Skip to content

Build the action from three adjoint chiral multiplets

The field-content lesson organized four-dimensional N=4\mathcal N=4 Yang–Mills as one N=1\mathcal N=1 vector and three adjoint chirals. Which interactions make that collection one theory with sixteen real supercharges? We will construct the action and eliminate its auxiliaries, keeping every normalization visible. The result will treat the six real scalars equally, although the calculation initially groups them into three complex fields.

Use four-dimensional superspace and interactions for the F-term expansion and gauge-matter coupling. The calculation stays in flat Lorentzian signature (+−−−)(+---) with gauge group SU(N)SU(N), N≥2N\geq2, real coupling g>0g>0, zero theta angle, and no mass terms. Four real supercharges are manifest in the superfield notation; the specified theory has sixteen. No large-NN limit is taken.

Write the three traceless chiral matrices as Φi=Φiata\Phi_i=\Phi_i^at^a, i=1,2,3i=1,2,3. A superscript aa is a gauge-algebra index, and

Tr⁡N(tatb)=12δab,[ta,tb]=ifabctc.\operatorname{Tr}_N(t^at^b)=\frac12\delta^{ab}, \qquad [t^a,t^b]=if^{abc}t^c.

The generators are Hermitian and fabcf^{abc} is real and totally antisymmetric. The trace is the ordinary fundamental trace. For each chiral, Φi=ϕi+2 θψi+θ2Fi\Phi_i=\phi_i+\sqrt2\,\theta\psi_i+\theta^2F_i in chiral coordinates. Thus 2Tr⁡N(ϕi†ϕi)=∑a∣ϕia∣22\operatorname{Tr}_N(\phi_i^\dagger\phi_i)=\sum_a|\phi_i^a|^2 is the canonical component norm.

All three fields transform by conjugation. A trace of their ordered product is gauge invariant because adjacent group matrices cancel, leaving a conjugation of the entire word. This is the construction in Minahan, (4.1)–(4.4). The particular cubic we need is

W=22 g Tr⁡N(Φ1[Φ2,Φ3])=i2 g fabcΦ1aΦ2bΦ3c.(N02.1)W=2\sqrt2\,g\,\operatorname{Tr}_N \bigl(\Phi_1[\Phi_2,\Phi_3]\bigr) =i\sqrt2\,g\,f^{abc}\Phi_1^a\Phi_2^b\Phi_3^c. \tag{N02.1}

The equality follows from Tr⁡N(ta[tb,tc])=ifbca/2\operatorname{Tr}_N(t^a[t^b,t^c])=if^{bca}/2. Cyclically permuting the three chiral labels leaves this expression unchanged. The coefficient is essential: replacing gg here by an unrelated coupling produces a different, generically only N=1\mathcal N=1, theory.

One way to fix it is the massless adjoint-hypermultiplet construction already used in the preceding lesson. In Tachikawa, (2.1.16), the three matrix kinetic terms and the cubic have a common coefficient 1/g21/g^2 at zero theta angle. Setting (ΦT,ZT,Z~T)=2g(Φ1,Φ2,Φ3)(\Phi_{\rm T},Z_{\rm T},\widetilde Z_{\rm T})=\sqrt2g(\Phi_1,\Phi_2,\Phi_3) gives kinetic coefficient 2Tr⁡N2\operatorname{Tr}_N and cubic coefficient 22g2\sqrt2g. This specifies the scalar-superfield normalization; source fermions must also be translated according to their superfield expansion.

The complete superspace action is

S=∫d4x d4θ 2∑i=13Tr⁡N(Φi†e2gVΦie−2gV)+∫d4x[∫d2θ(14∑aWaαWαa+W)+h.c.].(N02.2)\begin{aligned} S={}&\int d^4x\,d^4\theta\, 2\sum_{i=1}^3\operatorname{Tr}_N \bigl(\Phi_i^\dagger e^{2gV}\Phi_i e^{-2gV}\bigr)\\ &+\int d^4x\left[ \int d^2\theta\left( \frac14\sum_a\mathcal W^{a\alpha}\mathcal W^a_\alpha+W \right)+\text{h.c.}\right]. \end{aligned} \tag{N02.2}

VV is the vector superfield, and Wα\mathcal W_\alpha is its chiral field strength, not the superpotential. Its canonical definition is Wα=−Dˉ 2(e−2gVDαe2gV)/(8g)\mathcal W_\alpha=-\bar{\mathbb D}^{\,2}(e^{-2gV}\mathbb D_\alpha e^{2gV})/(8g), as in the prerequisite. The gauge connection in the covariant derivative is gAμgA_\mu: DμY=∂μY−ig[Aμ,Y]\mathscr D_\mu Y=\partial_\mu Y-ig[A_\mu,Y] for any adjoint YY. Consequently Fμν=∂μAν−∂νAμ−ig[Aμ,Aν]F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\mu A_\nu-\partial_\nu A_\mu-ig[A_\mu,A_\nu]. Minahan’s connection in (4.2) is instead Aμ,MIN=igAμA_{\mu,\mathrm{MIN}}=igA_\mu; its coupling is absorbed.

This action fixes both scalar and fermion interactions. Engineering dimensions provide an immediate check: [ϕ]=[A]=1[\phi]=[A]=1, [ψ]=[λ]=3/2[\psi]=[\lambda]=3/2, [Fi]=[D]=2[F_i]=[D]=2, and [g]=0[g]=0. Hence [W]=3[W]=3, appropriate to a four-dimensional chiral integral.

Let C1=[ϕ2,ϕ3]C_1=[\phi_2,\phi_3], with C2,C3C_2,C_3 obtained cyclically. Cyclicity of the ordinary trace gives

δW=22g Tr⁡N(δϕ1C1+δϕ2C2+δϕ3C3),Wia≡∂W∂ϕia=22g Tr⁡N(taCi).(N02.3)\begin{aligned} \delta W&=2\sqrt2g\,\operatorname{Tr}_N (\delta\phi_1C_1+\delta\phi_2C_2+\delta\phi_3C_3),\\ W_{ia}&\equiv\frac{\partial W}{\partial\phi_i^a} =2\sqrt2g\,\operatorname{Tr}_N(t^aC_i). \end{aligned} \tag{N02.3}

For example, Tr⁡(ϕ1[δϕ2,ϕ3])=Tr⁡(δϕ2[ϕ3,ϕ1])\operatorname{Tr}(\phi_1[\delta\phi_2,\phi_3]) =\operatorname{Tr}(\delta\phi_2[\phi_3,\phi_1]). This step determines the ordering and sign of the derivative.

The Lorentzian auxiliary terms are

Laux=∑i,a(∣Fia∣2+WiaFia+Wia‾ Fia‾)+12∑a(Da)2+g∑aDaμa,μa=2Tr⁡N(taC),C=∑i[ϕi,ϕi†].(N02.4)\begin{aligned} \mathcal L_{\rm aux} &=\sum_{i,a}\bigl(|F_i^a|^2+W_{ia}F_i^a+\overline{W_{ia}}\,\overline{F_i^a}\bigr)\\ &\quad+\frac12\sum_a(D^a)^2+g\sum_aD^a\mu^a,\\ \mu^a&=2\operatorname{Tr}_N(t^a\mathcal C), \qquad \mathcal C=\sum_i[\phi_i,\phi_i^\dagger]. \end{aligned} \tag{N02.4}

The symbol C\mathcal C is a Hermitian, traceless matrix. It is the adjoint charge density entering the D coupling; it is distinct from the three holomorphic commutators CiC_i. Equation (N02.4) follows from the canonical component action in Bilal, (5.27)–(5.29), with our F=−fBilalF=-f_{\rm Bilal}.

Completing each square gives Fia=−Wia‾F_i^a=-\overline{W_{ia}} and Da=−gμaD^a=-g\mu^a. The constant part of the Lorentzian Lagrangian is minus the potential, so U=∑i,a∣Wia∣2+g2∑a(μa)2/2U=\sum_{i,a}|W_{ia}|^2+g^2\sum_a(\mu^a)^2/2.

To convert to matrices, use the SU(N)SU(N) completeness identity

∑aTr⁡(taM)Tr⁡(taN)=12(Tr⁡(MN)−1NTr⁡M Tr⁡N).(N02.5)\sum_a\operatorname{Tr}(t^aM)\operatorname{Tr}(t^aN) =\frac12\left(\operatorname{Tr}(MN) -\frac1N\operatorname{Tr}M\,\operatorname{Tr}N\right). \tag{N02.5}

Every commutator has zero trace, so the last term vanishes here. It must not be dropped for an arbitrary matrix source. Substituting (N02.3) and (N02.4) now yields

UF=4g2∑i<jTr⁡([ϕi,ϕj]†[ϕi,ϕj]),UD=g2Tr⁡(C2).(N02.6)\boxed{ U_F=4g^2\sum_{i<j}\operatorname{Tr} \bigl([\phi_i,\phi_j]^\dagger[\phi_i,\phi_j]\bigr), \qquad U_D=g^2\operatorname{Tr}(\mathcal C^2). } \tag{N02.6}

Both terms are nonnegative on the Lorentzian physical slice. The same normalization gives the matrix equations Fi=−2g Ci†F_i=-\sqrt2g\,C_i^\dagger and D=−gCD=-g\mathcal C. The factors differ from simply treating the entries of a traceless matrix as independent canonical scalars.

Set ϕi=(X2i−1+iX2i)/2\phi_i=(X^{2i-1}+iX^{2i})/\sqrt2, with all XIX^I Hermitian. Their kinetic term is 2∑iTr⁡∣Dϕi∣2=∑ITr⁡(DXI)22\sum_i\operatorname{Tr}|\mathscr D\phi_i|^2 =\sum_I\operatorname{Tr}(\mathscr D X^I)^2, so each real component has coefficient 1/21/2.

The cancellation needed to combine (N02.6) is worth seeing. For two different complex-field labels, temporarily write ϕi=(a+ib)/2\phi_i=(a+ib)/\sqrt2 and ϕj=(c+id)/2\phi_j=(c+id)/\sqrt2. Define P=[a,b]P=[a,b], Q=[c,d]Q=[c,d], A=[a,c]A=[a,c], B=[b,d]B=[b,d], C=[a,d]C=[a,d], and E=[b,c]E=[b,c]. All six are anti-Hermitian. Then

[ϕi,ϕi†]=−iP,[ϕi,ϕj]=12(A−B+iC+iE),[\phi_i,\phi_i^\dagger]=-iP,\qquad [\phi_i,\phi_j]=\frac12(A-B+iC+iE),

and cyclicity removes the trace of the mixed commutator in the norm:

4Tr⁡∣[ϕi,ϕj]∣2=−Tr⁡(A2+B2+C2+E2)+2Tr⁡(AB−CE).(N02.7)4\operatorname{Tr}|[\phi_i,\phi_j]|^2 =-\operatorname{Tr}(A^2+B^2+C^2+E^2) +2\operatorname{Tr}(AB-CE). \tag{N02.7}

The cross term from Tr⁡C2\operatorname{Tr}\mathcal C^2 is −2Tr⁡(PQ)-2\operatorname{Tr}(PQ). These cancel because cyclicity and the Jacobi identity give

Tr⁡(AB−CE)=Tr⁡(a([c,[b,d]]−[d,[b,c]]))=Tr⁡(a[b,[c,d]])=Tr⁡([a,b][c,d]).(N02.8)\begin{aligned} \operatorname{Tr}(AB-CE) &=\operatorname{Tr}\bigl(a([c,[b,d]]-[d,[b,c]])\bigr)\\ &=\operatorname{Tr}\bigl(a[b,[c,d]]\bigr) =\operatorname{Tr}([a,b][c,d]). \end{aligned} \tag{N02.8}

The three same-pair terms supply the remaining commutator squares. Thus

U=−g2∑I<JTr⁡[XI,XJ]2=g2∑I<JTr⁡([XI,XJ]†[XI,XJ]).(N02.9)\boxed{ U=-g^2\sum_{I<J}\operatorname{Tr}[X^I,X^J]^2 =g^2\sum_{I<J}\operatorname{Tr} \bigl([X^I,X^J]^\dagger[X^I,X^J]\bigr). } \tag{N02.9}

If the sum is written over all ordered I,JI,J, its coefficient is g2/2g^2/2. The positive second form fixes the sign unambiguously. It also shows that zero potential requires every real-scalar commutator to vanish. Solving these equations modulo gauge transformations is a further vacuum-space calculation.

The equal coefficient for all fifteen scalar pairs is a strong check on (N02.1). It establishes the rotationally invariant scalar interaction, not by itself the complete extended supersymmetry algebra. The source construction uses the full action, including the fermions; Tachikawa, (2.1.17)–(2.1.18) explains that enhancement. The detailed symmetry organization can now build on the derived action.

Use lower-index Weyl fields with ψχ=ψαχα\psi\chi=\psi^\alpha\chi_\alpha. For odd fields this scalar contraction is symmetric: ψχ=χψ\psi\chi=\chi\psi. In component indices the superpotential Hessian is particularly transparent:

Wia,jb=i2g ϵijkfabcϕkc,ϵ123=1,LY,W=−12Wia,jbψiaψjb+h.c.(N02.10)\begin{aligned} W_{ia,jb}&=i\sqrt2g\,\epsilon_{ijk}f^{abc}\phi_k^c, \qquad \epsilon_{123}=1,\\ \mathcal L_{Y,W}&=-\frac12W_{ia,jb}\psi_i^a\psi_j^b+\text{h.c.} \end{aligned} \tag{N02.10}

Repeated flavor and gauge indices are summed. Interchanging (i,a)(i,a) with (j,b)(j,b) reverses both antisymmetric tensors, making the Hessian symmetric, as it must be. This avoids assigning ordinary commuting-matrix identities to Grassmann-valued matrix products.

The gauge D-term supplies the other Yukawa coupling. With the Hermitian adjoint generators (tadb)ac=−ifbac(t_{\rm ad}^b)_{ac}=-if^{bac}, it is

LY,g=i2g∑iϕi∗a(tadb)acλbψic+h.c.(N02.11)\mathcal L_{Y,g} =i\sqrt2g\sum_i \phi_i^{*a}(t_{\rm ad}^b)_{ac}\lambda^b\psi_i^c +\text{h.c.} \tag{N02.11}

This is the adjoint specialization of Bilal, (5.27); its matrix ordering is discussed in (8.5). The component formula fixes the phases without an ambiguous matrix anticommutator.

Together with (N02.9), these terms give the eliminated component action:

L=−14FμνaFaμν−iλaσμDμλˉa+∑i,a[(Dμϕia)∗Dμϕia−iψiaσμDμψˉia]−U+LY,g+LY,W.(N02.12)\begin{aligned} \mathcal L={}&-\frac14F^a_{\mu\nu}F^{a\mu\nu} -i\lambda^a\sigma^\mu\mathscr D_\mu\bar\lambda^a\\ &+\sum_{i,a}\left[ (\mathscr D_\mu\phi_i^a)^*\mathscr D^\mu\phi_i^a -i\psi_i^a\sigma^\mu\mathscr D_\mu\bar\psi_i^a \right]-U+\mathcal L_{Y,g}+\mathcal L_{Y,W}. \end{aligned} \tag{N02.12}

The sigma matrices and barred Lorentzian conjugates are those of the four-dimensional prerequisite. The auxiliaries made the chosen N=1\mathcal N=1 subalgebra work off shell. Eliminating them does not demonstrate a finite-auxiliary off-shell realization of all sixteen charges. No three-dimensional spinor or auxiliary convention enters these formulas.

Worked example: a scalar mass checks the coefficient

Section titled “Worked example: a scalar mass checks the coefficient”

Take SU(2)SU(2) with ta=τa/2t^a=\tau_a/2, and consider X1=u t3X^1=u\,t^3, X3=v t1X^3=v\,t^1, all other real scalars zero, with real u,vu,v. The only nonzero commutator is [X1,X3]=iuv t2[X^1,X^3]=iuv\,t^2. Equation (N02.9) gives

U=g22u2v2.(N02.13)U=\frac{g^2}{2}u^2v^2. \tag{N02.13}

In the complex description, ϕ1=ut3/2\phi_1=u t^3/\sqrt2 and ϕ2=vt1/2\phi_2=v t^1/\sqrt2 are Hermitian, so C=0\mathcal C=0 and only C3=iuv t2/2C_3=iuv\,t^2/2 contributes. Equation (N02.6) independently gives 4g2(u2v2/4)Tr⁡(t2)2=g2u2v2/24g^2(u^2v^2/4)\operatorname{Tr}(t^2)^2=g^2u^2v^2/2.

Hold uu constant and expand about v=0v=0. The kinetic term is (∂v)2/2(\partial v)^2/2, so this scalar fluctuation has mass g∣u∣g|u|. The background is a zero-potential configuration, and the chiral fermions provide a further test. The quadratic superpotential in their scalar partners is

Wquadratic=igu(ϕ21ϕ32−ϕ22ϕ31),W_{\rm quadratic}=igu (\phi_2^1\phi_3^2-\phi_2^2\phi_3^1),

which gives fermion pair masses of magnitude g∣u∣g|u| through (N02.10). The phases in the two pairings differ, but their singular values agree. This is a check of the action’s local normalization, not a classification of the whole broken-phase spectrum or of gauge-inequivalent vacua.

In a U(N)U(N) extension, a central component commutes with every field and drops out of these interactions. Its free multiplet must still be retained when that group is chosen. Our default action uses the traceless SU(N)SU(N) fields, not a normalized trace pretending to remove a central sector.

1. Differentiate within the traceless subspace

Section titled “1. Differentiate within the traceless subspace”

Let a general matrix MM couple to a traceless adjoint auxiliary through Wa=2c Tr⁡(taM)W_a=2c\,\operatorname{Tr}(t^aM), with complex constant cc. Derive ∑a∣Wa∣2\sum_a|W_a|^2 without assuming Tr⁡M=0\operatorname{Tr}M=0. Evaluate it for SU(2)SU(2) and M=diag⁡(m1,m2)M=\operatorname{diag}(m_1,m_2). Explain why no trace subtraction survives in (N02.6).

Hint 1

Apply (N02.5) to MM and M†M^\dagger, not to MM twice.

Hint 2

Only the traceless projection of a matrix can pair with every tat^a. For a two-by-two diagonal matrix, that projection depends on m1−m2m_1-m_2.

Solution

Completeness gives

∑a∣Wa∣2=2∣c∣2(Tr⁡M†M−1N∣Tr⁡M∣2)=2∣c∣2Tr⁡(M0†M0),M0=M−Tr⁡MN1.\sum_a|W_a|^2 =2|c|^2\left( \operatorname{Tr}M^\dagger M-\frac1N|\operatorname{Tr}M|^2 \right) =2|c|^2\operatorname{Tr}(M_0^\dagger M_0), \quad M_0=M-\frac{\operatorname{Tr}M}{N}\boldsymbol1.

For SU(2)SU(2), M0=diag⁡(m1−m2,m2−m1)/2M_0=\operatorname{diag}(m_1-m_2,m_2-m_1)/2, so the answer is ∣c∣2∣m1−m2∣2|c|^2|m_1-m_2|^2. If m1=m2m_1=m_2, the coupling vanishes, a useful check. In the theory above, every M=CiM=C_i is a commutator, and Tr⁡Ci=0\operatorname{Tr}C_i=0 exactly; the projection therefore changes nothing. Treating all matrix entries as independent would miss the projection for the general source.

In SU(2)SU(2) set ϕ1=v t+\phi_1=v\,t^+, ϕ2=ϕ3=0\phi_2=\phi_3=0, where t+=t1+it2=(0100)t^+=t^1+it^2=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}0&1\\0&0\end{smallmatrix}\right) and vv is complex. Calculate every FiF_i, the raw vector auxiliary DD, and the potential. For which vv is the configuration a supersymmetric constant vacuum with zero gauge field?

Hint 1

The superpotential derivatives require two different chiral fields, but the moment matrix contains a field and its own conjugate.

Hint 2

Use [t+,t−]=2t3[t^+,t^-]=2t^3 and Tr⁡(t3)2=1/2\operatorname{Tr}(t^3)^2=1/2.

Solution

All three CiC_i vanish, hence Fi=0F_i=0. However, C=2∣v∣2t3\mathcal C=2|v|^2t^3 and D=−2g∣v∣2t3D=-2g|v|^2t^3. Therefore

U=g2Tr⁡C2=2g2∣v∣4.U=g^2\operatorname{Tr}\mathcal C^2=2g^2|v|^4.

It vanishes only at v=0v=0. The raw DD also vanishes only there, agreeing with the gaugino supersymmetry variation for a constant zero-field-strength background. A complex scalar matrix may commute with the other two while failing to commute with its own conjugate. Holomorphic F equations alone therefore do not solve the physical vacuum problem.

Replace gg in (N02.1) by a complex parameter hh, leaving the gauge and kinetic terms fixed. Compare two SU(2)SU(2) configurations: first X1=ut1X^1=u t^1, X2=vt2X^2=v t^2; second X1=ut1X^1=u t^1, X3=vt2X^3=v t^2, with all other scalars zero. They are related by a rotation in the real-scalar 22–33 plane. Determine the condition for equal potentials. Does the test alone prove sixteen supercharges?

Hint 1

The first configuration lies in a single complex chiral and tests the D term. The second has two Hermitian complex chirals and tests the F term.

Hint 2

Changing the phase of hh does not change its F-term potential. The magnitude is what this scalar test can determine.

Solution

For the first configuration, ϕ1=(ut1+ivt2)/2\phi_1=(ut^1+ivt^2)/\sqrt2 and C=uv t3\mathcal C=uv\,t^3. Thus U1=g2u2v2/2U_1=g^2u^2v^2/2. For the second, [ϕ1,ϕ2]=iuv t3/2[\phi_1,\phi_2]=iuv\,t^3/2 and C=0\mathcal C=0, so U2=∣h∣2u2v2/2U_2=|h|^2u^2v^2/2. Equality for arbitrary nonzero u,vu,v requires ∣h∣=g|h|=g.

At the classical level, a fixed chiral-field phase can bring such an hh to the displayed positive convention, with the fermion interactions and transformations translated consistently. In the quantum theory its anomalous fermion measure can also shift the theta angle, so this is not a fixed-theta equivalence claim. If h=0h=0, the second configuration has zero potential while the first does not, immediately exposing the lost scalar rotation symmetry.

This is a necessary coefficient test, not a proof of all supersymmetry transformations or quantum conformality. The full source construction supplies the extended symmetry; the derived fermion couplings and the worked mass comparison test additional consequences. The same field list at arbitrary hh is not enough.

The action is now explicit: the gauge coupling fixes the gauge Yukawa interaction, the cubic fixes the chiral Yukawa interaction, and their auxiliary equations give a common commutator potential for all six real scalars. Continue with Symmetries and different multiplet descriptions to organize these interactions under SU(4) and compare the N=1 and N=2 descriptions.