Skip to content

Holomorphy and the quantum effective action

A heavy particle can disappear from the list of low-energy fields while leaving interactions behind. Supersymmetry makes part of that matching unusually simple: a holomorphic function determines the superpotential interactions. It does not determine every coefficient of the low-energy action.

Start from four-dimensional superspace and interactions. We use flat four-dimensional global N=1\mathcal N=1 supersymmetry, with four real supercharges, all manifest in N=1\mathcal N=1 superspace. The worked model has two gauge-neutral chiral multiplets and no gauge sector. Gravity and supersymmetry breaking are absent. We retain Lorentzian signature (+−−−)(+---), the chiral expansion Φ=ϕ+2θψ+θ2F\Phi=\phi+\sqrt2\theta\psi+\theta^2F, and the superpotential component convention

LW=WiFi−12Wijψiψj+h.c.\mathcal L_W=W_iF_i-\frac12W_{ij}\psi_i\psi_j+\text{h.c.}

The aim is to calculate a local effective interaction, then identify precisely what that calculation leaves undetermined.

Suppose a microscopic description is supplied at a cutoff ΛUV\Lambda_{\rm UV}. Choose a lower scale μ\mu. A Wilsonian action SμS_\mu incorporates fields heavier than μ\mu and high-momentum fluctuations of the light fields. Light fluctuations below μ\mu remain to be integrated over when computing an observable. Schematically, in Euclidean notation for this definition,

e−Sμ[Φ<]=∫DΦ> e−SΛUV[Φ<,Φ>].e^{-S_\mu[\Phi_<]} =\int\mathcal D\Phi_>\,e^{-S_{\Lambda_{\rm UV}}[\Phi_<,\Phi_>]}.

The split is an organizing definition; a supersymmetric calculation needs a regulator and counterterms consistent with the symmetries being used. It is not an instruction to impose an arbitrary sharp momentum cutoff separately on each component.

For external momenta much smaller than the eliminated scales, the action can be expanded in local operators and derivatives. Its coefficients depend on the matching prescription and on μ\mu. Changing μ\mu while compensating those coefficients leaves observables unchanged. This is the renormalization-group viewpoint. For a dimensionless coupling ga(μ)g_a(\mu), define

βa=μdgadμ.\beta_a=\mu\frac{d g_a}{d\mu}.

There is another effective action. With Euclidean sources, define W[J]=log⁡Z[J]\mathcal W[J]=\log Z[J], ϕc=δW/δJ\phi_c=\delta\mathcal W/\delta J, and

Γ[ϕc]=∫Jϕc−W[J].\Gamma[\phi_c]=\int J\phi_c-\mathcal W[J].

This Legendre transform is the one-particle-irreducible, or 1PI, effective action. Its vertices already include quantum fluctuations at all momenta. One uses those vertices to reconstruct connected functions without adding a second round of the loops already included in them. With massless particles, Γ\Gamma can contain nonlocal momentum dependence, such as logarithms and inverse differential operators. A zero-momentum limit then needs care.

Our holomorphy statements concern local Wilsonian superpotential terms at nonzero μ\mu. They do not assert that every zero-momentum 1PI expression is a local holomorphic function. This distinction is emphasized in Seiberg, §3 and Intriligator–Seiberg, §2.3.

Call the heavy chiral superfield HH and the light one XX, with scalar components hh and xx. At the matching scale choose

K=H†H+X†X,W=M2H2+y2HX2.K=H^\dagger H+X^\dagger X,\qquad W=\frac{M}{2}H^2+\frac{y}{2}HX^2.

Here [H]=[X]=[M]=1[H]=[X]=[M]=1 and [y]=0[y]=0. The complex parameter MM is nonzero. Around the supersymmetric origin, the heavy multiplet has mass ∣M∣|M| and XX is massless. Work at weak coupling ∣y∣2/(16π2)≪1|y|^2/(16\pi^2)\ll1, with

E≪μ≪∣M∣,u=∣y∣2∣x∣2∣M∣2≪1.E\ll\mu\ll |M|,\qquad u=\frac{|y|^2|x|^2}{|M|^2}\ll1.

The second condition keeps us near the vacuum where the heavy/light separation was chosen. In a superspace derivative expansion, auxiliary components must also be small on the heavy scale. This matters because a superspace derivative contains more than a spacetime gradient.

At tree level the leading algebraic part of the heavy superfield equation is

WH=MH+y2X2=0,H0=−y2MX2.W_H=MH+\frac{y}{2}X^2=0,\qquad H_0=-\frac{y}{2M}X^2.

The full equation also contains superspace derivatives from the kinetic term. Thus WH=0W_H=0 is a controlled leading elimination, not an exact minimization of the full component potential at every fixed xx.

Substitute H0H_0 into both terms of WW:

Weff=M2y2X44M2+y2(−yX22M)X2=y2X48M−y2X44M=−y28MX4.\begin{aligned} W_{\rm eff} &=\frac{M}{2}\frac{y^2X^4}{4M^2} +\frac{y}{2}\left(-\frac{yX^2}{2M}\right)X^2\\ &=\frac{y^2X^4}{8M}-\frac{y^2X^4}{4M} =-\frac{y^2}{8M}X^4. \end{aligned}

The relative sign is essential. Merely deleting HH would miss the interaction. An equivalent check completes the holomorphic square:

W=M2(H+yX22M)2−y2X48M.W=\frac{M}{2}\left(H+\frac{yX^2}{2M}\right)^2 -\frac{y^2X^4}{8M}.

This is tree exchange of a heavy multiplet, not a light-field loop correction. The heavy-field example appears in Tong, §3.3.3, (3.35)–(3.36); the calculation here fixes its coefficient and keeps track of the kinetic terms as well.

Several checks are immediate. The result has dimension three. It vanishes as y→0y\to0 or ∣M∣→∞|M|\to\infty at fixed X,yX,y. The coefficient contains 1/M1/M, not 1/∣M∣1/|M|: it retains the complex phase of a chiral coupling.

The pole at M=0M=0 is meaningful. The field we removed is no longer heavy there, so this description cannot be continued through that point at fixed E,μE,\mu. The expression is holomorphic on the patch M≠0M\ne0, and meromorphic as a function of MM across the excluded point. A singular reduced description need not mean that the original two-field Lagrangian is singular.

Recover kinetic data and the scalar potential

Section titled “Recover kinetic data and the scalar potential”

An effective superpotential is only part of an effective action. The same leading substitution in KK gives

Keff=X†X+∣y∣24∣M∣2(X†X)2+⋯ .K_{\rm eff}=X^\dagger X+ \frac{|y|^2}{4|M|^2}(X^\dagger X)^2+\cdots.

The omitted terms include superspace derivative corrections and quantum corrections. A general real Kähler potential defines the scalar kinetic metric

gxxˉ=∂2K∂x ∂xˉ.g_{x\bar x}=\frac{\partial^2K}{\partial x\,\partial\bar x}.

Treat x,xˉx,\bar x as independent coordinates while differentiating, then impose the Lorentzian conjugation condition. Differentiating the displayed quartic term twice gives a factor four:

gxxˉ=1+∣y∣2∣x∣2∣M∣2+⋯=1+u+⋯ .g_{x\bar x}=1+\frac{|y|^2|x|^2}{|M|^2}+\cdots=1+u+\cdots.

The coefficient of ∂μx ∂μxˉ\partial_\mu x\,\partial^\mu\bar x has changed. The correction depends on yy and yˉ\bar y, and is fully compatible with supersymmetry.

The same metric multiplies FFˉF\bar F in the bosonic auxiliary Lagrangian:

LF=gxxˉFFˉ+WxF+Wx‾Fˉ.\mathcal L_F=g_{x\bar x}F\bar F+W_xF+\overline{W_x}\bar F.

Varying with respect to Fˉ\bar F gives F=−Wx‾/gxxˉF=-\overline{W_x}/g_{x\bar x}. Substitution produces LF=−V\mathcal L_F=-V, where

V=gxxˉ−1∣Wx∣2.V=g_{x\bar x}^{-1}|W_x|^2.

This is the one-field version of the inverse-metric potential in Tong, (3.28)–(3.29). A superpotential by itself determines neither this metric nor the resulting potential away from its supersymmetric zeros.

Keeping the leading small-field term gives

Wx=−y22Mx3,V=∣y∣4∣x∣64∣M∣2 [1+O(u)].W_x=-\frac{y^2}{2M}x^3,\qquad V=\frac{|y|^4|x|^6}{4|M|^2}\,[1+O(u)].

The interaction is sextic in the scalar even though WeffW_{\rm eff} is quartic in the superfield. Its coefficient has dimension minus two, so VV has dimension four. It is nonnegative and has its only zero at x=0x=0 when y≠0y\ne0. Around that zero the light field still has no quadratic mass term.

There is a useful independent check before making a derivative expansion. The full two-field scalar potential is

Vfull(h,x)=∣Mh+y2x2∣2+∣yhx∣2.V_{\rm full}(h,x)=\left|Mh+\frac{y}{2}x^2\right|^2 +|yhx|^2.

At fixed constant xx, set A=∣M∣2+∣y∣2∣x∣2>0A=|M|^2+|y|^2|x|^2>0. Completing an ordinary positive square gives

hmin⁡(x)=−Mˉ y x22A=h0(x)1+u,Vfull(h,x)=A∣h−hmin⁡∣2+∣y∣4∣x∣64A.\begin{aligned} h_{\min}(x)&=-\frac{\bar M\,y\,x^2}{2A} =\frac{h_0(x)}{1+u},\\ V_{\rm full}(h,x)&=A|h-h_{\min}|^2+ \frac{|y|^4|x|^6}{4A}. \end{aligned}

Consequently the leading small-uu term in the minimum agrees with the effective potential. The displacement hmin⁡−h0h_{\min}-h_0 is relative order uu; WH=0W_H=0 was not the exact fixed-xx minimization. Substituting only h0h_0 into the original canonical kinetic terms does correctly recover the displayed leading metric correction through ∣dh0/dx∣2=u|dh_0/dx|^2=u.

For this simple model, using precisely the displayed g=1+ug=1+u in g−1∣Wx∣2g^{-1}|W_x|^2 even reproduces the rational expression for the constant-field minimum. That agreement does not establish an exact action for arbitrary fields: the full heavy equation still generates derivative and auxiliary corrections, and quantum corrections have not been computed. The approximation is a statement about an action and its regime, not just one successful function comparison.

Why was 1/M1/M permitted while 1/∣M∣1/|M| was not? A superpotential integrand must be chiral. Promote MM and yy temporarily to nondynamical chiral superfields. The local superpotential is then a holomorphic function of X,M,yX,M,y; dependence on their conjugates belongs to other structures, such as D-terms, rather than an ordinary derivative-free superpotential.

A constant supersymmetric coupling means a constant lowest component with zero background fermion and auxiliary component. A nonzero background auxiliary would change the problem. The background-field argument and its regulator assumptions are explained in Seiberg, §3. Here we use it as a selection rule and still perform matching to determine a coefficient.

Assign three formal charges:

ObjectFXF_XFHF_HRR
XX110011
HH001100
MM00−2-222
yy−2-2−1-100
WW000022

Every microscopic term has the required charge. The R column describes the superfield’s lowest component; θ\theta has R-charge one and d2θd^2\theta has R-charge minus two. The first two columns are ordinary flavor charges.

These are transformations of a family of theories, allowing the parameters to change. Each column separately need not generate a symmetry of a theory with M,yM,y fixed. In this example a suitable combination does survive: R−12FX+FHR-\tfrac12F_X+F_H assigns R(X)=1/2R(X)=1/2, R(H)=1R(H)=1, and leaves both parameters neutral. Formal charges are useful without confusing them with separately conserved currents.

Consider a derivative-free monomial yaMbXny^aM^bX^n in a perturbative local expansion, regular in XX near zero and in yy near zero, but allowing inverse powers of the nonzero heavy mass. Charge conservation requires

n−2a=0,−a−2b=0,n+2b=2.n-2a=0,\qquad -a-2b=0,\qquad n+2b=2.

Solving gives a=2a=2, b=−1b=-1, n=4n=4. Thus the allowed field-dependent form is

Weff=c y2X4M.W_{\rm eff}=c\,\frac{y^2X^4}{M}.

Charge and holomorphy arguments have not fixed cc, or shown by themselves that it is nonzero. The tree calculation gave c=−1/8c=-1/8. Conversely, the real combination ∣y∣2(X†X)2/∣M∣2|y|^2(X^\dagger X)^2/|M|^2 is neutral in every column and is allowed in KK. The two selections have different content.

This illustrates the method of Intriligator–Seiberg, §2.1: combine holomorphy and symmetry with controlled limits or a matching calculation. It is not a rule that every symmetry-allowed term must appear.

At some scale the quadratic kinetic term might be Z(μ)X†XZ(\mu)X^\dagger X, with real Z>0Z>0. Define Xc=Z XX_c=\sqrt Z\,X to make it canonical at that scale. Even if a holomorphic coefficient κ=−y2/(8M)\kappa=-y^2/(8M) is unchanged in the original field coordinate,

Weff=κX4=κZ2Xc4.W_{\rm eff}=\kappa X^4 =\frac{\kappa}{Z^2}X_c^4.

The canonically normalized coefficient is κc=κ/Z2\kappa_c=\kappa/Z^2. It depends on kinetic data. It is not a holomorphic function of spurions in general, since ZZ need not be one.

For clarity, define η=μ dlog⁡Z/dμ\eta=\mu\,d\log Z/d\mu; conventions for a symbol called an anomalous dimension vary. If κ\kappa is held fixed in this holomorphic coordinate, then

μdκcdμ=−2η κc,κ^=μκc,μdκ^dμ=(1−2η)κ^.\mu\frac{d\kappa_c}{d\mu}=-2\eta\,\kappa_c,\qquad \widehat\kappa=\mu\kappa_c,\qquad \mu\frac{d\widehat\kappa}{d\mu}=(1-2\eta)\widehat\kappa.

The one in the last expression is the engineering scaling of a coefficient of dimension minus one. These formulas specify how a given ZZ affects normalization; they do not calculate ZZ or a loop coefficient. Nor is a coefficient in a local action automatically an on-shell measured amplitude. That requires the appropriate kinematics, external-state normalization, and remaining light-field fluctuations.

The next quantum calculation must therefore ask two questions separately: what constrains the Wilsonian superpotential, and what nonzero correction appears in the kinetic term?

Take real M>0M>0, y=1/2y=1/2, and a real light field x=M/2x=M/2. Compute uu, h0h_0, hmin⁡h_{\min}, and Vmin⁡V_{\min}. Compare the leading sextic potential with Vmin⁡V_{\min}. Explain why the discrepancy is consistent with the approximation.

Hint 1

Use the dimensionless ratio x/Mx/M first. The heavy-field displacement is governed by 1/(1+u)1/(1+u).

Hint 2

Express Vmin⁡V_{\min} in units of M4M^4. Compare the leading value with the exact fixed-xx minimum, not with a new vacuum.

Solution

The field amplitude gives u=(1/4)(1/4)=1/16u=(1/4)(1/4)=1/16. Hence

h0=−M16,hmin⁡=−M17.h_0=-\frac{M}{16},\qquad h_{\min}=-\frac{M}{17}.

The leading sextic value and the exact constant-field minimum are

V0=M44096,Vmin⁡=1617V0=M44352.V_0=\frac{M^4}{4096},\qquad V_{\min}=\frac{16}{17}V_0=\frac{M^4}{4352}.

Their relative difference, measured against Vmin⁡V_{\min}, is 1/16=u1/16=u. The leading approximation has exactly the expected relative error. The positive square A∣h−hmin⁡∣2A|h-h_{\min}|^2 also shows that the fixed-xx minimum is stable in the heavy directions. It is not a vacuum of the full theory: varying xx lowers the potential toward the supersymmetric origin.

The small-field check does not test a momentum expansion. One must additionally keep E/∣M∣E/|M| small for time-dependent configurations.

Consider one light chiral field with

K=ZX†X,W=m2X2+λ3!X3,Z>0.K=Z X^\dagger X,\qquad W=\frac{m}{2}X^2+\frac{\lambda}{3!}X^3,\qquad Z>0.

Find the canonically normalized mass and cubic coefficient. Derive the scalar mass squared at x=0x=0 by eliminating FF and rescaling the scalar. Explain why a fixed holomorphic mm would not imply a fixed mass in canonical units.

Hint 1

Rescale the whole superfield, including its auxiliary field.

Hint 2

Before rescaling, the potential is ∣mx+λx2/2∣2/Z|m x+\lambda x^2/2|^2/Z, while the kinetic term has coefficient ZZ.

Solution

With Xc=Z XX_c=\sqrt Z\,X,

W=m2ZXc2+λ3!Z3/2Xc3.W=\frac{m}{2Z}X_c^2+ \frac{\lambda}{3!Z^{3/2}}X_c^3.

Thus the complex canonical mass parameter is mc=m/Zm_c=m/Z, the physical free quadratic mass is ∣m∣/Z|m|/Z, and the cubic coefficient is λc=λ/Z3/2\lambda_c=\lambda/Z^{3/2}. Eliminating FF gives

F=−mˉxˉ+λˉxˉ2/2Z,V=∣m∣2Z∣x∣2+O(∣x∣3)=∣m∣2Z2∣xc∣2+O(∣xc∣3).F=-\frac{\bar m\bar x+\bar\lambda\bar x^2/2}{Z}, \qquad V=\frac{|m|^2}{Z}|x|^2+O(|x|^3) =\frac{|m|^2}{Z^2}|x_c|^2+O(|x_c|^3).

The scalar mass squared is ∣m∣2/Z2|m|^2/Z^2, agreeing with the squared fermion mass from the canonically normalized superpotential. A scale-dependent ZZ changes these parameters even if m,λm,\lambda are constant in the original coordinate. Further momentum-dependent corrections are needed to identify an exact interacting pole mass. For Z=1Z=1 all expressions reduce to the original canonical formulas.

3. Distinguish a heavy threshold from an infrared limit

Section titled “3. Distinguish a heavy threshold from an infrared limit”

For positive a,ba,b, evaluate the convergent Euclidean integral

I(a,b)=∫d4p(2π)4[1(p2+a2)2−1(p2+b2)2].I(a,b)=\int\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4} \left[\frac1{(p^2+a^2)^2}-\frac1{(p^2+b^2)^2}\right].

Explain what happens as a→0a\to0 at fixed bb. Then examine the two-field superpotential at M=0M=0, y≠0y\ne0: solve its supersymmetric vacuum equations. How does this help interpret the pole of WeffW_{\rm eff}? The integral is a diagnostic of infrared behavior, not a claimed loop correction with the model’s vertices or multiplicities.

Hint 1

The unit three-sphere has area 2π22\pi^2. Set t=p2t=p^2 in the radial integral, and subtract before removing the upper limit.

Hint 2

At M=0M=0, use both WH=yX2/2W_H=yX^2/2 and WX=yHXW_X=yHX. Determine which field must be kept light.

Solution

Angular integration gives

I(a,b)=116π2∫0∞dt t[1(t+a2)2−1(t+b2)2].I(a,b)=\frac1{16\pi^2}\int_0^\infty dt\,t \left[\frac1{(t+a^2)^2}-\frac1{(t+b^2)^2}\right].

An antiderivative of t/(t+c)2t/(t+c)^2 is log⁡(t+c)+c/(t+c)\log(t+c)+c/(t+c). The upper-end difference vanishes; the lower-end difference is log⁡(a2/b2)\log(a^2/b^2). Therefore

I(a,b)=116π2log⁡b2a2.I(a,b)=\frac1{16\pi^2}\log\frac{b^2}{a^2}.

The difference is ultraviolet convergent. As a→0a\to0 the first term behaves like dp/pdp/p at small momentum, causing an infrared logarithm. Holding a nonzero lower momentum boundary would remove that endpoint. This demonstrates why integrating fluctuations all the way to zero momentum can differ from keeping a Wilsonian scale.

At M=0M=0, the equations are

y2x2=0,yhx=0.\frac y2x^2=0,\qquad yhx=0.

Thus x=0x=0 and hh is arbitrary. The original theory has a supersymmetric flat direction with HH retained. Its microscopic polynomial action has no 1/M1/M singularity. Integrating out HH near the origin is invalid at this point: precisely the degrees of freedom omitted by the reduced description must return. The infrared logarithm and the heavy-field pole arise in different calculations, but both warn against taking a singular limit after removing necessary low-energy information.

You can now obtain a local superpotential by matching and test its charges, dimensions, and domain. To predict a potential or a normalized interaction, also specify the Kähler metric and which fluctuations remain. Nonrenormalization and a first quantum correction makes that distinction quantitative: calculate a nonzero loop correction, then determine which interaction coefficients it can change.