Eur. Phys. J.

C (2017) 77:309
DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4861-2

Regular Article - Theoretical Physics

Boundary effects in super-YangMills theory

Mushtaq B. Shah1, Mir Faizal2,3,a , Prince A. Ganai1, Zaid Zaz4 , Anha Bhat5 , Syed Masood6
1 Department of Physics, National Institute of Technology, Srinagar, Kashmir 190006, India
2 Irving K. Barber School of Arts and Sciences, University of British Columbia-Okanagan, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada
3 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Lethbridge, Alberta T1K 3M4, Canada
4 Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, University of Kashmir, Srinagar, Kashmir 190006, India
5 Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Srinagar, Kashmir 190006, India
6 Department of Physics, International Islamic University, H-10 Sector, Islamabad, Pakistan

Received: 9 September 2016 / Accepted: 27 April 2017

The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication

Abstract In this paper, we shall analyze a three dimen-
sional supersymmetry theory with N = 2 supersymmetry.
We will analyze the quantization of this theory, in the pres-
ence of a boundary. The effective Lagrangian used in the path
integral quantization of this theory, will be given by the sum
of the gauge fixing term and the ghost term with the origi-
nal classical Lagrangian. Even though the supersymmetry of
this effective Lagrangian will also be broken due to the pres-
ence of a boundary, it will be demonstrated that half of the
supersymmetry of this theory can be preserved by adding
a boundary Lagrangian to the effective bulk Lagrangian.
The supersymmetric transformation of this new boundary
Lagrangian will exactly cancel the boundary term generated
from the supersymmetric transformation of the effective bulk
Lagrangian. We will analyze the SlavnovTaylor identity for
this N = 2 YangMills theory with a boundary.
1 Introduction
As any gauge theory contains unphysical gauge degrees of
freedom, and it is not possible quantize this theory with-
out removing these unphysical degrees of freedom. This is
achieved by fixing a gauge, and the gauge fixing is incor-
porated at a quantum level by adding a gauge fixing term
to the original Lagrangian. We also need to add a ghost
term corresponding to this gauge fixing term to the original
Lagrangian. This new effective Lagrangian obtained from a
sum of the original classical Lagrangian with the gauge fixing
and the ghost terms is invariant under the BRST transforma-
tions [1,2]. The BRST symmetry has been studied for various
different gauges [37], and it has been applied for analyzing
various aspects of different supersymmetric theories [812].
a e-mail: mirfaizalmir@gmail.com
The BRST symmetry has also been used in analyzing
ghostanti-ghost condensation [1317]. Furthermore, such
ghostanti-ghost condensation has been proposed as the mass
providing mechanism of the off-diagonal gluons and off-
diagonal ghosts in the YangMills theory [18,19]. This anal-
ysis has been performed using the maximal Abelian gauge.
Evidence for infrared Abelian dominance has also been pro-
vided by this mechanism [20], thereby justifying the dual
superconductor picture [2123] of the QCD vacuum. This
has been used in explaining quark confinement [1926]. It
may be noted that interesting consequences of the breaking
of BRST symmetry have also been discussed [1330].
The action for most renormalizable quantum field theo-
ries, including supersymmetric theories, is at most quadratic
in the derivatives. So, the supersymmetric variation of such
an action produces a total derivative term. In the absence
of a boundary this total derivative term vanishes. However,
in the presence of a boundary, boundary contributions arise
due to such a total derivative term. This breaks the super-
symmetry of a supersymmetric theory in the presence of a
boundary. It may be noted that the translational invariance
of any theory is broken by the presence of a boundary. The
breaking of the translational invariance in a supersymmetric
theory also breaks the supersymmetry of that theory. How-
ever, it is possible to retain some on-shell supersymmetry by
imposing suitable boundary conditions [31,32]. The super-
symmetry of a theory generates various constraints on the
possible boundary conditions [3337].
Even though some on-shell supersymmetry can be retained
by imposing boundary conditions, the off-shell supersym-
metry is still broken. This is because these boundary condi-
tions are only imposed on the on-shell field. It is important
to preserve the off-shell supersymmetry of a theory. This is
because the path integral formalism uses off-shell fields, and
most supersymmetric theories are quantized using a path inte-

123
309 Page 2 of 8 Eur. Phys. J. C (2017) 77:309

gral formalism. So, it is important to preserve the off-shell have ( )ab = ( )ac Ccb = ( )ba . A N = 2 supersym-
supersymmetry for a theory. It is possible to preserve half metric theory in three dimensions can be parameterized by
the off-shell supersymmetry of a theory by modifying the two supercharges,
original action of the theory. This has been done by the addi-
Q 1a = 1a ( 1 )a , Q 2a = 2a ( 2 )a . (1)
tion of new boundary terms to the original bulk action. The
boundary contribution generated from the supersymmetric These supercharges satisfy,
variation of the original bulk action are exactly canceled by
{Q 1a , Q 1b } = 2ab , {Q 2a , Q 2b } = 2ab ,
the supersymmetric variation of these new boundary terms.
This has been studied for a three dimensional theory with {Q 1a , Q 2b } = 0. (2)
N = 1 supersymmetry [38]. Furthermore, this procedure Now we define superderivatives by
has been used for analyzing ChernSimons-matter theories
in the presence of a boundary [8,3941]. It may be noted D1a = 1a + ( 1 )a , D2a = 2a + ( 2 )a . (3)
that an additional boundary term is also generated from the These superderivatives commute with the generators of N =
gauge transformation of ChernSimons-matter theories in 2 supersymmetry, {Q 1a , D1b } = {Q 1a , D2b } = 0 and
the presence of a boundary. So, additional boundary degrees {Q 2a , D1b } = {Q 2a , D2b } = 0. These superderivatives also
of freedom are needed to preserve the gauge invariance of a satisfy
ChernSimons-matter theory in the presence of a boundary.
This is because the boundary contribution generated from the {D1a , D1b } = 2ab , {D2a , D2b } = 2ab ,
gauge transformation of the bulk action are exactly canceled {D1a , D2b } = 0. (4)
by the gauge transformation of these new boundary degrees
We can also define gauge valued spinor superfields 1a =
of freedom.
1aA ( )T and 
1 A 2a = 2a (2 )T A , where [T A , TB ] =
A
A non-anticommutative deformation of supersymmetric C
i f AB TC . Now we can define covariant derivatives with these
theories has also been studied using this off-shell formalism
fields by
[42]. This has been done for a theory with N = 2 supersym-
metric theory in three dimensions. In this analysis, half the 1a = Da i1a , 2a = Da i2a . (5)
supersymmetry of such a supersymmetric theory was broken
These fields transform under the gauge transformation as
by imposing non-anticommutativity. Then by suitably com-
1a iu1a u 1 , and 2a iu2a u 1 [44]. We can also
bining the boundary effects with non-anticommutativity, a
construct the field strengths as follows:
theory with N = 1/2 supersymmetry was constructed. A
three dimensional super-YangMills theory has also been 1 b i 1
W1a = D D1a 1b {1b , D1b 1a } [1b , {1b , 1a }],
coupled to background flux in the presence of a boundary 2 1 2 6
[43]. In this paper, we shall make an analysis of gauge theory
1 b i 1
with N = 2 supersymmetry in the presence of a boundary. It W2a = D2 D2a 2b {2b , D2b 2a } [12 , {2b , 2a }].
is important to perform such an analysis to demonstrate the 2 2 6
(6)
preservation of half the supersymmetry for a gauge theory
at the quantum level. So, we will analyze this theory using These field strengths transform as W1a uW1a u 1 , and
the quantum fluctuations around a fixed background. We will W2a uW2a u 1 . We can write the action for super-Yang
analyze the BRST symmetry of such a theory, by analyzing Mills theory as
the fields as a sum of the classical background fields and
L = D12 [W1a W1a ]1 =0 + D22 [W2a W2a ]2 =0 . (7)
quantum fluctuations around such classical fields. We will
also analyze the SlavnovTaylor identity for such a theory. In the presence of a boundary the supersymmetry is
broken. However, half of the supersymmetry of the origi-
nal theory can be preserved by either adding or subtract-
2 Supersymmetric gauge theory ing a boundary term to the original Lagrangian [38]. We
now define a boundary along x3 direction. Thus, we can
In this section, we will review the construction of a three define the boundary fields as fields restricted to the bound-
dimensional supersymmetric gauge theory in the presence ary, and we can also construct boundary Lagrangian from
of a boundary [8,3842]. We define two fermionic coordi- such fields. We can define L1b and L2b to be such bound-
nates, 1a = (11 , 12 ) and 2a = (2a , 22 ). Now we can ary Lagrangian constructed from the boundary fields. Now
also define ( 1 )a = ( )ab 1a and ( 2 )a = ( )ab 2a . this boundary Lagrangian can be added or subtracted from
The raising and lowering of the spinor indices occurs as 1a = the bulk Lagrangian with N = 2 supersymmetry. It is pos-
C ba 1b , 1a = 1b Cab , and 2a = C ba 2b , 2a = 2b Cab . Here sible to choose this boundary Lagrangian such that L L1b
C ab = C ba , Cab = Cba , and C ba Ccb = ca . We also preserves the supersymmetry generated by  1 Q 1 , and

123
Eur. Phys. J. C (2017) 77:309 Page 3 of 8 309

L L2b preserves the supersymmetry generated by  2 Q 2 L1+2+

gh = (D12 + 3 )[c1 D1a 1a c1 ]1 =0
[42]. Here the projection operators P = (1 3 )/2 have
+(D22 + 3 )[c2 D2a 2a c2 ]2 =0 ,
been used to obtain these projections of the supercharges.
Now as the original Lagrangian L = D12 [1 (1 )]1 =0 and
L = D22 [2 (2 )]2 =0 , the boundary terms can be written as L12
gh = (D12 3 )[c1 D1a 1a c1 ]1 =0
L1b = 3 [1 (1 )]1 =0 and L2b = 3 [2 (2 )]2 =0 [39]. It +(D22 3 )[c2 D2a 2a c2 ]2 =0 ,
is not possible to simultaneously preserve both the super-
symmetry generated by  1 Q 1+ and  1+ Q 1 , or  2 Q 2+ L1+2 = (D12 + 3 )[c1 D1a 1a c1 ]1 =0
gh
and  2+ Q 2 , in the presence of a boundary. However, in
the presence of a boundary, we can construct the Lagrangian +(D22 3 )[c2 D2a 2a c2 ]2 =0 ,
which preserves the supersymmetry generated by  1 Q 1
and  2 Q 2 . We can write the Lagrangian for super-Yang L12+
gh = (D12 3 )[c1 D1a 1a c1 ]1 =0
Mills theory which preserves various supersymmetries as +(D22 + 3 )[c2 D2a 2a c2 ]2 =0 (10)
[42],
where c1 , c2 are the ghost fields and c1 , c are the anti-ghost
L12 = (D12 3 )[W1a W1a ]1 =0 +(D22 3 )[W2a W2a ]2 =0 , fields. Now we can define L12 as
g

L12+ = (D12 3 )[W1a W1a ]1 =0 +(D22 +3 )[W2a W2a ]2 =0 , L1+2+

g = L12
gf + L12
gh . (11)

L1+2 = (D12 +3 )[W1a W1a ]1 =0 +(D22 3 )[W2a W2a ]2 =0 , The effective Lagrangian L12 = L12 +L12 g , which is
given by the sum of the ghost and the gauge fixing terms with
modified super-YangMills Lagrangian, is invariant under
L1+2+ = (D12 +3 )[W1a W1a ]1 =0 +(D22 +3 )[W2a W2a ]2 =0 .
the following BRST transformations:
(8)
sb 1a = 1a c1 , sb 2a = 2a c2 ,
1 1
sb c1 = [c1 , c1 ], sb c2 = [c2 , c2 ],
3 BRST symmetry 2 2
sb c1 = b1 , sb c2 = b2 ,
In this section, we will study the effective Lagrangian sb b1 = 0, sb b2 = 0, (12)
obtained by the sum of the gauge fixing term and the ghost
This is because modified super-YangMills Lagrangian is
term with the modified super-YangMills Lagrangian in the
BRST invariant, and the sum of the gauge fixing and ghost
Lorenz gauge. The Lorenz gauge fixing conditions can be
terms can be expressed as
incorporated in the modified super-YangMills Lagrangian
 
at a quantum level by adding the following gauge fixing term: L1+2+ = sb (D12 + 3 ) c1 D1a 1a + c1 b1
 2
g
2 1 =0
L1+2+ = (D 2
+ ) b (D a
 ) + b  
1 3 1 1a
gf 1
2 1 1 =0 +sb (D2 + 3 ) c2 D2 2a + c2 b2
2 a
,
  2 2 =0
+(D22 + 3 ) b2 (D2a 2a ) + b2 ,
2 2 =0  
  L12 = sb (D12 3 ) c1 D1a 1a + c1 b1
g
L12 = (D12 3 ) b1 (D1a 1a ) + b12 2 1 =0
gf
2 1 =0  
 2 +sb (D2 3 ) c2 D2 2a + c2 b2
2 a
,
+(D2 3 ) b2 (D2 2a ) + b
2 a
, 2 2 =0
2 2 =0
 2  

L1+2 = (D 2
1 + 3 ) b1 (D a

1 1a ) + b L1+2 = sb (D12 + 3 ) c1 D1a 1a + c1 b1
gf
2 1 1 =0 g
2 1 =0
   

+(D22 3 ) b2 (D2a 2a ) + b2 , +sb (D2 3 ) c2 D2 2a + c2 b2
2 a
,
2 2 =0 2 2 =0
 2
L12+ = (D 2
1 3 ) b1 (D a
 1a ) + b  
gf 1
2 1 1 =0 L12+ = sb (D12 3 ) c1 D1a 1a + c1 b1
  g
2 1 =0
+(D22 + 3 ) b2 (D2a 2a ) + b2 . (9)  
2 2 =0 +sb (D2 + 3 ) c2 D2 2a + c2 b2
2 a
. (13)
2 2 =0
where b1 and b2 are NakanishiLautrup type auxiliary fields.
The ghost term corresponding to this gauge fixing term can Now as sb2 = 0, the sum of the gauge fixing and ghost terms
be written as is also invariant under the BRST transformations.

123
309 Page 4 of 8 Eur. Phys. J. C (2017) 77:309

It is possible to analyze this theory with fixed background Finally, the BRST transformation of these auxiliary fields
fields, and quantum fluctuations around these fields. We can vanish, sb u 1a = sb u 2a = 0 and sb v1 = sb v2 = sb v1 =
obtain the BRST symmetry of such a theory. The Lagrangian sb v2 = sb t1 = sb t2 = 0.
is expressed in terms of classical background fields and quan- Now we can add the following term to the sum of the
tum fluctuations around these fields, gauge fixing term and ghost term:
 
L12+ (1 , 2 ) + L12+
g (1 , 2 , c1 , c2 , c1 , c2 , b1 , b2 ) L1+2+ = (D 2
1 + 3 )  1a
s b  1a c1

s b c1
f 1 =0
L12+ (1  1 , 2  2 , c1 c1 , c2 c2 , c1 c1 ,  
g
+(D2 + 3 )  sb 2a c2 sb c2
2 2a
,
c2 c2 , b1 b1 , b2 b2 )+L12+ (1  1 , 2  2 ). 2 =0
 
(14) L12
f = (D12 3 )  1a sb 1a c1 sb c1
1 =0
Here the fields  1a ,  2a , c1 , c2 , c1 , c2 , b1 , b2 are quantum  
+(D22 3 )  2a sb 2a c2 sb c2 ,
fluctuations around the background fields. Let us express the 2 =0
fields as a sum of the background fields and quantum fluctu-  
ations around them, L1+2
f = (D12 + 3 )  1a sb 1a c1 sb c1
1 =0
 
1a 1a +  1a , 2a 2a +  2a , +(D2 3 )  sb 2a c2 sb c2
2 2a
,
2 =0
c1 c1 + c1 , c2 c2 + c2 ,  
c1 c1 + c1 , c2 c2 + c2 , L12+
f = (D12 3 )  1a sb 1a c1 sb c1
1 =0
 
b1 b1 + b1 , b2 b2 + b2 . (15) +(D2 + 3 )  sb 2a c2 sb c2
2 2a
. (19)
2 =0
So, the covariant derivative transforms to 1a 1a =
Da i1a i  1a and 2a 2a = Da i2a i  2a Now we can write the total action for this theory as
  
Now the quantum fluctuations transform as follows: 12
 1+2+0 = d3 x L12 + L12 g + L f . (20)
sb  1a = 1a 1a (c1 c1 ), sb  2a = 2a 2a (c2 c2 ),
1 Then we can calculate the effective action, and to the first
sb c1 = 1 [c1 c1 , c1 c1 ], order term that corresponds to this classical action. We can
2
1 write the SlavnovTaylor identity for this theory as
sb c2 = 2 [c2 c2 , c2 c2 ],
2 
sb c1 = 1 (b1 b1 ), sb c2 = 2 (b2 b2 ), d3 x(D12 + 3 )
sb b1 = 1 , sb b2 = 2 . (16)  1+2+0 1+2+0 
   1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
+ + b 1
1a 1a c1 c1 c1 1 =0
The BRST symmetry for the background fields can be 
expressed as + d 3 x(D22 + 3 )
 1+2+0 1+2+0 
sb 1a = 1a , sb 2a = 2a ,    1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
+ + b 2
sb c1 = 1a , sb c2 = 2a , 2a 2a c2 c2 c2 2 =0

sb c1 = 1 , sb c2 = 2 , = 0,

sb b1 = 1 , sb b2 = 2 . (17) 
d3 x(D12 3 )
Here we have introduced new ghosts associated with the shift  1+2+0 1+2+0 
   1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
symmetry, and the BRST transformation of these new ghost + + b 1
1a 1a c1 c1 c1
fields vanishes sb 1a = sb 2a = 0, and sb 1 = sb 2 = 
1 =0

sb 1 = sb 2 = sb 1 = sb 2 = 0. Now we double the + d 3 x(D22 3 )

field content of this theory by adding a set of anti-fields cor-  1+2+0 1+2+0 
responding to each field, and the BRST transformation of    1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
+ + b 2
these anti-fields is given by 2a 2a c2 c2 c2 2 =0
= 0,

sb 1a = u 1a , sb 2a = u 2a , 
sb c1 = v1 , sb c2 = v2 , d 3 x(D12 3 )
sb c1 = v1 , sb c2 = v2 ,  1+2+0 1+2+0
   1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0

+ + b1
sb b1 = t1 , sb b2 = t2 . (18)
1a 1a c1 c1 c1 1 =0

123
Eur. Phys. J. C (2017) 77:309 Page 5 of 8 309

+ d 3 x(D22 + 3 ) Here the boundary supercharges are defined as
 
 1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0 Q 1+ = 1+ s 1 s , Q 1 = 1 s 1+ s ,
+ + b2
2a 2a c2 c2 c2 2 =0
= 0, Q 2+ = 2+ s 2 s , Q 2 = 2 s 2+ s , (24)

where s is the index for the coordinates along the boundary,
d 3 x(D12 + 3 )
i.e., the case = 3 has been excluded for a boundary fixed at
 
 1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0 x3 . The supercharges Q 1 and Q 2 are the generators of the
+ + b1
1a 1a c1 c1 c1 1 =0 half supersymmetry for the bulk fields. Furthermore, Q 1

and Q 2 are the standard generators of the supersymmetry
+ d 3
x(D22 3 )
for the boundary fields. It is possible to express the boundary
 
 1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0 supercharges as [42]
+ + b2
2a 2a c2 c2 c2 2 =0
Q 1 = exp(+1+ 1 3 )Q 1 exp(1+ 1 3 ),
= 0. (21)
This procedure can be followed by using the effective action Q 1+ = exp(1 1+ 3 )Q 1+ exp(+1 1+ 3 ),
to obtain SlavnovTaylor identity at higher order. It may be
noted that the tree level SlavnovTaylor identity can be used Q 2 = exp(+2+ 2 3 )Q 2 exp(2+ 2 3 ),
to relate relating the two, three and four point functions. This
has been used for analyzing the consistency of occurring at Q 2+ = exp(2 2+ 3 )Q 2+ exp(+2 2+ 3 ). (25)
one loop in noncommutative gauge theories [45]. It will be
possible to use a similar analysis here and analyze the diver- It is also possible to write the super-algebra of the bulk super-
gences occurring in the supersymmetric YangMills theory. charges in the presence of a boundary as
However, the most important observation of this analysis is
that the standard form of the SlavnovTaylor identity does {Q 1+a , Q 1+b } = 2(ab
s
P+ )s , {D1+a , D1+b } = 2(ab
s
P+ )s ,
not get deformed, and it is only the measure that is deformed {Q 1a , Q 1b } = 2(ab
s
P )s , {D1a , D1b } = 2(ab
s
P )s ,
for such theories. This SlavnovTaylor identity depend on {Q 1+a , Q 1b } = 2(P )ab 3 , {D1+a , D1b } = 2(P )ab 3 ,
the gauge symmetry of the theory, and the gauge symme-
{Q 2+a , Q 2+b } = 2(ab
s
P+ )s , {D2+a , D2+b } = 2(ab
s
P+ )s ,
try of the theory is not broken in YangMills theory by the
{Q 2a , Q 2b } = 2(ab
s
P )s , {D2a , D2b } = 2(ab
s
P )s ,
presence of a boundary.

{Q 2+a , Q 2b } = 2(P )ab 3 , {D2+a , D2b } = 2(P )ab 3 .

4 Boundary action (26)

In this section, we will analyze the boundary action by It may be noted that {Q 1 , Q 2 } = {D1 , D2 } =
using the projection operators, P = (1 3 )/2. We can 0, and {Q 1 , D2 } = {Q 1 , D1 } = {Q 2 , D2 } =
project the superderivatives using these projection operators {Q 2 , D1 } = 0. Thus, we can write
as, D1a = (P )ab D1b and D2a = (P )ab D2b . The super- D1a D1+b = (P )ab (3 D12 ),
charges can also be projected as Q 1a = (P )ab Q 1b and
D1+a D1b = (P )ab (3 + D12 ),
Q 2a = (P )ab Q 2b [38]. The bulk supercharges Q 1a and
D2a D2+b = (P )ab (3 D22 ),
Q 2a can now be expressed as [39]
D2+a D2b = (P )ab (3 + D22 ). (27)
 Q 1a =  (P + P+ )Q 1a
1a 1a
Contracting these equation and using (P )aa = 1, we
=  1+ Q 1 +  1 Q 1+ ,
obtained [42]
 2a Q 2a =  2a (P + P+ )Q 2a D12 + 3 = D1+ D1 , D22 + 3 = D2+ D2 , (28)
= 2+
Q 2 +  2
Q 2+ . (22) D12 3 = D1 D1+ , D22 3 = D2 D2+ . (29)
These bulk supercharges Q 1 , Q 2 , are related to the bound- We can write the Lagrangian for the super-YangMills theory
ary supercharges Q 1 , Q 2 , as in presence of a boundary as
Q 1 = Q 1 + 1 3 , Q 1+ = Q 1+ 1+ 3 , L1+2+ = D1+ D1 [W1a W1a ]1 =0 + D2+ D2 [W2a W2a ]2 =0 ,

Q 2 = Q 2 + 2 3 , Q 2+ = Q 2+ 2+ 3 . (23) L12 = D1 D1+ [W1a W1a ]1 =0 + D2 D2+ [W2a W2a ]2 =0 ,

123
309 Page 6 of 8 Eur. Phys. J. C (2017) 77:309

L1+2 = D1 D1+ [W1a W1a ]1 =0 + D2+ D2 [W2a W2a ]2 =0 ,

L1+2 + L1+2
g = sb D1 D1+ [c1 D1a 1a + c1 b1 ]1 =0
2

L12+ = D1+ D1 [W1a W1a ]1 =0 + D2 D2+ [W2a W2a ]2 =0 . +sb D2+ D2 [c2 D2a 2a + c2 b2 ]2 =0
2
(30) +D1 D1+ [W1 W1a ]1 =0 + D2+ D2 [W2a W2a ]2 =0 ,
a

We can now write the gauge fixing terms in the Lorenz gauge

as L12+ + L12+
g = sb D1+ D1 [c1 D1a 1a + c1 b1 ]1 =0
 2
2
L1+2+ = D D b (D a
 ) + b
gf 1+ 1 1 1 1a
2 1 1 =0 +sb D2 D2+ [c2 D2a 2a + c2 b2 ]2 =0
 2
 +D1+ D1 [W1 W1a ]1 =0 + D2 D2+ [W2a W2a ]2 =0 .
a
+D2+ D2 b2 (D2a 2a ) + b2 ,
2 2 =0
 (33)

L12 = D1 D1+ b1 (D1a 1a ) + b12
gf
2 1 =0 Now we can write L12 as,
 2
f
+D2 D2+ b2 (D2 2a ) + b
a
, L1+2+ = D1+ D1 [ 1a sb 1a c1 sb c1 ]1 =0
2 2 =0 f
 2
L1+2 = D D b (D a
 ) + b +D2+ D2 [ 2a sb 2a c2 sb c2 ]2 =0 ,
1 1+ 1 1a
gf 1
2 1 1 =0
 
+D2+ D2 b2 (D2a 2a ) + b2 , L12
f = D1 D1+ [ 1a sb 1a c1 sb c1 ]1 =0
2 2 =0
  +D2 D2+ [ 2a sb 2a c2 sb c2 ]2 =0 ,
L12+
gf = D1+ D1 b1 (D1a 1a ) + b12
2 1 =0
  L1+2 = D1+ D1 [ 1a sb 1a c1 sb c1 ]1 =0
f
+D2 D2+ b2 (D2a 2a ) + b2 . (31)
2 2 =0 +D2 D2+ [ 2a sb 2a c2 sb c2 ]2 =0 ,
The ghost terms corresponding to this gauge fixing term can
be written as L12+
f = D1 D1 [ 1a sb 1a c1 sb c1 ]1 =0
 
L1+2+
gh = D1+ D1 c1 D1a 1a c1 =0 +D2+ D2 [ 2a sb 2a c2 sb c2 ]2 =0 . (34)
 
1

+D2+ D2 c2 D2a 2a c2 =0 , So, the SlavnovTaylor identity for this theory is

2

  
L12
gh = D1 D1+ c1 D1a 1a c1 =0 d3 x D1+ D1
 
1

+D2 D2+ c2 D2a 2a c2 =0 ,  1+2+0 1+2+0 

2    1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
+ + b 1
  1a 1a c1 c1 c1 1 =0
L1+2 = D1 D1+ c1 D1a 1a c1 =0 
gh
 
1
+ d3 x D2+ D2
+D2+ D2 c2 D2 2a c2 =0 ,
a
2  1+2+0 1+2+0 
   1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
  + + b 2
L12+ = D1+ D1 c1 D1a 1a c1 =0 2a 2a c2 c2 c2 2 =0
gh
 
1
= 0,
+D2 D2+ c2 D2 2a c2 =0 .
a
(32)
2

The total effective Lagrangian which is given by a sum of d3 x D1 D1+
the gauge fixing term and the ghost term with the original  1+2+0 1+2+0 
Lagrangian can be written as    1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
+ + b 1
1a 1a c1 c1 c1

1 =0
L1+2+ + L1+2+
g = sb D1+ D1 [c1 D1a 1a + c1 b1 ]1 =0
2 + d3 x D2 D2+
 1+2+0 1+2+0 
+sb D2+ D2 [c2 D2a 2a + c2 b2 ]2 =0    1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
2 + + b 2

2a 2a c2 c2 c2
+D1+ D1 [W1a W1a ]1 =0 + D2+ D2 [W2a W2a ]2 =0 , 2 =0
= 0,

L12
+ L12
g = sb D1 D1+ [c1 D1a 1a + c1 b1 ]1 =0 
2 d3 x D1 D1+

+sb D2 D2+ [c2 D2a 2a
+ c2 b2 ]2 =0  1+2+0 1+2+0 
2    1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
+ + b1
+D1 D1+ [W1a W1a ]1 =0 + D2 D2+ [W2a W2a ]2 =0 ,
1a 1a c1 c1 c1 1 =0

123
Eur. Phys. J. C (2017) 77:309 Page 7 of 8 309

+ d3 x D2+ D2 Mills theory coupled to a four dimensional hypermultiplet
  on the boundary has already been constructed [50]. It would
 1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0 be interesting to use results of this paper to analyze such a
+ + b2
2a 2a c2 c2 c2 2 =0 system. It would also be interesting to analyze the BRST
= 0, symmetry of such a system using both linear and non-linear
 gauges. Furthermore, the BRST symmetry and gauge fixing
d3 x D1+ D1 have been studied for perturbative quantum gravity [5156].
  It is possible to generalize this work to supergravity solu-
 1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
+ + b1 tions, and analyze the supersymmetry of such supergravity
1a 1a c1 c1 c1 1 =0
 solutions, when there is a boundary. In fact, the supergravity
+ d3 x D2 D2+ solutions with a boundary term have been studied, and this
  was done using a similar off-shell formalism [57]. It would
 1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0  1+2+0
+ + b2 be interesting to analyze the BRST symmetry for such super-
2a 2a c2 c2 c2 2 =0
= 0. (35) gravity theories with a boundary term.

It may be noted that it is possible to obtain higher order

SlavnovTaylor identity for such theories. In fact, this pro-
cedure can be used to obtain a SlavnovTaylor identity for
any gauge theory in the presence of a boundary. This identity
can be used to relate different correlation functions to each
other. Thus, they can be used to analyze scattering processes
in this theory. It is important to note that this identity pre-
serves only half of the supersymmetry of the original theory.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecomm
ons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,
and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit
to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Funded by SCOAP3 .
References

5 Conclusion 1. C. Becchi, A. Rouet, R. Stora, Ann. Phys. 98, 287 (1976)

In this paper, we analyzed a three dimensional supersym-
metric theory with N = 2 supersymmetry. Even though
the BRST symmetry has been analyzed for a YangMills
theory with a boundary in N = 1 superspace [43], in this
paper, we analyze the BRST symmetry for a YangMills
theory with a boundary in N = 2 superspace. The effective
Lagrangian was obtained by the sum of the gauge fixing term
and the ghost term with the original classical Lagrangian.
It was demonstrated that even though the supersymmetry
of the effective Lagrangian was broken by the presence of
the boundaries, it was possible to preserve half the super-
symmetry of this effective Lagrangian This was done by
adding new boundary terms to the original bulk effective
Lagrangian. The supersymmetric variation of the original
bulk effective Lagrangian was exactly canceled by the super-
symmetric variation of this new boundary term. Thus, it was
possible to retain half of the supersymmetry of this origi-
nal theory in the presence of a boundary. We also obtain the
SlavnovTaylor identity for this theory.
It may be noted that in the HoravaWitten theory, one of
the low energy limits of the heterotic string theory can be
obtained from the 11 dimensional supergravity in the pres-
ence of a boundary [4649]. It has been possible in this
construction to obtain a unification of gauge and gravita-
tional couplings. Motivated by the original HoravaWitten
theory, a five dimensional globally supersymmetric Yang
2. I.V. Tyutin, Lebedev preprint fian. 39 (1975). arXiv:0812.0580
3. D. Dudal, H. Verschelde, V.E.R. Lemes, M.S. Sarandy, S.P. Sorella,
M. Picariello, Ann. Phys. 308, 62 (2003)
4. R. Delbourgo, P.D. Jarvis, J. Phys. A Math. Gen. 15, 611 (1982)
5. M. Faizal, S. Upadhyay, Phys. Lett. B 736, 288 (2014)
6. L. Baulieu, J. Thierry-Mieg, Nucl. Phys. B 197, 477 (1982)
7. D. Dudal, V.E.R. Lemes, M. Picariello, M.S. Sarandy, S.P. Sorella,
H. Verschelde, JHEP 0212, 008 (2002)
8. M. Faizal, D.J. Smith, Phys. Rev. D 85, 105007 (2012)
9. M. Faizal, Phys. Rev. D 84, 106011 (2011)
10. M. Faizal, Commun. Theor. Phys. 57, 637 (2012)
11. M. Faizal, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 27, 1250147 (2012)
12. S. Upadhyay, D. Das, Phys. Lett. B 733, 63 (2014)
13. K.I. Kondo, arXiv:hep-th/0103141
14. D. Dudal, H. Verschelde, V.E.R. Lemes, M.S. Sarandy, S.P. Sorella,
M. Picariello, A. Vicini, J.A. Gracey, JHEP 0306, 003 (2003)
15. D. Dudal, H. Verschelde, J. Phys. A 36, 8507 (2003)
16. V.E.R. Lemes, M.S. Sarandy, S.P. Sorella, Ann. Phys. 308, 1 (2003)
17. A.R. Fazio, V.E.R. Lemes, M. Picariello, M.S. Sarandy, S.P.
Sorella, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 18, 711 (2003)
18. M. Schaden, arXiv:hep-th/9909011
19. K.-I. Kondo, T. Shinohara, Phys. Lett. B 491, 263 (2000)
20. G. t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B 190, 455 (1981)
21. Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. D 10, 4262 (1974)
22. S. Mandelstam, Phys. Rep. 23, 245 (1976)
23. A.M. Polyakov, Nucl. Phys. B 120, 429 (1977)
24. K.I. Kondo, Phys. Rev. D 58, 085013 (1998)
25. K.I. Kondo, Phys. Rev. D 58, 105016 (1998)
26. K.I. Kondo, Phys. Lett. B 455, 251 (1999)
27. L. Baulieu, S.P. Sorella, Phys. Lett. B 671, 481 (2009)
28. L. Baulieu, M.A.L. Capri, A.J. Gomez, V.E.R. Lemes, R.F.
Sobreiro, S.P. Sorella, Eur. Phys. J. C 66, 451 (2010)
29. D. Dudal, S.P. Sorella, N. Vandersickel, H. Verschelde, Phys. Rev.
D 79, 121701 (2009)

123
309 Page 8 of 8 Eur. Phys. J. C (2017) 77:309

30. P.M. Lavrov, O.V. Radchenko, A.A. Reshetnyak, Mod. Phys. Lett. 45. D.N. Blaschke, H. Grosse, J.C. Wallet, JHEP 1306, 038 (2013)
A. 27, 1250067 (2012) 46. P. Horava, E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 475, 94 (1996)
31. D.V. Belyaev, JHEP 0601, 046 (2006) 47. E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 471, 135 (1996)
32. D.V. Belyaev, JHEP 0601, 047 (2006) 48. P. Horava, Phys. Rev. D 54, 7561 (1996)
33. P. van Nieuwenhuizen, D.V. Vassilevich, Class. Quantum Gravity 49. P. Horava, E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 460, 506 (1996)
22, 5029 (2005) 50. E.A. Mirabelli, M.E. Peskin, Phys. Rev. D 58, 065002 (1998)
34. U. Lindstrom, M. Rocek, P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Nucl. Phys. B 51. M. Faizal, Found. Phys. 41, 270 (2011)
662, 147 (2003) 52. G. Esposito, G. Fucci, A.Y. Kamenshchik, K. Kirsten, Class. Quan-
35. P. Di Vecchia, B. Durhuus, P. Olesen, J.L. Petersen, Nucl. Phys. B tum Gravity 22, 957 (2005)
207, 77 (1982) 53. G. Esposito, AYu. Kamenshchik, I.V. Mishakov, G. Pollifrone,
36. P. Di Vecchia, B. Durhuus, P. Olesen, J.L. Petersen, Nucl. Phys. B Phys. Rev. D 52, 3457 (1995)
217, 395 (1983) 54. M. Faizal, Class. Quantum Gravity 29, 035007 (2012)
37. Y. Igarashi, Phys. Rev. D 30, 1812 (1984) 55. M. Faizal, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 28, 1350034 (2013)
38. D.V. Belyaev, P. van Nieuwenhuizen, JHEP 0804, 008 (2008) 56. M. Faizal, J. Phys. A 44, 402001 (2011)
39. D.S. Berman, D.C. Thompson, Nucl. Phys. B 820, 503 (2009) 57. D.V. Belyaev, P. van Nieuwenhuizen, JHEP 0809, 069 (2008)
40. M. Faizal, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 29, 1450154 (2014)
41. M. Faizal, JHEP 1204, 017 (2012)
42. M. Faizal, D.J. Smith, Phys. Rev. D 87, 025019 (2013)
43. M. Faizal, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 52, 392 (2013)
44. S.J. Gates Jr., M.T. Grisaru, M. Rocek, W. Siegel, Front. Phys. 58,
1 (1983)

123