
Λ
klm
= d
klm
+if
klm
, (A.12)
where d
klm
and f
klm
are real. Then
d
klm
=
1
4
Tr (λ
k
λ
l
λ
m
+λ
∗
k
λ
∗
l
λ
∗
m
) =
1
4
Tr (λ
k
λ
l
λ
m
+λ
T
k
λ
T
l
λ
T
m
)
=
1
4
Tr (λ
k
λ
l
λ
m
+λ
m
λ
l
λ
k
) =
1
4
Tr (λ
k
λ
l
λ
m
+λ
l
λ
k
λ
m
)
=
1
4
Tr (¦λ
k
, λ
l
¦ λ
m
), (A.13)
and similarly,
if
klm
=
1
4
Tr ([λ
k
, λ
l
] λ
m
). (A.14)
These representations of the d’s and f’s and the cyclic properties of the
trace imply that d
klm
is totally symmetric under interchange of any of its
labels. Likewise f
klm
is totally antisymmetric. Hence, (A.10) and (A.12)
imply
[λ
k
, λ
l
] = 2if
klm
λ
m
, (A.15)
¦λ
k
, λ
l
¦ = 2d
klm
λ
m
. (A.16)
We note in passing that
λ
0
λ
l
=
2
n
λ
l
→d
0lm
=
2
n
δ
lm
, f
0lm
= 0. (A.17)
A standard choice for the generators t
k
of the group SU(n) in the
fundamental (deﬁning) representation is given by
t
k
=
1
2
λ
k
, k = 1, 2, . . ., n
2
−1. (A.18)
In the exponential parameterization an arbitrary group element can be
written as
U = exp(iα
k
t
k
), (A.19)
A.2 Adjoint representation of SU(n) 231
where the α
k
are n
2
− 1 real parameters. From their occurence in the
commutation relations
[t
k
, t
l
] = if
klm
t
m
, (A.20)
the f
klm
are called the structure constants of the group.
Next we calculate the value C
2
of the quadratic Casimir operator
t
k
t
k
in the deﬁning representation. For this we need a useful formula
that follows from expanding the matrix X
(cd)
ab
≡ 2δ
ad
δ
bc
in terms of
(λ
k
)
ab
. According to (A.8) and (A.9) we have the expansion coeﬃcients
X
(cd)
k
= Tr (X
(cd)
λ
k
)/2 = δ
ad
δ
bc
(λ
k
)
ba
= (λ
k
)
cd
, hence,
(λ
k
)
ab
(λ
k
)
cd
= 2δ
ad
δ
bc
, (A.21)
where the summation is over k = 0, 1, . . ., n
2
− 1 on the lefthand side.
It follows that
(t
k
)
ab
(t
k
)
cd
=
1
4
(λ
k
)
ab
(λ
k
)
cd
−
1
4
(λ
0
)
ab
(λ
0
)
cd
=
1
2
δ
ad
δ
bc
−
1
2n
δ
ab
δ
cd
(A.22)
(note that k = 0 is lacking for the t
k
). Contraction with δ
bc
gives
(t
k
t
k
)
ad
=
1
2
n −
1
n
δ
ad
≡ C
2
δ
ad
, (A.23)
or
C
fund
2
=
1
2
n −
1
n
. (A.24)
For n = 2, C
fund
2
=
3
4
which is just the usual value j(j +1) for the j =
1
2
representation of SU(2).
A.2 Adjoint representation of SU(n)
The adjoint (regular) representation R is the representation carried by
the generators,
U
†
t
k
U = R
kl
t
l
. U ∈ SU(n). (A.25)
Note that Tr (U
†
t
k
U) = Tr t
k
= 0, so that U
†
t
k
U can indeed be written
as a linear superposition of the t
k
. By eq. (A.9) we have the explicit
representation in terms of the group elements
R
kl
= 2 Tr (U
†
t
k
Ut
l
). (A.26)
232 Appendix A. SU(n)
We shall now calculate R in terms of the parameters α
k
of the exponen
tial parameterization of U. Let
U(y) = exp(iyα
p
t
p
), R
kl
(y) = 2 Tr (U
†
(y)t
k
U(y)t
l
). (A.27)
Then
∂
∂y
R
kl
(y) = −iα
p
2 Tr (U
†
(y)[t
p
, t
k
]U(y)t
l
)
= α
p
f
pkn
2 Tr (U
†
(y)t
n
U(y)t
l
)
= iα
p
(F
p
)
kn
R
nl
, (A.28)
where
(F
p
)
mn
= −if
pmn
. (A.29)
In matrix notation (A.28) reads
∂
∂y
R(y) = iα
p
F
p
R(y), (A.30)
which diﬀerential equation is solved by
R(y) = exp(iyα
p
F
p
), (A.31)
using the boundary condition R(0) = 1. Hence,
R = exp(iα
p
F
p
), (A.32)
and we see that the F
p
are the generators in the adjoint representation.
By the antisymmetry of the structure constants we have
F
p
= −F
∗
p
= −F
T
p
, (A.33)
and it follows that the matrices R are real and orthogonal,
R = R
∗
, R
T
= R
−1
. (A.34)
Notice that the derivation of (A.28) uses only the commutation relations
of the generators, so that we have for an arbitrary representation D(U)
D(U)
−1
T
k
D(U) = R
kl
T
l
, (A.35)
where the T
k
are the generators in this representation D.
Next we calculate the value of the Casimir operator in the adjoint
representation, F
p
F
p
, using the results of the previous appendix:
(F
p
F
p
)
km
= if
kpl
if
lpm
= 4 Tr (t
k
t
p
t
l
) if
lpm
= 8 Tr (t
p
t
l
t
k
) Tr ([t
m
, t
l
]t
p
)
= 8(t
p
)
ab
(t
l
t
k
)
ba
[t
m
, t
l
]
dc
(t
p
)
cd
. (A.36)
A.2 Adjoint representation of SU(n) 233
With (A.22) for (t
p
)
ab
(t
p
)
cd
, this gives
(F
p
F
p
)
km
= 4 Tr (t
l
t
k
[t
m
, t
l
]), (A.37)
and using (A.22) again and t
l
t
l
= [(n
2
−1)/2n]11 gives ﬁnally
F
p
F
p
= n11, C
adj
2
= n. (A.38)
The matrix S
k
(α) introduced in (4.41) can be calculated as follows.
We write D(U(α)) = D(α) and consider (4.42),
M(y) = D(yα)D(yα +y)
−1
= 1 −i
k
S
k
(α) +O(
2
) (A.39)
= e
iyα
k
T
k
e
−iy(α
k
+
k
)T
k
. (A.40)
Then
∂
∂y
M(y) = D(yα)[iα
k
T
k
−i(α
k
+
k
)T
k
]D(yα +y)
−1
= −i
k
D(yα)T
k
D(yα)
−1
+O(
2
)
= −i
k
R
−1
kl
(yα)T
l
+O(
2
). (A.41)
This diﬀerential equation can be integrated with the boundary condition
M(0) = 1, using R
−1
(yα) = exp(−iyα), α ≡ α
p
F
p
,
M(y) = 1 −i
k
1 −e
−iyα
iα
kl
T
l
+O(
2
). (A.42)
Setting y = 1 we ﬁnd S
k
(α) = S
kl
(α)T
l
with
S
kl
(α) =
1 −e
−iα
iα
kl
, α = α
p
F
p
. (A.43)
We end this appendix with an expression for Tr T
k
T
l
in an arbitrary
representation D. The matrix
I
kl
= Tr (T
k
T
l
) (A.44)
is invariant under transformations in the adjoint representation,
R
kk
R
ll
I
k
l
= Tr (D
−1
T
k
DD
−1
T
l
D) = I
kl
. (A.45)
By Schur’s lemma, I
kl
must be a multiple of the identity matrix,
I
kl
= ρ δ
kl
. (A.46)
Putting k = l and summing over k gives the relation
(n
2
−1)ρ(D) = C
2
(D) dimension(D). (A.47)
234 Appendix A. SU(n)
For the fundamental and adjoint representations we have
ρ
fund
=
1
2
, (A.48)
ρ
adj
= n. (A.49)
A.3 Left and right translations in SU(n)
Let Ω and U be elements of SU(n). We deﬁne left and right transfor
mations by
U
(L) = ΩU, U
(R) = UΩ, (A.50)
respectively, which may be interpreted as translations in group space,
U → U
. In a parameterization U = U(α), Ω = Ω(ϕ), this implies
transformations of the α’s,
α
k
(L) = f
k
(α, ϕ, L), (A.51)
and similarly for R. We shall ﬁrst concentrate on the L case. For Ω near
the identity we can write,
Ω = 1 +iϕ
m
t
m
+ , (A.52)
α
k
(L) = α
k
+ϕ
m
S
k
m
(α, L) + , (A.53)
S
k
m
(α, L) =
∂
∂ϕ
m
f
k
(α, ϕ, L)
ϕ=0
. (A.54)
The S
k
m
(α, L) (which are analogous to the tetrad or ‘Vierbein’ in
General Relativity) can found in terms of the S
km
(α) as follows,
U
(L) = (1 +iϕ
m
t
m
+ )U, (A.55)
t
m
U = −i
∂
∂ϕ
m
U
ϕ=0
= −i
∂U
∂α
k
∂α
k
∂ϕ
m
ϕ=0
= −i
∂U
∂α
k
S
k
m
(α, L). (A.56)
Diﬀerentiating UU
†
= 1 gives
∂U
∂α
k
= −U
∂U
†
∂α
k
U, (A.57)
and using this in (A.56) we get
t
m
U = iU
∂U
†
∂α
k
U S
k
m
(α, L), = S
k
(α, L)U S
k
m
(α, L), (A.58)
where
S
k
(α, L) ≡ iU
∂U
†
∂α
k
(A.59)
A.3 Left and right translations in SU(n) 235
is the S
k
introduced earlier in (4.41). The factor U can be canceled out
from the above equation,
t
m
= S
k
(α, L) S
k
m
(α, L). (A.60)
We have already shown in (4.43) that S
k
is a linear superposition of the
generators, S
k
(α, L) = S
kn
(α, L)t
n
, so we get
t
m
= t
n
S
kn
(α, L)S
k
m
(α, L) (A.61)
or
δ
mn
= S
kn
(α, L)S
k
m
(α, L). (A.62)
Thus S
k
m
(α, L) is the inverse (in the sense of matrices) of S
km
(α, L).
Introducing the diﬀerential operators
X
m
(L) = S
k
m
(α, L)
∂
i ∂α
k
(A.63)
we can rewrite (A.56) in the form
X
m
(L)U = t
m
U. (A.64)
It follows from this equation that the X
m
(L) have the commutation
relations
[X
m
(L), X
n
(L)] = −if
mnp
X
p
(L). (A.65)
These diﬀerential operators may be called the generators of left transla
tions.
For the right translations we get in similar fashion
Ut
m
= −i
∂U
∂α
k
S
k
m
(α, R) = US
k
(α, R)S
k
m
(α, R), (A.66)
S
k
(α, R) ≡ −iU
†
∂U
∂α
k
= U
†
S
k
(α, L)U = S
kn
(α, L) U
†
t
n
U
= S
kp
(α, L)R
pn
t
n
, (A.67)
S
k
(α, R) = S
kn
(α, R)t
n
, (A.68)
S
kn
(α, R) = S
kp
(α, L)R
pn
, (A.69)
δ
mn
= S
kn
(α, R) S
k
m
(α, R), (A.70)
X
m
(R) = S
k
m
(α, R)
∂
i ∂α
k
, (A.71)
X
m
(R)U = Ut
m
, (A.72)
[X
m
(R), X
n
(R)] = +if
mnp
X
p
(R) (A.73)
236 Appendix A. SU(n)
The left and right generators commute,
[X
m
(L), X
n
(R)] = 0, (A.74)
which follows directly from (A.64) and (A.72), and their quadratic
Casimir operators are equal,
X
2
(L) = X
m
(L)X
m
(L), X
2
(R) = X
m
(R)X
m
(R), (A.75)
X
2
(R)U = Ut
m
t
m
= C
2
U = t
m
t
m
U = X
2
(L)U. (A.76)
The diﬀerential operator X
2
= X
2
(L) = X
2
(R) is invariant under
coordinate transformations on group space and is also known as a
Laplace–Beltrami operator.
Finally, the metric introduced in (4.91) can be expressed in terms of
the analogs of the tetrads,
g
kl
(α) = S
kp
(α, L)S
lp
(α, L) = S
kp
(α, R)S
lp
(α, R), (A.77)
S
kp
(α, L) = g
kl
(α)S
l
p
(α, L), S
kp
(α, R) = g
kl
(α)S
l
p
(α, R). (A.78)
For a parameterization that is regular near U = 1 (such as exp(iα
k
t
k
)),
U = 1 +iα
k
t
k
+O(α
2
), (A.79)
it is straightforward to derive that
S
k
p
(α, L) = δ
kp
−
1
2
f
kpl
α
l
+O(α
2
), (A.80)
S
k
p
(α, R) = δ
kp
+
1
2
f
kpl
α
l
+O(α
2
), (A.81)
g
kl
(α) = δ
kl
+O(α
2
). (A.82)
A.4 Tensor method for SU(n)
It is sometimes useful to view the matrices U representing the fundamen
tal representation of SU(n) as tensors. Products of U’s then transform as
tensor products and integrals over the group reduce to invariant tensors.
It will be useful to write the matrix elements with upper and lower
indices, U
ab
→U
a
b
. We start with the simple integral
dU U
a
b
U
†p
q
= I
ap
bq
. (A.83)
By making the transformation of variables U →V UW
†
, it follows that
the righthand side above is an invariant tensor in the following sense:
I
ap
bq
= V
a
a
W
p
p
V
†q
q
W
†b
b
I
a
p
b
q
. (A.84)
A.4 Tensor method for SU(n) 237
Here V and W are arbitrary elements of SU(n) and similarly for their
matrix elements in the fundamental representation and their complex
conjugates V
†
and W
†
. We are using a notation in which matrix indices
of U are taken from the set a, b, c, d, . . ., while those of U
†
are taken
from p, q, r, s, . . .. Upper indices in the ﬁrst set transform with V , upper
indices in the second set transform with W; lower indices in the ﬁrst set
transform with W
†
, lower indices in the second set transform with V
†
,
as in
U
a
b
→V
a
a
W
†b
b
U
a
b
, U
†p
q
→W
p
p
V
†q
q
U
†p
q
. (A.85)
This notation suﬃces for nottoocomplicated expressions.
Returning to the above group integral, there is only one such invariant
tensor: I
ap
bq
= cδ
a
q
δ
p
b
, which is a simple product of Kronecker deltas. The
constant c can be found by contracting the left and righthand sides
with δ
p
b
, with the result
dU U
a
b
U
†p
q
=
1
n
δ
a
q
δ
p
b
. (A.86)
Invariant tensors have to be linear combinations of products of Kro
necker tensors and the LeviCivita tensors
a
1
···a
n
= + 1, even permutation of 1, . . ., n
= −1, odd permutation of 1, . . ., n, (A.87)
and similarly for
a
1
···a
n
, etc. They are invariant because
V
a
1
a
1
V
a
1
a
1
a
1
···a
n
= det V
a
1
···a
n
. (A.88)
These tensors appear in
dU U
a
1
b
1
U
a
n
b
n
=
1
n!
a
1
···a
n
b
1
···b
n
(A.89)
=
1
n!
¸
permπ
(−1)
π
δ
a
1
b
π1
δ
a
n
b
πn
. (A.90)
The coeﬃcient can be checked by contraction with
a
1
···a
n
.
In writing down possible invariant tensors for group integrals we have
to keep in mind that, according to (A.85), there can be only Kronecker
deltas with one upper and one lower index, and furthermore one index
should correspond to a U and the other index to a U
†
, i.e. they should
be of the type δ
a
p
or δ
p
a
. It is now straightforward to derive identities for
238 Appendix A. SU(n)
integrals of the next level of complication:
dU U
a
b
U
c
d
U
e
f
= 0, n > 3, (A.91)
dU U
a
b
U
c
d
U
†p
q
U
†r
s
=
1
n
2
−1
δ
a
q
δ
c
s
δ
p
b
δ
r
d
+δ
a
s
δ
c
q
δ
r
b
δ
p
d
−
1
n(n
2
−1)
δ
a
s
δ
c
q
δ
p
b
δ
r
d
+δ
a
q
δ
c
s
δ
r
b
δ
p
d
, n > 2.
(A.92)
Note the symmetry under (a, b) ↔ (c, d) and (p, q) ↔ (r, s) in (A.92).
The coeﬃcients follow, e.g. by contraction with δ
p
d
. By contracting (A.92)
with the generators (t
k
)
s
c
(t
l
)
d
r
we get an identity needed in the main text:
dU U
a
b
U
†p
q
R
kl
(U) =
2
n
2
−1
(t
k
)
a
q
(t
l
)
p
b
, n > 2. (A.93)
where R
kl
(U) is the adjoint representation of U (cf. (A.26)).
Appendix B
Quantization in the temporal gauge
Gaugeﬁeld quantization in the temporal gauge in the continuum is often
lacking in text books. Here follows a brief outline. Consider the action
of SU(n) gauge theory,
S = −
d
4
x
1
4g
2
G
p
µν
G
µνp
. (B.1)
The stationary action principle leads to the equations of motion
D
µ
G
µνp
= ∂
µ
G
µνp
+f
pqr
G
q
µ
G
µνr
= 0. (B.2)
where D
µ
is the covariant derivative in the adjoint representation. Note
that we are using a Minkowskispace metric with signature (−1, 1, 1, 1),
e.g. G
0np
= −G
np
0
= −G
p
0n
. The Lagrangian is given by
L(G,
˙
G) =
d
3
x
1
2g
2
G
p
0n
G
p
0n
−
1
4g
2
G
p
mn
G
p
mn
, (B.3)
where
G
p
0n
=
˙
G
p
n
−∂
n
G
p
0
+f
pqr
G
q
0
G
r
n
, (B.4)
and the canonical momenta are given by
Π
p
0
≡
δL
δ
˙
G
p
0
= 0, (B.5)
Π
p
n
≡
δL
δ
˙
G
p
n
=
1
g
2
G
p
0n
. (B.6)
The fact that L is independent of
˙
G
p
0
and consequently the canonical
momentum of G
p
0
vanishes is incompatible with the presumed canonical
Poisson brackets (G
p
0
, Π
q
0
)
?
= δ
pq
δ(x − y), unless we eliminate G
p
0
as
239
240 Appendix B. Quantization in the temporal gauge
variable by a choice of gauge. This is the ‘temporal gauge’
G
p
0
= 0. (B.7)
The Hamiltonian in the temporal gauge is given by
H(G, Π) =
d
3
xΠ
p
m
˙
G
p
m
−L
=
d
3
x
g
2
2
Π
p
m
Π
p
m
+
1
4g
2
G
p
mn
G
p
mn
. (B.8)
However, one does not want to lose the time component (ν = 0) of the
equations of motion (B.2). In canonical variables this equation reads
T
p
≡ ∂
m
Π
p
m
+f
pqr
G
q
m
Π
r
m
= 0, (B.9)
and we see that it does not contain a time derivative. It is a constraint
equation for every space–time point. Imposing it at one time, the ques
tion of whether it is compatible with Hamilton’s equations arises.
Let us address this question directly in the quantized case, assuming
the canonical commutation relations
[
ˆ
G
p
m
(x),
ˆ
Π
q
n
(y)] = δ
pq
δ(x −y), [
ˆ
G
p
m
(x),
ˆ
G
q
n
(y)] = 0 = [
ˆ
Π
p
m
(x),
ˆ
Π
q
n
(y)].
(B.10)
Now it is straightforward to check that the
ˆ
T
p
deﬁned in (B.9) generate
timeindependent gauge transformations, e.g.
ˆ
Ω
†
ˆ
G
p
m
ˆ
Ω = inﬁnitesimally
gaugetransformed
ˆ
G
p
m
, where
ˆ
Ω = 1+i
d
3
xω
p
(x)
ˆ
T
p
(x) +O(ω
2
). The
Hamiltonian is gauge invariant,
[
ˆ
T
p
,
ˆ
H] = 0, (B.11)
and the constraints are compatible with the Heisenberg equations of
motion. A formal Hilbertspace realization of the canonical commutation
relations (B.10) is given by the coordinate representation
'G[
ˆ
G
p
m
(x)[Ψ` = G
p
m
(x)'G[Ψ`, (B.12)
'G[
ˆ
Π
p
m
(x)[Ψ` =
δ
iδG
p
m
(x)
'G[Ψ`, (B.13)
with wave functionals Ψ(G) = 'G[Ψ`. Unlike quantization in other
gauges, there are no negative norm states here, but physical states have
to be gauge invariant,
ˆ
T
p
(x) [Ψ`
phys
= 0. (B.14)
Appendix B. Quantization in the temporal gauge 241
Such states can be formally written as a superposition of Wilson loops
and this is useful for analytic calculations at strong coupling (on the
lattice, of course, to make it well deﬁned), but not at weak coupling.
Finally, the analogy with QED may be stressed in the notation by
writing
E
p
k
=
1
g
G
0kp
= −gΠ
p
m
, B
p
k
=
1
2g
klm
G
p
lm
, (B.15)
in terms of which
H =
d
3
x
1
2
E
2
+
1
2
B
2
. (B.16)
In case other ﬁelds are present, there are additional contributions to T
p
that act as generators for these ﬁelds, e.g. for QCD, ρ
p
= ψ
+
λ
p
ψ/2, and
(B.9) becomes the nonAbelian version of Gauss’s law:
D
k
E
p
k
= gρ
p
. (B.17)
Appendix C
Fermionic coherent states
In this appendix we derive the ﬁeld representation for fermion opera
tors. In the Bose case the ﬁeld representation was just the coordinate
representation which is also much used in quantum mechanics. For
Fermi operators the analog leads to the socalled Grassmann variables.
This means that the Fermi operator ﬁelds
ˆ
ψ(x) will be represented by
‘numbers’ ψ(x), which have to be anticommuting. As this might not be
so familiar, we shall ﬁrst describe how this works.
Consider the quantum Fermi operators satisfying the commutation
relations
¦ˆ a
k
, ˆ a
l
¦ = 0, ¦ˆ a
†
k
, ˆ a
†
l
¦ = 0, ¦ˆ a
k
, ˆ a
†
l
¦ = δ
kl
, (C.1)
where ¦A, B¦ = AB + BA. In the following we shall consider a ﬁnite
number n of such operators, k = 1, 2, . . ., n. (In the continuum limit of a
fermionic lattice ﬁeld theory n →∞.) It is sometimes convenient to use
the 2n equivalent Hermitian operators
ˆ a
1
k
= (ˆ a
k
+ ˆ a
†
k
)/
√
2, ˆ a
2
k
= (ˆ a
k
− ˆ a
†
k
)/i
√
2, (C.2)
with the commutation relations
¦ˆ a
p
k
, ˆ a
q
l
¦ = δ
pq
δ
kl
, p, q = 1, 2. (C.3)
The nonHermitian operators are used more often.
It is clarifying to look at a representation in Hilbert space. For n = 1
we have the ‘noquantum state’ [0` which is by deﬁnition the eigenstate
of ˆ a with eigenvalue 0, ˆ a[0` = 0, and the onequantum state [1` obtained
from [0` by the application of ˆ a
†
, [1` = ˆ a
†
[0`. Further application of ˆ a
†
on [0` gives zero, since (ˆ a
†
)
2
= 0 because of (C.1) (note that [1` is the
‘noquantum state’ for ˆ a
†
). So a pair of Fermi operators (ˆ a, ˆ a
†
) can be
242
Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states 243
represented in a simple twodimensional Hilbert space,
[0` →
0
1
, [1` →
1
0
, ˆ a →
0 0
1 0
, ˆ a
†
→
0 1
0 0
. (C.4)
For n > 1 we can take a tensor product of these representations. A basis
in Hilbert space is provided by
[k
1
k
p
` = ˆ a
†
k
1
ˆ a
†
k
p
[0`, p = 1, . . ., n, (C.5)
with the properties
n
¸
p=0
1
p!
¸
k
1
···k
p
[k
1
k
p
`'k
1
k
p
[ = 1, (C.6)
'k
1
k
p
[l
1
l
q
` = δ
pq
δ
k
1
···k
p
l
1
···l
q
, (C.7)
where
δ
k
1
···k
p
l
1
···l
q
=
¸
permπ
(−1)
π
δ
k
1
πl
1
δ
k
p
πl
p
. (C.8)
An arbitrary state [ψ` can be written as†
[ψ` = ψ(ˆ a
†
)[0`, (C.9)
ψ(ˆ a
†
) =
n
¸
p=0
1
p!
ψ
k
1
···k
p
ˆ a
†
k
1
ˆ a
†
k
p
, (C.10)
where ψ
k
1
···k
p
is totally antisymmetric in k
1
k
p
, and we sum over
repeated indices unless indicated otherwise. An arbitrary operator
ˆ
A
can be written as
ˆ
A =
¸
pq
1
p!q!
A
k
1
···k
p
, l
1
···l
q
ˆ a
†
k
1
ˆ a
†
k
p
ˆ a
l
q
ˆ a
l
1
, (C.11)
where all creation operators are ordered to the left of all annihilation
operators. This is called the normal ordered form of
ˆ
A. A familiar
example is the number operator
ˆ
N = ˆ a
†
k
ˆ a
k
, (C.12)
which has eigenvectors [k
1
k
p
` with eigenvalue p. Note that
A
k
1
···k
p
, l
1
···l
q
is in general not equal to 'k
1
k
p
[
ˆ
A[l
1
l
q
`. Note also
that the coeﬃcients A
k
1
···k
p
, l
1
···l
q
may themselves be elements of a
† Recall that repeated indices are summed, i.e. ψ
k
1
···k
p
ˆ a
†
k
1
· · · ˆ a
†
k
p
=
¸
n
k
1
=1
· · ·
¸
n
k
p
=1
ψ
k
1
···k
p
ˆ a
†
k
1
· · · ˆ a
†
k
p
.
244 Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states
Grassmann algebra, e.g.
ˆ
A = c
+
k
ˆ a
k
+ ˆ a
†
k
c
k
, with anticommuting c and
c
+
.
Suppose now that there are eigenstates [a` of the ˆ a
k
with eigenvalue
a
k
. Then it follows that the a
k
have to be anticommuting:
a
k
a
l
= −a
l
a
k
. (C.13)
To see this, assume
ˆ a
k
a
l
= a
l
ˆ a
k
, (C.14)
with some number = 0. Then
ˆ a
k
ˆ a
l
[a` = ˆ a
k
a
l
[a` = a
l
ˆ a
k
[a` = a
l
a
k
[a`
= −ˆ a
l
ˆ a
k
[a` = −a
k
a
l
[a`. (C.15)
Hence (C.13) has to hold. The a
k
cannot be ordinary numbers. Assuming
a
k
[a` = +[a`a
k
leads to
ˆ a
k
a
l
[a` = ˆ a
k
[a`a
l
= a
k
[a`a
l
= a
k
a
l
[a`
= a
l
ˆ a
k
[a` = a
l
a
k
[a`, (C.16)
and it follows that
= −1. (C.17)
So the ‘numbers’ a
k
have to anticommute with the fermionic operators
as well.
We also introduce independent conjugate anticommuting a
+
k
, assume
these to anticommute with the a
k
and the Fermi operators, and impose
the usual rules of Hermitian conjugation,
ˆ a
k
†
→ˆ a
†
k
, a
k
†
→a
+
k
, [a`
†
→'a[, 'a[ˆ a
†
k
= 'a[a
+
k
, (C.18)
a
k
a
l
†
→a
+
l
a
+
k
, ¦a
+
k
, a
+
l
¦ = 0. (C.19)
The anticommuting a
+
k
are on the same footing as the a
k
.
The a
k
and a
+
k
together with the unit element 1 generate a Grassmann
algebra. An arbitrary element f of this algebra has the form
f(a
+
, a) = f
0,0
+f
k,0
a
+
k
+f
0,l
a
l
+
1
2!
f
k
1
k
2
,0
a
+
k
1
a
+
k
2
+f
k,l
a
+
k
a
l
+ +f
1···n,1···n
a
+
1
a
+
n
a
n
a
1
,
(C.20)
where the f’s are complex numbers.
Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states 245
We have extended Hilbert space into a vector space over the elements
of a Grassmann algebra. The a
k
and a
+
k
are called Grassmann variables
and f(a
+
, a) is called a function of the Grassmann variables. This
nomenclature could be somewhat misleading – the generators a
k
and a
+
k
are ﬁxed objects and it is only the indices ‘k’ and ‘+’ that vary. However,
we will also be using other generators b
k
, b
+
k
, c
k
, . . ., and so eﬀectively
we draw elements from a Grassmann algebra with an inﬁnite number of
generators. It is straightforward to construct a matrix representation of
these generators, but this does not seem to be useful because the rules
above are suﬃcient for our derivations.
We now express the [a` in terms of the basis vectors (C.5). The state
[a` is given by
[a` = e
−a
k
ˆ a
†
k
[0`. (C.21)
Indeed, since (a
k
)
2
=0,
e
−a
k
ˆ a
†
k
=
¸
k
e
−a
k
ˆ a
†
k
=
¸
k
(1 −a
k
ˆ a
†
k
), (C.22)
and using ˆ a
k
(1 − a
k
ˆ a
†
k
)[0` = a
k
ˆ a
k
ˆ a
†
k
[0` = a
k
[0` (no summation over k)
gives
ˆ a
k
[a` =
¸
l=k
(1 −a
l
ˆ a
†
l
)
¸
¸
ˆ a
k
(1 −a
k
ˆ a
†
k
)[0` =
¸
l=k
(1 −a
l
ˆ a
†
l
)
¸
¸
a
k
[0`
= a
k
[a`. (C.23)
Note that a
k
commutes with pairs of fermion objects, e.g. [a
k
, a
l
ˆ a
†
m
] = 0.
Two states [a` and [b` have the inner product
'a[b` = '0[(1 − ˆ a
1
a
+
1
) (1 − ˆ a
n
a
+
n
)(1 −b
n
ˆ a
†
n
) (1 −b
1
ˆ a
†
1
)[0`
=
¸
k
(1 +a
+
k
b
k
)
= e
a
+
b
, (C.24)
where
a
+
b ≡ a
+
k
b
k
. (C.25)
We would like a completeness relation of the form
ˆ
1 =
da
+
da
[a`'a[
'a[a`
. (C.26)
246 Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states
For n = 1 this relation reads
ˆ
1 = [0`'0[ + ˆ a
†
[0`'0[ˆ a
=
da
+
da (1 −a
+
a)(1 −aˆ a
†
)[0`'0[(1 − ˆ aa
+
)
=
da
+
da [ (1 −a
+
a)[0`'0[ −aˆ a
†
[0`'0[
+a
+
[0`'0[ˆ a +aa
+
ˆ a
†
[0`'0[ˆ a ], (C.27)
which is satisﬁed if we deﬁne the Berezin ‘integral’:
da = 0,
da
+
= 0,
da a = 1,
da
+
a
+
= 1, (C.28)
where da and da
+
are taken anticommuting. For general n we deﬁne
da = da
1
da
n
, da
+
= da
+
n
da
+
1
, (C.29)
da
k
= 0,
da
k
a
k
= 1,
da
+
k
= 0,
da
+
k
a
+
k
= 1 (C.30)
(no summation over k; anticommuting da’s and da
+
’s). The integral
sign symbolizes Grassmannian integration, which has some similarities
to ordinary integration (and diﬀerentiation, see (C.42)). Cumbersome
checking of minus signs can be avoided by combining every da
k
with
da
+
k
into commuting pairs, as in the notation
da
+
da ≡
n
¸
k=1
da
+
k
da
k
, (C.31)
which we shall use in the following. Similar pairing will be done repeat
edly in the following.
We check the completeness relation (C.26) for general n by verifying
that it gives the right answer for an arbitrary inner product 'ψ[φ`.
Multiplying (C.9) by (C.26), we get
[ψ` =
da
+
da e
−a
+
a
ψ(a
+
)[a`, (C.32)
ψ(a
+
) = 'a[ψ` =
¸
p
1
p!
ψ
k
1
···k
p
a
+
k
1
a
+
k
p
. (C.33)
Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states 247
The inner product takes the form
'ψ[φ` =
da
+
da e
−a
+
a
ψ(a
+
)
†
φ(a
+
)
=
¸
pq
1
p!q!
ψ
∗
k
1
···k
p
φ
l
1
···l
q
da
+
da e
−a
+
a
a
k
p
a
k
1
a
+
l
1
a
+
l
q
. (C.34)
By (C.28) the integral is nonzero only if p = q and (k
1
, . . ., k
p
) =
(l
1
, . . ., l
p
) up to a permutation,
da
+
da e
−a
+
a
a
k
p
a
k
1
a
+
k
1
a
+
k
p
=
¸
l=k
1
,···,k
p
da
+
l
da
l
e
−a
+
l
a
l
¸
m=k
1
,···,k
p
da
+
m
da
m
a
m
a
+
m
= 1, (C.35)
and
da
+
da e
−a
+
a
a
k
p
a
l
1
a
+
k
1
a
+
l
q
= δ
pq
δ
k
1
···k
p
l
1
···l
q
. (C.36)
Hence, (C.34) gives
'ψ[φ` =
¸
p
1
p!
ψ
∗
k
1
···k
p
φ
k
1
···k
p
, (C.37)
which is the right answer. Therefore (C.26) is correct for general n.
The connection between Grassmannian integration and diﬀerentiation
can be seen as follows. Left and right diﬀerentiation can be deﬁned by
looking at terms linear in a translation over fermion b
k
,
f(a +b) = f(a) +b
k
f
L
k
(a) +
1
2
b
k
b
l
f
L
kl
(a) + (C.38)
= f(a) +f
R
k
(a)b
k
+
1
2
f
R
kl
(a)b
k
b
l
+ , (C.39)
which suggest
∂
∂a
k
f(a) := f
L
k
(a), (C.40)
f(a)
←
∂
∂a
k
:= f
R
k
(a) (C.41)
248 Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states
(the extension to functions of both a and a
+
is obvious). It follows that
‘integration’ is left diﬀerentiation:
da
k
f(a) =
∂
∂a
k
f(a). (C.42)
We shall now derive some further important properties of Grassman
nian integration. Let f(a
+
, a) be an arbitrary element of the Grassmann
algebra of the form by (C.20). Then
da
+
da f(a
+
, a) = f
1···n,1···n
. (C.43)
It follows that the integration is translation invariant,
da
+
da f(a
+
+b
+
, a +b) =
da
+
da f(a
+
, a). (C.44)
Furthermore, for an arbitrary matrix M,
da
+
da e
−a
+
Ma
=
da
+
da
(−1)
n
n!
(a
+
Ma)
n
=
da
+
da
1
n!
M
k
1
l
1
M
k
n
l
n
a
l
1
a
+
k
1
a
l
n
a
+
k
n
=
1
n!
M
k
1
l
1
M
k
n
l
n
δ
k
1
···k
n
l
1
···l
n
. (C.45)
Using the identity
k
1
···k
n
l
1
···l
n
= δ
k
1
···k
n
l
1
···l
n
, (C.46)
where
k
1
···k
n
is the ndimensional tensor (with
1···n
= +1) we obtain
the formula
da
+
da e
−a
+
Ma
= det M, (C.47)
since
det M = M
1l
1
M
nl
n
l
1
···l
n
. (C.48)
The more general formula
da
+
da e
−a
+
Ma+a
+
b+b
+
a
= det M e
b
+
M
−1
b
. (C.49)
follows from the translation invariance (C.44) by making the translation
a+ → a
+
+ b
+
M
−1
, a → a + M
−1
a. Note that (C.49) remains well
deﬁned if det M →0.
Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states 249
We can interpret (C.44) as a translation invariance of the fermionic
‘measure’,
da
+
= d(a
+
+b
+
), da = d(a +b). (C.50)
A linear multiplicative transformation of variables
a
k
→T
kl
a
l
, a
+
k
→a
+
l
S
lk
, (C.51)
has the eﬀect
d(a
+
S) = (det S)
−1
da
+
, d(Ta) = (det T)
−1
da, (C.52)
i.e.
da
+
da f(a
+
S, Ta) = det(ST)
da
+
da f(a
+
, a). (C.53)
This follows easily from (C.43) and (C.48). According to (C.52), the
fermionic measure transforms inversely to the bosonic measure dx:
d(Tx) = det T dx.
We note in passing the formula
da e
−
1
2
a
T
Ma
= ±
√
det M, (C.54)
where T denotes transposition and M is an antisymmetric matrix (in
this case only the antisymmetric part of M contributes anyway). This
formula follows from (C.47), by making the transformation of variables
a
k
a
+
k
=
1
√
2
1 −1
1 1
b
k
c
k
, (C.55)
which leads to
det M = (−1)
n/2
db e
−
1
2
a
T
Ma
dc e
1
2
b
T
Mb
, (C.56)
where we assumed n to be even (otherwise det M = 0). As is obvious
from the lefthand side of (C.54), the square root of the determinant
of an antisymmetric matrix is multilinear in its matrix elements. It is
called a Pfaﬃan.
States [ψ` are represented by Grassmann wavefunctions ψ(a
+
) de
pending only on the a
+
k
(cf. (C.33)). The representatives of operators
ˆ
A
depend in general also on the a
k
:
'a[
ˆ
A[a` =: A(a
+
, a). (C.57)
250 Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states
In the normal ordered form (C.11), A(a
+
, a) is obtained from
ˆ
A by
replacing everywhere the operators by their Grassmann representative,
keeping the same order, and multiplying by e
a
+
a
:
A(a
+
, a) = e
a
+
a
¸
pq
1
p!q!
A
k
1
···k
p
, l
1
···l
q
a
+
k
1
a
+
k
p
a
l
q
a
l
1
. (C.58)
(The e
a
+
a
just comes from the normalization factor 'a[a`.)
It is now straightforward to derive the following rules:
Aψ(a
+
) := 'a[
ˆ
A[ψ`
=
db
+
db e
−b
+
b
A(a
+
, b)ψ(b
+
), (C.59)
AB(a
+
, a) := 'a[
ˆ
A
ˆ
B[a`
=
db
+
db e
−b
+
b
A(a
+
, b)B(b
+
, a), (C.60)
ˆ
A = A(ˆ a
†
, ˆ a),
ˆ
B = B(ˆ a
†
),
ˆ
C = C(ˆ a)
⇒BAC(a
+
, a) = B(a
+
)A(a
+
, a)C(a). (C.61)
A useful identity is
ˆ
A = exp
ˆ a
†
k
M
kl
ˆ a
l
⇒A(a
+
, a) = exp
a
+
k
(e
M
)
kl
a
l
, (C.62)
This identity can be derived with wellknown diﬀerentiation/integration
tricks. Let F(t) be given by
F(t) = 'a[e
tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
[a`. (C.63)
To compute F(1) = A(a
+
, a) we diﬀerentiate with respect to t and
subsequently integrate, with the initial condition F(0) = exp(a
+
a).
Diﬀerentiation gives
F
(t) = 'a[ˆ a
†
Mˆ a e
tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
[a` = a
+
k
M
kl
'a[ˆ a
l
e
tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
[a`. (C.64)
The ˆ a
l
needs to be pulled trough the exponential so that we can use
ˆ a
l
[0` = a
l
[0`. For this we use a similar diﬀerentiation trick:
ˆ
G
l
(t) ≡ e
−tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
ˆ a
l
e
tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
,
ˆ
G
l
(t) = e
−tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
[ˆ a
l
, ˆ a
†
Mˆ a] e
tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
= M
lm
ˆ
G
m
(t),
ˆ
G(0) = ˆ a
l
,
ˆ
G
l
(t) = (e
tM
)
lm
ˆ a
m
,
ˆ a
l
e
tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
= e
tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
(e
tM
)
lm
ˆ a
m
. (C.65)
The diﬀerential equation for F(t) now reads
F
(t) = a
+
k
M
kl
'a[e
tˆ a
†
Mˆ a
[a`(e
tM
)
lm
a
m
= (a
+
e
tM
a)
F(t), (C.66)
Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states 251
with the solution
F(t) = exp(a
+
e
tM
a), A(a
+
, a) = F(1) = exp(a
+
e
M
a). (C.67)
Next we derive an important formula for the trace of a fermionic
operator. It is usually suﬃcient to consider only even operators, i.e.
operators containing only terms with an even number of fermionic
operators or fermionic variables. Such
ˆ
A and also their representative
A(a
+
, a) commute with arbitrary anticommuting numbers, for example
A(a
+
, b)c
k
= +c
k
A(a
+
, b). The formula reads
Tr
ˆ
A =
da
+
da e
−a
+
a
A(a
+
, −a), (C.68)
for even
ˆ
A. This trace formula can be derived as follows:
Tr
ˆ
A =
n
¸
p=0
1
p!
¸
k
1
···k
p
'k
1
k
p
[
ˆ
A[k
1
k
p
`
=
(da
+
da) (db
+
db) e
−a
+
a−b
+
b
¸
p
1
p!
¸
k
1
···k
p
'k
1
k
p
[a`'a[
ˆ
A[b`'b[k
1
k
p
`
=
(da
+
da) (db
+
db) e
−a
+
a−b
+
b
¸
p
1
p!
a
k
p
a
k
1
A(a
+
, b)b
+
k
1
b
+
k
p
=
(da
+
da) (db
+
db) e
−a
+
a−b
+
b
¸
p
1
p!
a
k
p
a
k
1
b
+
k
1
b
+
k
p
A(a
+
, b)
=
(da
+
da) (db
+
db) e
−a
+
a−b
+
b
e
a
k
b
+
k
A(a
+
, b)
= (−1)
n
(da
+
db) e
a
+
b
A(a
+
, b)
=
(da
+
db) e
−a
+
b
A(a
+
, −b), (C.69)
which is the desired result. We integrated over a and b
+
using (da
+
da)
(db
+
db) = (−1)
n
(da
+
db) (db
+
da) and (C.49). In the last line we made
the substitution b →−b using (C.52).
We note furthermore that omitting the minus sign from A(a
+
, −a) in
(C.68) leads to
da
+
da e
−a
+
a
A(a
+
, a) = Tr(−1)
ˆ
N
ˆ
A, (C.70)
252 Appendix C. Fermionic coherent states
where
ˆ
N is the fermionnumber operator (C.12). This formula can be
derived from the trace formula (C.68), the operatorproduct rule (C.60),
with B = exp(iπ
ˆ
N), and the application
ˆ
B = e
iπˆ a
†
ˆ a
→B(a
+
, a) = e
−a
+
a
(C.71)
of the rule (C.62).
Appendix D
Spinor ﬁelds
In this appendix we record the basics of spinor ﬁelds. We start with the
properties of Dirac matrices in Euclidean space–time. The four Dirac
matrices γ
µ
, µ = 1, 2, 3, 4, are 4 4 matrices with the properties
γ
µ
γ
ν
+γ
ν
γ
ν
= 2δ
µν
11. (D.1)
So they anticommute: γ
µ
γ
ν
= −γ
ν
γ
µ
, µ = ν. They can be chosen
Hermitian and unitary, γ
†
µ
= γ
µ
= γ
−1
µ
. The matrix
γ
5
≡ −γ
1
γ
2
γ
3
γ
4
(D.2)
anticommutes with the γ
µ
, γ
µ
γ
5
= −γ
5
γ
µ
, and it is also Hermitian
and unitary, γ
5
= γ
†
5
, γ
2
5
= 11. A realization can be given in terms
of tensor products of the 2 2 Pauli matrices σ
k
, k = 1, 2, 3, and
σ
0
≡ 11
2×2
: γ
k
= −σ
2
⊗ σ
k
, γ
4
= σ
1
⊗ σ
0
, γ
5
= σ
3
⊗ σ
0
. Usually
one does not need a realization as almost all relations follow from the
basic anticommutation relations (D.1). Other realizations are related by
unitary transformations, which preserve the Hermiticity and unitarity
of the Dirac matrices, but not the behavior under complex conjugation
or transposition. It can be shown that, in every such realization, there is
an antisymmetric unitary 4 4 matrix C, called the chargeconjugation
matrix, which relates γ
µ
to its transpose:
γ
T
µ
= −C
†
γ
µ
C, C
T
= −C, C
†
C = 11, (D.3)
⇒γ
T
5
= γ
∗
5
= C
†
γ
5
C. (D.4)
In the above realization a possible C is given by C = σ
3
⊗ σ
2
. The
matrices Γ = 11, γ
µ
, (−i/2)[γ
µ
, γ
ν
], iγ
µ
γ
5
and γ
5
form a complete set of
16 independent Hermitian 4 4 matrices with the properties Γ
2
= 11,
Tr Γ = 0 except for Γ = 11, Tr (ΓΓ
) = 0 for Γ = Γ
. Useful relations are
253
254 Appendix D. Spinor ﬁelds
furthermore γ
5
γ
κ
=
κλµν
γ
λ
γ
µ
γ
ν
, with
κλµν
the completely antisym
metric LeviCivita tensor,
1234
= +1, the trace of an odd number of
γ
µ
’s is zero, Tr (γ
5
γ
µ
γ
ν
) = 0, and
Tr (γ
µ
γ
ν
) = 4δ
µν
, (D.5)
Tr (γ
κ
γ
λ
γ
µ
γ
ν
) = 4(δ
κλ
δ
µν
−δ
κµ
δ
λν
+δ
κν
δ
λµ
), (D.6)
Tr (γ
5
γ
κ
γ
λ
γ
µ
γ
ν
) = −4
κλµν
. (D.7)
More trace relations are given in most textbooks on relativistic ﬁeld
theory.
The Dirac matrices are used to describe covariance under (in our case)
Euclidean rotations, which are elements of the group SO(4). A rotation
in the µ–ν plane over a small angle ω
µν
can be written as
R
µν
= δ
µν
+ω
µν
+O(ω
2
), ω
µν
= −ω
νµ
(D.8)
= δ
µν
+i
1
2
ω
κλ
(M
κλ
)
µν
+ , (D.9)
(M
κλ
)
µν
= −i(δ
κµ
δ
λν
−δ
κν
δ
λµ
). (D.10)
The antisymmetry of ω
µν
ensures that R
µν
is orthogonal, R
κµ
R
λµ
= δ
κλ
,
with det R = 1. The M
κλ
are the generators of SO(4) in the deﬁning
representation. The structure constants C
ρσ
κλµν
deﬁned by [M
κλ
, M
µν
] =
C
ρσ
κλµν
M
ρσ
are easily worked out.
The 4 4 spinor representation of these rotations can be written in
terms of Dirac matrices as
Λ = e
i
1
2
ω
µν
Σ
µν
= 11 +i
1
2
ω
µν
Σ
µν
+ , (D.11)
Σ
µν
= −i
1
4
[γ
µ
, γ
ν
], (D.12)
where the Σ
µν
are the generators in the spinor representation. They
satisfy the same commutation relations as the M
µν
, as follows from the
basic relations (D.1). The matrices Λ are unitary,
Λ
†
= Λ
−1
, Euclid. (D.13)
They form a unitary representation up to a sign, e.g. for a rotation over
an angle 2π in the 1–2 plane, ω
12
= −ω
21
= 2π, and in the realization of
the Dirac matrices introduced above, Λ = exp(
1
4
ω
µν
γ
µ
γ
ν
) = exp(iπσ
0
⊗
σ
3
) = −11.
The representation Λ is reducible, as follows from the fact that Λ
commutes with γ
5
, [Λ, γ
5
] = 0. Introducing the projectors P
R,L
onto the
Appendix D. Spinor ﬁelds 255
eigenspaces ±1 of γ
5
,
P
R
=
1
2
(11 +γ
5
), P
L
=
1
2
(11 −γ
5
), P
2
L
= P
L
, P
2
R
= P
R
,
P
L
P
R
= 0, P
L
+P
R
= 11, (D.14)
we can decompose Λ into two components Λ
L
and Λ
R
as
Λ = ΛP
L
+ ΛP
R
≡ Λ
L
+ Λ
R
. (D.15)
The Λ
L
and Λ
R
are inequivalent irreducible representations (up to a sign)
of SO(4). They are essentially twodimensional, because the subspace of
γ
5
= 1 or −1 is twodimensional, but we shall keep them as 44 matrices.
The Λ’s are real up to equivalence,
Λ
∗
= e
1
4
ω
µν
γ
∗
µ
γ
∗
ν
= e
1
4
ω
µν
γ
T
µ
γ
T
ν
= C
†
e
1
4
ω
µν
γ
µ
γ
ν
C
= C
†
ΛC, (D.16)
Λ
∗
L,R
= C
†
Λ
L,R
C. (D.17)
The γ
µ
are vector matrices in the sense that
Λ
†
γ
µ
Λ = R
µν
γ
ν
. (D.18)
This follows from the basic anticommutation relations between the γ’s,
as can easily be checked for inﬁnitesimal rotations. Products γ
µ
γ
ν
transform as tensors. Because γ
µ
P
R,L
= P
L,R
γ
µ
, the projected relations
have the form Λ
†
R
γ
µ
Λ
L
= R
µν
γ
ν
P
L
, and similarly for L ↔ R. It follows
that
R
µν
=
1
2
Tr (Λ
†
R
γ
µ
Λ
L
γ
ν
), (D.19)
which illustrates the relation
SO(4) · SU(2) SU(2)/Z
2
(D.20)
(interpreted as 2 2 matrices, Λ
L,R
are elements of SU(2), and Z
2
=
¦1, −1¦ compensates for Λ
L,R
and −Λ
L,R
giving the same R).
We can enlarge SO(4) to O(4) by adding reﬂections to the set of R’s,
which have determinant −1. An important one is parity P ≡ diag(−1,
−1, −1, 1). Its spinor representation can be taken as Λ
P
= γ
4
, which has
the expected eﬀect on the γ
µ
:
γ
4
γ
µ
γ
4
= P
µν
γ
ν
, (D.21)
and it has therefore also the required eﬀect on the generators Σ
µν
, such
that we have a representation of O(4). Because γ
4
P
L,R
γ
4
= P
R,L
we
256 Appendix D. Spinor ﬁelds
have γ
4
Λ
L,R
γ
4
= Λ
R,L
. So we need both irreps L and R in order to be
able to incorporate parity transformations.
Vector ﬁelds V
µ
(x) transform under SO(4) rotations as
V
µ
(x) = R
µν
V
ν
(R
−1
x), (R
−1
x)
µ
= R
νµ
x
ν
, (D.22)
which can be understood by drawing a vector ﬁeld in two dimensions on
a sheet of paper and seeing how it changes under rotations. Spinor ﬁelds
ψ(x) transform according to
ψ
α
(x) = Λ
αβ
ψ
β
(R
−1
x), (D.23)
where α and β are matrix indices (‘Dirac indices’). The ﬁelds can be
decomposed into irreducible components as
ψ
L
(x) = P
L
ψ(x), ψ
R
(x) = P
R
ψ(x). (D.24)
It is customary to introduce a separate notation
¯
ψ for ﬁelds transforming
with the inverse Λ
†
as
¯
ψ
(x) =
¯
ψ(R
−1
x) Λ
†
(D.25)
(so ψ is a column vector and
¯
ψ a row vector in the matrix sense). Under
parity we have
ψ
(x) = γ
4
ψ(Px),
¯
ψ
(x) =
¯
ψ(Px)γ
4
. (D.26)
In general ψ and
¯
ψ are independent ﬁelds, but with the help of the
chargeconjugation matrix C we can make a
¯
ψtype object out of ψ and
viceversa:
¯
ψ
(c)
≡ −(C
†
ψ)
T
= ψ
T
C
†
,
¯
ψ
(c)
(x) =
¯
ψ
(c)
(R
−1
x)Λ
−1
ψ
(c)
≡ (
¯
ψC)
T
= −C
¯
ψ
T
, ψ
(c)
(x) = Λψ
(c)
(R
−1
x). (D.27)
The ﬁelds
¯
ψ
(c)
and ψ
(c)
are called the charge conjugates of ψ and
¯
ψ,
respectively.
Note the standard notation for the projected
¯
ψ’s,
¯
ψ
L
=
¯
ψ P
R
,
¯
ψ
R
=
¯
ψ P
L
. (D.28)
This looks unnatural here but it is natural in the operator formalism
where
ˆ
¯
ψ
L,R
≡
ˆ
ψ
†
L,R
γ
4
=
ˆ
¯
ψP
R,L
. In the pathintegral formalism (in real
as well as imaginary time) one introduces independent generators ψ
α
(x)
and ψ
+
α
(x) of a Grassmann algebra, which are related by Hermitian
conjugation, such that ψ
L,R
= P
L,R
ψ implies ψ
+
L,R
= ψ
+
P
L,R
, and
Appendix D. Spinor ﬁelds 257
then
¯
ψ
L,R
≡ ψ
+
L,R
γ
4
also gives (D.28). The ﬁelds
¯
ψ
L,R
transform in
representations equivalent to Λ
R,L
:
¯
ψ
L
→
¯
ψ
L
Λ
†
R
⇒(
¯
ψ
L
C)
T
→Λ
R
(
¯
ψ
L
C)
T
, (D.29)
¯
ψ
R
→
¯
ψ
R
Λ
†
L
⇒(
¯
ψ
R
C)
T
→Λ
L
(
¯
ψ
R
C)
T
, (D.30)
where we used (D.17) and for clarity used the arrow notation for trans
formations, while suppressing the space–time index x.
An O(4) invariant action which contains all the types of ﬁelds intro
duced so far with a minimum number (>0) of derivatives is given by
S = −
d
4
x
¯
ψ(m+γ
µ
∂
µ
)ψ (D.31)
= −
d
4
x
m(
¯
ψ
L
ψ
R
+
¯
ψ
R
ψ
L
) +
¯
ψ
L
γ
µ
∂
µ
ψ
L
+
¯
ψ
R
γ
µ
∂
µ
ψ
R
.
Finally, we can get corresponding formulas for Minkowski space–time
by raising indices in contractions such that there is always a contraction
between an upper and a lower index, e.g. ω
µν
Σ
µν
= ω
µν
Σ
µν
(we do
not make a distinction between upper and lower indices in Euclidean
space–time), and substituting x
4
= x
4
→ ix
0
= −ix
0
, ω
4k
= ω
4k
→
iω
0k
= −iω
0k
. This implies that ∂
4
→ −i∂
0
, ∂
0
= ∂/∂x
0
. It is then
also expedient to use γ
0
= −γ
0
= −iγ
4
. We have to be careful with
Hermiticity properties of Λ, because after the substitution it is no longer
unitary:
Λ
−1
= βΛ
†
β, β ≡ iγ
0
, Minkowski. (D.32)
In Minkowski space–time µ = 0, 1, 2, 3 and indices are raised and lowered
with the metric tensor η
µν
= η
µν
= diag(−1, 1, 1, 1), e.g. ∂
0
= −∂
0
,
∂
k
= ∂
k
= ∂/∂x
k
.
Notes
Chapter 1
1 To avoid cluttering of brackets, we use the notation e
2
/4π ≡ e
2
/(4π), etc.
Furthermore, units = 1, c = 1 will be used. Then dimensions are like
[mass] = [energy] = [momentum] = [(length)
−1
] = [(time)
−1
], etc.
2 As a model for mesons we have to take the spins of the quarks into
account. In a ﬁrst approximation we can imagine neglecting
spindependent forces. Then the maximum spin is J = L +S, with L the
orbital angular momentum and S = 0, 1 the total spin of the
quark–antiquark system. The π has the q¯ q spins antiparallel, S = 0, the ρ
has parallel q¯ q spins, S = 1. In a second approximation spindependent
forces have to be added, which split the π and ρ masses. In picking the
right particles out of the tables of the Particle Data Group [2], we have to
choose quantum numbers corresponding to the same S but changing L.
This means that the parity and chargeconjugation parity ﬂip signs along
a Regge trajectory. The particles on the ρ trajectory in ﬁgure 1.3 are
ρ(769), a
2
(1320), ρ
3
(1690), and a
4
(2040), those on the π trajectory are
π(135), π(135), b
1
(1235), and π
2
(1670). The mass m
q
used in this model
is an eﬀective (‘constituent’) quark mass, m
u
≈ m
d
≈ m
ρ
/2 = 385 MeV,
which is much larger than the mass parameters appearing in the
Lagrangian (the socalled ‘current masses’), which are only a few MeV. In
the last chapter we shall arrive at an understanding of this in terms of
chiralsymmetry breaking.
Chapter 2
1 The formal canonical quantization of the scalar ﬁeld in the continuum is
done as follows. Given the Lagrangian of the system
L(ϕ, ˙ ϕ) =
d
3
x
1
2
( ˙ ϕ)
2
−V (ϕ), (N.1)
the canonical momentum follows from varying with respect to ˙ ϕ,
δ
˙ ϕ
L =
d
3
x ˙ ϕδ ˙ ϕ ⇒π ≡
δL
δ ˙ ϕ
= ˙ ϕ. (N.2)
258
Notes to pp. 90–206 259
Solving for ˙ ϕ in terms of π, the Hamiltonian is given by the Legendre
transformation
H(ϕ, π) =
d
3
xπ ˙ ϕ −L(ϕ, ˙ ϕ) =
d
3
x
1
2
π
2
+V (ϕ). (N.3)
Deﬁning the Poisson brackets as
(A, B) =
d
3
x
δA
δϕ(x)
δB
δπ(x)
−A ↔B, (N.4)
the canonical (equal time) Poisson brackets are given by
(ϕ(x), π(y)) = δ(x −y), (ϕ(x), ϕ(y)) = 0 = (π(x), π(y)). (N.5)
The Lagrange (stationaryaction) equations of motion are then identical
to Hamilton’s equations
˙ ϕ = (ϕ, H), ˙ π = (π, H). (N.6)
The canonically quantized theory is obtained by considering the
canonical variables as operators ˆ ϕ and ˆ π in Hilbert space satisfying the
canonical commutation relations obtained from the correspondence
principle Poisson bracket → commutator:
[ ˆ ϕ(x), ˆ π(y)] = iδ(x −y), [ ˆ ϕ(x), ˆ ϕ(y)] = 0 = [ˆ π(x), ˆ π(y)]. (N.7)
Observables such as the Hamiltonian become operators (after
symmetrizing products of ˆ ϕ and ˆ π, if necessary). The quantum equations
of motion then follow from Heisenberg’s equations
∂
0
ˆ ϕ = i[
ˆ
H, ϕ], ∂
0
ˆ π = i[
ˆ
H, ˆ π]. (N.8)
These need not, but often do, coincide with the classical equations of
motion transcribed to ˆ ϕ and ˆ π. From (N.7) one observes that the
quantum ﬁelds are ‘operatorvalued distributions’, hence products like ˆ π
2
occuring in the formal Hamiltonian are mathematically illdeﬁned.
Chapter 4
1 The derivation leading to (4.72) is how I found the lattice gaugetheory
formulation in 1972 (cf. [42]). I still ﬁnd it instructive how a pedestrian
approach can be brought to a good ending.
Chapter 8
1 Only Abelian chiral transformations form a group: if V and W are two
chiral transformations, then U = V W = V
L
W
L
P
L
+V
†
L
W
†
L
P
R
has
U
L
= V
L
W
L
= U
†
R
= W
L
V
L
, unless V
L
and W
L
commute.
2 This can be checked here by reinstalling the lattice spacing, writing
M
f
= m
f
+ 4r/a, and ψ
fx
= a
3/2
ψ
f
(x), etc. with continuum ﬁelds ψ(x),
¯
ψ(x) that are smooth on the lattice scale (the emerging overall factor a
3
must be dropped to get the continuum currents and divergences). Using
for convenience the twoindex notation for the lattice gauge ﬁeld
260 Notes to pp. 206–223
(U
µx
= U
x,x+µ
, U
†
µx−ˆ µ
= U
x,x−µ
), we may write
U
x,x±ˆ µa
ψ
g
(x ± ˆ µa) = ψ
g
(x) ±aD
µ
ψ
g
(x) +
1
2
a
2
D
2
µ
ψ
g
(x) +· · ·, with
D
µ
ψ
g
(x) = [∂
µ
−igG
µ
(x)]ψ
g
(x) the continuum covariant derivative, this
gives the expected result.
3 The way Σ is introduced here corresponds to four staggered ﬂavors,
Σ =
¸
4
f=1
¯
ψ
f
ψ
f
. Using the SU(2) value a
√
σ = 0.2634(14) [69] and
√
σ
= 420 MeV, the ratio (0.00863/4)
1/3
/0.263 = 0.491 corresponds to 206
MeV or Σ = 4(206 MeV)
3
. This number appears somewhat small, but we
have to keep in mind that this is for SU(2), not SU(3), and it also has to
be multiplied by the appropriate renormalization factor.
4 For staggered fermions to be sensitive to topology, quenched SU(3) gauge
couplings need to be substantially smaller than the value β = 6/g
2
= 5.1
used in [143, 144]. Vink [116, 117] found that values β 6 were needed in
order to obtain reasonable correlations between the ‘fermionic topological
charge’ and the ‘cooling charge’ (cf. ﬁgure 8.2). Note that the change
β = 5.1 →6 corresponds to a decrease in lattice spacing by a factor of
about four.
5 Ironically, when the mechanism of canceling the anomalies out between
diﬀerent fermion species was proposed [148], I doubted that it was
necessary, and this was one of the reasons (apart from a nonperturbative
formulation of nonAbelian gauge theory) why I attempted to put the
electroweak model on the lattice. On calculating the oneloop gaugeﬁeld
selfenergy and the triangle diagram, I ran into the speciesdoubling
phenomenon, without realizing that the lattice produced the very
cancellation mechanism I had wanted to avoid.
6 At the time of writing the direct Euclidean approach is considered
suspect and a Lorentzian formulation is being pursued [176]. For an
impression of what is involved in a nonperturbative computation of
gravitational binding energy, see [177].
7 The problem here is that, in order to deal with the oscillating phase
exp(iS) in the path integral, one has to make approximations right from
the beginning. To incorporate sphalerons, kinks, etc. one needs a lattice
formulation that allows arbitrarily inhomogeneous ﬁeld conﬁgurations
[178, 179].
References
[1] B.S. DeWitt, Dynamical Theory of Groups and Fields, Blackie,
London 1965.
[2] http://pdg.lbl.gov
[3] TP. Cheng and LF. Li, Gauge Theory of Elementary Particle
Physics, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1988.
[4] M. Creutz, Quarks, Gluons and Lattices, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge 1983.
[5] C. Rebbi, Lattice Gauge Theories and Monte Carlo Simulations, World
Scientiﬁc, Singapore 1983.
[6] C. Itzykson and J.M. Drouﬀe, Statistical Field Theory I & II,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1989.
[7] G. Parisi, Statistical Field Theory, AddisonWesley, New York 1988.
[8] J. ZinnJustin, Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena,
Clarendon, Oxford 1989.
[9] H.J. Rothe, Introduction to Lattice Gauge Theories, World Scientiﬁc,
Singapore 1992.
[10] G. M¨ unster and I. Montvay, Quantum Fields on a Lattice, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge 1994.
[11] M. Le Bellac and G. Barton, Quantum and Statistical Field Theory,
Clarendon, Oxford 1992.
[12] M. Nakahara, Geometry, Topology and Physics, Adam Hilger, Bristol
1991.
[13] R.B. Dingle, Asymptotic Expansions, their Derivation and
Interpretation, Academic Press, London and New York 1973.
[14] S.R. Sharpe, Phenomenology from the lattice, TASI 94,
hepph/9412243.
[15] R. Gupta, Introduction to lattice QCD, Les Houches 1997,
heplt/9807028.
[16] M. L¨ uscher, Advanced lattice QCD, Les Houches 1997,
heplat/9802029.
[17] J. Ambjørn, Quantization of geometry, Les Houches 1994,
hepth/9411179.
[18] P. van Baal, QCD in a ﬁnite volume, in Festschrift in honor of
B.L. Ioﬀe, ed. M. Shifman, hepph/0008206.
261
262 References
[19] H. Leutwyler, Chiral dynamics, in Festschrift in honor of B.L. Ioﬀe, ed.
M. Shifman, hepph/0008124; J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Ann. Phys.
158 (1984) 142.
[20] M. L¨ uscher and P. Weisz, Nucl. Phys. B290 [FS20] (1987) 25.
[21] M. L¨ uscher and P. Weisz, Nucl. Phys. B295 [FS21] (1988) 65.
[22] M. L¨ uscher and P. Weisz, Nucl. Phys. B300 [FS22] (1988) 325.
[23] M. L¨ uscher and P. Weisz, Nucl. Phys. B318 (1989) 705; Phys. Lett.
B212 (1988) 472.
[24] C. Frick, K. Jansen, J. Jers´ak, I. Montvay, P. Seuferling and
G. M¨ unster, Nucl. Phys. B331 (1990) 515.
[25] J. Kuti and Y. Shen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 (1988) 85.
[26] L. O’Raifeartaigh, A. Wipf and H. Yoneyama, Nucl. Phys. B271
(1986) 653.
[27] A. Hasenfratz, K. Jansen, J. Jers´ak, H.A. Kastrup, C.B. Lang,
H. Leutwyler and T. Neuhaus, Nucl. Phys. B356 (1991) 332.
[28] M. G¨ockeler, H.A. Kastrup, T. Neuhaus and F. Zimmermann, Nucl.
Phys. B404 (1993) 517.
[29] K.G. Wilson, Phys. Rev. B4 (1971) 3174; B4 (1971) 3184; Phys. Rev.
D7 (1973) 2911.
[30] J.B. Kogut and K.G. Wilson, Phys. Rep. 12 (1974) 75.
[31] R. Dashen and H. Neuberger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 1897.
[32] H. Neuberger, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 17 (1992) 17; Nucl. Phys.
B (Proc. Suppl.) 29B,C (1992) 19, and references therein.
[33] J. Kuti, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) (1993), talk at Lattice ’92.
[34] P. Hasenfratz, Lattice ’88.
[35] J. Jers´ak, Lattice studies of the Higgs system, Proceedings of the
Eloisatron Project Workshop on Higgs Particles, Erice 1989.
[36] W. Bock, J. Smit and J.C. Vink, Phys. Lett. B291 (1992) 297; W.
Bock, C. Frick, J. Smit and J.C. Vink, Nucl. Phys. B400 (1993) 309.
[37] H. Neuberger, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 29B,C (1992) 19.
[38] U.M. Heller, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 34 (1994) 101.
[39] K.G. Wilson, Phys. Rev. D10 (1974) 2445.
[40] J.B. Kogut and L. Susskind, Phys. Rev. D11 (1975) 395.
[41] A.M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B59 (1975) 82.
[42] K.G. Wilson, Future directions in particle theory, Proceedings of the
Lepton and Photon Interactions at High Energies Workshop, Ithaca,
1983, pp. 812–834, p. 827.
[43] J.B. Kogut, Rev. Mod. Phys. 55 (1983) 775.
[44] R. Balian, J.M. Drouﬀe and C. Itzykson, Phys. Rev. D10 (1974) 3376;
D11 (1975) 2098; D11 (1975) 2104, Erratum D19 (1979) 2514.
[45] A. Hasenfratz and P. Hasenfratz, Phys. Lett. B93 (1980) 165.
[46] R. Dashen and D.J. Gross, Phys. Rev. D23 (1981) 2340.
[47] P. Weisz, Phys. Lett. B100 (1981) 331.
[48] A. Billoire, Phys. Lett. B104 (1981) 472.
[49] Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. D10 (1974) 4262.
[50] G. ’t Hooft, in High Energy Physics, Proceedings of the EPS
International Conference, Palermo 1975, ed. A. Zichichi (Editrice
Compositori, Bologna, 1976); Nucl. Phys. B190 [FS3] (1981) 455;
Phys. Scr. 25 (1982) 133.
[51] G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B138 (1978) 1.
[52] G. Mack, in Recent Progress in Gauge Theories, Carg`ese 1979, eds.
References 263
G. ’t Hooft et al., Plenum Press, New York 1980; Phys. Rev. Lett. 45
(1980) 1378.
[53] J. Smit and A.J. van der Sijs, Nucl. Phys. B355 (1991) 603; B422
(1994) 349.
[54] A. di Giacomo, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 47 (1996) 136;
M.I. Polikarpov, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 53 (1997) 134; L. del
Debbio, M. Faber, J. Greensite and S. Olejnik, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc.
Suppl.) 53 (1997) 141; P. van Baal, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 63
(1998) 126; M. Garc´ıa P´erez, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 94 (2001)
27.
[55] P. van Baal, hepth/0109148.
[56] M. Faber, J. Greensite and S. Olejnik, heplat/0109032
[57] J. Ambjørn, J. Giedt and J. Greensite, JHEP 0002 (2000) 033.
[58] Y. Koma, E.M. Ilgenfritz, H. Toki and T. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. D64
(2001) 011501.
[59] F.V. Gubarev, E.M. Ilgenfritz, M.I. Polikarpov and T. Suzuki,
Phys. Lett. B468 (1999) 134.
[60] G.P. Lepage, P.B. Mackenzie, Phys. Rev. D48 (1993) 2250.
[61] R. Sommer, Nucl. Phys. B411 (1994) 839.
[62] S. Necco and R. Sommer, heplat/0108008.
[63] S. Capitani, M. L¨ uscher, R. Sommer and H. Wittig, Nucl. Phys. B544
(1999) 669.
[64] S. Necco and R. Sommer, heplat/0109093.
[65] G. Bali, Phys. Rep. 343 (2001) 1.
[66] P. Weisz, Nucl. Phys. (Proc. Suppl.) 47 (1996) 71, heplat/9511017.
[67] G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B72 (1974) 461.
[68] B. de Wit and G. ’t Hooft, Phys. Lett. B69 (1977) 61.
[69] B. Lucini and M. Teper, JHEP 0106 (2001) 050.
[70] L.H. Karsten and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B183 (1981) 103.
[71] K.G. Wilson, in New Phenomena in Subnuclear Physics, ed.
A. Zichichi, Plenum, New York 1977 (Erice 1975).
[72] L. Susskind, Phys. Rev. D16 (1977) 3031; Coarse grained quantum
chromodynamics, in Weak and Electromagnetic Interactions at High
Energies, NorthHolland, Amsterdam 1977 (Les Houches 1976).
[73] M.F.L. Golterman and J. Smit, Phys. Lett. B140 (1984) 392.
[74] M.F.L. Golterman and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B245 (1984) 64.
[75] M.F.L. Golterman and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B255 (1985) 328.
[76] M.F.L. Golterman, Nucl. Phys. B273 (1986) 666.
[77] M.F.L. Golterman, Nucl. Phys. B278 (1986) 417.
[78] H.S. Sharatshandra, H.J. Thun and P. Weisz, Nucl. Phys. B192
(1981) 205.
[79] C. van den Doel and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B228 (1983) 122.
[80] J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 29B,C (1992) 83.
[81] P. Becher and H. Joos, Z. Phys. C15 (1982) 343. M. G¨ ockeler and
H. Joos, in Progress in Field Theory, eds. G. ’t Hooft et al. Plenum,
New York 1984.
[82] J. Hoek and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B263 (1986) 129.
[83] N. Kawamoto and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B192 (1981) 100.
[84] J. Hoek, N. Kawamoto and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B199 (1982) 495.
[85] J. Hoek, J. Comput. Phys. 49 (1983) 265; 54 (1984) 245.
[86] K.G. Wilson, in New Phenomena in Quantum Field Theory and
264 References
Statistical Mechanics, ed. M. L´evy and P. Mitter, Plenum, New York
1977 (Carg`ese 1976).
[87] M. L¨ uscher, Commun. Math. Phys. 54 (1977) 283.
[88] M. Creutz, Phys. Rev. D35 (1987) 1460.
[89] J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 20 (1991) 542.
[90] W. Bock, J.E. Hetrick and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B437 (1995) 585.
[91] G. M¨ unster, Nucl. Phys. B190 (1981) 439; Erratum B205 (1982) 648.
[92] K. Seo, Nucl. Phys. B209 (1982) 200.
[93] G. Bali and K. Schilling, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 661.
[94] M. Luscher, R. Sommer, P. Weisz and U. Wolﬀ, Nucl. Phys. B413
(1994) 481.
[95] J. Jers´ak, T. Neuhaus and P.M. Zerwas, Nucl. Phys. B251 (1985) 299.
[96] E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B160 (1979) 57.
[97] CPPACS collaboration, A. Alikhan et al., heplat/0105015.
[98] CPPACS collaboration, S. Aoki et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 238.
[99] UKQCD collaboration, C.R. Allton et al., heplat/0107021.
[100] S.R. Coleman and E. Witten, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1980) 100.
[101] G. ’t Hooft, Phys. Rep. 142 (1986) 357.
[102] E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B156 (1979) 269.
[103] G. Veneziano, Nucl. Phys. B159 (1979) 213.
[104] J. Smit and J.C. Vink, Nucl. Phys. B284 (1987) 234.
[105] P. di Vecchia, K. Fabricius, G.C. Rossi and G. Veneziano, Nucl. Phys.
B192 (1981) 392; Phys. Lett. B108 (1982) 323.
[106] S.L. Adler, Phys. Rev. 177 (1969) 2426.
[107] J. Smit and J.C. Vink, Nucl. Phys. B286 (1987) 485.
[108] M.L. Laursen, J. Smit and J.C. Vink, Nucl. Phys. B343 (1990) 522.
[109] R. Groot, J. Hoek and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B237 (1984) 111.
[110] G.C. Rossi, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 53 (1997) 3,
heplat/9609038.
[111] B. All´es, M. Campostrini, A. di Giacomo, Y. G¨ und¨ uc and E. Vicari,
Phys. Rev. D48 (1993) 2284; B. All´es, M. D’Elia, A. di Giacomo and
R. Kirchner, Phys. Rev. D58 (1998) 114506.
[112] M. Teper, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 83–84 (2000) 146; M. Teper,
Phys. Lett. B202 (1988) 553; J. Hoek, M. Teper and J. Waterhouse,
Nucl. Phys. B288 (1987) 589.
[113] J. Smit and J.C. Vink, Nucl. Phys. B298 (1988) 557.
[114] J. Smit and J.C. Vink, Nucl. Phys. B303 (1988) 36.
[115] J.C. Vink, Nucl. Phys. B307 (1988) 549.
[116] J.C. Vink, Phys. Lett. B210 (1988) 211.
[117] J.C. Vink, Phys. Lett. B212 (1988) 483.
[118] M. Bochicchio, L. Maiani, G. Martinelli, G. Rossi and M. Testa, Nucl.
Phys. B262 (1985) 331.
[119] J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B175 (1980) 307.
[120] J. Greensite and J. Primack, Nucl. Phys. B189 [FS2] (1981) 170.
[121] H. KlubergStern, A. Morel, O. Napoly and B. Petersson, Nucl. Phys.
B190 [FS3] (1981) 504.
[122] S. Aoki, Phys. Rev. D30 (1984) 2653; Nucl. Phys. B314 (1989) 79.
[123] J. Fr¨ohlich and C. King, Nucl. Phys. B290 (1987) 157.
[124] P.H. Ginsparg and K.G. Wilson, Phys. Rev. D25 (1982) 2649.
[125] P. Hasenfratz, The theoretical background and properties of perfect
actions, heplat/9803027; Nucl. Phys. B525 (1998) 401.
References 265
[126] H. Neuberger, Phys. Lett. B417 (1998) 141.
[127] R. Narayanan and H. Neuberger, Phys. Lett. B302 (1993) 62; Nucl.
Phys. B412 (1994) 574; Nucl. Phys. B443 (1995) 305.
[128] D.B. Kaplan, Phys. Lett. B288 (1992) 342.
[129] Y. Shamir, Nucl. Phys. B406 (1993) 90.
[130] P. Hasenfratz, Nucl. Phys. B525 (1988) 401.
[131] M. L¨ uscher, Phys. Lett. B428 (1998) 342.
[132] K. Fujikawa, Phys. Lett. 42 (1979) 1195; Phys. Rev. D21 (1980) 2848;
D22 (1980) 1409.
[133] W. Kerler, Phys. Rev. D23 (1981) 2384.
[134] E. Seiler and I.O. Stamatescu, Phys. Rev. D25 (1982) 2177; D26
(1982) 534.
[135] F. Niedermayer, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 73 (1999) 105.
[136] R.G. Edwards, U.M. Heller and R. Narayanan, Nucl. Phys. B535
(1998) 403.
[137] L. Giusti, C.G. Rossi, M. Testa and G. Veneziano, heplat/0108009.
[138] T. Banks and A. Casher, Nucl. Phys. 169 (1980) 103.
[139] J.J.M. Verbaarschot, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 53 (1997) 88.
[140] P.H. Damgaard, heplat/0110192.
[141] E.V. Shuryak and J.J. Verbaarschot, Nucl. Phys. A560 (1993) 306.
[142] M.E. BerbenniBitsch, S. Meyer, A. Sch¨afer, J.J.M. Verbaarschot and
T. Wettig, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80 (1998) 1146.
[143] P.H. Damgaard, U.M. Heller, R. Niclasen and K. Rummukainen,
Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 014501.
[144] P.H. Damgaard, U.M. Heller, R. Niclasen and B. Svetitsky,
heplat/0110028.
[145] F. Farchioni, Ph. de Forcrand, J. Hip, C.B. Lang and K. Splittorﬀ,
Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 014503.
[146] P. Hernandez, K. Jansen and L. Lellouch, Phys. Lett. B469 (1999)
198.
[147] P. Hernandez, K. Jansen and L. Lellouch, JHEP 0107 (2001) 018.
[148] C. Bouchiat, J. Iliopoulos and Ph. Meyer, Phys. Lett. B38 (1972)
519. D.J. Gross and R. Jackiw, Phys. Rev. D6 (1972) 477.
[149] J. Smit, Acta Phys. Polon. B17 (1986) 531.
[150] P.V.D. Swift, Phys. Lett. 145B (1984) 256.
[151] E. D’Hoker and E. Farhi, Nucl. Phys. B248 (1984) 59, 77.
[152] T. Banks and A. Dabholkar, Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 4016; Nucl.
Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 29B,C (1992) 46.
[153] W. Bock, A.K. De, K. Jansen, J. Jers´ak, T. Neuhaus and J. Smit,
Nucl. Phys. B344 (1990) 207–237.
[154] W. Bock, A.K. De and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B388 (1992) 243.
[155] M.F.L. Golterman, D.N. Petcher and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B370
(1992) 51.
[156] E. Eichten and J. Preskill, Nucl. Phys. B268 (1986) 179.
[157] M. Creutz, M. Tytgat, G. Rebbi and S.S. Xue, Phys. Lett. B402
(1997) 341.
[158] M.F.L. Golterman, D.N. Petcher and E. Rivas, Nucl. Phys. B395
(1993) 596.
[159] I. Montvay, Phys. Lett. B199 (1987) 89; Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.)
29B,C (1992) 159.
266 References
[160] H.B. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya, Nucl. Phys. B185 (1981) 20; B193
(1981) 173.
[161] L.H. Karsten, Phys. Lett. B104 (1981) 315.
[162] J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 4 (1988) 415.
[163] A. Borrelli, L. Maiani, G.C. Rossi, R. Sisto and M. Testa, Phys. Lett.
B221 (1989) 360; Nucl. Phys. B333 (1990) 355.
[164] G.C. Rossi, R. Sarno and R. Sisto, Nucl. Phys. B398 (1993) 101.
[165] W. Bock, J.E. Hetrick and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B437 (1995) 585.
[166] M.F.L. Golterman and Y. Shamir, Phys. Lett. B399 (1997) 148.
[167] D. F¨orster, H.B. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya, Phys. Lett. B94 (1990)
135.
[168] M. Golterman, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 94 (2001) 189.
[169] J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 29B,C (1992) 83.
[170] W. Bock, J. Smit and J.C. Vink, Nucl. Phys. B414 (1994) 73; B416
(1994) 645.
[171] J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 17 (1990) 3; J. Shigemitsu,
Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 20 (1991) 515; M. Testa, Nucl. Phys. B
(Proc. Suppl.) 26 (1992) 228; D.N. Petcher, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc.
Suppl.) 30 (1993) 50; M. Creutz, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 42
(1995) 56; Y. Shamir, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 47 (1996) 212.
[172] M. L¨ uscher, Nucl. Phys. B549 (1999) 295; B568 (2000) 162; JHEP
0006 (2000) 028.
[173] R. Narayanan, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 34 (1994) 95.
[174] H. Neuberger, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 83–84 (2000) 67.
[175] M. L¨ uscher, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 83–84 (2000) 34; Chiral
gauge theories revisited, hepth/0102028.
[176] J. Ambjørn, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll, hepth/0105267.
[177] B.V. de Bakker and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B484 (1997) 476.
[178] G. Aarts and J. Smit, Nucl. Phys. B555 (1999) 355.
[179] M. Salle, J. Smit and J.C. Vink, Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 025016.
Index
Abelian gauge theory, 97–98
Abelian group, 88
Abrikosov ﬂux tubes, 139
action
continuum, 11
discretized, 10
functional, 9
plaquette, 140
Symanzikimproved, 66–67
action density, see Lagrange function
anharmonic oscillator, 6, 12
anticommuting numbers, 149
antiferromagnetic phase, 38
antiquarks, 179, 181
asymptotic freedom, 3, 121–125, 189
asymptotic scaling, 140–144
Atiyah–Singer index theorem, 204
averaging function, 68
axial vector current, 202
axisreversal symmetry, 74
bare coupling, 141, 180
constant, 50
baryons, 2, 175, 179–180, 184–185
masses, 184
propagators, 173–177
threequark hopping, 177
Berezin integral, 246
beta function, 49, 55–56, 58, 122
coeﬃcient, 59
trick, 49
Born approximation, 59
Boseﬁeld denominator, 154
bosons, 2, 26, 77, 158
Callan–Symanzik
beta function, 55
coeﬃcient, 57
equations, 49, 56
canonical quantization, 106
Casimir operator, 232
quadratic, 113, 120
character expansion, 128
charge quantization, 85
chargeconjugation matrix, 174
Chern classes, 203
chiral
anomaly, 202–204, 227
gauge theory, 217–223
perturbation theory, 63, 195
symmetry, 193–228
symmetry breaking, 182, 212
transformation, 207
class function, 104
classical
action, 65, 95
continuum limit, 18
ﬁeld theory, 6
ground state, 195
Hamilton equations, 4
QCD action, 200
Coleman’s theorem, 32
color index, 87, 171
commutation relations, 14, 29, 231, 242
complex Higgs doublet, 75
composite scalar ﬁelds, 5
conﬁnement
mechanisms, 138–140
phase, 136–138
contact terms, 208
contour integration, 24–25
coordinate representation, 15
correlation function, 27, 30, 38, 61–62,
68, 173
correlation length, 38, 69, 140
Coulomb
phase, 136–138
potential, 119
selfmass, 139
coupling
267
268 Index
renormalized, 46, 70, 190
tuning, 74
covariant derivative, 85, 87
creation and annihilation operators,
13–14, 25–26, 29
critical
exponent, 38
ﬁxed point, 69, 71
lines, 37
phenomena, 38
surface, 69–70
current algebra, 211
Dirac
action, naive discretization, 149–151
fermions, 161, 220
ﬁelds, 155
index, 87, 149, 171, 213, 256
matrices, 150, 162, 253, 254
operator eigenvalues, 214
particles, 151
spinor, 160
domainwall fermions, 212
dressed
particle states, 26
propagator, 62
eﬀective action, 68, 70, 190, 197
eﬀective interaction, 2–3, 6, 62
electroweak gauge ﬁelds, 75
elementary scalar ﬁelds, 5
energy
density, 6–7
spectrum, 29
zero point, 141
equation of motion, 6, 33
Euclidean action, 32
Euclidean formalism, 16
evolution operator, 16
expectation values, 54
Faddeev–Popov
factor, 147
measure, 146
fermion, 2, 151, 180
free, 225
masses, 76
staggered, 149, 160–161, 169, 213–214
fermion action, 156
fermion doubling, 92, 155
fermion ﬁelds
integration over, 170–171
fermion Hamiltonian, 165
fermion propagator, 152
fermion–antifermion correlation
function, 176
fermionic coherent states, 242–252
Feynman diagrams, 39
Feynman gauge, 116
selfenergy, 120
Feynman propagator, 27
ﬁeld conﬁgurations
nonperturbative, 139
ﬁnestructure constant, 1, 119, 190
ﬁnite renormalization constants, 208
ﬁnitesize eﬀects, 146
ﬁxed point
infrared stable, 51
ultraviolet stable, 51
ﬂavor index, 87, 171, 213
ﬂux lines
adjoint representation, 132
fundamental representation, 132
Fokker–Planck Hamiltonian, 82
formal continuum Hamiltonian, 106
formal continuum limit, 106
fourpoint function, 46
fourpoint vertex, 52
Fourier transform, 20–21
free scalar ﬁeld, 22–25
action, 22
gamma matrices, 160
gauge coupling, 76, 78
compution from masses, 190
gauge ﬁxing, 144, 146
gauge potential, 97
gauge theory
bare coupling, 123
dimensional transmutation, 124
gauge transformations, 97
gaugeﬁeld quantization
temporal gauge, 239
gaugeﬁxing action, 147
gaugeHiggs systems
lattice formulation, 78
gaugeinvariant
action, 95, 145
correlation function, 173
measure, 98
observable, 145
staggeredfermion action, 160
Gausslaw condition, 102
Gaussian
ﬁxed point, 70
GellMann matrices, 86
generalized Ising model, 35
Ginsparg–Wilson
Dirac operator, 223
fermions, 223, 226
relation, 211
glueball, 2–3, 97, 115, 135–136, 140,
145, 180
mass, 114, 144
mass ratio, 140
gluon, 1–2, 120, 135
Index 269
Goldstone bosons, 32, 34, 58, 63, 77, 198
ﬁnitesize eﬀects, 63
massless, 58
Goldstone’s theorem, 34
Grand Uniﬁed Theories, 85
Grassmann algebra, 244–245, 256
independent generators, 150
Grassmann representation, 162
Grassmann variables, 149, 242, 245
Gribov copies, 147
ground state, 6–7, 15, 31, 33, 114
group velocity, 7
Haar measure, 96, 169
hadrons, 1–3, 170, 178–180, 185, 190
Hamilton
function, 8
operator, 8, 11
Hamiltonian, 4, 20, 105, 156, 214
continuous time, 105–106
operator, 13
harmonic oscillator, 13
discretized, 14
Heisenberg
model, 35
operators, 30
Hermitian, 86
conjugate, 149, 244
Hamiltonian, 11, 102
matrix, 153
operator, 82, 99, 102, 242
Higgs
ﬁeld, 75
mass, 76–77
particle, 77
Hilbert space, 8, 99–100, 243
fermion, 155
hopping
expansion, 51–55, 57, 62, 66–67,
171–173
matrix, 53
result, 80
Hurewicz measure, 96
index theorem, 217, 225–226
infrared divergencies, 58
intermediatedistance regime, 142
irreducible representations, 103
kineticenergy operator, 102–105
Kogut–Susskind Hamiltonian, 106
Lagrange function, 6, 8, 10
discretized, 10
Lagrangian, 6, 239
lambda scale, 140
Landau pole, 49
Langevin algorithm, 60
Laplace–Beltrami operator, 236
lattice
artifact region, 167
derivatives, 90
ﬁnitesize eﬀects, 61
formulation, 209
gauge ﬁeld, 90–95, 105, 145
path integral, 95–97
regularization, 8–31, 34, 76, 167, 227
scaling violations, 61
symmetry, 73, 168
LeviCivita tensor, 254
link variable, 134
integration, 131
Lorentz covariant expression, 25
L¨ uscher–Weisz solution, 55–60
magnetic monopoles, 139
magnetization observable, 63
Majorana fermions, 161
Maxwell theory, 107
meanﬁeld approximation, 37–38, 54
Merwin–Wagner theorem, 32
mesons, 2, 175–177, 179–182, 185, 199,
201
propagators, 173–177
Metropolis algorithm, 60–61
Mexican hat potential, 33–34
microscopic spectral density, 216
minimal subtraction, 80, 191
Minkowskispace propagator, 27
Minkowski space–time, 149
Monte Carlo methods, 60–61
MSbar scheme, 124, 213
Nambu–Goldstone bosons, 196–197,
199, 213
Neuberger’s Dirac operator, 217
nogo theorem, 221
Noether currents, 205
nonAbelian gauge theory, 90
quadratic divergencies, 169
O(4) model, 55, 59–60, 74–77
O(n) model, 32–82
occupation number, 29
oneloop diagram, 46
operator mixing, 208
parallel transport, 92, 94
paramagnetic strong coupling, 220
partition function, 13, 22–23, 35, 51,
97–98
canonical, 13
path integral, 8–31, 38, 67, 98–99, 102,
146, 149–151, 202, 204, 256
discretized, 10
expectation value, 39
270 Index
imaginarytime, 12
measure, invariant, 207
pathordered product, 92
Pauli matrices, 75, 86, 253
perfect actions, 211
periodic boundary conditions, 13, 17
periodic delta function, 148
perturbation theory, 1, 3, 48
renormalized, 46, 56, 63
phase transition, 37–38
ϕ
4
model, 6, 16, 33, 71–72
oneloop approximation, 79
photons, 1, 135, 139
selfenergy, 166
pion–nucleon
mass ratio, 184
sigma model, 224
pions, 1, 5, 34, 224
lowenergy action, 32
Planck mass, 76
plaquette, 102, 125–127, 131–133
correlator, 136
ﬁeld, 97
hypercubic lattice, 94
spacelike, 106, 127
timelike, 127
tube, 132
Wilson loop, 108
Poincar´e–Hopf theorem, 222
Polyakov line, 107, 111–112
polymers, 128
polynomials
contact terms, 74
Pontryagin index, 203
propagators, 52
pseudoscalar masses, 182, 199–202
pseudoscalar mesons, 180
QCD, 1, 2, 5, 26, 76–77, 83, 85, 90, 95,
138, 143, 159–160, 165, 173, 186,
188, 190, 193, 195, 197, 200, 202,
212, 217–218, 241
action, 85–90, 193, 226
conﬁnement, 139
continuum limit, 160
lambda scales, 124
lowmass hadrons, 170–192
multicolor, 214
parameters, 188–189
scaling region, 178
theta parameter, 211, 226
weakcoupling expansion, 123
QED, 1, 83, 176, 217–220, 241
action, 83–85
electrons, 83
fermion propagation, 177
gauge invariance, 84
quantum chromodynamics, see QCD
quantum electrodynamics, see QED
quark, 1–2, 135, 160, 170, 180–182, 187,
193
quark–antiquark potential, 2, 190
quark–gluon theory, 224
quenched approximation, 209
quenched simulation, 187
randomwalk approximation, 53–54
realspace renormalizationgroup
method, 67, 71
Regge slope, 193
Regge trajectories, 3
regularization
Pauli–Villars, 77
space, 77
renormalizationgroup
beta functions, 48–51, 121
Callan–Symanzik, 55
equation, 48, 123
transformation, 68
renormalized mass parameter, 46–47
representation
nality, 135
ρ mesons, 34
ρ resonance, 78
rotation invariance, 28
rotation method, 65
running coupling, 47, 49, 51
saddlepoint
approximation, 65
expansion, 71
scalar ﬁeld, 5, 15, 32, 75, 125, 174, 194,
224
propagator, 23, 28
scale factor, 68
scaling
arguments, 216
numerical results, 140–144
Schur’s lemma, 104
Schwinger’s Source Theory, 56
seaquark
loops, 176, 180
semiclassical expansion, see
weakcoupling expansion
σ model, 34
action, 224
smalldistance regime, 142–143
space–time, xi, 32, 67, 90, 156, 209, 257
domain, 6
index, 171
Minkowski, 257
symmetry, 16, 74
volume, 146, 151
spatial links, 106
Index 271
species doubling, 149, 151–156
spectral density, 215
spectral representation, 26, 31, 38
spin models generalized, 35
spinor ﬁelds, 253–257
spinor representation, 254
Standard Model, 32, 58, 76, 218–220
anomalyfree, 219
Higgs–Yukawa sector, 161
lattice formulation, 78
triviality, 74–78
stationary points, 33
stationaryphase approximation, 9
string tension, 1–3, 114, 131, 193
nonzero, 140
strongcoupling, 134
diagrams, 136
expansion, 125–129, 144, 178
hadron masses, 177–178
region, 132
SU(n), 229–238
action, 239
adjoint representation, 231–234
fundamental representation, 229–231
gauge theory, 90, 112, 115–148
left and right translations, 234–236
phase diagram, 138
tensor method, 236–238
sum over representations, 95
superconductor, 139
topological charge density, 203
topological susceptibility, 204, 212
trajectory
physical, 70
renormalized, 70
transfer operator, 10–11, 13, 18–20, 26,
29
transfermatrix
elements, 163
formalism, 135
transformation of variables, 207
translation operator, 31, 102
treegraph, 75
triangle diagram, 203, 207, 218
twopoint correlation function, 53
twopoint function, 52–53
U(1), 85
compact gauge theory, 98
gauge theory, 115–148
gaugeﬁxed model, 222
problem, 199–202
unitarity bound, 59
unitary matrix, 153
universality, 67, 71
classes, 67
vacuum, 26
bubbles, 41
expectation value, 75
polarization tensor, 119
valencequark
lines, 176
propagators, 180–181
variational methods, 144
vector bosons, 75
vertex function, 41–42, 45–47, 52–53,
70, 73, 79, 165–166
vortex conﬁgurations, 139
Ward identity, 78, 167
constraints, 168
Ward–Takahashi identities, 166, 207,
209, 211–212
wave vector, 7, 20, 156
wavefunction renormalization constant,
58, 62
weak coupling, 71, 139
expansion, 39–46, 56–58, 72, 79, 116,
135, 139, 144–147, 165
perturbation theory, 160
potential, 115–121
Weyl fermions, 161
Wick rotation, 27
inverse, 154
Wilson action, 95, 187
parameters, 188
Wilson fermions, 149, 170–171, 212,
214, 223
free, 225
method, 156–160, 165, 204, 227
propagator, 172
transfer operator, 161–165
Wilson line, see Polyakov line
Wilson loop, 107–108, 110–111,
115–116, 119–120, 129–133,
135–136, 138, 175, 241
conﬁnement phase, 137
Coulomb phase, 137
plaquette, 108
rectangular, 137
spacelike, 135
Wilson’s hopping parameter, 159, 182
Wilson’s renormalization theory, 56
Wilson–Dirac Hamiltonian, 165
Wilson–Dirac operator, 214
Wilson–Yukawa framework, 220
Witten–Veneziano formula, 204, 209,
211
Yukawa couplings, 75–76, 78, 220
Z(n), 136
vortices, 140
Introduction to Quantum Fields on a Lattice Quantum ﬁeld theory, our description of the fundamental forces in nature, was originally formulated in continuous space–time, where it leads to embarrassing inﬁnities which have to be eliminated by a process called renormalization. A simple but rigorous formulation can be obtained by replacing continuous space–time by a discrete set of points on a lattice. This clariﬁes the essentials of quantum ﬁelds using concepts such as universality of critical phenomena and the renormalization group. This book provides a clear and pedagogical introduction to quantum ﬁelds on a lattice. The path integral on the lattice is explained in concrete examples using weak and strongcoupling expansions. Fundamental concepts, such as ‘triviality’ of Higgs ﬁelds and conﬁnement of quarks and gluons into hadrons, are described and illustrated with the results of numerical simulations. The book also provides an introduction to chiral symmetry and chiral gauge theory. Based on the lecture notes of a course given by the author, this book contains many explanatory examples and exercises, and is suitable as a textbook for advanced undergraduate and graduate courses. Jan Smit holds a position at the Institute of Theoretical Physics of the University of Amsterdam and, since 1991, he has been Professor of Theoretical Physics at Utrecht University. He is well known for his fundamental contributions to lattice gauge theory. His current interests are lattice methods for quantum gravity, applications to cosmology and the creation of the quark–gluon plasma in the laboratory.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CAMBRIDGE LECTURE NOTES IN PHYSICS 15
General Editors: P. Goddard, J. Yeomans
1. Clarke: The Analysis of Space–Time Singularities 2. Dorey: Exact sMatrices in Two Dimensional Quantum Field Theory 3. Sciama: Modern Cosmology and the Dark Matter Problem 4. Veltman: Diagrammatica – The Path to Feynman Rules 5. Cardy: Scaling and Renormalization in Statistical Physics 6. Heusler: Black Hole Uniqueness Theorems 7. Coles and Ellis: Is the Universe Open or Closed? 8. Razumov and Saveliev: Lie Algebras, Geometry, and Todatype Systems 9. Forshaw and Ross: Quantum Chromodynamics and the Pomeron 10. Jensen: Selforganised Criticality 11. Vandezande: Lattice Models of Polymers 12. Esposito: Dirac Operators and Spectral Geometry 13. Kreimer: Knots and Feynman Diagrams 14. Dorfman: An Introduction to Chaos in Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics 15. Smit: Introduction to Quantum Fields on a Lattice
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Introduction to Quantum Fields on a Lattice ‘a robust mate’ JAN SMIT University of Amsterdam .
VIC 3207.org © Jan Smit 2002 This edition © Jan Smit 2003 First published in printed format 2002 A catalogue record for the original printed book is available from the British Library and from the Library of Congress Original ISBN 0 521 89051 9 paperback ISBN 0 511 02078 3 virtual (netLibrary Edition) . Trumpington Street. Port Melbourne. NY 100114211.cambridge. New York.PUBLISHED BY CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS (VIRTUAL PUBLISHING) FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE The Pitt Building. USA 477 Williamstown Road. Australia http://www. Cambridge CB2 IRP 40 West 20th Street.
9 2.11 3 3.1 2.2 2 2.8 2.10 2.5 3.8 3.1 1.7 3.3 3.5 2.6 2.6 3.9 Introduction QED.2 3.Contents Preface 1 1.7 2.4 3.1 3.4 2. and conﬁnement Scalar ﬁeld Pathintegral and lattice regularization Path integral in quantum mechanics Regularization by discretization Analytic continuation to imaginary time Spectrum of the transfer operator Latticization of the scalar ﬁeld Transfer operator for the scalar ﬁeld Fourier transformation on the lattice Free scalar ﬁeld Particle interpretation Back to real time Problems O(n) models Goldstone bosons O(n) models as spin models Phase diagram and critical line Weakcoupling expansion Renormalization Renormalizationgroup beta functions Hopping expansion L¨scher–Weisz solution u Numerical simulation vii page xi 1 1 5 8 8 10 12 13 15 18 20 22 25 26 28 32 32 34 36 39 46 48 51 55 60 .3 2. QCD.2 2.
3 4.6 4.1 5.1 4.viii 3.9 4.1 6.13 4 4.9 5.2 5.4 4.10 3.4 6.11 3.10 5 5. conﬁnement phase Mechanisms of conﬁnement Scaling and asymptotic scaling.5 4.1 7.4 5.7 5.6 5.6 7 7.4 Contents Realspace renormalization group and universality Universality at weak coupling Triviality and the Standard Model Problems Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice QED action QCD action Lattice gauge ﬁeld Gaugeinvariant lattice path integral Compact and noncompact Abelian gauge theory Hilbert space and transfer operator The kineticenergy operator Hamiltonian for continuous time Wilson loop and Polyakov line Problems U (1)and SU (n) gauge theory Potential at weak coupling Asymptotic freedom Strongcoupling expansion Potential at strong coupling Conﬁnement versus screening Glueballs Coulomb phase.5 5.10 6 6.8 5.7 4.3 5.5 6.12 3. numerical results Problems Fermions on the lattice Naive discretization of the Dirac action Species doubling Wilson’s fermion method Staggered fermions Transfer operator for Wilson fermions Problems Lowmass hadrons in QCD Integrating over the fermion ﬁelds Hopping expansion for the fermion propagator Meson and baryon propagators Hadron masses at strong coupling 67 71 74 79 83 83 85 90 95 97 99 102 105 107 112 115 115 121 125 129 132 135 136 138 140 144 149 149 151 156 160 161 165 170 170 171 173 177 .2 7.8 4.3 6.3 7.2 6.2 4.
6 7.8 8 8.3 8.3 Left and right translations in SU (n) A.5 7.2 Adjoint representation of SU (n) A.4 Tensor method for SU (n) Appendix B Quantization in the temporal gauge Appendix C Fermionic coherent states Appendix D Spinor ﬁelds Notes References Index .4 8.8 Numerical results The parameters of QCD Computing the gauge coupling from the masses Problems Chiral symmetry Chiral symmetry and eﬀective action in QCD Pseudoscalar masses and the U (1) problem Chiral anomalies Chiral symmetry and the lattice Spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry Chiral gauge theory Outlook Problems ix 179 188 190 190 193 193 199 202 204 212 217 223 223 229 229 231 234 236 239 242 253 258 261 267 Appendix A SU (n) A.5 8.6 8.1 Fundamental representation of SU (n) A.2 8.Contents 7.7 7.1 8.7 8.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank .
Preface She [ﬁeld theory] is not a robust mate pitch in and lend a helping hand. universality. reﬁned. displayed in this book. our description of fundamental particles and their interactions. while at a pedestrian mathematical level. and the role of topology. Bryce S. and much too beautiful work. rigorous. This book is based on notes of a lecture course given to advanced undergraduate students during the period 1984–1995. scaling. By approximating space–time by a collection of points on a lattice we get a number of beneﬁts: • it serves as a precise but simple deﬁnition of quantum ﬁelds. An eﬀort was made to accomodate those without prior knowledge of ﬁeld theory. which has its own beauty. • it makes a fruitful connection to statistical physics. DeWitt ready to haunting for hard and thus found to Since the above characterization appeared [1] in 1965 we have witnessed great progress in quantum ﬁeld theory. giving truly nonperturbative results as well as new physical intuition into the behavior of the system. She is a mistress. In the present version. • it brings to the fore and clariﬁes essential aspects such as renormalization. • it allows numerical simulations on a computer. examples from numerical simulations have been replaced xi . This book displays her in informal dress. She is at her best in formal dress. robust and ready to give results. where rigor will be be absolutely absent.
In fact.edu/spires/hep/ I would like to thank my students. but a lot of exciting developments usually take place ‘on the fringe’. or the SPIRES website http://www. The latter notoriously complicated topic was not dealt with in the lectures. who stumbled over my mistakes. but for this book it seemed appropriate to give an introduction. in the parallel sessions. November 2001 .org/ and its mirrors. The appropriate papers can be retrieved from the eprint archive http://arXiv. Amsterdam. which is understandable.3–8.xii Preface by more recent results.stanford. which contain excellent reviews in which the authors tried hard to make the material accessible. and a few sections (8. These meetings tend to be dominated by QCD. for their perseverance and enthusiasm.6) on lattice aspects of chiral symmetry have been added.slac. as many of the physical applications are in the sphere of the strong interactions. and my colleagues for collaborations and for sharing their insight into this eversurprising research ﬁeld. An overview of the research area in this book is given by the proceedings of the yearly symposia ‘Lattice XX’. Lattice XX may be considered as the arena for nonperturbative ﬁeld theory.
In addition to electric charge they also carry ‘color charges’. νµ . the classical scalar ﬁeld. The ‘atoms’ of QCD are q q (¯ denotes the antiparticle of q) ¯ q 1 . pions (π ± ). which are the sources of the gluon ﬁelds. and conﬁnement Quantum electrodynamics (QED) is the quantum theory of photons (γ) and charged particles such as electrons (e± ). e. The expansion parameter of perturbation theory is the ﬁnestructure constant1 α = e2 /4π. The analogy with electrodynamics at short distances disappears at larger distances with the emergence of the string tension. Subsequently we introduce the simplest relativistic ﬁeld theory. muons (µ± ). ‘top’ and ‘bottom’) are analogous to the charged leptons νe . c. Quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is the quantum theory of quarks (q) and gluons (g). QCD.1 QED. t and b (‘up’. with g analogous to the electromagnetic charge e. except that they are selfinteracting because they also carry color charges. protons (p). ‘down’. µ. ‘strange’. 1. etc. and pair annihilation/production such as e+ + e− → µ+ + µ− . d. and τ . The strength of these interactions is measured by αs = g 2 /4π (alpha strong). The gluons are analogous to photons. ντ . Typical phenomena that can be described by perturbation theory are Compton scattering (γ + e− → γ + e− ). s.1 Introduction We introduce here quarks and gluons. the force that conﬁnes the quarks and gluons permanently into bound states called hadrons. Examples of nonperturbative phenomena are the formation of atoms and molecules. The quarks u. ‘charm’.
there are expected to be glueballs consisting mainly of gluons.5. (1.). The mesons are bosons and the baryons are fermions. (b) stringlike at large distances. Furthermore. Ξ. Intuitive representation of chromoelectric ﬁeld lines between a static quark–antiquark source pair in QCD: (a) Coulomblike at short distances. Λ∗ . . Σ∗ . bound states called mesons† (π. because there are eﬀective string models for V (r). There may be also multiquark states analogous to molecules. r → ∞. In QCD conﬁnement is realized such that V (r) increases linearly with r as r → ∞. 1. The energy of this conﬁguration is the quark–antiquark potential V (r). . and furthermore Σ. Λ. ∆. . K ∗ . V (r) ≈ σr. For a precise characterization of conﬁnement one considers the theory with gluons only (no dynamical quarks) in which static external sources are inserted with quark quantum numbers. Because of conﬁnement.1). ρ. η .1 in section 7. . The way that the gluons interact among themselves has dramatic eﬀects. . ω. φ. it is not possible to have single quarks in the theory: they are permanently conﬁned in bound states. the interactions are strong and αs eﬀectively becomes arbitrarily large as the distance scale increases. . These bound states are called ‘hadrons’ and their properties as determined by experiment are recorded in the tables of the Particle Data Group [2].1) The coeﬃcient σ is called the string tension. at which the energy content per unit length becomes constant. . quarks and gluons cannot exist as free parti† The quark content of these particles is given in table 7. ) and 3q bound states called baryons (the nucleon N .1. K.2 Introduction Fig. Because of the increasing potential energy between quarks at large distances. η. Such models are very useful for grasping some of the physics involved (ﬁgure 1. At distances of the order of the hadron size. a distance r apart.
1. which relate shortdistance to longdistance properties.5) See ﬁgure 1. The value of the string tension σ is known to be approximately (400 MeV)2 . Such approximately straight ‘Regge trajectories’ can be . Shape of the static q q potential and the force F = ∂V /∂r. Writing conventionally ¯ F (r) = 4 αs (r) .3) This is called asymptotic freedom. the spin J is approximately linear in the squared mass m2 . (1. No such free particles have been found. The eﬀective interaction strength αs is small at short distances. For the glueball mass m or string tension σ we can then write √ σ = Cσ Λ. The parameter Λ has the dimension of a mass and may be taken to set the dimension scale in quarkless ‘QCD’. are nonperturbative quantities. 11 ln(1/Λ2 r2 ) (1. (1. They are pure numbers whose computation is a challenge to be met by the theory developed in the following chapters. F = ∂V /∂r.1.4) m = Cm Λ. QCD.1 QED. J = α0 + α m2 . This information comes from a remarkable property of the hadronic mass spectrum. and conﬁnement 3 Fig. 3 r2 (1.3.2. perturbation theory is applicable at short distances or large momentum transfers. Constants like Cm and Cσ . ¯ cles.2. the fact that. However. This can also be seen from the force derived from the q q potential. αs (r) ≈ 4π .2) we know that αs → 0 very slowly as the distance decreases. See ﬁgure 1. for the leading spin states. scattering experiments at high momentum transfers (corresponding to short distances) have led to the conclusion that there are quarks and gluons inside the hadrons. Because of this.
dt ∂pk ∂H dpk =− . Hence. for which one expects that only the longdistance part of V (r) is important. r = r is the relative separation. p3 = 0. for clarity shifted upward by two units. r2 = a sin(ωt).6) Here mq is the mass of the constituent quarks. 1.8) . ∂H drk = . σ = 1/8αρ . taken to be equal for simplicity. The potential is taken to be purely linear. The line labeled ‘pot’ is L versus H 2 for the solution (1. understood from the following simple eﬀective Hamiltonian for binding of a q q pair. the straight lines are ﬁts to the data.and πlike particles. for mq = mρ /2. dt ∂rk (1. For such states with large quantum number L the classical approximation should be reasonable. p1 = −b sin(ωt).3. because we are interested in the largemass bound states with large relative angular momentum L. ¯ H = 2 m2 + p2 + σr.7) and the following Ansatz for a circular solution: r1 = a cos(ωt). p2 = b cos(ωt). Plot of spin J versus m2 (GeV2 ) for ρ. consider the classical Hamilton equations. and the spin of the quarks is ignored. (1. r3 = 0. The dots give the positions of particles.10). p = p is the relative momentum. q (1. labeled by their particles with lowest spin.4 Introduction Fig.
the experimental value α ≈ 0.10) m2 . Such composite ﬁelds can still be approximately represented by elementary ϕ(x).9) such that L and H can be written as L = rp = 2s−1 σ −1 p2 . (1. a. or ¯ composite scalar ﬁelds of the schematic form ψ(x)γ5 ψ(x).2 Scalar ﬁeld We start our exploration of ﬁeld theory with the scalar ﬁeld.90 GeV−2 gives σ ≈ 370 MeV.2 Scalar ﬁeld 5 Substituting (1.1. For example. Similarly. where ψ(x) ¯ and ψ(x) are quark ﬁelds and γ5 is a Dirac matrix.g. the classical approximation is suspect for L not much larger than unity. and expressions for p and r. For example. protons. The string model is perhaps closer to reality if most of the boundstate energy is in the stringlike chromoelectric ﬁeld. but the same phenomenon appears to take place quantum mechanically in nature. but composed of quarks and gluons on much shorter distance scales.11) It turns out that L is approximately linear in H 2 even for quite small p2 . The eﬀective string model (see e.7) we get relations among ω. [3] section 10. giving σ ≈ 420 MeV.8) into (1. H = 2(s + s−1 )p. and b. we see that α ≡ LH −2 p/mq →∞ = (8σ)−1 . as shown in ﬁgure 1. because For p2 q H = m is the mass (rest energy) of the bound state. etc.2 √ With α = 1/8σ. but it should be kept in mind that both the string model and the eﬀective Hamiltonian give only an approximate representation of QCD. where the lower spin states are also near the straight line ﬁtting the higher spin states. s ≈ 1. for the description of pions we may use elementary scalar ﬁelds ϕ(x). t). which are then called eﬀective ﬁelds. q (1.3. pions. Particles appearing elementary on one distance scale may turn out to be be composite bound states on a smaller distance scale. s≡ 1 + m2 /p2 . Scalar ﬁelds ϕ(x) (x = (x. ﬁelds may also be elementary or composite. such that L < 1. t ≡ x0 ) are used to describe spinless particles. This is useful for the description of eﬀective . Of course. L ∝ p2 and H ∝ p. r = a = 2s−1 σ −1 p.5) leads √ approximately to the same answer: α = 1/2πσ. 1. Then L ∝ H 2 and. appear elementary on the scale of centimeters. (1. which can be written in the form p = b = σω −1 .
2 ˙ 2 U = 1 µ2 ϕ2 + 1 λϕ4 .12) L(x) = 1 ∂t ϕ(x)∂t ϕ(x) − 1 ϕ(x) · ϕ(x) − 1 µ2 ϕ(x)2 − 1 λϕ(x)4 . summation over repeated indices is implied. .16) The ﬁeld conﬁguration with lowest energy is called the ground state. with L the Lagrangian. In quantum ﬁeld theory their importance depends very much on the problem and method of solution. q 2 ≡ qk qk . The action itself comes more to the foreground. ϕ(x) is a scalar ﬁeld. especially in the pathintegral description of quantum theory. It has ϕ = ϕ = 0 and minimal U . d4 x = dx0 dx1 dx2 dx3 . L = qk qk /2m − V (q). 2 4 (1. 3. leads to the equation of motion: δS = =0 2 d4 x −∂t ϕ(x) + 2 ϕ(x) − µ2 ϕ(x) − λϕ(x)3 δϕ(x) (1.14) ⇒ 2 (∂t − 2 + µ2 )ϕ + λϕ3 = 0. (1. For a nonrelativistic particle described by coordinates qk . and is given by H = 1 ϕ2 + 1 ( ϕ)2 + U. k = 1. The energy density has the form kinetic energy plus potential energy.6 Introduction interactions. In ﬁeld theory a simple example is the action for the ϕ4 theory.15) (1. such that H is ˙ † Unless indicated otherwise. Various states of the system can be characterized by the energy H = d3 x H. (1. Maxwell theory). which are the result of more fundamental interactions on a shorter distance scale. We shall assume λ > 0. Requiring the action to be stationary under variations δϕ(x) of ϕ(x). the Lagrangian has the form kinetic energy minus potential energy. L(x) is the action density or Lagrange function. Note that the index x is a continuous analog of the discrete index k: ϕ(x. In the ﬁrst step we made a partial integration. In classical ﬁeld theory the equations of motion are very important (e. A basic tool in the description is the action S = dt L. and λ and µ2 are constants (λ is dimensionless and µ2 has dimension (mass)2 = (length)−2 ). S= M d4 x L(x). such that δϕ(x) = 0 for x on the boundary of M . qk qk ≡ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ k qk qk . 2.13) 2 2 2 4 Here M is a domain in space–time.† For the anharmonic oscillator in three ˙ ˙ dimensions the potential has the form V (q) = ω 2 q 2 /2 + λ(q 2 )2 /4. t) ↔ qk (t).g.
In this case the symmetry of S or H under ϕ(x) → −ϕ(x) is broken.17) So the case µ2 < 0 leads to a doubly degenerate ground state. The energy density for constant ﬁelds for µ2 < 0. . 2 2 2 µ + 3λv = −2µ .18) (1. Writing ϕ = ϕg + ϕ and neglecting O(ϕ 2 ) gives 2 (∂t − 2 + m2 )ϕ = 0. From a graph of U (ϕ) (ﬁgure 1.18) propagate with a group √ velocity v = ∂ω/∂k.14) around ϕ = ϕg . For λ = 0 there is no scattering and the ﬁeld is called ‘free’. because a nonzero ϕg is not invariant. and one speaks of spontaneous (or dynamical) symmetrybreaking. 4 λ (1. µ2 < 0. where k is the average wave vector and ω = m2 + k2 . λ Ug = − 1 µ2 . µ2 > 0.19) m2 = U (ϕg ) = µ2 . The particles can scatter with an interaction strength characterized by the coupling constant λ. (1. In the quantum theory these wavepackets are interpreted as particles with energy–momentum (ω. which can be found by linearizing the equation of motion (1. Ug = 0. Small disturbances away from the ground state propagate and disperse in space and time in a characteristic way. k) and mass m.4. 1.2 Scalar ﬁeld 7 Fig. v2 = − µ2 . bounded from below for all ϕ.1. Wavepacket solutions of (1. ϕg = ±v.4) we see that the cases µ2 > 0 and µ2 < 0 are qualitatively diﬀerent: µ2 > 0: µ2 < 0: ϕg = 0.
see for example [8]. 2m (2. in the pathintegral formalism.2) ˆ ˆ with H the Hamilton operator. (2. (2. H = H(ˆ.1 Path integral in quantum mechanics To see how the path integral works. consider ﬁrst a simple system with one degree of freedom described by the Lagrange function L = L(q.1) where p and q are related by p = ∂L/∂ q = mq. ˙ or the corresponding Hamilton function H = H(p.4) . ˆ q q = δ(q − q). 2. q). operator ˆ ˆ U (t1 .) In the coordinate basis q characterized by q q = qq . 8 dq q q = 1. For a continuum treatment of path integrals in quantum ﬁeld theory. q ). Instead of working with p ˆ qnumbers (operators) p and q we can also work with time dependent ˆ ˆ cnumbers (commuting numbers) q(t). H = 2 p2 + V (q). t2 ) = exp[−iH(t1 − t2 )/ ]. (Later we shall use anticommuting numbers to incorporate Fermi–Dirac statistics.3) (2. ˙ L = 1 mq 2 − V (q). make it precise with the lattice regularization and use it to quantize the scalar ﬁeld. q).2 Pathintegral and lattice regularization In this chapter we introduce the pathintegral method for quantum theory. p] = i (we indicate operators ˆ ˆ q ˆ in Hilbert space by a caret ˆ The evolution in time is described by the ·). In the quantum theory p ˙ ˙ and q become operators p and q with [ˆ.
7) as illustrated in ﬁgure 2. S(q) = and t1 t2 dt L(q(t). The classical path. ˆ we can represent the matrix element of U (t1 . Each path has a ‘weight’ exp(iS/ ). ‘histories’) q(t) with given end points. in which the classical path and its small neighborhood give the dominant contributions. (2. then a stationaryphase approximation will be good. The path integral is a summation over all ‘paths’ (‘trajectories’.5) Here S is the action functional of the system.8) is only one out of inﬁnitely many possible paths. ˙ (2.6) Dq symbolizes an integration over all functions q(t) such that q(t1 ) = q1 . q(t2 ) = q2 . A formal deﬁnition of Dq is given by Dq = t2 <t<t1 dq(t). t2 ) by a path integral ˆ q1 U (t1 . ∂q ∂t ∂ q ˙ (2. (2. The other extreme is when the variation of S/ is of order one. or ∂ ∂L ∂L − = 0. 2. t2 )q2 = Dq exp[iS(q)/ ].1.1. In the following we shall use again units in which = 1. q(t)). which satisﬁes the equation of motion δS(q) = 0. (2.2.9) . If is relatively small such that the phase exp(iS/ ) varies rapidly over the paths. Illustration of two functions q(t) contributing to the path integral.1 Path integral in quantum mechanics 9 Fig.
(2.e. by the same symbols as their continuum counterparts. with n integer. (2. 2a 2 2 where we have divided the potential term equally between qn and qn+1 . Note that the exponent is ˆ similar to the Lagrange function. . 2. For a smooth function q(t) the time derivative q(t) can be approximated by q(t) = (qn+1 − qn )/a.10 Pathintegral and lattice regularization i. . The operator T is called the transfer operator. The deﬁnition is formal because the continuous product t still has to be deﬁned. its matrix elements the transfer matrix. t )q = ˆ dq1 · · · dqN −1 q T qN −1 ˆ ˆ × qN −1 T qN −2 · · · q1 T q im (q − qN −1 )2 =c c dq exp 2a ia im (qN −1 − qN −2 )2 − V (q ) − iaV (qN −1 ) + 2 2a im ia − iaV (qN −2 ) + · · · + (q1 − q )2 − V (q ) 2a 2 ≡ Dq eiS . . . ˆ We deﬁne a discretized evolution operator T by its matrix elements as follows: m 1 1 ˆ (q1 − q2 )2 − V (q1 ) − V (q2 ) . such ˙ ˙ that the discretized Lagrange function may be written as† 1 1 m (2.2 Regularization by discretization To deﬁne the path integral properly we discretize time in small units a. e. −∞ < q < ∞. (2.10) L(t) = 2 (qn+1 − qn )2 − V (qn+1 ) − V (qn ). We shall give such a deﬁnition with the help of a discretization procedure. for every t ∈ (t2 . In terms of the transfer matrix we now give a precise deﬁnition of the discretized path integral: ˆ q U (t . q(t) = qn .13) † For notational simplicity we shall denote the discretized forms of L..g. writing t = na.12) Here the discretized action is deﬁned by N −1 S=a n=0 L(na). S.11) q1 T q2 = c exp ia 2a2 2 2 where c is a constant to be speciﬁed below. t1 ) we integrate over the domain of q.
so we may write ˆ ˆ T = e−iaH .15) Inserting eigenstates p of the momentum operator p using ˆ qp = eipq . such smoothness is not typically present in the integrand of the path integral (typical paths qn will look like having a very discontinuous derivative) and a continuum limit at this stage is formal. dp p p = 1.18) ˆ This equation deﬁnes a Hermitian Hamiltonian operator H modulo 2π/a. . q H= 2m (2. with a suitable choice of the constant c.19) is formal: because p2 is an unbounded operator there may be matrix ˆ elements for which the expansion does not converge. It will now be shown that. 2πa (2. Since the qn are integrated over on every ‘time slice’ n.14) Taking matrix elements between q1  and q2 we see that this formula is correct if ˆ q1 e−iap 2 /2m q2 = ceim(q1 −q2 ) 2 /2a .17) ˆ The transfer operator T is the product of three unitary operators. (2.16) we ﬁnd that (2.2 Regularization by discretization 11 where qN ≡ q and q0 ≡ q . as an operator equation.15) is true provided that we choose c= m = 2πia m −iπ/4 e . the expansion (2.19) in which we recognize the usual Hamilton operator. In the limit N → ∞ this becomes equal to the continuum action. (2.2. the transfer operator can be written in the form q ˆ2 q ˆ T = e−iaV (ˆ)/2 e−iap /2m e−iaV (ˆ)/2 . For matrix elements between eigenstates with energy E 2π/a the expansion ˆ ˆ T = 1 − iaH + O(a2 ) leads to the identiﬁcation p2 ˆ ˆ + V (ˆ) + O(a2 ).20) (2. 2π (2. It should be kept in mind though that. (2. when we substitute smooth functions q(t).
For most purposes the imaginarytime formulation is suﬃcient to extract the relevant physical information such as the energy spectrum of a theory. If necessary.22) a = ae−iϕ . The integration over the variables qn continues to converge if we rotate a in the complex plane according to π (2.12). 2 n+1 2a 2 2 Here the subscript denotes the imaginarytime versions of U and S. Monte Carlo computations have the tendency to blow up upon continuation.23) The result of this analytic continuation in a is that the discretized path integral takes the form ˆ q U (t . ϕ: 0 → . 2 4 (2.12 Pathintegral and lattice regularization 2. which has led to many fruitful developments. (2. as is the case. since statistical errors in e. (This can be done only in analytic calculations.g. 2 The reason is that. by implementing the inverse of the rotation (2. −iae−iϕ = a(− sin ϕ − i cos ϕ).24) S = −a n=0 m 1 1 (q − qn )2 + V (qn+1 ) + V (qn ) .21) Consider the discretized path integral (2. π/2]. The integrand in the imaginarytime path integral is real and bounded from above. for all ϕ ∈ (0.3 Analytic continuation to imaginary time It is very useful in practice to make an analytic continuation to imaginary time according to the substitution t → −it.22). for the anharmonic oscillator V (q) = 1 mω 2 q 2 + 1 λq 4 .) In the following the subscript will be dropped and we will redeﬁne a → a. = −iϕ ae a (2. Furthermore.12) is negative: 1 i (− sin ϕ + i cos ϕ). in the generalization to ﬁeld theory there is a direct connection to statistical physics. This makes numerical calculations and theoretical analysis very much easier. t )q N −1 = c n cdqn eS . This can be justiﬁed if the potential V (q) is bounded from below. . the real part of the exponent in (2. for example. with a positive. one may analytically continue back to real time.
i.30) For simplicity we shall use units in which a = 1 and m = 1. p = ap. From quantum statistical mechanics we recognize that Z is the canonical partition function corresponding to the temperature T = (t+ − t− )−1 (2. 2.29) Here ‘pbc’ indicates the fact that the integration is now over all discretized functions q(t). 2 (2.4 Spectrum of the transfer operator Creation and annihilation operators are familiar from the theory of the harmonic oscillator. (2. t− < t < t+ .27) where we think of t+ (t− ) as the largest (smallest) time under consideration. for which V (q) = 1 mω 2 q 2 . with t+ − t− = N a. (2. with ‘periodic boundary conditions’ q(t+ ) = q(t− ).28) in units such that Boltzmann’s constant kB = 1. We may therefore redeﬁne the Hamiltonian ˆ operator H according to ˆ ˆ T = e−aH . Here we shall use them to derive the eigenvalue spectrum of the transfer operator of the harmonic oscillator.e. which may be obtained by transforming to variables q = q/a. m = am.26) A natural object in the imaginarytime formalism is the partition function Z = Tr e−H(t+ −t− ) = ˆ ˆ ˆ dq qe−H(t+ −t− ) q = Tr T N . (2.24) qN = q0 ≡ q (q = q ≡ q) and integrating over q: Z= pbc Dq eS . The pathintegral representation of Z is obtained by setting in (2.4 Spectrum of the transfer operator 13 After transformation to imaginary time the transfer operator takes the Hermitian form q ˆ2 q ˆ T = e−aV (ˆ)/2 e−ap /2m e−aV (ˆ)/2 .25) This is a positive operator. . all its expectation values and hence all its eigenvalues are positive. (2.2.
The eigenvalues µ± of M can be expressed as ω ˜ µ± = e±˜ . 2 sinh ω ˜ (2.38) (2.32) q p We want to ﬁnd linear combinations κˆ + λˆ such that ˆ q T (κˆ + λˆ) = µ(κˆ + λˆ)T . (2. (2.37) 1 . a† ] = 0. cosh ω = 1 + 1 ω 2 . q ] = −i and p ˆ 2 2 2 2 ˆ ˆ2 ˆ ˆ T = e−ω q /4 e−p /2 e−ω q /4 . −i(2 + 1 ω 2 ) 1 ω 2 1 + 1 ω 2 2 2 2 (2. p q p ˆ (2.39) .34) from which it follows that (κ. ˆ ωˆ p ωˆ p a† = ν[sinh(˜ q ) − iˆ]. 2 (2. [ˆ. a† ] = 1. p → −i ∂/∂q or viceversa one obtains ˆ ˆ the relation ˆ ˆ p T q ˆ where the matrix M is given by M= i 1 + 1 ω2 2 . T a† = e−˜ a† T . then to q = q m and p = p / m . 14 (2. ˆ (2. such that (omitting the primes) [ˆ.35) and the linear combinations sought are given by a = ν[sinh(˜ q ) + iˆ]. The a and a† are the annihilation ˆ ˆ and creation operators for the discretized harmonic oscillator. a] = [ˆ† .31) Using the representation q → q. They satisfy the usual commutation relations a ˆ a ˆ [ˆ.Pathintegral and lattice regularization √ √ and ω = aω. a ˆ provided that ν=√ and furthermore ˜ ˆ ω ˆˆ ˆˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ T a = eω aT .36) where ν is a normalization constant. λ) have to form an eigenvector of M T (the transpose of M ) with eigenvalue µ.33) =M p ˆ q ˆ ˆ T.
11).5 Latticization of the scalar ﬁeld 15 ˆ The ground state 0 with the highest eigenvalue of T satisﬁes a0 = 0. t) (2.44) (i.39) one ﬁnds that the 2˜ excitation energies occur in units of ω . Recalling that ω is really aω. This is the reason for the symmetric division of the potential in (2.46) (2. which is much better than O(a) as might be expected naively. and similarly for ω . ˆ T 0 = e−E0 0 . ˆ ϕ = x (2.e. ˆ from which one ﬁnds (using for example the coordinate representation) ˜ q0 = e− 2 sinh ω q .5 Latticization of the scalar ﬁeld We now transcribe these ideas to ﬁeld theory. The coordinate representation is formally characterized by ϕ(x)ϕ = ϕ(x)ϕ . cosh(a˜ ) = 1 + a2 ω 2 /2 + a4 ω 4 /24 + · · · = ω 1 + a2 ω 2 /2.42) which looks familiar. 2˜ (2. ˜ (2. (2. the energy spectrum is given by En = n + 1 2 ω.43) Note that the corrections are O(a2 ). except that ω = ω. δ(ϕ (x) − ϕ(x)). The dynamical variables generalize as q(t) → ϕ(x. 2. . that ω = ω + O(a2 ).41) Hence.48) ϕx . we see by expanding ˜ ˜ (2. x ϕ ϕ = ∞ x −∞ dϕ(x) ϕ ϕ = 1.47) (2. there is a q for every x).2.35) in powers of a.40) The groundstate energy is E0 = 1 ω and using (2.45) (2.e. for example ˜ ω ˜ ˆˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ T a† 0 = e−˜ a† T 0 = e−(3/2) ω a† 0 . i. taking the scalar ﬁeld as the ﬁrst example. ˜ We now can take the continuum limit a → 0 in the physical quantities ˜ En . 1 2 E0 = 1 ω . ˜ (2.
reﬂections and translations. N → ∞. L ﬁxed.49) where the integral is over all functions ϕ(x. a = L/N → 0. . Let xµ be restricted to a fourdimensional hypercubic lattice.. 1. The notation N −1 N −1 ≡ a4 x m1 =0 ··· m4 =0 ≡ a4 m (2.53) will be used in this book. (2. (2. t1.16 Pathintegral and lattice regularization The evolution operator is given by ˆ ϕ1 U (t1 . (2. t) with ϕ(x. N/2. since the space–time symmetries of the theory consist of Euclidean rotations. (2. .54) We have put x = 0 at the edge of the box. xµ = mµ a. The theory is speciﬁed furthermore by the choice of action S. The path integral Z will be given a precise deﬁnition with the lattice regularization. we shall not distinguish between upper and lower indices µ. For smooth functions f (x) we have in the continuum limit L f (x) → x 0 d4 x f (x). The size of the hypercubic box is L = N a and its space–time volume is L4 . since the metric tensor is simply equal to the Kronecker δµν . . If we want it in the middle of the box we can choose mµ = −N/2 + 1.. For the standard ϕ4 model 1 µ2 2 λ ∂µ ϕ(x)∂µ ϕ(x) + ϕ (x) + ϕ4 (x) . N − 1. . Below we . x4 ) and x4 = t.52) where a is the lattice distance. ϕ(x.51) where the integral is over all functions periodic in the time direction.2 (x). ν.50) where x = (x. t2 )ϕ2 = Dϕ eS(ϕ) .2 ) = ϕ1. . Consequently. Note that in the imaginarytime formalism the symmetry between space and time is manifest. t). One often speaks of the Euclidean formalism. The partition function is given by S(ϕ) = − t1 dx4 d3 x Z= Dϕ eS(ϕ) . . −N/2 + 2.. mµ = 0. by a straightforward generalization of the example of quantum mechanics with one degree of freedom. . . t + β) = ϕ(x. 2 2 4 t2 (2. . with β = T −1 the inverse temperature.
x ≡ m .55) (2. (2.y − δx. a → 0. the path integral will now be deﬁned by (∂µ )xy = Z= Dϕ = x Dϕ eS(ϕ) . We shall use the notation 1 (ϕx+aˆ − ϕx ). ∂µ f (x) → (2. for example. we write ϕx . (2. ˆ ∂µ f (x). The scalar ﬁeld on the lattice is assigned to the sites x.58) With periodic boundary conditions the derivative operators ∂µ and ∂µ are related by ‘partial summation’ (the analog of partial integration) ϕ1x ∂µ ϕ2x = − x x ∂µ ϕ1x ϕ2x .(N −1)a ).59) (2.63) (∂µ )xy = (δx. (2. µ and. µ a After these preliminaries.2. The part of the action without derivatives is transcribed to the lattice as x (µ2 ϕ2 /2 + λϕ4 /4).y − δx−aˆ.0 − ϕx.61) 1 (δx+aˆ. c ∞ −∞ (2.5 Latticization of the scalar ﬁeld 17 shall choose such a labeling for Fourier modes and we shall assume N to be even in the following.(N −1)a = 1 (ϕx. µ a ∂µ ϕx = ∂ f (x). For smooth functions f (x).56) where µ is a unit vector in the µ direction. ∂µ ϕx = (∂µ )xy ϕy . ∂4 ϕx.57) It is convenient to use periodic boundary conditions (such that the lattice has no boundary). x x Derivatives can be replaced by diﬀerences.60) In matrix notation.65) . ∂xµ (2. µ a 1 ∂µ ϕx = (ϕx − ϕx−aˆ ).y ). ∂µ = −∂µ : (2.62) µ a 1 T (2.64) dϕx .y ) = −(∂µ )yx = −(∂µ )xy . a (2. which are speciﬁed by ϕx+N aˆ = ϕx . T ∂µ is minus the transpose of ∂µ .
one generated by a computer with some Monte Carlo algorithm. [ϕ] = a−(d−2)/2 . it is useful to keep in mind that typical ﬁeld conﬁgurations ϕx contributing to the path integral are not smooth at all on the lattice scale.. Then the action can be written as S(ϕ) = −at n x 1 2 (ϕn+1. Drawing a typical ﬁeld conﬁguration ϕ from this ensemble. However.x = ϕ0. The discussion of continuum behavior in the quantum theory is a delicate matter. although this should not be the case for physically observable properties. with n = 0. e. For later use we generalize to diﬀerent lattice spacings for time and space.74) below. diﬀerent discrete diﬀerentiation schemes) may lead to diﬀerent answers for certain properties. N −1 and ϕN.80). (2. In d space–time dimensions. We use the notation x4 = t = nat . This has the consequence that diﬀerent discretizations (e.x − ϕn. scaling and universality. The dimension of ϕ follows from the requirement that the action S is dimensionless.68) √ The factor 1/ 2π is an inessential convention. S(f ) → Scont (f ) in the classical continuum limit a → 0. which would lead to an additional constant in the Hamiltonian (2. one ﬁnds that it varies rather wildly from site to site on the lattice. (2.69) n . The lattice action was chosen such that for smooth functions f (x). . chosen such that there is no additional factor in the expression for the transfer operator (2. 1 µ2 2 λ 4 ∂µ ϕx ∂µ ϕx + ϕ + ϕ . at and a. 1. . respectively. 2 2 x 4 x (2.67) Note that cϕ is dimensionless.6 Transfer operator for the scalar ﬁeld The derivation of the transfer operator for the scalar ﬁeld on the lattice follows the steps made earlier in the example with one degree of freedom.x ) − at 2a2 t V (ϕn ).g. 2. .18 Pathintegral and lattice regularization S(ϕ) = − x √ c = a/ 2π. c = a(d−2)/2 .g. The factor Z −1 exp S(ϕ) can be interpreted as a normalized probability distribution for an ensemble of ﬁeld conﬁgurations ϕx . which involves concepts like renormalization.x .x . ϕx = ϕn.66) (2. The previous sentence is meant in the following sense.
y . It follows that a ξ . with the property ˆ ˆ [ϕx .74) x where πx is the canonical conjugate operator of ϕx . p = a2 π → −i ∂/∂q.79) c=a 2π at .x + .6 Transfer operator for the scalar ﬁeld 3 µ2 2 λ 4 1 ϕ + ϕ ∂j ϕn.70) 1 (ϕn+1.x 4 n. 2 such that Z= x dϕx ˆ ˆ ϕN T ϕN −1 · · · ϕ1 T ϕ0 (2.x ∂j ϕn. ξ= .75) To check (2. for given x.x − ϕn.72) (2.77) This relation is just a product over x of relations of the onedegreeoffreedom type ˆ q1 e−p 2 /2ξ q2 = ξ −ξ(q1 −q2 )2 /2 e . Using ˆ e−at 2 V (ϕ) ϕn = e−at 2 V (ϕn ) ϕn .2.74) we take matrix elements between ϕn and ϕn+1  and compare with (2. 1 1 (2. πy ] = ia−3 δx. ˆ The transfer operator T can be written in the form 1 1 ˆ ˆ T = exp −at V (ϕ) exp −at 2 2 1 ˆ πx exp −at V (ϕ) .x ) /2a2 . and ˆ √ ϕ = aq (such that ϕ ϕ = a q q = aδ(q − q) = δ(ϕ − ϕ)).x )2 2a2 t (2.71).74) is correct provided that ϕn+1 e−at 2 1 x πx ˆ2 ϕn = cN exp −at x 3 (ϕn+1. ˆ ˆ (2. t 2 (2. 2π (2.71) 1 × exp −at (V (ϕn+1 ) + V (ϕn )) .78) ˆ with the identiﬁcation. ˆ2 2 (2. q = aϕ.73) ˆ = Tr T N .x x ˆ The transfer operator T is deﬁned by its matrix elements ˆ ϕn+1 T ϕn = cN exp −at x 3 19 (2. V (ϕn ) = 2 j=1 2 n.x − ϕn. (2.76) we see that (2.
80) 2. The usual plane waves in a ﬁnite volume with periodic boundary conditions are given by eipx . . a 2 L (2. mµ = 0.82) Indeed. Making the formal continuoustime limit by letting at → 0 and exˆ ˆ panding T = 1 − at H + · · ·. we ﬁnd a conventionallooking Hamiltonian1 on a spatial lattice. L = N a. ﬁgure 2. There should not be more pµ than xµ . L (2.2. . ˆ ˆ ˆx 4 ˆx 2 2 (2..7 Fourier transformation on the lattice We record now some frequently used formulas involving the Fourier transform.. . . pµ = nµ 2π .2) λmin = 2a.20 Pathintegral and lattice regularization Fig. N − 1. N/2. the shortest wave length and largest wave vector are given by (cf.83) . we take nµ = −N/2 + 1. On the lattice the xµ are restricted to xµ = mµ a. . . 2.81) where the nµ are integers. −N/2 + 2. Shortest wave length of a lattice ﬁeld. (2. pmax = N 2π π = . ˆ H= x 1 2 ˆ 2 πx + 1 ∂j ϕx ∂j ϕx + 1 µ2 ϕ2 + 1 λϕ4 + O(a2 ). We want to use these functions for (Fourier) transformations of variables.
n .89) ¯ N aµ δmµ . ∗ Umn Umn = δn.n ≡ 0.p ≡ x µ (2.93) where aµ  is the lattice spacing in the µ direction (unless stated otherwise. mn = mµ nµ ) Umn ≡ N −d/2 ei2πmn/N ≡ N −d/2 eipx is a unitary matrix. n = n mod N. (2. n = n mod N = 1.90) (2. µ (2.95) ϕx = . aµ  = a).87) r ≡ ei2π(n−n )/N .n . ¯ aµ −1 δnµ . d = 1: ∗ Umn Umn = 1 N N −1 rm = m=0 1 1 − rN ¯ = δn.x ≡ p ≡ x µ .7 Fourier transformation on the lattice 21 Apart from these intuitive arguments.88) (2.mµ .2. the reason for (2. mn (2. N 1−r (2.85) We check this for the onedimensional case. ˜ p (2.nµ .91) ¯ eip(x−x ) = δx.94) (2. where ¯ δn.92) aµ  mµ .82) is the fact that (in d dimensions.86) (2. eipx ϕp . nµ ≡ p µ 1 N aµ  (2. With this notation we can write the Fourier transformation of variables (‘from position space to momentum space’) and its inverse as ϕp = ˜ x e−ipx ϕx .84) (2. We shall use this result in the form ¯ e−i(p−p )x = δp.
98) (2. f (p) = p (∆p)4 (2π)4 π/a f n 2πn Na (2.100) It is useful to introduce an external source Jx .z .x δz. brings Z(J) into the form Z(J) = Z(0) exp 1 2 Gxy Jx Jy (2. The partition function with an external source is deﬁned as Z(J) = Dϕ exp S + x Jx ϕx .104) . (2.97) 2. For this case the path integral can be done easily.x − δz. (2. which can be chosen as we wish. ¯ Sxy Gyz = −δx. Assuming µ2 ≡ m2 > 0. N → ∞.99) = where Sxy = − z µ 1 2 xy Sxy ϕx ϕy .8 Free scalar ﬁeld For λ = 0 we get the free scalar ﬁeld action. (2.x )(δz+aˆ. ¯ µ ¯ ¯ µ ¯ ¯ ¯ (δz+aˆ. we write S=− x 1 2 ∂µ ϕx ∂µ ϕx + 1 m 2 ϕ2 x 2 (2.22 Pathintegral and lattice regularization For smooth functions f (p) we have. −π/a d4 p f (p). in the inﬁnitevolume limit L = N a → ∞.101) The transformation of variables ϕ x → ϕx + y Gxy Jy . a ﬁxed.102) with Gxy minus the inverse of Sxy .96) → where ∆p = 2π/N a.y .103) . (2π)4 (2.y − δz.y ) + m2 δz. (2.
G(p) = m2 + p2 1 . The propagator G can be easily found in ‘momentum space’. 2 .111) and in the continuum limit a → 0.−q = Gp δp.106) =− ¯ = Sp δp.2. First we determine the Fourier transform of Sxy .−q ≡ xy e−ipx+iqy Sxy µ ˆ (e−ipˆ − 1)(eiqµ − 1) + m2 e−ipz+iqz z µ (2.110) + From this we can restore the lattice distance by using dimensional analysis: p → ap. m → am and Gp → a2 G(p). (2. Gp = m2 1 . µ (2 − 2 cos pµ ) (2.105) There is ﬁnitetemperature physics that can be extracted from the partition function Z(0). Z(0) = =√ Dϕ exp − 1 G−1 ϕx ϕy 2 xy 1 det G−1 = exp 1 2 23 ln det G . This gives G(p) = m2 + a−2 1 . Sp. It is instructive to check that the corrections to the continuum form are already quite small for apµ < 1 . + O(a2 ) (2.108) (2. 2 (2. but here we shall not pay attention to it.8 Free scalar ﬁeld The integral Z(0) is just a multiple Gaussian integral.−q is diagonal in momentum space.107) (2 − 2 cos pµ ) 4 sin2 pµ . its inverse is given by ¯ Gp. µ (2 − 2 cos apµ ) (2.q .112) which is the usual covariant expression for the scalar ﬁeld propagator.q . using lattice units a = 1.109) = m2 + µ Since Sp. −Sp = m + 2 µ (2.
We now calculate the time dependence of Gxy . ∂Jx J=0 ∂ ln Z = = Gxy . z− < 1. (2. in lattice units.104) we calculate the correlation function of the free theory. z± = b ± b2 − 1. We shall take t > 0. the propagator G is the correlation function of the system (cf.118) (2.120) z− = e−ω . z+ z− = 1. assuming that the temporal extent of the lattice is inﬁnite (zero temperature).114) Hence. −π 2π 2b − 2 cos p4 p 3 pj 1 2 m + . problem (v)). see ﬁgure 2.3. 2 − 2bz + 1 2πi z (2. ϕx = ϕ x ϕy ∂ ln Z = 0. z 2 − 2bz + 1 = (z − z+ )(z − z− ). π G(x − y) ≡ Gxy = G(x. t) = eipx −π π dp4 2π eip(x−y) G(p). ω = ln b + b2 − 1 . With z = exp(ip4 ) we have π I≡ −π eip4 t dp4 2π 2b − 2 cos p4 zt dz .116) dp4 eip4 t .121) .119) =− where the integration is counter clockwise over the contour z = 1.113) (2. The residue at z = z− gives I= e−ωt . t is an integer and b > 1.117) where we reverted to lattice units.115) (2. p (2. The integral over p4 can be done by contour integration. ∂Jx ∂Jy J=0 (2. 2 sinh ω (2. 4 sin2 b=1+ 2 2 j=1 (2.24 Pathintegral and lattice regularization From the form (2. z+ > 1. cosh ω = b. The denominator has a pole at z = z− within the unit circle. Note that.
which are ˆp indexed by the Fourier label p. One then ﬁnds (cf.9 Particle interpretation The free scalar ﬁeld is just a collection of harmonic oscillators. and we see that the correlation length of the system is 1/m. dominates.2. ω→ m2 + p2 . We can diagonalize the transfer operator explicitly by taking similar steps to those for the harmonic oscillator. The crosses indicate the positions of the poles at z = z± . t → ∞. (2. pj → apj . (2. and it follows that (ω depends on p) G(x.122) is a sum of exponentials exp(−ωt). which are coupled by the gradient term ∂j ϕ∂j ϕ in the action or Hamiltonian (2. ω = m. G ∝ e−mt .124) 2. Integration contour in the complex z = eip4 plane. 2. ˆ problem (iii)) creation and annihilation operators a† and ap . a → 0) we get the familiar Lorentz covariant expression.122) Notice that the pole z = z− corresponds to a pole in the variable p4 at p4 = iω. 2 sinh ω (2. In the continuum limit (m → am. t) = p eipx−ωt . The elementary excitations p = ˆ . ω → aω.9 Particle interpretation 25 Fig.123) The form (2.80). The ground state 0 has the property ap 0 = 0 with energy E0 = p ωp /2.3. For large t the exponential with the smallest ω.
γ − E0 . The quantum numbers of the particles excited by the ﬁelds out of the vacuum match those of the ﬁelds chosen in the correlation functions. but only the singleparticle states have the simple free energy– m2 + p2 . They have spin zero because they correspond to a scalar ﬁeld under rotations (there are no further quantum numbers to characterize their state). and the spatial translation operator Ux (eigenvalue exp(−ipx). their wavepackets) are far apart. for which the states with lowest excitation energies (i.γ=0  0ϕ0 p. The ‘dressed’ particle states are the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian.γ = Ep.26 Pathintegral and lattice regularization a† 0 are interpreted as particles with momentum p and energy ωp . the particles) ωp dominate. see problem (vii) for its deﬁnition).22) we analytically continued the lattice distance in the time direction at to imaginary values. For instance. Alternatively.125) ωp.e. In the continuum limit we recover the relativistic energy–momentum relation ω(p) = m2 + p2 . unless the particles (i. The mass (rest energy) of the particles is evidently m. This ˆp interpretation is guided by the fact that these states are eigenstates of ˆ the translation operators in space and time. 2. namely. one can diagonalize the transfer operator by variational methods. These methods are very general and also apply to conﬁning theories such as QCD.10 Back to real time In (2. exp(Ht) (eigenvalue ˆ exp[(ωp + E0 )t]). For interacting ﬁelds the above creation and annihilation operators no longer commute with the Hamiltonian – they are said to create ‘bare’ particles. e.70) may be . problem (viii)) ϕx ϕy − ϕ 2= p. The ground state is usually called ‘the vacuum’. γ 2 exp[−ωp. Using the spectral representation (cf. Multiparticle states have in momentum relation ω(p) = general interaction energy.γ x4 − y4  + ip(x − y)]. the action (2.e. ˆ (2. They are bosons because the (basis) states are symmetric in ˆp ˆp ˆp ˆp interchange of labels: p1 p2 ≡ a† 1 a† 2 0 = a† 2 a† 1 0 = p2 p1 .g. the particle properties can still be deduced from the correlation functions. If we want to go back to real time we have to keep track of at . by studying their behavior at large time diﬀerences.
For instance. In the continuum limit m → am. pj → apj . ϕ: π/2 → . (2 − 2 cos pj ) − ξ2 (2 − 2 cos p4 ) − i j (2. (2 − 2 cos p4 ) is also positive.127) We have to realize that the symbol at in the Euclidean notation was really at  (cf.134) .128) Rotating back to real time.24)) and that at  = iat = iat  exp(−iϕ). ϕ: 0 → π/2 in the complex plane. (2. > 0 inﬁnitesimal. one continues the Minkowski space propagator to the Euclideanspace correlation function GM (x) = eipx dp0 d3 p 4 m2 + p2 − p2 − i (2π) 0 dp4 d3 p eipx →i (2π)4 m2 + p2 + p2 4 = iG(x).129) where we freely rescaled the inﬁnitesimal by positive values. p0 → −ip4 .130) In continuum language the rotation to imaginary time is usually called a Wick rotation: x0 → −ix4 . according to (2. m2 + p2 − p2 − i 4 (2. p0 → ip4 . below (2.131) where −i is meant to represent the rotation exp(−iϕ). ξ = .132) (2. [−i exp(i )]2 = (−i + )2 = −1 − i .10 Back to real time rewritten in lattice units as S = −ξ x 1 2 ∂4 ϕx ∂4 ϕx 27 − 1 ξ x 1 m2 2 λ 4 a ∂j ϕx ∂j ϕx + ϕ + ϕ . (2.22).2.126) 2 2 x 4 at which leads to the correlation function in momentum space Gp = m2 + ξ . p4 → ξ−1 ap4 . (2.133) (2. (2. ϕ = π/2. (2 − 2 cos pj ) + ξ 2 (2 − 2 cos p4 ) j (2. a → 0 we obtain the Feynman propagator G(p) → −i ≡ −iGM (p). This gives G→ m2 + −iξ . we keep ϕ inﬁnitesimally positive in order to avoid singularities in Gp . Gp → a−2 ξG(p). restoring the ϕ dependence of ξ means ξ → ξ(−ieiϕ ). Hence.
˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ϕ∗ = ϕ−p . along a lattice direction.137) 1.28 Pathintegral and lattice regularization without encountering the singularities at p0 = ± m2 + p2 i . The correlation length ξ(n) in direction n is identiﬁed by G ∝ exp(−t/ξ(n)). In nonlattice units m → am. cosh ω = 1 + m2 /4. The actual values of G in the scaling region x a are the same as in the continuum. Discuss the cases m the ﬁrst case 1 and m (2.138) ξ /ξ = 1 − m2 /48 + O(m4 ). ξ /ξ → 1 as a → 0. n = (1. t → ∞. Notice 3 4 that exp(ipx) is invariant under the rotation: µ=0 pµ xµ → µ=1 pµ xµ . or √ along the diagonal: x − y = nt. may be considered independent variables equivalent ˜ to ϕx . Since ϕx is real. The ϕp . 1)/ 2. Use the saddlepoint technique to show that. In (2. (2π)2 m2 + 4 − 2 cos p1 − 2 cos p2 (2.136) whereas along the diagonal √ ξ −1 = 2ω . (i) Restoration of rotation invariance Consider the free scalar ﬁeld propagator in two dimensions Gxy = d2 p eip(x−y) . cosh ω = 1 + m2 /2. Corrections are of order a2 m2 . and we see restoration of rotation invariance. 2.11 Problems We use lattice units a = 1 unless indicated otherwise. p ≥ 0. p < 0. Expressing ϕx in these variables gives the real form of the .135) Let x − y → ∞ along a lattice direction. and ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ϕ−p . 0) or n = (1. In particular show that in (2. because the pµ (and xµ ) in lattice units are just dummy indices denoting lattice points.130) the timelike momentum is still denoted by p4 instead of p0 . ξ −1 = ω. Let ϕp = ϕp + iϕp . The real and imaginary parts ϕp ˜p and ϕp satisfy ϕp = ϕ−p and ϕp = −ϕ−p . (ii) Real form of the Fourier transform Consider for simplicity one spatial dimension. (2.
.q . N − 1.. . π q ] = 0. . [ϕp . .11 Problems Fourier transform. . Omn = √ .q . N N 2 (2. [ϕp . ϕq ] = [ϕp . is orthogonal: O OT = 1 ˜ Similar considerations apply to canonical conjugate πx and πp .143) where Np is the occupation number of the mode p (recall that in our notation L p = n . . 2 p (2. ˜ ˜ (iii) Creation and annihilation operators For a free scalar ﬁeld show that ˆ T = e− m2 p 2 p † † † † ˆ m2 ϕp 2 /4 − p ˜ e p ˆ π p 2 /2 − ˜ e p ˆ m2 ϕp 2 /4 p ˜ . etc. show that the energy spectrum is given by E=L p Np + 1 2 ωp . π q ] = [π p . . n = 1. (2. and the matrix O given by 29 1 n = 0. . = N N 2 N 1 n= . . N 2πmn 2 N cos − 1. ϕq ] = [π p . π q ] = 0. ˜ ˜ 2 sinh ωp (2. ˆ† ˆ ˆ ˜ ˜ where ϕp 2 = ϕp ϕp . π q ] = iδp. −1.2.141) = m + 2(1 − cos p).. the transfer operator has the ˜ ˆp .142) Using the results derived for the harmonic oscillator. ˆ ˆ ˜ Verify that the operators ϕp and π p satisfy the commutation ˜ relations ¯ ¯ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ [ϕp .139) 1. ˜ ˜ (2. 2 N 2πmn 2 N sin =− . ˆ= form T p T Obtain the commutation relations of the creation (ˆ† ) and ap annihilation (ˆp ) operators deﬁned by a ap = ˆ 1 ˆ ˆ† [sinh(ωp ) ϕp + iπ p ]. cosh ωp = 1 + 1 m2 .140) ˆ ˆ† ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ† ˆ ˆ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ in addition to [ϕp . =√ . π q ] = iδp. where m = 0. n = − + 1. . π q ] = 0. . Hence. . p = 2πn/L). [ϕp .
Show that for β → ∞ (zero temperature) ˆ ˆ ϕx ϕy = 0T ϕx ϕy 0 . (v) Correlation functions We deﬁne expectation values ϕx1 · · · ϕxn = 1 Z(J) Dϕ eS(ϕ)+Jx ϕx ϕx1 · · · ϕxn . ∂Jx1 ∂Jx1 (2.0 e−x4 H . (2.151) where T is the time ordering ‘operator’ and ϕx is the Heisenberg ˆ operator ˆ ϕx.30 Pathintegral and lattice regularization Verify that ϕx = ˆ p 1 ˆ ˆp eipx ap + e−ipx a† . Note that ϕx may be nonzero in cases of spontaneous symmetry breaking even when Jx = 0. (2.144) (iv) Groundstate wave functional For the free scalar ﬁeld. 2 sinh ωp (2. ˆ ˆ ˆ (2.146) Give similar expressions for the three. Ψ0 (ϕ) = ϕ0 . (2. verify that ϕ x ϕy = ˆ ˆ Tr e−(β−x4 +y4 )H ϕx e−(x4 −y4 )H ϕy ˆ Tr e−β H ˆ ˆ .149) where x4 > y4 and J = 0. E0 . ˆ (2.148) conn = ∂ ∂ ··· ln Z(J). (vi) Groundstate expectation values of Heisenberg operators On an L3 × β space–time lattice.147) (2. (2.145) and correlation functions (connected expectation values) Gx1 ···xn = ϕx1 · · · ϕxn Verify that G x = ϕx . The ground state 0 has lowest energy.and fourpoint functions Gx1 x2 x3 and Gx1 x2 x3 x4 . write down the wave function for the ground state in the coordinate representation.150) Hn = En n .x4 = ex4 H ϕx.152) . Let n be a complete set of energy eigenstates of the Hamiltonian. Gx1 x2 = ϕx1 ϕx2 − ϕx1 ϕx2 .
Ux p. Verify that for periodic boundary conditions the Hamiltonian is translation invariant.γ x4 − y4  + ip(x − y)]. ˆ ˆ Hp.γ p.156) (viii) Spectral representation ˆ ˆ Let p. (2. γ Derive the spectral representation for zero temperature: ϕ x ϕy − ϕ 2 (2. .158) where γ = 0 indicates that the ground state is not included. ϕx in an actively translated ˆ ˆ state ψ ≡ Uz ψ behaves in a way to be expected intuitively: ˆ ˆ ψ ϕx ψ = ψϕx−z ψ .153) ϕy .γ − E0 . This (2. (2.g. ˆ y 31 (2. ˆ ˆ† ˆ ˆ Ux H Ux = H. γ be simultaneous eigenvectors of H and Ux (γ is some label needed to specify the state in addition to p).γ=0  0ϕ0 p. γ .154) (2.2. with ϕy the factor in the tensor product ϕ = operator has the properties ˆ† ˆ ˆ Ux ϕy Ux = ϕx−y . ˆ † ˆ ˆ ˆ Ux πy Ux = πx−y . ωp.157) = p. γ 2 ˆ × exp[−ωp.11 Problems (vii) Translation operator ˆ The translation operator Ux may be deﬁned by ˆ Ux ϕy = ϕx−y . γ = Ep.γ = Ep.155) such that the expectation value of e. γ = e−ipx p.
For n > 1 there are also two phases and we shall see that in the case of continuous internal symmetry the consequence of spontaneous symmetry breaking is the appearance of massless particles. The action is invariant under O(n).2 that the onecomponent classical scalar ﬁeld (i. Coleman’s theorem).1) where ϕα (x) = α = 0. concepts of fundamental importance in quantum ﬁeld theory. 32 . namely a ‘broken phase’ in which the groundstate value ϕg = 0.e. . this is true in space–time dimensions ≥ 3. n = 1) can be in two diﬀerent phases. depending on the sign of µ2 . It turns out that scalar ﬁeld models (in four dimensions) become ‘trivial’ in the sense that the interactions disappear very slowly when the lattice distance is taken to zero. called Goldstone bosons. The interpretation and implication of this interesting phenomenon will be also be discussed. In one and two space– time dimensions spontaneous breaking of a continuous symmetry is not possible (Merwin–Wagner theorem. . For n = 4 this action describes the scalar Higgs sector of the Standard Model.3 O(n) models In this chapter we study scalar ﬁeld models with O(n) symmetry described by the Euclidean action S=− d4 x α α 1 2 ∂µ ϕ ∂µ ϕ + 1 µ2 ϕα ϕα + 1 λ(ϕα ϕα )2 . 3.1 Goldstone bosons We have seen in section 1.. Since the models are relatively simple they serve as a good arena for illustrating scaling and universality.† † Actually. n − 1 is an nvector in ‘internal space’. the group of orthogonal transformations in n dimensions. 2 4 (3. It can also be used as an eﬀective lowenergy action for pions. . and a ‘symmetric phase’ in which ϕg = 0.
ϕα = vδα0 . ∆S = dx ϕ0 (x). Shape of U for n = 2 for µ2 < 0. To force the system into a deﬁnite ground state we add a symmetrybreaking term to the action (the same could be done in the onecomponent ϕ4 model). The potential U = 1 µ2 ϕ2 + 1 λ(ϕ2 )2 2 4 (3. has the solution ϕα = vδα.6) Consider now small ﬂuctuations about ϕg .7) . (µ2 + λϕ2 )ϕα = 0. The equations of motion (ﬁeld equations) read (−∂ 2 + µ2 + λϕ2 )ϕα = δα0 . (3. ∂2 ≡ 2 2 − ∂t .5) With the symmetry breaking (3.3) or any O(n) rotation of this vector. The equation for the stationary points now reads (µ2 + λϕ2 )ϕα = δα0 . (3.4) the ground state has ϕα pointing in g the α = 0 direction. > 0. g (µ2 + λv 2 )v = . It is clear that for µ2 > 0 the ground state is unique (ϕg = 0) but that for µ2 < 0 it is inﬁnitely degenerate. g v 2 = −µ2 /λ (µ2 < 0).0 .1. (3. (3.2) has a ‘winebottlebottom’ shape.4) The constant has the dimension of (mass)3 . (3. 3.1 Goldstone bosons 33 Fig. also called ‘Mexicanhat’ shape. if µ2 < 0 (ﬁgure 3. The equation ∂U/∂ϕk = 0 for the minima.1).3.
As mentioned earlier. 0 The subscript 0 indicates that these are ‘bare’ or ‘unrenormalized’ parameters that diﬀer from the physical ‘dressed’ or ‘renormalized’ values which are measured in experiments.12) The simple eﬀective O(n) model reproduces the important features of Goldstone’s theorem: spontaneous symmetry breaking of a continuous symmetry leads to massless particles.13) We have changed the notation for the parameters: µ2 → m2 .11) For µ2 > 0. . m2 ≈ /v0 → 0.9) (3. σ with m2 = µ2 + 3λv 2 = 2λv 2 + /v. v = 0 and m2 = m2 = µ2 . the Goldstone bosons. λ → λ0 . k = 1. we ﬁnd (−∂ 2 + m2 )σ = 0. For → 0 the π particles become massless.8) (−∂ 2 + m2 )πk = 0. The massless modes correspond to oscillations along the vacuum valley of the ‘Mexican hat’.2 O(n) models as spin models We continue in the quantum theory. π (3. . 3.10) (3. . for example the ρ mesons with mass 770 MeV are completely neglected. n − 1. (3. writing ϕ0 = v + σ. The model loses its validity at such energies.. whereas for µ2 < 0. The particles π ± and π 0 are described by the ﬁelds πk (x). The σ ﬁeld (after which the model is named the σ model) corresponds to the very broad σ resonance around 900 MeV. . (3. v0 = v π =0 . x x 2 0 x x 4 (3. For small explicit symmetry breaking the Goldstone bosons get a squared mass proportional to the strength of the breaking. The lattice regularized action will be taken as S=− x α α 1 2 ∂µ ϕx ∂µ ϕx + 1 m2 ϕα ϕα + 1 λ0 (ϕα ϕα )2 . the O(4) model is a reasonable model for the eﬀective lowenergy interactions of pions amongst themselves. v > 0 and σ π the σ particle is heavier than the π particles.34 O(n) models Linearizing around ϕ = ϕg . σ m2 π = µ + λv = /v. 2 2 ϕ k = πk .
Dµ(φ) = x dµ(φx ). κ2 (3. m2 = 0 1 − 2λ − 2d. κ λ0 = λ . For λ → ∞ the distribution dµ(φ) peaks at φ2 = 1.19) where dΩn is the integral over the unit sphere S n in n dimensions. . dΩn (3. (3. dµ(φ) = dn φ exp[ −φ2 − λ(φ2 − 1)2 ].20) Hence.3. x x x+ˆ the action can be rewritten in the form S= xµ ϕ α ϕα µ − x x+ˆ x 1 2 (2d + m2 )ϕ2 + 1 λ0 (ϕ2 )2 . which is the product of probability measures dµ(φ) for a single site. For n = 3. The O(n) models on the lattice are therefore also called (generalized) spin models.15) which brings S into the form S = 2κ xµ φα φα µ − x x+ˆ x φα φα + λ(φα φα − 1)2 . µ (3. In particular.16) The partition function is given by Z= xα ∞ −∞ dφα x exp S ≡ Dµ(φ) exp 2κ xµ φx φx+ˆ . for n = 1 and λ → ∞ we get precisely the Ising model in d dimensions. 2 dµ(φ) (3. d = 3 the model is called the Heisenberg model for a ferromagnet. 0 4 (3. for n = 1. a typical model studied in statistical physics. Using ∂µ ϕα = ϕα µ − ϕα .14) where d is the number of space–time dimensions. x x x x (3. Another standard choice of parameters is obtained by writing ϕα = √ 2κ φα .18) Note that λ has to be positive in order that the integrations dµ(φ) make sense. a = 1. dµ(φ) f (φ) → dµ(φ) dΩn f (φ) . The second form in (3.2 O(n) models as spin models 35 We shall mostly use lattice units.17) shows Z as the partition function of a generalized Ising model.17) where we have introduced an integration measure Dµ(φ). dµ(φ) f (φ) 1 → [f (1) + f (−1)].
23) By consistency we should have φα = v α . κ < κc (λ). or x vα = z(J) = (3.29) (3.22) Here κc (λ) is the boundary line between the two phases in the λ–κ plane.27) κc . We can give a meanﬁeld estimate of κc as follows. λ = ∞. As κ evidently v → 0. Then we can expand v = tanh(4κdv) = 4κdv − 1 (4κdv)3 + · · ·. (3. see ﬁgure 3. n = 1.28) (3. λ = ∞. 3 1 . v = tanh(4κdv). The probability for φα is proportional to dµ(φx ) exp[ 2κφα µ (φα µ + x x x+ˆ φα µ ) ]. Consider a site x. Assume that we may approximate φα at the 2d neighbors of x x−ˆ by their average value. numerically otherwise.32) .36 O(n) models 3. z(J) = z(0) 1 + φα Jα + 1 φα φβ Jα Jβ + · · · 2 = z(0) 1 + 1 φ 1 Jα Jα + · · · . such that in the thermodynamic limit and for zero temperature φα ≡ v α = 0. µ (φα µ + φα µ ) → 2dv α .3 Phase diagram and critical line The spin model aspect makes it plausible that the models can be in a broken (ferromagnetic) or in a symmetric (paramagnetic) phase. x = 0. κ Analysis for arbitrary n and λ leads to similar conclusions. dµ(φ) exp(4κdφβ v β ) ∂ 1 z(J)J=4κdv .26) (3.31) (3. κc = 4d κc .21) (3. v 2 ∝ (κ − κc ). (3. κ > κc (λ).25) The integral z(J) can be calculated analytically in various limits.2.30) (3. z(J) = z(0) cosh(J). The equation for v can be analyzed graphically.24) (3. (3. Then the average x+ˆ x−ˆ value of φα can be written as x φα = x dµ(φ) φα exp(4κdφβ v β ) . The basics are already illustrated by the Ising case n = 1. z(J) ∂Jα dµ(φ) exp(Jα φα ). 2 n 2 1 (3.
36) The behavior v 2 ∝ (κ − κc ) is typical for a secondorder phase transition in the meanﬁeld approximation.33) = δαβ (3.3.35) (3. λ = 0.2. n (3. Fig.3 Phase diagram and critical line 37 Fig. λ = ∞. So we ﬁnd κc (λ) = n 4d φ2 1 n . 3. 0 where we used the notation F and φα φβ 1 1 = dµ(φ) F (φ) . λ = ∞.3. 3. The line κ = κc (λ) is a critical line in parameter space where a secondorder phase transition takes place. for n = 1. u = 4dκv. = 2d = (3.34) for the onesite averages. Critical lines in the λ–κ plane and the m2 –λ0 plane (qualitative). 4d 1 . Note that in general m2 is negative at the phase boundary 0 . Meanﬁeld equation u/4dκ = tanh u. dµ(φ) φ2 1 .
The correlation length is the inverse mass gap. For κ < 0 the story more or less repeats itself. we then get an antiferromagnetic phase for κ < −κc (λ). that theory is crucial for quantum ﬁelds. for example.38) .γ − E0 is the diﬀerence in energy from the ground state.15) and ﬁgure 3.41) where 0 is the ground state (vacuum). This can be understood from the spectral representation Gαβ = xy p. (3. and ωpγ = Ep. In the symmetric phase ξ is independent of α and β. Gαβ ≡ φα φβ − φα φβ xy x y x y ∝ x − y 2−d−η −x−y/ξ (3. In four dimensions.40) 0φα pγ pγφβ 0 eip(x−y)−ωpγ x4 −y4  . and indeed. distinguished by other quantum numbers γ. the Compton wave length of the lightest particle. The region with negative κ can be mapped onto the region of positive κ by the transformation φα → x (−1)x1 +x2 +···+xd φα . The correlation length is deﬁned in terms of the longdistance behavior of the correlation function. The exponent η is another critical exponent. This representation is obtained by writing the path integral in terms of the transfer operator and its eigenstates in the limit of zero temperature. ξ = 1/am.39) e Here ξ may in principle depend on the direction we take x−y to inﬁnity. x It is important that the phase transition is of second order rather than.3).38 O(n) models (cf. (3.γ=0 (3. in lattice units. the details on the scale of the lattice distance become irrelevant. pγ are states with total momentum p.37) diﬀers in general from the meanﬁeld value β = 1 . In a secondorder transition the correlation length diverges as a critical point is approached. . We have restricted ourselves here to the region κ > 0. This is the subject of 2 the theory of critical phenomena. it turns out that there are only small corrections to meanﬁeld behavior. but the point is that it becomes independent of that direction (a lattice detail) as ξ → ∞. however. of ﬁrst order. when physical quantities are expressed in terms of ξ. The critical exponent β in v ∝ (κ − κc )β (3. 0 0 (3. x − y → ∞. The correlation length ξ can then be interpreted as the physical length scale and.
The region near the phase boundary line where ξ 1 is called the scaling region. t = x4 − y4 . problem (viii) in chapter 2).1). σ → 2π. 0 The free propagator is given by 0 αβ Gxy = δαβ p eip(x−y) m2 0 + 1 .4 Weakcoupling expansion 39 using translation invariance (cf. we can expect two mass gaps: mσ for the components of Gαβ parallel to v α and mπ for the components perpendicular to v α . 2 2 0 4 (3. For large t the exponential with smallest ω dominates. the correlation function Gxy is expected to become a universal scaling function (independent of lattice details. For simplicity we shall deal with the symmetric phase. which starts out with m2 > 0 in the weakcoupling expansion. 1 1 1 ∂µ ϕα ∂µ ϕα + m2 ϕ2 + λ0 (ϕ2 )2 . with 1/m as the only relevant length scale rather than a). at large distances x − y. In the broken phase we expect Goldstone bosons (section 3. Then the largedistance behavior for the σ correlation function is controlled by 2mπ rather than by the mass mσ of the unstable particle.42) (3.4 Weakcoupling expansion Expansion of the pathintegral expectation value F (ϕ) = 1 Z x Dϕ eS(ϕ) F (ϕ). equation (3.41) is a sum of exponentials exp(−ωt). Expression (3. G ∝ exp(−ωmin t). In this region. If these are made suﬃciently heavy by adding an explicit symmetrybreaking n term x ϕx to the action (cf.3.43) S(ϕ) = − in powers of λ0 leads to Feynman diagrams in terms of the free propagator and vertex functions. 2mπ becomes less than mσ and the σ particle becomes unstable. with ωmin = m the minimum energy or mass gap. µ (2 − 2 cos pµ ) (3.11)). 3.44) . the transverse correlation length will be inﬁnite in this case (for inﬁnite volume). hence ξ = 1/ωmin . Since mπ is expected to be zero in absence of explicit symmetry breaking. When the explicit symmetry breaking is diminished.
which is minus the inverse of the free secondorder vertex function δαβ Sxy (recall (2.46) Since they correspond to a translationally invariant theory. 0Γ(2) and 0Γ(n) . In momentum space 0 Γαβ (p) = −δαβ m2 + 0 µ (2 − 2 cos pµ ) . without this ◦ the external line does not represent a propagator. Notice the convention of attaching a small circle at the end of external lines that represent propagators. lowestorder) vertex functions 0Γ(n) are deﬁned by the expansion of the action S around the classical minimum ϕα = v α . (2.99) and (2. ¯ e−ip1 x1 ···−ipn xn 0Γx1 ···xn = 0Γα1 ···αn (p1 · · · pn ) δp1 +···+pn .4. (3.40 O(n) models Fig.e.90)). 3. (3. x S(ϕ) = n 1 0 x1 ···xn α1 n Γ (ϕ − v α1 ) · · · (ϕαn − v αn ). which we shall denote here by 0Γ(2) .45) The bare (i. Diagrams for 0G. their Fourier ¯ transform contains a δ function expressing momentum conservation modulo 2π (cf. x n! α1 ···αn x1 (3.47) α1 ···αn x1 ···xn In the symmetric phase (v α = 0) there is only one interaction vertex .0 .108)).
48) (3.56) (3. sαβγδ ≡ δαβ δγδ + δαγ δβδ + δαδ δβγ .53) where as usual repeated indices are summed. The free propagators and vertex functions are illustrated in ﬁgure 3. the fourpoint function 0 wxyz Γαβγδ 0 41 = −2λ0 (δαβ δγδ + δαγ δβδ + δαδ δβγ )δwx δwy δwz . The two. (3.52) G 33 =G 11 G 22 G 44 Γ1 2 3 4 . (3. The expectation values can be rewritten in terms of vertex functions.54) (3.50) 24 =G G 12 34 +G G 13 +G G 14 23 +G 1234 . x x x 1 2 3 4 ϕα1 ϕα2 ϕα3 ϕα4 x x x x (3.3.5. This may be replaced by ordinary momentum conservation because all functions in momentum space have period 2π anyway.and fourpoint functions can be expressed as 1 2 1 α2 ϕα1 ϕα2 = Gα1 x2 ≡ G12 . To oneloop order Γ12 and Γ1234 are given by the connected diagrams in ﬁgure 3. We ﬁnd for the twopoint vertex function ˆ Γα1 α2 (p) = −(m2 + p2 )δα1 α2 0 1 + (−2λ0 )sα1 α2 α3 α4 δα3 α4 2 1 l m2 + ˆ2 l 0 (3.57) ˆ ≡ −δα1 α2 [ m2 + p2 + λ0 (n + 2)I(m0 ) ]. 0 Γ1234 + 1 0Γ1256 0G55 0G66 0Γ5 6 34 2 (3.55) + two permutations.49) Γα1 ···αn (p1 · · · pn ) = −2λ0 sαβγδ . Notice that Γ123 is zero in the symmetric phase. which are simpler to study because they have fewer diagrams in a given order in λ0 . It can be shown that disconnected subdiagrams without external lines (‘vacuum bubbles’) cancel out between the numerator and the denominator in the above expectation values. Γ12 = 0Γ12 + Γ1234 = 0 34 10 2 Γ1234 G . 12 G 1234 (3. 0 . (3. we have conservation of momentum modulo 2π at each vertex. In momentum space.4 Weakcoupling expansion function.4.51) and the vertex functions Γ(2) and Γ(4) can be identiﬁed by writing G12 = −Γ−1 .
61) .58) + p2 ) 2λ2 tα1 α2 α3 α4 J(m0 . and for the fourpoint vertex function Γα1 α2 α3 α4 (p1 p2 p3 p4 ) = −2λ0 sα1 α2 α3 α4 1 + (2λ0 )2 sα1 α2 α5 α6 sα3 α4 α5 α6 2 × m2 0 +2 1 l m2 0 + ˆ2 l 1 µ (1 − cos(l + p1 + p2 )µ ) (3. (3. and (using the condensed notation δ12 = δα1 α2 etc. (1 − cos lµ ). p1 0 + two permutations ≡ −2λ0 sα1 α2 α3 α4 + Here ˆ2 = 2 l µ + two permutations.5. Diagrams for Γ12 and Γ1234 to oneloop order.59) and similarly for p2 .60) (3. (3. t1234 = s1256 s3456 = δ12 δ34 (n + 4) + 2δ13 δ24 + 2δ14 δ23 .42 O(n) models Fig.) ˆ s1234 = δ12 δ34 + δ13 δ24 + δ14 δ23 . 3.
Then l I = Il<δ + Il>δ .4 Weakcoupling expansion 43 Fig. we may use the continuum form l2 for ˆ2 . The functions I and J have dimensions a−2 and a0 .6. respectively. Here we shall give just one. Il<δ (am0 ) = l<δ (3. There are various ways to deal with this situation. The functions I and J are given by π I(m0 ) = J(m0 .62) d4 l 1 . We are interested in a−2 I(am0 ) and J(am0 . such that. A straightforward expansion l l 1/(a2 m2 + ˆ2 ) = n (−a2 m2 )n /(ˆ2 )n+1 leads to divergences in the loop 0 0 integrals at the origin l = 0. The radius δ is sent to zero.6 We are interested in the scaling forms of I and J. Consider ﬁrst I. l → d4 l/(2π)4 .63) 2 δ d l 1 2π = 4 a2 m2 + l2 (2π) (2π)4 0 4 l3 dl 0 1 a2 m2 0 + l2 . The momentum ﬂow in the second term in (3. This suggests expanding in powers of a and keeping only terms nonvanishing as a → 0. Intuitively we know that the region near the origin in momentum space corresponds to continuum physics. ap). For I we need terms of order a0 and a2 . 4 2 + ˆ }{m2 + 2 2 (2π) {m0 l 0 µ (1 − cos(l + p)µ )} We assumed an inﬁnite lattice.58) is illustrated in ﬁgure 3.3. Momentum ﬂow. Let us split the integration region into a ball round the origin with radius δ and the rest. with a δ. 3. for the integrand in the region l < δ. p) = −π π −π d4 l 1 . for J only terms of order a0 . (2π)4 m2 + ˆ2 l 0 (3. for a → 0. Let us therefore restore the lattice distance a.
J = Jl<δ + Jl>δ . ap) for a → 0. Instead.69) d4 l 1 1 + ln δ 2 (2π)4 (ˆ2 )2 16π 2 l = 0. . The function J can be evaluated in similar fashion. . . l → al.65) where I ≡ ∂I/∂(a2 m2 ). 0 (3. With the help of the identity 1 [a2 m2 0 + = 0 l2 ][a2 m2 0 1 dx + (l + ap)2 ] (3.. To deal with this we use the same procedure. 0 However. = 0 16π 2 (3. .66) (3. C2 = lim δ→0 −π. we encounter ln δ 2 terms in Il>δ (0).l>δ (Jl>δ can be expanded in powers of a.64) because the complete integral is independent of δ.l>δ (3.68) (3.64) With symbols like O(a2 ) we shall mean terms proportional to a2 or a2 ln a2 . Jl<δ = Jl>δ = l<δ −π (3.0303457. δ 2 ).154933 . would bring a−2 Il<δ into continuum form with a spherical cutoﬀ δ/a. So we get I(am0 ) = C0 − C2 a2 m2 + 0 π 1 2 2 a m0 ln(a2 m2 ).73) 1 {x[a2 m2 + l2 ] + (1 − x)[a2 m2 + (l + ap)2 ]}2 0 0 . δ 2 ). the term linear in a vanishes). Note that expressing also l in physical units.72) d4 l 1 . 0 16π 2 C0 = I(0) = 0. We need J(am0 . The integral Il>δ can be expanded in a2 without encountering ln(a2 m2 ) 0 terms. Il>δ (am0 ) = Il>δ (0) + Il>δ (0)a2 m2 + O(a4 ) 0 = I(0) + Il>δ (0)a2 m2 + O(a4 .67) (3. these cancel out against the ln δ 2 term in (3.71) (3.70) (3.44 = O(n) models a2 m2 + δ 2 1 0 δ 2 − a2 m2 ln 0 16π 2 a2 m2 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 [ −a m0 ln δ + a m0 ln(a2 m2 )] + O(a4 . 4 [a2 m2 + l2 ][a2 m2 + (l + ap)2 ] (2π) 0 0 d4 l 1 + O(a2 ) (2π)4 (ˆ2 )2 l π. For a = 0 the integral for J is logarithmically divergent at the origin.
0 2 ∆ ≡ m2 + x(1 − x)p . (2π)4 [a2 m2 + l 2 + x(1 − x)a2 p2 ]2 0 (3. ap) = − dx ln[ a2 (m2 +x(1−x)p2 )]+C2 − 0 Γαβ (p) = −δαβ + m2 + p2 + λ0 (n + 2) 0 . the integrand is O(δ −4 ). Replacing D by the original ball with radius δ leads to an error of order a.e. which may be neglected. 1 1 − 2 16π 16π 2 C0 − C2 m2 0 a2 (3.77) (We expect errors O(a2 ).) Summarizing.78) 1 16π 2 1 1 m2 ln(a2 m2 ) 0 16π 2 0 Γα1 α2 α3 α4 (p1 p2 p3 p4 ) = −2λ0 sα1 α2 α3 α4 + 2λ2 tα1 α2 α3 α4 0 1 C2 − × 0 dx ln[a2 (m2 + x(1 − x)(p1 + p2 )2 )] 0 (3.3. including reﬂections. Combining the term ln δ 2 /16π 2 with Jl>δ as in (3.79) + two permutations. 16π 2 0 (3. not O(a): a will appear together with the external momentum as apµ or as a2 m2 . and there will not be odd powers 0 of pµ because of cubic symmetry. i.74) Here the domain of integration D is obtained from the ball with radius δ by shifting it over (1−x)ap.) Then 1 Jl<δ = dx 0 2π 2 (2π)4 1 0 δ l3 dl 0 [a2 m2 0 + l2 1 + x(1 − x)a2 p2 ]2 δ2 a2 ∆ + δ 2 (3.68) we get 1 +O(a2 ).75) (3. we have obtained the following continuum forms for the vertex functions (in physical units): J(am0 . .76) 1 = 16π 2 = dx ln(a2 ∆ + δ 2 ) − ln(a2 ∆) − 1 1 ln δ 2 − 16π 2 dx ln(a2 ∆) − 1 + O(a2 ).4 Weakcoupling expansion 45 and the transformation of variable l = l + (1 − x)ap we get for the innerregion integral 1 Jl<δ = dx 0 D d4 l 1 . (The diﬀerence between the two integration regions has a volume O(apδ 3 ).
R (3. The renormalized (n) GR = Z −n/2 G(n) are the correlation functions of renormalized ﬁelds ϕR = Z −1/2 ϕ. we ﬁnd λ R = λ0 + λ2 0 n+8 [ln(a2 m2 ) + c]. the order λ contribution to Z vanishes in the O(n) model. From (3.82) and t1234 + t1324 + t1423 = (n + 8)s1234 . using (3.81) Since the oneloop diagram for Γ(2) is momentum independent. (n) (3. when we rescale the correlation functions G(n) by a suitable factor Z −n/2 and express them in terms of a suitable renormalized mass parameter mR and renormalized coupling constant λR . n+8 16π 2 (3.85) . Z = 1 + O(λ2 ).78) m2 = m2 + λ0 (n + 2) C0 a−2 − C2 m2 + R 0 0 1 m2 ln(a2 m2 ) .80) The wave function renormalization constant Z and the renormalized mass parameter mR may be deﬁned by the ﬁrst two terms of the expansion Γαβ (p) = −Z −1 (m2 + p2 + O(p4 ))δαβ . α (3.53) we see that the renormalized vertex functions are then given by ΓR = Z n/2 Γ(n) . quadratically and logarithmically divergent as a → 0. 0. For mR we ﬁnd from (3.79) for the fourpoint function.82) A renormalized coupling constant λR may be deﬁned in terms of Γ(4) at zero momentum.83) (3. 0 16π 2 0 (3. 0 16π 2 1 16π 2 C2 − c=− . by writing ΓR1 α2 α3 α4 (0.84) From the result (3. 0. 3. the result is ﬁnite as a → 0. 0) = −2λR sα1 α2 α3 α4 .5 Renormalization Perturbative renormalization theory tells us that.46 O(n) models We see that Γ(2) and Γ(4) are. respectively.86) (3.87) (3.
R The O(n) tensor structure in (3.94) = λR . To this order the mass m of the particles is equal to mR .83). (3. (3. n+8 [ln(µ2 /m2 ) − 2].78). (3. 0 0 (3. λ 0 = λR − λ2 R R R 16π 2 Inserting these relations into (3.95) ≈ λR + λ2 R R R 16π 2 1 .92) dx ln[a2 m2 + x(1 − x)a2 µ2 ] + c .91) dx ln 0 2λ2 tα1 α2 α3 α4 R m2 + x(1 − R + two permutations + O(λ3 ).93) Expressing the running coupling in terms of λR and mR leads to n+8 ¯ dx ln[1 + x(1 − x)µ2 /m2 ] + O(λ3 ) λ(µ) = λR + λ2 R R R 16π 2 0 µ = 0. symmetry point µ.5 Renormalization 47 To express the correlation functions in terms of mR and λR we consider λR as an expansion parameter and invert (3.89) + O(λ2 ).86). Notice that the constants C0 . α which gives n+8 ¯ λ(µ) = λ0 + λ2 0 16π 2 1 (3. m2 = m2 − λR (n + 2) C0 a−2 − C2 m2 + 0 R R 1 m2 ln(a2 m2 ) R 16π 2 R (3. In higher orders the mass m will be diﬀerent from the renormalized mass parameter mR : m = mR (1 + O(λ2 )).3.88) (3. C1 and C2 are absent: all reference to the lattice has disappeared from the renormalized vertex functions. αβ R R ΓR1 α2 α3 α4 (p1 p2 p3 p4 ) α = −2λR sα1 α2 α3 α4 − × 1 16π 2 1 (3. µ2 m2 .90) x)(p1 + p2 )2 m2 R (3.79) gives the renormalized vertex functions ΓR (p) = −δαβ (m2 + p2 ) + O(λ2 ). The mass m is given by the value of −p2 where Γ(2) is zero and G(2) has a pole. ¯ We can therefore also deﬁne a ‘running renormalized coupling’ λ(µ) at momentum scale µ by ¯ ΓR1 α2 α3 α4 (p1 p2 p3 p4 ) = −2λ(µ)sα1 α2 α3 α4 . (3.84) is the general form of Γ(4) at a symmetry point where (p1 + p2 )2 = (p1 + p3 )2 = (p1 + p4 )2 ≡ µ2 . R n+8 [ln(a2 m2 ) + c] + O(λ3 ). R which are indeed independent of the lattice spacing a.
97) · · ·.88) and (3. So. β1 = 8π 2 λ0 2 β1 λ0 + O(λ3 ) 0 2 β1 λR + β2 λ3 + R λ0 (3.91) in terms of this running coupling shows that.6 Renormalizationgroup beta functions The renormalized quantities do not depend explicitly on the lattice distance. 3. Neither can we trust (3.48 O(n) models The running coupling indicates the strength of the interactions at momentum scale µ. This we found earlier in the meanﬁeld approximation. βR (λR ) = a = = ∂λR ∂a = amR ∂λR ∂amR n+8 . even in the symmetric phase. λR . since then the coeﬃcient of λ2 blows up. However. Consider what happens to λR as we approach the phase boundary at ﬁxed λ0 .99) The function βR (λR ) is one of the renormalizationgroup functions introduced by Callan and by Symanzik. the logarithms are generically not large and the strength of ¯ the fourpoint vertex on this momentum scale is expressed by λ(µ).89) if a becomes too small. the bare λ0 increases as a decreases and beyond a certain value we can no longer trust perturbation theory in λ0 . Thus it seems that we can take the continuum limit a → 0 in the renormalized quantities. λ0 and mR . In (3. We can extract more information by diﬀerentiating with respect to a and writing the result in terms of λR . as given by (3. Changing a while keeping mR and λR ﬁxed implies that m0 and λ0 must be chosen to depend on a. but when the logarithm becomes too large the perturbative relation breaks down. λ R = λ0 + λ 2 0 n+8 [ln(a2 m2 ) + c] + O(λ3 ). R 0 16π 2 (3. R Let us look at the problem in another way.96) We see that λR decreases as a decreases. For a clear derivation of the . terms of the type ¯ λ2 ln[(p1 + p2 )2 /m2 ] are replaced by λ2 (µ) ln[(p1 + p2 )2 /µ2 ]. We see that a2 m2 decreases and becomes negative 0 as a decreases.98) (3. at large momenta. Expressing the vertex function (3. all dependence on a is absorbed by the relations between m0 .86) we may replace to this order m0 by mR . (3. on R R 2 2 choosing µ equal to values of (pi + pj ) that typically occur in a given situation.89).
but. Integration of ∂λR /∂t = −β1 λ2 gives R λR = λ1 .104) ¯ The eﬀective coupling λ increases with momentum scale µ. As a → 0.3.6 Renormalizationgroup beta functions 49 Callan–Symanzik equations in our context see [20].101) a 0 ∂a λR Note the change of sign compared with (3.89) we ﬁnd ∂λ0 ≡ −β0 (λ0 ) = −β1 λ2 + · · · . of course.100) where λ1 is an integration constant.97) in terms of λR .mR mR . for large µ mR . µ λR . 1 − λ3 β1 ln(µ/mR ) (3. The approximation of using only the lowestorder approximation to the beta function is therefore selfconsistent. µ ¯ ∂ λ(µ) ∂µ ¯ ¯ ¯ ≡ β(λ) = β1 λ2 + · · ·. ¯ λ= λ3 . 1 + λ1 β1 t (3. Integrating this equation gives λ2 . (3. (3.102) λ0 = 1 − λ2 β1 t where λ2 = λR + O(λ2 ). The solution is similar to that for λ0 . They are dimensionless functions which may be expressed in terms of renormalized vertex functions and are given by renormalized perturbation theory as a series k βk λk . This is the justiﬁcation for rewriting (3. (3. To see if it can become arbitrarily large we need to go beyond the weakcoupling expansion. From (3. This means that the higherorder terms of the form R λk [ln(amR )]l can be rearranged in terms of powers of λR with coeﬃcients 0 that do not depend any more on ln(amR ). We see that λ0 blows up at the ‘Landau pole’ R t = 1/λ2 β1 .103) again with the same universal coeﬃcient for the ﬁrstorder term in its expansion.98). ¯ ¯ ¯ Consider next the beta function β(λ) for the running coupling λ(µ) on momentum scale µ. From (3. before reaching this value the ﬁrstorder approximation to β0 (λ0 ) breaks down. t ≡ −[ln(amR ) + c/2]. . t → ∞ 0 and we see that λR approaches zero.95) we see that. Let us try the betafunction trick on λ0 to see whether we can determine how it depends on a if we keep λR ﬁxed. λ1 = λ0 + O(λ2 ).
Since t can go to inﬁnity without a problem. apart from the origin λ0 = 0. Two possible shapes of β0 (λ0 ). (3. .7.7.107) ξ= amR which shows that the critical exponent ν is determined by the slope of the beta function at the ﬁxed point. (3. a cannot go to zero and a continuum limit is not possible. λ0 → ∞.106) where C is an integration constant.105) (3. ∂t λ0 − λ∗ = C exp(−At). t → ∞. Since λ0 = ∞ is the largest value λ0 can take. ν = 1/A. t cannot go beyond t1 . In case (b) the beta function does not have a zero. a continuum limit a → 0 is possible for case (a). 0 ∂t leads to the asymptotic solution λ0 −(α−1) (3. A > 0. We end this section by speculating about diﬀerent shapes of the beta function β0 for the bare coupling constant.50 O(n) models Fig. In case (a) there is a ﬁxed point λ∗ that attracts the ﬂow of λ0 for increasing ‘time’ t. The larget behavior can be rewritten in the form 1 ∝ (λ∗ − λ0 )−ν .108) = −A(α − 1)(t − t1 ). (3. The arrows denote the ﬂow of λ0 for increasing t = − ln(amR ) + constant. Supposing a behavior ∂λ0 = Aλα .109) where we assumed α > 1. Two typical possibilities are shown in ﬁgure 3. Near λ∗ we can linearize ∂λ0 = −A(λ0 − λ∗ ). 3. α > 0. In this case λ0 becomes inﬁnite in a ﬁnite ‘time’ t = t1 .
A ﬁxed point like λ∗ is called ultraviolet stable as it attracts the running coupling when µ → ∞. whereas in case (b) λ goes to inﬁnity on some large but ﬁnite momentum scale µ1 . Odd powers of φ vanish in the onesite average F 1 = dµ(φ) F (φ) dµ(φ). x y z Dµ(φ) φα φβ φγ φδ = Z0 φα φβ φγ φδ 1 . This can be done with the hopping expansion and with numerical simulations. x x x x etc. Cases (a) and (b) also illustrate possible behaviors of the running coupling for large momentum scales µ.7 Hopping expansion 51 ¯ A similar discussion can be given for the running coupling λ.3. where # sites is the total number of lattice sites. (3.110) where Dµ(φ) = x dµ(φx ) is the product of onesite measures deﬁned in (3. (3.111) (3. To see whether we can avoid a noninteracting theory in the continuum limit.114) Dµ(φ) φα φβ = δxy Z0 φα φβ 1 . x y Dµ(φ) φα φβ φγ = 0. we need to be able to investigate large λ0 .112) (3. The main conclusion in this section is that λR → 0 as we approach the phase boundary at ﬁxed suﬃciently small λ0 .115) .113) (3. while the ﬁxed point at the origin is called infrared stable as it attracts the running coupling for µ → 0. In case (a) the running coupling approaches ¯ λ∗ as µ → ∞. x x+ˆ (3. whereas we shall see in the following that in four dimensions the situation is like case (b). 3.7 Hopping expansion Consider the partition function in the form Z= Dµ(φ) xµ exp(2κφα φα µ ).18). Case (a) is like the situation in three Euclidean dimensions (with a reﬂection about the horizontal axis). Expansion in κ (hopping expansion) leads to products of onesite integrals of the form # sites Dµ(φ) ≡ Z0 = dµ(φ) ..
.120) n3 (φ2 )2 1 n2 − 2 2. The integration over φ leads to diagrams as shown in ﬁgure 3. It xy x y . For small λ. By O(n) symmetry we have g αβ = δαβ g. as illustrated in ﬁgure 3. As usual.119) (3. x x+ ˆ Fig. and that the twopoint function. =g =g αβ γδ αα (3.8. 2 4 n+2 φ 1 φ 1 (3. γ4 ∝ λ.9. n2 + 2n γαβγδ = sαβδγ γ4 . γαβγδ can be deﬁned by φα φβ φ φ φ φ g α β γ δ 1 = g αβ . analogously to (3. The fat dot denotes the fourpoint vertex γ4 . g = g αβγδ = sαβδγ φ2 1 .53).49). Diagrams in the expansion of exp(2κ xµ φα φα µ ).. Before integration over φ. whereas for λ → ∞. γ4 → −2n4 /(n + 2). each term in the expansion can be represented by a dimer diagram ‘on the lattice’. one expects that disconnected diagrams cancel out in expressions for the vertex functions. For instance.121) (φ2 )2 1 . 3. (3. with propagators g αβ and vertex functions γα1 ···α4 .8 after integration over φ. 3.9. n (3.116) +g g αγ βδ 1 αβγδ g g +g g γ δ αδ βγ +g αβγδ . Gαβ = φα φβ .52 O(n) models Fig. . can be expressed as a sum of connected diagrams. The dots indicate the ﬁelds φ.8.117) (3. The diagrams of ﬁgure 3. The onesite integrals can be treated as a mini ﬁeld theory. γ4 = where sαβδγ = δαβ δγδ + · · · has been deﬁned in (3. γα1 ···α6 .118) g ββ γγ g δδ γα β . .
. and each site a factor g.3.10. µ µ (3. to the vector δv. Applying H once more corresponds to making one more step in all possible directions. all sites that can be reached from x in ‘one step’..x gives a nonzero answer only for u’s that are nearest neighbors of x. In momentum space we get π Gαβ = δαβ xy = δαβ where −π π −π d4 p ip(x−y) e g (2π)4 (2κg)L H(p)L L (3. Here ‘interactions’ denote the neglected contributions proportional to γ(4) .123) Applying this matrix e.126) In the randomwalk approximation the twopoint correlation function has the freeﬁeld form. (3.0 ). and we introduced the hopping matrix Huv = µ (δu+ˆ−v. Each link in the expansion contributes a factor 2κ. e (2π)4 1 − 2κgH(p) H(p) = x e−ipx Hx.0 + δv+ˆ−u.g.10. .124) (3. etc. . i. .122) illustrated in ﬁgure 3. is instructive to make an approximation for the twopoint function in which the vertex functions γ(4) .. Randomwalk contribution to the propagator. .125) d4 p ip(x−y) g . This leads to the randomwalk approximation ∞ Gαβ = δαβ xy L=0 (2κ)L g L+1 (H L )xy + ‘interactions’. In this way a random walk is built up by successive application of H.0 = µ 2 cos pµ . For small momenta we identify the mass param .e. (3. . γ(6) . γ(6) . 3.7 Hopping expansion 53 Fig. are neglected at ﬁrst.
Notice that κc is also the radius of convergence of the expansion (3. 3. where γ(4) . goes to zero.128) Zφ = (2κ)−1 . eter mR and the wavefunctionrenormalization constant Zφ . the linkedcluster expansion. because the chance of selfintersections in the walk.131) This indicates already that λR is not inﬁnite at λ = ∞. n = 4.124). This is called the hopping expansion because the randomwalk picture suggests propagation of particles by ‘hopping’ from one site to the next.11. m2 + p2 + O(p4 ) R (3. γ(6) . When mR → 0 we enter the scaling region. . Using computers to help with the algebra. This is not so surprising as the meanﬁeld approximation is good for d → ∞. m2 = (2gκ)−1 − 2d. By the analogy of κ with the inverse temperature in the Ising model. λ → 0. Within the randomwalk approximation we have the estimate for the renormalized coupling (cf. (3.130) → 2d n 2 32 n2 = . [22] and references therein). In the randomwalk approximation this occurs at κ = κc = 1/4gd. come into play.36). the expansion can be carried out to high orders (see e. when also the randomwalk approximation is expected to be good. which is the meanﬁeld value (3. The partition function and expectation values can be expressed as a systematic expansion in κ.129) −2λR = Z 2 γ4 = 2 .80)) as illustrated in ﬁgure 3. d = 4. 4κc λ R → λ0 .15)). Four random walks correlated by the one site γ4 . . λ → ∞. . with increasing sophistication. or. R This Zφ corresponds to Zϕ = 1 (cf. Gαβ (p) = δαβ Zφ . (3. (3. γ4 (3.54 O(n) models Fig. . n+2 3 (3.127) (3. the expansion is known in statistical physics as the hightemperature expansion.g.11.
(3.304 11(6) at λ = ∞. R R ∂mR (3. An important aspect of the results is the carefully estimated errors in various quantities.132) For ﬁxed ﬁnite N the sum gives an accurate approximation to f (x). λR = 3. 22.2 may be considered as relatively weak coupling.28 and the renormalized coupling λR increasing from 0 to 3. L¨scher and Weisz showed how the u O(n) models in four dimensions can be solved to a good approximation [20.3.40 to 0. which is an asymptotic expansion (as is typical for saddlepoint expansions) with zero radius of convergence (see ∞ for example [13]). The critical κc (λ) is estimated from the radius of convergence of the hopping expansion to be monotonically increasing from κc = 1 at λ = 0 8 to κc = 0. For simplicity. This is in contrast to the weakcoupling expansion. 23].133) . The coeﬃcients of the hopping series were calculated to 14th order and the Callan–Symanzik beta functions were used to threeloop order. u 3.5.8 L¨ scher–Weisz solution Using the hopping expansion in combination with the Callan–Symanzik renormalizationgroup equations. 21] and n = 4 [23] were worked out in detail. we shall not quote the errors anymore in the following. At a slightly smaller κ < κc such that mR = 0.3 for λ = ∞. λR = 4. 21. Remarkably. for any ﬁxed λ ∈ (0. Along the line κ = 0. An expansion f (x) = k=0 fk xk is called asymptotic if N f (x) − k=0 fk xk = O(xN +1 ). We shall review the highlights for the O(4) model.2 as λ increases from 0 to ∞. with the mass parameter mR decreasing from 0. ∞).98 κc in the κ–λ plane the hopping expansion still converges well. The interested reader is urged to study these lucid papers which contain a lot of information on ﬁeld theory. for suﬃciently small x. Let us rewrite the beta function mR ∂λR = βR (λR ) = β1 λ2 + β2 λ3 + · · ·. The cases n = 1 [20.8 L¨scher–Weisz solution u 55 A good property of the hopping expansion is that it has a nonzero radius of convergence. The expansion need not converge as N → ∞ and for a given x there is an optimum N beyond which the approximation becomes worse.
it appears natural from the point of view of Wilson’s renormalization theory in terms of an eﬀective action with an eﬀective cutoﬀ. =− β1 λR β1 λR (3. or Schwinger’s Source Theory. Then λR = 3.139) = dx .2 means λ ≈ 0. which uses unitarity to obtain higherorder approximations in an expansion in a physical coupling parameter (e. (The variable κ is traded for mR .41 and the twoloop term in (3.134) 2 ˜ give β2 /β1 ≈ −0.133). This indicates that renormalized perturbation theory may be applicable for these couplings. β1 x2 β1 x β2 1 − 2 ln(β1 λR ) + ln C1 + O(λR ).g. even if the bare λ is inﬁnite. L¨scher and Weisz integrate the Callan–Symanzik equations toward u the critical point mR = 0. mR The results β1 = n+8 9n + 42 .134) is only about 20% of the oneloop term.138) (3. A basic assumption made in order to proceed is that renormalized perturbation theory is valid for suﬃciently small λR .and threeloop values. using (3. β2 = − . This may seem daring if one thinks of deriving renormalized perturbation theory from the bare weakcoupling expansion.137) (3. 2 8π (8π 2 )2 (3. ln mR = βR (x) 1 β2 − 2 + O(1) .136) (3. The integration is done numerically.135) ˜ ∂λ β2 ˜ ˜ = λ2 + 2 λ 3 + · · · .) As we have seen in (3. ∂ ln mR λR dx .54. λR ). ∂λR = βR (λR ). Suﬃciently deep in the scaling region we may integrate by expansion.56 O(n) models ˜ in terms of a natural variable λ ≡ β1 λR .100) this leads to the conclusion that the renormalized coupling vanishes at the phase boundary. ∂mR β1 (3. which is thus established even for bare coupling λ = ∞ (!). Using the beta function calculated in renormalized perturbation theory. or from the point of view of eﬀective actions. However. The next (threeloop) term in the series is again positive and L¨scher and Weisz reason that the true beta function in this coupling u region may be between the two.
144) (3. 2 λR →  ln τ −1 . for given λR . Eq.145) We recognize that the behavior (3. the smallest lattice spacing (smallest mR ) is obtained with the largest λ. (3. Note that (3. i. i. For small bare coupling C1 can be calculated with the weakcoupling expansion. 2 In the scaling limit all information about the renormalized coupling coming from the hopping expansion is contained in C1 (λ).8 L¨scher–Weisz solution u 57 Here C1 is an integration constant. The u fact that C1 (λ) decreases as λ increases corresponds to the intuition that for given mR .e. which increases monotonically with decreasing λ. (3. τ = 1 − κ/κc → 0: mR → C4 τ 1/2  ln τ δ1 /2β1 . β1 Z → C2 .143) shows that the correlationlength critical exponent ν has almost the meanﬁeld value ν = 1 : it is modiﬁed only by a power of ln τ . which becomes dependent on the bare λ once the solution is matched to the hopping expansion.) Notice that knowledge of β2 is needed in order to be able to deﬁne C1 (λ) as λR → 0. 2 (3.146) For inﬁnite bare coupling L¨scher and Weisz ﬁnd C1 (∞) = exp(1.100). β1 λ0 β1 2 (3. inserting the expansion (3. the symmetric phase. (3.e. the renormalized coupling increases with λ.5). L¨scher and u Weisz extended these results into the physically relevant broken phase. L¨scher and Weisz show that similarly u Z = C2 [1 + O(λR )].143) (3. (Part 2 of the integration constant is written as −(β2 /β1 ) ln β1 . The hopping expansion holds in the region of the phase diagram connected to the line κ = 0.141) (3. κc − κ = C3 m2 (λR )δ1 /β1 [1 R + O(λR )].144) follows from (3.86) for λR into (3.142) where δ1 is a Callan–Symanzik coeﬃcient similar to the β’s. In fact.140) which shows that mR depends nonanalytically on λR for λR → 0.3. Conversely. λ = ∞. From these equations follow the scalings laws.145) were obtained with coeﬃcients .139) can also be written as mR = C1 (β1 λR )−β2 /β1 e−1/β1 λR [1 + O(λR )].140) and expanding in λ0 leads to ln C1 (λ) = 1 β2 c + 2 ln(β1 λ0 ) − + O(λ0 ). where relations similar to (3.140)–(3.
This choice is identical in form to the classical relation between the coupling. The renormalized coupling in the broken phase cannot be deﬁned at zero momentum. or equivalently m2 .3 (λ).147) Another deﬁnition was chosen for the renormalized coupling in the broken phase.12 shows lines of constant renormalized coupling with varying κ/κc for the case n = 1 [21]. It follows that the beta function of the model has to correspond to case (b) in ﬁgure 3. Here we see that the behavior continues for large λ and that the line λ = ∞ is reached before reaching the critical line. until the renormalized λR became too large and the perturbative beta function could no longer be trusted.10)). Figure 3. at λ = ∞.7. The critical line can be approached arbitrarily closely only for arbitrarily small renormalized coupling. or with the electroweak scale of 246 GeV in the application to the Standard Model.5. which is very convenient: λR = m2 −1/2 −1/2 R v = Zπ φ. C2.3 (λ) = C2. We mention here the result λR < 3. taken somewhat arbitrarily to be at mR = 0. as in the symmetric phase. but the results there became invalid as λ grew too big. The renormalizationgroup equations were numerically integrated again in the broken phase. approach the critical line κ/κc = 1 by increasing the bare coupling λ. This behavior was also found in the weakcoupling expansion. Using Zπ in the deﬁnition of vR allows the identiﬁcation of vR with the pion decay constant fπ in the application of the O(4) model to lowenergy pion physics.e.435 C1 (λ).5 for mR < 0. this time for increasing mR . also in the broken phase the renormalized coupling is relatively small even at the edge of the scaling region. because the massless Goldstone bosons would lead to infrared divergences (in absence of explicit symmetry breaking). 2 . This is done again using renormalized perturbation theory with the results C1 (λ) = 1.58 O(n) models C (the Callan–Symanzik coeﬃcients are the same in both phases). (3.5. . (3. vR ≡ Zπ 2vR (3. For a given λR we can go deeper into the scaling region. to connect the symmetric and broken R phases.148) where Zπ is the wavefunction renormalization constant of the Goldstone bosons. i. Hence. mass and vacuum expectation value (cf. They considered the critical theory at κ = κc and used perturbation theory in κ − κc . and the renormalized coupling goes to zero in the continuum limit mR → 0.
From [21]. 1). the swave) the scattering matrix is ﬁnite dimensional. Let us recall here another wellknown criterion for a coupling being small or large: the unitarity bound. one requires the Born approximation for T  to be smaller than 1. except that the values of λR at a given amR are smaller [23]. its eigenvalues are phase factors S = exp(i2δ). Since the lowestorder (Born) approximation is real and T = (S − 1)/i = 2 exp(iδ) sin δ has a real part ∈ (−1.8 L¨scher–Weisz solution u 59 Fig. the ﬁgure corresponding to 3. This gives an upper bound on λR : the unitarity bound. In a partial wave state of deﬁnite angular momentum (e. so one expects the renormalization eﬀects to be larger than for n = 1. This is the value of the renormalized coupling at which the lowestorder approximation to the elastic scattering amplitude T becomes larger than a bound deduced from the unitarity of the scattering matrix S. the results show that the O(n) models (in particular the cases n = 1 and 4) in four dimensions are ‘trivial’: the renormalized coupling vanishes in the continuum limit. Summarizing. u ¯ The bare coupling λ increases from 0 to ∞ as the LW parameter λ goes from 0 to 1. The ﬁrst betafunction coeﬃcient increases with n.12 is similar.g. with δ the standard phase shifts. 3.12.5 turn out to be smaller than the unitarity bound (in the broken phase the maximum λR is only about two thirds of this bound).3. Lines of constant renormalized coupling for the case n = 1 determined by L¨ scher and Weisz. Since we want of course an . The lines are labeled by the value of gR ≡ 6λR . For the O(4) model. The maximum values of the renormalized coupling at mR = 0.
. using a Metropolis or a Langevin algorithm.60 O(n) models interacting model we cannot take the lattice distance to zero. j = x 1. with N = 4. . For not too large renormalized coupling the cutoﬀ can be huge and lattice artifacts very small. 2. . and in realistic applications new physical input is needed. The relevance of these results for the Standard Model will be discussed later.. and Nt of the same order. ∂φα x.150) √ with a statistical error ∝ 1/ K. n = x. giving the approximate result O ≈O≡ 1 K K O(φj ). by the rule α φα x. K. 6. . j=1 (3. 8. e.n + δ ∂S(φn ) √ α + 2δ ηx. which is distributed according to the weight factor exp S(φ)..149) are evaluated by producing a set of ﬁeld conﬁgurations {φα }j . We shall give only a brief description of the Monte Carlo methods and the analysis of the results.n . The lattice is usually taken of the form N 3 × Nt .n (3. For simplicity we shall assume that Nt = N in the following. a Langevin simulation produces a sequence φα .n+1 = φx..9 Numerical simulation With numerical simulations we get nonperturbative results albeit on ﬁnite lattices.n 1. For the O(4) model sizes 104 –164 are already very useful. Simulations provide furthermore a valuable kind of insight into the properties of the systems. The ensemble is generated with a stochastic process. Where this happens depends on the circumstances. which is complementary to expansions in some parameter.151) . 10]. 3.g. . For example. . . . Expectation values O = 1 Z Dφ exp[S(φ)] O(φ) (3. At the scale of the cutoﬀ the model loses its validity. . Monte Carlo methods are described in more detail in [4. The model is to be interpreted as an eﬀective model that is valid at momenta much smaller than the cutoﬀ π (π/a in physical units). 6.
For example. Using a small δ such as 0. The ﬁnite δ produces a systematic error. problem (viii)). and products like x x+ˆ φα φβ giving correlation functions upon averaging. e. It can be shown that as t → ∞. The conﬁgurations j and j +1 are usually correlated. α α ηx.9 Numerical simulation 61 α where ηx. (3.3.153) but there are methods to take care of this. or by using several δ’s and extrapolating to δ = 0. It is important to determine these systematic errors and check that they accord with theoretical scaling and ﬁnitesize formulas.n ηx . and conﬁgurations φj may be recorded every ∆t = 1. Typical observables O for the O(n) models are the average ‘magnetiza¯ tion’ φα = x φα /N 4 . New algorithms are being reported every year in the ‘Lattice proceedings’. say.n are Gaussian pseudorandom numbers with unit variance and zero mean. we have to take into account systematic errors due to scaling (O(a)) violations and ﬁnitesize (L) eﬀects (L = N a). α ηx. the φ’s become distributed according to the desired exp S(φ). in the symmetric . We can then attempt to extrapolate to inﬁnite volume and zero lattice spacing. The free energy F = x y − ln Z itself cannot be obtained directly by Monte Carlo methods.01. Research into eﬃcient algorithms is fascinating and requires good insight into the nature of the system under investigation. but may be reconstructed. in units related to the mass gap of the model. x x+ˆ The correlation function Gαβ = φα φβ − φα φβ is used to dexy x y x y termine the masses of particles. The Metropolis algorithm is often preferred over the Langevin one.152) and δ is a step size related to the Langevin time t by t = δn. such that the true statistical error is larger than the naive standard deviation 1 K K O(φj ) − O j=1 2 (3.n = 0. by integrating ∂F/∂κ = −2 xµ φα φα µ . Since the lattices are ﬁnite. With periodic boundary conditions it depends only on the diﬀerence x − y. the average ‘energy’ −S/N 4 . which reduces to the x average ‘link’ xµ φα φα µ /4N 4 in the limit λ → ∞. which can be reduced by taking δ suﬃciently small. the system reaches equilibrium after some time.n = δαα δxx δnn . up to terms of order δ (cf. since it does not suﬀer from systematic stepsize errors ∝ δ and it is often more eﬃcient.g.
The results for the coupling constant roughly agree within the errors with those obtained by L¨scher and Weisz using the hopping expansion.t. γ 2 e−ωp.γ (Nt −t) .154) x where ﬁnitetemperature (ﬁnite Nt ) corrections of the form ∝ p γ φα pγ have been neglected. The latter correspond to the Gold . one can try to determine the renormalized mass and wavefunction renormalization constant in momentum space from eq. Lm. can be neglected for suﬃciently large times. apart from renormalization. changes by roughly a factor of two). We see that the interactions cause the ﬁnitevolume mass to increase over the inﬁnitevolume value (the linear extent in physical units. which have relative size exp[−(ω −m)t].0. despite the large bare coupling.0 = γ  0φα p. Choosing zero momentum p. Only when the particle is weakly coupled is mR ≈ m. along φα = v α = 0.81). For illustration we show ﬁrst some early results in the symmetric phase. there is a preferred direction. In the broken phase of the O(n) model for n > 1. 2 (3. The higherorder correlation functions (such as the fourpoint functions) require in general much better statistics than do the propagators.and brokenphase regions in parameter space is clear in the simulations. Although there is rigorously no phase transition in a ﬁnite volume.62 O(n) models phase the spectral representation can be written as e−ipx Gαα x.14 shows u a result [25] for the dressed propagator (correlation function) analyzed in momentum space. and one considers the longitudinal and transverse modes Gσ = v −2 v α v β Gαβ and Gπ = (δαβ − v −2 v α v β )Gαβ /(n − 1). The phase boundary is somewhat smeared out by ﬁnitevolume eﬀects.155) where m = ωmin is the mass of the particle with the quantum numbers of φα . Alternatively. (3. R =  0φα 0α 2 exp −m Nt . Figure 3. the diﬀerence between the symmetric. The broken phase is physically more interesting.γ t + e−ωp. The fact that the propagator resembles so closely a free propagator. Figure 3. one may x ﬁt the propagator data for large t and Nt − t to R cosh m t − Nt 2 .13 shows the particle mass and the renormalized coupling gR = 6λR as functions of the spatial size N in a simulation at inﬁnite bare coupling [24]. It is assumed that the contributions of the next energy levels ω with the same quantum numbers (such as three particle intermediate states). is an indication that the eﬀective interactions are not very strong. but this does not give the particle mass directly. (3.
The Goldstone bosons lead to strong ﬁnitesize eﬀects. which leads to complications in the analysis of the numerical data. the ﬁnite size also gives a nonzero mass to the Goldstone bosons. In a ﬁnite volume there is no spontaneous . α 4 ¯ Consider the magnetization observable φα = x φx /N . yet the ¯ ﬁgure suggests correctly that the angular average leads to φα = 0 also in the brokenphase region.13. the correlation length. The full circles correspond to a ﬁnitesize dependence expected from renormalized perturbation theory. The theoretical analysis is based on eﬀective actions.3. 3. However. Finitesize eﬀects depend on the range of the interactions. stone bosons. λ = ∞). An impression of its typical distribution is illustrated in ﬁgure 3.9 Numerical simulation 63 Fig. Finitesize dependence of m and gR = 6λR in a simulation in the symmetric phase (L = N . The σ particle can decay into the π particles. From [24]. These eﬀects have to be taken into account in the analysis of the simulation results. The diﬀerence between the symmetric and broken phase is clear.15. using ‘chiral perturbation theory’ or ‘renormalized perturbation theory’. which is inﬁnite for the Goldstone bosons.
64
O(n) models
Fig. 3.14. Dressed propagator in momentum space plotted as a function of 2 2 µ 4 sin (pµ /2), at m0 = −24.6, λ0 = 100. From [25].
¯ Fig. 3.15. Qualitative illustration of the probability distribution of φα at ﬁnite volume for n = 2 in the symmetric phase (left) and the broken phase (right).
symmetry breaking. To formulate a precise deﬁnition of v α , we introduce an explicit symmetrybreaking term into the action, which ‘pulls’ the spins along a direction, say 0, ∆S =
x
φ0 , x
(3.156)
3.9 Numerical simulation and deﬁne v α = lim lim φα , x
→0 L→∞
65
(3.157)
where the order of the limits is crucial. To understand this somewhat ¯ better, one introduces the constrained eﬀective potential VL (φ), which is obtained by integrating over all ﬁeld conﬁgurations with the constraint ¯ φα = x φα /L4 , x ¯ exp(−L4 VL (φ)) = such that Z= and ¯ φα = ¯ ¯ ¯ dn φ exp −L4 VL (φ) φα . ¯ ¯ dn φ exp −L4 VL (φ) (3.160) ¯ ¯ dn φ exp −L4 VL (φ) , (3.159) ¯ Dφ exp[S(φ)] δ φα −
x
φα /L4 , x
(3.158)
The fact that the eﬀective potential comes with a factor L4 is easily understood from the lowestorder approximation in λ → 0, which is ¯ obtained by simply inserting the constant φα for φα in the classical x action, ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ S(φ) = −L4 VL (φ) = −N 4 [(1 − 8κ)φ2 + λ(φ2 − 1)2 − φ0 ], (3.161)
where we used the form (3.16) of the action in lattice units. In this classical approximation the constraint eﬀective potential is independent of L. The exact constraint eﬀective potential is only weakly dependent on L, for suﬃciently large L, and as L increases the integrals in (3.160) are accurately given by the saddlepoint approximation, i.e. by the sum ¯ over the minima of VL (φ). In absence of the term there is a continuum ¯ of saddle points and φα = 0 even in the broken phase. A unique saddle point is obtained, however, for nonzero . If we let go to zero after the ¯ inﬁnitevolume limit, φα remains nonzero. For more information on the constraint eﬀective potential, see e.g. [26]. This technique of introducing explicit symmetry breaking is used in simulations [27] as shown in ﬁgure 3.16. A simpler estimate of the inﬁnitevolume value v of the magnetization is obtained with the ‘rotation method’, in which the magnetization of each individual conﬁguration is rotated to a standard direction before averaging. The resulting ¯ φ can be ﬁtted to a form v + constant × N −2 .
66
O(n) models
¯ Fig. 3.16. Plots of φ4 as a function of j = in the O(4) model for various lattice sizes. The data are ﬁtted to the theoretical behavior (curves) and extrapolated to inﬁnitevolume and = 0, giving the full circle in the upper lefthand corner. From [27].
Fig. 3.17. Results on mσ /F = mσ /vR as a function of the correlation length 1/mσ , for the ‘standard (usual) action’ (lower data) and a ‘Symanzikimproved action’ (upper data). The crosses are results of L¨ scher and Weisz obtained u with the hopping expansion. The bare coupling λ = ∞. The curves are interpolations based on renormalized perturbation theory. From [28].
3.10 Realspace renormalization group and universality
67
As a last example we show in ﬁgure 3.17 results on the renormalized √ coupling 2λR = mR /vR [28]. Data are shown for the action considered here (the ‘standard action’) and for a ‘Symanzikimproved action’. We see that the data for the standard action agree with the results obtained with the hopping expansion in the previous section, within errors. The Symanzikimproved action has nexttonearestneighbor couplings such that the O(a2 ) errors are eliminated in the classical continuum limit. It is not clear a priori that this leads to better scaling in the quantum theory, because the scalar ﬁeld conﬁgurations that contribute to the path integral are not smooth on the lattice scale, but it is interesting that the diﬀerent regularization leads to somewhat larger renormalized couplings for a given correlation length. In conclusion, the numerical simulations have led to accurate results which fully support the theoretical understanding that the O(n) models are ‘trivial’.
3.10 Realspace renormalization group and universality One of the cornerstones of quantum ﬁeld theory is universality: the physical properties emerging in the scaling region are to a large extent independent of the details of formulating the theory on the scale of the cutoﬀ. The physics of the O(n) models is expected to be independent of the lattice shape, the addition of nextnearestneighbor couplings, nextnextnearestneighbor couplings, . . ., or higherorder terms (φ2 )k , k = 3, 4, . . . (of course, in its Ising limit or nonlinear sigma limit where φ2 = 1 such higherorder terms no longer play a role). More precisely, the physical outcome of the models falls into universality classes, depending on the symmetries of the system and the dimensionality of space–time. Our understanding of universality comes from the renormalization group a ` la Wilson [29, 30] (‘block spinning’, see e.g. [11]), and from the weakcoupling expansion. We shall sketch the ideas using the onecomponent scalar ﬁeld as an example, starting with the block spinning approach used in the theory of critical phenomena. In the realspace renormalizationgroup method one imagines integrating out the degrees of freedom with wave lengths of order of the lattice distance and expressing the result in terms of an eﬀective action for the remaining variables. On iterating this procedure one obtains the eﬀective action describing the theory at physical ( a) distance scales.
68
O(n) models
¯¯ ¯ Let φx be the average of φx over a region of linear size s around x, ¯¯ φx =
x
Bx,x φx . ¯
(3.162)
The averaging function B(¯, x) is concentrated near sites x on a coarser x ¯ lattice that are a distance s apart in units of the original lattice. We could simply take values xµ = 2xµ with Bx,¯ = z µ δx±ˆ,x (‘blocking’), or a ¯ x ¯ µ ¯ smoother Gaussian average B = z x exp(−(x − x)2 /2s), with suitable ¯ normalization factors z. The eﬀective action S is deﬁned by eS(φ) = and it satisﬁes ¯ Dφ eS(φ) =
¯ ¯ ¯ ¯
Dφ eS(φ)
x ¯
¯¯ δ φx −
x
Bx,x φx , ¯
(3.163)
Dφ eS(φ) .
(3.164)
After a few iterations the eﬀective action has many types of terms, so one is led to consider general actions of the form S(φ) =
α
Kα Oα (φ).
(3.165)
Here Oα denotes terms of the schematic form (∂µ φ∂µ φ)k , (φ2 )k , . . . (k = 1, 2, . . .). The new eﬀective action can then again be written in the form ¯ ¯ S(φ) =
α
¯ ¯ Kα Oα (φ).
(3.166)
The scale factor z in the deﬁnition of the averaging function B is chosen ¯ ¯ such that the coeﬃcient of ∂µ φ∂µ φ is equal to 1 , in lattice units of 2 ¯ the coarse x lattice, in order that the new coeﬃcients Kα do not run ¯ away after many iterations. Because of the locality of the averaging ¯ function one expects the action S to be local too, i.e. the range of the ¯ is eﬀectively ﬁnite, and one expects the dependence of couplings in S ¯ the coeﬃcients Kα on Kα to be analytic. One iteration thus constitutes a renormalizationgroup transformation ¯ Kα = Tα (K). (3.167)
We can still calculate correlation functions and quantities of physical ¯ interest with the new ﬁelds φ. For these the highestmomentum contributions are suppressed by the averaging, as can be seen by expressing them in terms of the original ﬁelds φ, but contributions from physical momenta which are low compared to the cutoﬀ are unaﬀected. In particular the
3.10 Realspace renormalization group and universality
69
correlation length in units of the original lattice distance is unchanged. However, in units of the x lattice distance the correlation length is ¯ smaller by a factor 1/s. Each iteration the correlation length is shortened by a factor 1/s and when it is of order one we imagine stopping the iterations. We can then still extract the physics on the momentum scales of order of the mass scale. If we want to discuss scales ten times higher, we can stop iterating when the correlation length is still of order ten. In the inﬁnite dimensional space of coupling constants Kα there is a hypersurface where the correlation length is inﬁnite, the critical surface. We want to start our iterations very close to the critical surface because we want a large correlation length on the original lattice, which means that we are able to do many iterations before the correlation length is of order unity. If there is a ﬁxed point K ∗ ,
∗ Tα (K ∗ ) = Kα ,
(3.168)
then we can perform many iterations near such a point without changing the Kα very much. At such a ﬁxed point the correlation length does not change, so it is either zero or inﬁnite. We are of course particularly interested in ﬁxed points in the critical surface. Linearizing about such a critical ﬁxed point (on the critical surface),
∗ ∗ ¯ Kα − Kα = Mαβ (Kβ − Kβ ), Mαβ = [∂Tα /∂Kβ ]K=K ∗ ,
(3.169)
it follows that the eigenvalues λi of Mαβ determine the attractive (λi < 1) or repulsive (λi > 1) directions of the ‘ﬂow’. These directions are given by the corresponding eigenvectors eα , which determine the combinations i eα Oα . i One expects only a few repulsive eigenvalues, called ‘relevant’, while most of them are attractive and called ‘irrelevant’. Eigenvalues λi = 1 are called marginal. Further away from the ﬁxed point the attractive and repulsive directions will smoothly deform into attractive and repulsive curves. The marginal directions will also turn into either attractive or repulsive curves. Let us start the iteration somewhere on the critical surface. Then the ﬂow stays on the surface. Suppose that the ﬂow on the surface is attracted to a critical ﬁxed point K ∗ . Next let us start very close to the critical surface. Then the ﬂow will at ﬁrst still be attracted to K ∗ , but, since with each iteration the correlation length decreases by a factor 1/s, the ﬂow moves away from the critical surface and eventually turns away from the ﬁxed point. Hence the critical ﬁxed point has at least one relevant direction away from the critical surface.
70
O(n) models
Suppose there is only one such relevant direction (and its opposite on the other side of the critical surface). Then, after many iterations the ﬂow just follows the ﬂowline through this relevant direction. The physics is then completely determined by the ﬂowline through the relevant direction: the physical trajectory (also called the renormalized trajectory). To the relevant direction there corresponds the only free parameter we end up with: the ratio cutoﬀ/mass, Λ/m (where Λ = π/a). This ratio is determined by the initial distance to the critical surface, or equivalently, by the number of iterations and the ﬁnal distance to the critical surface where we stop the iterations. However, the mass just sets the dimensional scale of the theory and there is no physical free parameter at all under these circumstances. All the physical properties (e.g. the renormalized vertex functions and the renormalized coupling λR ) are ﬁxed by the properties of the physical trajectory. On the other hand, each additional relevant direction oﬀers the possibility of an additional free physical parameter, which may be tuned by choosing appropriate initial conditions. Many years of investigation have led to the picture that there is only one type of critical ﬁxed point in the O(n) symmetric models, which has only one relevant direction corresponding to the mass as described above, and one marginal but attractive direction corresponding to the renormalized coupling. This means that eventually the renormalized coupling will vanish after an inﬁnite number of iterations (triviality). This is the reason that the ﬁxed point is called ‘Gaussian’, for the corresponding eﬀective action is quadratic. However, because the renormalized coupling is marginal and therefore changes very slowly near the critical point, it can still be substantially diﬀerent from zero even after very many iterations (very large Λ/m ratios). With a given number of iterations we can imagine maximizing the renormalized coupling over all possible initial actions parameterized by Kα , giving an upper bound on the renormalized coupling. Within its upper bound the renormalized coupling is then still a free parameter in the models. The situation is illustrated in ﬁgure 3.18. For the massless theory the correlation length is inﬁnite, so we start on the critical surface. The ﬂow is attracted to K ∗ , which determines the physics outcome. The marginally attractive direction corresponds in ¯ the massless case to the running renormalized coupling λ(µ) at some physical momentum scale µ. Each iteration the maximum momentum scale is lowered by a factor 1/s and, after many iterations, the ratio (maximum momentum scale)/cutoﬀ is very small. We stop the iteration
direction 2 represents the marginal direction corresponding to the renormalized coupling.16) and ﬁrst make a scale transformation φ = φ / λ. So the massless theory can be deﬁned by taking the ¯ number of iterations (∝ Λ/µ) large but ﬁnite. Shown are two ﬂows starting from a point in C. 3.11 Universality at weak coupling To formulate a general action at weak coupling we start with the form √ (3. one near the critical surface and on this surface.18. For a given number of iterations the running coupling can still vary within its upper bound. Renormalization groupﬂow in φ4 theory. The line C represents the ‘canonical surface’ of actions of the standard form S = 2κ xµ φx φx+µ − ˆ 2 2 2 x [φx + λ(φx − 1) ]. The critical ﬁxed points of the realspace renormalizationgroup transformation give a very attractive explanation of universality. µ has to go to zero and ¯ λ(µ) → 0 because the ﬂow along the marginal direction is attracted to zero coupling. which brings the action into the form S(φ ) = 1 λ 2κ x µ φx φx+ˆ − φx2 − (φx2 − 1)2 .3. The line P represents the physical trajectory. As the number of iterations goes to inﬁnity. 3. and λ(µ) → 0 as µ → 0.170) We see that λ appears as a natural expansion parameter for a saddlepoint expansion.11 Universality at weak coupling 71 Fig. while the other coeﬃcients in the action are of order . Direction 1 is an irrelevant direction. when the maximum momentum scale is of order µ. µ (3.
before we set it equal to 1.171) in the form S=− =− x 1 λ0 x 1 ∂µ ϕx ∂µ ϕx + z∂µ ϕx2 ∂µ ϕx2 + · · · + 2 u2k ϕx2k k 1 ∂µ ϕx ∂µ ϕx + λ0 z∂µ ϕ2 ∂µ ϕ2 + · · · + x x 2 λk−1 u2k ϕ2k . A natural generalization is given by S(φ ) = 1 λ 2κ x µ φx φx+ˆ + κ µ µ<ν φx φx+ˆ+ˆ µ ν ∞ 2 φx2 φx+ˆ + · · · − µ µ k=1 (3.72 O(n) models one in lattice units..13) with the ﬁeld ϕ = φ/ 2κ and rewrite (3. In the classical continuum limit a → 0 we end up with just the ϕ4 theory. . Here again the coeﬃcients z.173) + k where now ∂µ ϕx = (ϕx+aµ − ϕx )/a and x contains a factor a4 . For convenience in the following we shall use the original continuum√ motivated parameterization (3. It can be shown that the expansion in powers of corresponds to an expansion in the number of loops in Feynman diagrams. .171) v2k φx2k . x 0 (3. It is instructive to rewrite the generic action (3.172) where ϕ = λ0 ϕ. In other . x 0 k (3.172) in physical units. For this reason the weakcoupling expansion is called the semiclassical expansion. The coeﬃcients in this expression are supposed to be of order 1. . with u2 chosen such that m2 = 2u2 a−2 remains ﬁnite. The parameter λ enters in the same place as Planck’s constant when we introduced the pathintegral quantization method. +κ µ φx φx+2ˆ + κ µ which still has the symmetry φ → −φ. and u2k are supposed to be dimensionless numbers of order unity. S=− x √ 1 ∂µ ϕx ∂µ ϕx + a2 λ0 z∂µ ϕ2 ∂µ ϕ2 + · · · x x 2 a2k−4 λk−1 u2k ϕ2k . The higherdimensional operators are accompanied by powers of the lattice distance a such that the action is dimensionless. with the exception of u2 which becomes m2 = O(λ0 ) at the phase boundary (this is special to 0c the continuum parameterization).
the bare two. We have 0 seen in section 3. the loop integrations over the cosines near the edge of the Brillouin zone in momentum space. The − 1 6! λ2 u6 a2 0 2 π/a d4 l (2π)4 m2 + a−2 0 . 0 2 −π/a µ (2 − 2 cos alµ ) (3. am0 ) on dimensional grounds.19. The bare vertex function in momentum space is −6! λ2 u6 a2 0 and the contribution to Γ(4) is given by 1 = − 1 6!λ2 u6 C0 . are universal. What about the polynomial τµν pµ pν ? Its coeﬃcient τµν depends on lattice details. Contribution of the bare sixpoint vertex to Γ(4) .67)). By looking at more examples one may convince oneself that the higherorder bare vertex functions just lead to new expressions for the vertex functions in terms of the coeﬃcients in the action. Here the lattice symmetries come to help.11 Universality at weak coupling 73 Fig. 3. order by order in perturbation theory. In nontrivial orders of the semiclassical expansion. consider the eﬀect of the term − x λ2 u6 a2 ϕ6 x 0 on the fourpoint vertex at oneloop order as given by the diagram in ﬁgure 3.and fourpoint vertex functions take their usual continuum limits and the higherorder bare vertex functions vanish. and in the relation between λR and m2 to λ0 and R m2 . All lattice artifacts end up in constants like C0 . words.19.3. such that the renormalized vertex functions. the powers of a in the bare vertex functions can be compensated by the divergences in the loop diagrams.4 how the logarithms emerge from the integration over the loop variable near the origin in momentum space where the lattice expressions take their classical continuum form: the terms containing logarithms are covariant under continuous rotations. which have. Consider the twopoint vertex function in oneloop order. the same momentum dependence as before. which has the form Γ(2) (p) = a−2 f (ap. however.174) in the limit a → 0 (the constant C0 was deﬁned in (3. There is one aspect worth mentioning: the eﬀect of the lattice symmetries. For example. For a → 0 this takes the form a−2 (τ a2 m2 + τµν a2 pµ pν ) + logarithms. once expressed in terms 0 of the renormalized coupling λR and renormalized mass parameter mR .
In the previous sections we reviewed some calculations and numerical simulations leading to accurate determination of the renormalized coupling in the O(4) model in the broken phase. because they correspond in position space to Dirac delta functions and derivatives thereof.175) There is only one such polynomial: p2 = p2 + · · · + p2 . e. The O(4) model may be identiﬁed with the scalar Higgs sector of the Standard Model. e. by having diﬀerent couplings in the space and time directions. . (3. and we shall now review the implications and applications of triviality. The action for the Higgs ﬁeld is given by SH = − d4 x [(Dµ ϕ)† Dµ ϕ + m2 ϕ† ϕ + λ0 (ϕ† ϕ)2 ]. Dimensional analysis showed that the above polynomial is at most of second order and even in pµ → −pµ because of axisreversal symmetry.g.176) (3.. such as cutoﬀ eﬀects ∝ a2 . xσ → −xρ . .12 Triviality and the Standard Model Arguments that scalar ﬁeld models are trivial in the sense that they become noninteracting when the regularization is removed were ﬁrst given by Wilson.g. then we may have to tune the couplings in the action to regain covariance in the scaling region. The polynomials are called contact terms. 3. 30]. So the lat1 4 tice symmetries and dimensional eﬀects are important in order to get covariant renormalized vertex functions. xµ=ρ → xµ .178) 1 k τk Dµ ϕ = ∂µ − ig1 Bµ − ig2 Wµ 2 2 . xµ=ρ. using his formulation of the renormalization group [29. .74 O(n) models polynomial has to be invariant under the cubic rotations R(ρσ) : xρ → xσ . nexttonearestneighbor couplings.σ → xµ and axis reversals I (ρ) : xρ → −xρ . First we review how the O(4) model is embedded in the Standard Model. Note that there is more than one fourthorder polynomial τκλµν pκ pλ pµ pν that is invariant under the lattice symmetries. Such polynomials go together with dimensional couplings. The arguments imply that triviality should hold within a universality class of bare actions. 0 ϕ. If we destroy the space–time symmetry of the lattice. (3.177) (3.
v (3. The Yukawa couplings to the leptons are similar (in the massless neutrino limit the righthanded neutrino ﬁelds decouple).184) (3. 2 2 4 1 1 (3. Setting the gauge couplings to zero.185) in the action. 0 . we have 2 2 m2 = 1 g2R vR .179) 1 m2 λ0 ∂µ ϕα ∂µ ϕα + 0 ϕα ϕα + (ϕα ϕα )2 . ϕd )T is the complex Higgs k doublet and Bµ . the action becomes equivalent to the O(4) model. ρ > 0. Sg=0 = − =− d4 x [∂µ ϕ† ∂µ ϕ + m2 ϕ† ϕ + λ0 (ϕ† ϕ)2 ] 0 d4 x (3.R = (1 γ5 )/2 are the projectors on the left. we ﬁnd the masses of the vector bosons W and Z and the photon A. If we insert the vacuum expectation value of the scalar ﬁeld 1 ϕ= √ 2 φ = v1 1. ϕd = √ (ϕ0 − iϕ3 ).181) (3.182) = ϕ0 + iϕk τk = ρV.180) ϕu = √ (ϕ2 + iϕ1 ). −ϕ∗ ϕd u V ∈ SU (2). . and Wµ are the U (1) × SU (2) electroweak gauge ﬁelds.186) (3. and the masses of the fermions from the Yukawa couplings.183) Here PL. The Yukawa couplings y are diagonal in SU (2) doublet space. (3. Z 4 mA = 0. m2 H = 2 2λR vR . 2 2 The Higgs ﬁeld enters also in Yukawa couplings with the fermions. Choosing renormalization conditions such that the ‘treegraph’ relations remain valid after renormalization. W 4 2 2 2 m2 = 1 (g1R + g2R ) vR .12 Triviality and the Standard Model 75 where τk are the Pauli matrices. In terms of a matrix ﬁeld φ deﬁned by φ≡ √ 2 ϕ∗ ϕ u d . ϕ = (ϕu . the Yukawa couplings to the quarks can be expressed as SY = − ¯ d4 x ψcg (PR φyg + yg PL φ† )ψcg .3.and righthanded fermion ﬁelds and the summation is over the QCD colors c and generations g. y = yu (1 + τ3 )/2 + yd (1 − τ3 )/2. (3. from the terms quadratic in the gauge ﬁelds.187) mf = yRf vR . (3.
Λ = mH C(β1 λR )β2 /β1 exp(1/β1 λR )[1 + O(λR )]. Even the much heavier top quark. assume that the Higgs mass is nonzero (we shall comment on these assumptions below). It then follows from the triviality of the O(4) model that the Standard Model itself must be ‘trivial’. The Yukawa couplings are generally much smaller. the triviality leads to the conclusion that the regularization cannot be removed completely. but we still have nonperturbative results for λR and the corresponding Λ/mH anyhow. as follows from (3.64. hence Λ maximal. for inﬁnite bare coupling λ0 . we can use eq. The constant C1 is minimal. (3. Because a nonzero Higgs mass implies λR = 0. when mH increases. If the Higgs mass is not too large such that λR = m2 /2vR is in H the perturbative domain.71. To discuss the implications of triviality of the O(4) model.5) ﬁgure .187) and the fact that the fermion masses are generally small (< 5 GeV) on the electroweak scale. It would obviously be very interesting if we could predict at which scale new physics has to come into play. for mH = 615 GeV (mH /vR = 2.34. Λ decreases. On the other hand.188) The electroweak gauge couplings are eﬀectively quite small (recall the typical factors of g 2 /π 2 that occur in perturbative expansions). The (running) QCD gauge coupling of the strong interactions is also relatively small on the electroweak scale of 100 GeV: g3R ≈ 1. which is not very large either. This value for Λ is far beyond the Planck mass O(1019 ) GeV for which gravity cannot be neglected. so eﬀectively the regulator scale for mH = 100 GeV may be considered to be irrelevantly high.4 (the value obtained by L¨scher and Weisz). mH = 100 GeV gives λR = 0. Certainly new physics comes into play at the Planck scale. let us assume for the moment that all the gauge and Yukawa couplings can be treated as perturbations on scales vR or higher.2.189) can no longer be trusted. We shall assume this in the following. When λR becomes too large eq.083 and Λ = 7×1036 GeV. Furthermore. which has a mass of about 175 GeV has a Yukawa coupling yt ≈ 0.76 O(n) models where f denotes the fermion. g1R = 0.140) to calculate the cutoﬀ Λ = π/a in the lattice regularization. (3. As an example. From experiment we know vR = 246 GeV.189) where C = π/C1 (λ0 ). Consequently the model must lose its validity on the regularization scale. with u C1 (∞) = 6. (3. 2 (3. New physical input is required on this momentum or equivalent distance scale. g2R = 0. To some extent this can be done as follows. For example.
requiring Λ/mH > 2π (amH < 1 ). that such an amplitude diﬀers by less than 5%. for the standard action. but at the edge of the scaling region. The Pauli–Villars regularization in the continuum appears to give much larger Λ’s than the lattice [33]. For example. vR = fπ = 93 MeV. The problem with relating various regularization schemes lies in the fact that it is not immediately clear what the physical implications of a requirement like Λ/mH > 2π are. cf. c in eq. which has more rotational symmetry than does the hypercubic lattice. This should then be maximized over all possible regularizations. in a given regularization. One may correlate Λ to regularization artifacts (mimicking ‘new physics’) in physical quantities. Requiring. which are Goldstone bosons with masses around 140 MeV due to explicit symmetry breaking. however. from the value obtained in renormalized perturbation theory. For values of mH deep in the scaling regime Λ is very sensitive to changes in mH . for Λ/mH ≈ 6. there is an upper bound on mH [31].12 Triviality and the Standard Model 77 3. For the Symanzikimproved action this would be Λ ≈ 8300 GeV. It is believed that the results of this program will not lead to drastic changes in the above result mH /vR 3. we 2 get an upper bound on mH from results like ﬁgure 3. would determine Λ and the corresponding upper bound on mH in that regularization.17. The analog of the Higgs particle is the very broad σ resonance around 900 MeV. So we can compute a cutoﬀ scale Λ from knowledge of the Higgs mass.146)). e. At this point it is useful to recall one example in which nature (QCD) introduces ‘new physics’. The O(4) model may also be interpreted as giving an eﬀective description of the three pions. The lowenergy pion physics is . Figure 3. but this Λ is clearly regularization dependent (the dependence of C in (3. this dependence is greatly reduced.3. such as the scattering amplitude for the Goldstone bosons. The expectation value vR is equal to the pion decay constant. To order 1/Λ2 all possible regularizations (including ones formulated in the continuum) can be represented by a threeparameter action on the F4 lattice.17 shows that the standard and Symanzikimproved actions give the bounds mH /vR 2. respectively. A way to search through regularization space systematically has been advocated especially by Neuberger [32]. (3. say. hence Λ ≈ 3πmH = 5800 GeV.7 and 3. This supports the idea of establishing an upper bound on the Higgs mass: given a criterion for allowed scaling violations.g.17 shows that 1/amH ≈ 3.189) on λ0 also indicates a regularization dependence. The signiﬁcance of such criteria is unclear.
its size on the Planck scale is still small. the assumption made above. However. . namely that mH = 0. the cutoﬀ needed in this application of the O(4) model is very low. and the model is not expected to describe physics at the σ scale. which are based on the eﬀect that the fermions and gauge bosons induce on the Higgs selfcouplings (for reviews. lattice formulations of gaugeHiggs systems and to a certain extent Yukawa models are possible and have been much studied over the years. The same can be said about the Yukawa couplings.186) is exact. It turns out that the Yukawa couplings are also ‘trivial’ and that the maximum renormalized coupling is also relatively weak. However.78 O(n) models approximately described by the O(4) model. which are also not asymptotically free (possibly with the exception of the topquark coupling). it is desirable to verify the above expectations nonperturbatively.3 are asymptotically free and their eﬀective size is even smaller on the scale of the cutoﬀ. Numerical simulations have set upper bounds on the masses of possible hitherto undiscovered generations of heavy fermions (including heavy neutrinos). see [37. An important 2 2 result based on O(4) Ward identities is that relations like m2 = g2 vR /4 W 2 are still valid to ﬁrst order in g2 on treating the Higgs selfcoupling nonperturbatively [31. The U (1) coupling g1 is not asymptotically free and its eﬀective strength grows with the momentum scale. This may be seen as justifying a deﬁnition of the gR such that (3. there is ‘new physics’ in the form of the wellknown ρ resonance with a mass of 770 MeV and width of about 150 MeV. However. Indeed.4). probably even below mσ . 34]. presentation and discussion of which here would lead too far [35]. Finally. A lattice formulation of the Standard Model is diﬃcult because of problems with fermions on a lattice (cf. 38]). The lattice formulation of gaugeHiggs systems has interesting aspects having to do with the gaugeinvariant formulation of the Higgs phenomenon. section 8. The gauge couplings g2. is justiﬁed by theoretical arguments for a lower bound on mH . Let us now discuss the assumptions of neglecting the eﬀect of the gauge and Yukawa couplings. Of course. These expectations have been studied in some detail. So it seems reasonable that their inclusion will not cause large deviations from the above results. since mσ /vR ≈ 10 is far above the upper bounds found above. If we accept not putting the cutoﬀ beyond the Planck scale anyway. then also the gauge coupling g1 may be expected to have little inﬂuence. as well as the inﬂuence of such generations on the Higgsmass bound. see for example [36].
ln aµ) = 1 + n=1 k=0 ∞ Znk λn (ln aµ)k Zk (λ)(ln aµ)k . wavefunction. (3. s − t). The renormalized λ depends on a physical scale µ but not on a.15)). Introducing a reference mass µ1 . whereas λ0 is supposed to depend on a but not on µ. order by order in perturbation theory. we write λ0 (t) = λ(s)Zλ (λ(s). Show that it converges in the limit a → 0.191) . to the expression one would write down directly in the continuum. (3.13 Problems 3. From the point of view of obtaining ﬁnite renormalized vertex functions we can be quite liberal and allow any choice of the coeﬃcients Znk leading to a series in λ for physical quantities for which the a dependence cancels out. s = ln(µ/µ1 ). it is a ‘running coupling’. We substitute the bare λ0 for a series in terms of a renormalized λ (not to be confused with the λ in the lattice parameterization (3. and couplingconstant renormalizations are needed. In this case λ(µ) is still a good renormalized coupling. For one of these diagrams.3.13 Problems 79 (i) Sixpoint vertex Determine the Feynman diagrams for the sixpoint vertex function in the ϕ4 theory in the oneloop approximation. ln aµ).190) = k=0 Terms vanishing as a → 0 have been neglected. t = − ln(aµ1 ). Here we concentrate on the latter. ∞ n Zλ (λ. α (iii) Critical κ and m0 at weak coupling What are the critical values of the bare mass m2 (in lattice units) 0c and the hopping parameter κc to ﬁrst order in λ0 in the weakcoupling expansion? (iv) Minimal subtraction To obtain renormalized vertex functions in the weakcoupling expansion. write down the corresponding mathematical expression in lattice units (a = 1) and in physical units (a = 1). Give the renormalized four¯ point vertex function ΓR1 ···α4 (p1 · · · p4 ) in terms of λ(µ). (ii) Renormalized coupling for mass zero ¯ In the massless O(n) model λR is ill deﬁned. mass. λ0 = λZλ (λ.
128) shows that the mass parameter mR is inﬁnite for κ = 0.195) In a minimal subtraction scheme one does not ‘subtract’ more than is necessary to cancel out the ln(aµ)’s.122). solve eq. (3.. (3.80 O(n) models From 0 = dλ0 /ds we ﬁnd ∂ ∂ +β ∂s ∂λ where β= ∂λ . Compare also with equations (2. 0) = Z0 (λ) = 1. (3. ∂s (3. since such a c is equivalent to a redeﬁnition of µ. with c some numerical constant. For small κ.122) that Gxy ∝ (2gκ)Lxy = exp(−mxy x − y). 1. . . For small κ we see from (3.192) Using the above expansion for Zλ in terms of powers (ln aµ)k = (t − s)k . It follows that the beta function in a minimal subtraction scheme can be read oﬀ from the coeﬃcients of the terms involving only a single power of ln aµ: β(λ) = −Z1 (λ). (v) Mass for small κ The hopping result (3. ∂(λZ0 (λ))/∂λ (3.120) and (2. show that (k + 1)Zk (λ) + β ∂ (λZk (λ)) = 0.193) λZλ (λ. s − t) = 0.194) and hence that the β function is given by β(λ) = − (3. ∂λ Z1 (λ) . Notice that there is a whole class of minimal subtraction schemes: we may replace ln(aµ) by ln(aµ) + c. compare mxy for x. y along a lattice direction and along a lattice diagonal with the results of problem (i) in chapter 2. .117). We can identify a mass mxy = − ln(2gκ) (Lxy /x − y). for the case that x and y are along a timelike direction in the lattice.192) with the boundary condition Zλ (λ. 2. (2. and one chooses Z0 (λ) ≡ 1. . Assuming that the beta function is given.196) Show that in minimal subtraction the beta function β0 (λ0 ) for λ0 is identical to β(λ0 ). k = 0. where Lxy is the minimal number of steps between x and y.
200) 1 iapµ − 1). (3. One Langevin time step changes φ into φ according to √ ∂S(φ) φx = φx + 2δ ηx + δ . i. (viii) Langevin equation and Fokker–Planck Hamiltonian Consider a probability distribution P (φ) for the ﬁeld φx . π (3. After a Langevin time step the new average value is Dφ P (φ) O(φ (φ)) η .201) Kµ (p) = (e ia In the classical continuum limit this vertex vanishes but in oneloop order it contributes to the twopoint function Γ(p) (cf. .198) (3.173) corresponds to the vertex function 0 ∗ ∗ Γ(p1 · · · p4 ) = −8a2 λ0 z(−i)2 Kµ (p1 + p2 )Kµ (p3 + p4 ) + two permutations. Let O(φ) be an arbitrary observable.5). 4 independent of µ = 1. are given by z(κ. with average value Dφ P (φ)O(φ). in κ and λ.203) ∂φx This corresponds to P (φ) → P (φ).e. 4. By deﬁnition this new average value is equal to Dφ P (φ)O(φ).199) λ−1/4 2 Γ(k/2 + 1/4) (−κλ−1/2 )k k! Γ(2k + 1/2) (−λκ−2 )k . .204) . .67) and we used (2π)−4 −π d4 l ˆµ /ˆ2 = 1 . ﬁgure 3. (3. where · · · η denotes the average over the Gaussian random numbers ηx . k! = κ−1/2 Verify.13 Problems 81 (vi) An example of a divergent expansion Instructive examples of convergent and divergent expansions. Show that this contribution is given by +4λ0 z 2a−2 + p2 C0 − 1 8 + O(a2 ) .202) l2 l where C0 is given in (3.3. (3..197) (3. (vii) A dimensionsix fourpoint vertex Show that the dimensionsix term − x a2 λ0 z∂µ ϕ2 ∂µ ϕ2 in the x x general action (3. Dφ P (φ)O(φ) = Dφ P (φ) O(φ (φ)) η . (3. The new P (φ) may be determined as follows. λ) = = ∞ −∞ dφ exp(−κφ2 − λφ4 ) ∞ k=0 ∞ k=0 (3.
∂φx ∂φx ∂φx ∂φx (3.209) ∂ 1 ∂S − . HFP . as δ → 0 and the number n of iterations goes to inﬁnity.207) x ≡ −HFP P. with t = nδ → ∞. δ 1 ∂S ∂ ˜ H= − − ∂φx 2 ∂φx x (3. P will tend to the desired distribution exp S. show that O(φ ) η = O(φ) + δ x ∂O(φ) ∂S(φ) ∂ 2 O(φ) + + O(δ 2 ). The partial diﬀerential operator in φspace. is called the Fokker–Planck Hamiltonian. ∂φx 2 ∂φx ˜ Show that H is a Hermitian positive semideﬁnite operator.205) ∂ ∂ ∂S − P ∂φx ∂φx ∂φx and consequently that P −P = δ (3.82 O(n) models √ By expansion in δ.206) (3.208) ˜ ˜ show that P deﬁned by P = eS/2 P satisﬁes ˜ ˜ P −P ˜˜ = −H P + O(δ). ∂φx 2 ∂φx (3. which has one eigenvalue equal to zero with eigenvector exp(S/2). Using ∂ S/2 e = eS/2 ∂φx ∂ 1 ∂S + . Give arguments showing that. .
In this chapter we shall ﬁrst review the classical QED and QCD actions. appendix D) acting on the ψ’s. Subsequently a natural quantummechanical Hilbertspace interpretation will be given.3) is the electromagnetic ﬁeldstrength tensor.1 QED action The QED action for electrons is given by S= dx L(x).4) 83 . The γ µ are Dirac matrices (cf. which makes the lattice very well suited as a regulator for gauge theories. 4 (4.2) where ψ is the electron ﬁeld. Gaugeinvariant couplings to external sources will be shown to correspond to Wilson loops. Aµ the photon ﬁeld and Fµν (x) = ∂µ Aν (x) − ∂ν Aµ (x) (4. 4. e is the elementary charge (e > 0) and m is the electron mass. (4. e (4.4 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice Gauge invariance is formulated in position space (as opposed to momentum space). then put these theories on the lattice and deﬁne gaugeinvariant path integrals.1) ¯ ¯ L(x) = − 1 Fµν (x)F µν (x) − ψ(x)γ µ [∂µ + ieAµ (x)] ψ(x) − mψ(x)ψ(x). It can be useful to absorb the coupling constant e in the vector potential: Aµ → 1 Aµ .
ψ (x) = e−iω(x)q ψ(x).6) in which the function of e as a coupling constant (characterizing the strength of the interaction) is separated from the charge q.8) entirely in terms of Ω(x). A ). (4. ψ (x) = Ω(x)q ψ(x). which characterizes the behavior under gauge transformations. ¯ ¯ ψ (x) = eiω(x)q ψ(x). Aµ (x) = Aµ (x) + ∂µ ω(x). ψ. for the electron. R: ω(x) → eiω(x)q .9) form a group. (4.10) as a unitary representation of the group (under addition) of real numbers.11) (4.5) (4. ω(x) ∈ R. The phase factors Ω(x) = eiω(x) (4. 4e2 q = −1. The action is invariant under gauge transformations. ¯ ¯ S(ψ.8) (4.14) ¯ ¯ such that ψγ µ Dµ ψ = ψ γ µ Dµ ψ .7) and (4.84 Then L takes the form L=− Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice 1 ¯ ¯ Fµν F µν − ψγ µ (∂µ − iqAµ )ψ − mψψ. Above we have interpreted the gauge transformations as belonging to the group U (1). (4.15) . We may rewrite (4. where ω(x) is real.12) Aµ (x) = Aµ (x) + iΩ(x)∂µ Ω∗ (x). ¯ ¯ ψ (x) = ψ(x)Ω∗ (x)q .10) (4. ψ .7) (4. We may also interpret (4. (4. for each x: the gauge group U (1). The covariant derivative Dµ ≡ ∂µ − iAµ q (4. A) = S(ψ .13) has the property that Dµ ψ(x) transforms just like ψ(x) under gauge transformations: Dµ ψ (x) ≡ [∂µ − iqAµ (x)]ψ (x) = Ω(x)q Dµ ψ(x).
Ω1 Ω2 = Ω3 with ω1.16) where T is a real number. In Grand Uniﬁed Theories the gauge group of electromagnetism is a U (1) group which is embedded as a subgroup in the Grand Uniﬁed gauge group.1 π . Suppose there are ﬁelds ψr transforming with the representations T = qr = integer: ψr (x) = Dr (x)ψr (x). r Dµ = ∂µ − iqr Aµ (x). however.g. 4. 2 ω3 = 1. Dr (x) = Ω(x)qr . the product rule would be violated for some Ω’s.20) is U (1)gauge invariant. D(Ω) = ΩT is not single valued as a function of Ω.2 QCD action The QCD action has the form S=− d4 x 1 k kµν ¯ ¯ G G + ψγ µ Dµ ψ + ψmψ .9 π = eiω3 T = e−i0. If the gauge group were R.) If the gauge group were necessarily U (1). (For example. It follows that the charges eqr are a multiple of the fundamental unit e. charge would have to be quantized.17) is a representation only if T is an integer. π] to make Ω → eiωT unique.21) . there would be no need for charge quantization. ω ∈ [−π.4.2 = 0. Even if we restrict e.19) such that the action density L=− 1 Fµν F µν − 4e2 r ¯ ψr γ µ Dµ ψr − r r ¯ mr ψr ψr (4. (4.18) r Then we have to use a corresponding covariant derivative Dµ . If T is not an integer. 4g 2 µν (4.2 QCD action Another unitary representation of R could be ω → eiωT 85 (4. which is called charge quantization. This could provide the explanation for the quantization of charge observed in nature.9 π. for T = 1 .2 π would result in eiω1 T eiω2 T = ei0. For the group U (1). (4.8 π − 2π = −0. the mapping Ω = eiω → D(Ω) = eiωT (4.
tl ] = ifklm tm . −1 (4. the group of unitary 3 × 3 matrices with determinant equal to 1. 2 [tk . . . They have the properties Tr (tk tl ) = 1 δkl .1). . 0 1 0 0 0 −i λ5 = 0 0 0 . i 0 0 0 0 0 λ7 = 0 0 −i .27) (4.26) These λ’s are the wellknown GellMann matrices.28) where the fklm are the real structure constants of SU (3). 3.25) 0 0 1 0 . l and m (cf.22) where the tk . appendix A. 0 0 1 λ4 = 0 0 0 . 0 i 0 (4. Then Ω−1 = Ω† and Tr tk = 0 ⇒ det Ω = exp(Tr ln Ω) = 1. 1 0 0 0 0 0 λ6 = 0 0 1 .23) The tk are the generators of the group in the deﬁning representation..24) σk 0 k = 1. (4. 2 with λk = 0 0 . (4. are a complete set of Hermitian traceless 3 × 3 matrices. 0 −2 0 1 1 . A standard choice for these matrices is patterned after the SU (2) spin matrices 1 σk in terms of the Pauli matrices 2 σ1 = namely. tk = 1 λk . . 2. (4.86 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice The gauge group is SU (3). totally antisymmetric in k. i 0 σ3 = 1 0 0 . An element of SU (3) can be written as Ω = exp(iω k tk ). k = 1. 0 σ2 = 0 −i . 0 0 1 1 0 λ8 = √ 3 0 (4. 8.
30) We shall now explain the covariant derivative Dµ and the gaugeﬁeld term Gµν Gµν .13). : a = 1. . . For notational convenience we shall still denote the matrices by Ω. c. the Dirac gamma matrices act on α and the diagonal mass matrix m acts on f . (4.2). md . 3 (or red. . (4.31) with Tk the generators in the chosen representation. b.29) The gauge transformations and the covariant derivative Dµ act on a.33) For the deﬁning representation ρ = 1 .37) (4. white. Treating ∂µ as an operator gives the requirement Dµ = ΩDµ Ω† . . color index. m = diag(mu . ms . (4. (4. (4. (4.35) . . under the gauge transformation ψ (x) = Ω(x)ψ(x). or Dµ = ∂µ − iGµ . which satisfy [Tk . for the adjoint representation 2 ρ = 3 (an expression for ρ is given in (A.34) The matrix gauge ﬁeld Gµ (x) should transform such that. ψ αaf α = 1. Dµab = δab ∂µ − iGµ (x)ab . (4. not necessarily the deﬁning representation. 4. t).32) (4. Dµ ψ transforms just like ψ. d. Tl ] = ifklm Tm . Tr (Tk Tl ) = ρ δkl . they can be written as Ω = eiωk Tk . Dµ ψ (x) = Ω(x)Dµ ψ(x) = Ω(x)Dµ Ω† (x)ψ (x) . It is instructive to assume for the moment that the ψ ﬁelds transform under some arbitrary unitary irreducible representation of the color group SU (3). . However.). They carry three discrete indices. . . nf (or u. We assume that Dµ has a form similar to (4.36) ¯ ¯ ψ (x) = ψ(x)Ω† (x). f = 1. s. 2..47) in appendix A.2 QCD action 87 ¯ The quark ﬁelds ψ and ψ are in the deﬁning representation of SU (3). blue)..4. here it is a matrix. . Dirac index. ﬂavor index.
(4. The lefthand side of this equation is only a small deviation of the unit matrix.41) ∂ † Ω ∂µ ω k = Sk ∂µ ω k . since the generators Tm transform under the adjoint representation of the group (cf.45) .42) (4. ε) = Skm (ω)εk . so it is possible to write it as 1 − iϕm (ω. appendix A. (4.2) −1 ΩTm Ω† = Rmn Tn . ε)Tm . Furthermore.88 or more explicitly Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice ∂µ − iGµ = Ω(∂µ − iGµ )Ω† = Ω∂µ Ω† + ∂µ − iΩGµ Ω† . It follows from (4. ∂ω k ∂ † Ω (ω) + O(ε2 ) ∂ω k (4.40) Let ω + ε be a small deviation of ω and consider Ω(ω)Ω† (ω + ε) = Ω(ω) Ω† (ω) + εk = 1 − iεk Sk (ω) + O(ε2 ). It follows that Gµ has to transform as Gµ = ΩGµ Ω† + iΩ∂µ Ω† . so the parameterization of Gµ must at least incorporate the general form of iΩ∂µ Ω† .43)) that the coeﬃcients Skm (ω) are independent of the representation chosen for Ω. so ϕm (ω.44) incorporates the general form of iΩ∂µ Ω† . (4. What is the general form of Gµ (x)? How to parameterize this matrix ﬁeld? Suppose Gµ = 0. Hence. ∂ω k (4.39) (4.43) that the Ansatz Gµ (x) = Gm (x)Tm µ (4. We write iΩ∂µ Ω† = iΩ where Sk (ω) = iΩ(ω) ∂ † Ω (ω).12) for an Abelian group.38) Note that this reduces to (4.2 (eq. Then Gµ = iΩ∂µ Ω† . (A.41) and (4.43) It will be shown in appendix A. We shall now show that the latter can be written as a linear superposition of the generators Tm . where ϕm is of order ε. Sk (ω) can be written as Sk (ω) = Skm (ω)Tm .
Indeed.49) (4.44) is preserved under the gauge transformation (4.3). µν ν µ µ ν (4. µ µ n Gµ = Rnm Gm + Skn ∂µ ω k . Snm and ω k are real. not on the particular representation chosen for Ω. this can also be written as Gµν = [Dµ .54) .33)).47) Analogously to the electrodynamic case (4.37) we have [Dµ . µ 89 (4.50) which veriﬁes the transformation rule (4. Notice that the righthand side does not depend on the representation chosen for Ω.47). S=− d4 x 1 k kµν ¯ ¯ G G + ψγ µ ∂µ − iTm Gm ψ + ψmψ .21) can now be written in more detail.52) (4. (4. Dν ] = Dµ Dν − (µ ↔ ν) = ΩDµ Dν Ω† − (µ ↔ ν) = Ω[Dµ . Gν ]. The Rnm . µν Gk = ∂µ Gk − ∂ν Gk + fkmn Gm Gn . Dν ]Ω† .44) as the parameterization of Gµ (x) with real ﬁelds Gm (x). The gaugeﬁeld Gµ transforms inhomogeneously under the gauge group.44) and (4.48) According to (4. (4. Gµν can be written as Gµν = Dµ Gν − Dν Gν = ∂µ Gν − ∂ν Gµ − i[Gµ .39): −1 ΩGm Tm Ω† + iΩ∂µ Ω† = Gm Rmn + Skn ∂µ ω k Tn .45) and (4. The ﬁeld tensor Gµν is constructed out of Gµ such that it transforms homogeneously. µ 4g 2 µν (4. using (4. µ Note that the transformation law for Gm (x) depends only on the group µ (its adjoint representation).47).51) (4. Using operator notation. Gk transforms in the adjoint represenµν tation of the group.53) is gauge invariant (ρ has been deﬁned in (4. The matrix ﬁeld Gµν (x) can be written in terms of Gm (x). so we may take (4.32): µ Gµν = Gk Tk . Dν ]. Gµν = ΩGµν Ω† .4.2 QCD action the form (4. using (4. The combination Gk Gkµν = µν 1 Tr (Gµν Gµν ) ρ (4.46) where we used R−1 = RT . The action (4.
Since the lattice derivative ∂µ ψx = (ψx+aˆ − ψx )/a µ (4.58) .57) ˜ Here Cµx and Cµx are supposed to compensate for the lack of gauge covariance of the lattice derivative. by the representation Ω under which the ψ’s transform. analogously to the matrix gauge potential Gµ (x). Under local gauge transformations it transforms as ψx = Ωx ψx .90 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice Since Gk Gkµν contains terms of higher order than quadratic in Gm . The covariant derivative has to satisfy Dµ ψx = Ωx Dµ ψx .55) where as before Ωx is an irreducible representation of the gauge group G.54) with lattice derivatives. µν µ the nonAbelian gauge ﬁeld is selfcoupled. 4.1 except for choosing to work in Euclidean space–time. (4.e.59) = Ωx (ψx+aˆ − ψx ) − i(Cµx ψx + Cµx ψx+aˆ ) µ µ a 1 ˜ = Ωx (Ω† µ ψx+aˆ − Ω† ψx 0 − i(Cµx Ω† ψx + Cµx Ω† µ ψx+aˆ ) . or 1 ˜ (ψ µ µ − ψx ) − i(Cµx ψx + Cµx ψx+aˆ ) a x+aˆ 1 ˜ (4. µ µ a (4. we try a covariant derivative of the µ form Dµ ψx = 1 ˜ (ψx+aˆ − ψx ) − i(Cµx ψx + Cµx ψx+aˆ ). The QCD action has a straightforward generalization to SU (n) gauge groups with n = 3. µ x x µ x+aˆ a x+aˆ (4. Let the fermion ﬁeld ψx be associated with the sites xµ = mµ a of the lattice. The coupling to the ψ ﬁeld is completely determined by the generators Tm . analogously to the scalar ﬁeld. i.3 Lattice gauge ﬁeld We shall mimic the steps leading to the QCD action (4. For the quark ﬁelds. The case of the noncompact group G = R will be discussed later. Ω is the deﬁning representation Tm → tm .56) contains ψ both at x and at x + aˆ. We shall assume the gauge group G = U (1) or SU (n).
x+aˆ ν (4. x µ ˜ Cµx ≡ 0.62).61) (4.64) (4. (4.67) a where Uµx is a unitary matrix of the same form as Ωx . x Cµx i = Ωx Cµx Ω† µ + (Ωx Ω† µ − 1) x+aˆ x+aˆ a † = Ωx Cµx Ωx+aˆ + Ωx i∂µ Ω† . i. Then i (4. The question is now that of how to parameterize the matrix Cµx in a way consistent with the transformation rule (4.68) To connect with the gauge potentials Gk (x) in the continuum we write µ (4. since it gives Cµx = Uµx = Ωx Uµx Ω† µ . By analogy with the continuum theory we try for the ﬁeld strength the form Cµνx = Dµ Cνx − Dν Cµx 1 = (Cν.4.65) † and consequently Tr (Cµνx Cµνx ) is gauge invariant ((4. µx (4.x+aˆ − (µ ↔ ν).66) Cµx = Ωx i∂µ Ω† = (Ωx Ω† µ − 1). it is a group element in the same representation of the gauge group G. x x+aˆ a which suggests that we write i (Uµx − 1).x+aˆ − Cνx ) − iCµx Cν.62). 91 (4.60) (4. which resembles the transformation behavior of the continuum gauge potentials quite closely. This parameterization of Cµx is indeed consistent with the transformation rule (4. Cµνx = Ωx Cµνx Ω† µ+aˆ . as in the continuum in the previous section.62). x+aˆ Uµx = e−iaGµx .62) It is consistent to set (4. This can be answered by looking at the case Cµx = 0.3 Lattice gauge ﬁeld Comparing coeﬃcients of ψx and ψx+aˆ gives µ ˜ ˜ Cµx = Ωx Cµx Ω† .69) . Gµx = Gk Tk .e.62) implies that Cµνx cannot be Hermitian in general). µ µ a We ﬁnd that Cµνx indeed transforms homogeneously.63) For Cµx we then ﬁnd the transformation rule (4.
there is a better way of associating Ux. µ µ (4. and by construction Cµx → Gµ (x). µx µ (4.y = Ωx Ux. The action (4. Cµνx → Gµν (x).71) where Gµν (x) is the continuum form (4. this action reduces to the µ continuum form (4.92 and identify Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice Gk = Gk (x). let Gk (x) be smooth gauge potentials in the continuum µ which we evaluate at the lattice points xµ = mµ a.74) This notation suggests that it is natural to think of Ux.y with the parallel transporter from y to x along the link (x.54) in the limit a → 0. upon inserting ψx = ψ(x).x+aˆ ≡ Uµx . A possible latticeregulated gaugetheory action is now given by S=− x 1 ¯ † ¯ ¯ (ψx γµ Dµ ψx − ψx γµ Dµx ψx ) + ψx mψx 2 (4.x ≡ Uµx .75) .x+aˆ as belonging µ to the link (x. y).70) More precisely. .68) can be written in a more suggestive form by using the notation † Ux. rather than having four U1x .73) because then µ Ux. (4.. . as illustrated in ﬁgure 4.72) + 1 † Tr (Cµνx Cµνx ) . y (4.y with the continuum gauge ﬁeld Gµ (x): by identifying Ux. ψx = ψ(x) and Gk = Gk (x) with xµ µ ¯ smooth functions ψ(x). (4. 4ρg 2 with ρ the representationdependent constant deﬁned in (4.1. Then aGµ (x) → 0 as a → 0.48). We shall come back to this in a later chapter.72) is not yet satisfactory in its fermion part: it describes too many fermions in the scaling region – this is the notorious phenomenon of ‘fermion doubling’. y = x + aˆ.y Ω† . The parallel transporter U (Cxy ) along a path Cxy from y to x is deﬁned by the pathordered product (in the continuum) U (Cxy ) = P exp −i Cxy dzµ Gµ (z) . In fact. The transformation property (4.33). U4x µ belonging to the site x. Ux+aˆ. . ψ(x) and Gk (x). x + aˆ) of the lattice. Evi¯ ¯ dently.
zn + dzn ).70).x+aˆ ≡ Uµx .77) 2 = Ω(zn )[1 − i dznµ Gµ (zn )]Ω (zn+1 ) + O(dz ). x U (Cxy ) = lim exp −i N →∞ zN −1 z1 y dzµ Gµ (z) · · · exp −i dzµ Gµ (z) zn+1 zn dzµ Gµ (z) · · · exp −i N →∞ = lim [1 − i dz0µ Gµ (z0 )] · · ·[1 − i dzN −1 µ Gµ (zN −1 )].69) and (4. (4.76) Under a gauge transformation Gµ (z) = Ω(z)Gµ (z)Ω† (z) + Ω(z)i∂µ Ω† (z) we have 1 − i dznµ Gµ (zn ) = Ω(zn )[Ω† (zn ) − i dznµ Gµ (zn )Ω† (zn ) + dznµ ∂µ Ω† (zn )] † (4. Illustration of Uµx and Uµx . (4. U (Cxy ) parallel transports vectors under the gauge group at y to vectors at x along the path Cxy .3 Lattice gauge ﬁeld 93 † Fig. however. where P denotes the path ordering.x+aˆ+aˆ ). the basic variables are the Ux. U (Cxy ) = Ω(x)U (Cxy )Ω† (y). µ one for each link (x. such that all the Ω’s cancel out in U (Cxy ) except at the end points. . µ µ µ ν ν ν µ ν a . x + aˆ)..x+aˆ Ux+aˆ. The pathordered product can be deﬁned by dividing the path into N segments (zn . (4.78) Hence. For our lattice theory. N − 1. . . It is known that this way of associating Ux.x+aˆ ψx+aˆ − ψx ).x+aˆ Ux+aˆ. and taking the ordered product.y with the continuum gauge ﬁeld via U (Cxy ) leads to smaller discretization errors in the action than does use of (4. n = 0.x+aˆ simpliﬁes things and makes µ the transformation properties more transparent: D µ ψx = Cµνx 1 (Ux.4. µ Expressing everything in terms of Ux.79) µ µ a i = 2 (Ux. 4.x+aˆ+aˆ − Ux.1.
which conforms to a convention for the Feynman rules in the weakcoupling expansion. µ µ µ ν µ ν ν ν We see in (4.x+aˆ+aˆ Ux+aˆ+aˆ.94 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice ¯ Fig. Illustration of the terms in the action Tr Uµνx (a). 4.x+aˆ Ux+aˆ. We continue with the theory without fermions. and ψ ˆ † Tr (Cµνx Cµνx ) = † Uµνx = Uνµx 1 † Tr (2 − Uµνx − Uµνx ). µ < ν) and the product of the U ’s around p is denoted by Up . To make the representation dependence explicit. we will from now on assume U to be in the deﬁning representation of the gauge group.x . µ. a4 = Ux. which in our derivation was dictated by ¯ the representation carried by ψ and ψ. The gaugeﬁeld part of the action can then be written as S(U ) = 1 g2 ρ Re Tr Up + constant. ν. The action can be written as 1 Tr (1 − Uµνx ) S=− 2 ρa4 2g xµν − xµ 1 ¯ † ¯ µ (ψx γµ Uµx ψx+aˆ − ψx+aˆ γµ Uµx ψx ). This is in contrast to the classical action which is independent of the group representation.81) in lattice units (a = 1). This action depends on the representation of the gauge group chosen for the U ’s. The arrows representing Uµx and † ¯ Uµx are chosen such that they ﬂow from ψ to ψ.46)). p (4. ψx Uµx ψx+aµ (b) ˆ † ¯x+aµ Uµx ψx (c).2. as we saw in the previous section (below (4.80) which is illustrated in ﬁgure 4.79) how the covariant derivative involves parallel transport. The elementary square of a hypercubic lattice is called a plaquette.2. µ 2a (4. It may be denoted by p (p = (x.x+aˆ Ux+aˆ. .
(4. containing only gauge ﬁelds). with χr the character (trace) in the representation r. DU = xµ dUµx . S(U ) = p r r βr Re χr (Up ) .2). We want Z to be gauge invariant.1 and A. so we want the integration measure DU to satisfy Ω DU = DU Ω . da = n2 − 1 (cf.81) refers to representation Dr (U ). If the gauge group is compact we can deﬁne a lattice path integral by Z= DU exp[S(U )]. (4.87) . ρf = 1/2. The dynamical variables Uµx are in the fundamental representation of the gauge group G and the system is described by the gaugeinvariant action S(U ).86) Here dU for a given link is a volume element in group space. x+aˆ (4.4 Gaugeinvariant lattice path integral We continue with a pure gauge theory (i. Uµx = Ωx Uµx Ω† µ .4 Gaugeinvariant lattice path integral 95 Supposing that (4. and 1/g 2 = βf /2n + βa n/(n2 − 1). we replace ρ → ρr and Tr Up → χr (Up ).82) (4. in an action containing both the fundamental irrep f and the adjoint irrep a of the gauge group SU (n). For a compact group the total volume of group space is ﬁnite and therefore Z is well deﬁned for a ﬁnite lattice.84) r where dr is the dimension of representation r. 4. χr (1) (4. appendices A.4. It is usually called the Wilson action [39]. with 1 = g2 βr ρr . (4. dr dr = χr (1).83) χr (U ) ≡ Tr [D (U )]. we have df = n. ρa = n.e. which reduces to the classical gaugeﬁeld action in the classical continuum limit.85) The simplest lattice formulation of QCD has a plaquette action with only the fundamental representation. For example. A more general lattice action may involve a sum over representations r.
g. (4.96 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice On a given link with link variable U .43) in appendix A. ρ= . It can be written in a form familiar from general relativity.94) The above may be illustrated by the exponential parameterization.88) (4.90) where the αk are coordinates on group space.93) gkl = gmn ∂αk ∂αl The Jacobian factors of coordinate transformations cancel out in (4. U = U (α). k ∂αl ∂α 2 dU = 1.2.95) For the (n2 − 1)dimensional group SU (n) we have U = exp(iαk tk ). (4. right.96) where we used (4. ∂α m ∂α n .89) A measure that is invariant under such translations in group space is well known: the Hurewicz or Haar measure. U = Ω† U corresponds to U (α) = Ω† U (α ). gkl = 1. dU = −π dα = 1. (4. For the onedimensional group U (1) we have π U = exp(iα). gauge transformations U = Ω1 U Ω† 2 are combinations of left and right translations in group space: U = ΩU.90).41). U = U Ω. Since left and right translations are special cases of coordinate transformations. or d(ΩU ) = d(U Ω) = dU.91) is covariant under coordinate transformations αk = f k (α ). of the form gkl = 1 Tr ρ ∂U ∂U † 1 . such that dU = dU . An explicit form for Skm is given in (A. (4. left. 2π (4. e. (4. (4. dU = dU . dU = ν det g k dαk .92) The metric (4. which follows from diﬀerentiating U U † = 1.43) and ∂U † /∂αk = −U † ∂U/∂αk U † . and gkl is a metric on this space. the measure is again invariant. . gkl = Skm Slm . (4.91) The normalization constant ν will be chosen such that (4.
105) except for the mod(2π). We used the fundamental representation in S. x+aˆ aAµx = aAµx + ωx+aˆ − ωx . The need for gauge ﬁxing shows up again when we attempt to make a weakcoupling expansion. Uµνx = exp[−ia(Aµx + Aνx+aˆ − Aµx+aˆ − Aνx )] µ ν = exp(−ia Fµνx ).106) 1 = βr r2 . 2π Gauge transformations Ω = exp(iωx ) are linear for the gauge potentials. and ρr = r2 .100) (4.98) (4.5 Compact and noncompact Abelian gauge theory Let us write the formulas obtained so far more explicitly for U (1): Uµx = exp(−iaAµx ). The more general form (4. 2 (4. or more simply Tr Up . for a compact gauge group. which takes the form of a Fourier series: S= 1 2a4 ∞ βr cos(ra2 Fµνx ) + constant.102) (4. It is a composite ﬁeld in QCD. dr = 1.4. One such object we know already: the plaquette ﬁeld Tr Uµνx . with Dr (U ) = exp(−iraA) = χr (U ).82) is a sum over irreps r = integer.103) Fµνx = ∂µ Aνx − ∂ν Aµx . 1 [2 − 2 cos(a2 Fµνx )]. mod(2π).5 Compact and noncompact Abelian gauge theory 97 This completes the deﬁnition of the partition function Z. for example Tr Up Tr Up = Z −1 DU exp[S(U )] Tr Up Tr Up . Expectation values are deﬁned as usual. µ (4. which will later be seen to describe ‘bound states of glue’ – glueballs.97) We stress at this point that gauge ﬁxing (which is familiar in the formal continuum approach) is not necessary with the nonperturbative lattice regulator. S=− 2 4 4g a xµν π DU = xµ −π d(aAµx ) . 4.107) . (4. xµν r (4.99) (4.101) (4. We shall introduce gaugeinvariant observables later. g2 r=−∞ (4. Uµx = Ωx Uµx Ω† µ .104) (4.
To deﬁne (4. ∂µ Aµx = (Aµx −Aµx−aˆ )/a. The reason is that DA contains also an integration over all gauge transformations.111) for the noncompact formulation. with gauge transformations ωx ∈ R acting on Aµx as in (4. It is clear that there is also a noncompact version of the Abelian gauge theory. gauge ﬁxing is needed. the path integral Z= DA exp[S(A)] (4.98 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice We could for example choose the βr such that S=− 1 4g 2 2 Fµνx mod(2π/a2 ) . which is inﬁnite. which are unrestrained by the gaugeinvariant weight exp S(A). Monte Carlo computations based on (4.112) † where ∂µ = −∂µ is the backward derivative. xµν (4.110) However. and µ the simple action S(A) = − 1 4g 2 2 Fµνx . aAµx = aAµx + ωx+aˆ − ωx . µ See problem 5(i) for more details. with Fµνx as in (4. xµ (4. xµν (4.111) still make sense.108) The above is called the compact U (1) gauge theory. For the ∞ noncompact group G = R this is x −∞ dωx .109) In this case the gaugeinvariant measure is given by DA = xµ ∞ −∞ d(aAµx ). but without the mod(2π). A suitable partition function is now given by Z= DA exp S(A) − 1 2g 2 ξ (∂µ Aµx )2 .g. As a consequence Z is proportional to the volume of the gauge group DΩ. On the other hand.101). this divergence formally cancels out in expectation values of gaugeinvariant observables and e.111) is ill deﬁned because it is divergent. (4. .105).
which can of course be made explicit in a parameterization U (α). dUmx x. (4.6 Hilbert space and transfer operator We shall show here that the path integral Z= xµ 99 dUµx eS(U ) (4.116) 1= such that ψ1 ψ2 = x. .118) The delta function δ(U . The basis states U are eigenstates of operators (Umx )ab .114) where N is the number of time slices. m = 1. .117) dUmx ∗ ψ1 (U )ψ2 (U ). b = 1. A state ψ has a wavefunction ψ(U ) = U ψ depending on ˆ the Umx . Umx ).113) can be expressed as the trace of a positive Hermitian transfer operator ˆ T in Hilbert space. The basis is orthonormal and complete U U = x. (4.m δ(Umx . n for SU (n)): ˆ (Umx )ab U = (Umx )ab U . and U ≡ α .m (4. This Hilbert space is set up in the coordinate representation. U ) = 1. corresponding to the spatial link variables. Uab = U (ˆ )ab . .115) In a parameterization U = U (α) with real parameters αk one may think of the usual coordinate representation for Hermitian operators αk : ˆ ˆ αk α = αk α . 2. (4. The Hermitian conjugate ˆ α ∗ ˆ† α matrix U † corresponds to the operator Uba = Uba (ˆ ).6 Hilbert space and transfer operator 4. ˆ Z = Tr T N .4. (4.m U U . U ) corresponds to the measure dU such that dU δ(U. .. where a and b denote the matrix elements (a. We continue with the notation U for the basis states. thus providing the quantummechanical interpretation. The coordinates are Umx . 3.
m dUmxn ˆ Un+1 T Un . xµν Tr Uµνx /2g 2 ρa4 . (4.80). We now have to work the path integral (4. .113) into the form (4.122) ˆ with the operator TK given by the matrix elements ˆ U TK U = x. but keeping the a’s.113) with action (4. takes the form a3 at x. ˆ g 2 at (4. x+ ˆ (4. these are ˆ hidden in T .e. Ω Umx = Ωx Umx Ω† m . Equivalently we can view this as a gauge transformation on Umx . All the latticedistance dependence is in the ratio at /a. Notice that the timelike link variables U4xn are not indicated explicitly in (4.100 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice ˆ After this speciﬁcation of Hilbert space the trace in Z = Tr T N can be written more explicitly as N −1 ˆ Tr T N = n=0 x. Using a notation in which the xµ are in lattice units (i.119) where n indicates the U variables in time slice n.124) † with Ωx = U4x . Upt = U4jxn . There is an integral over all such gauge transformations.120) shows that T can be identiﬁed in the form ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ T = e− 2 at W TK e− 2 at W .n [ j 2 Re Tr U4jxn /g 2 a2 + i<j 2 Re Tr Uijxn /g 2 a2 ] (ρ = 1/2 t in the fundamental representation). Inspection of (4.121) (4. W = 2 g a p s 1 1 (4.123) The way the U4x enter in (4.119). one coupling g 2 a/at for the timelike plaquettes and another g 2 at /a for the spacelike ˆ plaquettes. x and x4 = n become integers).119). at and a.m dU4x exp 2a † † Re Tr (Umx U4x+m Umx U4x ) .120) where ps and pt are spacelike and timelike plaquettes. Ups = Uijxn . This dependence is really a couplingconstant dependence. It is useful for later to allow for diﬀerent lattice spacings in time and space. ps (4. or S= 2 g2 a at Re Tr Upt + pt at a Re Tr Ups . the puregauge part of the action (4.123) can be viewed as a gauge transformation on Umx . −2 ˆ ˆ Re Tr Ups .
Deﬁne furthermore ˆ P0 by ˆ P0 = x dΩx ˆ D(Ω). ˆ with TK given by ˆ U TK U = x.m (4. We used the invariance of the integration measure in group space and the normalization dΩx = 1. ˆ2 P0 ˆ = P0 .131) (4. (4.130) ˆ D(Ω1 Ω) = x dΩx ˆ d(Ω1x Ωx ) D(Ω1 Ω) (4.134) .129) ˆ The operator P0 is the projector onto the gaugeinvariant subspace of ˆ Hilbert space. D(Ω)ψ = ψ .126) This operator is a unitary representation of the gauge group of timeindependent gauge transformations in Hilbert space. It can therefore be written in the from ˆ ˆ TK = e−at K .6 Hilbert space and transfer operator 101 We can write this in operator notation as follows.4. taking matrix elements that P ˆ We shall show in the next section that TK is a positive operator. g 2 at (4.125) Then ˆ U D(Ω)ψ = U Ω ψ = ψ(U Ω ).132) (4. (4. (4.133) ˆ = P0 ˆ ˆ = P0 D(Ω1 ). ˆ ˆ ˆ D(Ω1 )D(Ω) = D(Ω1 Ω).127) ˆ It follows that TK can be written as ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ TK = TK P0 = P0 TK . Deﬁne the gaugeˆ transformation operator D(Ω) by † ˆ D(Ω)U = U Ω . It follows that a state ψ of the form ˆ ˆ ψ = P0 φ is gauge invariant. It also follows easily by ˆ ˆ0 commutes with W . (4. ˆ ˆ D(Ω1 )P0 = x (4.128) exp 2a † Re Tr (Umx Umx ) . This follows from the fact that D(Ω) is a representation of the gauge group.
140) (4. 2a κ= 2 . ˆ R(V )U = U V .138) (4. we note that (4. (4.129) for the matrix elements ˆ of TK shows a plaquette in the temporal gauge U4x = 1. 4.136) ˆ ˆ We recognize a kinetic part (K) and potential part (W ). ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ T = P0 e−at H = e−at H P0 . The form (4.139) where the subscript 1 reminds us of the fact that we are dealing with a single link. Summarizing.e. To simplify the notation we write U = Umx .141) . ˆ ˆ phys = P0 phys .135) ˆ which is positive and deﬁnes therefore a Hermitian Hamiltonian H. the kineticenergy transfer opˆ erator TK is a product of uncoupled link operators. (4.102 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice ˆ with K a Hermitian operator. (4. D(Ω)phys = phys . Then the singlelink kinetic transfer operator is given by ˆ U TK1 U = exp κ Re Tr (U U † ) . Left and right translations ˆ ˆ L(V ) and R(V ) can be deﬁned by ˆ L(V )U = V † U .129). So we may expect to gain understanding here too by introducing translation operators. the path integral leads naturally to a quantummechanical Hilbert space and a transfer operator ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ T = P0 e− 2 at W e−at K e− 2 at W = e− 2 at W e−at K e− 2 at W P0 .7 The kineticenergy operator As we can see from its deﬁnition (4. which also involved a translation in the coordinates.15) in quantum mechanics. invariant under timeindependent gauge transformations). Realizing that Re Tr (U U † ) may be taken as the distance between the points U and U in group space. x + m) and simple states ψ for which ψ(U ) depends ˆ only on Umx . appendix B). analogously to the example of the scalar ﬁeld. So let us concentrate on a single link (x. The path integral has automatically provided the supplementary condition that has to be imposed in this ‘gauge’: physical states must be gauge invariant (i. g at (4.137) In the continuum this corresponds to the ‘Gauss law’ condition (cf.138) is analogous to the expression (2. 1 1 1 1 (4.
144) Here r labels the irreps and m and n label the matrix elements. These unitary matrices form a complete orthogonal set of basis functions.147) with the inversion ψrmn = rmnψ = r dU Dmn (U )∗ ψ(U ).3 (eq.145) (4.142) (4. r U → Dmn (U ) = U rmn . r r dU Dm n (U )∗ Dmn (U ) = δr r δm m δn n r r dr Dmn (U ) Dmn (U )∗ = δ(U. rmn 1 . (4. (4. The eigenfunctions are the ﬁnitedimensional unitary r irreducible representations (irreps) Dmn (U ) of the group.149) dV exp(κ Re Tr V ) Dr (V U )mn .4. (4.150) is the coeﬃcient for the expansion of the exponential in irreps. the integral in the above expression. A function ψ(U ) can be expanded as ψ(U ) = U ψ = rmn r ψrmn dr Dmn (U ). exp(κ Re Tr V ) = rmn r dr crmn Dmn (V ).148) ˆ The action of TK1 on ψ now follows from ˆ U TK1 ψ = = rmn ˆ dV exp(κ Re Tr V ) U L(V )ψ ψrmn dr (4. (4. ˆ dV exp[κRe Tr V ] R(V ). (A.7 The kineticenergy operator ˆ By comparing matrix elements we see that TK1 can be written as ˆ TK1 = = ˆ dV exp[κ Re Tr V ] L(V ). dr (4.143) The eigenstates of the translation operators can be found among the eigenstates of the Laplacian on group space.76)). (4.151) .146) where dr is the dimension of the representation (Dr (U ) is a dr × dr matrix). 103 (4. U ). the complex conjugate of crmn ≡ r dV Dmn (V )∗ exp(κ Re Tr V ). Using the grouprepresentation property Dr (V U ) = Dr (V )Dr (U ). i. as summarized in appendix A.e.
104 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice as follows from the orthogonality of the irreps. with real cr . The irrep states rmn ˆ are eigenstates of TK1 with eigenvalue cr .158) where f is the fundamental (deﬁning) representation.e.156) with r χr (V ) = Tr Dr (V ) = Dmm (V ) (4. gives the relation r r crmn = Dmm (W )crm n Dn n (W † ). These have a character expansion. as follows from (4. we can show that the cr are positive. The characters are orthonormal. with arbitrary group element W .160) .153) holds generally for expansion coeﬃcients of functions on the group which are invariant under V → W V W † . Making a transformation rnm of variables V → W V W † . (4.157) the character in the representation r.153) ψrmn dr cr Dr (U )mn . Expansion of the righthand side of (4. (4. i. A change of variables V → V † in (4. dV χr (V )∗ χs (V ) = δrs .154) Every irrep r is just multiplied by the number cr .150) shows that crmn = c∗ . Returning to (4. Writing dr cr = dV exp κ κ χf (V ) + χf (V )∗ χr (V )∗ .159) in powers of κ leads to cr = (κ/2)n n! n=0 ∞ n k=0 n! k!(n − k)! dV χf (V )∗k χf (V )n−k χr (V )∗ .152) Using Schur’s lemma it follows that crmn can be written in the form crmn = cr δmn . (4.149) we get ˆ U TK1 ψ = rmn (4.155) The relation (4. ˆ TK1 rmn = cr rmn . (4. exp(κ Re Tr V ) = r dr cr χr (V ).145). (4. 2 2 (4.159) (4. class functions.
3).8 Hamiltonian for continuous time In the Hamiltonian approach to lattice gaugetheory time is kept continuous while space is replaced by a lattice. being the product of operator. TK1 is a positive ˆK . i.e.164) + O(α ).8 Hamiltonian for continuous time 105 Reducing the tensor product representation Dr1 · · · Drk to irreducible components. Since κ is positive the cr are positive.162) ˆ Some work is required for TK as at → 0 since it depends explicitly on 2 a/at through κ = 2a/g at .167) 2 ˆ where we have written the left translator L in terms of its generators ˆ k (L) (cf. The full kinetic transfer operator T ˆ singlelink operators TK1 . ˆ ˆ It follows that the eigenvalues of TK1 are positive. appendix A. V = exp(iαk tk ). Consider again the form (4.166) dαk [1 + O(α2 )]. The highest saddle point is at V = 1. Gaussian integration over αk gives X 1 ˆ ˆ TK1 = constant × 1 − X 2 + · · · . 4.169) (4. rk ) (4. we see that dV χr1 (V ) · · · χrk (V ) = n(r1 ..168) (4. . is also positive.165) (4. t (4.161) is the number of times the singlet irrep occurs.163) Since κ → ∞ as at → 0 we can evaluate this expression with the saddlepoint method. κ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ X 2 = Xk (L)Xk (L) = Xk (R)Xk (R).142) for one link. ˆ TK1 = ˆ dV exp[κ Re Tr V ] L(V ). . constant = k (4. Taking the formal limit at → 0 we get the appropriate Hamiltonian from ˆ ˆ ˆ T = P0 exp −at H + O(a2 ) . (4.170) dαk exp[κ(df − α2 /4)]. It is convenient to use the exponential parameterization. Re Tr V = df − dV = k 1 k k 4α α (4. .4. 4 (4. . ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ L(V ) = 1 + iαk Xk (L) − 1 αk αl Xk (L)Xl (L) + O(α3 ). (4.
3.174) and the conventional ‘electric’ and ‘magnetic’ ﬁelds are given by p Ek = −gΠp . Uµx = exp(−iaGµx ) → 1 − iaGµ (x)+· · · leads to the formal continuum Hamiltonian in the temporal gauge: H= d3 x 1 g2 p p Πk Πk + 2 Gp Gp 2 4g lm lm = d3 x 1 2 1 2 E + B . (4. . k p Bk = 1 g p klm Glm . the symmetry between time and space is broken. It is good to keep in mind that.175) In the continuum the canonical quantization in the temporal gauge is often lacking in text books. The formal continuum limit a → 0. ps where the ls denote the spatial links and ps the spatial plaquettes. 2. 2 2 (4. . p = 1. The above Hamiltonian is known as the Kogut–Susskind Hamiltonian [40].106 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice Here the constant could have been avoided by changing the measure in the path integral by an overall constant. In ˆ ˆ the coordinate representation U → U and X 2 becomes the covariant Laplacian on group space. m l l m k = 1.172) where Πp = −i k Gp lm δ . with continuous time and a lattice in space. (4.. . δGp k = ∂l Gp − ∂m Gp + fpqr Gq Gr .171).173) (4. because it is less suited for weakcoupling perturbation theory. which amounts to introducing dif2 2 ferent couplings gK and gW for the kinetic and potential terms in the Hamiltonian (4. It is necessary to renormalize the velocity of light. n2 − 1. The Hamiltonian can be written as ˆ ˆ ˆ H =K +W = 1 g a 2 2 ls (4. A brief exposition is given in appendix B. .171) 2 ˆ Xl2 + 2 s g ˆ Re Tr (1 − Ups ) + constant.
A0 = iA4 .180) The Euclidean form is obtained from the Minkowski form by the substitution J 0 = −iJ4 . dτ (4. ∂µ J µ = 0) for a closed path or a neverending path.9 Wilson loop and Polyakov line 4. 0) .181) The source aﬀects the places where the time components enter in the action and we have to take a second look at the derivation of the transfer operator.182) . 0. In classical electrodynamics one thinks of z µ (τ ) as the trajectory of a point charge. (4. z 3 . (4.9 Wilson loop and Polyakov line 107 In the classical Maxwell theory an external current J µ enters in the weight factor in the realtime path integral as eiS → eiS+i For a line current along a path z µ (τ ). (4. (4.178) where the integral is along the path speciﬁed by z(τ ).176) the phase exp(i J µ Aµ ) takes the form exp i dz µ Aµ (z) . dz 0 = −i dz4 .179) We may however choose the external current as we like and use also spacelike dz/dτ . 4 exp i µ=1 dzµ Aµ (z) . Then dz µ /dτ is timelike.177) d4 x J µ Aµ . Consider therefore ﬁrst in the compact U (1) theory the path integral Z(J) = DU exp S(U ) + xµ Jµx Aµx . (4. z 0 ) . J µ (x) = dτ dz µ (τ ) 4 δ (x − z(τ )). For a positive static point charge at the origin the phase is exp i dz 0 A0 (0. The phase remains a phase. For a line current running along the coordinate 3axis the phase is exp i dz 3 A3 (0. (4.4. The current is ‘conserved’ (i.e.
x + µ). Such a product U (C) of U ’s around a loop C is called a Wilson loop [39]. r r (4.3.108 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice Fig. x) ∈ C ˆ = 0 otherwise.3 we have ˆ Jµx = −i for links (x. This current is ‘conserved’. The simplest Wilson loop is the plaquette Uµνx . It is gauge invariant.183) (4. ν µ We have written the source term in conventional Euclidean form as a reallooking addition to S(U ). µ (4. For a line current of unit strength over a closed contour C as illustrated in ﬁgure 4. The Wilsonloop form of the interaction with an external line source generalizes easily to nonAbelian gauge theories. we have . (4.188) ˆ where l denotes a directed link. A contour C specifying a line current or Wilson loop. S(U ) = 1 4g 2 Uµνx . exp xµ Jµx Aµx = l∈C Ul ≡ U (C).185) Uµx = exp(−iAµx ). ∂µ Jµx = µ (4.189) with D (U (C)) the ordered product of the link matrices D (Ul ) along the loop C.186) (Jµx − Jµx−ˆ ) = 0. For a source in irrep r we have Tr Dr (U (C)) = χr (U (C)).187) and the integrand of the path integral is gauge invariant. x + µ) ∈ C = +i for links (x + µ. 4. The phase factor associated with the current can be written in another way. Ul = Uµx for l = (x.184) (4. xµν (4. y). Uµνx = exp[i(Aµx+ˆ − Aµx − Aνx+ˆ + Aνx )]. Denoting the links l by the pair of neighbors (x. but the current Jµ is purely imaginary.
y + ˆ and (z + ˆ z).196) .v . Then.193) the righthand side of (4. U = Uu.z ˆ P 0x (4.195) the projector onto the gaugeinvariant subspace except at y and z. We see that the operator P0 deﬁned in (4. The operator ¯ ˆ rx Pmn projects onto the subspace transforming at x in the irrep r in the following way.123) is 4) 4.m † r r dU4x exp[· · ·] Dmn (U4y )Dpq (U4z ).191) where exp[· · ·] is the same as in (4. for these time slices. (4.127) is replaced by ˆ P0 → x r r ˆ dVx D(V )Dmn (Vy )Dpq (Vz† ). With the notation ˆ rx Pmn = r ˆ dVx Dmn (Vx )D(Vx ). Consider now the derivation of the transfer operator. p. modiﬁed to ˆ U TK U = x. s U skl = Dkl (U ). For the parts of C where it runs in spacelike directions it represents an operator in ˆ Hilbert space through Ul → Ul as before. (4. What about the timelike links? Suppose that between two time slices there are only two such links. The gaugex ˆ ˆ transformation operator D(V ) is the product of operators D(Vx ) at sites x. v). n. dΩ = dV . (4.4. 109 (4. The irrep r is the Hermitian conjugate of the irrep r. (4.9 Wilson loop and Polyakov line for example in the fundamental representation U (C) = Tr (Ux1 x2 Ux2 x3 · · · Uxn x1 ). (4.194) with ˆ P0 = x=y.190) The gauge invariance is obvious: the gauge transformations cancel out pairwise in the product along the closed loop. (4.123) and the indices m. Let skl be an irrep state for some link (u. say the links (y.192) where we used the notation Ω† = Vx = U4x . q hook ˆ up to the other Dr ’s of the Wilson loop.192) can be written as ¯ ˆ ˆ ry ˆ rz P0 Pmn Ppq .
4. A rectangular timelike Wilson loop.z ]. ˆ rv U Pmn skm = m r s s dV Dmn (V )Dkm (U V † ) = δrs Dkn (U ). for x = u. x4 ) = −i[δx.200) Consider next a Wilson loop of the form shown in ﬁgure 4.y − δx. t1 < x4 < t2 . n (4. for x = v.4.202) . If r is the deﬁning representation ¯ of the gauge group SU (3) we say that we have a static quark at z and an antiquark at y.198) ˆ The P r are Hermitian projectors in the following sense: ˆ rx ˆ rx (Pmn )† = Pnm . then. n r s s dV Dmn (V )Dnl (V U ) = δr¯Dml (U ). m (4. s (4. In the U (1) case this corresponds to two charges that are static at times between t1 and t2 . The pathintegral average of this Wilson loop W (C) = 1 Z DU exp[S(U )] χr (U (C)).4.110 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice Fig. ˆ ru U Pmn snl = n ¯ ˆ su Pmn snl = sml .199) (4. ˆ rx ˆ rx ˆ rx Pmn Pnq = Pmq . ˆ sv Pmn skm = skn . a charge +1 at z and a charge −1 at y: J4 (x. (4. (4.197) similarly.201) In the SU (n) case the interpretation is evidently that we have a source in irrep r at y and a source in irrep r at z.
206) r r ˆ ˆ 0Dmn (U † )0 rmn 0 rmnDmn (U )0 . 111 (4.4.) For example. (In case of closure by periodic boundary conditions in the spatial direction.208) . we have found a formula for the static potential (e. V = V r (y. (4. the situation illustrated in ﬁgure 4. z).g. U is the operator corresponding to the product of U ’s at time t1 and similarly ˆ ˆ ˆ for U † at t2 .203) 1 r ˆ ¯ ˆ ˆ ˆ rz r ˆ ˆ ry Tr T N −t Dkl (U † ) (T )t Plm Dmn (U ) Pnk . N = ∞. For large times t the lowest energy level E0 will dominate. R0 = R0 (y. the diﬀerence E0 − E0 is the potential V : W (C) → R0 e−V t . this is often called a Wilson line. Another interesting quantity is the Polyakov line [41].1 · · · U4x.0 U4x.g. (4. the trace in (4. z).205) where Rn and En depend on y and z. gives the representation W (C) = n Rn e−(En −E0 )t .4. In the zerotemperature limit N → ∞.204) Z ˆ Here C is the rectangular loop shown in ﬁgure 4. m (4. The expectation value W (L) of the Polyakov line operator at x. which is a string of U ’s closed by periodic boundary conditions in the Euclidean time direction.195)). (4. in the deﬁning representation Tr U (L) = Tr (U4x. ¯ ˆ ˆ rz ˆ ry Inserting intermediate states n . T 0 = exp(−E0 ) 0 . can be written as W (L) = Tr U (L) = 1 ˆ Tr (T )N Z ˆ rx Pmm . This is the energy of the ground state 0 rmn in that sector of Hilbert space which corresponds to the static sources at y and z. (4. t = t2 − t1 .N −1 ). for a quark– antiquark pair) in terms of the expectation value of a Wilson loop.9 Wilson loop and Polyakov line Z= can be expressed as W (C) = ˆ DU exp[S(U )] = Tr T N . a source which is always switched on. which are eigenstates of T Plm Pnk with eigenvalues exp(−En ). e.204) is replaced ˆ by the expectation value in the ground state 0 .207) (4. R0 = t→∞ mn Hence.5 corresponds to a single static quark. and T is the transfer operator with P0 (cf. By deﬁnition.
5.112 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice Fig.10 Problems (i) The case SU (2) (a) Work out the metric gkl = 2 Tr [(∂U/∂αk ) (∂U † /∂αl )] using the exponential parameterization U = exp(iαk τk /2). 1. 2 2 (d) Check the orthogonality relation dU χj (U )χ∗ (U ) = δjj . A Polyakov line. In ordinary units g has the dimension of mass (in two dimensions). . 3 . r and periodic boundary conditions in space. For temperature going to zero it behaves as W (L) ∝ e− with N . (4. 4.212) L(U ) = κr ρr = 1. (ii) Twodimensional SU (n) gaugeﬁeld theory Consider twodimensional SU (n) gauge theory with action S= p L(Up ).209) the selfenergy of a static quark.211) (4. (e) Verify for a onelink state that 1 U X (f) Verify that X 2 (L) = X 2 (R). j ˆ k (L)ψ 1 = Xk (L)ψ1 (U ). 1 g2 κr Re χr (U ). N → ∞. It is the free energy of a static quark at inverse temperature N . . 4. (c) Find the characters χj (U ) = Tr Dj (U ) as a function of αk (j = 1 .210) (4. such that in lattice . (b) Determine the normalization constant ν in √ dU = ν det g dα1 dα2 dα3 such that dU = 1.). r (4. .
l = 0. L = N a. T = TK P0 . deduce from the result above that. TK = l where l. (4.n} (U ) = x rx Dmx nx (Ux ). the link variables in the spatial direction may be denoted by Ux . (d) Restoring the lattice spacing a. using a saddlepoint expansion about U = 1. This result holds independently of the detailed choice of κr ’s. . the gaugeinvariant component is nonzero only if all irreps are equal.m.213) TKl .m. x = 0. .4. in the continuum limit.n} (U ) ≡ U P0 ψ = d−N r0 Tr [D (U0 )D (U1 ) · · · D r0 r1 rN −1 (4.214) which is just a product of irreps rx at each x.212). . (a) Show that ˆ P0 ψ{r. Hence.216) = dU eL(U ) χr (U ) . .219) .. the energy spectrum takes the universal form r Er − E0 = 1 g 2 C2 L. say r. (4.218) 2 dr r where C2 is the value of the quadratic Casimir operator in the representation r. N − 1.215) (UN −1 )] ×δr0 r1 · · · δrN −1 r0 δn0 m1 δn1 m2 · · · δnN −1 m0 . as long as they satisfy the constraint (4.217) (c) Show for g → 0. . (b) Show that the energy spectrum of the system is given by Er = −N ln a0 + ln where χr 1 χr 1 dr . 2 (4. that χr 1 r → 1 − 1 C2 g 2 + O(g 4 ). dU eL(U ) (4. x + 1). Consider the wavefunction ψ{r.. Since there is only one space direction. N − 1 labels the spatial links (x.10 Problems 113 units g → 0 in the continuum limit. The transfer operator is given by ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ (4. and it is a Wilson line in the spatial direction. (4. .
it has to be interpreted as a state with external sources at these points. Use lattice units a = at = 1. Similarly. Using the transferoperator formalism. n) denotes a spacelike plaquette. where p = (x. where the links l belong to an open contour from x to y. m.y .y = l∈C Ul . and for the string mass corresponding to Ux.114 Gauge ﬁeld on the lattice (iii) Glueball masses and string tension Simple glueball operators may be deﬁned in terms of the plaquette ﬁeld Tr Up . a string state may be created by the operator Ux. The string state deﬁned this way is not gauge invariant at x and y. . derive to leading order a strongcoupling formula for the glueball mass corresponding to the plaquette. When this operator acts on the ground state (vacuum state) it creates a state with the quantum numbers of the plaquette. Note that the potentialenergy ˆ factors exp(−at W /2) in the transfer operator may be neglected to leading order in 1/g 2 .
206) the static potential V (r) in a gauge theory is given by the formula 1 (5. t).5 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory In this chapter we make a ﬁrst exploration of U (1) and SU (n) ‘pure gauge theories’ (i. Fig. t) is a rectangular r × t Wilson loop in a lattice of inﬁnite extent in the time direction (ﬁgure 5. without electrons or quarks etc. t→∞ t where W (r. This will illustrate that (5.e. We shall ﬁrst evaluate this formula for free gauge ﬁelds and then give the results of the ﬁrst nontrivial order in the weakcoupling expansion.1 Potential at weak coupling According to (4. 5. the static potential and the glueball masses. A rectangular Wilson loop for the evaluation of the potential.1) V (r) = − lim ln W (r.1) indeed gives the familiar Coulomb potential plus corrections. 5. 115 .1).).1.
111). We shall not go into details here (cf.3) is the usual free Maxwell action (noncompact U (1) theory).2) The weakcoupling expansion can be obtained by substituting Uµ (x) = exp[−igaAµ (x)] into the action. The other terms are interaction terms special to the compact U (1) theory.5) This is similar to the boson propagator (2. ap → 0. The ﬁrst term in (5. This can be done on the lattice in the same way as in the continuum formulation.3) (5.7) (5. xy 1 2 xy Jµ (x)Dµν (x−y)Jν (y) Z(0). in which the external source Jµ (x) speciﬁed in (4. Z(J) is given by Z(J) = e 2 g and V (r) = − 11 2 g t2 Jµ (x)Dµν (x − y)Jν (y). To leading order in g 2 .6) → δµν 1 . S=− xµν 1 1 [Fµνx ]2 − g 2 a2 [Fµνx ]4 + · · · . t Z(0) (5. gauge ﬁxing is necessary in the weakcoupling expansion. (5. µ (2 − 2 cos apµ ) 1 .1) can be rewritten as V (r) = − lim t→∞ Z(J) 1 ln . problem (i)). 4 48 (5. p2 d4 p ip(x−y) e (2π)4 (5.8) . t → ∞. In position space π/a µν Dµν (x − y) ≡ Dxy = δµν −π/a a2 µ (2 − 2 cos apµ ) (5.116 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory First we consider the compact U (1) gauge theory (4. (x − y)2 /a2 → ∞. As usual. 4π 2 (x − y)2 The largex behavior of Dµν (x) corresponds to the smallp behavior of Dµν (p).182). and just state that the free part of S (the part quadratic in Aµ ) leads in the Feynman gauge to the propagator Dµν (p) = δµν = δµν a2 . In this case (5. This can be shown with the help of the saddlepoint method for evaluating the largex behavior. and expanding the path integral in the gauge coupling g.186) serves to introduce the Wilson loop.4) Fµνx = ∂µ Aνx − ∂ν Aµx .
1 Potential at weak coupling 117 Fig. 1 2 g 2 1 J D J ∼ − g2 t 2 y 1 = − g2 t 2 1 = − g2 t 2 ∞ D44 (0.9) where the times t1 and t2 in ﬁgure 5. Fig. Diagram (d) is a selfenergy contribution. 5.2. This expression leads to the diagram in ﬁgure 5.10) 1 = − g 2 tv(0).3). Diagram illustrating 1 2 g 2 J D J.5.3.90)). For t → ∞ this summation converges at large y4 and becomes independent of x4 . Typical contributing diagrams. The summation over y4 sets p4 in the Fourier representation for D to zero (cf. 2 . x4 − y4 ). x4 − y4 ) 4 =−∞ (d) π/a −π/a π/a −π/a d4 p ip4 (x4 −y4 ) e (2π)4 d3 p (2π)3 a2 3 j=1 (2 a2 µ (2 − 2 cos apµ ) − 2 cos apj ) (5. We may ﬁrst sum over y4 .1 have been taken as ±t/2. 1 2 g 2 J DJ = (d) 1 2 2 g (i) 2 t/2 D44 (0. 5. With the currents J ﬂowing according to ﬁgure 5.2. x4 .1.y4 =−t/2 (5. (2. the following types of contributions can be distinguished (ﬁgure 5.
12) 1 2 g i(−i) 2 t/2 −t/2 dx4 dy4 1 .4.13) where we assumed r/a 1 such that the asymptotic form (5. The series (5.4. 5.118 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Fig. Its numerical value at the origin is given by av(0) = 0. unless the powers of a are compensated . (5. (5. (b) and (c) do not grow linearly with t.6) is valid and the summations over x4 and y4 may be replaced by integrations. Remembering that there are two contributions of types (d) and (e) (related by interchanging x and y) we ﬁnd for the potential to order g 2 = V (x) = g 2 [v(0) − v(x)].15) as expected. where π/a v(x) = −π/a d3 p ipx e (2π)3 a2 3 j=1 (2 − 2 cos apj ) (5.14) 2 4πr From these example calculations it is clear that the diagrams of types (a). Their eﬀect vanishes in the continuum limit.3) for S leads to interaction vertices of the type shown in ﬁgure 5. which are proportional to (ag)n−2 .11) is the latticeregularized Coulomb potential.253 · · · . The contribution of type (e) is given by 1 2 g 2 J DJ ∼ (e) (5. 4π 2 [(x4 − y4 )2 + r2 ] (5. Let us now brieﬂy consider higherorder corrections in the compact U (1) theory. Vertices in the compact U (1) theory. Proceeding as for diagram (d) we get 1 2 g 2 J DJ ∼ (e) 1 2 g t 2 ∞ −∞ dy4 1 4π 2 [(x4 − y4 )2 + r2 ] 1 2 1 g t .
4πr (5.5. p Z(g 2 ) = [1 − 1 g 2 + O(g 4 )]−1 . Note that Z(g 2 ) is ﬁnite. An example of this is the selfenergy diagram ﬁgure 5. → ∞. 4 and a modiﬁed propagator −1 Dµν = p2 δµν + O(a2 ) + Πµν (p).16) (5.17) (5. it does not diverge as a → 0. Further analysis leads to the conclusion that there are no other eﬀects of the selfinteraction in the weakcouplingexpansion continuum limit.5. i.18) (5. We conclude that in the compact U (1) theory the potential is given by V (r) = −g 2 Z(g 2 ) 1 + constant + O(a2 ).e. 5.1 Potential at weak coupling 119 Fig. 4 (5. α= g 2 Z(g 2 ) e2 = . 4π 4π (5. which leads to a ‘vacuumpolarization tensor’ (cf. problem (ii)) Πµν (p) = − 1 g 2 (δµν p2 − pµ pν ) + O(a2 ). .20) which is just a Coulomb potential. as expressed by ‘current conservation’ ∂µ Jµx = 0. by powers of a−1 coming from divergent loop diagrams.5.21) The compact U (1) theory is equivalent to the free Maxwell ﬁeld at weak coupling.19) The terms ∝ pµ pν do not contribute to the Wilson loop because of gauge invariance. To make contact with the free Maxwell theory we identify the ﬁnestructure constant α. 1 Dµν (p) = Z(g 2 )δµν 2 + terms ∝ pµ pν . A selfenergy diagram in the compact U (1) theory.
23) This gR is deﬁned independently of perturbation theory. A calculation to order g 4 gives in this case the result for the magnitude of the force.22) Here C2 is the value of the quadratic Casimir operator in the representation of the Wilson loop and c is a numerical constant which depends on lattice details. 2 gR = g 2 + d2 11n ln 2 48π 2 a + c g 4 + · · ·. F (r). This problem is resolved by expressing physically measurable quantities in terms of each other. The formula (5. Gluon selfenergy contribution to the Wilson loop. 4πd2 (5. 2 g 2 = gR − d2 11n ln 2 2 48π a 4 + c gR + · · · . It diverges logarithmically as a → 0.22) comes from the Feynman gauge selfenergy contribution shown in ﬁgure 5.120 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Fig. (5. neglecting O(a2 ): F (r) = 1 r2 11n 4 ∂V (r) = C2 g 2 + g ln 2 ∂r 4πr2 48π 2 a + c + O(g 6 ) .22). which is not present in the U (1) theory. 5.25) because then the coeﬃcient of 4 gR blows up (and similarly for the higherorder coeﬃcients). We now turn to the SU (n) gauge theory. This dependence is here known incompletely: we cannot take the limit a → 0 in (5.25) The original parameter g in the action has to depend on a if we want to get a gR independent of a. by writing F (d) = 2 C2 gR . (5. The limit . Its expansion in g 2 follows from (5.6. (5. Some aspects of the calculation are described in [43]. The logarithm in (5.24) which may be inverted.22) exhibits the typical divergencies occuring in perturbation theory. Here we shall choose an intuitive deﬁnition of a renormalized coupling constant gR at some reference length scale d.6.
β(g) = − 48π 2 Actually the ﬁrst two terms in the expansions βR (gR ) = − β(g) = −β1 g 3 − β2 g 5 − β2 g 7 − · · ·. respectively.32) − 5 βR2 gR − 7 βR3 gR − ··· of the two beta functions are equal. g). βR (gR ) = 3 −βR1 gR (5. The argument for this is as follows. Insertion into (5.22) leads to the form F (r) = r2 11n 4 1 2 C gR + g ln 2 2 2 2 R 4πr 48π d 6 + O(gR ) . The renormalizability of QCD implies that all divergences can be removed in this way to all orders in perturbation theory. We can extract more information from the weakcoupling expansion by considering renormalizationgroup beta functions.24). deﬁned by ∂ gR .and adependence on the righthand side of (5.and gdependence. It is useful only for r of order d.28) can be converted into a gR .31) (5.2 Asymptotic freedom 121 a → 0 will be discussed in the following sections. since then the logarithm blows up. the distance scale used in the deﬁnition of the renormalized coupling constant gR .26) is useless for r → 0 or r → ∞.34) . gR = gR (r). Let gR = F (t.27) and (5. giving βR (gR ) = −r 11n 3 g + · · ·. Then gR = gR (r). (5. 5. using (5. (5.26) from which all dependence on a has disappeared to this order in gR .30) (5.33) (5.2 Asymptotic freedom The perturbative form (5.5. (5. r2 t = ln 2 . a (5.29) (5. So let us take d = r from now on.28) β(g) = −a ∂a It is assumed here that gR can be considered to depend only on r and not on a – its dependence on a is compensated by the dependence on a of g.25) and (5. g = g(a). Then the r.27) ∂r ∂ g. 48π 2 R 11n 3 g + ···.
1 for our β1. so we may take the coeﬃcient β2 from calculations in the continuum using dimensional regularization.122 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Make a scale transformation a → λa. The precise dependence of gR (r) for small r follows by integrating the diﬀerential equation (5. . 3 F1 (t)gR (5.35) Inserting the expansions for β(g) and gR = g + F1 (t)g 3 + F2 (t)g 5 + · · ·. (5. This property is called asymptotic freedom.27). as will now be shown.36) (5.39) The remarkable fact in these formulas is that the beta functions are negative in a neighborhood of the origin. and −βR (gR ) = ∂F ∂gR = ∂λ ∂g ∂g ∂λ =− ∂F β(g). which does not aﬀect t. and we can use the rdependence of gR (r) to our advantage. As we shall see. and diﬀerentiate with respect to λ. it implies that g → 0 in the continuum limit.2 .† β2 = 102 2 11n β . ∂ ln r gR dx − ln r = βR (x) † Other authors write β0. ∂g (5. β1 = . provided that a ‘running gR ’ can be used at the appropriate length or momentum scale. We come back to this in a later section. In the case of the potential V (r) there is only one relevant length scale. setting λ = 1 afterwards. It suggests furthermore that perturbation theory in the renormalized coupling gR becomes reliable at short distances.36) has the same beta function. Then ∂/∂λ = a ∂/∂a = r ∂/∂r. 121 1 48π 2 (5. r. g = gR − gives −βR (gR ) = [1 + 3F1 g 2 + O(g 4 )][β1 g 3 + β2 g 5 + O(g 7 )] 2 4 3 5 5 7 = [1 + 3F1 gR + O(gR )][β1 gR − 3β1 F1 gR + β2 gR + O(gR )] 3 5 7 = β1 gR + β2 gR + O(gR ). r → λr.37) + · · ·.38) Any coupling constant related to g by a series of the type (5. implying that the couplings become smaller as the length scale decreases. ∂gR = −βR (gR ).
Note also that ΛV can be deﬁned precisely 2 only if the β2 term is taken into account – the O(gR ) term no longer involves a constant term. in case there is more than one) is known: it is g = 0. This formula can be inverted so as to give gR as a function of r.41) for the bare coupling.5. this expansion tells us nothing about the longdistance behavior. The analog of (5. This means that the critical point of the theory (the one that is physically relevant. β1 g 2 ≈ 1/ ln(a2 Λ2 ). β1 gR 1 (5. 2 β1 g β1 (5. However.23) for d = r gives F (r) = −1 β1 C2 . making the ﬁrst few terms of the weakcoupling expansion irrelevant in this regime.40) The integration constant can be partially combined with ln r to form a dimensionless quantity ln(rΛV ) in a way that has become standard: − ln(r2 Λ2 ) = V 1 β2 2 2 2 + β 2 ln(β1 gR ) + O(gR ).45) where we introduced the ‘lattice lambda scale’ ΛL .41) Note the ‘ln β1 convention’. L (5. 2 s + (β /β 2 )s−1 ln s + O(s−2 ln s) 4πr 2 1 (5. 2 β1 gR = 1 β2 1 − 2 ln s + O(s−3 ln s). s β1 s2 (5.44) So the shortdistance behavior of the potential can be reliably computed (‘renormalizationgroup improved’) in QCD by means of the weakcoupling expansion. − ln(a2 Λ2 ) = L 1 β2 + 2 ln(β1 g 2 ) + O(g 2 ).28) leads to the analog of (5.43) s = − ln(r2 Λ2 ). 2β1 gR 1 gR 123 = dx (5.42).46) shows that the bare coupling vanishes in the continuum limit a → 0.2 Asymptotic freedom −1 β2 + 2 + O(x) β1 x3 β1 x β2 1 2 = 2 + β 2 ln gR + constant + O(gR ). V Inserting this into the force formula (5. because gR (r) increases as r increases. A second important implication of asymptotic freedom is the application of the renormalizationgroup equation to the bare coupling g. .42) (5. Integration of (5.
They are all proportional and their ratios can be calculated in oneloop perturbation theory.48) Inserting this relation into (5. A comparison of lambda scales on the lattice and in the continuum was done some time ago [45.53) .82. 47]. The oneloop relation (5.45) can be written as Λ2 = L 2 2 1 (β1 g 2 )−β2 /β1 e−1/β1 g [1 + O(g 2 )].124 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory The inverse of (5. The ΛV and ΛL are examples of the QCD lambda scales which set the physical scale of the theory.51) (5. such that g and gR go to zero.81. which depends on the details of the regularization.25) can be rewritten as d2 1 1 = 2 + ln a2 2 β1 g β1 gR 2 + c + O(gR ). 46.52) (5. 2 a (5. V (5.50) Hence the ratio is determined by the constant c.47) and letting a and d go to zero with d/a ﬁxed. SU (2) = 28. all physical quantities with a dimension are proportional to the appropriate power of ΛL (as in (1.47) This equation is sometimes accompanied by the phrase ‘dimensional transmutation’: the pure gauge theory has no dimensional parameters (such as mass terms) in its classical action and we may think of transforming the bare coupling g into the dimensional lambda scale via the arbitrary regularization scale 1/a. SU (3). gives Λ2 = L 2 2 e−c 2 2 (β1 gR )−β2 /β1 e−1/β1 gR [1 + O(gR )] 2 d = Λ2 e−c . The relation with the popular MSbar scheme (modiﬁed minimal subtraction scheme) in dimensional renormalization is ΛMS = exp[(1/16n − 0. (5.0849780 n)/β1 ] ΛL = 19.49) (5. Let us see how this is done for the ratio ΛV /ΛL . As we shall see later. (5.4)).
(5. A lot of eﬀort has been put into using it as a method of computation.60) . We write the compact U (1) action in the form S= p L(Up ) + constant. see e.3 Strongcoupling expansion The strongcoupling expansion is an expansion in powers of 1/g 2 . We start again with the compact U (1) theory. similarly to the hightemperature or hopping expansion for scalar ﬁeld theories. There are sophisticated methods for organizing the strongcoupling expansion. (5. µ < ν.3 Strongcoupling expansion 125 A calculation [48] of the constant c in the MSbar scheme then gave the relation to the potential scheme ΛV . but here we give only a minimal outline of the basic ideas. One has to be able to match on to coupling values where the theory exhibits continuum behavior. In the path integral we expand exp S in powers of 1/g 2 . First consider 1 1 1 ∗ (Up + Up ) = 2 2g m!n! 2g 2 m.56) 5.5. such as conﬁnement and the particle spectrum. 2g 2 Up = Uµν (x) = Uνµ (x)∗ .57) (5.19 for SU (3).g. This turns out to be diﬃcult for gauge theories.78.095884 n)/β1 ] ΛL = 20. for SU (2) = 30.54) (5. exp (5. ν).55) (5. It has the advantage over the weakcoupling expansion that it has a nonzero radius of convergence.57 · · · is Eulers’s constant) ΛV = exp[γ − 1 − (1/16n − 0. Let p be the plaquette (x.59) L(Up ) = 1 ∗ (Up + Up ). [6. a very important aspect of the strongcoupling expansion is that it gives insight into the qualitative behavior of the theory. 44]. However.n=0 ∞ m+n m ∗n Up Up . µ. (γ = 0.58) (5.
which for the group U (1) is simply given by 2π dU U r = 0 dθ irθ e = δr.61) Recognizing the modiﬁed Bessel function Ik .68) . which gives ∞ n=0 1 n! 2 1 2g 2 2n −1 + (Up + Up ) 1 1 (n + 1)!n! 2g 2 n=0 2n+k ∞ 2n+1 k −k + · · · + (Up + Up ) 1 1 (n + k)!n! 2g 2 n=0 ∞ ∞ + ···.66) DU exp S. The coeﬃcients ak are of order (1/g 2 )k . U4 of the plaquette p. Consider now the expansion of the partition function Z = k Using (5. . (5. ±1. (5.64) (5.126 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory ∗ −1 Since Up = Up we put m = n + k and sum over n and k. Z= DU (coeﬃcient) k Up .67) k k k −k −k Each Up is a product U1 U2 U3 U4 of the four link variables U1 . I0 (1/g 2 ) f (1/g 2 ) = I0 (1/g 2 ). A given link variable belongs to 2d plaquettes (in d dimensions). . . raised to the power k. ±2. eL(Up ) = f k k ak Up . k = 0. 2π (5.63) This is actually an expansion of exp L(Up ) in irreducible representations of the group U (1).57) and (5. (5. . It is useful to extract an overall factor.0 . (5. ..65) (5. For each link there is an integration dU over the group manifold. ak (1/g 2 ) = Ik (1/g 2 ) . (5. .64) we get a sum of products of Up ’s.62) eL(Up ) = k=−∞ Ik k Up . labeled by the integer k. Ik (x) = I−k (x) = we ﬁnd ∞ x 1 (n + k)!n! 2 n=0 1 g2 2n+k ..
as illustrated in ﬁgure 5.5. 5. the nonvanishing terms in (5. Simple diagrams contributing to the partition function. If the surface is not closed.67) can be represented by diagrams consisting of plaquettes forming closed surfaces. . Diagram (c) is disconnected. 5. V d(d − 1)/2 is the number of plaquettes.3 Strongcoupling expansion 127 Fig. The hatched area in (b) belongs to the closed surface.69) where V is the number of lattice sites.8. after integration.7.7. Z = f V d(d−1)/2 1 + 1 V d(d − 1)(d − 2) 3! k=0 (ak )6 + · · ·.7 represents the leading contribution to Z. It follows that. (5. Fig. labeled by k. Each plaquette carries an amount of electric or magnetic ﬂux (depending on its being timelike or spacelike. Diagram (a) in ﬁgure 5. The integration over the link variables enforces conservation of ﬂux. where r is an integer. We can interpret this as follows. then dU r = 0 along each link of its boundary.8. recall that it corresponds to a miniature line current). V d(d − 1)(d − 2)/3! is the number of ways the cube can be embedded in the ddimensional hypercubic lattice (d ≥ 3) and 6 is the number of faces of the cube. Hence the group integration projects out the trivial (r = 0) representation. Conservation of ﬂux in three dimensions: k + l + m = 0. Now r is the sum of the k’s belonging to the plaquettes impinging on the link under consideration. as in ﬁgure 5.
77) ∗ ∗ (5. dU eL(U ) χ∗ r . r = 0. χf (1) (5. β = 1/g 2 . f (β) = dU e(β/2n)(χf +χf ) (5. Next exp L is written as a character expansion.73) (5. χr (U ) = exp(irθ) and we recover (5. called polymers. . naf (β) = f (β)−1 dU e(β/2n)(χf +χf ) χ∗ f . Recall (we encountered this before in section 4.76) = 1 + O(β 2 ).7) that these characters are orthonormal.128 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory The expansion can be arranged as an expansion for ln Z containing only connected diagrams. For a general gauge theory the derivation of the strongcoupling expansion is similar. ±2. One writes L(Up ) = β Re χf (Up ). (5. ±1. χf (1) = n and β = 2n/g 2 .72) where r = 0 denotes the trivial representation Up → 1 and dr = χr (1) is the dimension of the representation r. The leading βdependence of af (β) is easily found.75) Ir (x) = π 0 For the group SU (n). The expansion coeﬃcients are given by f= dr ar = dU eL(U ) . .74) For the group U (1). (5.. dU eL(U ) (5.71) = and complete for class functions F (U ) (which satisfy F (U ) F (V U V −1 )). eL(Up ) = f + f r=0 dr ar χr (Up ). .65) from the integral representation of the Bessel functions 1 π dθ cos(kθ) ex cos θ . dU χr (U )χs (U )∗ = δrs .70) where χf (Up ) is the character of Up in the fundamental representation. (5.
that disconnected diagrams may be discarded: they cancel out . = ng 2 (5. A small Wilson loop with compensating plaquettes. β + O(β 2 ). from which the potential can be calculated. n = 3. . (5. otherwise the integration over U gives zero. n > 2 2n β = + O(β 2 ). Figure 5. however. 4. . but the coeﬃcients diﬀer. af = 1 + · · ·.80) (5.83) In higher orders disconnected diagrams appear.4 Potential at strong coupling We now turn to the expectation value of the rectangular Wilson loop U (C) . 5.9. The graphs are the same.4 Potential at strong coupling 129 Fig. n = For SU (2) the characters are real. It can be shown. (5.78) (5.82) which is the leading contribution for this curve C. Recall that a1 is given by a1 (1/g 2 ) = 1 I1 (1/g 2 ) 1 1 = 2− I0 (1/g 2 ) 2g 2 2g 2 3 + ···.81) Up to grouptheoretical complications (which can be formidable) the strongcoupling expansion for general gauge groups follows that of the U (1) case. n = 2. The contribution of this diagram is (the Wilson loop is taken in the fundamental representation of U (1)) [a1 (1/g 2 )]4 . .5. In terms of g 2 . 5.. g2 1 + · · ·. n = 2.9 shows a simple example.79) (5. The links on the curve C contain explicit factors of U that have to be compensated by plaquettes from the expansion of exp S.
V (r) = 1 ln W (r. dr (5. in lattice units A = rt. between the numerator and denominator of U (C) . Hence. Hence .88) cancel out with those in (5. Figure 5.87) At strong coupling the compact U (1) theory is conﬁning. Leading diagrams for a large Wilson loop. A → ∞ and the boundary corrections become negligible. (5. σ = − ln a1 − 2(d − 2)a4 1 + ···.10 illustrates the leading terms for a large Wilson loop. The use of this formula is illustrated in ﬁgure 5.85) For r → ∞. For other gauge theories the calculation of the leading contribution to a Wilson loop in the fundamental representation goes similarly. the potential is linearly conﬁning at large distances.12. Note that the factors dr in (5.11. 5.130 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Fig. The expansion can be rewritten as a sum of connected diagrams. dr 1 .1) and A = rt. 1 (5. The equality signs symbolize U U † = 1. t) = aA + 2(d − 2)AaA+4 + · · ·.89) seen earlier in (4. 1 1 (5. Boundary corrections are also in the · · ·. Successive integration in the simple Wilsonloop example in ﬁgure 5. Each arrow in ﬁgure 5. t) t = −[ln a1 + 2(d − 2)a4 + · · ·] r.88) (5. W (r.12 denotes the result of ‘integrating out a link’. The higher orders correspond to ‘decorations’ of the minimal surface.86) (5. r → ∞. A useful formula here is dU χr (U V )χs (W † U † ) = which follows from r r dU Dmn (U )Dm n (U )∗ = δrr δmm δnn δrs χr (V W † ).145). The potential V (r) follows now from (5.72).10. V (r) ≈ σr.9 is illustrated in ﬁgure 5.84) where A is the area of the loop.
Integrating the leading contribution to a 2 × 2 Wilson loop. Each plaquette has a factor dr p by (5.5.12.72). Another way to see this is as follows: in ﬁgure 5. Integrating over each link gives a factor d−nl by (5. Fig. Integration of a link variable. . In higher orders the ar (β) corresponding to other irreps enter.90) For a Wilson loop in the fundamental representation of the SU (n) theory the ﬁrst few terms in the expansion for the string tension σ = − ln af (β) − 2(d − 2)af (β)4 + · · · . the numerical value of the diagram is dr ar (β)4 . 5.87). r For a simple surface without handles. for a Wilson loop in representation r. the Euler number is −nl + ns + np = 1 ⇒ leading contribution = (dr )−nl +ns [dr ar (β)]np = dr ar (β)np .89) and contracting the Kronecker deltas at r n each site gives a factor dns .9 there are nl = 12 links. The ﬁnal result may then be reexpressed by expansion in powers of 1/ng 2 .11.91) are similar to the U (1) result (5.4 Potential at strong coupling 131 Fig. (5. (5. 5. np = 4 plaquettes and ns = 9 sites.
The tube of plaquettes is able to screen the adjoint loop. To evaluate this contribution we unfold the tube as in ﬁgure 5. 5. as illustrated intuitively in ﬁgure 5. The latter can be constructed from U and U † . The links in the interior .93) Rl (5. Flux lines for sources in the fundamental (a) and the adjoint (b) representation.13.14. Since R is an irrep.92) where the tk are the generators in the fundamental representation.132 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Fig. external charges in the adjoint representation of SU (n) are not conﬁned. Let U denote the fundamental representation (as before) and R the adjoint representation. Rkl = 2 Tr (U † tk U tl ). we may draw a Wilson surface and ﬁnd in the same way as in the previous section the seemingly leading contribution da aa (β)A . (5. there is a more economical possibility for large A. However. From the derivation we can see that this is true for external charges (Wilson loops) in the fundamental representation of any compact gauge group. dU Rkl (U ) = 0.95) with A the minimal surface spanned by C.94) by the plaquettes from the expansion of exp S. However. We now show how this happens at strong coupling.13. (5. This is because the charges in the adjoint representation can be screened by the gauge ﬁeld. A adjoint source is like a quark–antiquark pair. 5.5 Conﬁnement versus screening In the previous section we saw that the U (1) and SU (n) potentials are conﬁning in the strongcoupling region. To compensate the R’s on the links of the adjoint Wilson loop Tr R(C) = Tr l∈C (5. da = n2 − 1.15. illustrated in ﬁgure 5.
Fig. The wavy line indicates the adjoint representation. There remains the integration over the links of the Wilson loop. which leads to integrals of the type (for n ≥ 3) (cf. (5. This leads to a factor af (β)4P . So we get a trace of the form 2d−1 (tk )a (tl )q 2d−1 (tl )b (tm )r · · · (tk )p = 1.16.93) in appendix A.98) (5.14. (b) is a close up of a piece of the circumference in (a).4) a q† dU Ub Up Rkl = 1 2(tk )a (tl )q . Unfolding the tube of plaquettes.16.97) where P is the perimeter of the (large) adjoint loop in lattice units: . (A.5. Diagram contributing to a Wilson loop in the adjoint representation.96) as illustrated in ﬁgure 5.17.12. (5. can be integrated out as in ﬁgure 5. 5.15. Integrating out the interior. a p a q c a b since 2 Tr (tk tk ) = n2 − 1 = da .5 Conﬁnement versus screening 133 Fig. The horizontal and vertical boundaries are to be identiﬁed. 5. as illustrated in ﬁgure 5. The ﬁrst step gives a factor df af (β)Np with Np the number of plaquettes (df = n). 5. p b da n > 2. Fig. The second step gives an additional factor 1/df .
I= s s r dU Dmn (U ) Dm n (U )∗ Dkl (U ). n2 (ng 2 )−2 + · · · .134 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Fig. The leading contributions of the perimeter and area type in the SU (n) theory are given by Wa (r. t) ∼ (n2 − 1)(aa )rt + · · · + 2(d − 1)(d − 2)(af )8(r+t) + · · ·. 5. the calculation suggests that there is an intermediate region where the potential is approximately linear with some eﬀective string tension σeﬀ .17. we consider the generalization of (5. vanishes for adjoint sources. Link variables on the adjoint loop.96). σeﬀ (5. and the factor 4 in the exponent reﬂects the fact that there are four plaquettes per unit length. af = (ng ) + · · ·.96).100) with σeﬀ = − ln aa + · · ·. Still. The sharp crossover from linear to constant behavior (at r ≈ 4) is an artifact of our simplistic strongcoupling calculation. To decide whether static charges in an irreducible representation r can be screened by the gauge ﬁeld.74) and (5. r ≤ V (∞) σeﬀ V (∞) = V (∞).1) leads to a potential V (r) = σeﬀ r.101) (5. aa = 2 n −1 2 −1 (5.103) (This behavior of aa follows easily from (5. r → ∞. r ≥ .102) (5. (5.99) which by (5. deﬁned by σ = V (r)/r. (5. P = 2(r + t). V (∞) = −8 ln af + · · ·. although strictly speaking the string tension.104) .) At large distances the potential approaches a constant.
In QCD. a (Zk )a = eik2π/n δb .6 Glueballs The particles of the pure gauge theory are called glueballs.105) Irreps r can be constructed from a tensor product U ⊗ U · · · U ⊗ U † · · · ⊗ U † . . as in ﬁgure 5. sources with zero nality are not conﬁned. . The transfermatrix formalism shows that an arbitrary state can be created out of the vacuum by application of a suitable combination of spacelike Wilson loops. The simplest of these is the plaquette ﬁeld Tr Umnx . from the way it transforms under U → Z1 U : r r Dkl (Z1 U ) → eiν(r)2π/n Dkl (U ). Since there are four plaquettes per unit of time. static quarks have nonzero triality and are conﬁned. with the quantum numbers of the particles being studied. because of asymptotic freedom. If the integral I is zero. say p times U and q times U † . 5. However.18. and viceversa. The plaquette–plaquette expectation value (4. they manifest themselves as eﬀective particlelike excitations at high energies. gluons do not exist as free particles because of conﬁnement.e. such as Wilson loops. n − 1. The relevant diagrams consist of tubes of plaquettes.5. (5..107) and we conclude that I = 0 if the nality ν(r) = 0. 3.97) can be calculated easily at strong coupling.106) The integer ν(r) is called the nality of the representation (triality for n = 3).104) gives I = eiν(r)2π/n I. Sources with nonzero nality are conﬁned. (5. These are gaugeinvariant ﬁelds constructed out of the link variables Uµx . 1. the glueball mass is given by m = −4 ln af (β) + · · ·. the source cannot be screened. n = 1. b (5. Masses of particles can be calculated from the longdistance behavior of suitable ﬁelds. 2. Making the change of variables U → Z1 U in (5. so r can be assigned an integer ν(r) = p − q mod n. .6 Glueballs 135 where s denotes the irreps of the two screening plaquettes. Let Zk denote an element of the center of SU (n). as we shall see. k = 0. m. They may be interpreted as bound states of gluons. The higherorder corrections correspond to . Gluons appear as a sort of photons in the weakcoupling expansion and. i. Zk ∈ SU (n) commutes with all group elements and it is represented in the fundamental representation as a multiple of the identity matrix.
92]. To be more precise. conﬁnement phase We have seen that all gauge theories with a compact gauge group such as U (1).7 Coulomb phase. SU (n) and Z(n) have the property of conﬁnement at strong coupling.g. . C = chargeconjugation parity) excited by the plaquette are 0++ . The plaquette can be decomposed into operators with deﬁnite quantum numbers under the symmetry group of the lattice. 5. The description of glueballs with other quantum numbers requires more complicated Wilson loops.108) have been calculated to order u8 for gauge groups SU (2) and SU (3) [91. j u ≡ af (β). 1+− and 2++ . also the U (1) and e. T.18. Time runs horizontally. which will also cause the tube to perform random walks. one and two. On the other hand. axial vector (A) and tensor (T ). that the weakcoupling expansion on the lattice gives the usual universal results for renormalized quantities found with perturbation theory in the continuum. In particular the compact U (1) theory at weak coupling is not conﬁning and it contains no glueballs but simply the photons of the free † Z(n) is the discrete group consisting of the center elements (5. The leading strongcoupling diagram for the plaquette–plaquette correlator.136 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Fig. Since the strongcoupling diagrams are independent of the (compact) gauge group (but their numerical values are not). which may be called scalar (S). The terms in the strongcoupling series mj = −4 ln u + k mk uk . j = S.18. we have also given arguments. and the emerging particles are ‘glueballs’. for U (1) and SU (n). A. diagrams decorating the basic tube of ﬁgure 5. and such operators can in turn be embedded into representations of the continuum rotation group of spin zero. the quantum numbers J P C (J = spin. (5.105) of SU (n). 5. P = parity. See [10] for details. Z(n) gauge theories† have a particle content at strong coupling similar to that of glueballs.
the collection of articles in [5]) and it is also supported by analytic meanﬁeld calculations (see e. n = 2. Phase diagram of the compact U (1) gauge theory (a) and the SU (n) gauge theory. Coulomb phase.7 Coulomb phase. Maxwell theory. and σ is the string tension experienced by a particle. see for example [95]. This can be understood from the fact that there is a phase transition as a function of the bare coupling constant (ﬁgure 5. In the Coulomb phase the static potential has the standard Coulomb form 2 V = −gR /4πr+constant. . V ≈ σr.5. There is no phase transition in the SU (2) and SU (3) models with the standard plaquette action in the fundamental representation in the whole region 0 < β < ∞ (β = 2n/g 2 ). One speaks of a Coulomb phase at weak coupling and a conﬁning phase at strong coupling. The physics of the compact U (1) theory is clearly diﬀerent in the weak. with perimeter P = 2(r + t) and area A = rt. This conclusion is based primarily on numerical evidence (see e.109) (5. the dominant behavior is a decay according to a perimeter law or an area law: W (C) ∼ e− W (C) ∼ e P . may be interpreted as evidence for conﬁnement also in the weakcoupling region.and strongcoupling regions. . whereas in the conﬁnement phase the potential is linearly conﬁning at large distances. [6] for a review). 5. There is a phase 2 transition at a critical coupling βc ≡ 1/gc ≈ 1.19). conﬁnement phase 137 Fig. The absence of a phase transition. The Wilson loop serves as an order ﬁeld in pure gauge theories. combined with conﬁnement at strong coupling. 3 (b).01. (5.g.110) −σA Here may be interpreted as the selfenergy of a particle tracing out the path C in (Euclidean) space–time. at which the string tension σ(β) vanishes.19.g. Consider a rectangular r × t Wilson loop C. conﬁnement phase. When the loop size is scaled up to inﬁnity.
the one relevant for QCD is the region connected to the weakcoupling region βf /2n + βa n/(n2 − 1) = 1/g 2 → ∞ (recall (4.138 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Fig. This ﬁgure shows two connected phase regions. It is. For n > 3 the phase boundary going downward in the southeast direction crosses the βf axis.20. Only the scaling region near a critical point is supposed to have universal properties. however. a f (5. The phase structure of lattice gauge theories is rich subject and for more information we refer the reader to [5] and [6]. Qualitative phase diagram of mixedaction SU (n) gauge theory for n = 2. In the compact U (1) theory. 5.85)). not a deconﬁning transition because we can go around it continuously through negative values of the adjoint coupling βa . the calculation of the static potential from a Wilson loop to lowest order of perturbation in g 2 gives a Coulomb potential. and [10]. for n > 3. 5. This implies that.111) the phase diagram in the βf –βa coupling plane looks schematically like ﬁgure 5. It should be kept in mind that the phase structure of a theory is not universal and depends on the action chosen.20. For example. .8 Mechanisms of conﬁnement As we have seen in section 5. 3. in SU (n) gauge theory with an action consisting of a term in the fundamental representation and a term in the adjoint representation. S= p [βf d−1 Re Tr Up + βa d−1 Re Tr Da (Up )]. whereas in SU (n) gauge theory. there are logarithmic corrections. the model with only the standard plaquette action in the fundamental representation shows a phase transition. higher orders did not change this result qualitatively.1. that can be interpreted in terms of asymptotic freedom.
It can be shown that the conﬁnement of the compact U (1) theory is due to the fact that it is really a theory of photons interacting with magnetic monopoles (see e. and Polyakov [41]. Magnetic monopoles. so how can we understand conﬁnement in this region? Nonperturbative ﬁeld conﬁgurations have long been suspected to do the job.5. In a standard typeII superconductor. In a dual superconductor electric and magnetic properties are interchanged. electrically charged Cooper pairs are condensed in the ground state. which phenomenon causes magneticﬁeld lines to be concentrated into linelike structures. because the energy in the magnetic ﬂux tube between a monopole and an antimonopole would increase linearly with the distance between them. We mention here in particular magneticmonopole conﬁgurations envisioned by Nambu [49]. ’t Hooft [50]. This can be understood from the fact that we expect the string tension to depend on the bare coupling g 2 as √ σ = Cσ ΛL = Cσ 2 2 1 (β1 g 2 )−β2 /2β1 e−1/β1 g [1 + O(g 2 )]. However. in which the magnetically charged monopoles condense and the electricﬁeld lines are concentrated in tubes.112) which has no weakcoupling expansion (all derivatives ∂/∂g 2 vanish at g = 0). In this way the model is an illustration of the dualsuperconductor hypothesis as the explanation of conﬁnement in QCD.8 Mechanisms of conﬁnement 139 However. At weak coupling the monopoles decouple in the compact U (1) model. such that the energy between a pair of positively and negatively charged particles increases linearly with distance. in SU (2) gauge theory. These monopoles condense in the conﬁnement phase in which the model behaves like a dual superconductor. there is no sign of conﬁnement in weakcoupling perturbation theory. the ﬁrst reference in [53] for a review). Such conﬁgurations are fundamentally diﬀerent from mere ﬂuctuations on a zero or puregauge background. there are ‘fat’ monopoles that have physical sizes and masses. and do not decouple at weak bare gauge coupling g 2 .g. would be conﬁned in such a superconductor. where the lattice spacing is small. called Abrikosov ﬂux tubes. and Z(n) vortex conﬁgurations put forward by ’t Hooft [51] and Mack [52]. They remain condensed as g 2 → 0 and continue to produce a nonzero string . according to [53]. if they were to exist. because they are point particles that acquire a Coulomb selfmass of order of the inverse lattice spacing a−1 . The compact U (1) model is a dual superconductor in the strongcoupling phase. The physical region is at weak coupling. a (5.
In pure SU (n) gauge theory the correlation length is given by the mass in lattice units of the lightest glueball. In practice this means once ξ is suﬃciently large. This may seem disturbing.g. in the sense that scaling may set in when the correlation length is only a few lattice spacings. with ΛL the lambda scale introduced in (5. which are of order β = 2n/g 2 = 6 for SU (3) gauge theory with the plaquette action in the fundamental representation. also in scattering processes. see also [55. 58. mi /mj = rij + rij a2 m2 + O(a4 ).9 Scaling and asymptotic scaling. depending on the gauge one chooses to work in. 59].7 or so. ξ = 1/am. The correlation length is then related to the gauge coupling by −2 2 2 ξm = a2 m2 = Cm a2 Λ2 = Cm (β1 g 2 )−β2 /β1 e−1/β1 g [1 + O(g 2 )]. There seems to be more than one explanation of conﬁnement. Typically one expects corrections of order a2 . We can write m = Cm ΛL . (5. this behavior as a function of g 2 is called asymptotic scaling. whereas asymptotic scaling is not very well satisﬁed yet. numerical results We say that relations between physical quantities scale if they become independent of the correlation length ξ as it increases toward inﬁnity. the correlation length appears to be suﬃciently large and the O(a4 ) corrections small enough 2 2 . In the usual range of couplings. A similar mechanism is supposed to take place in SU (n) gauge theory for n > 2. The mechanism for conﬁnement in SU (n) gauge theory proposed by Mack is condensation of fat Z(n) vortices. 56. once β ≥ 5. It turns out that asymptotic scaling is a much stronger property than scaling. L (5. The latter cause an areatype decay of large Wilson loops in much the same way as in the Z(n) gauge theory at strong coupling. Numerical simulations oﬀer a great help in studying these fundamental questions. For instance.113) For the usual plaquette action am is only a function of the bare gauge coupling g 2 . glueballmass ratios mi /mj are said to scale when they become approximately independent of ξ.140 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory tension for all values of g 2 . e. Lattice XX reviews are in [54]. 5. 57. diﬀerent reference frames (such as ‘center of mass’ or ‘laboratory’) lead to diﬀerent physical pictures. but.114) 2 2 for suﬃciently small g . Neglecting the O(g ).45) and Cm a numerical constant characterizing the glueball.
1).070 (n = 3) is so small. i. However.117) ξσ (β) σ ˜ These relations ‘scale’ when V becomes independent of β.65. As a measure of the correlation length we may take √ (5. (5.115) ξσ (β) = 1/a σ. This can be used to express the potential in physical units as follows. ‘improved’ deﬁnitions of a bare coupling that may give better convergence. Expressing the potential in physical units. which goes to zero as β √ approaches inﬁnity.114) cannot be neglected. V (1) = 0.g. which can be ﬁxed by a suitable choice of the zero ˜ point of energy. Recall that V contains the unphysical selfenergy of the sources. This has led to a search for ‘better’ expansion parameters.g.β . β) + v0 (β). where a2 σ is the string tension in lattice units. a (5. see e. which is distance independent. e. Apparently the O(g 2 ) corrections in (5. in terms of which we can deﬁne a reference distance r0 by 2 r0 F (r0 ) = 1. [60].9 Scaling and asymptotic scaling. for example (cf. (5. as set by the string tension. after computing σ from the longdistance behavior V ≈ σr + constant + O(r−1 ).118) .48 corresponds to a reduction of a2 by a factor of four near β = 6.116) where v is a function of the dimensionless variables r/a and β. Here v0 (β) is the selfenergy. the data points at various β ≥ 6 can be made to form a single scaling curve by plotting √ √ V / σ versus r σ with a suitable vertical shift corresponding to v0 (β). Assuming σ = 400 MeV. the value of a σ give us the lattice distance a in units (MeV)−1 . asymptotic scaling does not hold very well yet in this region. β ≡ V (r σ. This problem may be circumvented by concentrating on the force F = ∂V /∂r.e. Note that exp(−1/β1 g 2 ) is a rapidly varying function of g 2 because β1 = 11n/48π 2 ≈ 0. In practice. Typically ∆β ≈ 0. The potential in lattice units can be written as aV = v r . the accuracy of such scaling tests is limited by the fact that σ is an asymptotic quantity deﬁned in terms of the behavior of the potential at inﬁnity. section √ 1. numerical results 141 for scaling corrections to be under control. However.5. gives √ √ r σ V ˜ √ = ξσ (β) v . The potential V (r) is a good quantity to test for scaling because it is relatively easy to compute and there are many values V (r).
leading to much smaller scaling violations in the small. The scaling test for the force avoids ambiguities from the Coulomb selfenergy in the potential.and intermediatedistance region [61]. From [62]. where rc is deﬁned as in (5. namely (4πr1 )−2 = [v(r1 .5. √ The choice 1.92]. 0.11).119) √ and scaling tests can then be performed as above with σ → 1/r0 . The values of (a/r0. 0)]/a. 6. and 1. The force may be computed as r1 = r − a/2.120). a scaling analysis is carried out in [62] in the form 2 r0 F (xr0 ) = f0 (x) + f0 (a/r0 )2 + O(a4 ).7.65. 0) − v(r1 − a. . 5.65 turns out to give r0 ≈ 1/ σ. where v(x. and x = r/rc = 0. 0.5 (right) from top to bottom.c )2 correspond to β in the interval [5.119)/(5.21. and 0. (5. Writing r = xr0 . y. 0. (5.65 → 0.5.21.142 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Fig. The stronger/weaker dependence on a corresponds to r1 deﬁned in (5. Scaling of the SU (3) force and the continuum limit at x = r/r0 = 0.9 (left). or r = xrc .4. There is another choice for r1 that gives an improved deﬁnition of the force. 0. which is in the intermediatedistance regime within which the potential and force can be computed accurately [61].120) F (r1 ) = [V (r + a) − V (r)]/a. as shown in ﬁgure 5. or with r0 → rc .6.118) with 1. z) is the lattice Coulomb potential (5.
23). dotted lines correspond to 1 σ uncertainties of ΛMS (r0 ).5 fm. 5.22. appears as an integration constant. Note that knowledge of a nonperturbative Λ scale allows the prediction of αs . In physical units r0 ≈ 1/ σ ≈ 0.5. From [64]. or equivalently ΛMS . up to quite large √ α’s. which is known to threeloop order.41) in which ΛV . has been determined independently in an elaborate nonperturbative renormalizationgroup computation [63]. where we see that perturbation theory works surprisingly well. 2 gR (µ) = 4πr2 F (r)/C2 . numerical results 143 2 Fig. see also the review in [2]. µ = 1/r.e. r0 ΛMS . The result is shown in ﬁgure 5.22. µ = 1/r plotted versus ¯ r/r0 and compared with the dependence on r as predicted by the weakcoupling expansion for the renormalizationgroup beta function (the curves labeled RGE. . i. can be compared with the prediction of the perturbative beta function. Instead of using the perturbative expansion it is more accurate to integrate the twoor threeloop renormalizationgroup equation numerically. In the smalldistance regime the running of the coupling (5.9 Scaling and asymptotic scaling. when it is implemented in this way. i. Such a program has been pursued in full QCD in various ways [66] and the resulting αs agrees well with the experimentally measured values. The running coupling αqq (µ) = gR (µ)/4π. This scale in units of r0 .e. One could use the perturbative expansion (5.
using variational methods for determining the eigenvalues of the transfer matrix. Figure 5.23. 3 An overview of numerically computed potential is given in ﬁgure 5. 5. It is particularly interesting to do this for varying n. We see that ratios with σ do indeed behave smoothly as a function of 1/n2 all the way down to n = 2. analytic computations in ﬁnite volume are theoretically very interesting and a comparison with numerical data is very rewarding. The same is true in the strongcoupling expansion [68].23. From [65].10 Problems (i) Gauge ﬁxing and the weakcoupling expansion Consider a partition function for a U (1) or SU (n) lattice gauge . The potential from two values of β. Glueball masses have by now also been computed with good accuracy in the SU (n) models. since the theory simpliﬁes in the largen limit in the sense that only planar diagrams contribute [67]. Last. The curve labeled ‘Cornell’ is a ﬁt of the form − 4 α/r + constant + σr with constant α. For a review. but not least.24 shows recent results for √ various n.144 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory Fig. 5. see [18].
123) and O = DU exp[S(U )] O(U ) . Let O(U ) be a gaugeinvariant observable.124) be the average of O. 4. as a function of 1/n2 . as in the .24. Z (5. section 7. ﬁeld theory with gaugeinvariant action S(U ). We want to evaluate the path integrals in the weakcoupling expansion and expect to have to use gauge ﬁxing. cf. with A the ‘fermion matrix’.1. Ratios of glueball masses with σ.5.121) The action may be the standard plaquette action S(U ) = − 1 2ρg 2 Tr (1 − Uµνx ). Z= DU exp[S(U )]. O(U ) = O(U Ω ). 3. Ω Uµx = Ωx Uµx Ω† µ . (5. xµν (5. From [69]. for n = 2. 5. 5.122) it may also contain the eﬀect of dynamical fermions in the form ln det A(U ).10 Problems 145 √ Fig. x+ˆ (5. extrapolated to a → 0 and inﬁnite volume.
For example. It is assumed that ∆(U )−1 = 0. loosely called gauge ﬁxing.e. without dynamical fermions. Im U ≡ . writing Uµx = exp(−igAk x tk ). We can try to restrict the implicit integration over all gauge transformations in O . Using the gauge invariance of S(U ).125) † with ∂µ = −∂µ the backward derivative. For example. by adding an action Sgf (U ) to S(U ) that is not invariant under gauge transformations. Restricting ourselves here to the latter case.127) In the weakcoupling expansion we expand about the saddle points with maximum action. and ∆(U ) we get O = = DΩ DU ∆(U ) exp[S(U ) + Sgf (U )] O(U ) DΩ DU ∆(U ) exp[S(U ) + Sgf (U )] DU ∆(U ) exp[S(U ) + Sgf (U )] O(U ) . Let µ ∆(U ) be deﬁned by Sgf (U ) = − 1 ξ ∆(U )−1 = DΩ exp[Sgf (U Ω )]. Uµx = U (i. ∂µ fx = fx − fx+ˆ . independent of x and µ) and Uµx = Zµ . DU ∆(U ) exp[S(U ) + Sgf (U )] (5. Because of the factor 1/g 2 in the gaugeﬁxing . Intuitively we expect constant modes to be important for ﬁnitesize eﬀects.126) where DΩ is the integration over all gauge transformations.128) The evaluation of the integral (5. (a) Show that the Faddeev–Popov measure factor ∆(U ) is gauge invariant. We assume this maximum to be given by Uµx = 1. (5. O(U ).126) deﬁning ∆(U ) is also done perturbatively.146 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory continuum. with Zµ an element of the center of the gauge group. but not important in the limit that the space–time volume goes to inﬁnity. give the same value of the plaquette action as does Uµx = 1. 2g 2 ρ 2i x (5. There will in general be more maxima. 1 U − U† Tr (∂µ Im Uµx )2 . We insert 1 = ∆(U ) DΩ exp[Sgf (U Ω )] into the integrands in the above pathintegral expression for O and make a transfor† mation of variables U → U Ω . we shall not integrate over constant modes and expand about Uµx = 1. µ (5.
Ak and ωx are well deﬁned µx in terms of Uµx and Ωx . A typical example is given by π −π dx e−x 2 /g 2 ∞ = −∞ dx e−x 2 /g 2 + O(e−π 2 /g 2 ).130) leads to a Faddeev– Popov factor that is independent of U . but there are in general many more saddle points Ωx .129) and expand in gωx . and this is what we shall do in the following. One can give arguments that the correct weakcoupling expansion is obtained by restriction to the standard choice Ωx = 1.134) . as g → 0. µx νx x (5. The bare vertex functions −V are given by SA + Sgf = − n 1 n! x 1 ···xn x ···xn Vµ11···µn Aµ1 x1 · · · Aµn xn . (5.) We extend the initially compact integration region over Ak µx k and ωx to the entire real line (−∞. we can write k Ωx = exp(igωx tk ) (5.130) for gauge ﬁxing. ∆(U ) = constant × det( ). for the perturbative evaluation of ∆(U ).131) (b) For a U (1) gauge theory show that (5.126) has a saddle point at Ωx = 1. This means that. and therefore negligible compared with powers of g.133) and use (5. The study of Gribov copies is complicated. xy ¯ = ∂µ ∂µ δxy . The integral (5. (ii) Weakcoupling expansion in compact QED We consider ﬁrst the bosonic theory given by the action S(U ) = − 1 2g 2 (1 − Uµνx ) xµν (5.10 Problems 147 action. In perturbation theory we may just as well simplify the gaugeﬁxing action and use Sgf = − 1 2ξ 2 ∂µ Ak ∂ν Ak .5. ∞). called Gribov copies. (5.132) with the constant independent of Aµ . (5. with Sgf (U Ω ) = Sgf (U ).130) k (In the neighborhood of the identity. we only need to know ∆(U ) for small ∂µ Im Tr Uµx . The error made in doing so is expected to be of order exp(−constant/g 2 ).
137) ∗ 1 Kµ (k)Kν (k) +ξ . K(k)2 K(k)4 (5.136) (5. (c) Derive (5. for even n ≥ 2 (by convention the momentumconserving periodic delta function is omitted in x ···xn the deﬁnition of the Fourier transform of Vµ11···µn ).2 Kµ1 (k1 )Kµ2 (k2 ). Dµν (k) = δµν − .148 U (1) and SU (n) gauge theory (a) Show that. Kµ (k) = (b) Show that the photon propagator Dµν (k) is given by ∗ Kµ (k)Kν (k) K(k)2 (5. in momentum space. Kµ (k) = −Kµ (−k). i αβ ∗ ∗ Tµ (k) = Kα (k)δβµ − Kβ (k)δαµ .138) The Feynman gauge corresponds to ξ = 1. for arbitrary ξ.19). Vµ1 ···µn (k1 · · · kn ) = − 1 (g 2 )n/2−1 2 αβ αβ αβ Tµ1 (k1 ) · · · Tµn (kn ) 1 − δn. ξ where 1 ikµ ∗ (e − 1).135) (5.
(6.3) ψ + = ψβ. (but suppressing the label x for brevity). .1) is Hermitian. (ψα (x)ψβ (y))† = ψβ (y)ψα (x). e.2) ¯ The ψ and ψ are anticommuting objects. S=− 1 ¯ ¯ ¯ d4 x (γ µ )αβ 2 (ψα ∂µ ψβ − ∂µ ψα ψβ ) + mψα ψα . the interpretation of the path integral in Hilbert space. β = iγ 0 .6 Fermions on the lattice In this chapter we introduce the path integral for Fermi ﬁelds. . socalled Grassmann variables.g. ¯ e. exhibiting the Dirac indices α. 6. that ψ and ψ are independent ‘variables’ (which is why we use 149 . + + as Hermitian conjugates. We shall discuss the speciesdoubling phenomenon – the fact that a naively discretized Dirac fermion ﬁeld leads to more particle excitations than expected and desired. The integrand in (6. which go under the names ‘Wilson fermions’ and ‘staggered fermions’.1 Naive discretization of the Dirac action In continuous Minkowski space–time the action for a free fermion ﬁeld can be written as (see appendix D for an introduction) S=− d4 x µ 1 ¯ 2 (ψ(x)γ ∂µ ψ(x) ¯ ¯ − ∂µ ψ(x)γ µ ψ(x)) + mψ(x)ψ(x) . and the construction of the transfer operator. ¯ (6. two remedies for this. Integration over ‘anticommuting numbers’. (6.1) or.g. how+ ever. the ‘Grassmann variables’ and the relation with creation and annihilation operators in fermionic Hilbert space is reviewed in appendix C. Note. . ψα (x)ψ + treating ψ and ψ . ¯β (y) = −ψβ (y)ψα (x). β.
appendix C). ψx = a3/2 ψ(x). The last equality in (6. The Dirac matrices have the following properties: † 2 γ 0 = −γ0 . k = 1. We recall also the deﬁnition of fermionic integration (cf. k = 1. ¯ ¯ (6. to be diﬀerent from the spatial lattice spacing ak = a.9) follows from the rule d(T ψ) = (det T )−1 dψ (cf.9) We assumed the action to be rewritten in terms of dimensionless ψx and ¯ ψx . ap+ pendix C) and det β = 1. (6. The ψxα and ψxα are independent generators of a Grassmann algebra. The path integral for free fermions with anticommuting external sources η and η is now tentatively deﬁned by ¯ Z(η.10) ψx = a3/2 ψ(x). db = 0. x (6. γ0 = −γ0 .1) a lattice version S=− x. (6. ∂µ ψ(x) → 1 [ ψ(x + aµ µ) − ψ(x) ].4) (6.5) implying that β = β † and β 2 = 1. + and similarly the symbols dψxα and dψxα are dimensionless. η ) = ¯ where ¯ Dψ Dψ = x. a0 . db b = 1. . (6.α ¯ Dψ Dψ ei[S+ η x (¯ψ+ψη)] ¯ . 3.7) Recall that aµ is the lattice spacing in the µ direction. 2. γ0 = −1. ˆ aµ (6.11) + where b is any of the ψxα or ψxα .6) we obtain from (6. So let nµ † We usually write just 1 for the unit matrix 1 1.µ 1 ¯ ¯ [ψ(x)γ µ ψ(x+aµ µ)− ψ(x+aµ µ)γ µ ψ(x)]−m ˆ ˆ 2aµ ¯ ψ(x)ψ(x). 3. 2.† Replacing the derivative operators by discrete diﬀerences. (6. Before making the transition to imaginary time we need to make the dependence on a0 explicit.8) ¯ dψxα dψxα = xα + dψxα dψxα . γk = 1.150 Fermions on the lattice the superscript + instead of †). † 2 γ k = γk = γk . We shall occasionally only need the spacing in the time direction.
µ 2aµ 4 0). Recalling that x = a0 a3 n in our notational convention. (6. We shall infer it in this section from inspection of the fermion propagator and the excitation energy spectrum. x = na. This transforms the path integral into its Euclidean version (iS → S . an analytic continuation to ‘imaginary time’ poses no problem: a0 = a0  exp(−iϕ). a0 → −ia4 .12) ˆ 2a + k=1 Furthermore x a0 ¯ (¯ψ + ψη) ≡ η a ¯ (¯αn ψαn + ψαn ηαn ). This is the speciesdoubling phenomenon. (6. Using a matrix notation. where µ now runs from 1 to 4 (with n4 ≡ n0 . η n (6. and let ¯ ¯ ψn ≡ ψx and ψn ≡ ψx . writing Z(η. (6. η ) = ¯ η ¯ DψDψ e−ψAψ+¯ψ+ψη . Hence. ¯ ¯ (6. ϕ: 0 → π/2.14) with a4 = a0 .15) a4 ¯ ¯ µ ¯ (ψn γµ ψn+ˆ − ψn+ˆ γµ ψn ) + a4 m ψn ψn . x0 = n0 at .6.2 Species doubling 151 be the integers specifying the lattice site x. (6.17) . the lattice action reads more explicitly S=− n 3 1 ¯ 0 ¯ (ψn γ ψn+ˆ − ψn+ˆ γ 0 ψn ) 0 0 2 a0 ¯ k ¯ ˆ ¯ (ψn γ ψn+k − ψn+k γ k ψn ) + (a0 m)ψn ψn . Z= S=− n µ ¯ DψDψ eS+ η n (¯ψ+ψη) ¯ .2 Species doubling It turns out that the model described by the action in (6. ˆ ≡ ˆ and γ4 = iγ 0 = β.15) yields 24 = 16 Dirac particles (fermions with two charge and two spin states) instead of one.16) 6.13) with dimensionless ηαn and ηαn . ¯ It follows from the rules of fermionic integration that the path integral for a ﬁnite space–time volume is a polynomial in a0 m and a0 /a. dropping the ).
However. π). 0. .z+ˆ − δx. . π1 = (π. .22) S(k)−1 = S(k) = m − iγµ sµ . π2 = (0.z δy. π.23) for which the limit a → 0 gives the continuum result m − iγk + O(a2 ).. π234 = (0. 0.20) (6. . The pole is near the zeros of the sine functions at the origin akµ = 0. 0). π. µ (6. π1234 = (π. 0). −l) = xy ¯ e−ikx+ily Axy = S(k)−1 δ(k − l). π). . 0.. 0). m2 + s2 m−i m2 + sµ = sin kµ .21) (6. iγµ sin kµ + m. (6. π).18) the path integral is easily integrated (appendix C) to give ¯ Z(η. A(k. π. . π4 = (0.z . z (6. Reverting to nonlattice units the propagator becomes S(k) = µ µ γµ sin(akµ )/a sin2 (akµ )/a2 .19) Here A−1 ≡ Sxy is the fermion propagator. 0. 0). π.. 0.z δy. 16 in total: (A) m − iγµ pµ + O(a). a = a4 = 1) Axy = zµ 1 ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ γµ (δx. 0). (6.z ) + m µ µ 2 ¯ ¯ δx. π. η ) = det A eηA ¯ −1 η . π).26) . mod 2π kA = a with π0 = (0. . k = kA + p (6. π. 0.152 Fermions on the lattice where (in lattice units. assuming inﬁnite space–time. there are 15 more regions in the four dimensional torus −π < akµ ≤ π where the sine functions vanish. (6. 0. 0. π. . π34 = (0. π123 = (π.24) m2 + k 2 √ The propagator has a pole at k4 = iω = i k2 + m2 corresponding to a Dirac particle.z+ˆ δy. π.27) π12 = (π. . 0. It can be evaluated in xy momentum space.25) S(k) = m2 + p2 S(k) = where the kA is one of the 16 fourvectors πA . (6. (6. π.
and 4 S(x. Sρ = iγρ γ5 . where γ5 = iγ 0 γ 1 γ 2 γ 3 = −γ1 γ2 γ3 γ4 is the Hermitian and unitary matrix which anticommutes with the γµ : γµ γ5 = −γ5 γµ . 2π m2 + s2 + sin2 k4 (6.2 Species doubling and (A) γµ = γµ cos πAµ = ±γµ . S1 S2 S3 S4 }. at ±z+ and ±z− . t) = −π d3 k ikx e (2π)3 π −π dk4 ik4 t m − iγs − iγ4 sin k4 e . {SA } = {1 Sρ .34) (6. Sρ Sσ . This transformation is easy to build up out of products of γρ γ5 . where z± are given by (z± )2 = f ± f 2 − 1.35) (6. Sρ Sσ Sτ . analogously to the boson case: π S(x. Then (6. sinh ω = .36) cosh(2ω) = f.29) where ρ = σ = τ = ρ and A ↔ πA ↔ SA . z± = e±ω .30) and we have † S(kA + p) = SA m − iγµ pµ SA + O(a2 ). The excitationenergy spectrum is conveniently obtained from the time dependence of the propagator. The k4 integral can be performed by changing variables to z = eik4 . as shown in ﬁgure 6.31) The transformations SA are useful for the detailed interpretation of the zeros of the sine functions near kA = 0 in terms of genuine particles [70]. (6. t) = −4 d3 k ikx e (2π)3 dz t z(m − iγs) − γ4 (z 2 − 1)/2 z .32) where we reverted to lattice units and used the notation sµ = sin kµ .g.1.33) f = 1 + 2(m2 + s2 ). 2πi z 4 − 2f z 2 + 1 (6. Here we shall support the interpretation of the 15 additional particles – the species doublers – by deriving the spectrum of excitation energies above the energy of the ground state. 153 (6. π23 ↔ S23 = S2 S3 . (6. m2 + p2 (6. e. in terms of which s2 = 1 − (z 2 + z −2 + 2)/4.6. m2 + s2 . † (A) γµ = SA γµ SA . The denominator of the integrand has four zeros. The integral over z is over the unit circle in the complex plane. So let 1.28) A Since the γµ diﬀer only by a sign from the original γµ . they are equivalent to these by a unitary transformation.
giving S(x.1. k4 = −iω + π. The residues of the other poles are given by eik4 t (m − iγs − iγ4 s4 ) = e−ωt (m − iγs + γ4 sinh ω). for later use. −iω + π poles are relevant for t < 0. For t > 0 (t = integer) the two poles at z = ±z− contribute. + (−1)t (2π)3 sinh(2ω) (6. k4 = −iω. Recall that the Boseﬁeld denominator m2 + 2 µ (1 − cos kµ ) gives only a pole for ϕ = 0. (m − iγs − γ4 sinh ω). In this case we have have poles at ϕ = 0 and ϕ = π. We have to let k4 → ik 0 + ϕ. t) = d3 k eikx−ωt (m − iγs + γ4 sinh ω) (2π)3 sinh(2ω) d3 k eikx−ωt (m − iγs − γ4 sinh ω). and for z = −z± at k4 = iω + π (mod 2π). = (−1) e =e ωt t −ωt k4 = iω.154 Fermions on the lattice Fig.37) Before interpreting this result we want to summarize it in terms of the variable k4 . We see that we cannot blindly perform the inverse Wick rotation on the lattice k4 → ik 0 and look for particle poles at k 0 = ±ω. t ωt = (−1) e (m − iγs + γ4 sinh ω).38) (m − iγs − γ4 sinh ω). k4 = iω + π. . In terms of k4 the zeros of the denominator m2 + s2 + sin4 k4 at z = z± are at k4 = iω. ϕ ∈ [0. > t < 0. Contour integration in the complexz plane. (6. The k4 = −iω. 2π): then k 0 = ±ω corresponds to e ωt eiϕt . 6.
So there is a doubling of fermion species due to the discretization of time. There is a further proliferation of particles due to the discretization of space. Since there are two poles contributing for t > 0. An exception is Wilson’s fermion method [86. The other (at −z− ) has in addition the rapidly oscillating factor (−1)t .39) j=1 sinh ω = m2 + j=1 sin2 kj . see below). This is in accordance with the transfer operator interpretation of the path integral. Apparently. 87]. fermion.40) . boson. One of them (the pole at z = z− ) has the usual e−ωt factor. in lattice units (m = 0. Excitationenergy spectra for bosons (upper curve) and fermions (lower curve) on the lattice.37). there must be two fermion particles for every k.2 act. which has no fermion doubling (for r = 1.6. in which two independent operator Dirac ﬁelds ψ1. From the time dependence of the propagator we identify the energy spectrum ω(k). in which in general two adjacent time slices are identiﬁed with the fermion Hilbert ˆ space [78. 89]. In ﬁgure 6. to obtain smooth behavior at large times (in lattice units) we have to take two lattice units as our basic time step. corresponding to the two particle poles.2 we compare the boson and fermion excitationenergy spectra cosh ω = 1 + 1 m2 + 2 2 3 3 (1 − cos kj ).2.2). We now interpret the result (6. 79. (6.2 Species doubling 155 Fig. (6. 6.
We shall ﬁrst describe Wilson’s method and then brieﬂy introduce the staggeredfermion method. The phenomena related to fermions on a lattice touch on deep issues involving anomalies and topology. π 23 . From the time and space ‘doubling’ we count 24 = 16 particles. kA = 0. 74. 0. π 2 . m → 0. π 12 . 0. For the hypercubic lattice the staggeredfermion method is equivalent to the ‘geometrical’ or Dirac–K¨hler fermion method of a Becher and Joos [81].41) and p can be interpreted as the momentum of the particle.3 Wilson’s fermion method Wilson’s method can be viewed as adding a momentumdependent ‘mass term’ to the fermion action. Note that the wave vector k is just a label to identify the states and that the physical momentum interpretation has to be supplied separately. p = k − kA → 0. One may wish to ignore the kA = 0 particles. For free fermions we replace the mass term in . For m → 0 (in lattice units) the spectrum is relativistic near k = kA . because kµ is conserved only modulo 2π. In a ﬁrst exploration we shall describe two important methods used for ameliorating the eﬀects of species doubling in QCDlike theories: Wilson’s method [71] and the method of Kogut–Susskind [72. 80]). 6. provided that an appropriate choice is made of the couplings to the gauge ﬁelds. The latter is also known as the staggeredfermion method. two kA = 0 particles may collide and produce two kA = π1 = (π.156 Fermions on the lattice We deﬁne a particle state to correspond to a local minimum of the energy surface ω(k). π 31 . in an interacting theory this is not possible. However. π 123 . The minima are at k = kA .6. which raises the masses of the unwanted doublers to values of the order of the cutoﬀ. π 1 . π 3 . For example. This is a vast and technically diﬃcult subject and we shall give only a brief review in sections 8. 0) particles: p1 + p2 = p3 + π1 + p4 + π1 = p3 + p4 (mod 2π). with rest energy given by ωA ≡ ω(kA ). sinh ωA = m. 40] (in the Hamiltonian formulation). ω→ m2 + p2 . (6. thereby decoupling them from continuum physics.4 and 8. in its generalization to Euclidean space–time (see for example [79.
. M2 (k) + µ sin2 kµ (6. (6. Hence.44) For k = kA + p and small p in lattice units this takes the form S(p) = mA − iγµ pµ . nA = 0.e. µ xµ = m+ x r ¯ ψx ψx − 2a The has the eﬀect of replacing the mass m in the inverse propagator in momentum space by m+r µ (1 − cos kµ ) ≡ M(k). s2 = sµ sµ . These mass parameters mA may be identiﬁed with the fermion masses if they are small in lattice units. i. 4 3 (6. the denominator of the propagator can be written as M2 + s2 = 1 + s2 + Σ2 − 2rΣc4 − (1 − r2 )c2 . (6. .48) (6.6.45) (6. m2 + p2 A mA = m + 2nA r. The propagator is then given by S(k) = M(k) − iγµ sin kµ .37). . 4. as explained below (6. cµ = cos kµ . the mass parameters of the doubler (nA > 0) fermions are of order one in lattice units as long as r = 0. For simplicity we shall use the notation sµ = sin kµ . (A) (6. m x 157 ¯ ψx ψx → m x ar ¯ ψx ψx + 2 ar ¯ ψx ψx + 2 4r a ¯ ∂µ ψx ∂µ ψx xµ (6. . We therefore look for the poles of the propagator as a function of k4 and identify the energy ω from k4 = iω or k4 = iω + π. .3 Wilson’s fermion method the action as follows.46) where nA is the number of π’s in kA . For general r and momenta p the fermion energies diﬀer from m2 + p2 and it is interesting to see what they A actually are.47) Separating the k4 dependence.43) in lattice units.42) =m x xµ 1 ¯ ¯ (ψx+aˆ − ψx )(ψx+aˆ − ψx ) µ µ a2 ¯ µ ¯ (ψx+aˆ ψx + ψx ψx+aˆ ).49) Σ=m+r+r j=1 (1 − cj ). for small m and r. 1.
Actually.53) The special signiﬁcance of r = 1 can be seen in another way from the complete action. ± ± + − + − (Pµ )2 = Pµ . Pµ Pµ = 0.48) that in this case there is no species doubling because the inverse propagator is linear in cos k4 . (6. as r increases from 0 to 1 the doublers disappear before reaching r = 1 in the sense that the local minima of the energy surface at kA = 0 disappear.55) become orthogonal projectors for r = 1. The combinations ± Pµ = r ± γµ .51) r2 (1 + 2n)2 + 1 − r2 ± r2 (1 + 2n) . 2. π123 . the particle energy can be found to contain errors of order a. Wilson’s choice is r = 1.52) Hence.50) Here the plus sign corresponds to k4 = iω + π and the minus sign to k4 = iω. It can be seen directly from (6. 1. − The nontimedoubler rest energies become ωn = ln(1 + 2n) at r = 1. 1 − r2 (6.158 Fermions on the lattice which denominator vanishes for cosh ω ± = Σ2 + (1 − r2 )(1 + s2 ) ± rΣ . For m = 0 the particles have rest energy ωn given by ± cosh ωn = (6.56) . πj . − sign) fermion has rest energy zero and the doubler fermions have rest energies of order 1 in lattice units (energies of order of the cutoﬀ). (6. πjk . which has the form S= xµ ¯ µ ¯ r − γµ ψx+ˆ + ψx+ˆ r + γµ ψx ψx µ 2 2 −M x ¯ ψx ψx . (6. 1 − r2 (6. Pµ + Pµ = 1. ω + → ∞. n = 0. For r → 1 the rest energies of the timedoublers (for which the + sign applies) become inﬁnite. 2 (6. 3 for kA = 0. only the wanted (n = 0.54) M = m + 4r. The rest energies of the particles at k = kA follow from s = 0 and Σ = m + r + 2nr. Reinstalling the lattice spacing a. to be compared with O(a2 ) for naive/staggered fermions or bosons. − ω = ω0 = m2 + p2 + O(a).
for given gauge coupling g. A parameterization introduced ¯ ¯ by Wilson follows from rescaling ψ → M −1/2 ψ.6. ψ → ψM −1/2 . temporarily reintroducing the lattice spacing a. which implies a critical value for the hopping parameter κ= κ → κc = 1/8r. because of asymptotic freedom.3 Wilson’s fermion method 159 Replacing derivatives by covariant derivatives we obtain the expression for the fermion action coupled to a lattice gauge ﬁeld Uµx . However. etc. SF = − x 1 ¯ r ¯ ¯ ¯ (ψγµ Dµ ψ − Dµ ψγµ ψ) + ψmψ + a Dµ ψDµ ψ . and m = M − 4r/a is sometimes called the bare fermion mass. With the gauge ﬁeld present the eﬀective strength of the hopping term is reduced by the ‘ﬂuctuating’ unitary Uµx . we rearranged the ˆ summation over x. such that the fermions acquire zero mass.59) where 1 . We then expect Mc < 4 and κc > 1/8r.. at gauge coupling of order one we can be deep in the scaling region of QCD and we may expect an eﬀective κc substantially larger than 1/8r.61) should still be valid (κc is of course gauge independent). (6.60) 2M is Wilson’s hopping parameter (it is ﬂavor dependent). In the QCD case M is a diagonal matrix in ﬂavor space and r is usually chosen ﬂavorindependent. implying Uµx → 1 in a suitable gauge and (6.58) † ¯ ¯ ¯ where Dµ ψ(x) = [ψ(x + µa)Uµx − ψ(x)]/a. We may ¯ interpret − x ψx ψx as belonging to the integration measure in the path integral.61) ¯ At this critical value there is somehow a cancellation of the ψψlike terms. µ (6. (6. Since there are no . (6. For one ﬂavor this gives the form S=− x ¯ ψ x ψx + κ xµ † ¯ ¯ µ [ψx (r − γµ )Uµx ψx+ˆ + ψx+ˆ (r + γµ )Uµx ψx ].57) or. SF = xµ ¯ − ¯ µ + † (ψx Pµ Uµx ψx+ˆ + ψx+ˆ Pµ Uµx ψx ) − µ x ¯ ψx M ψx . However. This κ is analogous to the hopping parameter in the scalar ﬁeld models. 2 2 (6. M → Mc = 4r. For free fermions the continuum limit means m → 0 in lattice units. in the QCD case we know already that g itself should go to zero in the continuum limit. mostly r = 1.
g. Inserting the ‘parallel transporters’ Uµx then leads to a gaugeinvariant staggeredfermion action SF = − xµ ηµx 1 † χax (Uµx )ab χbx+ˆ − χax+µ (Uµx )ab χbx − ¯ ¯ µ 2 mχax χax .64) where η1 x = 1.160 Fermions on the lattice free quarks in QCD we cannot deﬁne κc as the value at which the quark mass vanishes. γ ≡ (γ1 ) x x1 (6. It can indeed be shown that taking χ and χ as onecomponent ﬁelds leads to 16/4 = 4 Dirac particles in ¯ the continuum limit. ¯ x (6. We shall see later that it may be deﬁned as the value at which the pion mass vanishes. (6. η2 x = (−1)x1 .63) Because µ (γ x )† γµ γ x+ˆ αβ µ = γ x γµ (γ x+ˆ )† αβ = ηµ x δαβ . ψx = χx (γ x )† .67) where we have made all indices on χ and χ explicit (a and b are color ¯ ¯ indices) – there are e. η4 x = (−1)x1 +x2 +x3 . which acquires the form 4 S=− α=1 xµ 1 ηµ x (χα χα µ − χα µ χα ) + m ¯x+ˆ x ¯ 2 x x+ˆ χα χα . ¯x x x (6. 6. 74] (the mass degeneracy of the quarks can be lifted by adding . one for each value of the Dirac index. no spin or ﬂavor indices for χ and χ. Analysis in weakcoupling perturbation theory leads to the conclusion that this action describes QCD with four massdegenerate ﬂavors in the continuum limit [73. one of these should suﬃce in describing fermion particles. (6.66) In this representation the Dirac spinor labels α on χ and χ are like ¯ internal symmetry labels and the action is just a sum of four identical terms. (6. Hence. η3 x = (−1)x1 +x2 .4 Staggered fermions Starting with the naive fermion action we make the unitary transformation of variables (in lattice units) ¯ ¯ ψx = γ x χx .62) x4 (γ2 ) x2 (γ3 ) x3 (γ4 ) .65) this transformation has the eﬀect of removing the gamma matrices from the naive fermion action. In QCD all these fermions are interpreted as quark ﬂavors.
6.5 Transfer operator for Wilson fermions
161
other terms to the action). The action has an interesting symmetry group [76], which is important for the construction of composite ﬁelds with the quantum numbers of hadrons [75, 77]. In the scaling region this symmetry group enlarges to the group in the continuum (including ‘anomalies’). A further reduction by a factor of two is possible by assigning χx only ¯ to the even sites and χx only to the odd sites [78, 79, 80]. Even and odd sites are deﬁned by x = 1 and − 1, respectively, with
x
= (−1)x1 +x2 +x3 +x4 .
(6.68)
In this formulation we may as well omit the bar on χx since no confusion ¯ between even and odd sites is possible. Then a minimal action with only one Grassmann variable per site is given by S=−
xµ 1 ηµ x 2 χx χx+ˆ , µ
(6.69)
in case of zero fermion mass. This method leads essentially to four Majorana fermions, which are equivalent to two Dirac fermions or eight Weyl fermions. Nonzero mass requires onelink or multilink couplings, since χ2 = 0. x Staggered fermions are technically rather specialized and we shall not emphasize them in this book. For an application of the method (6.69) to numerical simulations of the Higgs–Yukawa sector of the Standard Model see [36].
6.5 Transfer operator for Wilson fermions It will now be shown that the fermion partition function with Wilson fermions can for r = 1 be written in the form ˆ Z = Tr T N , (6.70)
ˆ where T is a positive transfer operator in Hilbert space and N is the number of time slices. A transfer operator was ﬁrst given by Wilson [86] and a study of its properties was presented in [87]. The construction below is slightly diﬀerent. (A general construction for r = 1 is sketched in [89], which is easily adapted to naive or staggered fermions. See ˆ also [79, 88, 90] and references therein.) To identify T we ﬁrst assume ˆN in the Grassmann that the gauge ﬁeld is external and and write Tr T
162 representation, ˆ Tr T N =
Fermions on the lattice
da+ da1 · · · da+ daN e−aN aN T (a+ , aN −1 ) e−aN −1 aN −1 1 N N × T (a+ −1 , aN −2 ) · · · T (a+ , ak ) e−ak ak T (a+ , ak−1 ) · · · N k+1 k × e−a2 a2 T (a+ , a1 ) e−a1 a1 T (a+ , −aN ). 2 1
+ + +
+
+
(6.71)
The minus sign in the last factor corresponds to the same sign in (C.68) in appendix C. It implies that there are antiperiodic boundary conditions in the path integral, i.e. there is a change of sign in the couplings in the action between time slices 0 and N − 1. The expression above is to be compared with ZF = ¯ DψDψ exp SF , (6.72)
where SF is the fermion part of the action. We have seen in the puregauge case that the integration over the timelike links U4x leads to the projector on the gaugeinvariant subspace of Hilbert space, together with a transfer operator in the temporal ‘gauge’ U4x = 1. We therefore set U4x = 1 and write the fermion action in the form (using lattice units, t ≡ x4 and x are integers) SF =
t + −ψt
1−β + 1+β ψt+1 + ψt+1 ψt 2 2
+ ψt Dt ψt . t
−
t
+ ψt βAt ψt −
(6.73)
Here a matrix notation is used with
3
Axy,t = M δx,y −
j=1 3
1 (Uxy,t δx+ˆ + x ↔ y), j,y 2
(6.74)
Dxy,t =
j=1
αj
1 (Uxy,t δx+ˆ − x ↔ y), j,y 2i
(6.75)
and αj = iγ4 γj and β = γ4 are Dirac’s matrices, and furthermore = a4 /a. We recognize the projectors
± P ± ≡ P4 = (1 ± β)/2
(6.76)
(6.77)
+ for Wilson parameter r = 1. They reduce the number of ψt±1 ψt couplings by a factor of two compared with the naive fermion action.
6.5 Transfer operator for Wilson fermions
163
Fig. 6.3. The association of time slices with Hilbert space for Wilson fermions (r = 1).
The association of time slices t with Hilbertspace slices k is as follows (for each x, T denotes transposition):
+ P + ψt = (a+ P + )T , ψt P − = a+ P − , k k
(6.78) (6.79) (6.80)
P ψt+1 = P ak ,
−
−
+ ψt+1 P +
= (P ak ) ,
+ T
At = Ak , Dt = Dk
as illustrated in ﬁgure 6.3. With this notation the action can be written as SF = −
k
a+ ak + k
k +
a+ Ak ak−1 k (6.81)
−
k
(ak−1 P Dk P − ak−1 + a+ P − Dk P + a+ ). k k
Here we have used βD = −Dβ, such that D = (P + + P − )D(P + + P − ) = P + DP − + P − DP + , (6.82)
and abused the notation by leaving out the transposition symbol T. ˆ Comparison with Tr T N in the form (6.71) gives the (Grassmannian) transfermatrix elements TF (a+ , ak−1 ) = exp(− a+ P − Dk P + a+ ) exp(a+ Ak ak−1 ) k k k k × exp(− ak−1 P + Dk P − ak−1 ). (6.83)
Using the rules listed above (C.68) in appendix C this translates into operator form as ˆ TF = e−
a† P − DP + a† ˆ ˆ ˆ ea
†
ln(A)ˆ − aP + DP − a a ˆ ˆ
e
.
(6.84)
Here D and A depend in general on the gaugeﬁeld conﬁguration in a time slice. ˆ Consider now ﬁrst the case of free fermions, Uxy = 1. Then T is clearly a positive operator provided that A is positive, i.e. a Hermitian
164
Fermions on the lattice
matrix with only positive eigenvalues. In momentum space we get the eigenvalues
3
A(p) = M −
j=1
cos pj ,
(6.85)
which shows that A > 0 for M >3 . (6.86)
With dynamical gauge ﬁelds we have to take into account in (6.84) the ˆ transfer operator for the gauge ﬁeld TU . The complete transfer operator can be taken as ˆ ˆ1/2 ˆ ˆ1/2 ˆ T = TF TU TF P0 , ˆ TF = e
ˆ − a P DP + a† ˆ ˆ
† −
(6.87)
†
e
ˆˆ ˆ a ln A a − aP + DP − a ˆ ˆ ˆ
e
(6.88)
where we have also put in the projector P0 on the gaugeinvariant subspace. Since A has lowest eigenvalues when the link variables are unity, the condition (6.86) remains suﬃcient in general for positivity of ˆ TF . ˆ ˆ We can now use (6.80) in reverse and deﬁne operator ﬁelds ψ and ψ † , for each spatial site x, by ˆ ˆ ˆ a P + ψ = (ˆ† P + )T , ψ † P − = a† P − , −ˆ − ˆ† = (P + a)T . ˆ ˆ P ψ = P a, ψ (6.89) (6.90)
In terms of these ﬁelds the fermion transfer operator takes the explicitly chargeconserving form ˆ TF = e−
ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ψ † P − DP + ψ −ψ † β ln A ψ Tr P + ln A − ψ † P + DP − ψ
e
e
e
.
(6.91)
Notice the Diracsea factor exp(Tr P + ln A). ˆ ˆ The continuous time limit T = 1 − H + O( 2 ) can be taken if we let M depend on → 0 according to M = 1 + M3 , such that A takes the form A(U ) = 1 + M3 (U )
3
(6.92)
(6.93) + x ↔ y), (6.94)
M3 = M 3 −
j=1
1 j,y 2 (Ux,y δx+ˆ
6.6 Problems and we get the fermion Hamiltonian ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ HF = ψ † [M3 (U )β + D(U )]ψ.
165
(6.95)
This may be called a Wilson–Dirac Hamiltonian on a spatial lattice. In summary, we conclude that the Euclideanlattice formulation of QCD using Wilson’s fermion method has a good Hilbertspace interpretation, with a positive transfer operator.
6.6 Problems The following exercises serve to clarify the continuum limit in QED and the phenomenon of species doubling by calculation of the photon selfenergy at one loop in the weakcoupling expansion. (i) Vertex functions Consider the naive fermion action in QED SF = −
xµ −igAµx 1 ¯ ψx+ˆ µ 2 (ψx γµ e
¯ µ − ψx+ˆ γµ eigAµx ψx ).
(6.96)
The bare fermion–photon vertex functions are the derivatives of the action with respect to the ﬁelds. Taking out a minus sign and the momentumconserving delta functions, let the vertex function Vµ1 ···µn (p, q; k1 · · · kn ) be deﬁned by SF = −
uvx1 ···xn
1 ¯ ψu Vµ1 ···µn (u, v; x1 · · · xn )ψv Aµ1 x1 · · · Aµn xn , n! (6.97)
e−ipu+iqv−ik1 x1 ···−ikn xn Vµ1 ···µn (u, v; x1 · · · xn )
uvx1 ···xn
¯ = Vµ1 ···µn (p, q; k1 · · · kn ) δ(p − q + k1 + · · · kn ). (6.98) Show that (p − q + k1 + · · · kn = 0) Vµ1 ···µn (p, q; k1 · · · kn ) =
µ 1 γµ 2 [(−ig)n eiqµ − (ig)n e−ipµ ]
× δµµ1 · · · δµµn , m − iγµ sin pµ . m2 + sin2 p
(6.99)
as illustrated in ﬁgure 6.4. The fermion propagator is given by S(p)−1 = V (p, p), S(p) = (6.100)
. . . ψ .101) where Kµ (k) = (eikµ − 1)/i... q. ∗ Kµ (k)Vµ (p.. Aµx = Aµx +(1/g)∂µ ωx (recall the deﬁnition of the forward and backward lattice derivatives. k1 . ψx = 2 ¯ (1−iωx +O(ω ))ψx . (6. . 6. k. x1 . Collect the linear terms in ωx in the µ ¯ ¯ invariance relation 0 = SF (ψ . q.. x1 . l) (p − q + k = 0. v. k) = S(p)−1 − S(q)−1 . . .5. k1 . . . v. A) and derive the Ward identities 0= 1 i∂ Vνµ1 ···µn (u. which describe the photon selfenergy vertex function Π = Π(a) + Π(b) . k1 . . for n = 0 and 1. l) − Vν (q − l. ∂µ ωx = ωx+ˆ −ωx µ and ∂µ ωx = ωx − ωx−ˆ ). ∗ Kµ (k)Vµν (p. x. Consider a ¯ small gauge transformation ψx = (1 + iωx + O(ω 2 ))ψx . (ii) Ward–Takahashi identities The gauge invariance of SF implies certain properties of the vertex functions. q − k. q. and the momentumspace version 0= 1 ∗ K (k)Vµµ1 ···µn (p.166 Fermions on the lattice Fig. .. q. p + l. . x1 . q. xn ). . . kn ).. Fermion vertex function −Vµ1 ···µn (p. xn ) g µ + δux Vµ1 ···µn (u. q. kn ) g µ + Vµ1 ···µn (p + k.103) = Vµ (p.102) (6. . . xn ) − δvx Vµ1 ···µn (u. . (iii) Photon selfenergy We study the ‘vacuumpolarization’ diagrams in ﬁgure 6. k. . kn ). . l) (6. A ) − SF (ψ.4. . ψ. p − q + k + l = 0). called Ward–Takahashi identities. kn ) − Vµ1 ···µn (p. v.. k1 . . In particular. .
up to possible arbitrariness in the polynomials.6 Problems 167 Fig. 6. p. δ → 0. The region outside the 16 balls can contribute only a seconddegree polynomial Tµν (p) in a−1 .103) to show that the sum Πµν = Πµν + (b) Πµν satisﬁes the Ward identity ∗ Kµ (p)Πµν (p) = 0. (6.104) −π d l Tr [Vµ (l.5.4 We split the integration region into a ball of radius δ around the origin l = 0 and the rest.6. Vacuumpolarization diagrams for −Πµν (p). show that in the scaling region limit a → 0. given by π Π(a) (p) = −g 2 µν Π(b) (p) = g 2 µν −π π 4 d4 l Tr [Vµν (l. ap/δ → 0 the contribution of this ball can be written as − g2 (δµν p2 − pµ pν ) 2π 2 1 dx x(1 − x) ln[a2 (m2 + x(1 − x)p2 )] 0 (6. −p)S(l)]. (2π)4 (6. −l. am/δ → 0. m → am. p → ap.) (iv) Continuum region and latticeartifact region The calculation of the continuum limit of Πµν (p) can be done in the same way as for the scalar ﬁeld in section 3. Verify that the 15 fermion doublers in similar balls around nonzero l = πA give identical contributions. l)S(l)]. m and p in the continuum . where δ is so small that we may use the continuum form of the propagators and vertex functions. (2π)4 (a) Use the identities (6.106) up to a seconddegree polynomial in p.105) (Note that the loop integrals in the lattice regularization are invariant under translation of the integration variable. l + p)S(l + p)Vν (l + p. Going over to physical units. Π → Πa−2 .
because possible infrared divergences cannot develop in the outside regions.110) p) = (ρ) (ρ) Iµµ Iνν Tµ ν (p).111) (In the third term there is of course no summation over µ. σ). µ (6. (R(ρσ) p)σ = −pρ . µ = ρ. (v) Lattice symmetries The polynomial has to comply with the symmetries of the model.108) (6.g. µ = {ρ. Note that the coeﬃcient c1 of the quadratic divergence is zero.109) (6. (R(ρσ) p)ρ = pσ . (a) Note that Πµν contributes only to the polynomial part of Πµν in the continuum limit (it is just a constant ∝ δµν ). (I (ρ) p)µ = pµ . σ} and inversions I (ρ) . (ρσ) (R(ρσ) p)µ ≡ Rµν pν . (6.112) + c(p2 δµν − pµ pν ). The reason is that there is no logarithmic contribution from the balls around l = πA because the vertex function Vµν vanishes in the classical continuum limit. e. (R(ρσ) p)µ = pµ . This can of course also be veriﬁed by an explicit calculation. Tµν (I (ρ) (ρσ) (ρσ) (6. . Show using the lattice symmetries that the form of the polynomial is limited to c1 a−2 δµν + c2 m2 + c3 p2 δµν + c4 pµ pν + c5 p2 δµν .105) to show ﬁnally that Πµν (p) has the continuum covariant form.107) The polynomial Tµν (p) has to be a tensor under these transformations. (I (ρ) p)ρ = −pρ . Πµν (p) = −16 × 0 g2 (δµν p2 − pµ pν ) 2π 2 1 dx x(1 − x) ln[a2 (m2 + x(1 − x)p2 )] (6. Tµν (R(ρσ) p) = Rµµ Rνν Tµ ν (p).168 Fermions on the lattice limit.) (vi) Constraints from the Ward identity Use the continuum limit of the Ward identity (6. in particular cubic rotations R(ρσ) in a plane (ρ.
Then counterterms are needed in order to ensure covariance. In nonAbelian gauge theory such quadratic divergences are also absent. the ratio of lambda scales ΛMS /ΛL in the theory with (naive) dynamical fermions.6.g.6 Problems 169 for p = 0. provided that the contribution from the integration (Haar) measure in the path integral is not forgotten.67). Note also that the coeﬃcient c3 . . It determines e. is zero. On dividing by a factor of four we get the analogous result for fourﬂavor staggered fermions described by the U (1) version of the action (6. of the term that is lattice covariant but not covariant under continuous rotations. The numerical constant c can be obtained by a further careful analysis and numerical integration. Such cancellations will not happens in models in which vector ﬁelds are not gauge ﬁelds (no Ward identities).
d and s.1 Integrating over the fermion ﬁelds The partition function for a fermion gauge theory Z= ¯ DU DψDψ exp(SU + SF ) (7. we can perform the integration over these variables and evaluate fermion correlation 170 . 7. We shall use Wilson fermions as an example.2) (7.7 Lowmass hadrons in QCD In this chapter we address the calculation of the properties of hadrons composed of the light quarks u.3) (7. Sxy (U ) ≡ A−1 (U ) = xy 1 M − W (U ) + D ) /(U .1) can be expressed in an alternative form involving only the gauge ﬁelds by ﬁrst integrating out the fermion ﬁelds. Its inverse is the fermion propagator S(U ) in a given gaugeﬁeld conﬁguration. We can write SF in matrix notation. xy (7. A = D + M − W. / The matrix A = A(U ) is called the fermion matrix.5) ¯ Since ψ and ψ occur only bilinearly in the action. SF = − xµ 1 ¯ † ¯ µ (ψx γµ Uµx ψx+ˆ − ψx+ˆ γµ Uµx ψx ) µ 2 ¯ ψx M ψx + r ¯ ¯ µ † (ψx Uµx ψx+ˆ + ψx+ˆ Uµx ψx ) µ 2 (7.4) − x xµ ¯ ≡ −ψAψ.
12) l = (x. Here we describe it for the propagator.7) µ µ in terms of which Axaαf.10) (7. and suppressed the color.7. 7. L=0 (7.2 Hopping expansion for the fermion propagator functions explicitly: Z= DU det[A(U )] exp(SU ) DU det[A(U )] eSU Sxy (U ) 171 ¯ ψx ψy = Z −1 ≡ Sxy U .1.11) (7. for which it gives an intuitive representation in terms of a summation over random paths. (7.ybβ = µ − + [(Pµ )αβ (Uxy )ab δx+ˆ. x + µ) ˆ l = (x + µ. ¯ ψu ψ ¯ ¯ ¯ ψu ψv ψw ψx ψy ψz = Sux Svy Swz + 5 permutations U. Let us deﬁne the hopping matrix H by Hxaα. α. .7. l∈C − Pµ . + Pµ .x ]. For a given ﬂavor we have Sxy = M −1 1 1 − 2κH = M −1 xy ∞ (7. as illustrated in ﬁgure 7. . and f of the fermion aαf ﬁelds ψx . ˆ .ybβ ].y + (Pµ )αβ (Uyx )ab δy+ˆ. .8) (2κ)L (H L )xy . For clarity we indicated only the space–time indices x. (7. We have seen this earlier for the scalar ﬁeld in section 3. The successive terms in this series can be represented as a sum over paths of length L.ybβg = Mf δf g [1 − 2κf Hxaα. To each path C there corresponds a color factor Uxy (C) and a spin factor Γ(C) = Pl = = Pl . (7. The diagrams for L + 1 are obtained from those for L by application of H (by attaching the L = 1 diagrams). Dirac.6) etc. x). and ﬂavor indices a. ¯v ψx ψy = Suv Sxy − Suy Sxv U .2 Hopping expansion for the fermion propagator For Wilson fermions an expansion in the hopping parameter κ = 1/2M has given useful results.9) where we suppressed again the nonspace–time indices.
1. (r cos pµ − iγµ sin pµ ) µ (7. For free fermions we can perform the summation in momentum space. Illustration of the terms in the hopping expansion of the propagator. (H L )xy = p eip(x−y) H(p)L . e−ipx+iqy Hxy . M− 1 .16) S(p) = So the summation over random paths with the particular weight factor (7. Note that.13) (7. The maximum eigenvalue of H(p) is 4r at p = 0. depending on the conﬁguration of U ’s. which means that the radius of convergence of the hopping expansion for free fermions is given by κ < 1/8r.14) ¯ H(p)δpq = H(p) = = µ (r cos pµ − iγµ sin pµ