Volume 87B, number 3 PHYSICS LETTERS 5 November 1979

SUPERSYMMETRY AND KAHLER MANIFOLDS

B. ZUMINO
CERN, Geneva, Switzerland

Received 24 August 1979

We give the supersymmetric extension of non-linear models with scalar fields taking values in a complex K~hler manifold.
The supersymmetry is simple for four-dimensional Minkowski space, complex for two-dimensional space-time. The super-
symmetric lagrangian is given by a simple and elegant formula in terms of the Kb~hlermetric of the manifold. (Anti-)self-
dual supersymmetric solutions are also given. The special cases of the CPn-1 models and of models with scalar fields valued
in a Grassmann manifold Gp,q= U(p+ q)/U(p)® U(q) are discussed in some detail.

Two-dimensional non-linear models, in which the
scalar fields take values in a complex manifold, have
aroused much interest recently [1 - 1 0 ] because of
their similarities with four-dimensional gauge theories.
The general formulation [10] makes use of the idea
of a K ~ l e r manifold, where the topological quantum
number (if it exists) can be defmed as the integral o f
the (closed) K~ller two-form.
In the special case of the so-called CP n-1 models
(and in the O(3) real o model, which is equivalent to
the CP 1 model) a supersymmetric extension has been
given [2,3,9], and it has been observed that the a c - .
tion actually admits an 0 ( 2 ) extended supersymmetry.
In this letter we show that all non-linear models with
scalar fields valued in a K~ller manifold can be made
supersymmetric, with 0 ( 2 ) supersymmetry, and give
a very simple explicit formula for the supersymmetric
lagrangian in terms of the metric o f the Khhler mani-
fold. Conversely, it will become clear that 0 ( 2 ) super-
symmetry implies a metric of the K~aler type, a fact
that we f'md most remarkable. Our results apply in
particular to non-linear models with scalar fields val-
ued in a Grassmann manifold Gp,q = U ( p + q)/U(p)
uCq).
Exactly the same method can also be applied in
the case of simple supersymmetry in four-dimensional
Minkowski space and gives the generalization of the
supersymmetric CP n-1 model [4] to an arbitrary
K~fler manifold. The calculations in the four-dimen-
sional case are indeed identical with those given below,
provided one uses two-component spinor notation *t .
If one applies dimensional reduction from four to
three dimensions (by making all fields independent
of one o f the space-like coordinates) one obtains a
model in three-dimensional Minkowski space with
0 ( 2 ) supersymmetry. A further dimensional reduc-
tion to two euclidean dimensions brings us back to
the case described in detail below. Therefore the three-
dimensional model will have soliton-like solutions,
corresponding to the instanton-like solutions in two
dimensions. One expects the O (2) supersymmetry al-
gebra to have a topological central charge ,2, in anal-
ogy with similar known cases [13,14].
The lagrangian of a non-linear model with N com-
plex scalar fields A i can be written (sum over repeated
indices)
L = - hi] ( A , A ) ~uAi~u24/, (1)
where a u = a/axU, the bar denotes complex conjuga-
tion and the matrix hij !s hermitean and positive. We
shall assume that the A t, ~ i are local coordinates on
a complex manifold [15,16]. The hermitean metric
ds 2 = hij dAidA j (2)
is called k~hlerian if the corresponding K~hler form
,1 For the necessary two-component formulas, see refs. [i1,
12].
,2 I thank D. Olive for this observation.

203
Volume 87B, number 3 PHYSICS LETTERS 5 November 1979

= ~l i hi/ dA i A dA/ (3) taking supersymmetric derivatives and setting then

0 = 6 = 0. We record only the expression of the "last"
is closed: component

d ~ : 0, (4) L -g- 1 D ~ D ~ V . (12)

or, explicitly,
3hi//aAk = ahk//aAi, ahi//o.4 l : Ohil/a.,~].
These conditions imply the existence (locally on the
manifold) of a function V(A, A ) such that
hi] = 2 02 V/OAiO.4/.
We wish to find the supersymmetric extension of
eq. (1). Let us consider the case of a euclidean two-
dimensional space-time with coordinates x u, p = 1,2.
We enlarge it to an 0(2) superspace by introducing
two-component complex spinorial*3 coordinates0a,
0a. A superfield is a function ¢(x, 0, 0 ) which trans-
forms as
6(~={-~(O/O0+ioaOOu)-(a/OO+iOoUOu)~)¢#,
under a supersymmetry transformation.
The supersymmetric derivatives
D = b/OO -i(oU3 u, D = - O/ad+iouOBu,
commute with the transformation (7). They satisfy
{D%D~)= {/)~,/)~) : O,
{/)~, Off) = 2i(ou)cf 0u"
A chiral superfield, which is necessarily complex, is
defined by
/)~b = Dq5 = 0.
The (complex) independent fields contained in ~ can
be obtained as the values for 0 = 0= 0 of the super-
fields
A = ~b, Ca = 2 - 1 / 2 D ~ b , F--~-i DD(a.
A real superfield V has a larger number of indepen-
dent components, which can also be obtained [17] by
,a We take as gamma matrices the Pauli matrices (ol)a# and
(o2)t~ #. Since we are working with complex spinors, there
is no advantage in taking the gamma matrices real. Com-
plex conjugation of spinors raises or lowers an index, e.g.,
(0c0* = ~a. Indices can be raised and lowered by means
of e ~ = - ea~,.el? = 1. We use the abbreviations g/
= ~,~e)= ~.
Using eqs. (9), one can check that L is real and that
it is invariant under the transformation
(5)
V-+ V + M + M , (13)
where M is a chiral superfield
(6) DM= Di~= O. (14)
We now state our main result. The complex fields
A i are generalized to chiral superfields ~i and the su-
persymmetric extension of (1) is simply given by the
superspace lagrangian density
V(qS, ¢ ) , (15)
where V is exactly the function related to the metric
hi/by eq. (6). It is supersymmetric by construction.
(7) We must show that its last component (12) agrees
with (1) up to terms containing the felds ~ and F.
Inserting (15) into (12) and using e qs. (9), (10) and
the definitions (11), one finds after some algebra the
(8) explicit expression for the supersymmetric lagrangian:
L = hi] ( - auAiOuAJ- ~1"1 ~JO °~-~~i+FipJ)
+ ~ (ah~flaAk)(¢kg#P/-i~Jo. OAk C)
(16)
(9) + ~ (~hi]/aAk)(~/k~JFi+i~ jO. a 2 k ¢ i)
+ ¼(02hij/OAkOAl)(~l~J)(~i~bk) •
Observe that the function V enters only through its
(10)
second derivative (6), the metric tensor. While V can
only be defined locally on the manifold, the metric
has a global meaning and so does (16).
The supersymmetric equations of motion can be
obtained from (16). In particular, those for the aux-
(11)
iliary fields F i, F/are
2hi]Fi+ (Ohi//OAk) ~ k ~i = O, (17)
2hi~F/+ (Ohi//aAk) ~/k ffi= O.
Since the metric is non-singular by hypothesis, one
can solve for the auxiliary fields and substitute them
back into the lagrangian. The lagrangian can then be
written completely in terms of geometrical quantities
on the fibre bundle of which the K~hler manifold is
the base and the spinors ~bi, ~J span the fibres

204
Volume 87B, number 3 PHYSICS LETTERS 5 November 1979

L = hij(-~uAio~a/- ½i ~/o. c'l)~i+ ½it1) ~j. a~i) matrix elements of B are a kind of homogeneous co-
ordinates on the Grassmann manifold Gp, q. One can
+ ¼K;m (18) define a metric on the manifold
Here c/)u denote the covariant derivatives and
clg2 = ~ 2 -fl2U dBdB t , (26)
Kilkl = 32hij/OAko~l-hmn (ahin/aAk)(ahm//aAl) ~BOB *
(19) where
are components of the curvature tensor of the mani-
U - i -1 In det BB ~ , (27)
fold(h mn is the inverse of the metric tensor, hmnhkn
=aD. B ~ is the hermitean conjugate of B and the derivatives
In superfield form the equations of motion are ob- (and the sum) are with respect to all matrix elements
tained by varying (15) under the constraints (10). This of the matrix indicated. Under the transformation
gives
B-+CB, U~U+~l l n d e t C +~l l n d e t C t , (28)
DD ~ v/a~ i =/3D ~ v/aqai = 0, (20)
(26) is invariant. The metric tensor is singular, with p
or, more explicitly, vanishing eigenvalues, corresponding to the fact that
we are using too many coordinates. It is often conve-
hi] D1D2 (ai+ (ahil/~qsk) D l c~kD2 q~i= 0, (21)
nient to work with the singular metric tensor, but, if
and its complex conjugate. A particular class of solu- we prefer, we can easily find a non-singular one [16].
tions is obtained by requiring Write the matrix B as
O1 ~i=/31~i= 0, (22) (B1,B2), (29)
or, alternatively, where B 1 is a p X p matrix and B 2 is p X q. We can as-
D2~i=/32~ i = 0. (23) sume that B 1 is non-singular. Then

Clearly eqs. (22) (or eqs. (23)) are invariant under

BB t =B 1 (1 +AA ~f) B?I, (30)
two-dimensional rotations. They are the supersym- where
metric generalizations of the (anti-)self-duality equa-
A = (B1)- 1B2 , (31)
tions. Observe that, because of the chirality condition
(10), and
-/31D1 ~i =/~ 2D1 oi = 2i(a i -i~2) ~i. In detBB t = In det (1 +AA t ) + In detB 1 + In detB*1 .
Therefore eq. (22) implies (32)
(a I - ia 2) ¢ i = (~ 1 + ia 2) ~i = 0, (24) If one takes the matrix elements of A as coordinates
on the manifold, (26) projects onto
and, similarly, eq. (23) implies
(31 + i02)~b i =(01 --i~2) ~i = 0. (25) ds 2= ~ 2 b~2V
A b ~ dAdA#' (33)
The eqs. (24) (or eqs. (25)) say that all component
fields are anti-holomorphic or holomorphic functions where
of the variable x 1 + ix 2. Eqs. (22) (or eqs. (23)) are
V -- - 1~ In det (1 +AAt). (34)
easily solved in conjunction with eqs. (10).
We describe now briefly the important special case The supersymmetric version of the model can be ob-
of a complex Grassmann manifold [15,16]. Consider tained by using either eqs. (26), (27) or eqs. (33), (34),
the space of complex matrices B with p rows and p+q simply by replacing the matrices B, C, or respectively
columns, having rank p. We take as equivalent all ma- A, by matrices whose elements are chiral superfields.
trices CB, where C is a non-singular p ×p matrix. The For the first of these formulations, we observe that

205
Volume 87B, number 3 PHYSICS LETTERS 5 November 1979

In det C is also a chiral superfield. Therefore the ex-
pression (12) for the superspace lagrangian (with U
Instead of V) is invariant under the transformation
(28). F o r p = 1 ,G1, q = c P q the matrix B consists of
q + 1 complex numbers, not all zero, and C is an arbi-
trary complex number, different from zero.
It is known [7,9] that the model CP 1 is equivalent
to the 0 ( 3 ) o model but the connection has not been
made explicit in terms of 0 ( 2 ) supersymmetry. The
o model is described [8] in terms of real superfields
n a (x, 0, if), a = 1,2,3, satisfying the constraints
n 2 + n 22+ n 23 = 1,
(35)
and
D n a + ieab c n b D n c = 0 ,
(36)
D n a - ieab c n b D n c = O,
and the equations of motion
D D n a = D D n a = 0. (37)
The CP 1 model is described in terms o f two chiral su-
perfields ~ i , i = 1,2,
xI'i = O - ~ i = 0, (38)
defined up to multiplication by a common chiral su-
per field. The connection between the two models is
given by the relation
na = ~ Oa ~/C~ . qs, (39)
which implies eq. (35). One can see, with a little al-
gebra, that the non-linear constraints (36) follow from
eq. (38). Furthermore, the equations of motion (37)
follow trivially from those of the CP 1 model, which
are
DD(~l,i/~.~)=DD(~i/~. qs)= O. (40)
As explained above for a general K/ihler manifold,
these equations have very simple (anti-)self-dual solu-
tions, which are obtained by solving the linear eq. (38)
together with equations for ~ i similar to eqs. (22) or
(23). If, for instance, qz I does not vanish, one can, of
course, also use the chiral superfield ¢ = ~I,2/q~ 1 (ste-
reographic projection).
I am very grateful to A. D'Adda, P. Di Vecchia,
D. Olive and R. Stora for discussing with me different
aspects of the subject and to E. Witten for pointing
out the relevance of complex manifolds.
References
[1] A. Belavin and A. Polyakov, JETP Lett. 22 (1975) 245
[Russian 22 (1975) 503].
[2] P. Di Vecchia and S. Ferrara, Nucl. Phys. B130 (1977)
93.
[3] E. Witten, Phys. Rev. 16 (1977) 2991.
[4] E. Cremmer and J. Seherk, Phys. Lett. 74B (1978) 341.
[5] H. Eichenherr, Nucl. Phys. B146 (1978) 215.
[6] V. Golo and A. Perelomov, Phys. Lett. 79B (1978) 112.
[7] A. D'Adda, P. Di Vecchia and M. Lfischer, Nucl. Phys.
B146 (1978) 73,
[8] E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B149 (1979) 285.
[9] A. D'Adda, P. Di Vecchia and M. Ltischer, Nucl. Phys.
B152 (1979) 125.
[10] A. Perelomov, Commun. Math. Phys. 63 (1978) 237.
[11] J. Wess, S. Ferrara and B. Zumino, Phys. Lett. 51B
(1974) 239.
[12] S. Ferrara and B. Zumino, Nucl. Phys. B79 (1974) 413;
B87 (1975) 207.
[13] A. D'Adda, R. Horsley and P. Di Vecchia, Phys. Lett.
76B (1978) 298.
[14] E. Witten and D. Olive, Phys. Lett. 78B (1978) 97.
[15] S. Chern, Complex manifolds without potential theory
(Van Nostrand, 1967).
[16] S. Kobayashi and K. Nomizu, Foundations of differen-
tial geometry (Wiley-Interscience, 1969) Vol. II.
[17] J. Wess and B. Zumino, Phys. Lett. 79B (1978) 394.

206