Skip to content

R-Symmetry, Anomalies, and the Holomorphic Scale

An anomalous chiral or R-symmetry remains an exact bookkeeping tool when the complexified gauge coupling is transformed with the regulated measure. The resulting charge of the renormalization-group invariant combination Λhb0\Lambda_h^{b_0} is what allows holomorphy to constrain strong-coupling terms. This page fixes the sign, index, and branch conventions explicitly and applies them to four-dimensional N=1\mathcal N=1 SQCD.

Required background. Holomorphic couplings and background superfields supplies spurionic covariance. Regulated Jacobians and measure variation supplies the Fujikawa logic behind the anomaly coefficient.

Helpful background. Theta terms, periodicity, and vacuum sectors explains why the phase of the complex coupling is periodic and why roots of the holomorphic scale require branch data.

Let GG be simple and normalize its generators by

trR(TaTb)=T(R)δab.\operatorname{tr}_{R}(T^aT^b)=T(R)\delta^{ab}.

For a left-handed Weyl fermion of U(1)XU(1)_X charge qq in representation RR, the mixed G2U(1)XG^2U(1)_X coefficient is qT(R)qT(R). In an N=1\mathcal N=1 theory, a chiral superfield Φi\Phi_i of R-charge rir_i contains a fermion of charge ri1r_i-1, while the gaugino has R-charge 11. Therefore

AG2R=T(G)+iT(Ri)(ri1).\mathcal A_{G^2R} =T(G)+\sum_iT(R_i)(r_i-1).

This coefficient is local and perturbatively one-loop exact in the anomaly equation, although its interpretation inside a full supercurrent multiplet can depend on operator definitions. The only claim needed here is the regulated Jacobian of the chiral change of variables.

The supersymmetric anomaly and instanton-measure normalizations used here are reviewed in Shifman 2022, §§ 10.7 and 10.16.

We use the following sign convention. In an instanton sector of charge kk, the Euclidean weight contains eiθke^{i\theta k}. Under

ψieiqiαψi,\psi_i\longmapsto e^{iq_i\alpha}\psi_i,

the fermion zero-mode measure transforms by

Dψe2iαkiqiT(Ri)Dψ.\mathcal D\psi\longmapsto e^{-2i\alpha k\sum_iq_iT(R_i)}\mathcal D\psi.

The family of theories is therefore covariant if the background angle transforms as

θθ+2Aα,A=iqiT(Ri),\theta\longmapsto\theta+2\mathcal A\alpha, \qquad \mathcal A=\sum_iq_iT(R_i),

including the adjoint gaugino when appropriate. Reversing the sign used for the topological term reverses both displayed signs and leaves invariant conclusions unchanged.

Define

τ(μ)=θ2π+4πigh2(μ),b0=3T(G)iT(Ri),\tau(\mu)=\frac{\theta}{2\pi}+\frac{4\pi i}{g_h^2(\mu)}, \qquad b_0=3T(G)-\sum_iT(R_i),

and

Λhb0=μb0e2πiτ(μ).\Lambda_h^{b_0}=\mu^{b_0}e^{2\pi i\tau(\mu)}.

Perturbative holomorphic running is

μdτdμ=ib02π,\mu\frac{d\tau}{d\mu}=\frac{i b_0}{2\pi},

so Λhb0\Lambda_h^{b_0} is independent of μ\mu. Under the anomalous transformation above,

ττ+Aαπ,Λhb0e2iAαΛhb0.\tau\longmapsto\tau+\frac{\mathcal A\alpha}{\pi}, \qquad \Lambda_h^{b_0}\longmapsto e^{2i\mathcal A\alpha}\Lambda_h^{b_0}.

Thus Λhb0\Lambda_h^{b_0} has spurionic U(1)XU(1)_X charge 2A2\mathcal A. This is the invariant datum. Writing a charge for Λh\Lambda_h itself requires choosing a b0b_0th root and hence a branch.

A finite holomorphic redefinition ττ+c\tau\mapsto\tau+c rescales Λhb0\Lambda_h^{b_0} by e2πice^{2\pi ic}. Consequently an overall coefficient written in terms of Λh\Lambda_h is meaningful only with the scale convention. Monodromy under θθ+2π\theta\mapsto\theta+2\pi can permute the branches of condensates even though Λhb0\Lambda_h^{b_0} is single-valued.

Consider SU(Nc)SU(N_c) with NfN_f pairs

QiNc,Q~iNc,i=1,,Nf,Q^i\in\mathbf{N_c}, \qquad \widetilde Q_i\in\overline{\mathbf{N_c}}, \qquad i=1,\ldots,N_f,

and no tree superpotential. Since T(Nc)=1/2T(\mathbf{N_c})=1/2,

b0=3NcNf.b_0=3N_c-N_f.

First take the axial transformation U(1)AU(1)_A with qA(Q)=qA(Q~)=1q_A(Q)=q_A(\widetilde Q)=1 and neutral gaugino. Its mixed anomaly is

AG2A=Nf(12+12)=Nf.\mathcal A_{G^2A} =N_f\left(\frac12+\frac12\right)=N_f.

Therefore Λh3NcNf\Lambda_h^{3N_c-N_f} has axial charge 2Nf2N_f. The meson

Mij=QiQ~jM^i{}_j=Q^i\widetilde Q_j

has charge 22, so detM\det M also has charge 2Nf2N_f. The ratio

Λh3NcNfdetM\frac{\Lambda_h^{3N_c-N_f}}{\det M}

is spurionically axial invariant. The anomalous symmetry has not disappeared; its anomaly supplies exactly the transformation needed to form the invariant.

Now seek an ordinary anomaly-free R-symmetry with equal charges rr for QQ and Q~\widetilde Q. The mixed coefficient is

AG2R=Nc+Nf(r1).\mathcal A_{G^2R} =N_c+N_f(r-1).

Setting it to zero gives

r=1NcNf.r=1-\frac{N_c}{N_f}.

Then R(M)=2(1Nc/Nf)R(M)=2(1-N_c/N_f), while Λhb0\Lambda_h^{b_0} is neutral under this anomaly-free R-symmetry. These two charge assignments, together with dimension, severely restrict a possible nonperturbative superpotential for Nf<NcN_f<N_c.

Let

W=C(Λh3NcNfdetM)p.W=C\left(\frac{\Lambda_h^{3N_c-N_f}}{\det M}\right)^p.

The quantity in parentheses is axially invariant and has dimension

(3NcNf)2Nf=3(NcNf).(3N_c-N_f)-2N_f=3(N_c-N_f).

Requiring [W]=3[W]=3 gives p=1/(NcNf)p=1/(N_c-N_f). The anomaly-free R-charge gives the same condition because

R(detM)=2(NfNc).R(\det M)=2(N_f-N_c).

Thus

W=C(Λh3NcNfdetM)1/(NcNf).W=C\left(\frac{\Lambda_h^{3N_c-N_f}}{\det M}\right)^{1/(N_c-N_f)}.

The derivation has fixed the functional form on the patch detM0\det M\neq0. It has not fixed CC, selected one of the NcNfN_c-N_f branches, proved that a superpotential is dynamically generated, or established validity at the singular locus. Those obligations are discharged using zero-mode analysis and holomorphic decoupling on later pages. The anomaly and charge argument in SQCD is reviewed with its dynamical completion in Intriligator and Seiberg 1996, §§ 3.1–3.2, while the logic of holomorphic background couplings is isolated in Seiberg 1993, pp. 469–475.

  • Λhb0\Lambda_h^{b_0} is RG invariant in the stated holomorphic convention; Λh\Lambda_h requires a root.
  • The anomalous Jacobian coefficient is fixed by the regulated measure; a current may still mix with other currents under renormalization.
  • A holomorphic scale is not automatically a pole mass or confinement scale. Canonical normalization introduces real wavefunction factors.
  • A spurionic anomalous transformation relates couplings and operators across a family of theories. It is not a conserved charge acting within a fixed theory when θ\theta is held fixed.
  • Matching formulas remain covariant only when the phase of every complex mass and the theta angle are tracked together.

Dropping an anomalous symmetry. Its current is not conserved at fixed θ\theta, but its regulated Jacobian determines how the background coupling transforms. That information is indispensable.

Assigning a charge to Λ\Lambda without a branch. The single-valued object is Λb0\Lambda^{b_0}. Roots label local branches and can be permuted by theta-angle monodromy.

Using scalar R-charges in the anomaly sum. A chiral multiplet’s left-handed fermion has charge ri1r_i-1, while the gaugino has charge 11.

For SU(Nc)SU(N_c) SQCD, add a mass source mjiMijm^j{}_iM^i{}_j. Determine the axial and anomaly-free R-charges of mm.

Solution

Since qA(M)=2q_A(M)=2 and a superpotential term must be spurionically neutral, qA(m)=2q_A(m)=-2. Since R(W)=2R(W)=2 and R(M)=2(1Nc/Nf)R(M)=2(1-N_c/N_f),

R(m)=2R(M)=2NcNf.R(m)=2-R(M)=\frac{2N_c}{N_f}.

These assignments ensure that a complex mass phase is included consistently in anomalous transformations and scale matching.

Show directly that Λhb0\Lambda_h^{b_0} is independent of μ\mu using the stated beta function for τ\tau.

Solution

Taking a logarithmic derivative,

ddlnμlnΛhb0=b0+2πidτdlnμ=b0+2πiib02π=0.\frac{d}{d\ln\mu}\ln\Lambda_h^{b_0} =b_0+2\pi i\frac{d\tau}{d\ln\mu} =b_0+2\pi i\frac{i b_0}{2\pi}=0.
  • Kenneth A. Intriligator and Nathan Seiberg, “Lectures on Supersymmetric Gauge Theories and Electric–Magnetic Duality,” Nuclear Physics B Proceedings Supplements 45BC (1996), 1–28, arXiv, DOI.
  • Mikhail Shifman, Advanced Topics in Quantum Field Theory: A Lecture Course, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press (2022), §§ 10.7 and 10.16, DOI.
  • Nathan Seiberg, “Naturalness versus Supersymmetric Non-renormalization Theorems,” Physics Letters B 318 (1993), 469–475, arXiv, DOI.