Skip to content

Superconformal currents and two-point functions

A conserved current has a fixed scaling dimension, but that does not fix the size of its fluctuations. A two-point coefficient measures those fluctuations once the current’s charge normalization is fixed. Supersymmetry can relate that coefficient to another one; it does not normally supply its numerical value.

Use source derivatives and contact terms, shortening and protected quantities, and stress-tensor improvements as preparation. We will derive a current correlator, turn it into a response to a smooth source, and calculate its normalization for a free chiral multiplet. The paper’s squashed-sphere response will then have a precisely identified quantity to measure.

Work in a unitary three-dimensional N=2\mathcal N=2 superconformal field theory, in its conformally invariant vacuum on flat Euclidean R3\mathbb R^3. Its Lorentzian parent has four real Poincaré and four real conformal supercharges. A particular curved source configuration need not preserve that full algebra. No gauge rank is fixed here; if the theory has a gauge description, the currents below are gauge-invariant local operators.

Let jμ(R)j_\mu^{(R)} be the superconformal R-current: its charge is the R-generator in the superconformal algebra, with the two Poincaré families carrying charges −1,+1-1,+1. It belongs to the same superconformal multiplet as the stress tensor TμνT_{\mu\nu} and the supersymmetry currents. Choose the conformal stress tensor, including the improvement specified by this multiplet. At separated points,

∂μjμ(R)=0,∂μTμν=0,Tμμ=0,Δj=2,ΔT=3.\partial^\mu j_\mu^{(R)}=0,\qquad \partial^\mu T_{\mu\nu}=0,\qquad T^\mu{}_\mu=0, \qquad \Delta_j=2,\quad\Delta_T=3.

These equations have contact terms when inserted into correlation functions with charged operators. We first keep x≠0x\ne0, so no such distribution is being discarded without a prescription.

A conserved flavor current can be added to a trial R-current. That changes the operator whose correlator is measured. Conservation alone does not identify the R-generator of the superconformal algebra, just as conservation alone did not choose the conformal stress-tensor improvement.

Write rx=∣x∣r_x=|x| for distance, reserving rr later for a field’s R-charge. Translation and rotation invariance, together with dimension two, give the parity-even ansatz

Gμν(x)=⟨jμ(R)(x)jν(R)(0)⟩=aδμνrx4+bxμxνrx6.G_{\mu\nu}(x)=\langle j_\mu^{(R)}(x)j_\nu^{(R)}(0)\rangle =a\frac{\delta_{\mu\nu}}{r_x^4} +b\frac{x_\mu x_\nu}{r_x^6}.

For x≠0x\ne0, direct differentiation in three dimensions yields ∂μ(δμνrx−4)=−4xν/rx6\partial_\mu(\delta_{\mu\nu}r_x^{-4})=-4x_\nu/r_x^6 and ∂μ(xμxνrx−6)=−2xν/rx6\partial_\mu(x_\mu x_\nu r_x^{-6})=-2x_\nu/r_x^6. Conservation therefore requires b=−2ab=-2a. Define

Iμν(x)=δμν−2xμxνrx2,Gμν(x)=CJIμν(x)rx4.(O07.1)I_{\mu\nu}(x)=\delta_{\mu\nu}-2\frac{x_\mu x_\nu}{r_x^2}, \qquad G_{\mu\nu}(x)=C_J\frac{I_{\mu\nu}(x)}{r_x^4}. \tag{O07.1}

II is the orthogonal reflection matrix appearing in conformal inversion. Full conformal covariance gives this same structure and forbids an independent parity-odd two-point structure at separated points. This does not require the theory itself to be parity invariant: a parity-odd contact term can remain.

The coefficient CJC_J is positive for a nonzero Hermitian current by the positive radial-quantization norm. This is not a claim that every coordinate component of GG is positive: along x=(rx,0,0)x=(r_x,0,0), G11=−CJ/rx4G_{11}=-C_J/r_x^4. The reflected vector index enters the norm.

To match the paper, introduce the differential operator Dμν=δμν∂2−∂μ∂ν\mathcal D_{\mu\nu}=\delta_{\mu\nu}\partial^2-\partial_\mu\partial_\nu. It is identically transverse. Since ∂2rx−2=2rx−4\partial^2r_x^{-2}=2r_x^{-4} and ∂μ∂νrx−2=−2δμνrx−4+8xμxνrx−6\partial_\mu\partial_\nu r_x^{-2} =-2\delta_{\mu\nu}r_x^{-4}+8x_\mu x_\nu r_x^{-6}, we find

Gμν(x)=τRR16π2Dμν1rx2=τRR4π2Iμν(x)rx4,CJ=τRR4π2.(O07.2)\boxed{ G_{\mu\nu}(x) =\frac{\tau_{RR}}{16\pi^2}\mathcal D_{\mu\nu}\frac1{r_x^2} =\frac{\tau_{RR}}{4\pi^2}\frac{I_{\mu\nu}(x)}{r_x^4}, \qquad C_J=\frac{\tau_{RR}}{4\pi^2}.} \tag{O07.2}

This defines the dimensionless τRR\tau_{RR} of P v3, (8.3). A different printed prefactor defines a different numerical coefficient. The position-space power is fixed by dimension; the factor 16π216\pi^2 is a normalization choice.

Turn that coefficient into a source response

Section titled “Turn that coefficient into a source response”

Let aμa_\mu source this current with linear action +∫aμj(R)μ+\int a_\mu j^{(R)\mu}, and set W[a]=−log⁡Z[a]\mathcal W[a]=-\log Z[a]. In the paper’s background dictionary this is the combination Aμ−3Vμ/2A_\mu-3V_\mu/2, not the matter derivative’s Aμ−Vμ/2A_\mu-V_\mu/2. One can probe the flat correlator by varying A=aA=a with the other sources zero. This arbitrary probe is not claimed to preserve supersymmetry.

The preceding lesson gives the exact response identity

Kμν(x,y)=δ2Wδaμ(x)δaν(y)=⟨S,aμaν⟩−⟨jμ(R)(x)jν(R)(y)⟩c.(O07.3)\mathcal K_{\mu\nu}(x,y) =\frac{\delta^2\mathcal W}{\delta a_\mu(x)\delta a_\nu(y)} =\left\langle S_{,a_\mu a_\nu}\right\rangle -\langle j_\mu^{(R)}(x)j_\nu^{(R)}(y)\rangle_c. \tag{O07.3}

The explicit second derivative is local. For the nonlocal part we consequently need minus the Fourier transform of (O07.2). Use f^(p)=∫d3x eip⋅xf(x)\widehat f(p)=\int d^3x\,e^{ip\cdot x}f(x) and inverse measure d3p/(2π)3d^3p/(2\pi)^3. The transform of 1/rx21/r_x^2 is obtained without treating its singularity as an ordinary integrable function at infinity:

1rx2=∫0∞du e−urx2,rx−2^(p)=π3/2∫0∞du u−3/2e−p2/(4u)=2π2∣p∣,p≠0.(O07.4)\begin{aligned} \frac1{r_x^2}&=\int_0^\infty du\,e^{-u r_x^2},\\ \widehat{r_x^{-2}}(p) &=\pi^{3/2}\int_0^\infty du\,u^{-3/2}e^{-p^2/(4u)} =\frac{2\pi^2}{|p|},\qquad p\ne0. \end{aligned} \tag{O07.4}

These formulas specify the tempered-distribution transform; a damping regulator followed by its limit gives the same result. Differentiation becomes multiplication by −ipμ-ip_\mu. Define the transverse projector PμνT(p)=δμν−pμpν/p2P^T_{\mu\nu}(p)=\delta_{\mu\nu}-p_\mu p_\nu/p^2. Then

G^μνnonlocal(p)=−τRR8∣p∣PμνT,K^μνnonlocal(p)=τRR8∣p∣PμνT.(O07.5)\widehat G_{\mu\nu}^{\rm nonlocal}(p) =-\frac{\tau_{RR}}8|p|P^T_{\mu\nu},\qquad \boxed{\widehat{\mathcal K}_{\mu\nu}^{\rm nonlocal}(p) =\frac{\tau_{RR}}8|p|P^T_{\mu\nu}.} \tag{O07.5}

The minus sign in the first formula is compatible with CJ>0C_J>0. Fourier transforming the singular correlator requires its local completion; it is not the variance of an unsubtracted pointwise random variable. Positivity of the conformal current norm and the sign convention for the source Hessian are distinct statements.

For a real smooth decaying source, its quadratic nonlocal response is therefore

Re⁡Wnonlocal(2)[a]=τRR16∫d3p(2π)3∣p∣ a^μ(−p)PTμν(p)a^ν(p).(O07.6)\operatorname{Re}\mathcal W^{(2)}_{\rm nonlocal}[a] =\frac{\tau_{RR}}{16}\int\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi)^3} |p|\,\widehat a_\mu(-p)P_T^{\mu\nu}(p)\widehat a_\nu(p). \tag{O07.6}

The factor 1/21/2 is the Taylor-expansion factor. A pure gradient source drops out because PTp=0P_Tp=0. The source has dimension one, a^\widehat a dimension −2-2, and the integral is dimensionless. A local counterterm adds a polynomial momentum kernel; it cannot change the nonanalytic ∣p∣|p| coefficient.

In particular the Chern–Simons completion contributes Cμν=+iκϵμνρ∂ρδ(3)(x)/(2π)\mathcal C_{\mu\nu}=+i\kappa\epsilon_{\mu\nu\rho}\partial^\rho\delta^{(3)}(x)/(2\pi) to C=−K\mathcal C=-\mathcal K, with the sign fixed in the preceding lesson. Its coefficient requires the actual R-source global data; do not import a unit flavor group’s integer lattice without checking those data. A real local counterterm can affect the real response too if the prescription allows a new dimensionful scale. Exercise 3 makes that limitation explicit.

What supersymmetry adds to the stress tensor

Section titled “What supersymmetry adds to the stress tensor”

Conservation fixes tensor shapes but would leave CJC_J and the stress-tensor coefficient independent in a generic conformal theory. The additional superconformal Ward identity relates the norms of the currents within their common multiplet. In the stated R-charge and stress-tensor normalization, its component form is P, (8.3):

⟨Tμν(x)Tρσ(0)⟩=τRR64π2(DμρDνσ+DμσDνρ−DμνDρσ)1rx2.(O07.7)\langle T_{\mu\nu}(x)T_{\rho\sigma}(0)\rangle =\frac{\tau_{RR}}{64\pi^2} \left(\mathcal D_{\mu\rho}\mathcal D_{\nu\sigma} +\mathcal D_{\mu\sigma}\mathcal D_{\nu\rho} -\mathcal D_{\mu\nu}\mathcal D_{\rho\sigma}\right)\frac1{r_x^2}. \tag{O07.7}

We use this supersymmetric identity as the input relating the two operators; the current-conservation calculation alone did not prove it. Its conservation follows immediately from ∂μDμν=0\partial^\mu\mathcal D_{\mu\nu}=0. Its trace vanishes because in three dimensions Dμμ=2∂2\mathcal D_{\mu\mu}=2\partial^2 and DμρDμσ=∂2Dρσ\mathcal D_{\mu\rho}\mathcal D_{\mu\sigma}=\partial^2\mathcal D_{\rho\sigma}.

To translate to another common convention, define CTC_T by

⟨Tμν(x)Tρσ(0)⟩=CTrx6[12(IμρIνσ+IμσIνρ)−13δμνδρσ].(O07.8)\langle T_{\mu\nu}(x)T_{\rho\sigma}(0)\rangle =\frac{C_T}{r_x^6} \left[\frac12(I_{\mu\rho}I_{\nu\sigma}+I_{\mu\sigma}I_{\nu\rho}) -\frac13\delta_{\mu\nu}\delta_{\rho\sigma}\right]. \tag{O07.8}

For x=(rx,0,0)x=(r_x,0,0) the 23,2323,23 component on the right is CT/(2rx6)C_T/(2r_x^6). On the left of (O07.7) its differential operator reduces to D22D33rx−2=48/rx6\mathcal D_{22}\mathcal D_{33}r_x^{-2}=48/r_x^6. Thus the explicit dictionary is

CT=3τRR2π2=6CJ.(O07.9)\boxed{C_T=\frac{3\tau_{RR}}{2\pi^2}=6C_J.} \tag{O07.9}

Both tensor expressions have dimension six. The factor six is specific to these definitions and the superconformal R-current, not a relation for an arbitrary flavor current or an arbitrary improved stress tensor.

Take a massless gauge-neutral chiral multiplet, with scalar ϕ\phi and two-component fermion ψ\psi. Its physical superconformal scalar charge is r=1/2r=1/2; the fermion charge is r−1=−1/2r-1=-1/2. The auxiliary has no propagating separated-point contribution. Use the independent Euclidean row χ\chi so that the fermion action is χγμ∂μψ\chi\gamma^\mu\partial_\mu\psi. In the earlier component convention χ=−iψ~TC\chi=-i\widetilde\psi^TC. The gamma matrices obey {γμ,γν}=2δμν\{\gamma_\mu,\gamma_\nu\}=2\delta_{\mu\nu} and tr⁡1=2\operatorname{tr}1=2.

For a scalar of charge qsq_s and a fermion of charge qfq_f, the plus-source currents and free propagators are

jμs=iqs(ϕ~ ∂μϕ−∂μϕ~ ϕ),Gs(x)=14πrx,jμf=−iqfχγμψ,S(x)=⟨ψ(x)χ(0)⟩=−γμ∂μGs(x)=γ⋅x4πrx3.(O07.10)\begin{aligned} j_\mu^s&=iq_s(\widetilde\phi\,\partial_\mu\phi -\partial_\mu\widetilde\phi\,\phi), &G_s(x)&=\frac1{4\pi r_x},\\ j_\mu^f&=-iq_f\chi\gamma_\mu\psi, &S(x)&=\langle\psi(x)\chi(0)\rangle =-\gamma^\mu\partial_\mu G_s(x) =\frac{\gamma\cdot x}{4\pi r_x^3}. \end{aligned} \tag{O07.10}

The current agrees with P, (7.13) after the stated row translation. The sign in SS follows from −∂2Gs=δ(3)-\partial^2G_s=\delta^{(3)}.

The two scalar cross-contractions give ⟨jμsjνs⟩=2qs2(∂μGs∂νGs−Gs∂μ∂νGs)\langle j_\mu^s j_\nu^s\rangle =2q_s^2(\partial_\mu G_s\partial_\nu G_s-G_s\partial_\mu\partial_\nu G_s). Inserting GsG_s gives qs2Iμν/(8π2rx4)q_s^2I_{\mu\nu}/(8\pi^2r_x^4). For the fermion, the closed Grassmann contraction and the two factors −i-i give qf2tr⁡[γμS(x)γνS(−x)]q_f^2\operatorname{tr}[\gamma_\mu S(x)\gamma_\nu S(-x)]. Since S(−x)=−S(x)S(-x)=-S(x) and tr⁡(γμγ⋅xγνγ⋅x)=4xμxν−2δμνrx2\operatorname{tr}(\gamma_\mu\gamma\cdot x\gamma_\nu\gamma\cdot x) =4x_\mu x_\nu-2\delta_{\mu\nu}r_x^2, its result is the same tensor with coefficient qf2q_f^2.

The scalar and fermion sectors have no connected mixed contraction, so

τRRfree=(1/2)2+(−1/2)22=14,CTfree=38π2.(O07.11)\tau_{RR}^{\rm free} =\frac{(1/2)^2+(-1/2)^2}{2}=\frac14, \qquad C_T^{\rm free}=\frac3{8\pi^2}. \tag{O07.11}

This reproduces the value stated after the paper’s (8.3) using flat-space fields. It is separate from evaluating any sphere determinant. Giving the fermion the scalar’s charge happens to leave its squared contribution unchanged at r=1/2r=1/2, so that numerical answer alone would not detect the error. Mixed current correlations do detect it; exercise 2 uses them.

Identify the sphere quantity before differentiating it

Section titled “Identify the sphere quantity before differentiating it”

For the specific supersymmetric squashed-sphere family of the paper, with its superconformal R-multiplet and prescribed source counterterms, the result to be derived geometrically is

d2db2Re⁡F(b)∣b=1=π22τRR,F(b)=−log⁡ZSb3.(O07.12)\left.\frac{d^2}{db^2}\operatorname{Re}F(b)\right|_{b=1} =\frac{\pi^2}{2}\tau_{RR},\qquad F(b)=-\log Z_{S_b^3}. \tag{O07.12}

Here bb is that family’s dimensionless squashing parameter, and b=1b=1 is the round point. Equation (O07.12) is P, (8.2), not a formula for every deformation called “squashing.” Its derivation must specify which metric and auxiliary sources vary, the integrated current kernel and its regulator. The paper performs those steps in (8.4)–(8.10); they are the next sphere calculation, not consequences of changing a metric name in (O07.6).

For that background family the allowed contact contributions relevant to this response are imaginary in the conformal supersymmetric prescription, as explained after (8.10). The real part then isolates the stated coefficient. This does not erase the contact data from the full complex partition function, and it does not make arbitrary real finite counterterms harmless in another prescription.

The distinction to carry forward is now numerical as well as conceptual: τRR\tau_{RR} is the coefficient of a specified physical current, CTC_T uses the tensor definition (O07.8), and a sphere derivative measures them only after its source path and scheme have been fixed.

1. Measure the nonlocal coefficient with a smooth probe

Section titled “1. Measure the nonlocal coefficient with a smooth probe”

In flat space take L>0L>0 and a real source amplitude a0a_0 of dimension one: a(x)=(a0/L)(−x2,x1,0)e−∣x∣2/(2L2)a(x)=(a_0/L)(-x^2,x^1,0)e^{-|x|^2/(2L^2)}. Show that it is transverse and compute (O07.6). Explain what happens if a smooth gradient ∂μα\partial_\mu\alpha is added. Use x1,x2x^1,x^2 here as coordinate labels.

Hint 1

The radial Gaussian has transform (2π)3/2L3e−L2p2/2(2\pi)^{3/2}L^3e^{-L^2p^2/2}. With our Fourier sign, multiplying by xjx^j is −i∂pj-i\partial_{p_j}.

Hint 2

The squared transverse factor is p12+p22p_1^2+p_2^2. Its angular integral is 8πp2/38\pi p^2/3, and ∫0∞p5e−L2p2dp=L−6\int_0^\infty p^5e^{-L^2p^2}dp=L^{-6}.

Solution

The two derivatives of the Gaussian cancel in ∂⋅a\partial\cdot a; derivatives of the explicit coordinate prefactors contribute zero. The transform is a^=ia0(2π)3/2L4(−p2,p1,0)e−L2p2/2\widehat a=i a_0(2\pi)^{3/2}L^4(-p_2,p_1,0)e^{-L^2p^2/2}, which is perpendicular to pp. Hence

Re⁡Wnonlocal(2)=τRRa02L8168π3∫0∞dp p5e−L2p2=πτRR6(a0L)2.\operatorname{Re}\mathcal W^{(2)}_{\rm nonlocal} =\frac{\tau_{RR}a_0^2L^8}{16}\frac{8\pi}{3} \int_0^\infty dp\,p^5e^{-L^2p^2} =\frac{\pi\tau_{RR}}6(a_0L)^2.

This is dimensionless and nonnegative. At fixed dimensionless amplitude a0La_0L it is independent of the width, as expected at a fixed point for this scaled source family. A gradient has transform −ipμα^-ip_\mu\widehat\alpha and is annihilated by PTP_T, including in cross terms. This statement concerns the nonlocal quadratic response; allowed local terms require their separate treatment.

2. A trial current is not a new superconformal generator

Section titled “2. A trial current is not a new superconformal generator”

Take two decoupled free chirals and a flavor generator FF which gives them charges +1,−2+1,-2. Each multiplet’s scalar and fermion have the same flavor charge. Compute the two-point coefficient matrix τAB\tau_{AB} for the physical R-current and this flavor current, using the normalization (O07.2). Then find the coefficient of Rt=R+tFR_t=R+tF. Does it become the physical τRR\tau_{RR} for every tt?

Hint 1

For two currents A,BA,B, one free multiplet contributes (qsAqsB+qfAqfB)/2(q_s^Aq_s^B+q_f^Aq_f^B)/2. Independent multiplets add.

Hint 2

For physical R, the two component charges are +1/2,−1/2+1/2,-1/2. Their contributions to a mixed R-flavor coefficient cancel, while their squares do not.

Solution

The coefficients are

(τRRτRFτFRτFF)=(1/2005),τRtRt=12+5t2.\begin{pmatrix}\tau_{RR}&\tau_{RF}\\\tau_{FR}&\tau_{FF}\end{pmatrix} =\begin{pmatrix}1/2&0\\0&5\end{pmatrix}, \qquad \tau_{R_tR_t}=\frac12+5t^2.

Each physical R contribution is 1/41/4. The flavor entries are 121^2 and (−2)2(-2)^2. For either multiplet, [(1/2)qF+(−1/2)qF]/2=0[(1/2)q_F+(-1/2)q_F]/2=0. This would fail if the fermion were incorrectly assigned scalar R-charge +1/2+1/2.

RtR_t is a conserved trial symmetry, but the fixed SCFT’s superconformal generator remains RR. Its scalar dimensions stay 1/21/2; they do not become 1/2+t1/2+t and 1/2−2t1/2-2t. The physical stress coefficient is CT=3/(4π2)C_T=3/(4\pi^2) from (O07.9) with τRR=1/2\tau_{RR}=1/2, not from substituting the trial-current coefficient. This example establishes the distinction explicitly; it is not a proposed minimization theorem for arbitrary interacting theories.

3. Taking the real part is not a universal subtraction

Section titled “3. Taking the real part is not a universal subtraction”

Allow a broader source prescription with the real local term ΔW=c(4M)−1∫d3x fμνfμν\Delta\mathcal W=c(4M)^{-1}\int d^3x\,f_{\mu\nu}f^{\mu\nu}, where f=daf=da, cc is dimensionless and M>0M>0 is a fixed mass scale. Find its momentum Hessian and its value for the probe in exercise 1. Can it change τRR\tau_{RR}? How would changing LL at fixed a0La_0L distinguish the two responses?

Hint 1

Integration by parts gives ∫f2=2∫d3p/(2π)3 p2a^(−p)PTa^(p)\int f^2=2\int d^3p/(2\pi)^3\,p^2\widehat a(-p)P_T\widehat a(p). Remember the 1/21/2 in the Hessian expansion.

Hint 2

Relative to exercise 1 there is one additional factor pp in the radial integral: ∫0∞dp p6e−L2p2=15π/(16L7)\int_0^\infty dp\,p^6e^{-L^2p^2}=15\sqrt\pi/(16L^7).

Solution

The added kernel is local and transverse:

ΔK^μν=cM(p2δμν−pμpν),ΔW=5cπ3/24Ma02L.\Delta\widehat{\mathcal K}_{\mu\nu} =\frac cM(p^2\delta_{\mu\nu}-p_\mu p_\nu),\qquad \Delta\mathcal W=\frac{5c\pi^{3/2}}{4M}a_0^2L.

The polynomial kernel cannot alter the nonanalytic ∣p∣|p| coefficient in (O07.5), so it does not change the defined τRR\tau_{RR}. It does change a real integrated response at a fixed width. Setting u=a0Lu=a_0L gives the combined result πτRRu2/6+5cπ3/2u2/(4ML)\pi\tau_{RR}u^2/6+5c\pi^{3/2}u^2/(4ML). The first term is constant in LL and the second scales as 1/L1/L.

This term introduces a scale into the source prescription and is not a conformally covariant counterterm for the scale-free response. Allowing it does not deform the zero-source SCFT, but it changes contact conventions. The special real-part protection of the specified supersymmetric sphere prescription cannot be inferred merely from the word “real.”

What squashing the sphere measures uses this current normalization in a complete supersymmetric background and derives the prescribed round-point response.