SUPERSPACE

or One thousand and one

lessons in supersymmetry

S. James Gates, Jr.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts

(Present address: University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland)
[email protected]

Marcus T. Grisaru

Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts

(Present address: McGill University, Montreal, Quebec)
[email protected]

Martin Roček

State University of New York, Stony Brook, New York

[email protected]

Warren Siegel

University of California, Berkeley, California

(Present address: State University of New York)
[email protected]
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Main entry under title:
Superspace : one thousand and one lessons in supersymmetry.
(Frontiers in physics ; v. 58)
Includes index.
1. Supersymmetry. 2. Quantum gravity.
3. Supergravity. I. Gates, S. J. II. Series.
QC174.17.S9S97 1983 530.1’2 83-5986
ISBN 0-8053-3160-3
ISBN 0-8053-3160-1 (pbk.)
Superspace is the greatest invention since the wheel [1] .

Preface
Said Ψ to Φ, Ξ, and Υ: ‘‘Let’s write a review paper.’’ Said Φ and Ξ: ‘‘Great
idea!’’ Said Υ: ‘‘Naaa.’’
But a few days later Υ had produced a table of contents with 1001 items.
Ξ, Φ, Ψ, and Υ wrote. Then didn’t write. Then wrote again. The review grew;
and grew; and grew. It became an outline for a book; it became a first draft; it became
a second draft. It became a burden. It became agony. Tempers were lost; and hairs;
and a few pounds (alas, quickly regained). They argued about ‘‘;’’ vs. ‘‘.’’, about
‘‘which’’ vs. ‘‘that’’, ‘‘˜’’ vs. ‘‘ˆ’’, ‘‘γ’’ vs. ‘‘Γ’’, ‘‘+’’ vs. ‘‘-’’. Made bad puns, drew pic-
tures on the blackboard, were rude to their colleagues, neglected their duties. Bemoaned
the paucity of letters in the Greek and Roman alphabets, of hours in the day, days in
the week, weeks in the month. Ξ, Φ, Ψ and Υ wrote and wrote.

* * *

This must stop; we want to get back to research, to our families, friends and stu-
dents. We want to look at the sky again, go for walks, sleep at night. Write a second
volume? Never! Well, in a couple of years?
We beg our readers’ indulgence. We have tried to present a subject that we like,
that we think is important. We have tried to present our insights, our tools and our
knowledge. Along the way, some errors and misconceptions have without doubt slipped
in. There must be wrong statements, misprints, mistakes, awkward phrases, islands of
incomprehensibility (but they started out as continents!). We could, probably we
should, improve and improve. But we can no longer wait. Like climbers within sight of
the summit we are rushing, casting aside caution, reaching towards the moment when we
can shout ‘‘it’s behind us’’.
This is not a polished work. Without doubt some topics are treated better else-
where. Without doubt we have left out topics that should have been included. Without
doubt we have treated the subject from a personal point of view, emphasizing aspects
that we are familiar with, and neglecting some that would have required studying others’
work. Nevertheless, we hope this book will be useful, both to those new to the subject
and to those who helped develop it. We have presented many topics that are not avail-
able elsewhere, and many topics of interest also outside supersymmetry. We have
[1]. A. Oop, A supersymmetric version of the leg, Gondwanaland predraw (January 10,000,000
B.C.), to be discovered.
included topics whose treatment is incomplete, and presented conclusions that are really
only conjectures. In some cases, this reflects the state of the subject. Filling in the
holes and proving the conjectures may be good research projects.
Supersymmetry is the creation of many talented physicists. We would like to
thank all our friends in the field, we have many, for their contributions to the subject,
and beg their pardon for not presenting a list of references to their papers.
Most of the work on this book was done while the four of us were at the California
Institute of Technology, during the 1982-83 academic year. We would like to thank the
Institute and the Physics Department for their hospitality and the use of their computer
facilities, the NSF, DOE, the Fleischmann Foundation and the Fairchild Visiting Schol-
ars Program for their support. Some of the work was done while M.T.G. and M.R. were
visiting the Institute for Theoretical Physics at Santa Barbara. Finally, we would like to
thank Richard Grisaru for the many hours he devoted to typing the equations in this
book, Hyun Jean Kim for drawing the diagrams, and Anders Karlhede for carefully read-
ing large parts of the manuscript and for his useful suggestions; and all the others who
helped us.
S.J.G., M.T.G., M.R., W.D.S.
Pasadena, January 1983

August 2001: Free version released on web; corrections and bookmarks added.
Contents

Preface

1. Introduction 1
2. A toy superspace
2.1. Notation and conventions 7
2.2. Supersymmetry and superfields 9
2.3. Scalar multiplet 15
2.4. Vector multiplet 18
2.5. Other global gauge multiplets 28
2.6. Supergravity 34
2.7. Quantum superspace 46
3. Representations of supersymmetry
3.1. Notation 54
3.2. The supersymmetry groups 62
3.3. Representations of supersymmetry 69
3.4. Covariant derivatives 83
3.5. Constrained superfields 89
3.6. Component expansions 92
3.7. Superintegration 97
3.8. Superfunctional differentiation and integration 101
3.9. Physical, auxiliary, and gauge components 108
3.10. Compensators 112
3.11. Projection operators 120
3.12. On-shell representations and superfields 138
3.13. Off-shell field strengths and prepotentials 147
4. Classical, global, simple (N = 1) superfields
4.1. The scalar multiplet 149
4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 159
4.3. Gauge-invariant models 178
4.4. Superforms 181
4.5. Other gauge multiplets 198
4.6. N -extended multiplets 216
5. Classical N = 1 supergravity
5.1. Review of gravity 232
5.2. Prepotentials 244
 5.3. Covariant approach 267
5.4. Solution to Bianchi identities 292
5.5. Actions 299
5.6. From superspace to components 315
5.7. DeSitter supersymmetry 335
6. Quantum global superfields
6.1. Introduction to supergraphs 337
6.2. Gauge fixing and ghosts 340
6.3. Supergraph rules 348
6.4. Examples 364
6.5. The background field method 373
6.6. Regularization 393
6.7. Anomalies in Yang-Mills currents 401
7. Quantum N = 1 supergravity
7.1. Introduction 408
7.2. Background-quantum splitting 410
7.3. Ghosts 420
7.4. Quantization 431
7.5. Supergravity supergraphs 438
7.6. Covariant Feynman rules 446
7.7. General properties of the effective action 452
7.8. Examples 460
7.9. Locally supersymmetric dimensional regularization 469
7.10. Anomalies 473
8. Breakdown
8.1. Introduction 496
8.2. Explicit breaking of global supersymmetry 500
8.3. Spontaneous breaking of global supersymmetry 506
8.4. Trace formulae from superspace 518
8.5. Nonlinear realizations 522
8.6. SuperHiggs mechanism 527
8.7. Supergravity and symmetry breaking 529

Index 542
1. INTRODUCTION

There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a

dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle
ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition; and it lies
between the pit of man’s fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the
dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call, ‘‘the Twilight Zone.’’

Rod Serling

1001: A superspace odyssey

Symmetry principles, both global and local, are a fundamental feature of modern
particle physics. At the classical and phenomenological level, global symmetries account
for many of the (approximate) regularities we observe in nature, while local (gauge)
symmetries ‘‘explain’’ and unify the interactions of the basic constituents of matter. At
the quantum level symmetries (via Ward identities) facilitate the study of the ultraviolet
behavior of field theory models and their renormalization. In particular, the construc-
tion of models with local (internal) Yang-Mills symmetry that are asymptotically free
has increased enormously our understanding of the quantum behavior of matter at short
distances. If this understanding could be extended to the quantum behavior of gravita-
tional interactions (quantum gravity) we would be close to a satisfactory description of
micronature in terms of basic fermionic constituents forming multiplets of some unifica-
tion group, and bosonic gauge particles responsible for their interactions. Even more
satisfactory would be the existence in nature of a symmetry which unifies the bosons
and the fermions, the constituents and the forces, into a single entity.

Supersymmetry is the supreme symmetry: It unifies spacetime symmetries with

internal symmetries, fermions with bosons, and (local supersymmetry) gravity with mat-
ter. Under quite general assumptions it is the largest possible symmetry of the S-
matrix. At the quantum level, renormalizable globally supersymmetric models exhibit
improved ultraviolet behavior: Because of cancellations between fermionic and bosonic
contributions quadratic divergences are absent; some supersymmetric models, in particu-
lar maximally extended super-Yang-Mills theory, are the only known examples of four-
dimensional field theories that are finite to all orders of perturbation theory. Locally
2 1. INTRODUCTION

supersymmetric gravity (supergravity) may be the only way in which nature can recon-
cile Einstein gravity and quantum theory. Although we do not know at present if it is a
finite theory, quantum supergravity does exhibit less divergent short distance behavior
than ordinary quantum gravity. Outside the realm of standard quantum field theory, it
is believed that the only reasonable string theories (i.e., those with fermions and without
quantum inconsistencies) are supersymmetric; these include models that may be finite
(the maximally supersymmetric theories).

At the present time there is no direct experimental evidence that supersymmetry is

a fundamental symmetry of nature, but the current level of activity in the field indicates
that many physicists share our belief that such evidence will eventually emerge. On the
theoretical side, the symmetry makes it possible to build models with (super)natural
hierarchies. On esthetic grounds, the idea of a superunified theory is very appealing.
Even if supersymmetry and supergravity are not the ultimate theory, their study has
increased our understanding of classical and quantum field theory, and they may be an
important step in the understanding of some yet unknown, correct theory of nature.

We mean by (Poincaré) supersymmetry an extension of ordinary spacetime sym-

metries obtained by adjoining N spinorial generators Q whose anticommutator yields a
translation generator: {Q ,Q } = P . This symmetry can be realized on ordinary fields
(functions of spacetime) by transformations that mix bosons and fermions. Such realiza-
tions suffice to study supersymmetry (one can write invariant actions, etc.) but are as
cumbersome and inconvenient as doing vector calculus component by component. A
compact alternative to this ‘‘component field’’ approach is given by the super-
space--superfield approach. Superspace is an extension of ordinary spacetime to include
extra anticommuting coordinates in the form of N two-component Weyl spinors θ.
Superfields Ψ(x , θ) are functions defined over this space. They can be expanded in a
Taylor series with respect to the anticommuting coordinates θ; because the square of an
anticommuting quantity vanishes, this series has only a finite number of terms. The
coefficients obtained in this way are the ordinary component fields mentioned above. In
superspace, supersymmetry is manifest: The supersymmetry algebra is represented by
translations and rotations involving both the spacetime and the anticommuting coordi-
nates. The transformations of the component fields follow from the Taylor expansion of
the translated and rotated superfields. In particular, the transformations mixing bosons
 1. INTRODUCTION 3

and fermions are constant translations of the θ coordinates, and related rotations of θ
into the spacetime coordinate x .

A further advantage of superfields is that they automatically include, in addition

to the dynamical degrees of freedom, certain unphysical fields: (1) auxiliary fields (fields
with nonderivative kinetic terms), needed classically for the off-shell closure of the super-
symmetry algebra, and (2) compensating fields (fields that consist entirely of gauge
degrees of freedom), which are used to enlarge the usual gauge transformations to an
entire multiplet of transformations forming a representation of supersymmetry; together
with the auxiliary fields, they allow the algebra to be field independent. The compen-
sators are particularly important for quantization, since they permit the use of super-
symmetric gauges, ghosts, Feynman graphs, and supersymmetric power-counting.

Unfortunately, our present knowledge of off-shell extended (N > 1) supersymmetry

is so limited that for most extended theories these unphysical fields, and thus also the
corresponding superfields, are unknown. One could hope to find the unphysical compo-
nents directly from superspace; the essential difficulty is that, in general, a superfield is a
highly reducible representation of the supersymmetry algebra, and the problem becomes
one of finding which representations permit the construction of consistent local actions.
Therefore, except when discussing the features which are common to general superspace,
we restrict ourselves in this volume to a discussion of simple (N = 1) superfield super-
symmetry. We hope to treat extended superspace and other topics that need further
development in a second (and hopefully last) volume.

We introduce superfields in chapter 2 for the simpler world of three spacetime

dimensions, where superfields are very similar to ordinary fields. We skip the discussion
of nonsuperspace topics (background fields, gravity, etc.) which are covered in following
chapters, and concentrate on a pedagogical treatment of superspace. We return to four
dimensions in chapter 3, where we describe how supersymmetry is represented on super-
fields, and discuss all general properties of free superfields (and their relation to ordinary
fields). In chapter 4 we discuss simple (N = 1) superfields in classical global supersym-
metry. We include such topics as gauge-covariant derivatives, supersymmetric models,
extended supersymmetry with unextended superfields, and superforms. In chapter 5 we
extend the discussion to local supersymmetry (supergravity), relying heavily on the com-
pensator approach. We discuss prepotentials and covariant derivatives, the construction
4 1. INTRODUCTION

of actions, and show how to go from superspace to component results. The quantum
aspects of global theories is the topic of chapter 6, which includes a discussion of the
background field formalism, supersymmetric regularization, anomalies, and many exam-
ples of supergraph calculations. In chapter 7 we make the corresponding analysis of
quantum supergravity, including many of the novel features of the quantization proce-
dure (various types of ghosts). Chapter 8 describes supersymmetry breaking, explicit
and spontaneous, including the superHiggs mechanism and the use of nonlinear realiza-
tions.

We have not discussed component supersymmetry and supergravity, realistic

superGUT models with or without supergravity, and some of the geometrical aspects of
classical supergravity. For the first topic the reader may consult many of the excellent
reviews and lecture notes. The second is one of the current areas of active research. It
is our belief that superspace methods eventually will provide a framework for streamlin-
ing the phenomenology, once we have better control of our tools. The third topic is
attracting increased attention, but there are still many issues to be settled; there again,
superspace methods should prove useful.

We assume the reader has a knowledge of standard quantum field theory (sufficient
to do Feynman graph calculations in QCD). We have tried to make this book as peda-
gogical and encyclopedic as possible, but have omitted some straightforward algebraic
details which are left to the reader as (necessary!) exercises.
 1. INTRODUCTION 5

A hitchhiker’s guide

We are hoping, of course, that this book will be of interest to many people, with
different interests and backgrounds. The graduate student who has completed a course
in quantum field theory and wants to study superspace should:

(1) Read an article or two reviewing component global supersymmetry and super-
gravity.

(2) Read chapter 2 for a quick and easy (?) introduction to superspace. Sections 1,
2, and 3 are straightforward. Section 4 introduces, in a simple setting, the concept of
constrained covariant derivatives, and the solution of the constraints in terms of prepo-
tentials. Section 5 could be skipped at first reading. Section 6 does for supergravity
what section 4 did for Yang-Mills; superfield supergravity in three dimensions is decep-
tively simple. Section 7 introduces quantization and Feynman rules in a simpler situa-
tion than in four dimensions.

(3) Study subsections 3.2.a-d on supersymmetry algebras, and sections 3.3.a,

3.3.b.1-b.3, 3.4.a,b, 3.5 and 3.6 on superfields, covariant derivatives, and component
expansions. Study section 3.10 on compensators; we use them extensively in supergrav-
ity.

(4) Study section 4.1a on the scalar multiplet, and sections 4.2 and 4.3 on gauge
theories, their prepotentials, covariant derivatives and solution of the constraints. A
reading of sections 4.4.b, 4.4.c.1, 4.5.a and 4.5.e might be profitable.

(5) Take a deep breath and slowly study section 5.1, which is our favorite approach
to gravity, and sections 5.2 to 5.5 on supergravity; this is where the action is. For an
inductive approach that starts with the prepotentials and constructs the covariant
derivatives section 5.2 is sufficient, and one can then go directly to section 5.5. Alterna-
tively, one could start with section 5.3, and a deductive approach based on constrained
covariant derivatives, go through section 5.4 and again end at 5.5.

(6) Study sections 6.1 through 6.4 on quantization and supergraphs. The topics in
these sections should be fairly accessible.

(7) Study sections 8.1-8.4.

(8) Go back to the beginning and skip nothing this time.

6 1. INTRODUCTION

Our particle physics colleagues who are familiar with global superspace should
skim 3.1 for notation, 3.4-6 and 4.1, read 4.2 (no, you don’t know it all), and get busy
on chapter 5.

The experts should look for serious mistakes. We would appreciate hearing about
them.

A brief guide to the literature

A complete list of references is becoming increasingly difficult to compile, and we

have not attempted to do so. However, the following (incomplete!) list of review articles
and proceedings of various schools and conferences, and the references therein, are useful
and should provide easy access to the journal literature:

For global supersymmetry, the standard review articles are:

P. Fayet and S. Ferrara, Supersymmetry, Physics Reports 32C (1977) 250.

A. Salam and J. Strathdee, Fortschritte der Physik, 26 (1978) 5.

For component supergravity, the standard review is

P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Supergravity, Physics Reports 68 (1981) 189.

The following Proceedings contain extensive and up-to-date lectures on many

supersymmetry and supergravity topics:

‘‘Recent Developments in Gravitation’’ (Cargesè 1978), eds. M. Levy and S. Deser,

Plenum Press, N.Y.

‘‘Supergravity’’ (Stony Brook 1979), eds. D. Z. Freedman and P. van Nieuwen-

huizen, North-Holland, Amsterdam.

‘‘Topics in Quantum Field Theory and Gauge Theories’’ (Salamanca), Phys. 77,
Springer Verlag, Berlin.

‘‘Superspace and Supergravity’’(Cambridge 1980), eds. S. W. Hawking and M.

Roček, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

‘‘Supersymmetry and Supergravity ’81’’ (Trieste), eds. S. Ferrara, J. G. Taylor and

P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

‘‘Supersymmetry and Supergravity ’82’’ (Trieste), eds. S. Ferrara, J. G. Taylor and

P. van Nieuwenhuizen, World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore.
Contents of 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

2.1. Notation and conventions 7

a. Index conventions 7
b. Superspace 8
2.2. Supersymmetry and superfields 9
a. Representations 9
b. Components by expansion 10
c. Actions and components by projection 11
d. Irreducible representations 13
2.3. Scalar multiplet 15
2.4. Vector multiplet 18
a. Abelian gauge theory 18
a.1. Gauge connections 18
a.2. Components 19
a.3. Constraints 20
a.4. Bianchi identities 22
a.5. Matter couplings 23
b. Nonabelian case 24
c. Gauge invariant masses 26
2.5. Other global gauge multiplets 28
a. Superforms: general case 28
b. Super 2-form 30
c. Spinor gauge superfield 32
2.6. Supergravity 34
a. Supercoordinate transformations 34
b. Lorentz transformations 35
c. Covariant derivatives 35
d. Gauge choices 37
d.1. A supersymmetric gauge 37
d.2. Wess-Zumino gauge 38
e. Field strengths 38
f. Bianchi identities 39
g. Actions 42
2.7. Quantum superspace 46
a. Scalar multiplet 46
 a.1. General formalism 46
a.2. Examples 49
b. Vector multiplet 52
2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

2.1. Notation and conventions

This chapter presents a self-contained treatment of supersymmetry in three

spacetime dimensions. Our main motivation for considering this case is simplicity. Irre-
ducible representations of simple (N = 1) global supersymmetry are easier to obtain
than in four dimensions: Scalar superfields (single, real functions of the superspace coor-
dinates) provide one such representation, and all others are obtained by appending
Lorentz or internal symmetry indices. In addition, the description of local supersymme-
try (supergravity) is easier.

a. Index conventions

Our three-dimensional notation is as follows: In three-dimensional spacetime

(with signature − + +) the Lorentz group is SL(2, R) (instead of SL(2,C )) and the cor-
responding fundamental representation acts on a real (Majorana) two-component spinor
ψ α = (ψ + , ψ − ). In general we use spinor notation for all Lorentz representations, denot-
ing spinor indices by Greek letters α, β, . . . , µ, ν, . . .. Thus a vector (the three-dimen-
sional representation) will be described by a symmetric second-rank spinor
V αβ
= (V ++
,V +−
,V −−
) or a traceless second-rank spinor V α . (For comparison, in four
β

• •

dimensions we have spinors ψ α , ψ α and a vector is given by a hermitian matrix V αβ .)

All our spinors will be anticommuting (Grassmann).

Spinor indices are raised and lowered by the second-rank antisymmetric symbol
C αβ , which is also used to define the ‘‘square’’ of a spinor:
! "
0 −i
C αβ = −C βα = = −C αβ , C αβC γδ = δ [α γ δ β] δ ≡ δ α γ δ β δ − δ β γ δ α δ ;
i 0

1
ψ α = ψ βC βα , ψ α = C αβ ψ β , ψ2 = ψαψα = i ψ+ψ− . (2.1.1)
2

We represent symmetrization and antisymmetrization of n indices by ( ) and [ ], respec-

1
tively (without a factor of ). We often make use of the identity
n!

A[α B β] = −C αβ Aγ B γ , (2.1.2)
8 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

which follows from (2.1.1). We use C αβ (instead of the customary real ϵαβ ) to simplify
the rules for hermitian conjugation. In particular, it makes ψ 2 hermitian (recall ψ α and
ψ α anticommute) and gives the conventional hermiticity properties to derivatives (see
below). Note however that whereas ψ α is real, ψ α is imaginary.

b. Superspace

Superspace for simple supersymmetry is labeled by three spacetime coordinates x µν

and two anticommuting spinor coordinates θ µ , denoted collectively by z M = (x µν , θ µ ).
They have the hermiticity properties (z M )† = z M . We define derivatives by

∂ µ θ ν ≡ {∂ µ , θ ν } ≡ δ µ ν ,

1 σ τ
∂ µν x στ ≡ [∂ µν , x στ ] ≡ δ δ , (2.1.3a)
2 (µ ν)
so that the ‘‘momentum’’ operators have the hermiticity properties

(i ∂ µ )† = − (i ∂ µ ) , (i ∂ µν )† = + (i ∂ µν ) . (2.1.3b)

and thus (i ∂ M )† = i ∂ M . (Definite) integration over a single anticommuting variable γ is

#
defined so that the integral is translationally invariant (see sec. 3.7); hence dγ 1 = 0 ,
#
d γ γ = a constant which we take to be 1. We observe that a function f (γ) has a ter-
minating Taylor series f (γ) = f (0) + γ f ′(0) since {γ , γ} = 0 implies γ 2 = 0. Thus
#
d γ f (γ) = f ′(0) so that integration is equivalent to differentiation. For our spinorial
#
coordinates d θ α = ∂ α and hence
#
d θα θβ = δα β . (2.1.4)

Therefore the double integral

#
d 2 θ θ2 = − 1 , (2.1.5)

1 α
and we can define the δ-function δ 2 (θ) = − θ 2 = − θ θα .
2

* * *

We often use the notation X | to indicate the quantity X evaluated at θ = 0.

 2.2. Supersymmetry and superfields 9

2.2. Supersymmetry and superfields

a. Representations

We define functions over superspace: Φ... (x , θ) where the dots stand for Lorentz
(spinor) and/or internal symmetry indices. They transform in the usual way under the
Poincaré group with generators P µν (translations) and M αβ (Lorentz rotations). We
grade (or make super) the Poincaré algebra by introducing additional spinor supersym-
metry generators Q α , satisfying the supersymmetry algebra

[P µν , P ρσ ] = 0 , (2.2.1a)

{Q µ ,Q ν } = 2 P µν , (2.2.1b)

[Q µ , P νρ ] = 0 , (2.2.1c)

as well as the usual commutation relations with M αβ . This algebra is realized on super-
fields Φ... (x , θ) in terms of derivatives by:

P µν = i ∂ µν , Q µ = i (∂ µ − θ ν i ∂ νµ ) ; (2.2.2a)

i (µ ν) µ
ψ(x µν , θ µ ) = exp[i (ξ λρ P λρ + ϵλQ λ )]ψ(x µν + ξ µν − ϵ θ , θ + ϵµ ) . (2.2.2b)
2

Thus ξ λρ P λρ + ϵλQ λ generates a supercoordinate transformation

i (µ ν)
x ′µν = x µν + ξ µν − ϵ θ , θ ′µ = θ µ + ϵµ . (2.2.2c)
2

with real, constant parameters ξ λρ , ϵλ .

The reader can verify that (2.2.2) provides a representation of the algebra (2.2.1).
We remark in particular that if the anticommutator (2.2.1b) vanished, Q µ would annihi-
late all physical states (see sec. 3.3). We also note that because of (2.2.1a,c) and
(2.2.2a), not only Φ and functions of Φ, but also the space-time derivatives ∂ µν Φ carry a
representation of supersymmetry (are superfields). However, because of (2.2.2a), this is
not the case for the spinorial derivatives ∂ µΦ. Supersymmetrically invariant derivatives
can be defined by

D M = (D µν , D µ ) = (∂ µν , ∂ µ + θ ν i ∂ µν ) . (2.2.3)
10 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

The set D M (anti)commutes with the generators: [D M , P µν ] = [D M ,Q ν } = 0. We use

[A , B} to denote a graded commutator: anticommutator if both A and B are fermionic,
commutator otherwise.

The covariant derivatives can also be defined by their graded commutation rela-
tions

{D µ , D ν } = 2iD µν , [D µ , D νσ ] = [D µν , D στ ] = 0 ; (2.2.4)

or, more concisely:

[D M , D N } = T MN P D P ;

T µ,ν στ = i δ (µ σ δ ν) τ , rest = 0 . (2.2.5)

Thus, in the language of differential geometry, global superspace has torsion. The
derivatives satisfy the further identities

∂ µσ ∂ νσ = δ ν µ , D µ D ν = i ∂ µν +C νµ D 2 ,

D ν D µD ν = 0 , D 2 D µ = − D µ D 2 = i ∂ µν D ν , (D 2 )2 = . (2.2.6)

They also satisfy the Leibnitz rule and can be integrated by parts when inside d 3 x d 2 θ
integrals (since they are a combination of x and θ derivatives ). The following identity is
useful
# # #
3 2 3 2
d x d θ Φ(x , θ) = d x ∂ Φ(x , θ) = d 3 x ( D 2Φ(x , θ) )| (2.2.7)

(where recall that | means evaluation at θ = 0). The extra space-time derivatives in D µ
(as compared to ∂ µ ) drop out after x -integration.

b. Components by expansion

Superfields can be expanded in a (terminating) Taylor series in θ. For example,

Φαβ ... (x , θ) = Aαβ ... (x ) + θ µ λµαβ ... (x ) − θ 2 F αβ ... (x ) . (2.2.8)

A , B , F are the component fields of Φ. The supersymmetry transformations of the com-

ponents can be derived from those of the superfield. For simplicity of notation, we con-
sider a scalar superfield (no Lorentz indices)
 2.2. Supersymmetry and superfields 11

Φ(x , θ) = A(x ) + θ α ψ α (x ) − θ 2 F (x ) , (2.2.9)

The supersymmetry transformation (ξ µν = 0, ϵµ infinitesimal)

δΦ(x , θ) = − ϵµ (∂ µ − i θ ν ∂ µν )Φ(x , θ)

≡ δA + θ α δψ α − θ 2 δF , (2.2.10)

gives, upon equating powers of θ,

δA = − ϵα ψ α , (2.2.11a)

δψ α = − ϵβ (C αβ F + i ∂ αβ A) , (2.2.11b)

δF = − ϵαi ∂ α β ψ β . (2.2.11c)

It is easy to verify that on the component fields the supersymmetry algebra is satisfied:
The commutator of two transformations gives a translation, [δQ (ϵ) , δQ (η)] = −2i ϵα η β ∂ αβ ,
etc.

c. Actions and components by projection

The construction of (integral) invariants is facilitated by the observation that

supersymmetry transformations are coordinate transformations in superspace. Because
#
we can ignore total θ-derivatives ( d 3 xd 2 θ ∂ α f α = 0, which follows from (∂)3 = 0) and
total spacetime derivatives, we find that any superspace integral
#
S = d 3 x d 2 θ f (Φ, D αΦ, . . .) (2.2.12)

that does not depend explicitly on the coordinates is invariant under the full algebra. If
the superfield expansion in terms of components is substituted into the integral and the
θ-integration is carried out, the resulting component integral is invariant under the
transformations of (2.2.11) (the integrand in general changes by a total derivative). This
also can be seen from the fact that the θ-integration picks out the F component of f ,
which transforms as a spacetime derivative (see (2.2.11c)).

We now describe a technical device that can be extremely helpful. In general, to

obtain component expressions by direct θ-expansions can be cumbersome. A more
12 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

efficient procedure is to observe that the components in (2.2.9) can be defined by projec-
tion:

A(x ) = Φ(x , θ)| ,

ψ α (x ) = D α Φ(x , θ)| ,

F (x ) = D 2 Φ(x , θ)| . (2.2.13)

This can be used, for example, in (2.2.12) by rewriting (c.f. (2.2.7))

#
S = d 3 x D 2 f (Φ, D αΦ, . . .)| . (2.2.14)

After the derivatives are evaluated (using the Leibnitz rule and paying due respect to
the anticommutativity of the D’s), the result is directly expressible in terms of the com-
ponents (2.2.13). The reader should verify in a few simple examples that this is a much
more efficient procedure than direct θ-expansion and integration.

Finally, we can also reobtain the component transformation laws by this method.
We first note the identity

iQ α + D α = 2θ β i ∂ αβ . (2.2.15)

Thus we find, for example

δA = i ϵαQ αΦ|

= − ϵα (D αΦ − 2θ β i ∂ αβ Φ)|

= − ϵα ψ α . (2.2.16)

In general we have

iQ α f | = − D α f | . (2.2.17)

This is sufficient to obtain all of the component fields transformation laws by repeated
application of (2.2.17), where f is Φ , D αΦ , D 2Φ and we use (2.2.6) and (2.2.13).
 2.2. Supersymmetry and superfields 13

d. Irreducible representations

In general a theory is described by fields which in momentum space are defined

for arbitrary values of p 2 . For any fixed value of p 2 the fields are a representation of the
Poincaré group. We call such fields, defined for arbitrary values of p 2 , an off-shell repre-
sentation of the Poincaré group. Similarly, when a set of fields is a representation of the
supersymmetry algebra for any value of p 2 , we call it an off-shell representation of super-
symmetry. When the field equations are imposed, a particular value of p 2 (i.e., m 2 ) is
picked out. Some of the components of the fields (auxiliary components) are then con-
strained to vanish; the remaining (physical) components form what we call an on-shell
representation of the Poincaré (or supersymmetry) group.

A superfield ψ̃ α... (p, θ) is an irreducible representation of the Lorentz group, with

regard to its external indices, if it is totally symmetric in these indices. For a represen-
tation of the (super)Poincaré group we can reduce it further. Since in three dimensions
the little group is SO(2), and its irreducible representations are one-component (com-
plex), this reduction will give one-component superfields (with respect to external
indices). Such superfields are irreducible representations of off-shell supersymmetry,
when a reality condition is imposed in x -space (but the superfield is then still complex in
p-space, where Φ(p) = Φ(−p) ).

In an appropriate reference frame we can assign ‘‘helicity’’ (i.e., the eigenvalue of

1
the SO(2) generator) ± to the spinor indices, and the irreducible representations will
2
be labeled by the ‘‘superhelicity’’ (the helicity of the superfield): half the number of +
1
external indices minus the number of −’s. In this frame we can also assign ± helicity
2
to θ ± . Expanding the superfield of superhelicity h into components, we see that these
1
components have helicities h, h ± , h. For example, a scalar multiplet, consisting of
2
1 1
‘‘spins’’ (i.e., SO(2, 1) representations) 0 , (i.e., helicities 0 , ± ) is described by a
2 2
superfield of superhelicity 0: a scalar superfield. A vector multiplet, consisting of spins
1 1 1 1
, 1 (helicities 0 , , , 1) is described by a superfield of superhelicity + : the ‘‘+’’ com-
2 2 2 2
ponent of a spinor superfield; the ‘‘−’’ component being gauged away (in a light-cone
gauge). In general, the superhelicity content of a superfield is analyzed by choosing a
gauge (the supersymmetric light-cone gauge) where as many as possible Lorentz compo-
nents of a superfield have been gauged to 0: the superhelicity content of any remaining
14 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

1
component is simply the number of +’s minus −’s. Unless otherwise stated, we will
2
automatically consider all three-dimensional superfields to be real.
 2.3. Scalar multiplet 15

2.3. Scalar multiplet

The simplest representation of supersymmetry is the scalar multiplet described

by the real superfield Φ(x , θ), and containing the scalars A, F and the two-component
1
spinor ψ α . From (2.2.1,2) we see that θ has dimension (mass)− 2 . Also, the canonical
1
dimensions of component fields in three dimensions are less than in four dimensions
2
# #
(because we use d 3 x instead of d 4 x in the kinetic term). Therefore, if this multiplet
1
is to describe physical fields, we must assign dimension (mass) 2 to Φ so that ψ α has
canonical dimension (mass)1 . (Although it is not immediately obvious which scalar
should have canonical dimension, there is only one spinor.) Then A will have dimension
1
(mass) 2 and will be the physical scalar partner of ψ, whereas F has too high a dimen-
sion to describe a canonical physical mode.
#
Since a θ integral is the same as a θ derivative, d 2 θ has dimension (mass)1 .
Therefore, on dimensional grounds we expect the following expression to give the correct
(massless) kinetic action for the scalar multiplet:
#
1
S kin = − d 3 x d 2 θ (D αΦ)2 , (2.3.1)
2

1
(recall that for any spinor ψ α we have ψ 2 = ψ α ψ α ). This expression is reminiscent of
2
# #
the kinetic action for an ordinary scalar field with the substitutions d x → d 3 x d 2 θ
3

and ∂ αβ → D α . The component expression can be obtained by explicit θ-expansion and

integration. However, we prefer to use the alternative procedure (first integrating D α by
parts):
#
1
S kin = d 3 x d 2 θ ΦD 2Φ
2

#
1
= d 3 x D 2 [Φ D 2Φ]|
2

#
1
= d 3 x (D 2Φ D 2Φ + D αΦ D α D 2Φ + Φ(D 2 )2Φ)|
2

#
1
= d 3 x (F 2 + ψ αi ∂ α β ψ β + A A) , (2.3.2)
2
16 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

where we have used the identities (2.2.6) and the definitions (2.2.13). The A and ψ
kinetic terms are conventional, while F is clearly non-propagating.

The auxiliary field F can be eliminated from the action by using its equation of
motion F = 0 (or, in a functional integral, F can be trivially integrated out). The
resulting action is still invariant under the bose-fermi transformations (2.2.11a,b) with
F = 0; however, these are not supersymmetry transformations (not a representation of
the supersymmetry algebra) except ‘‘on shell’’. The commutator of two such transforma-
tions does not close (does not give a translation) except when ψ α satisfies its field equa-
tion. This ‘‘off-shell’’ non-closure of the algebra is typical of transformations from which
auxiliary fields have been eliminated.

Mass and interaction terms can be added to (2.3.1). A term

#
S I = d 3 x d 2 θ f (Φ) , (2.3.3)

leads to a component action

#
S I = d 3 x D 2 f (Φ)|

#
= d 3 x [ f ′′(Φ) (D αΦ)2 + f ′(Φ) D 2Φ]|

#
= d 3 x [ f ′′(A) ψ 2 + f ′(A) F ] . (2.3.4)

In a renormalizable model f (Φ) can be at most quartic. In particular,

1 1
f (Φ) = mΦ2 + λΦ3 gives mass terms, Yukawa and cubic interaction terms. Together
2 6
with the kinetic term, we obtain
#
1 1 1
d 3 xd 2 θ[ − (D αΦ)2 + mΦ2 + λΦ3 ]
2 2 6

#
1
= d 3 x [ (A A + ψ αi ∂ α β ψ β + F 2 )
2

1
+ m(ψ 2 + AF ) + λ(Aψ 2 + A2 F )] . (2.3.5)
2

F can again be eliminated using its (algebraic) equation of motion, leading to a

 2.3. Scalar multiplet 17

conventional mass term and quartic interactions for the scalar field A. More exotic
kinetic actions are possible by using instead of (2.3.1)
#
S kin = d 3 x d 2 θ Ω (ζ α , Φ) , ζ α = D αΦ ,
′
(2.3.6)

∂2Ω 1
where Ω is some function such that = − C αβ . If we introduce more than
∂ζ α ∂ζ β |ζ,Φ = 0 2
one multiplet of scalar superfields, then, for example, we can obtain generalized super-
symmetric nonlinear sigma models:
#
1 1
S =− d 3 x d 2 θ g ij (Φ) ( D αΦi ) ( D αΦ j ) (2.3.7)
2 2
18 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

2.4. Vector multiplet

a. Abelian gauge theory

In accordance with the discussion in sec. 2.2, a real spinor gauge superfield Γα
1 1
with superhelicity h = (h = − can be gauged away) will consist of components with
2 2
1 1
helicities 0, , , 1. It can be used to describe a massless gauge vector field and its
2 2
fermionic partner. (In three dimensions, a gauge vector particle has one physical compo-
nent of definite helicity.) The superfield can be introduced by analogy with scalar QED
(the generalization to the nonabelian case is straightforward, and will be discussed
below). Consider a complex scalar superfield (a doublet of real scalar superfields) trans-
forming under a constant phase rotation

Φ → Φ ′ = e iK Φ ,

Φ → Φ ′ = Φe −iK . (2.4.1)

The free Lagrangian |DΦ|2 is invariant under these transformations.

a.1. Gauge connections

We extend this to a local phase invariance with K a real scalar superfield depend-
ing on x and θ, by covariantizing the spinor derivatives D α :

D α → ∇α = D α −
+ i Γα , (2.4.2)

when acting on Φ or Φ, respectively. The spinor gauge potential (or connection) Γα

transforms in the usual way

δΓα = D α K , (2.4.3)

to ensure

∇ ′α = e iK ∇α e −iK . (2.4.4)

This is required by (∇ Φ)′ = e iK (∇ Φ), and guarantees that the Lagrangian |∇Φ|2 is
locally gauge invariant. (The coupling constant can be restored by rescaling Γα → gΓα ).
 2.4. Vector multiplet 19

It is now straightforward, by analogy with QED, to find a gauge invariant field

strength and action for the multiplet described by Γα and to study its component cou-
plings to the complex scalar multiplet contained in |∇Φ|2 . However, both to understand
its structure as an irreducible representation of supersymmetry, and as an introduction
to more complicated gauge superfields (e.g. in supergravity), we first give a geometrical
presentation.

Although the actions we have considered do not contain the spacetime derivative
∂αβ , in other contexts we need the covariant object

∇αβ = ∂αβ − i Γαβ , δΓαβ = ∂ αβ K , (2.4.5)

introducing a distinct (vector) gauge potential superfield. The transformation δΓαβ of

this connection is chosen to give:

∇ ′αβ = e iK ∇αβ e −iK . (2.4.6)

(From a geometric viewpoint, it is natural to introduce the vector connection; then Γα

and Γαβ can be regarded as the components of a super 1-form ΓA = (Γα , Γαβ ); see sec.
2.5). However, we will find that Γαβ should not be independent, and can be expressed in
terms of Γα .

a.2. Components

To get oriented, we examine the components of Γ in the Taylor series θ-expansion.

They can be defined directly by using the spinor derivatives D α :

1
χα = Γα | , B= D α Γα | ,
2

i 1
V αβ = − D (α Γβ) | , λα = D β D α Γβ | , (2.4.7a)
2 2

and

W αβ = Γαβ | , ρβ = D α Γαβ | ,

ψ αβγ = D (α Γβγ) | , T αβ = D 2 Γαβ | . (2.4.7b)

We have separated the components into irreducible representations of the Lorentz group,
that is, traces (or antisymmetrized pieces, see (2.1.2)) and symmetrized pieces. We also
20 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

define the components of the gauge parameter K :

ω = K| , σα = D αK | , τ = D 2K | (2.4.8)

The component gauge transformations for the components defined in (2.4.7) are found
by repeatedly differentiating (2.4.3-5) with spinor derivatives D α . We find:

δχα = σ α , δB = τ ,

δV αβ = ∂ αβ ω , δλα = 0 , (2.4.9a)

and

δW αβ = ∂ αβ ω , δρα = ∂ αβ σ β ,

δψ αβγ = ∂(βγ σα) , δT αβ = ∂ αβ τ . (2.4.9b)

Note that χ and B suffer arbitrary shifts as a consequence of a gauge transformation,

and, in particular, can be gauged completely away; the gauge χ = B = 0 is called Wess-
Zumino gauge, and explicitly breaks supersymmetry. However, this gauge is useful since
it reveals the physical content of the Γα multiplet.

Examination of the components that remain reveals several peculiar features:

There are two component gauge potentials V αβ and W αβ for only one gauge symmetry,
3
and there is a high dimension spin field ψ αβγ . These problems will be resolved below
2
when we express Γαβ in terms of Γα .

We can also find supersymmetric Lorentz gauges by fixing D α Γα ; such gauges are
useful for quantization (see sec. 2.7). Furthermore, in three dimensions it is possible to
choose a supersymmetric light-cone gauge Γ+ = 0. (In the abelian case the gauge trans-
formation takes the simple form K = D + (i ∂ ++ )−1 Γ+ .) Eq. (2.4.14) below implies that in
this gauge the superfield Γ++ also vanishes. The remaining components in this gauge are
χ− , V +− , V −− , and λ− , with V ++ = 0 and λ+ ∼ ∂ ++ χ− .

a.3. Constraints

To understand how the vector connection Γαβ can be expressed in terms of the
spinor connection Γα , recall the (anti)commutation relations for the ordinary derivatives
are:
 2.4. Vector multiplet 21

[ D M , D N } = TMN P D P . (2.4.10)

For the covariant derivatives ∇A = (∇α , ∇αβ ) the graded commutation relations can be
written (from (2.4.2) and (2.4.5) we see that the torsion TAB C is unmodified):

[ ∇A , ∇B } = TAB C ∇C − i FAB . (2.4.11)

The field strengths F AB are invariant (F ′AB = F AB ) due to the covariance of the deriva-
tives ∇A . Observe that the field strengths are antihermitian matrices, F AB = − F BA , so
that the symmetric field strength F αβ is imaginary while the antisymmetric field
strength F αβ ,γδ is real. Examining a particular equation from (2.4.11), we find:

{ ∇α , ∇β } = 2i ∇αβ − i Fαβ = 2i ∂αβ + 2Γαβ − i Fαβ . (2.4.12)

The superfield Γαβ was introduced to covariantize the space-time derivative ∂ αβ . How-
i
ever, it is clear that an alternative choice is Γ ′αβ = Γαβ − F αβ since F αβ is covariant (a
2
field strength). The new covariant space-time derivative will then satisfy (we drop the
primes)

{∇α , ∇β } = 2i ∇αβ , (2.4.13)

with the new space-time connection satisfying (after substituting in 2.4.12 the explicit
forms ∇A = D A − i ΓA )

i
Γαβ = − D Γ . (2.4.14)
2 (α β)
Thus the conventional constraint

F αβ = 0 , (2.4.15)

imposed on the system (2.4.11) has allowed the vector potential to be expressed in terms
of the spinor potential. This solves both the problem of two gauge fields W αβ ,V αβ and
the problem of the higher spin and dimension components ψ αβγ ,T αβ : The gauge fields
are identified with each other (W αβ = V αβ ), and the extra components are expressed as
derivatives of familiar lower spin and dimension fields (see 2.4.7). The independent com-
ponents that remain in Wess-Zumino gauge after the constraint is imposed are V αβ and
λα .
22 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

We stress the importance of the constraint (2.4.15) on the objects defined in

(2.4.11). Unconstrained field strengths in general lead to reducible representations of
supersymmetry (i.e., the spinor and vector potentials), and the constraints are needed to
ensure irreducibility.

a.4. Bianchi identities

In ordinary field theories, the field strengths satisfy Bianchi identities because they
are expressed in terms of the potentials; they are identities and carry no information.
For gauge theories described by covariant derivatives, the Bianchi identities are just
Jacobi identities:

[ ∇[A , [ ∇B , ∇C ) } } = 0 , (2.4.16)

(where [ ) is the graded antisymmetrization symbol, identical to the usual antisym-

metrization symbol but with an extra factor of (−1) for each pair of interchanged
fermionic indices). However, once we impose constraints such as (2.4.13,15) on some of
the field strengths, the Bianchi identities imply constraints on other field strengths. For
example, the identity

0 = [ ∇ α , { ∇ β , ∇ γ } ] + [ ∇ β , { ∇ γ , ∇ α } ] + [ ∇ γ , { ∇ α , ∇β } ]

1
= [ ∇(α , { ∇β , ∇γ) } ] (2.4.17)
2

gives (using the constraint (2.4.13,15))

0 = [ ∇(α , ∇βγ) ] = − i F (α,βγ) . (2.4.18)

Thus the totally symmetric part of F vanishes. In general, we can decompose F into
irreducible representations of the Lorentz group:

1 1
F α,βγ = F (α,βγ) − C α(β| F δ ,δ|γ) (2.4.19)
6 3

(where indices between | . . . | , e.g., in this case δ, are not included in the symmetriza-
tion). Hence the only remaining piece is:

Fα,βγ = i C α(β W γ) , (2.4.20a)

where we introduce the superfield strength W α . We can compute F α,βγ in terms of Γα

 2.4. Vector multiplet 23

and find

1
Wα = D β D α Γβ . (2.4.20b)
2

The superfield W α is the only independent gauge invariant field strength, and is
constrained by D αW α = 0, which follows from the Bianchi identity (2.4.16). This
implies that only one Lorentz component of W α is independent. The field strength
1
describes the physical degrees of freedom: one helicity and one helicity 1 mode. Thus
2
W α is a suitable object for constructing an action. Indeed, if we start with
# #
1 1 1
S = 2 d x d θ W = 2 d 3 x d 2 θ ( D β D α Γβ )2 ,
3 2 2
(2.4.21)
g g 2

we can compute the component action

# #
1 1 1
S = 2 d x D W = 2 d 3 x [W α D 2 W α − (D αW β ) (D αW β ) ]|
3 2 2
g g 2

# $ %
1 1
= d 3x λα i ∂ α β λβ − f αβ f αβ . (2.4.22)
g2 2

Here (cf. 2.4.7) λα ≡ W α | while f αβ = D αW β | = D βW α | is the spinor form of the usual

field strength

1
F αβ γδ | = (∂ αβ Γ γδ − ∂ γδ Γαβ )| = δ (γ f β) δ)
2 (α

1
= −i [∂ αβ D (γ Γδ) − ∂ γδ D (α Γβ) ]| . (2.4.23)
2

To derive the above component action we have used the Bianchi identity D αW α = 0, and
its consequence D 2W α = i ∂ α βW β .

a.5. Matter couplings

We now examine the component Lagrangian describing the coupling to a complex

scalar multiplet. We could start with
#
1
S =− d 3 xd 2 θ(∇αΦ)(∇αΦ)
2
24 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

#
1
=− d 3 xD 2 [(D α + i Γα )Φ][(D α − i Γα )Φ] , (2.4.24)
2

and work out the Lagrangian in terms of components defined by projection. However, a
more efficient procedure, which leads to physically equivalent results, is to define covari-
ant components of Φ by covariant projection

A = Φ(x , θ)| ,

ψ α = ∇αΦ(x , θ)| ,

F = ∇2Φ(x , θ)| . (2.4.25)

These components are not equal to the ordinary ones but can be obtained by a (gauge-
field dependent) field redefinition and provide an equally valid description of the theory.
We can also use
# # #
3 2 3 2
d xd θ = d x D |= d 3 x ∇2 | , (2.4.26)

when acting on an invariant and hence

#
S = d 3 x ∇2 [Φ∇2Φ]|

#
= d 3 x [∇2Φ∇2Φ + ∇αΦ∇α ∇2Φ + Φ(∇2 )2Φ]|

#
= d 3 x [F F + ψ α (i ∂ α β +V α β )ψ β + (iψ α λα A + h. c. ) + A(∂ αβ − i V αβ )2 A]. (2.4.27)

We have used the commutation relations of the covariant derivatives and in particular
∇α ∇2 = i ∇α β ∇β + iW α , ∇2 ∇α = − i ∇α β ∇β − 2iW α , (∇2 )2 = − iW α ∇α , where is
the covariant d’Alembertian (covariantized with Γαβ ).

b. Nonabelian case

We now briefly consider the nonabelian case: For a multiplet of scalar superfields
transforming as Φ ′ = e iK Φ, where K = K iT i and T i are generators of the Lie algebra,
we introduce covariant spinor derivatives ∇α precisely as for the abelian case (2.4.2).
We define Γα = Γαi T i so that
 2.4. Vector multiplet 25

∇α = D α − i Γα = D α − i Γαi T i . (2.4.28)

The spinor connection now transforms as

δΓα = ∇α K = D α K − i [ Γα , K ] , (2.4.29)

leaving (2.4.4) unmodified. The vector connection is again constrained by requiring

F αβ = 0; in other words, we have

i
∇αβ = − { ∇α , ∇β } , (2.4.30a)
2

1
Γαβ = − i [D (α Γβ) − i {Γα , Γβ } ] . (2.4.30b)
2

The form of the action (2.4.21) is unmodified (except that we must also take a trace over
group indices). The constraint (2.4.30) implies that the Bianchi identities have nontriv-
ial consequences, and allows us to ‘‘solve’’ (2.4.17) for the nonabelian case as in
(2.4.18,19,20a). Thus, we obtain

[ ∇α , ∇βγ ] = C α(βW γ) (2.4.31a)

in terms of the nonabelian form of the covariant field strength W :

1 i 1
Wα = D β D α Γβ − [ Γβ , D β Γα ] − [ Γβ , { Γβ , Γα } ] . (2.4.31b)
2 2 6

The field strength transforms covariantly: W ′α = e iKW αe −iK . The remaining Bianchi
identity is

[ { ∇α , ∇β } , ∇γδ ] − { ∇(α , [∇β) , ∇γδ ] } = 0 . (2.4.32a)

Contracting indices we find [{∇α , ∇β }, ∇αβ ] = {∇(α , [∇β) , ∇αβ ]}. However,
[{∇α , ∇β }, ∇αβ ] = 2i [∇αβ , ∇αβ ] = 0 and hence, using (2.4.31a),

0 = { ∇(α , [ ∇β) , ∇αβ ] } = − 6{ ∇α ,W α } . (2.4.32b)

The full implication of the Bianchi identities is thus:

{ ∇α , ∇β } = 2i ∇αβ (2.4.33a)

[ ∇α , ∇βγ ] = C α(βW γ) , { ∇α ,W α } = 0 (2.4.33b)

1 1
[ ∇αβ , ∇γδ ] = − i δ (α (γ f β) δ) , f αβ ≡ { ∇(α ,W β) } . (2.4.33c)
2 2
26 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

The components of the multiplet can be defined in analogy to (2.4.7) by projec-

tions of Γ:

1
χα = Γα | , B = D α Γα | ,
2
(2.4.34)
V αβ = Γαβ | , λα = W α | .

c. Gauge invariant masses

A curious feature which this theory has, and which makes it rather different from
four dimensional Yang-Mills theory, is the existence of a gauge-invariant mass term: In
the abelian case the Bianchi identity D αW α = 0 can be used to prove the invariance of
# $ %
1 1
Sm = 2 d 3x d 2θ m ΓαW α . (2.4.35)
g 2

In components this action contains the usual gauge invariant mass term for three-dimen-
sional electrodynamics:
# #
3
m d xV αβ
∂ γα V β = m
γ
d 3 x V αβ f αβ , (2.4.36)

which is gauge invariant as a consequence of the usual component Bianchi identity

∂ αβ f αβ = 0.

The superfield equations which result from (2.4.21,35) are:

i ∂ αβ W β + m W α = 0 , (2.4.37)

which describes an irreducible multiplet of mass m. The Bianchi identity D αW α = 0

implies that only one Lorentz component of W is independent.

For the nonabelian case, the mass term is somewhat more complicated because the
field strength W is covariant rather than invariant:
#
1 1 i
S m = tr 2 d 3 x d 2 θ m ( ΓαW α + { Γα , Γβ } D β Γα
g 2 6

1
+ { Γα , Γβ } { Γα , Γβ } )
12
 2.4. Vector multiplet 27

#
1 1 1
= tr d 3x d 2θ m Γα (W α − [ Γβ , Γαβ ] ) . (2.4.38)
g2 2 6

The field equations, however, are the covariantizations of (2.4.37):

i ∇α β W β + m W α = 0 . (2.4.39)
28 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

2.5. Other global gauge multiplets

a. Superforms: general case

The gauge multiplets discussed in the last section may be described completely in
terms of geometric quantities. The gauge potentials ΓA ≡ (Γα , Γαβ ) which covariantize
the derivatives D A with respect to local phase rotations of the matter superfields consti-
tute a super 1-form. We define super p-forms as tensors with p covariant supervector
indices (i.e., supervector subscripts) that have total graded antisymmetry with respect to
these indices (i.e., are symmetric in any pair of spinor indices, antisymmetric in a vector
pair or in a mixed pair). For example, the field strength F AB ≡ (F α,β , F α,βγ , F αβ,γδ ) con-
stitutes a super 2-form.

In terms of supervector notation the gauge transformation for ΓA (from (2.4.3) and
(2.4.5)) takes the form

δΓA = D A K . (2.5.1)

The field strength defined in (2.3.6) when expressed in terms of the gauge potential can
be written as

F AB = D [A ΓB ) − T AB C ΓC . (2.5.2)

The gauge transformation law certainly takes the familiar form, but even in the abelian
case, the field strength has an unfamiliar nonderivative term. One way to understand
how this term arises is to make a change of basis for the components of a supervector.
We can expand D A in terms of partial derivatives by introducing a matrix, E A M , such
that

D A = E A M ∂ M , ∂ M ≡ ( ∂ µ , ∂ µν ) ,

⎡ 1 (µ ν) ⎤
δαµ i θ δα
⎢ 2 ⎥
E AM = ⎣ ⎦ . (2.5.3)
1 (µ ν)
0 δ δ
2 α β

This matrix is the flat vielbein; its inverse is

 2.5. Other global gauge multiplets 29

⎡ 1 ⎤
δµ α − i θ (α δ µ β)
⎢ 2 ⎥
EMA = ⎣ ⎦ . (2.5.4)
1 (α β)
0 δ δν
2 µ

If we define ΓM by ΓA ≡ E A M ΓM , then

δΓM = ∂ M K . (2.5.5)

Similarly, if we define F MN by

F AB ≡ (−)A(B +N ) E B N E A M F MN , (2.5.6a)

then

F MN = ∂ [M ΓN ) . (2.5.6b)

(In the Grassmann parity factor (−)A(B +N ) the superscripts A , B , and N are equal to
one when these indices refer to spinorial indices and zero otherwise.) We thus see that
the nonderivative term in the field strength is absent when the components of this
supertensor are referred to a different coordinate basis. Furthermore, in this basis the
Bianchi identities take the simple form

∂ [M F NP ) = 0 . (2.5.7)

The generalization to higher-rank graded antisymmetric tensors (superforms) is

now evident. There is a basis in which the gauge transformation, field strength, and
Bianchi identities take the forms

1
δΓM 1 ...M p = ∂ [M 1 K M 2 ...M p ) ,
(p − 1)!

1
F M 1 ...M p+1 = ∂ [M 1 ΓM 2 ...M p+1 ) ,
p!

0 = ∂ [M 1 F M 2 ...M p+2 ) . (2.5.8)

We simply multiply these by suitable powers of the flat vielbein and appropriate Grass-
mann parity factors to obtain

1 1 B
δΓA1 ...Ap = D [A1 K A2 ...Ap ) − T K B |A3 ...Ap ) ,
(p − 1)! 2(p − 2)! [A1 A2 |
30 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

1 1 B
F A1 ...Ap+1 = D [A1 ΓA2 ...Ap+1 ) − T ΓB |A3 ...Ap+1 ) ,
p! 2(p − 1)! [A1 A2 |

1 1 B
0= D [A1 F A2 ...Ap+2 ) − T F B |A3 ...Ap+2 ) . (2.5.9)
(p + 1)! 2p! [A1 A2 |

(The | ’s indicate that all of the indices are graded antisymmetric except the B ’s.)

b. Super 2-form

We now discuss in detail the case of a super 2-form gauge superfield ΓAB with
gauge transformation

δΓα,β = D (α K β) − 2i K αβ ,

δΓα,βγ = D α K βγ − ∂ βγ K α ,

δΓαβ,γδ = ∂ αβ K γδ − ∂ γδ K αβ . (2.5.10)

The field strength for ΓAB is a super 3-form:

1
F α,β,γ = (D (α Γβ,γ) + 2i Γ(α,βγ) ) ,
2

F α,β,γδ = D (α Γβ),γδ + ∂ γδ Γα,β − 2i Γαβ,γδ ,

F α,βγ,δϵ = D α Γβγ,δϵ + ∂ δϵ Γα,βγ − ∂ βγ Γα,δϵ ,

F αβ,γδ,ϵζ = ∂ αβ Γγδ,ϵζ + ∂ ϵζ Γαβ,γδ + ∂ γδ Γϵζ,αβ . (2.5.11)

All of these equations are contained in the concise supervector notation in (2.5.9).

The gauge superfield ΓA was subject to constraints that allowed one part (Γα,β ) to
be expressed as a function of the remaining part. This is a general feature of supersym-
metric gauge theories; constraints are needed to ensure irreducibility. For the tensor
gauge multiplet we impose the constraints

F α,β,γ = 0 , F α,β, γδ = i δ (α γ δ β) δ G = T α,β γδG , (2.5.12)

which, as we show below, allow us to express all covariant quantities in terms of the sin-
gle real scalar superfield G. These constraints can be solved as follows: we first observe
that in the field strengths Γα,β always appears in the combination D (α Γβ,γ) + 2i Γ(α,βγ) .
 2.5. Other global gauge multiplets 31

Therefore, without changing the field strengths we can redefine Γα,βγ by absorbing
D (α Γβ,γ) into it. Thus Γα,β disappears from the field strengths which means it could be
set to zero from the beginning (equivalently, we can make it zero by a gauge transforma-
tion). The first constraint now implies that the totally symmetric part of Γα,βγ is zero
and hence we can write Γα,βγ = i C α(β Φγ) in terms of a spinor superfield Φγ . The
remaining equations and constraints can be used now to express Γαβ,γδ and the other
field strengths in terms of Φα . We find a solution

Γα,β = 0 , Γα,βγ = i C α(β Φγ) ,

1
Γαβ, γδ = δ (γ [ D β)Φδ) + D δ)Φβ) ] ,
4 (α

G = − D α Φα . (2.5.13)

Thus the constraints allow ΓAB to be expressed in terms of a spinor superfield Φα . (The
general solution of the constraints is a gauge transform (2.5.10) of (2.5.13).)

The quantity G is by definition a field strength; hence the gauge variation of Φα

must leave G invariant. This implies that the gauge variation of Φα must be (see
(2.2.6))

1
δΦα = D β D α Λβ , (2.5.14)
2

where Λβ is an arbitrary spinor gauge parameter. This gauge transformation is of course

consistent with what remains of (2.5.10) after the gauge choice (2.5.13).

We expect the physical degrees of freedom to appear in the (only independent)

field strength G. Since this is a scalar superfield, it must describe a scalar and a spinor,
and Φα (or ΓAB ) provides a variant representation of the supersymmetry algebra nor-
mally described by the scalar superfield Φ. In fact Φα contains components with helici-
1 1 1
ties 0, , , 1 just like the vector multiplet, but now the , 1 components are auxiliary
2 2 2
1
fields. (Φα = ψ α + θ α A + θ β v αβ − θ 2 χα ). For Φα with canonical dimension (mass) 2 , on
dimensional grounds the gauge invariant action must be given by
#
1
S =− d 3 x d 2 θ (D αG)2 . (2.5.15)
2

Written in this form we see that in terms of the components of G, the action has the
32 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

same form as in (2.3.2). The only differences arise because G is expressed in terms of
Φα . We find that only the auxiliary field F is modified; it is replaced by a field F ′. An
explicit computation of this quantity yields

1
F ′ = − D 2 D αΦα | = i ∂ αβ D αΦβ | ≡ ∂ αβV αβ | , V αβ ≡ iD (αΦβ) . (2.5.16)
2

In place of F the divergence of a vector appears. To see that this vector field really is a
gauge field, we compute its variation under the gauge transformation (2.5.14):

1
δV αβ = ∂ γ (α [ D β) Λγ + D γ Λβ) ] . (2.5.17)
4

This is not the transformation of an ordinary gauge vector (see (2.4.9)), but rather that
of a second-rank antisymmetric tensor (in three dimensions a second-rank antisymmetric
tensor is the same Lorentz representation as a vector). This is the component gauge
field that appears at lowest order in θ in Γαβ,γδ in eq. (2.5.13). A field of this type has no
dynamics in three dimensions.

c. Spinor gauge superfield

Superforms are not the only gauge multiplets one can study, but the pattern for
other cases is similar. In general, (nonvariant) supersymmetric gauge multiplets can be
described by spinor superfields carrying additional internal-symmetry group indices. (In
a particular case, the additional index can be a spinor index: see below.) Such super-
fields contain component gauge fields and, as in the Yang-Mills case, their gauge trans-
formations are determined by the θ = 0 part of the superfield gauge parameter (cf.
(2.4.9)). The gauge superfield thus takes the form of the component field with a vector
index replaced by a spinor index, and the transformation law takes the form of the com-
ponent transformation law with the vector derivative replaced by a spinor derivative.
3
For example, to describe a multiplet containing a spin component gauge field, we
2
introduce a spinor gauge superfield with an additional spinor group index:

δΦµ α = D µ K α . (2.5.18)

The field strength has the same form as the vector multiplet field strength but with a
spinor group index:
 2.5. Other global gauge multiplets 33

1
W αβ = D γ D α Φγ β . (2.5.19)
2

(We can, of course, introduce a supervector potential ΓM α in exact analogy with the
abelian vector multiplet. The field strength here simply has an additional spinor index.
The constraints are exactly the same as for the vector multiplet, i.e., F αβ γ = 0.)

In three dimensions massless fields of spin greater than 1 have no dynamical

degrees of freedom. The kinetic term for this multiplet is analogous to the mass term
for the vector multiplet:
#
S ∼ d 3 xd 2 θ W αβ Φαβ . (2.5.20)

3
This action describes component fields which are all auxiliary: a spin gauge field
2
ψ (αβ)γ , a vector, and a scalar, as can be verified by expanding in components. The
invariance of the action in (2.5.20) is not manifest: It depends on the Bianchi identity
D αW αβ = 0. The explicit appearance of the superfield Φαβ is a general feature of super-
symmetric gauge theories; it is not always possible to write the superspace action for a
gauge theory in terms of field strengths alone.
34 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

2.6. Supergravity

a. Supercoordinate transformations

Supergravity, the supersymmetric generalization of gravity, is the gauge theory of

the supertranslations. The global transformations with constant parameters ξ µν , ϵµ gen-
erated by P µν and Q µ are replaced by local ones parametrized by the supervector
K M (x , θ) = (K µν , K µ ). For a scalar superfield Ψ(x , θ) we define the transformation

Ψ(z ) → Ψ ′(z ) = e iK Ψ(z ) = e iK Ψ(z ) e −iK , (2.6.1)

where

K = K M iD M = K µν i ∂ µν + K µ iD µ . (2.6.2)

(To exhibit the global supersymmetry, it is convenient to write K in terms of D µ rather

than Q µ (or ∂ µ ). This amounts to a redefinition of K µν ). The second form of the
transformation of Ψ can be shown to be equivalent to the first by comparing terms in a
power series expansion of the two forms and noting that iK Ψ = [iK , Ψ]. It is easy to see
that (2.6.1) is a general coordinate transformation in superspace:
e iK Ψ(z )e −iK = Ψ(e iK ze −iK ); defining z ′ ≡ e −iK ze iK , (2.6.1) becomes Ψ ′(z ′) = Ψ(z ).

We may expect, by analogy to the Yang-Mills case, to introduce a gauge superfield

H α M with (linearized) transformation laws

δH α M = D α K M , (2.6.3)

(we introduce H αβ M as well, but a constraint will relate it to H α M ) and define covariant
derivatives by analogy to (2.4.28):

E A = D A + H AM D M = E AM D M . (2.6.4)

E A M is the vielbein. The potentials H α µν , H α µ have a large number of components

among which we identify, according to the discussion following equation (2.5.17), a sec-
ond-rank tensor (the ‘‘dreibein’’, minus its flat-space part) describing the graviton and a
3
spin field describing the gravitino, whose gauge parameters are the θ = 0 parts of the
2
vector and spinor gauge superparameters K M |. Other components will describe gauge
degrees of freedom and auxiliary fields.
 2.6. Supergravity 35

b. Lorentz transformations

The local supertranslations introduced so far include Lorentz transformations of a

scalar superfield, acting on the coordinates z M = (x µν , θ µ ). To define their action on
spinor superfields it is necessary to introduce the concept of tangent space and local
frames attached at each point z M and local Lorentz transformations acting on the
indices of such superfields Ψα,β ... (z M ). (In chapter 5 we discuss the reasons for this pro-
cedure.) The enlarged full local group is defined by

Ψα,β ... (x , θ) → Ψ ′α,β ... (x , θ) = e iK Ψα,β ... (x , θ) e −iK , (2.6.5)

where now

K = K M iD M + K α β iM β α . (2.6.6)

Here the superfield K α β parametrizes the local Lorentz transformations and the Lorentz
generators M β α act on each tangent space index as indicated by

[X β γ M γ β , Ψα ] = X α β Ψβ , (2.6.7)

for arbitrary X β γ . M αβ is symmetric, i.e., M α β is traceless (which makes it equivalent to

a vector in three dimensions). Thus, X α β is an element of the Lorentz algebra SL(2, R)
(i.e., SO(2, 1)). Therefore, the parameter matrix K α β is also traceless.

From now on we must distinguish tangent space and world indices; to do this, we
denote the former by letters from the beginning of the alphabet, and the latter by letters
from the middle of the alphabet. By definition, the former transform with K α β whereas
the latter transform with K M .

c. Covariant derivatives

Having introduced local Lorentz transformations acting on spinor indices, we now

define covariant spinor derivatives by

∇α = E α M D M + Φαβ γ M γ β , (2.6.8)

as well as vector derivatives ∇αβ . However, just as in the Yang-Mills case, we impose a
conventional constraint that defines

1
∇αβ = − i {∇α , ∇β } , (2.6.9)
2
36 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

The connection coefficients ΦAβ γ , which appear in

∇A = E A M D M + ΦAβ γ M γ β , (2.6.10)

and act as gauge fields for the Lorentz group, will be determined in terms of H α M by
imposing further suitable constraints. The covariant derivatives transform by

∇A → ∇A ′ = e iK ∇A e −iK . (2.6.11a)

All fields Ψ... (as opposed to the operator ∇) transform as

Ψ ′... = e iK Ψ...e −iK = e iK Ψ... (2.6.11b)

when all indices are flat (tangent space); we always choose to use flat indices. We can
use the vielbein E A M (and its inverse E M A ) to convert between world and tangent space
indices. For example, if ΨM is a world supervector, ΨA = E A M ΨM is a tangent space
supervector.

The superderivative E A = E A M D M is to be understood as a tangent space super-

vector. On the other hand, D M transforms under the local translations (supercoordinate
transformations), and this induces transformations of E A M with respect to its world
index (in this case, M ). We can exhibit this, and verify that (2.6.6) describes the famil-
iar local Lorentz and general coordinate transformations, by considering the infinitesimal
version of (2.6.11):

δ∇A = [iK , ∇A ] , (2.6.12)

which implies

δE A M = E A N D N K M − K N D N E A M − E A N K PT PN M − K A B E B M ,

δΦAγ δ = E A K γ δ − K M D M ΦAγ δ − K A B ΦB γ δ − K γ ϵ ΦAϵ δ + K ϵ δ ΦAγ ϵ

= ∇A K γ δ − K M D M ΦAγ δ − K A B ΦB γ δ , (2.6.13)

1
where T MN P is the torsion of flat, global superspace (2.4.10), and K αβ γδ ≡ K (α (γ δ β) δ) .
2
The first three terms in the transformation law of E A M correspond to the usual form of
the general coordinate transformation of a world supervector (labeled by M ), while the
last term is a local Lorentz transformation on the tangent space index A. The relation
between K αβ γδ and K α γ implies the usual reducibility of the Lorentz transformations on
 2.6. Supergravity 37

the tangent space, corresponding to the definition of vectors as second-rank symmetric

spinors.

d. Gauge choices

d.1. A supersymmetric gauge

As we have mentioned above, the gauge fields (or the vielbein E A M ) contain a
large number of gauge degrees of freedom, and some of them can be gauged away using
the K transformations. For simplicity we discuss this only at the linearized level (where
we need not distinguish world and tangent space indices); we will return later to a more
complete treatment. From (2.6.13) the linearized transformation laws are

δE α µ = D α K µ − K α µ ,

δE α µν = D α K µν − i δ α (µ K ν) . (2.6.14)

Thus K α µ can be used to gauge away all of E α µ except its trace (recall that K α µ is
traceless) and K µ can gauge away part of E α µν . In the corresponding gauge we can
write

E αµ = δαµ Ψ ,

E α αµ = 0 ; (2.6.15)

this globally supersymmetric gauge is maintained by further transformations restricted

by

1 1 β
K αβ = D (α K β) ≡ D α K β − δ Dγ K γ ,
2 2 α

i
Kµ = − D ν K µν . (2.6.16)
3

Under these restricted transformations we have

1
δΨ = ∂ µν K µν ,
6

δE (µ,νσ) = D (µ K νσ) . (2.6.17)

38 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

In this gauge the traceless part h (µν,ρσ) of the ordinary dreibein (the physical graviton
field) appears in E (µ,νσ) . The trace h = h µν µν is contained in (the θ = 0 part of) Ψ and
has an identical (linearized) transformation law. (In super ‘‘conformal’’ theories the viel-
bein also undergoes a superscale transformation whose scalar parameter can be used to
gauge Ψ to 1, still in a globally supersymmetric way. Thus E (µ,νσ) contains the ‘‘confor-
mal’’ part of the supergravity multiplet, whereas Ψ contains the traces.)

d.2. Wess-Zumino gauge

The above gauge is convenient for calculations where we wish to maintain manifest
global supersymmetry. However just as in super Yang-Mills theory, we can find a non-
supersymmetric Wess-Zumino gauge that exhibits the component field content of super-
gravity most directly. In such a gauge

Ψ = h + θµ ψµ − θ2 a ,

E (µ,νρ) = θ τ h (µνρτ ) − θ 2 ψ (µνρ) , (2.6.18)

where h and h (µνρτ ) are the remaining parts of the dreibein, ψ µ and ψ (µνρ) of the grav-
itino, and a is a scalar auxiliary field. The residual gauge invariance (which maintains
the above form) is parametrized by

K µν = ξ µν + θ (µ ϵν) , (2.6.19)

where ξ µν (x ) parametrizes general spacetime coordinate transformations and ϵν (x )

parametrizes local (component) supersymmetry transformations.

e. Field strengths

We now return to a study of the geometrical objects of the theory. The field
strengths for supergravity are supertorsions T AB C and supercurvatures R AB γ δ , defined by

[∇A , ∇B } ≡ T AB C ∇C + R AB γ δ M δ γ . (2.6.20)

Our determination of ∇αβ in terms of ∇α (see (2.6.9) ), is equivalent to the constraints

T αβ γδ = i δ (α γ δ β) δ , T αβ γ = R αβγ δ = 0 . (2.6.21)

We need one further constraint to relate the connection Φαβ γ (the gauge field for the
 2.6. Supergravity 39

local Lorentz transformations) to the gauge potential H α M (or vielbein E α M ). It turns

out that such a constraint is

T α,βγ δϵ = 0 . (2.6.22)

To solve this constraint, and actually find Φ in terms of E α M it is convenient to make

some additional definitions:

i
Ě α ≡ E α , Ě αβ ≡ − {Ě α , Ě β } ,
2

[Ě A , Ě B } ≡ Č AB C Ě C . (2.6.23)

The constraint (2.6.22) is then solved for Φαβ γ as follows: First, express [∇α , ∇βγ ] in
terms of Φαβ γ and the ‘‘check’’ objects of (2.6.23) using (2.6.9). Then, find the coeffi-
cient of Ě αβ in this expression. The corresponding coefficient of the right-hand side of
(2.6.20) is T α,βγ δϵ . This gives us the equation

1 1
T α,βγ δϵ = Č α,βγ δϵ − Φ (δ δ ϵ) + Φ (δ δ ϵ)
2 (βγ) α 2 α(β γ)

1
= Č α,βγ δϵ − C α(β Φ(δϵ) γ) = 0 . (2.6.24)
2

(From the Jacobi identity [ Ě (α , { Ě β , Ě γ) } ] = 0, we have, independent of (2.6.21,22),

Č (α,βγ) δϵ = 0.) We then solve for Φαβ γ : We multiply (2.6.24) by C αβ and use the identity
1
Φαβ γ = (Φ(αβ) γ − C αβ Φ(γδ) δ ). We find
2
1
Φαβγ = (Č δ, δα,βγ − Č δ, δ(β,γ)α ) , (2.6.25)
3

the Č ’s being calculable from (2.6.23) as derivatives of E α M .

f. Bianchi identities

The torsions and curvatures are covariant and must be expressible only in terms
of the physical gauge invariant component field strengths for the graviton and gravitino
and auxiliary fields. We proceed in two steps: First, we express all the T ’s and R’s in
(2.6.20) in terms of a small number of independent field strengths; then, we analyze the
content of these superfields.
40 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

The Jacobi identities for the covariant derivatives explicitly take the form:

[ [ ∇[A , ∇B } , ∇C ) } = 0 . (2.6.26)

The presence of the constraints in (2.6.21,22) allows us to express all of the nontrivial
torsion and curvature tensors completely in terms of two superfields R and G αβγ (where
G αβγ is totally symmetric), and their spinorial derivatives. This is accomplished by alge-
braically solving the constraints plus Jacobi identities (which are the Bianchi identities
for the torsions and curvatures). We either repeat the calculations of the Yang-Mills
case, or we make use of the results there, as follows:

We observe that the constraint (2.6.21) {∇α , ∇β } = 2i ∇αβ is identical to the Yang-
Mills constraint (2.4.13,30a). The Jacobi identity [∇(α {∇β , ∇γ) }] = 0 has the same solu-
tion as in (2.4.17-20a,31a):

[∇α , ∇βγ ] = C α(βW γ) , (2.6.27)

where W α is expanded over the supergravity ‘‘generators’’ i ∇ and iM (the factor i is

introduced to make the generators hermitian):

˜
W α = W α β i ∇β + Wα βγ i ∇βγ + W αβ γ iM γ β . (2.6.28)

The solution to the Bianchi identities is thus (2.4.33), with the identification (2.6.28).

˜
The constraint (2.6.22) implies Wα βγ = 0, and we can ‘‘solve’’ {∇α ,W α } = 0 (see
(2.4.33b)) explicitly:

1 2
W αβ = − C αβ R , W αβγ = G αβγ + C α(β ∇γ) R , ∇αG αβγ = − i ∇βγ R , (2.6.29)
3 3

where we have introduced a scalar R and a totally symmetric spinor G αβγ . The full
solution of the Bianchi identities is thus the Yang-Mills solution (2.4.33) with the substi-
tutions

2
−iW α = − R∇α + (∇β R)M α β + G αβ γ M γ β
3

2
∇αG αβγ = − i ∇βγ R
3

1 2
−if αβ = − (∇(α R)∇β) + G αβ γ ∇γ − 2R i ∇αβ + (∇2 R)M αβ
3 3
 2.6. Supergravity 41

1
+ (i ∇γ(α R)M β) γ + W αβγ δ M δ γ (2.6.30)
2

1
where W αβγδ ≡ ∇(αG βγδ) . We have used ∇α ∇β = i ∇αβ − C αβ ∇2 to find (2.6.30). Indi-
4!
vidual torsions and curvatures can be read directly from these equations by comparing
with the definition (2.6.20). Thus, for example, we have

1
R αβ, γδ, ϵ ζ = δ (γ r β) δ) ϵ ζ ,
2 (α

1 1
r αβ γδ ≡ W αβ γδ − δ γ δ δ ∇2 R + δ (γ i ∇β) δ) R . (2.6.31)
3 (α β) 4 (α

The θ-independent part of r is the Ricci tensor in a spacetime geometry with (θ-inde-
pendent) torsion.

In sec. 2.4.a.3 we discussed covariant shifts of the gauge potential. In any gauge
theory such shifts do not change the transformation properties of the covariant deriva-
tives and thus are perfectly acceptable; the shifted gauge fields provide an equally good
description of the theory. In sec. 2.4.a.3 we used the redefinitions to eliminate a field
strength. Here we redefine the connection Φαβ,γ δ to eliminate T αβ,γδ ϵζ by

∇ ′αβ = ∇αβ − iRM αβ . (2.6.32)

(This corresponds to shifting Φa bc by a term ∼ϵa bc R to cancel T a bc ; we temporarily make

use of vector indices ‘‘a’’ to represent traceless bispinors since this makes it clear that the
shift (2.6.32) is possible only in three dimensions.) The shifted r αβ γδ , dropping primes,
is

1 4
r αβ γδ = W αβ γδ − δ γδ δ r , r≡ ∇2 R + 2R 2 . (2.6.33)
4 (α β) 3

This redefinition of Φαβ,γ δ is equivalent to replacing the constraint (2.6.9) with

{ ∇α , ∇β } = 2i ∇αβ − 2RM αβ . (2.6.34)

We will find that the analog of the ‘‘new’’ term appears in the constraints for four
dimensional supergravity (see chapter 5). This is because we can obtain the three
dimensional theory from the four dimensional one, and there is no shift analogous to
(2.6.32) possible in four dimensions.

The superfields R and G αβγ are the variations of the supergravity action (see
below) with respect to the two unconstrained superfields Ψ and E (µ,νσ) of (2.6.15-17).
42 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

The field equations are R = G αβγ = 0; these are solved only by flat space (just as for
ordinary gravity in three-dimensional spacetime), so three-dimensional supergravity has
no dynamics (all fields are auxiliary).

g. Actions

We now turn to the construction of actions and their expansion in terms of com-
ponent fields. As we remarked earlier, in flat superspace the integral of any (scalar)
superfield expression with the d 3 xd 2 θ measure is globally supersymmetric. This is no
longer true for locally supersymmetric theories. (The new features that arise are not
specifically limited to local supersymmetry, but are a general consequence of local coor-
dinate invariance).

We recall that in our formalism an arbitrary "matter" superfield Ψ transforms

according to the rule
← ←
Ψ ′ = e iK Ψ e −iK = e −iK Ψ e iK ,

← ← ← α
K = K M iD M + K α β iM β , (2.6.35)
←
where D M means that we let the differential operator act on everything to its left. (The
various forms of the transformation law can be seen to be equivalent after power series
expansion of the exponentials, or by multiplying by a test function and integrating by
parts). Lagrangians are scalar superfields, and since any Lagrangian IL is constructed
from superfields and ∇ operators, a Lagrangian transforms in the same way.
← ←
IL ′ = e iK ILe −iK = e −iK IL e iK . (2.6.36)
#
Therefore the integral d 3 x d 2 θ IL is not invariant with respect to our gauge group. To

find invariants, we consider the vielbein as a square supermatrix in its indices and com-
pute its superdeterminant E . The following result will be derived in our discussion of
four-dimensions (see sec. 5.1):
←
(E −1 ) ′ = e iK E −1e −iK (1 · e iK )

←
= E −1 e iK . (2.6.37)
 2.6. Supergravity 43

Therefore the product E −1 IL transforms in exactly the same way as E −1 :

←
(E −1 IL) ′ = E −1 IL e iK . (2.6.38)
←
Since every term but the first one in the power series expansion of the e iK is a total
derivative, we conclude that up to surface terms
#
S = d 3 x d 2 θ E −1 IL , (2.6.39)

is invariant. We therefore have a simple prescription for turning any globally supersym-
metric action into a locally supersymmetric one:

[ IL(D AΦ , Φ)]global → E −1 IL(∇AΦ , Φ) , (2.6.40)

in analogy to ordinary gravity. Thus, the action for the scalar multiplet described by eq.
(2.3.5) takes the covariantized form
#
1 1 λ
S Φ = d 3 x d 2 θ E −1 [ − (∇αΦ)2 + mΦ2 + Φ3 ] . (2.6.41)
2 2 3!

For vector gauge multiplets the simple prescription of replacing flat derivatives D A
by gravitationally covariant ones ∇A is sufficient to convert global actions into local
actions, if we include the Yang-Mills generators in the covariant derivatives, so that they
are covariant with respect to both supergravity and super-Yang-Mills invariances. How-
ever, such a procedure is not sufficient for more general gauge multiplets, and in particu-
lar the superforms of sec. 2.5. On the other hand, it is possible to formulate all gauge
theories within the superform framework, at least at the abelian level (which is all that
is relevant for p-forms for p > 1). Additional terms due to the geometry of the space
will automatically appear in the definitions of field strengths. Specifically, the curved-
space formulation of superforms is obtained as follows: The definitions (2.5.8) hold in
arbitrary superspaces, independent of any metric structure. Converting (2.5.8) to a tan-
gent-space basis with the curved space E A M , we obtain equations that differ from (2.5.9)
only by the replacement of the flat-space covariant derivatives D A with the curved-space
ones ∇A .

To illustrate this, let us return to the abelian vector multiplet, now in the presence
of supergravity. The field strength for the vector multiplet is a 2-form:
44 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

F αβ = ∇α Γβ + ∇β Γα − 2i Γαβ ,

F αβ ,γ = ∇αβ Γγ − ∇γ Γαβ − T αβ ,γ ϵ Γϵ ,

F αβ,γδ = ∇αβ Γγδ − ∇γδ Γαβ − T αβ,γδ E ΓE . (2.6.42)

We again impose the constraint F αβ = 0, which implies

1
F α,βγ = iC α(βW γ) , W α = ∇β ∇α Γβ + RΓα ; (2.6.43)
2

where we have used (2.6.30) substituted into (2.4.33). Comparing this to the global field
strength defined in (2.4.20), we see that a new term proportional to R appears. The
extra term in W α is necessary for gauge invariance due to the identity
2
∇ α ∇β ∇α = i [∇α , ∇αβ ]. In the global limit the commutator vanishes, but in the local
3
case it gives a contribution that is precisely canceled by the contribution of the R term.
These results can also be obtained by use of derivatives that are covariant with respect
to both supergravity and super-Yang-Mills.

We turn now to the action for the gauge fields of local supersymmetry. We expect
to construct it out of the field strengths G αβγ and R. By dimensional analysis (noting
1
that κ has dimensions (mass)− 2 in three dimensions), we deduce for the Poincaré super-
gravity action the supersymmetric generalization of the Einstein-Hilbert action:
#
2
S SG = − 2 d 3 x d 2 θ E −1 R . (2.6.44)
κ

We can check that (2.6.44) leads to the correct component action as follows:
#
3
d 2 θ E −1 R ≃ ∇2 R ≃ r (see (2.6.33)), and thus the gravitational part of the action is
4
correct. We can also add a supersymmetric cosmological term
#
λ
S cosmo = 2 d 3 x d 2 θ E −1 , (2.6.45)
κ

which leads to an equations of motion R = λ , G αβγ = 0. The only solution to this equa-
tion (in three dimensions) is empty anti-deSitter space: From (2.6.33),
r = 2λ2 ,W αβγδ = 0.

Higher-derivative actions are possible by using other functions of G αβγ and R. For
example, the analog of the gauge-invariant mass term for the Yang-Mills multiplet exists
 2.6. Supergravity 45

#
here and is obtained by the replacements in (2.4.38) (along with, of course, d 3x d 2θ
#
→ d 3 x d 2 θ E −1 ):

2
ΓAi T i → ΦAβ γ iM γ β , W αi T i → G αβ γ iM γ β + (∇β R)iM α β . (2.6.46)
3

This gives
#
2 γ 1 ϵ η
ILmass = d 3 x d 2 θ E −1Φα γ δ (G αδ γ + δ ∇δ R − Φ δ Φ(αϵ)η γ ) . (2.6.47)
3 α 6
46 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

2.7. Quantum superspace

a. Scalar multiplet

In this section we discuss the derivation of the Feynman rules for three-dimen-
sional superfield perturbation theory. Since the starting point, the superfield action, is
so much like a component (ordinary field theory) action, it is possible to read off the
rules for doing Feynman supergraphs almost by inspection. However, as an introduction
to the four-dimensional case we use the full machinery of the functional integral. After
deriving the rules we apply them to some one-loop graphs. The manipulations that we
perform on the graphs are typical and illustrate the manner in which superfields handle
the cancellations and other simplifications due to supersymmetry. For more details, we
refer the reader to the four-dimensional discussion in chapter 6.

a.1. General formalism

The Feynman rules for the scalar superfield can be read directly from the
Lagrangian: The propagator is defined by the quadratic terms, and the vertices by the
interactions. The propagator is an operator in both x and θ space, and at the vertices
we integrate over both x and θ. By Fourier transformation we change the x integration
to loop-momentum integration, but we leave the θ integration alone. (θ can also be
Fourier transformed, but this causes little change in the rules: see sec. 6.3.) We now
derive the rules from the functional integral.

We begin by considering the generating functional for the massive scalar superfield
Φ with arbitrary self-interaction :
# #
1 1
Z (J ) = IDΦ exp d 3 xd 2 θ [ ΦD 2Φ + mΦ2 + f (Φ) + J Φ]
2 2

# #
= IDΦ exp [S 0 (Φ) + S INT (Φ) + J Φ]

# #
δ 1
= exp [S INT ( )] IDΦ exp [ Φ(D 2 + m)Φ + J Φ] . (2.7.1)
δJ 2

In the usual fashion we complete the square, do the (functional) Gaussian integral over
Φ, and obtain
 2.7. Quantum superspace 47

#
δ 1 1
Z (J ) = exp [S INT ( )] exp [− d 3 xd 2 θ J J] . (2.7.2)
δJ 2 D2 +m

Using eq.(2.2.6) we can write

1 D2 − m
= . (2.7.3)
D2 + m − m2

(Note D 2 behaves just as /

∂ in conventional field theory.) We obtain, in momentum
space, the following Feynman rules:

Propagator:
#
δ δ d 3k 2 1 D2 − m
· d θ J (k , θ) J (−k , θ)
δJ (k , θ) δJ (−k , θ ′) (2π)3 2 k 2 + m2

D2 − m 2
= δ (θ − θ ′) . (2.7.4)
k 2 + m2
#
Vertices: An interaction term, e.g. d 3 xd 2 θ ΦD αΦD β Φ . . . , gives a vertex with Φ
lines leaving it, with the appropriate operators D α , D β , etc. acting on the corresponding
lines, and an integral over d 2 θ. The operators D α which appear in the propagators, or
are coming from a vertex and act on a specific propagator with momentum k leaving
that vertex, depend on that momentum:

∂
Dα = + θ β k αβ . (2.7.5)
∂θ α
In addition we have loop-momentum integrals to perform.

In general we find it convenient to calculate the effective action. It is obtained in

standard fashion by a Legendre transformation on the generating functional for con-
nected supergraphs W (J ) and it consists of a sum of one-particle-irreducible contribu-
tions obtained by amputating external line propagators, replacing them by external field
factors Φ(p i , θi ), and integrating over p i , θi . Therefore, it will have the form

, 1 # d 3p 1 . . . d 3p n
Γ(Φ) = d 2 θ 1 . . . d 2 θn Φ(p 1 , θ 1 ) . . . Φ(p n , θn )
n
n! (2π) 3n

, -# d 3k - # - -
3 2
× (2π) δ( pi ) d θ propagators vertices (2.7.6)
loops
(2π)3 internal vertices
48 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

As we have already mentioned, all of this can be read directly from the action, by anal-
ogy with the derivation of the usual Feynman rules.

The integrand in the effective action is a priori a nonlocal function of the x ’s (non-
polynomial in the p’s) and of the θ 1 , . . . θn . However, we can manipulate the θ-integra-
tions so as to exhibit it explicitly as a functional of the Φ’s all evaluated at a single com-
mon θ as follows: A general multiloop integral consists of vertices labeled i , i + 1, con-
nected by propagators which contain factors δ(θi − θi+1 ) with operators D α acting on
them. Consider a particular loop in the diagram and examine one line of that loop.
The factors of D can be combined by using the result (‘‘transfer’’ rule):

D α (θi , k )δ(θi − θi+1 ) = − D α (θi+1 , −k )δ(θi − θi+1 ) , (2.7.7)

as well as the rules of eq.(2.2.6), after which we have at most two factors of D acting at
one end of the line. At the vertex where this end is attached these D’s can be integrated
by parts onto the other lines (or external fields) using the Leibnitz rule (and some care
with minus signs since the D’s anticommute). Then the particular δ-function no longer
has any derivatives acting on it and can be used to do the θi integration, thus effectively
"shrinking" the (θi , θi+1 ) line to a point in θ-space. We can repeat this procedure on
each line of the loop, integrating by parts one at a time and shrinking. This will gener-
ate a sum of terms, from the integration by parts. The procedure stops when in each
term we are left with exactly two lines, one with δ(θ 1 − θm ) which is free of any deriva-
tives, and one with δ(θm − θ 1 ) which may carry zero, one, or two derivatives. We now
use the rules (which follow from the definition δ 2 (θ) = − θ 2 ),

δ 2 (θ 1 − θm )δ 2 (θm − θ 1 ) = 0 ,

δ 2 (θ 1 − θm ) D α δ 2 (θm − θ 1 ) = 0 ,

δ 2 (θ 1 − θm ) D 2 δ 2 (θm − θ 1 ) = δ 2 (θ 1 − θm ) . (2.7.8)

Thus, in those terms where we are left with no D or one D we get zero, while in the
terms in which we have a D 2 acting on one of the δ-functions, multiplied by the other
δ-function, we use the above result. We are left with the single δ-function, which we can
use to do one more θ integration, thus finally reducing the θ-space loop to a point.
 2.7. Quantum superspace 49

The procedure can be repeated loop by loop, until the whole multiloop diagram
has been reduced to one point in θ-space, giving a contribution to the effective action
#
d 3p 1 . . . d 3p n 2
Γ(Φ) = d θ
(2π)3n

×G(p 1 , . . . , p n ) Φ(p 1 , θ) . . . D αΦ(p i , θ) . . . D 2Φ(p j , θ) . . . , (2.7.9)

where G is obtained by doing ordinary loop-momentum integrals, with some momentum

factors in the numerators coming from anticommutators of D’s arising in the previous
manipulation.

a.2. Examples

We give now two examples, in a massless model with Φ3 interactions, to show how
the θ manipulation works. The first one is the calculation of a self-energy correction
represented by the graph in Fig. 2.7.1

φ(−p, θ ′) φ(p, θ)

k +p

Fig. 2.7.1

#
d 3p 2 2 ′ d 3 k D 2 δ(θ − θ ′) D 2 δ(θ ′ − θ)
Γ2 = d θd θ Φ(−p, θ ′
)Φ(p, θ) . (2.7.10)
(2π)3 (2π)3 k2 (k + p)2

The terms involving θ can be manipulated as follows, using integration by parts:

D 2 δ(θ − θ ′) D 2 δ(θ ′ − θ) Φ(p, θ)

1
= − D α δ(θ − θ ′) [D α D 2 δ(θ ′ − θ)Φ(p, θ) + D 2 δ(θ ′ − θ)D αΦ(p, θ)]
2
50 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

= δ(θ − θ ′)[(D 2 )2 δ(θ ′ − θ)Φ(p, θ) + D α D 2 δ(θ ′ − θ)D αΦ(p, θ)

+ D 2 δ(θ ′ − θ)D 2Φ(p, θ)] . (2.7.11)

However, using (D 2 )2 = − k 2 and D α D 2 = k αβ D β we see that according to the rules in

eq. (2.7.8) only the last term contributes. We find
# #
d 3p 2 d 3k 1
Γ2 = d θ Φ(−p, θ)D 2Φ(p, θ) . (2.7.12)
(2π) 3 (2π) k (k + p)2
3 2

Doing the integration by parts explicitly can become rather tedious and it is
preferable to perform it by indicating D’s and moving them directly on the graphs. We
show this in Fig. 2.7.2:

D2
Dα D2

D2 D2 D2 D2 Dα D2

Fig. 2.7.2

Only the last diagram gives a contribution. One further rule is useful in this procedure:
In general, after integration by parts, various D-factors end up in different places in the
final expression and one has to worry about minus signs introduced in moving them past
each other. The overall sign can be fixed at the end by realizing that we start with a
particular ordering of the D’s and we can examine what happened to this ordering at
the end of the calculation. For example, we may start with an expression such as
1 1 1
D2 . . . D2 . . . D2 . . . = D αD α . . . D β D β . . . D γ D γ . . . and end up with
2 2 2
D α . . . D β . . . D γ . . . D α . . . D γ . . . D β . . . where the various D’s act on different fields. The
overall sign can obviously be determined by just counting the number of transpositions.
For example, in the case above we would end up with a plus sign. Note that this rule
also applies if factors such as k αγ arise, provided one pays attention to the manner in
which they were produced (e.g., at which end of the line were the D’s acting? Did it
come from D α D γ or from D γ D α ?).

Our second example is the three-point diagram below, which we manipulate as

shown in the sequence of Fig. 2.7.3:
 2.7. Quantum superspace 51

D2 D2 D2 D2
D2
D2
D2 Dα

D2 Dα D2

Dβ D2

Dβ
2
D D2 D2
Dα

Dα D2

Fig. 2.7.3

At the first stage we have integrated by parts the D 2 off the bottom line and immedi-
ately replaced (D 2 )2 by = − k 2 . At the second stage we have integrated by parts the
D 2 off the right side, but kept only those terms that are not zero: The bottom line has
already been shrunk to a point by the corresponding δ-function (but we need not indi-
cate this explicitly; any line that has no D’s on it can be considered as having been
shrunk) and in the end we keep only terms with exactly two factors of D in the loop. For
the middle diagram this means using D α D 2 D β = D α k βγ D γ = − k βα D 2 + a term with no
D’s which may be dropped. The integrand in the effective action can be written then as
#
d 3k 1
Φ(p 3 , θ)[ − Φ(p 1 , θ)Φ(p 2 , θ)k 2
(2π) k (k + p 1 )2 (k − p 3 )2
3 2

− D αΦ(p 1 , θ)D β Φ(p 2 , θ)k αβ + D 2Φ(p 1 , θ)D 2Φ(p 2 , θ)] , (2.7.13)

and only the k -momentum integral remains to be done.

In general, the loop-momentum integrals may have to be regularized. The proce-

dure we use, which is guaranteed to preserve supersymmetry, is to do all the D-manipu-
lations first, until we reduce the effective action to an integral over a single θ of an
expression that is a product of superfields, and therefore manifestly supersymmetric.
The remaining loop-momentum integrals may then be regularized in any manner
52 2. A TOY SUPERSPACE

whatsoever, e.g., by using dimensional regularization. We shall discuss the issues

involved in this kind of regularization in sec. 6.6. An alternative procedure, somewhat
cumbersome in its application but better understood, is supersymmetric Pauli-Villars
regularization. In three dimensions this is applicable even to gauge theories, since gauge
invariant mass terms exist.

b. Vector multiplet

Nothing new is encountered in the derivation or application of the Feynman

rules. However, the derivation must be preceded by quantization, i.e., introduction of
gauge-fixing terms and Faddeev-Popov ghosts, which we now discuss.

We begin with the classical action

#
1
SC = tr d 3 xd 2 θW 2 . (2.7.14)
g2

The gauge invariance is δΓα = ∇α K and, by direct analogy with the ordinary Yang-Mills
1
case, we can choose the gauge-fixing function F = D α Γα . We use an averaging proce-
2
dure which leads to a gauge-fixing term without dimensional parameters, FD 2 F , and
obtain, for the quadratic action,
#
1 1 1 1
S 2 = 2 tr d 3 xd 2 θ [ ( D β D α Γβ ) ( D γ D α Γγ )
g 2 2 2

1 1 1
− ( D β Γβ )D 2 ( D γ Γγ )]
α 2 2

#
1 1 1 1 1 1
= tr d 3 xd 2 θ[ (1 + )Γα Γα + (1 − )Γαi ∂ α β D 2 Γβ ] . (2.7.15)
2 g2 2 α 2 α

Various choices of the gauge parameter α are possible: The choice α = − 1 gives the
1 1
kinetic term Γαi ∂ α β D 2 Γβ , while the choice α = 1 gives Γα Γα , which results in the
2 2
simplest propagator.

The Faddeev-Popov action is simply

#
1 1
S FP = 2 tr d 3 xd 2 θ c ′(x , θ) D α ∇αc(x , θ) , (2.7.16)
g 2

with two scalar multiplet ghosts. (Note that in a background-field formulation of the
 2.7. Quantum superspace 53

theory, similar to the one we discuss in sec. 6.5, one would replace the operator D 2 in
the gauge fixing term by the background-covariant operator ∇ 2 , and this would give rise
to a third, Nielsen-Kallosh, ghost as well.)

The Feynman rules are now straightforward to obtain. The ghost propagator is
conventional, following from the quadratic ghost kinetic term c ′D 2c, while the gauge
field propagator is

δαβ 2
δ (θ − θ ′) . (2.7.17)
k2
Vertices can be read off from the interaction terms. The gauge-field self-interactions (in
the nonabelian case ) are

i 1
g 2 LINT = − D γ D α Γγ [ Γβ , D β Γα ] − D γ D α Γγ [ Γβ , { Γβ , Γα } ]
4 12

1 i
− [ Γγ , D γ Γα ] [ Γβ , D β Γα ] + [ Γγ , D γ Γα ] [ Γβ , { Γβ , Γα } ]
8 12

1
+ [ Γγ , { Γγ , Γα } ] [ Γβ , { Γβ , Γα } ] , (2.7.18)
72

those of the ghosts are

1 ′ α
g 2 LINT = − i c D [Γα , c] , (2.7.19)
2

while those of a complex scalar field are

1
g 2 LINT = Φ(∇2 − D 2 )Φ = Φ[−i Γα D α − i (D α Γα ) − Γ2 ]Φ . (2.7.20)
2
Contents of 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

3.1. Notation 54
a. Index conventions 54
b. Superspace 56
c. Symmetrization and antisymmetrization 56
d. Conjugation 57
e. Levi-Civita tensors and index contractions 58
3.2. The supersymmetry groups 62
a. Lie algebras 62
b. Super-Lie algebras 63
c. Super-Poincaré algebra 63
d. Positivity of the energy 64
e. Superconformal algebra 65
f. Super-deSitter algebra 67
3.3. Representations of supersymmetry 69
a. Particle representations 69
a.1. Massless representations 69
a.2. Massive representations and central charges 71
a.3. Casimir operators 72
b. Representations on superfields 74
b.1. Superspace 74
b.2. Action of generators on superspace 74
b.3. Action of generators on superfields 75
b.4. Extended supersymmetry 76
b.5. CPT in superspace 77
b.6. Chiral representations of supersymmetry 78
b.7. Superconformal representations 80
b.8. Super-deSitter representations 82
3.4. Covariant derivatives 83
a. Construction 83
b. Algebraic relations 84
c. Geometry of flat superspace 86
d. Casimir operators 87
3.5. Constrained superfields 89
3.6. Component expansions 92
 a. θ-expansions 92
b. Projection 94
c. The transformation superfield 96
3.7. Superintegration 97
a. Berezin integral 97
b. Dimensions 99
c. Superdeterminants 99
3.8. Superfunctional differentiation and integration 101
a. Differentiation 101
b. Integration 103
3.9. Physical, auxiliary, and gauge components 108
3.10. Compensators 112
a. Stueckelberg formalism 112
b. CP(1) model 113
c. Coset spaces 117
3.11. Projection operators 120
a. General 120
a.1. Poincaré projectors 121
a.2. Super-Poincaré projectors 122
b. Examples 128
b.1. N=0 128
b.2. N=1 130
b.3. N=2 132
b.4. N=4 135
3.12. On-shell representations and superfields 138
a. Field strengths 138
b. Light-cone formalism 142
3.13. Off-shell field strengths and prepotentials 147
3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

3.1. Notation

An i for an i, and a 2 for a 2.

We now turn to four dimensions. Our treatment will be entirely self-contained; it

will not assume familiarity with our three-dimensional toy. Although supersymmetry is
more complicated in four dimensions than in three, because we give a more detailed dis-
cussion, some general aspects of the theory may be easier to understand. We begin by
giving the notation and conventions we use throughout the rest of the work.

a. Index conventions

Our index conventions are as follows: The simplest nontrivial representation of

1
the Lorentz group, the two-component complex (Weyl) spinor representation ( , 0) of
2
SL(2,C ), is labeled by a two-valued (+ or -) lower-case Greek index (e.g., ψ α = (ψ + , ψ − )),
1
and the complex-conjugate representation (0, ) is labeled by a dotted index
2
• • •
(ψ α = (ψ + , ψ − )). A four-component Dirac spinor is the combination of an undotted
1 1
spinor with a dotted one ( , 0)+
⃝(0, ), and a Majorana spinor is a Dirac spinor where
2 2
the dotted spinor is the complex conjugate of the undotted one. An arbitrary irre-
ducible representation (A, B) is then conveniently represented by a quantity with 2A
undotted indices and 2B dotted indices, totally symmetric in its undotted indices and in
its dotted indices. An example is the self-dual second-rank antisymmetric tensor (1, 0),
which is represented by a second-rank symmetric spinor f αβ . (The choice of self-dual vs.
anti-self-dual follows from Wick rotation from Euclidean space, where the sign is unam-
biguous.)
1 1
Another example is the vector ( , ), labeled with one undotted and one dotted
2 2
• • •
index, e.g., V αα . A real vector satisfies the hermiticity condition V
= V αβ = V β α . As
αβ •

a shorthand notation, we often use an underlined lower-case Roman index to indicate a

vector index which is a composite of the corresponding undotted and dotted spinor
•
indices: e.g., V a ≡V αα . We consider such an index merely as an abbreviation: It may
appear on one side of an equation while the explicit pair of spinor indices appears on the
 3.1. Notation 55

other, or it may be contracted with an explicit pair of spinor indices. When discussing
Lorentz noncovariant quantities (as, e.g., in light-cone formalisms), we sometimes label
the values of a vector index as follows:
• • • •
V a = (V ++ ,V +− ,V −+ ,V −− ) ≡ (V + ,V T ,V T , −V − ) , (3.1.1)

where V T is the complex conjugate of V T , and V ± are real in Minkowski space (but V +
is the complex conjugate of V − in Wick-rotated Euclidean space). More generally, we
can relate a vector label a in an arbitrary basis, where a ̸= αα, to the αα basis by a set
• •

˜ ˜
of Clebsch-Gordan coefficients, the Pauli matrices: We define
• 1 • b b 1 b •
for fields: V αα = √ σb ααV ˜ , V ˜ = √ σ˜ αα•V αα ;
2 ˜ 2

b 1 αα•
for derivatives: ∂ αα• = σ˜ αα• ∂ b , ∂ b = σ ∂ αα• ;
˜ ˜ 2 ˜b

•
1 αα• b b b •
for coordinates: x αα = σ x˜ , x˜ = σ˜ αα• x αα . (3.1.2a)
2 ˜b

The Pauli matrices satisfy

• •
• c c b
σb αα σ˜ αα• = 2δb˜ , σ˜ αα• σb β β = 2δ α β δ α• β . (3.1.2b)
˜ ˜ ˜

These conventions lead to an unusual normalization of the Yang-Mills gauge coupling

constant g, since
b 1 b b
∇αα• ≡ ∂ αα• − igV αα• = σ˜ αα• ∂ b − ig √ σ˜ αα•V b ≡ σ˜ αα• (∂ b − i g̃V b )
˜ 2 ˜ ˜ ˜
√
and hence our g is 2 times the usual one g̃ . (We use the summation convention: Any
index of any type appearing twice in the same term, once contravariant (as a super-
script) and once covariant (as a subscript), is summed over.)

Next to Lorentz indices, the type of indices we most frequently use are isospin
indices: internal symmetry indices, usually for the group SU (N ) or U (N ). These are
represented by lower-case Roman letters, without underlining. We use an underlined
index only to indicate a composite index, an abbreviation for a pair of indices. In addi-
tion to the vector index defined above, we define a composite spinor-isospinor index by
• •
an underlined lower-case Greek index (undotted or dotted): ψ α ≡ ψaα , ψ α ≡ ψa α ,
56 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

ψ α ≡ ψaα , ψ α• ≡ ψa α• .

b. Superspace

We define N -extended superspace to be a space with both the usual real com-
•
muting spacetime coordinates x αα = x a = x a , and anticommuting coordinates θaα = θα
•
(and their complex conjugates θ α = (θα )† ) which transform as a spinor and an N -com-
ponent isospinor. To denote these coordinates collectively we introduce supervector
indices, using upper-case Roman letters:
•
z A = (x a , θα , θ α ) , (3.1.3a)

and the corresponding partial derivatives

∂ A = (∂ a , ∂ α , ∂ α• ) , ∂ A z B ≡ δ A B , (3.1.3b)
• •

where the nonvanishing parts of δ A B are δa b , δα β ≡ δa b δ α β , and δ α• β ≡ δb a δ α• β . The deriva-

tives are defined to satisfy a graded Leibnitz rule, given by expressing differentiation as
graded commutation:

(∂ A XY ) ≡ [∂ A , XY } = [∂ A , X }Y + (−)XA X [∂ A ,Y } , (3.1.4a)

where (−)XA is − when both X and ∂ A are anticommuting, and + otherwise, and the
graded commutator [A , B} ≡ AB − (−)AB BA is the anticommutator {A , B} when A
and B are both operators with fermi statistics, and the commutator [A , B] otherwise.
Eq. (3.1.4a) follows from writing each (anti)commutator as a difference (sum) of two
terms. The partial derivatives also satisfy graded commutation relations:

[∂ A , ∂ B } = 0 . (3.1.4b)

c. Symmetrization and antisymmetrization

Our notation for symmetrizing and antisymmetrizing indices is as follows: Sym-

metrization is indicated by parentheses ( ), while antisymmetrization is indicated by
brackets [ ]. By symmetrization we mean simply the sum over all permutations of
indices, without additional factors (and similarly for antisymmetrization, with the appro-
priate permutation signs). All indices between parentheses (brackets) are to be
(anti)symmetrized except those between vertical lines | |. For example, A(α|β B γ|δ) =
 3.1. Notation 57

Aαβ B γδ + Aδβ B γα . In addition, just as it is convenient to define the graded commutator

[A , B}, we define graded antisymmetrization [ ) to be a sum of permutations with a plus
sign for any transposition of two spinor indices, and a minus sign for any other kind of
pair.

d. Conjugation

When working with operators with fermi statistics, the only type of complex con-
jugation that is usually defined is hermitian conjugation. It is defined so that the hermi-
tian conjugate of a product is the product of the hermitian conjugates of the factors in
reverse order. For anticommuting c-numbers hermitian conjugation again is the most
natural form of complex conjugation. We denote the operation of hermitian conjugation
by a dagger †
, and indicate the hermitian conjugate of a given spinor by a bar:
• •
(ψ α )† ≡ ψ α , or (χα )† ≡ χα . In particular, this applies to the coordinates θ and θ intro-
duced above. Hermitian conjugation of an object with many (upper) spinor indices is
defined as for a product of spinors:
• •

(ψ 1 α1 . . . ψ j αj χ1 β 1 . . . χk β k )† = χk β k . . . χ1 β 1 ψ j αj . . . ψ 1 α1
• •

1
= (−1) 2 [j (j −1)+k (k −1)] χ1 β 1 . . . χk β k ψ 1 α1 . . . ψ j αj ,
• •
(3.1.5a)

and hence
• • 1
(ψ α1 ...αj β 1 ...β k )† ≡ (−1) 2 [j (j −1)+k (k −1)] ψ β 1 ...β k α1 ...αj .
• •
(3.1.5b)

In addition, isospin indices for SU (N ) go from upper to lower, or vice versa, upon her-
mitian conjugation. Hermitian conjugation of partial derivatives follows from the reality
of δ A B = (∂ A z B ) = [∂ A , z B }:

(∂ A )† = − (−)A ∂ A , (3.1.6a)

where (−)A is −1 for spinor indices and +1 otherwise:

(∂ a )† = − ∂ a , (∂ α )† = + ∂ α• . (3.1.6b)

Hermitian conjugation as applied to general operators is defined by

# #
χOψ ≡ (O † χ)ψ , (3.1.7)
58 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

where the integration is over the appropriate space (as will be described in sec. 3.7) and
χ is the hermitian conjugate of the function χ, as defined above.
#
Since integration defines not only a sesquilinear (hermitian) metric χψ on the
#
space of functions, as used to define a Hilbert space, but also a bilinear metric χψ, we
can also define the transpose of an operator:
# #
χOψ ≡ (±O t χ)ψ , (3.1.8)

where ± is − for O and χ anticommuting, + otherwise. When the operator is expressed

as a matrix, the hermitian conjugate and transpose take their familiar forms. We can
also define complex conjugation of an operator:

Oχ ≡ ±O * χ , (3.1.9)

with ± as in (3.1.8). For c-numbers we have ψt = ψ and ψ * = ψ. For partial deriva-

tives, integration by parts implies (∂ A )t = − ∂ A . In general, we also have the relation
O * t =O † , and the ordering relations (O 1O 2 )t = ± O 2t O 1t and (O 1O 2 ) * = ± O 1 * O 2 *, as
well as the usual (O 1O 2 )† =O 2 †O 1 † .

e. Levi-Civita tensors and index contractions

There is only one nontrivial invariant matrix in SL(2,C ), the antisymmetric sym-
bol C αβ (and its complex conjugate and their inverses), due to the volume-preserving
nature of the group (unit determinant). Similarly, for SU (N ) we have the antisymmet-
ric symbol C a 1 ...a N (and its complex conjugate). In addition we find it useful to introduce
the antisymmetric symbol of SL(2N ,C )⊃SU (N )×
⃝SL(2,C ), C α ...α . Because of anti-
1 2N

commutativity, it appears in the antisymmetric product of the 2N θ’s of N -extended

supersymmetry. These objects satisfy the following relations:

C αβ = C β•α• , C αβC γδ = δ [α γ δ β] δ ; (3.1.10a)

C a 1 ...a N = C a 1 ...a N , C a 1 ...a N C b 1 ...b N = δ [a 1 b 1 . . . δa N ]b N ; (3.1.10b)

C α1 ...α2N = C α• 2N ...α• 1 , C α1 ...α2N C β 1 ...β 2N = δ [α1 β 1 . . . δα2N ] β 2N . (3.1.10c)

The SL(2N ,C ) symbol can be expressed in terms of the others:

 3.1. Notation 59

1 . . .C α α
C α1 ...α2N = (C C C
N !(N + 1)! a 1 ...a N a N +1 ...a 2N α1 αN +1 N 2N

± permutations of αi ) . (3.1.11)

The magnitudes of the C ’s are fixed by the conventions

• • • •
C αβ = C β α , C α1 ...α2N = C α2N ...α1 , (3.1.12)

which set the absolute values of their components to 0 or 1.

We have the following relation for the product of all the θ’s (because {θ α , θ β } = 0,
the square of any one component of θ vanishes):

1
θα1 . . . θα2N = C α2N ...α1 ( C θβ 1 . . . θ β 2N )
(2N )! β 2N ...β 1

≡ C α2N ...α1 θ 2N , (3.1.13)

and a similar relation for θ , where, up to a phase factor, θ 2N is simply the product of all
the θ’s. Our conventions for complex conjugation of the C ’s imply θ 2N † = θ 2N . Although
⃝SU (N ) covariants in terms of covari-
seldom needed (except for expressing the SL(2,C )×
ants of a subgroup, as, e.g., when performing dimensional reduction or using a light-cone
formalism), we can fix the phases (up to signs) in the definition of the C ’s by the follow-
ing conventions:

C αβ = C α• β• , C α1 ...α2N = C α• 1 ...α• 2N → C a 1 ...a N = C a 1 ...a N . (3.1.14)

In particular, we take
! "
0 −i
C αβ = (3.1.15)
i 0

1
For N = 1 we have θ 2 = C βα θ α θ β = i θ + θ − . C αβ is thus the SL(2,C ) metric, and can be
2
used for raising and lowering spinor indices:

ψ α = ψ βC βα , ψ α = C αβ ψ β , (3.1.16a)

1 1 1
ψ · χ ≡ ψ α χα = χ · ψ , ψ 2 ≡ C βα ψ α ψ β = ψαψα = ψ · ψ = i ψ+ψ− ; (3.1.16b)
2 2 2

• • • •
ψ α• = ψ βC β•α• , ψ α = C αβ ψ β• , (3.1.16c)
60 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1 1 1
• • • • • •
ψ · χ ≡ ψ α χα• = χ · ψ , ψ 2 ≡ C β•α• ψ α ψ β = ψ α ψ α• = ψ · ψ = iψ + ψ − ; (3.1.16d)
2 2 2

• •
V a = V bC βαC β• α• ≡ V b ηba , V a = C αβC αβV b ≡ ηabV b , (3.1.16e)

V ·W ≡ V aW a = W ·V ,

1 1 1 •

V2 ≡ η V aV b = V aV a = V ·V = V +V − +V TV T = − det V αβ . (3.1.16f)
2 ba 2 2

(As indicated by these equations, we contract indices with the contravariant index first.)
Our unusual definition of the square of a vector is useful for spinor algebra, but we cau-
tion the reader not to confuse it with the standard definition. In particular, we define
1 a
≡ ∂ ∂a . (However, when we transform (with a nonunimodular transformation) to a
2
a
cartesian basis, then we have the usual = ∂˜ ∂ a . For the coordinates, we have
˜
2 1 a
x = x˜ x a . Our conventions are convenient for superfield calculations, but may lead to
4 ˜
a few unusual component normalizations.)

Defining
• •

∂ αβ• ≡ δa b ∂ αβ• , ∂ αβ ≡ δb a ∂ αβ ; (3.1.17)

we have the identities

• •
∂ αγ ∂ β γ• = δ β α , ∂ αγ ∂ β γ• = δ β α . (3.1.18)

From (3.1.10a) we obtain the frequently used relation

ψ [α χβ] = C βα (C δγ ψ γ χδ ) = C βα (ψ δ χδ ) , (3.1.19)

which is the Weyl-spinor form of the Fierz identities. Similar relations follow from
(3.1.10b,c).

The complex conjugation properties of C αβ imply that the complex conjugates of

covariant (lower index) spinors, including spinor partial derivatives (cf. (3.1.6)), have an
additional minus sign:

(ψ α )† = − ψ α• . (3.1.20)

From (3.1.11) and (3.1.18), or directly from the fact that antisymmetric symbols define
 3.1. Notation 61

• •

determinants (det V αβ = (det V αβ )N = (−V 2 )N ), we have the following identity:

• •

C β• • ∂ α1 β 1 . . . ∂ α2N β 2N = C α1 ...α2N (− )N . (3.1.21)

2N ... β 1

Finally, we define the SO(3, 1) Levi-Civita tensor as

ϵabcd = i (C αδC βγC α• β•C γ•δ• − C αβC γδC α• δ•C β•γ• ) ,

ϵabcd ϵe f gh = − δ [a e δb f δc g δd ] h . (3.1.22)
62 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

3.2. The supersymmetry groups

Lie algebras and Lie groups play an important role in field theory; groups such as
⃝U (1) are
the Poincaré group ISO(3, 1), the Lorentz group SO(3, 1), SU (3) and SU (2)×
familiar. The new feature needed for supersymmetry is a generalization of Lie algebras
to super-Lie algebras (also called graded Lie algebras; however, this term is sometimes
used in a different way).

a. Lie algebras

A Lie algebra consists of a set of generators {ΩA }, A = 1, . . . , M . These objects

close under an antisymmetric binary operation called a Lie bracket; we write it as a
commutator:

[ΩA , ΩB ] = ΩA ΩB − ΩB ΩA . (3.2.1)

The Lie algebra is defined by its structure constants f AB C :

[ΩA , ΩB ] = i f AB C ΩC . (3.2.2)

The structure constants are restricted by the Jacobi identities

f AB D f DC E + f BC D f DA E + f CA D f DB E = 0 (3.2.3)

which follow from

[[ΩA , ΩB ] , ΩC ] + [[ΩB , ΩC ] , ΩA ] + [[ΩC , ΩA ] , ΩB ] = 0 . (3.2.4)

The generators form a basis for vectors of the form K = λA ΩA , where the λA are coordi-
nates in the Lie algebra which are usually taken to commute with the generators ΩA . In
most physics applications they are taken to be real, complex, or quaternionic numbers.
Because the structure constants satisfy the Jacobi identities, it is always possible to rep-
resent the generators as matrices. We can then exponentiate the Lie algebra into a Lie
group with elements g = e iK ; in general, different representations of the Lie algebra will
give rise to Lie groups with different topological structures. If a set of fields Φ(x ) trans-
forms linearly under the action of the Lie group, we say Φ(x ) is in or carries a represen-
tation of the group. Abstractly, we write

Φ ′(x ) = e iK Φ(x )e −iK ; (3.2.5)

 3.2. The supersymmetry groups 63

to give this meaning, we must specify the action of the generators on Φ, i.e.,[ΩA , Φ]. For
example, if K is a matrix representation and Φ is a column vector, the expression above
is to be interpreted as Φ ′ = e iK Φ.

b. Super-Lie algebras

For supersymmetry we generalize and consider super-Lie algebras. The essential

new feature is that now the Lie bracket of some generators is symmetric. Those genera-
tors whose bracket is symmetric are called fermionic; the rest are bosonic. We write the
bracket as a graded commutator

[ΩA , ΩB } = ΩA ΩB − (−)AB ΩB ΩA ≡ Ω[A ΩB ) . (3.2.6)

The structure constants of the super-Lie algebra obey super-Jacobi identities that follow
from:

1
0= (−)AC [[Ω[A , ΩB } , ΩC) }
2

≡ (−)AC [[ΩA , ΩB } , ΩC } + (−)AB [[ΩB , ΩC } , ΩA } + (−)BC [[ΩC , ΩA } , ΩB } . (3.2.7)

Again, we can define a vector space with the generators ΩA acting as a basis; however,
in this case the coordinates λA associated with the fermionic generators are anticommut-
ing numbers or Grassmann parameters that anticommute with each other and with the
fermionic generators. Grassmann parameters commute with ordinary numbers and
bosonic generators; these properties ensure that K = λA ΩA is bosonic. Formally, we
obtain super-Lie group elements by exponentiation of the algebra as we do for Lie
groups.

c. Super-Poincaré algebra

Field theories in ordinary spacetime are usually symmetric under the action of a
spacetime symmetry group: the Poincaré group for massive theories in flat space, the
conformal group for massless theories, and the deSitter group for theories in spaces of
constant curvature. For supersymmetry, we consider extensions of these groups to
supergroups. These were investigated by Haag, /Lopuszański, and Sohnius, who classified
the most general symmetries possible (actually, they considered symmetries of the S-
matrix and generalized the Coleman-Mandula theorem on unified internal and spacetime
64 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

symmetries to include super-Lie algebras). They proved that the most general
super-Poincaré algebra contains, in addition to {J αβ , J α• β• , P αβ• } (the generators of the
Poincaré group), N fermionic spinorial generators Q a α (and their hermitian conjugates
1
−Q a α• ), where a = 1, . . . , N is an isospin index, and at most N (N − 1) complex central
2
charges (called central because they commute with all generators in the theory)
Z ab = − Z ba . The algebra is:

{Q aα ,Q b β• } = δa b P αβ• , (3.2.8a)

{Q aα ,Q bβ } = C αβ Z ab , (3.2.8b)

[Q aα , P β β• ] = [P αα• , P β β• ] = [J α• β• ,Q cγ ] = 0 , (3.2.8c)

1
[J αβ ,Q cγ ] = iC γ(αQ cβ) , (3.2.8d)
2

1
[J αβ , P γ γ• ] = iC γ(α P β)γ• , (3.2.8e)
2

1
[J αβ , J γδ ] = − i δ (α (γ J β) δ) , (3.2.8f)
2

[J αβ , J α• β• ] = [Z ab , Z cd ] = [Z ab , Z cd ] = 0 . (3.2.8g)

The essential ingredients in the proof are the Coleman-Mandula theorem (which restricts
the bosonic parts of the algebra), and the super-Jacobi identities. The N = 1 case is
called simple supersymmetry, whereas the N > 1 case is called extended supersymmetry.
Central charges can arise only in the case of extended (N > 1) supersymmetry. The
supersymmetry generators Q act as ‘‘square roots’’ of the momentum generators P .

d. Positivity of the energy

A direct consequence of the algebra is the positivity of the energy in supersym-

metric theories. The simplest way to understand this result is to note that the total
energy ϵ can be written as
ϵ = 12 (P + − P − ) = 12 δαβ P αβ = − 12 δαβ P αβ
• •

• • . (3.2.9)
 3.2. The supersymmetry groups 65

Since P αβ• can be obtained from the anticommutator of spinor charges, we have

ϵ = − 2N1 δαβ {Q a α , Q a β } = 2N1 {Q a α , (Q a α )† }

•
•
(3.2.10)

(we use Q a α• = − (Q a α )† ). The right hand side of eq. (3.2.10) is manifestly non-negative:
For any operator A and any state |ψ >,
,
< ψ|{A , A† }|ψ > = (< ψ|A|n >< n|A† |ψ > + < ψ|A† |n >< n|A|ψ >)
n

,
= (| < n|A† |ψ > |2 + | < n|A|ψ > |2 ) . (3.2.11)
n

Hence, ϵ is also nonnegative. Further, if supersymmetry is unbroken, Q must annihilate

the vacuum; in this case, (3.2.10) leads to the conclusion that the vacuum energy van-
ishes. Although this argument is formal, it can be made more precise; indeed, it is possi-
ble to characterize supersymmetric theories by the condition that the vacuum energy
vanish.

e. Superconformal algebra

For massless theories, Haag, /Lopuszański, and Sohnius showed what form exten-
sions of the conformal group can take: The generators of the superconformal groups
consist of the generators of the conformal group (P αβ• , J αβ , J α• β• , K αβ• , ∆) (these are the
generators of the Poincaré algebra, the special conformal boost generators, and the dila-
tion generator), 2N spinor generators (Q a α , S aα ) (and their hermitian conjugates
•
−Q a α• , −S a α with a total of 8N components), and N 2 further bosonic charges (A,T a b )
where T a a = 0. The algebra has structure constants defined by the following (anti)com-
mutators:
• •

{Q aα ,Q b β• } = δa b P αβ• , {S aα , S b β } = δb a K αβ , (3.2.12a)

1 β 1 β b 4
{Q aα , S bβ } = − i δa b (J α β + δ ∆) − δ α δa (1 − )A + 2δ α βT a b (3.2.12b)
2 α 2 N

1 1
[T a b , S cγ ] = (δa c S bγ − δa b S cγ ) , (3.2.12c)
2 N
66 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1 1
[A , S cγ ] = S cγ , [∆ , S cγ ] = − i S cγ , (3.2.12d)
2 2

1
[J α β , S cγ ] = − i δ (α |γ| S cβ) , [P αα• , S cγ ] = − δ α γQ c α• , (3.2.12e)
2

1 1
[T a b ,Q cγ ] = − (δc bQ aγ − δa bQ cγ ) , (3.2.12f)
2 N

1 1
[A ,Q cγ ] = − Q cγ , [∆ ,Q cγ ] = i Q cγ , (3.2.12g)
2 2

1 • •
[J α β ,Q cγ ] = i δ (βQ cα) , [K αα ,Q cγ ] = δ γ α S c α , (3.2.12h)
2 γ

1
[T a b ,T c d ] = (δa dT c b − δc bT a d ) , (3.2.12i)
2

• •
[∆ , K αα ] = − iK αα , [∆ , P αα• ] = iP αα• , (3.2.12j)

• 1 • 1
[J α β , K γγ ] = − i δ (α |γ| K β)γ , [J α β , P γ γ• ] = i δ (β P α)γ• , (3.2.12k)
2 2 γ

1
[J αβ , J γδ ] = − i δ (α (γ J β) δ) , (3.2.12l)
2

• • • •

[P αα• , K β β ] = i (δ α• β J α β + δ α β J α• β + δ α β δ α• β ∆) = i (J a b + δa b ∆) . (3.2.12m)

All other (anti)commutators vanish or are found by hermitian conjugation.

The superconformal algebra contains the super-Poincaré algebra as a subalgebra;

however, in the superconformal case, there are no central charges (this is a direct conse-
quence of the Jacobi identities). In the same way that the supersymmetry generators Q
act as ‘‘square roots’’ of the translation generators P , the S -supersymmetry generators S
act as ‘‘square roots’’ of the special conformal generators K . The new bosonic charges A
and T a b generate phase rotations of the spinors (axial or γ 5 rotations) and SU (N ) trans-
formations respectively (all but the SO(N ) subgroup of the SU (N ) is axial). For N = 4,
the axial charge A drops out of the {Q , S } anticommutator whereas the [Q , A] and
[S , A] commutators are N independent. The normalization of A is chosen such that
1 1 1 b
T ab + δa b A generates U (N ) (e.g., [T a b + δa b A ,Q cγ ] = − δ Q ).
N N 2 c aγ
 3.2. The supersymmetry groups 67

f. Super-deSitter algebra

Finally, we turn to the supersymmetric extension of the deSitter algebra. The

generators of this algebra are the generators of the deSitter algebra (P̃ , J̃ , J˜), spinorial
1
generators (Q̃, Q̃), and N (N − 1) bosonic SO(N ) charges T̃ ab = −T̃ ba . They can be
2
constructed out of the superconformal algebra (just as the super-Poincaré algebra is a
subalgebra of the superconformal algebra, so is the super-deSitter algebra). We can
define the generators of the super-deSitter algebra as the following linear combinations
of the superconformal generators:

P̃ αα• = P αα• + |λ|2 K αα• , Q̃ aα = Q aα + λδab S b α ,

J̃ αβ = J αβ , T̃ ab = δc[bT a]c , (3.2.13)

where, since we break SU (N ) to SO(N ), we have lowered the isospin indices of the
superconformal generators with a kronecker delta. (We could also formally maintain
SU (N ) invariance by using instead λab satisfying λab = λba and λac λbc ∼ δa b , with
λab = λδab in an appropriate SU (N ) frame.) Thus we find the following algebra:

{Q̃ aα ,Q̃ bβ } = 2λ(−i δab J̃ αβ + C αβT̃ ab ) , (3.2.14a)

{Q̃ aα , Q̃ b β• } = δa b P̃ αβ• , (3.2.14b)

[Q̃ aα , P̃ β β• ] = − λC αβ δabQ̃ b β• , (3.2.14c)

1
[J̃ αβ ,Q̃ cγ ] = iC γ(αQ̃ cβ) , (3.2.14d)
2

1
[J̃ αβ , P̃ γ γ• ] = iC γ(α P̃ β)γ• , (3.2.14e)
2

[P̃ αα• , P̃ β β• ] = − i 2|λ|2 (C α• β• J̃ αβ + C αβ J˜α• β• ) , (3.2.14f)

1
[J̃ αβ , J̃ γδ ] = − i δ (α (γ J̃ β) δ) . (3.2.14g)
2

1
[T̃ ab ,Q̃ cγ ] = δ Q̃ , (3.2.14h)
2 c[a b]γ
68 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1
[T̃ ab ,T̃ cd ] = (δb[cT̃ d ]a − δa[cT̃ d ]b ) (3.2.14i)
2

This algebra, in contrast to the superconformal and super-Poincaré cases, depends on a

dimensional constant λ. Physically, |λ|2 is the curvature of the deSitter space. (Actu-
ally, the sign is such that the relevant space is the space of constant negative curvature,
or anti-deSitter space. This is a consequence of supersymmetry: The algebra deter-
mines the relative sign in the combination P + |λ|2 K above.)
 3.3. Representations of supersymmetry 69

3.3. Representations of supersymmetry

a. Particle representations

Before discussing field representations of supersymmetry, we study the particle

content of Poincaré supersymmetric theories. We analyze representations of the super-
symmetry group in terms of representations of its Poincaré subgroup. Because P 2 is a
Casimir operator of supersymmetry (it commutes with all the generators), all elements
of a given irreducible representation will have the same mass.

a.1. Massless representations

We first consider massless representations. We then can choose a Lorentz frame

where the only nonvanishing component of the momentum p a is p + . In this frame the
anticommutation relations of the supersymmetry generators are

{Q a + ,Q b + } = 0 , {Q a + ,Q b +• } = p + δa b ,

{Q a − ,Q b − } = 0 , {Q a − ,Q b −• } = 0 ,

{Q a + ,Q b − } = 0 , {Q a + ,Q b −• } = 0 . (3.3.1)

Since the anticommutator of Q a− with its hermitian conjugate vanishes, Q a− must van-
ish identically on all physical states: From (3.2.11) we have the result that
,
0 = < ψ|{A , A† }|ψ > = (| < n|A† |ψ > |2 + | < n|A|ψ > |2 )
n

→ < n|A|ψ > = < n|A† |ψ > = 0 . (3.3.2)

On the other hand, Q a + and its hermitian conjugate satisfy the standard anticommuta-
tion relations for annihilation and creation operators, up to normalization factors (with
the exception of the case p + = 0, which in this frame means p a = 0 and describes the
physical vacuum). We can thus consider a state, the Clifford vacuum |C >, which is
annihilated by all the annihilation operators Q a + (or construct such a state from a given
state by operating on it with a sufficient number of annihilation operators) and generate
all other states by action of the creation operators Q a +• . Since, as usual, an annihilation
operator acting on any state produces another with one less creation operator acting on
70 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

the Clifford vacuum, this set of states is closed under the action of the supersymmetry
generators, and thus forms a representation of the supersymmetry algebra. Further-
more, if the Clifford vacuum is an irreducible representation of the Poincaré group, this
set of states is an irreducible representation of the supersymmetry group, since any
attempt to reduce the representation by imposing a constraint on a state (or a linear
combination of states) would also constrain the Clifford vacuum (after applying an
appropriate number of annihilation operators; see also sec. 3.8.a). The Clifford vacuum
may also carry representations of isospin and other internal symmetry groups.

The Clifford vacuum, being an irreducible representation of the Poincaré group, is

1
also an eigenstate of helicity. In this frame, Q a +• has helicity − , thus determining the
2
helicities of the other states in terms of that of the Clifford vacuum. (In general frames,
1 1
the helicity − component of Q α• is the creation operator, and the helicity + compo-
2 2
•
nent, which is the linearly independent Lorentz component of P ααQ a α• , vanishes:
• •

{P ααQ a α• , P β βQ bβ } = δb a P 2 P αβ• = 0, since p 2 = 0 in the massless case.) The representa-

tions of the states under isospin are also determined from the transformation properties
of the Clifford vacuum and the Q’s: We take the tensor product of the Clifford vac-
uum’s representation with that of the creation operators (namely, that formed by multi-
plying the representations of the individual operators and antisymmetrizing).

As examples, we consider the cases of the massless scalar multiplet (N = 1, 2),

super-Yang-Mills (N = 1, . . . , 4), and supergravity (N = 1, . . . , 8), defined by Clifford
1
vacua which are isoscalars and have helicity + , +1, and +2, respectively. (In the
2
scalar and Yang-Mills cases, the states may carry a representation of a separate internal
symmetry group.) The states are listed in Table 3.3.1. Each state is totally antisym-
metric in the isospin indices, and thus, for a given N , states with more than N isospin
1 1 N
indices vanish. The scalar multiplet contains helicities ( , . . . , − ), super Yang-Mills
2 2 2
N N
contains helicities (1, . . . , 1 − ), and supergravity contains helicities (2, . . . , 2 − ). In
2 2
addition, any representation of an internal symmetry group that commutes with super-
symmetry (such as the gauge group of super Yang-Mills) carried by the Clifford vacuum
is carried by all states (so in super Yang-Mills all states are in the adjoint representation
of the gauge group). Thus the total number of states in a massless representation is
2N k , where k is the number of states in the Clifford vacuum.
 3.3. Representations of supersymmetry 71

helicity scalar multiplet super-Yang-Mills supergravity

+2 ψ = |C >
+3/2 ψa
+1 ψ = |C > ψab
+1/2 ψ = |C > ψa ψabc
0 ψa ψab ψabcd
-1/2 ψab ψabc ψabcde
-1 ψabcd ψabcdef
-3/2 ψabcdefg
-2 ψabcdefgh

Table 3.3.1. States in theories of physical interest

The CPT conjugate of a state transforms as the complex conjugate representation.

Just as for representations of the Poincaré group, one may identify a supersymmetry
representation with its conjugate if it has the same quantum numbers: i.e., if it is a real
representation. (In terms of classical fields, or fields in a functional integral, this self-
conjugacy condition relates fields to their complex conjugates: see (3.12.4c) or (3.12.11).
Thus, in a functional integral formalism, self-conjugacy is with respect to a type of
charge conjugation: A charge conjugation is complex conjugation times a matrix (see
sec. 3.3.b.5).) For the above examples, this self-conjugacy occurs for N = 4 super Yang-
Mills and N = 8 supergravity. (This is not true for the N = 2 scalar multiplet, since an
SU (2) isospinor cannot be identified with its complex conjugate, unless an extra isospin
index of the internal SU (2) symmetry, independent of the supersymmetry SU (2), is
added. The self-conjugacy then simply cancels the doubling introduced by the extra
index.)

a.2. Massive representations and central charges

The massive case is treated similarly, except that we can no longer choose the
Lorentz frame above; instead, we choose the rest frame, p αα• = − mδ αα• :

{Q α ,Q β } = 0 , {Q α ,Q β• } = − mδαβ• . (3.3.3)

Now we have twice as many creation and annihilation operators, the Q − ’s as well as the
72 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

Q + ’s. Therefore the number of states in a massive representation is 22N k . (For example,
1 1
an N = 1 massive vector multiplet has helicity content (1, , , 0).)
2 2

The case with central charges can be analyzed by similar methods, but it is simpler
to understand if we realize that supersymmetry algebras with central charges can be
obtained from supersymmetry algebras without central charges in higher-dimensional
spacetimes by interpreting some of the extra components of the momentum as the cen-
tral charge generators (they will commute with all the four-dimensional generators).
The analysis of the state content is then the same as for the cases without central
charges, since both cases are obtained from the same higher-dimensional set of states
(except that we do not keep the full higher-dimensional Lorentz group). However, the
two distinguishing cases are now, in terms of P 2 higher −dimensional = P 2 + Z 2 =
1 a
(P P a + Z ab Z ab ): (1) P 2 + Z 2 = 0 , which has the same set of states as the massless
2
Z = 0 case (though the states are now massive, have a smaller internal symmetry group,
and transform somewhat differently under supersymmetry), and (2) P 2 + Z 2 < 0, which
has the same set of states as the massive Z = 0 case. By this same analysis, we see that
P 2 + Z 2 > 0 is not allowed (just as for Z = 0 we never have P 2 > 0).

a.3. Casimir operators

We can construct other Casimir operators than P 2 . We first define the supersym-
metric generalization of the Pauli-Lubanski vector
•
1
W αα• = i (P β α• J αβ − P α β J α• β• ) − [Q aα ,Q a α• ] , (3.3.4)
2

where the last term is absent in the nonsupersymmetric case. This vector is not invari-
ant under supersymmetry transformations, but satisfies

1 1
[W a ,Q β ] = − P aQ β , [W a ,Q β• ] = P aQ β• . (3.3.5)
2 2

1
As a result, P [aW b] commutes with Q α , and thus its square P 2W 2 − (P ·W )2 com-
4
mutes with all the generators of the super-Poincaré algebra and is a Casimir operator.
In the massive case this Casimir operator defines a quantum number s, the superspin.
The generalization of the nonsupersymmetric relation W 2 = m 2 s(s + 1) is
 3.3. Representations of supersymmetry 73

1
P 2W 2 − (P ·W )2 = − m 4 s(s + 1) . (3.3.6)
4
• •
In the massless case, not only P 2 = 0, but also P ααQ aα = P ααQ a α• = 0, and hence
P ·W = P [aW b] = 0. However, using the generator A of the superconformal group
(3.2.12), we can construct an object that commutes with Q and Q: W a − AP a . Thus
we can define a quantum number λ, the superhelicity, that generalizes helicity λ0
(defined by W a = λ0 P a ):

W a − AP a = λP a . (3.3.7)

We also can construct supersymmetry invariant generalizations of the axial genera-

tor A and of the SU (N ) generators:

1 •
W 5 ≡ P 2A + P αα [Q aα , Q a α• ] ,
4

1 • 1
W a b ≡ P 2T a b + P αα ([Q aα , Q b α• ] − δa b [Q cα ,Q c α• ]) . (3.3.8)
4 N

In the massive case, the superchiral charge and the superisospin quantum numbers can
then be defined as the usual Casimir operators of the modified group generators
−m −2W 5 , − m −2W a b . In the massless case, we define the operators

1
W 5 αα• ≡ P αα• A + [Q aα ,Q a α• ] ,
4

1 1
W a b αα• ≡ P αα•T a b + ([Q aα ,Q b α• ] − δa b [Q cα , Q c α• ]) . (3.3.9)
4 N
•
These commute with Q and Q when the condition P ααQ aα = 0 holds, which is precisely
• •
the massless case. Since P β γW 5 γ γ• = P β γW a b γ γ• = 0, we can find matrix representations
g 5 , g a b such that

W 5c = g 5 P c , W abc = gab Pc . (3.3.10)

The superchiral charge is g 5 , and superisospin quantum numbers can be defined from the
traceless matrices g a b . All supersymmetrically invariant operators that we have con-
structed can be reexpressed in terms of covariant derivatives defined in sec. 3.4.a; see sec
3.4.d.
74 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

b. Representations on superfields

We turn now to field (off-shell) representations of the supersymmetry algebras.

These can be described in superspace, which is an extension of spacetime to include
extra anticommuting coordinates. To discover the action of supersymmetry transforma-
tions on superspace, we use the method of induced representations. We discuss only
simple N = 1 supersymmetry for the moment.

b.1. Superspace

Ordinary spacetime can be defined as the coset space (Poincaré group)/(Lorentz

group). Similarly, global flat superspace can be defined as the coset space
(super-Poincaré group)/(Lorentz group): Its points are the orbits which the Lorentz
group sweeps out in the super-Poincaré group. Relative to some origin, this coset space
can be parametrized as:
• •
i( x αβ P̂ • + θαQ̂ α + θ αQ̂ α• )
h(x , θ, θ ) = e αβ (3.3.11)

where x , θ, θ are the coordinates of superspace: x is the coordinate of spacetime, and

θ, θ are new fermionic spinor coordinates. The ‘‘hat’’ on P̂ and Q̂ indicates that they
are abstract group generators, not to be confused with the differential operators P and
Q used to represent them below. The statistics of θ, θ are determined by those of Q̂, Q̂:

{θ, θ} = {θ, θ } = {Q̂, θ} = [θ, x ] = [θ, P̂ ] = 0 , (3.3.12)

etc., that is, θ, θ are Grassmann parameters.

b.2. Action of generators on superspace

We define the action of the super-Poincaré group on superspace by left multiplica-

tion:

h(x ′, θ ′, θ ′) = ĝ −1 · h(x , θ, θ ) mod SO(3, 1) (3.3.13)

where ĝ is a group element, and ‘‘mod SO(3, 1)’’ means that any terms involving Lorentz
generators are to be pushed through to the right and then dropped. To find the action
of the generators (J , P ,Q) on superspace, we consider
 3.3. Representations of supersymmetry 75

. •
/
Jˆα β + ω α• β Jˆα• β )
• •
− i(ξ αβ P̂ ) •

e − i(ω α , e − i(ϵ Q̂ α + ϵ Q̂ α )
β • α α
ĝ = , e , (3.3.14)
•
αβ

1
A+B + [A,B ]
respectively. Using the Baker-Hausdorff theorem (e Ae B = e 2 if
[A, [A, B]] = [B, [A, B]] = 0) to rearrange the exponents, we find:
• • • • •
•
J & J : x ′αα = [e ω ]β α [e ω ]β• α x β β , θ ′α = [e ω ]β α θ β , θ ′α = [e ω ]β• α θ β ,

• •
P : x ′a = x a + ξa , θ ′α = θ α , θ ′α = θ α ,

1 • • • • •
Q & Q: x ′a = x a − i (ϵα θ α + ϵ α θ α ) , θ ′α = θ α + ϵα , θ ′α = θ α + ϵ α . (3.3.15)
2

Thus the generators are realized as coordinate transformations in superspace. The

Lorentz group acts reducibly: Under its action the x ’s and θ’s do not transform into each
other.

b.3. Action of generators on superfields

To get representations of supersymmetry on physical fields, we consider superfields

Ψα... (x , θ, θ): (generalized) multispinor functions over superspace. Under the supersym-
metry algebra they are defined to transform as coordinate scalars and Lorentz multi-
spinors. They may also be in a matrix representation of an internal symmetry group.
The simplest case is a scalar superfield, which transforms as: Φ′(x ′, θ ′, θ ′) = Φ(x , θ, θ ) or,
infinitesimally, δΦ ≡ Φ′(z ) − Φ(z ) = − δz M ∂ M Φ(z ). Using (3.3.13), we write the trans-
• •
formation as δΦ = − i [(ϵαQ̂ α + ϵ αQ̂ α• ) , Φ] = i [(ϵαQ α + ϵ αQ α• ) , Φ], etc. Hence, just as in
the ordinary Poincaré case, the generators Q̂, etc., are represented by differential opera-
tors Q, etc.:

1 •
J αβ = − i (x (α γ ∂ β)γ• + θ (α ∂ β) ) − iM αβ ,
2

P αβ• = i ∂ αβ• ,

1 •
1 α
Q α = i (∂ α − θ αi ∂ αα• ) , Q α• = i (∂ α• − θ i ∂ αα• ) ; (3.3.16)
2 2

where M αβ generates the matrix Lorentz transformations of the superfield Ψ:

76 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1
[M αβ , Ψγ ... ] = C γ(αΨβ)... + . . ..
2

For future use, we write Q and Q as

1 1 1 1
Q α = e 2U i ∂ αe − 2U , Q α• = e − 2U i ∂ α• e 2U , (3.3.17a)

where
•

U = θ α θ β i ∂ αβ• . (3.3.17b)

Finally, from the relation {Q, Q} = P , we conclude that the dimension of θ and θ is
1
(m)− 2 .

b.4. Extended supersymmetry

We now generalize to extended Poincaré supersymmetry. In principle, the results

we present could be derived by methods similar to the above, or by using a systematic
differential geometry procedure. In practice the simplest procedure is to start with the
N = 1 Poincaré results and generalize them by dimensional analysis and U (N ) symme-
try.
• • •
For general N , superspace has coordinates z A = (x αα , θaα , θ a α ) ≡ (x a , θα , θ α ).
Superfields Ψαβ ...ab ... (x , θ, θ) transform as multispinors and isospinors, and as coordinate
scalars. Including central charges, the super-Poincaré generators act on superfields as
the following differential operators:

1 β 1 b
•

Q aα = i (∂ aα − θ i ∂ αβ• − θ Z ) , (3.3.18a)
2 a 2 α ba

1 aβ 1
Q a α• = i (∂ a α• − θ i ∂ βα• − θ b α• Z ba ) , (3.3.18b)
2 2

1 •
J αβ = − i (x (α γ ∂ β)γ• + θa (α ∂ aβ) ) − iM αβ , (3.3.18c)
2

1 a •
J α• β• = − i (x γ (α• ∂ γ β)
• + θ
a(α ∂ β) ) − iM α• β ,
• • (3.3.18d)
2

P αα• = i ∂ αα• . (3.3.18e)

Central charges are discussed in section 4.6.

 3.3. Representations of supersymmetry 77

b.5. CPT in superspace

Poincaré supersymmetry is compatible with the discrete invariances CP (charge

conjugation × parity) and T (time reversal). We begin by reviewing C, P, and T in
ordinary spacetime. We describe the transformations as acting on c-number fields, i.e.,
we use the functional integral formalism, rather than acting on q-number fields or
Hilbert space states.

Under a reflection with respect to an arbitrary (but not lightlike) axis u a , (u = u,

u 2 = ± 1) the coordinates transform as
• •

x ′a = R(u)x a = − u −2 u α β• u β α x β β

= x a − u −2 u a u · x , R2 = I (3.3.19)

(u · x changes sign, while the components of x orthogonal to u are unchanged.) T then

acts on the coordinates as R(δa 0 ) while a space reflection can be represented by
R(δa 1 )R(δa 2 )R(δa 3 ) (in terms of a timelike vector δa 0 , and three orthogonal spacelike
vectors δa i , i = 1, 2, 3).

We define the action of the discrete symmetries on a real scalar field by

φ′(x ′) = φ(x ). The action on a Weyl spinor is
• • •
ψ ′α (x ′) = iu α α• ψ α (x ) , ψ ′α (x ′) = iu α α ψ α (x ) ;

ψ ′ ′α (x ) = u 2 ψ α (x ) . (3.3.20)

Since this transformation involves complex conjugation, we interpret R as giving CP and

T. Indeed, since under complex conjugation e −ipx → e +ipx , we have
p ′a = − (p a − u −2u a u · p). Therefore p 0 changes sign for spacelike u, and this is consis-
tent with our interpretation. The combined transformation CPT is simply x → − x and
the fields transform without any factors (except for irrelevant phases). The transforma-
tion of an arbitrary Lorentz representation is obtained by treating each spinor index as
in (3.3.20).

The definition of C, and thus P and CT, requires the existence of an additional,
internal, discrete symmetry, e.g., a symmetry involving only sign changes: For the pho-
ton field CAa = − Aa ; for a pair of real scalars, Cφ1 = + φ1 , Cφ2 = − φ2 gives
78 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

C(φ1 + i φ2 ) = (φ1 + i φ2 )† . For a pair of spinors, Cψ 1 α = ψ 2 α , Cψ 2 α = ψ 1 α gives, for the

• • •
Dirac spinor (ψ 1 α , ψ 2 α ), the transformation C(ψ 1 α , ψ 2 α ) = (ψ 2 α , ψ 1 α )† , i.e., complex con-
jugation times a matrix. Therefore, C generally involves complex conjugation of a field,
as do CP and T, whereas P and CT do not. (However, note that the definition of com-
plex conjugation depends on the definition of the fields, e.g., combining φ1 and φ2 as
φ1 + i φ2 .)

The generalization to superspace is straightforward: In addition to the transforma-

tion R(u)x given above, we have (as for any spinor)
• • •
θ ′aα = iu α α• θ a α , θ ′a α = iu α α θaα . (3.3.21)

A real scalar superfield and a Weyl spinor superfield thus transform as the corresponding
component fields, but now with all superspace coordinates transforming under R(u). To
preserve the chirality of a superspace or superfield (see below), we define R(u) to always
complex conjugate the superfields. We thus have, e.g.,
•

Φ ′(z ′) = Φ(z ) , Ψ ′α (z ′) = iu α β• Ψβ (z ) = iu α β• Ψβ (z ) . (3.3.22)

As for components, C can be defined as an additional (internal) discrete symmetry

which can be expressed as a matrix times hermitian conjugation.

We remark that R(u) transforms the supersymmetry generators covariantly only

•

for u 2 = + 1. For u 2 = − 1 there is a relative sign change between ∂ α and θ β i ∂ αβ• . This
is because CP changes the sign of p 0 , which is needed to maintain the positivity of the
energy (see (3.2.10)).

b.6. Chiral representations of supersymmetry

As in the N = 1 case (see (3.3.17)), Q, Q can be written compactly for higher N ,

even in the presence of central charges:
1 1 b 1
Q α = e 2U i (∂ α − θ α Z ba )e − 2U ,
2

1 1 1
Q α• = e − 2U i (∂ α• − θ b α• Z ba )e 2U , (3.3.23a)
2

U ≡ θ γ θ δ i ∂ γδ• , ∂ γ δ• = δc d ∂ γδ• . (3.3.23b)

 3.3. Representations of supersymmetry 79

This allows us to find other representations of the super-Poincaré algebra in which Q (or
Q) take a very simple form. We perform nonunitary similarity transformations on all
generators ΩA :
−1 1
ΩA (±) = e + 2U ΩAe ± 2U , (3.3.24)

which leads to:

1 b
Q α (+) = i (∂ α − θ Z ) ,
2 α ba

1
Q α• (+) = e −U i (∂ α• − θ b α• Z ba )eU , (3.3.25)
2

or

1 b
Q α (−) = eU i (∂ α − θ Z )e −U ,
2 α ba

1
Q α• (−) = i (∂ α• − θ b α• Z ba ) . (3.3.26a)
2

The generators act on transformed superfields

−1 1
Ψ(±) (z ) = e + 2U Ψ(z )e ± 2U (3.3.26b)

These representations are called chiral or antichiral representations, whereas the original
one is called the vector representation. They can also be found directly by the method
of induced representations by using a slightly different parametrization of the coset space
manifold (superspace) (cf. (3.3.11)):
(+) P̂ (−) P̂
h (+) = e iθQ̂ e ix e i θ Q̂ , h (−) = e i θ Q̂ e ix e iθQ̂ , (3.3.27a)

where

1 1 −1
x (±) = x ± i θθ = e ± 2U x e + 2U (3.3.27b)
2

are complex (nonhermitian) coordinates. The corresponding superspaces are called chi-
ral and antichiral, respectively. The similarity transformations (3.3.26b) can be regarded
as complex coordinate transformations:
1 −1
Ψ(z ) = e ± 2U Ψ(±) (z )e + 2U = Ψ(±) (z (±) ) ,
80 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1 −1
z (±) = e ± 2U ze + 2U = (x (±) , θ , θ) . (3.3.28)

Hermitian conjugation takes us from a chiral representation to an antichiral one:

(V (+) ) = V (−) . Consequently, a hermitian quantity V = V in the vector representation
satisfies

V = e −U V eU (3.3.29)

in the chiral representation.

b.7. Superconformal representations

The method of induced representations can be used to find representations for the
superconformal group. However, we use a different procedure. The representations of
Q, P , and J are as in the super-Poincaré case. The representations of the remaining
generators are found as follows: In ordinary spacetime, the conformal boost generators
K can be constructed by first performing an inversion, then a translation (P transforma-
tion), and finally performing another inversion; a similar sequence of operations can be
used in superspace to construct K from P and S from Q.

We define the inversion operation as the following map between chiral and antichi-
ral superspace:
• − − •
x ′(±)αα = (x ( +) )−2 x ( +)αα
•
= (x (±) )−2 x (±)αα ,

•
θ ′a α = i (x (−) )−2 x (−)α α• θ a α
•
= − i (x (+) )−2 x (+) α α θaα ,

• •
θ ′a α = i (x (+) )−2 x (+) α α θaα
•
= − i (x (−) )−2 x (−)α α• θ a α ; (3.3.30)

we have z ′ ′ = z . The essential property of this mapping is that it scales a supersymetri-

1 •

cally invariant extension of the line element. We write ds 2 = s αβ• s αβ , where

2

i
• • • •

s αβ = dx αβ + (θaαdθ a β + θ a β d θaα ) , (3.3.31)

2

is a supersymmetrically invariant 1-form (invariance follows at once from (3.3.15)).

Under inversions (3.3.30), we find
• • •
s ′αβ = − (x (+) )−2 (x (−) )−2 x (+)β β x (−)αα s β α• ,
 3.3. Representations of supersymmetry 81

ds ′2 = (x (+) )2 (x (−) )2 ds 2 . (3.3.32)

Superfields transform as
• •
... β ...
(z ) = (x (+) )−2d (x (−) )−2d f α α• . . . f β β Ψα...β ... (z ′) ,
+ − •
II Ψα (3.3.33a)

• •
f α α• ≡ i (x (+) )−1 x (+)α α• , f α α ≡ i (x (−) )−1 x (−) α α . (3.3.33b)

Here d ≡ d + + d − is the canonical dimension (Weyl weight) of Ψ, and d − − d + is pro-

portional to the chiral U (1) weight w . Note that chiral superfields (fields depending only
on and x (+) and θ, not θ; see sec. 3.5) with d − = 0 and only undotted indices remain chi-
ral after an inversion.

We can calculate S α as described above: We use the inversion operator II and

compute S a α = IIQ α• II and S a α• = IIQ α II . Using the superconformal commutator algebra
we then compute K , A, T , and ∆. We find

1 •
A= (θα ∂ α − θ α ∂ α• ) − Y , (3.3.34a)
2

1 •
1 •
T ab = (θbα ∂ aα − θ a α ∂ b α• − δa b (θα ∂ α − θ α ∂ α• )) + t a b , (3.3.34b)
2 N

• 1 bα α• a • 1 •
S aα = i (x αα − i θ θ b )Q α + θaβ θbαi (∂ bβ + i θ b γ ∂ βγ• )
2 2

1 a 4 1 a 1 α
− 2i θbβ [δ β α (t b a + δ (1 − )Y ) − δ (M β α + δ d )] , (3.3.34c)
4 b N 2 b 2 β

1 bα α• 1 bβ
• • •
•
S a α = i (x αα + i θ θ b )Q aα + θ a β θ b αi (∂ b β• + i θ ∂ ββ• )
2 2

1 b 4 1 b 1 • α•
• • •
−2i θ b β [−δ β• α (t a b + δa (1 − )Y ) − δa (M β• α + δ d )] , (3.3.34d)
4 N 2 2 β

1 • 1 •
∆ = −i ({x αα , ∂ αα• } + ([θ α , ∂ α ] + [θ α , ∂ α• ])) − idd , (3.3.34e)
2 2

1 aα β bβ α•
• • • •
• • •
K αα = − i (x αβ x β α ∂ β β• + x αβ θ a α ∂ a β• + x β α θaα ∂ aβ − θ θ a θ θ b ∂ β β• )
4

1 • • •
+ (θaβ θ a α θbα ∂ bβ − θaα θ a β θ b α ∂ b β• )
2
82 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1 aβ α• 1 aα β
• • •
•
− i (x β α + i θ θ a )M β α − i (x αβ − i θ θ a )M β• α
2 2

• •
1 b 4
− x ααidd − 2θaα θ b α (t a b + δ (1 − )Y ) . (3.3.34f)
4 a N

Here d is the matrix piece of the generator ∆; its eigenvalue is the canonical dimension
d . Similarly, Y , t a b are the matrix pieces of the axial generator A and the SU (N ) gener-
1
ators T a b ; the eigenvalue of Y is w. The terms in S , S proportional to Y and t a b do
2
not follow from the inversion (3.3.33), but are determined by the commutation relations
and (3.3.34a,b).

b.8. Super-deSitter representations

To construct the generators of the super-deSitter algebra, we use the expressions

for the conformal generators and take the linear combinations prescribed in (3.2.13).

To summarize, for general N , in each of the cases we have considered the genera-
tors act as differential operators. In addition the superfields may carry a nontrivial
matrix representation of all the generators except for P and Q in the Poincaré and
deSitter cases, and P , Q, K , and S in the superconformal case. They may also carry a
representation of some arbitrary internal symmetry group.
 3.4. Covariant derivatives 83

3.4. Covariant derivatives

In ordinary flat spacetime, the usual coordinate derivative ∂ a is translation

invariant: the translation generator P a , which is represented by ∂ αα• , commutes with
itself. In supersymmetric theories, the supertranslation generator Q α has a nontrivial
anticommutator, and hence is not invariant under supertranslations; a simple computa-
tion reveals that the fermionic coordinate derivatives ∂ α , ∂ α• are not invariant either.
There is, however, a simple way to construct derivatives that are invariant under super-
symmetry transformations generated by Q α ,Q α• (and are covariant under Lorentz, chiral,
and isospin rotations generated by J αβ , J α• β• , A, and T a b ).

a. Construction

In the preceding section we used the method of induced representations to find

the action of the super-Poincaré generators in superspace. The same method can be
used to find covariant derivatives. We define the operators D α and D α• by the equation

(e ϵD + ϵ D )(e i(x P̂ + θQ̂ + θ Q̂) ) ≡ (e i(x P̂ + θQ̂ + θ Q̂) )(e i(ϵQ̂ + ϵ Q̂) ) . (3.4.1)

The anticommutator of Q̂ with D can be examined as follows:

(e − i(ϵQ̂ + ϵ Q̂) )(e ζD + ζ D )(e i(ϵQ̂ + ϵ Q̂) )(e i(x P̂ + θQ̂ + θ Q̂) )

0 1
− i(ϵQ̂ + ϵ Q̂) i(ϵQ̂ + ϵQ̂) i(x P̂ + θQ̂ + θ Q̂) i(ζQ̂ + ζ Q̂)
= (e ) (e )(e )(e )

= (e i(x P̂ + θQ̂ + θ Q̂) )(e i(ζQ̂ + ζQ̂) )

= (e ζD + ζD )(e i(x P̂ + θQ̂ + θ Q̂) ) . (3.4.2)

Thus the D’s are invariant under supertranslations (and also under ordinary transla-
tions):

{Q, D} = {Q, D} = [P , D] = 0 . (3.4.3)

We can use the Baker-Hausdorff theorem, (3.4.1), and (3.3.11,13) to compute the
explicit forms of the D’s from the Q’s. We find
•
D α = − iQ α + θ α P αα• , D α• = − iQ α• + θ α P αα• . (3.4.4)
84 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

For N = 1, when acting on superfields, they have the form

1 •
1 α
D α = ∂α + θ αi ∂ αα• , D α• = ∂ α• + θ i ∂ αα• , (3.4.5)
2 2

and are covariant generalizations of the ordinary spinor derivative ∂ α , ∂ α• . For general
N , with central charges, the covariant derivatives have the form:

1 •
1 b
D α = D aα = ∂ α + θ αi ∂ α α• + θ Z ,
2 2 α ba

1 α 1
D α• = D a α• = ∂ α• + θ i ∂ α α• + θ b α• Z ba . (3.4.6)
2 2

They can be rewritten using eU as:

1 1 b 1
D α = e − 2U (∂ α + θ α Z ba )e 2U ,
2

1 1 1
D α• = e 2U (∂ α• + θ b α• Z ba )e − 2U . (3.4.7)
2

Consequently, just as the generators Q simplify in the chiral (antichiral) representation,

the covariant derivatives have the simple but asymmetric form:

1 b 1
D α (+) = e −U (∂ α + θ Z )eU , D α• (+) = ∂ α• + θ • Z ab ,
2 α ab 2 bα

1 b 1
D α (−) = ∂ α + θ Z , D α• (−) = eU (∂ α• + θ b α• Z ab )e −U . (3.4.8)
2 α ab 2

In any representation, they have the following (anti)commutation relations:

{D α , D β } = C αβ Z ab , {D α , D β• } = i ∂ αβ• . (3.4.9)

It is also possible to derive deSitter covariant derivatives by these methods. How-

ever, there is an easier, more useful, and more physical way to derive them within the
framework of supergravity, since deSitter space is simply a curved space with constant
curvature. This will be described in sec. 5.7.

b. Algebraic relations

The covariant derivatives satisfy a number of useful algebraic relations. For

1
N = 1, the only possible power of D is D 2 = D α D α . (Because of anticommutativity
2
higher powers vanish: (D)3 = 0.) From the anticommutation relations we also have
 3.4. Covariant derivatives 85

•
[D α , D 2 ] = i ∂ αα D α• , D 2D 2D 2 = D2 ,

D αD β = δβ αD 2 , D 2 θ2 = − 1 . (3.4.10)

For N > 1 we have similar relations; for vanishing central charges:

D n α1 ...αn ≡ D α1 . . . D αn ,

...α2N 1 α2N ...α1 n

D n αn + 1 ≡ C D α1 ...αn ,
n!

1 ...
D n α1 ...αn = C ... D n αn + 1 α2N ,
(2N − n)! α2N α1

...αn
D 2N −n α1 D n β 1 ...βn = δ [β 1 α1 . . . δ βn ] αn D 2N ,

(D n α1 ...αn )† = D n α• n ...α• 1 ,

...αn † •
...α• 1
(D 2N −n α1 ) = (−1)n D 2N −n αn ,

D 2N θ 2N = (−1)N ,

D 2N D 2N D 2N = N
D 2N . (3.4.11)

It is often necessary to reduce the product of D’s or D’s with respect to SU (N ), as

well as with respect to SL(2,C ). For each, the reduction is done by symmetrizing and
antisymmetrizing the indices. Specifically, we find the irreducible representations as fol-
lows: A product D α D β . . . . D λ is totally antisymmetric in its combined indices since the
D’s anticommute; however, antisymmetry in α, β implies opposite symmetries between
a, b and α, β, (one pair symmetric, the other antisymmetric), and hence a Young
tableau for the SU (N ) indices is paired with the same Young tableau reflected about the
diagonal for the SL(2,C ) indices. The latter is actually an SU (2) tableau since if we
have only D’s then only undotted indices appear, and has at most two rows. (Actually,
for SU (2) a column of 2 is equivalent to a column of 0, and hence the SL(2C ) tableau
can be reduced to a single row.) Therefore, the only SU (N ) tableaux that appear have
two columns or less. The SL(2,C ) representation can be read directly from the SU (N )
tableau (if we keep columns of height N ): The general SU (N ) tableau consists of a first
86 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

column of height p and a second of height q, where p + q is the number of D’s; the cor-
responding SL(2C ) representation is a (p − q)-index totally symmetric undotted spinor.
⃝SU (N ) has dimensionality
Therefore this representation of SL(2,C )×
! "! "
p −q +1 N N +1
(p − q + 1) . (3.4.12)
p+1 p q

c. Geometry of flat superspace

The covariant derivatives define the geometry of ‘‘flat’’ superspace. We write

them as a supervector:

D A = (D α , D α• , ∂ a ) . (3.4.13)

In general, in flat or curved space, a covariant derivative can be written in terms of coor-
∂
dinate derivatives ∂ M ≡ and connections ΓA :
∂z M

D A ≡ D A M ∂ M + ΓA (M ) + ΓA (T ) + ΓA (Z ) . (3.4.14)

The connections are the Lorentz connection

• •

ΓA (M ) = ΓAβ γ M γ β + ΓA β• γ M γ• β , (3.4.15a)

isospin connection

ΓA (T ) = ΓAb cT c b , (3.4.15b)

and central charge connection

1
ΓA (Z ) = (ΓAbc Z bc + ΓAbc Z bc ) . (3.4.15c)
2

The Lorentz generators M act only on tangent space indices. (Although the distinction
is unimportant in flat space, we distinguish ‘‘curved’’, or coordinate indices M , N , . . .
from covariant or tangent space indices A, B, . . .. In curved superspace we usually write
the covariant derivatives as ∇A = E A M D M + ΓA , D M ≡ δ M A D A , i.e., we use the flat
superspace covariant derivatives instead of coordinate derivatives: see chapter 5 for
details.)

In flat superspace, in the vector representation, from (3.4.6) we find the flat viel-
bein
 3.4. Covariant derivatives 87

⎛ 1 •
⎞
δα µ 0 i δ α µ δa m θ m µ
⎜ 2 ⎟
M ⎜ • 1 •
⎟
DA = ⎜ 0 δα• µ i δ α• µ δm a θm µ ⎟ , (3.4.16)
⎝ 2 ⎠
0 0 δa m

and the flat central charge connection

1
ΓAbc = − (C αβ θ [b β δa c] , 0 , 0) ,
2

1
•

ΓAbc = − (0 , C α• β• θ [b β δc]a , 0) , (3.4.17)

2

all other flat connections vanishing. We can describe the geometry of superspace in
terms of covariant torsions T AB C , curvatures R AB (M ), and field strengths F AB (T ) and
F AB (Z ):

[D A , D B } = T AB C D C + R AB (M ) + F AB (T ) + F AB (Z ) (3.4.18)

From (3.4.16-17), we find that flat superspace has nonvanishing torsion

•
T αβ• c = i δa b δ α γ δ β• γ (3.4.19)

and nonvanishing central charge field strength

F αβ cd = C αβ δa [c δb d ] , F α• β• cd = C α• β• δ [c a δd ]b , (3.4.20)

all other torsions, curvatures, and field strengths vanishing. Hence flat superspace has a
nontrivial geometry.

d. Casimir operators

The complete set of operators that commute with P a , Q α and Q α• (and trans-
•

form covariantly under J αβ and J α• β• ) is {D A , M α β , M α• β ,Y , t a b , d }. (Except for D A ,

which is only covariant with respect to the super-Poincaré algebra, all these operators
are covariant with respect to the entire superconformal algebra. Note that the matrix
operators M ,Y , t , d act only on tangent space indices.) Thus the Casimir operators
(group invariants) can all be expressed in terms of these operators. Following the dis-
cussion of subsec. 3.3.a.3, it is sufficient to construct:
88 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1
•

P [aW b] = P [a f b] , f a ≡ [D aα , D a α• ] − i (∂ β α• M α β − ∂ αβ• M α• β ) ,
2

W a − AP a = f a + Yi ∂ a , (3.4.21)

i • 1
W a b = − m 2t a b − ∂ αα ([D aα , D b α• ] − δa b [D cα , D c α• ]) ,
4 N

i •
W 5 = m 2Y − ∂ αα [D aα , D a α• ] (3.4.22)
4

1 1
W a b a = t a b i ∂a − ([D aα , D b α• ] − δa b [D cα , D c α• ]) ;
4 N

1
W 5a = − Yi ∂ a − [D aα , D a α• ] (3.4.23)
4
• • •
where we have used P 2 = − m 2 for W a b , and P ααQ α = ∂ αα D α = ∂ αα ∂ α = 0 for W a b c (the
massless case: see subsec. 3.3.a.3).
 3.5. Constrained superfields 89

3.5. Constrained superfields

The existence of covariant derivatives allows us to consider constrained super-

fields; the simplest (and for many applications the most useful) is a chiral superfield
defined by

D α• Φ = 0 . (3.5.1)

We observe that the constraint (3.5.1) implies that on a chiral superfield DΦ = 0 and
therefore {D , D}Φ = 0 → Z Φ = 0.

In a chiral representation, the constraint is simply the statement that Φ(+) is inde-
pendent of θ , that is Φ(+) (x , θ, θ ) = Φ(+) (x , θ). Therefore, in a vector representation,
1 1
Φ(x , θ, θ ) = e 2U Φ(+) (x , θ)e − 2U = Φ(+) (x (+) , θ) , (3.5.2)

where x (+) is the chiral coordinate of (3.3.27b). Alternatively, one can write a chiral
superfield in terms of a general superfield by using D 2N +1 = 0:

Φ = D 2N Ψ(x , θ, θ ) (3.5.3)

This form of the solution to the constraint (3.5.1) is valid in any representation. It is
the most general possible; see sec. 3.11.

Similarly, we can define antichiral superfields; these are annihilated by D α . Note

that Φ, the hermitian conjugate of a chiral superfield Φ, is antichiral. These superfields
may carry external indices.

* * *

The supersymmetry generators are represented much more simply when they act
on chiral superfields, particularly in the chiral representation (3.3.25), than when they
act on general superfields. For the super-Poincaré case we have:

1 b
Q α = i (∂ α − θ Z ) , Q α• = θaα ∂ αα• , P a = i ∂ a ,
2 β ba

1 •
J αβ = − i (x (α α ∂ β)α• + θa (α ∂ aβ) ) − iM αβ ,
2

1
J α• β• = − i x α (α• ∂ αβ)
• − iM • • , (3.5.4)
2 αβ
90 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

where Z ab Φ = 0 (as explained above) but Z ab Φ is unrestricted. If we think of Z ab as a

∂
partial derivative with respect to complex coordinates ζ ab , i.e., Z ab = i , then a chiral
∂ζ ab
superfield is a function of x , θ , ζ and is independent of θ , ζ . In the superconformal
case, Z ab must vanish, and, for consistency with the algebra, a chiral superfield must
have no dotted indices (i.e., M α• β• = 0). On chiral superfields, the inversion (3.3.33) takes
the form

... ...
II Φα (x , θ) = x −2d f α α• . . . Φα... (x ′ , θ ′) = x −2d f α α• . . . Φα (x ′ , θ ′) ,
•

•
f α α• = i (x )−1 x α α• , x ′a = x −2 x a , θ ′α = ix −2 x α α θaα ; (3.5.5)

(note that d − = 0 and hence d = d + ). The generators of the superconformal algebra are
now just (3.5.4),
• • •
S α = − x αα ∂ aα , S α = − θaβG β α , K a = x β αG β α ; (3.5.6a)

with

1
G α β = J α β + δ α β [∆ + i ( x a ∂ a + 2 − N )] ,
2

1 α
∆ = − i (x a ∂ a + θ ∂α + 2 − N +d) ,
2

1 α
A= θ ∂α − (4 − N )−1 N d ,
2

1 1
T ab = ([θbα , ∂ aα ] − δa b [θ α , ∂ α ]) . (3.5.6b)
4 N

The commutator algebra is, of course, unchanged. Note that the expression for A con-
1
tains a term (1 − N )−1d ; this implies that for N = 4, either d vanishes, or the axial
4
charge must be dropped from the algebra (see sec. 3.2.e). The only known N = 4 theo-
ries are consistent with this fact: N = 4 Yang-Mills has no axial charge and N = 4 con-
formal supergravity has d = 0. We further note that consistency of the algebra forbids
the addition of the matrix operator t a b to T a b in the case of conformal chiral superfields.
This means that conformal chiral superfields must be isosinglets, i.e., cannot carry exter-
nal isospin indices.
 3.5. Constrained superfields 91

* * *

For N = 1, a complex field satisfying the constraint D 2 Σ = 0 is called a linear

superfield. A real linear superfield satisfies the constraint D 2G = D 2G = 0. While such
objects appear in some theories, they are less useful for describing interacting particle
multiplets than chiral superfields. A complex linear superfield can always be written as
•
Σ = D αΨα• , whereas a real linear superfield can be written as G = D α D 2Ψα + h. c..
92 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

3.6. Component expansions

a. θ-expansions

Because the square of any anticommuting number vanishes, any function of a

finite number of anticommuting variables has a terminating Taylor expansion with
respect to them. This allows us to expand a superfield in terms of a finite number of
ordinary spacetime dependent fields, or components. For general N , there are 4N inde-
4N !
, "
4N
pendent anticommuting numbers in θ, and thus = 24N components in an uncon-
i =0
i

strained scalar superfield. For example, for N = 1, a real scalar superfield has the
expansion
•
V = C + θ α χα + θ α χα• − θ 2 M − θ 2 M

• •
+ θ α θ α Aa − θ 2 θ α λα − θ 2 θ α λ α• + θ 2 θ 2 D ′ (3.6.1)

with 16 real components. Similarly, a chiral scalar superfield in vector representation

has the expansion:
1 1
Φ = e 2U (A + θ α ψ α − θ 2 F )e − 2U

1 α α•
= A + θα ψα − θ2 F + i θ θ ∂a A
2

1 2 α• 1 2 2
+i θ θ ∂a ψ α + θ θ A (3.6.2)
2 4

with 4 independent complex components.

These expansions become complicated for N > 1 superfields but fortunately are
not needed. However, we give some examples to familiarize the reader with the compo-
nent content of such superfields. For instance, for N = 2, in addition to carrying
Lorentz spinor indices, superfields are representations of SU (2). A real scalar-isoscalar
superfield has the expansion
•
V (x , θ, θ ) = C (x ) + θα χα + θ α χα• − θ 2 αβ M (αβ) − θ 2 ab M (ab)

• •
+ θaα θ b α (W a b αα• + δa bV αα• ) + . . .
•
− θ 2 αβ M (α• β)
• − θ
2
ab M
(ab)
 3.6. Component expansions 93

• •
+ θ 4 N + θ 4 N + . . . + θ 2αβ θ 2αβ h αβ α• β• + . . . + θ 4 θ 4 D ′(x ) (3.6.3)

where W a a αα• = 0, while a chiral scalar isospinor superfield has the expansion (in the chi-
ral representation)

Φ(+)a (x , θ) = Aa + θbα (C ab ψ α + ψ (ab)α )

− θ 2 αβ F a(αβ) − θ 2 bc (F (abc) + C ab F c )

− θ 3b α (δa b λα + λa b α ) + θ 4 D ′a , (3.6.4)

where λa a α = 0. The spin and isospin of the component fields can be read from these
expressions.

General superfields are not irreducible representations of extended supersymmetry.

As we discuss in sec. 3.11, chiral superfields are irreducible under supersymmetry (except
for a possible further decomposition into real and imaginary parts); we present there a
systematic way of decomposing any superfield into its irreducible parts.

The supersymmetry transformations of the component fields follow straightfor-

wardly from the transformations of the superfields. Thus, for example, for N = 1, from
δV = [i (ϵQ + ϵ Q),V ] = δC + θ α δχα + . . . (with a constant spinor parameter ϵα ) we
find:
•
δC (x ) = − (ϵα χα + ϵ α χα• ) ,

•
1
δχα (x ) = ϵα M − ϵ α (i ∂ aC + Aa ) ,
2

1
δχα• (x ) = ϵ α• M − ϵα (i ∂ aC − Aa ) ,
2

•
1
δM (x ) = − ϵ α (λ α• + i ∂ a χα ) ,
2

1 1
•

δAa (x ) = − ϵβ (C βα λ α• + i ∂ β α• χα ) + ϵ β (C β• α• λα + i ∂ αβ• χα• ) ,

2 2

1 1
• •
δλα (x ) = ϵβ (C βα D′ + i ∂ β α• Aα β ) − i ϵ α ∂ αα• M ,
2 2
94 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1 • •
δD ′(x ) = i ∂ a (ϵα λ α + ϵ α λα ) , etc. , (3.6.5)
2

Similarly, for a chiral superfield Φ we find:

δA = − ϵα ψ α ,

•
δψ α = − ϵ αi ∂ αα• A + ϵα F ,

•
δF = − ϵ αi ∂ α α• ψ α . (3.6.6)

b. Projection

For many applications, the θ-expansions just considered are inconvenient; an

alternative is to define ‘‘components by projection’’ of an expression as the θ-independent
parts of its successive spinor derivatives. We introduce the notation X | to indicate the θ
independent part of an expression X . Then, for example, we can define the components
of a chiral superfield by

A(x ) = Φ(x , θ, θ )| ,

ψ α (x ) = D αΦ(x , θ, θ )| ,

F (x ) = D 2Φ(x , θ, θ )| . (3.6.7)

The supersymmetry transformations of the component fields follow from the algebra of
the covariant derivatives D; we use (−iQΨ)| = (DΨ)| and {D α , D β• } = i ∂ αβ• to find

δA = i (ϵ · Q + ϵ · Q)Φ| = − (ϵ · D + ϵ · D)Φ|

= − ϵ · DΦ| = − ϵα ψ α ,

δψ α = i (ϵ · Q + ϵ · Q)D αΦ| = − (ϵ · D + ϵ · D)D αΦ|

• •
= (ϵα D 2 − ϵ αi ∂ αα• )Φ| = ϵα F − ϵ αi ∂ αα• A ,

•
δF = i (ϵ · Q + ϵ · Q)D 2Φ| = − ϵ · DD 2Φ| = − ϵ αi ∂ α α• ψ α . (3.6.8)
 3.6. Component expansions 95

Explicit computation of the components shows that, in this particular case, the
components in the θ-expansion are identical to those defined by projection. This is not
necessarily the case: For superfields that are not chiral, some components are defined
with both D’s and D’s; for these components, there is an ambiguity stemming from how
the D’s and D’s are ordered. For example, the θ 2 θ component of a real scalar superfield
V could be defined as D 2 DV |, DDDV |, or DD 2V |. These definitions differ only by
spacetime derivatives of components lower down in the θ-expansion (defined with fewer
D’s). In general, they will also differ from components defined by θ-expansions by the
same derivative terms. These differences are just field redefinitions and have no physical
significance.

Usually, one particular definition of components is preferable. For example, one

model that we will consider (see sec. 4.2.a) depends on a real scalar superfield V which
transforms as V ′ = V + i (Λ − Λ) under a gauge transformation that leaves all the
physics invariant (here Λ is a chiral field). In this case, if possible, we select components
that are gauge invariant; in the example above, D 2 DV | is the preferred choice.

If the superfield carries an external Lorentz index, the separation into components
requires reduction with respect to the Lorentz group. Thus, for example, a chiral spinor
superfield has the expansion in the chiral representation (where it only depends on θ):

Φα (+) (x , θ) = λα + θ β (C βα D ′ + f αβ ) − θ 2 χα . (3.6.9)

Using projections, we would define the components by

λα = Φα | ,

1
D′ = D α Φα | ,
2

1
f αβ = D (αΦβ) | ,
2

χα = D 2Φα | . (3.6.10)

For N > 1 a similar definition of components by projection is possible. In this

case, in addition to reduction with respect to the external Lorentz indices, one can fur-
ther reduce with respect to SU (N ) indices.
96 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

The projection method is also convenient for finding components of a product of

superfields. For example, the product Φ = Φ1Φ2 is chiral, and has components

Φ| = Φ1Φ2 | = A1 A2 ,

D αΦ| = (D αΦ1 )Φ2 | + Φ1 (D αΦ2 )| = ψ 1α A2 + A1 ψ 2α ,

D 2Φ| = (D 2Φ1 )Φ2 | + (D αΦ1 )(D αΦ2 )| + Φ1 (D 2Φ2 )|

= F 1 A2 + ψ 1 α ψ 2α + A1 F 2 . (3.6.11)

Similarly, the components of the product Ψ = Φ1Φ2 can be worked out in a straightfor-
ward manner, using the Leibnitz rule for derivatives.

c. The transformation superfield

The transformations of Poincaré supersymmetry (translations and Q-supersymme-

try transformations) are parametrized by a 4-vector ξa and a spinor ϵα respectively. It is
possible to view these, along with the parameter r of ‘‘R-symmetry’’ transformations
generated by A in (3.2.12, 3.3.34a), as components of an x -independent real superfield ζ

1 1
ξa ≡ [D α• , D α ]ζ| , ϵα ≡ i D 2 D α ζ| , r ≡ D α D 2 D α ζ| , (3.6.12)
2 2

and to write the supersymmetry transformations in terms of ζ and the covariant

derivatives D A :
•
δΨ = i (ξa P a + ϵαQ α + ϵ αQ α• + 2rA)Ψ

•
1 •
= − [(iD 2 D α ζ)D α + (− iD 2 D α ζ)D α• + ( [D α , D α ]ζ)∂ αα•
2

1
+ iw ( D α D 2 D α ζ)]Ψ , (3.6.13)
2

1
where w is the eigenvalue of the operator Y (the matrix part of the axial generator A).
2
These transformations are invariant under ‘‘gauge transformations’’ δζ = i (λ − λ), λ chi-
ral and x -independent. Consequently, they depend only on ξa , ϵα , and the component r .
The R-transformations with parameter r are axial rotations

Ψ′(x , θ, θ ) = e −iwr Ψ(x , e ir θ, e −ir θ ) . (3.6.14)

 3.6. Component expansions 97

3.7. Superintegration

a. Berezin integral

To construct manifestly supersymmetrically invariant actions, it is useful to have

a notion of (definite) integration with respect to θ. The essential properties we require
of the Berezin integral are translation invariance and linearity. Consider a 1-dimensional
anticommuting space; then the most general form a function can take is a + θb. The
most general form that the integral can take has the same form:
#
d θ ′ (a + θb) = A + θB where A , B are functions of a, b. Imposing linearity and invari-
ance under translations θ′ → θ′ + ϵ leads uniquely to the conclusion that
#
d θ (a + θb) ∼ b. The normalization of the integral is arbitrary. We choose
#
dθ θ = 1 (3.7.1)

and, as we found above,

#
dθ 1 = 0 . (3.7.2)

We can define a δ-function: We require

#
d θ δ(θ − θ ′) (a + θb) = a + θ ′b (3.7.3)

and find

δ(θ − θ ′) = θ − θ ′ (3.7.4)

These concepts generalize in an obvious way to higher dimensional anticommuting

#
spaces; for N -extended supersymmetry, d 2N θ d 2N θ picks out the highest θ component
of the integrand, and a δ-function has the form

δ 4N (θ − θ ′) = (θ − θ ′)2N (θ − θ ′)2N . (3.7.5)

We define δ 4+4N (z − z ′) ≡ δ 4 (x − x ′)δ 4N (θ − θ ′). We thus have

#
d 4+4N z δ 4+4N (z − z ′)Ψ(z )
98 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

#
= d 4 xd 4N θ δ 4 (x − x ′)δ 4N (θ − θ ′)Ψ(x , θ) = Ψ(z ′) (3.7.6)

We note that all the properties of the Berezin integral can be characterized by say-
ing it is identical to differentiation:
#
d θ β f (θ) = ∂ β f (θ) . (3.7.7)

This has an important consequence in the context of supersymmetry: Because super-

space actions are integrated over spacetime as well as over θ, any spacetime total deriva-
tive added to the integrand is irrelevant (modulo boundary terms). Consequently, inside
#
a spacetime integral, in the absence of central charges we can replace d θ β = ∂ β by D β .
This allows us to expand superspace actions directly in terms of components defined by
projection (see chap. 4, where we consider specific models). Inside superspace integrals,
#
we can integrate D by parts, because d 4N θ∂ α = ∂ 2N ∂ 2N ∂ α = 0 (since ∂ 2N +1 = 0).

Since supersymmetry variations are also total derivatives (in superspace), we have
# #
d xd θ Q αΨ = d 4 xd 2N θQ α• Ψ = 0, and thus for any general superfield Ψ the follow-
4 2N

ing is a supersymmetry invariant:

#
SΨ = d 4 xd 4N θ Ψ . (3.7.8)

In the case of chiral superfields we can define invariants in the chiral representation by
#
S Φ = d 4 xd 2N θ Φ , (3.7.9)

since Φ is a function of only x a and θα . In fact, this definition is representation indepen-

dent, since the operator U used to change representations is a spacetime derivative, so
1
only the 1 part of e 2U contributes to S Φ . Furthermore, if we express Φ in terms of a gen-
eral superfield Ψ by Φ = D 2N Ψ, we find
# #
S Φ = d xd θ D Ψ = d 4 xd 4N θ Ψ = S Ψ ,
4 2N 2N
(3.7.10)
#
since D α• = d θ α• when inside a d 4 x integral.
 3.7. Superintegration 99

Similarly, the chiral delta function, which we define as

4 2N 4 N ′ 2N
δ (x − x ′)δ (θ − θ ′) ≡ δ (x − x ′)(−1) (θ − θ ) in the chiral representation, takes the
following form in arbitrary representations:

D 2N δ 4+4N (z − z ′) , (3.7.11)

which is equivalent in the chiral representation (D α• = ∂ α• ), and in general representations

gives
#
d 4 xd 2N θ [D 2N δ 4+4N (z − z ′)]Φ(z )

#
= d 4 xd 4N θ δ 4+4N (z − z ′)Φ(z )

= Φ(z ) (3.7.12)

b. Dimensions

Since the Berezin integral acts like a derivative (3.7.7), it also scales like a deriva-
#
tive; thus it has dimension [ d θ] = [D]. However, from (3.4.9), we see that the dimen-
1 #
sions of D α ∼m 2 , and consequently, a general integral has dimension d 4 x d 4N θ∼m 2N −4
#
and a chiral integral has dimension d 4 x d 2N θ∼m N −4 . In particular, for N = 1, we have
# # # #
d 4x d 4θ ≡ d 8 z ∼m −2 and d 4x d 2θ ≡ d 6 z ∼m −3 .

c. Superdeterminants

Finally, we use superspace integrals to define superdeterminants (Berezinians).

Consider a (k , n) by (k , n) dimensional supermatrix M with a k by k dimensional even-
even part A, a k by n dimensional even-odd part B, an n by k dimensional odd-even
part C , and an n by n dimensional odd-odd part D:
! "
A B
M = (3.7.13)
C D

where the entries of A, D are bosonic and those of B,C are fermionic. We define the
superdeterminant by analogy with the usual determinant:
100 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

#
d k x d k x ′ d n θ d n θ ′ e −z M z ,
′t
(sdet M ) −1
=K (3.7.14a)

where
0 x1
z ′t = (x ′ θ ′) , z = , (3.7.14b)
θ
and K is a normalization factor chosen to ensure that sdet(1) = 1. The exponent
x ′Ax + x ′Bθ + θ ′Cx + θ ′Dθ can be written, after shifts of integration variables either in
x or in θ, in two equivalent forms: x ′Ax + θ ′(D − C A−1 B)θ or
x (A − B D
′ −1
C )x + θ Dθ. Integration over the bosonic variables gives us an inverse
′

determinant factor, and integration over the fermionic variables gives a determinant fac-
tor. We obtain sdet M in terms of ordinary determinants:

det A det(A − BD −1C )

sdet(M ) = = . (3.7.15)
det(D − CA−1 B) det D

This formula has a number of useful properties. Just as with the ordinary deter-
minant, the superdeterminant of the product of several supermatrices is equal to the
product of the superdeterminants of the supermatrices. Furthermore,

ln (sdet M ) = str (ln M ) , (3.7.16a)

where the supertrace of a supermatrix M is the trace of the even-even matrix A minus
the trace of the odd-odd matrix D:

strM ≡ trA − trD (3.7.16b)

An arbitrary infinitesimal variation of M induces a variation of the superdeterminant:

δ(sdet M ) = δexp[str (ln M )]

= (sdet M )str (M −1 δM ) (3.7.17)

 3.8. Superfunctional differentiation and integration 101

3.8. Superfunctional differentiation and integration

a. Differentiation

In this section we discuss functional calculus for superfields. We begin by review-

ing functional differentiation for component fields: By analogy with ordinary differentia-
tion, functional differentiation of a functional F of a field A can be defined as

δF [A] F [A + δ ϵ,x A] − F [A]

= lim , (3.8.1)
δA(x ) ϵ→0 ϵ

where

δ ϵ,x A(x ′) = ϵδ 4 (x − x ′) . (3.8.2)

This is not the same as dividing δF by δA. The derivative can also be defined for arbi-
trary variations by a Taylor expansion:
! "
δF [A]
F [A + δA] = F [A] + δA , +O((δA)2 ) , (3.8.3)
δA

where the product ( , ) of two arbitrary functions is given by

#
(C , B) = d 4 x C (x )B(x ) . (3.8.4)

In particular, from (3.8.2) we find

(δ ϵ,x A , B) = ϵB(x ) . (3.8.5)

This definition allows a convenient prescription for generalized differentiation. For

#
example, in curved space, where the invariant product is (C , B) = d 4 x g 1/2CB, the

normalization (δA, B) = ϵB(x ) corresponds to the functional variation

δA(x ′) = ϵg −1/2 (x )δ 4 (x − x ′). Generally, a choice of δ ϵ,x is equivalent to a choice of the
product ( , ). In particular, for (3.8.2,4) we have the functional derivative

δA(x )
= δ 4 (x − x ′) . (3.8.6)
δA(x )
′

In curved space, using the invariant product, we would obtain g −1/2 (x )δ 4 (x − x ′). Note
that the inner product is not always symmetric: In (C , B), C transforms contragredi-
ently to B. For example, if A is a covariant vector, the quantity on the left-hand side of
102 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

the inner-product is a covariant vector, while that on the right is a contravariant vector;
δF
if A is an isospinor, is a complex-conjugate isospinor; etc.
δA
In superspace, the definitions for general superfields are analogous. The product
# #
(Ψ, Ψ ′) is d 4+4N z Ψ(z )Ψ ′(z ) = d 4 xd 4N θ Ψ(x , θ)Ψ ′(x , θ), and thus

δΨ(z )
= δ 4+4N (z − z ′) = δ 4 (x − x ′)δ 4N (θ − θ ′) . (3.8.7)
δΨ(z ′)

(Appropriate modifications will be made in curved superspace.) However, for chiral

superfields we have
# #
4+2N
(Φ , Φ ) =
′
d z ΦΦ =′
d 4 xd 2N θ ΦΦ ′ , (3.8.8)

•
since Φ and Φ ′ essentially depend on only x a and θα , not θ α . The variation is therefore
defined in terms of the chiral delta function:

δ ϵ,z Φ(z ′) = ϵD 2N δ 4+4N (z − z ′) (3.8.9)

so that

δΦ(z )
= D 2N δ 4+4N (z − z ′) , (3.8.10)
δΦ(z )
′

and the complex conjugate relation

δΦ(z )
= D 2N δ 4+4N (z − z ′) . (3.8.11)
δΦ(z ′)

(Again, appropriate modifications will be made in curved superspace.) Furthermore,

variations of chiral integrals give the expected result
# #
δ 4 2N
d xd θ f (Φ(z )) = d 4 xd 2N θ f ′(Φ(z ))D 2N δ 4+4N (z − z ′)
δΦ(z ′)

#
= d 4 xd 4N θ f ′(Φ(z ))δ 4+4N (z − z ′) = f ′(Φ(z ′)) . (3.8.12)

When the functional differentiation is on an expression appearing in a chiral integral

with d 2N θ, the D 2N can always be used to convert it to a d 4N θ integral, after which the
full δ-function can be used as in (3.8.12).
 3.8. Superfunctional differentiation and integration 103

This result can also be obtained by expressing Φ in terms of a general superfield,

as Φ = D 2N Ψ: we have

δΦ(z ) δD 2N Ψ(z ) δΨ(z )

= = D 2N = D 2N δ 4+4N (z − z ′) . (3.8.13)
δΨ(z )
′
δΨ(z )′
δΨ(z )
′

δ δ
We can thus identify with for Φ = D 2N Ψ.
δΦ δΨ
These definitions can be analyzed in terms of components and correspond to ordi-
nary functional differentiation of the component fields. We cannot define functional dif-
ferentiation for constrained superfields other than chiral or antichiral ones. For exam-
•
ple, for a linear superfield Υ (which can be written as Υ = D αΨα• ) there is no functional
derivative which is both linear and a scalar.

b. Integration

In chapters 5 and 6 we discuss quantization of superfield theories by means of

functional integration. We need to define only integrals of Gaussians, as all other func-
tional integrals in perturbation theory are defined in terms of these by introducing
sources and differentiating with respect to them. The basic integrals are
# #
1
d 4 xd 4N θ V 2
IDV e 2 =1 , (3.8.14a)

# #
1
d 4 xd 2N θ Φ2
IDΦ e 2 =1 , (3.8.14b)

# #
1
d 4 xd 2N θ Φ2
IDΦ e 2 =1 , (3.8.14c)

-
where, e.g., IDV = IDV i , for V i the components of V . Because a superfield has the
i

same number of bose and fermi components, many factors that appear in ordinary func-
tional integrals cancel for superfields. Thus we can make any change of variables that
∂
does not involve both explicit θ’s and ’s without generating any Jacobian factor,
∂θ
because unless the bosons and fermions mix nontrivially, the superdeterminant (3.7.14)
is equal to one. For example, a change of variables V → f (V , X ) where X is an arbi-
trary external superfield generates no Jacobian factor; the same is true for the change of
104 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

variables V → V as long as is a purely bosonic operator. Nontrivial Jacobian

determinants arise for changes of variables such as V → D 2V or V → V where is
background covariant, e.g., in supergravity or super-Yang-Mills theory, and hence con-
tains spinor derivatives.

To prove the preceding assertions, we consider the case with one θ; the general case
can be proven by choosing one particular θ and proceeding inductively. We expand the
superfield with respect to θ as V = A + θψ; similarly, we expand the arbitrary external
superfield as X = C + θχ. Then we can expand the new variable f (V , X ) as

f (V , X ) = f (A ,C ) + θ[ψ f V (A ,C )| + χf X (A ,C )|] (3.8.15)

∂(f |)
where f V | ≡ f A ≡ , etc. The Jacobian of this transformation is
∂A
! "
∂f f A (A ,C ) ψ f AA + χf AC det( f A )
sdet = sdet = = 1 . (3.8.16)
∂V 0 f A (A ,C ) det( f A )

In particular, the external superfield X can be a nonlocal operator such as −1

.

An immediate consequence of the preceding result is that superfield δ-functions

-
δ(V −V ′) ≡ δ(V i −V ′i ) (3.8.17a)
i

are invariant under ‘‘θ-nonmixing’’ changes of variables:

,
δ( f (V )) = δ(V − c i ) . (3.8.17b)
f (c i )=0

In general, if nontrivial operators appear in the actions, the functional integrals are
no longer constant. We first introduce the following convenient notation:
⎞ ⎛
V
Ξ≡⎝Φ⎠ ,
Φ
# # !# # # "
t 4 4N t 2N t 2N t
Ξ ≡ d x d θV d θΦ d θ Φ , (3.8.18)

where V , Φ, and Φ themselves can stand for several superfields arranged as column vec-
tors. We next consider actions of the form
 3.8. Superfunctional differentiation and integration 105

#
1
S = Ξt O Ξ , (3.8.19)
2

where the nonsingular operator O is such that the components of the column vector O Ξ
have the same chirality as the corresponding components of Ξ. These actions give the
field equations

δS
= OΞ , (3.8.20)
δΞ
due to the integration measures chosen for the definition of the integrals (3.8.18).

We define, for commuting Ξ,

#
1
(det O ) −
2 ≡ IDΞe S , (3.8.21)

1
with S given by (3.8.19). For anticommuting Ξ we obtain (det O ) 2 . Then (3.8.14) can
be written as

det I = 1 . (3.8.22)

From the definition (3.8.21) we have

# #
Ξ1T OΞ2
IDΞ1 IDΞ2e = (detO
O)−1 . (3.8.23)

We also have

(det O 1 ) (detO
O2 ) = det (O
O1O 2 ) . (3.8.24)

This can be proven as follows: We consider the action

#
(Ξ1t O 1 Ξ2 + Ξ3t O 2 Ξ4 ) . (3.8.25)

The functional integral of the exponential of this action is equal to that of

#
(Ξ1t O 1O 2 Ξ2 + Ξ3t Ξ4 ) , (3.8.26)

as can be seen from the field redefinitions

Ξ2 → O 2 Ξ2 , Ξ4 → O 2 −1 Ξ4 , (3.8.27)
106 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

whose Jacobians cancel.

As an important example we consider the N = 1 case with one Φ and one Φ and
no V :
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
Φ 0 D2
Ξ=⎝ ⎠ , O=⎝ ⎠ . (3.8.28)
2
Φ D 0

This operator satisfies the identity

O2Ξ = Ξ . (3.8.29)

Therefore, from (3.8.24) we have

(det O )2 = det (3.8.30)

and hence the integral of the exponential of the action

#
1
S = [ d 4 x d 2 θ (Φ1 D 2 Φ1 + Φ2 D 2 Φ2 ) + h. c. ]
2

#
= d 4 x d 4 θ (Φ1Φ1 + Φ2Φ2 ) (3.8.31)

is equal to that of
#
1
S = [ d 4 x d 2 θ Φ Φ + h. c. ] . (3.8.32)
2

In the same manner we have the following equivalence:

# ,#
2m+1
4 4 m
d xd θΦ Φ ←→ d 4 x d 4 θ Φi Φi . (3.8.33)
i=1

As another example we consider the case of a chiral spinor Φα :

⎛ ⎞
⎛ ⎞ •

Φα 0 i ∂ αβ D 2
⎜ ⎟
Ξ=⎝ ⎠ , O=⎜
⎝
⎟ ,
⎠ (3.8.34)
2
Φα
• i ∂ αD
β • 0

with

O2Ξ = 2
Ξ . (3.8.35)
 3.8. Superfunctional differentiation and integration 107

Therefore
# #
4 4
•
1
d x d θ Φ i ∂ αΦα ←→
α α •
[ d 4 x d 2 θ Φα Φα + h. c. ] . (3.8.36)
2
108 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

3.9. Physical, auxiliary, and gauge components

In section 3.6 we discussed the component field content of supersymmetric theo-

ries. However, the field content of a theory does not determine its physical states. Con-
versely, a given set of physical states can be described by different sets of fields.

Given a set of fields and their free Lagrangian, we can classify any component of a
field as one of three types: (1) physical, with a propagating degree of freedom; (2) auxil-
iary, with an equation of motion that sets it identically equal to zero; and (3) gauge, not
appearing in the Lagrangian. (Super)Fields can contain all three kinds of components;
off-shell representations (of the Poincaré or supersymmetry group) contain only the first
two; and on-shell representations contain only the first. We also classify any field as one
of three types: (1) physical, containing physical components, but perhaps also auxiliary
and/or gauge components; (2) auxiliary, containing auxiliary, but perhaps also gauge,
components; and (3) compensating, containing only gauge components.

The simplest example of this is the conventional vector gauge field of electromag-
netism. The explicit separation is necessarily non(Poincaré)covariant, and is most con-
veniently performed in a light-cone formalism. In the notation of (3.1.1) we treat
•
x − = x −− as the ‘‘time’’ coordinate, and x + , xT , xT as ‘‘space’’ coordinates. We are thus
free to construct expressions that are nonlocal in x + (i.e. containing inverse powers of
•
∂ + ), since the dynamics is described by evolution in x −− . (In fact, the formalism closely
resembles nonrelativistic field theory, with x − acting as the time and ∂ + as the mass.)
The vector gauge field Aαα• transforms as

δAαα• = ∂ αα• λ . (3.9.1)

By making the field redefinitions (by A → f (A) we mean A = f (A ′) and then drop all
’s)
′

A+ → A+ ,

AT → AT + (∂ + )−1 ∂T A+ ,

A− → A− + (∂ + )−1 (∂ − A+ − ∂T AT − ∂T AT ) ; (3.9.2)

we obtain the new transformation laws

 3.9. Physical, auxiliary, and gauge components 109

δAT = δA− = 0 , δA+ = ∂ + λ . (3.9.3)

Furthermore, the Lagrangian

1
IL = − F αβ F αβ , (3.9.4)
2

where

1 •
F αβ = ∂ (αγ• Aβ) γ (3.9.5)
2

in terms of the old A, becomes

1
IL = AT AT − A− (∂ + )2 A− . (3.9.6)
4

Thus, the complex component AT describes the two physical (propagating) polarizations,
the real component A− is auxiliary (it has no dynamics; its equation of motion sets it
equal to zero) , and the real component A+ is gauge. In this formalism the obvious
gauge choice is A+ = 0 (the light-cone gauge), since A+ does not appear in IL. However,
gauge components are important for Lorentz covariant gauge fixing: For example,
•

(∂ αβ Aαβ• )2 → (∂ + A− + 2(∂ + )−1 A+ )2 .

We can perform similar redefinitions to separate arbitrary fields into physical, aux-
iliary, and gauge components. Any original component that transforms under a gauge
transformation with a ∂ + or a nonderivative term corresponds to a gauge component of
the redefined field. Any component that transforms with a ∂ − term corresponds to an
auxiliary component. Of the remaining components, some will be auxiliary and some
physical (depending on the action), organized in a way that preserves the ‘‘transverse’’
SO(2) Lorentz covariance. For the known fields appearing in interacting theories, the
components with highest spin are physical and the rest (when there are any: i.e., for
3
physical spin 2 or ) are auxiliary. These arguments can be applied in all dimensions.
2

An example that illustrates the separation between physical and auxiliary (but not
gauge) components without the use of nonlocal, noncovariant redefinitions is that of a
massive spinor field:
•
1 •
IL = ψ αi ∂ α α• ψ α − m(ψ α ψ α + ψ α ψ α• ) . (3.9.7)
2

Since ψ and ψ may be considered as independent fields in the functional integral (and,
110 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

in fact, must be considered independent locally after Wick rotation to Euclidean space),
we can make the following nonunitary (but local and covariant) redefinition:

ψα → ψα ,

1
ψ α• → ψ α• − i ∂ αα• ψ α . (3.9.8)
m

The Lagrangian becomes

1 1 •
IL = ψα( − m 2 )ψ α − mψ α ψ α• . (3.9.9)
2m 2

We thus find that ψ represents two physical polarizations, while ψ contains two auxiliary
components.

The same analysis can be made for the simplest supersymmetric multiplet: the
massive scalar multiplet, described by a chiral scalar superfield (see section 4.1). The
action is
# # #
4 4 1 4 2 2
S = d xd θ ΦΦ − m( d xd θ Φ + d 4 xd 2 θ Φ2 ) . (3.9.10)
2

We now redefine

Φ→Φ,

1
Φ → Φ+ D 2Φ ; (3.9.11)
m
#
and, using d 2 θ = D 2 , we obtain the action
# #
1 4 2 2 1
S = d xd θ Φ( − m )Φ − m d 4 xd 2 θ Φ2 . (3.9.12)
2m 2

(Note that the redefinition of Φ preserves its antichirality D αΦ = 0.) Now Φ contains
only physical and Φ contains only auxiliary components; each contains two Bose compo-
nents and two Fermi. As can be checked using the component expansion of Φ, the origi-
nal action (3.9.10) contains the spinor Lagrangian of (3.9.7), whereas (3.9.12) contains
the Lagrangian (3.9.9). It also contains two scalars and two pseudoscalars, one of each
being a physical field (with kinetic operator − m 2 ) and the other an auxiliary field
(with kinetic operator 1). For more detail of the component analysis, see sec. 4.1.
 3.9. Physical, auxiliary, and gauge components 111

As we discuss in sec. 4.1, auxiliary fields are needed in interacting supersymmetric

theories for several reasons: (1) They facilitate the construction of actions, since without
them the kinetic and various interaction terms are not separately supersymmetric; (2)
because of this, actions without auxiliary fields have supersymmetry transformations
that are nonlinear and coupling dependent, and make difficult the application of super-
symmetry Ward identities (e.g., to prove renormalizability); and (3) auxiliary fields are
necessary for manifestly supersymmetric quantization. Compensating fields (see follow-
ing section) are also necessary for the latter two reasons. Although they disappear from
the classical action, they appear in supersymmetric gauge-fixing terms.
112 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

3.10. Compensators

In our subsequent discussions, we will often use ‘‘compensating’’ fields or compen-

sators. These are fields that enter a theory in such a way that they can be algebraically
gauged away. Thus, in a certain sense, they are trivial: The theory can always be writ-
ten without them. However, they frequently simplify the structure of the theory; in par-
ticular, they can be used to write nonlinearly realized symmetries in a linear way. This
is often important for quantization. Another application, which is particularly relevant
to supergravity, arises in situations where one knows how to write invariant actions for
systems transforming under a certain symmetry group G (e.g., the superconformal
group): If one wants to write actions for systems transforming only under a subgroup H
(e.g., the super-Poincaré group), one can enlarge the symmetry of such systems to the
full group by introducing compensators. After writing the action for the systems with
the enlarged symmetry, one simply chooses a gauge, thus breaking the symmetry of the
action down to the subgroup H .

A simple example in ordinary field theory is ‘‘fake’’ scalar electrodynamics. The

usual kinetic action for a complex scalar z (x )
#
1
S = d 4 x z ∂a ∂a z (3.10.1)
2

has a global U (1) symmetry: z ′ = e iλ z . This symmetry can be gauged trivially by intro-
ducing a real compensating scalar φ, assumed to transform under a local U (1) transfor-
mation as φ′ = φ − λ. We can then construct a covariant derivative
∇a = e −iφ ∂ a e iφ = ∂ a + i ∂ a φ that can be used to define a locally U (1) invariant action
#
1
S = d 4 x z ∇a ∇a z (3.10.2)
2

Fake spinor electrodynamics can be obtained by an obvious generalization.

a. Stueckelberg formalism

In the previous example, the compensator served no useful purpose. The Stueck-
elberg formalism provides a familiar example of a compensator that simplifies the theory.
We begin with the Lagrangian for a massive vector Aa :

1
IL = − F a b F a b − m 2 (Aa )2 , (3.10.3)
8
 3.10. Compensators 113

F a b = ∂ [a Ab] . (3.10.4)

The propagator for this theory is:

1 1
Da b = − (ηa b − ∂a ∂b ) (3.10.5)
− m2 2m 2

We can recast the theory in an improved form by introducing a U (1) compensator φ

that makes the action (3.10.3) gauge invariant. We define

1
A′a = Aa + ∂a φ (3.10.6)
m

where A′a and φ transform under U (1) gauge transformations:

δA′a = ∂ a λ , δφ = mλ . (3.10.7)

In terms of these fields, the gauge invariant Lagrangian is (dropping the prime):

1
IL = − F a b F a b − m 2 (Aa )2
8

− mφ∂ a Aa − (∂ a φ)2 . (3.10.8)

We now choose a gauge by adding the gauge fixing term

1
ILGF = − (∂ a Aa − 2mφ)2 (3.10.9)
4

and find:

1
IL + ILGF = Aa ( − m 2 )Aa + φ( − m 2 )φ . (3.10.10)
2

The propagators can be trivially read off from (3.10.10): for Aa ,

1
Da b = − ηa b ( − m 2 )−1 , and for φ, D = − ( − m 2 )−1 . They have better high energy
2
behavior than (3.10.5). Thus, by introducing the compensator φ, we have simplified the
structure of the theory. We note that the compensator decouples whenever Aa is cou-
pled to a conserved source (i.e., in a gauge invariant way).

b. CP(1) model

Another familiar example is the CP (1) nonlinear σ-model, which describes the
Goldstone bosons of an SU (2) gauge theory spontaneously broken down to U (1). It con-
sists of a real scalar field ρ and a complex field y subject to the constraint
114 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

|y|2 + ρ2 = 1 (3.10.11)

The group SU (2) can be realized nonlinearly on these fields by

1
δρ = (βy + βy)
2

1 −1
δy = − 2i αy − βρ − ρ (βy − βy)y . (3.10.12)
2

where α, β, and β are the (constant) parameters of the global SU (2) transformations.
These transformations leave the Lagrangian

1 ↔
IL = − [(∂ a ρ)2 + |∂ a y|2 + (y ∂ a y)2 ] (3.10.13)
4

invariant, but because the transformations are nonlinear this is far from obvious.

We can give a description of the theory where the SU (2) is represented linearly by
introducing a local U (1) invariance which is realized by a compensating field φ. Under
this local U (1), φ transforms as

φ′(x ) = φ(x ) − λ(x ) . (3.10.14)

We define fields z i by

z 1 = e −iφ ρ , z 2 = e −iφy . (3.10.15)

Because of this definition they transform under the local U (1) as

z ′i = e iλ z i . (3.10.16)

The constraint (3.10.11) becomes

|z 1 |2 + |z 2 |2 = 1 . (3.10.17)

Ignoring the constraint the SU (2) acts linearly on these fields (see below):

δz 1 = i αz 1 + βz 2

δz 2 = − i αz 2 − βz 1 . (3.10.18)

The complicated nonlinear transformations (3.10.12) arise in the following manner:

when we fix the U (1) gauge

z1 = z1 ≡ ρ (3.10.19)
 3.10. Compensators 115

the linear SU (2) transformations (3.10.18) do not preserve the condition (3.10.19). Thus
we must add a ‘‘gauge-restoring’’ U (1) transformation with parameter

1 −1 1 −1
i λ(x ) = − ρ (δz 1 − δz 1 ) = − i α − ρ (βz 2 − βz 2 ) . (3.10.20)
2 2

The combined linear SU (2) transformation and gauge transformation (3.10.16) with
nonlinear parameter (3.10.20) preserves the gauge condition (3.10.19) and are equivalent
to (3.10.12).

To write an action invariant under both the global SU (2) and the local U (1) trans-
formations we need a covariant derivative for the latter. By analogy with our first
example we could write

∇a = e −iφ ∂ a e iφ = ∂ a + i ∂ a φ . (3.10.21)

A manifestly SU (2) invariant choice in terms of the new variables is

1 i↔
∇a = ∂ a − z ∂ azi
2

1 ↔
= ∂a + i ∂a φ − y∂ ay . (3.10.22)
2
↔
This differs from (3.10.21) by the U (1) gauge invariant term y ∂ a y; one is always free to
change a covariant derivative by adding covariant terms to the connection. (This is sim-
ilar to adding contortion to the Lorentz connection in (super)gravity; see sec. 5.3.a.3.)
Then a manifestly covariant Lagrangian is

IL = − |∇a z i |2

1 ↔
= − |∂ a z i |2 − (z i ∂ a z i )2 . (3.10.23)
4

In the gauge (3.10.19) this Lagrangian becomes that of (3.10.13).

We consider now another application of compensators: The constraint (3.10.17) is

awkward: It makes the transformations (3.10.18) implicitly nonlinear. We can avoid
this by introducing a second compensating field. We observe that neither the constraint
nor the Lagrangian are invariant under scale transformations. However, we can intro-
duce a scale invariance into the theory by writing

z i = e −ζ Z i (3.10.24)
116 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

in terms of new fields Z i and the compensator ζ(x ). The constraint and the action,
written in terms of Z i , ζ, will be invariant under the scale transformations

Z ′i = e τ Z i , ζ′ = ζ + τ . (3.10.25)

The SU (2) transformations of Z i are now the (truly) linear transformations

(3.10.18). The U (1) and the scale transformations can be combined into a single com-
plex scale transformation with parameter

σ = τ + iλ (3.10.26)

Z ′i = e σ Z i , ζ′ = ζ + τ . (3.10.27)

The constraint (3.10.17) becomes

Z Z = e 2ζ (3.10.28)

where we write Z Z ≡ |Z 1 |2 + |Z 2 |2 . In terms of the new variables the Lagrangian is

IL = − |∇a (e −ζ Z i )|2

1 −4ζ i ↔
= − |∂ a (e −ζ Z i )|2 − e (Z ∂ a Z i )2 . (3.10.29)
4

Substituting for ζ the solution of the constraint (3.10.28), a manifestly SU (2) invariant
procedure, leads to
2 ↔
Z (Z i ∂ a Z i )2
|
IL = − ∂ a 8 i | −
1
4 (Z Z )2
ZZ

1 ZiZk 1
=− k
(δi − ) (∂ a Z i ) (∂ a Z k ) (3.10.30)
ZZ ZZ 2
This last form of the Lagrangian is expressed in terms of unconstrained fields Z i only. It
is manifestly globally SU (2) invariant and also invariant under the local complex scale
transformations (3.10.27). We can use this invariance to choose a convenient gauge. For
example, we can choose the gauge Z 1 = 1; or we can choose a gauge in which we obtain
(3.10.13). Once we choose a gauge, the SU (2) transformations become nonlinear again.

These two compensators allowed us to realize a global symmetry (SU (2)) of the
system linearly. However, they play different roles: φ(x ), the U (1) compensator, gauges
 3.10. Compensators 117

a global symmetry of the system, whereas ζ(x ), the scale compensator introduces an
altogether new symmetry. For the U (1) invariance we introduced a connection, whereas
for the scale invariance we introduced ζ(x ) directly, without a connection. In the former
case, the connection consisted of a pure gauge part, and a covariant part chosen to make
it manifestly covariant under a symmetry (SU (2)) of the system; had we tried to intro-
duce φ(x ) directly, we would have found it difficult to maintain the SU (2) invariance. In
the case of the scale transformations no such difficulties arise, and a connection is unnec-
essary. As we shall see, both kinds of compensators appear in supersymmetric theories.

c. Coset spaces

Compensators also simplify the description of more general nonlinear σ-models.

We consider a model with fields y(x ) that are points of a coset space G/H ; they trans-
form nonlinearly under the global action of a group G, but linearly with respect to a
subgroup H . By introducing local transformations of the subgroup H via compensators
φ(x ), we realize G linearly, and thus easily find an invariant action.

The generators of G are T , S , where S are the generators of H and T are the
remaining generators, with T , S antihermitian. Since H is a subgroup, the generators S
close under commutation:

[S , S ] ∼ S . (3.10.31)

We require in addition that the generators T carry a representation of the H , that is

[T , S ] ∼ T . (3.10.32)

(This is always true when the structure constants are totally antisymmetric, since then
the absence of [S , S ] ∼ T terms implies the absence of [T , S ] ∼ S terms.)

We could write y(x ) = e ζ(x )T mod H , but instead we introduce compensating fields
φ(x ), and define fields z (x ) that are elements of the whole group G:

z = e ζ(x )T e φ(x )S ≡ e Φ (3.10.33)

(where Φ = ζˆ(x )T + φ̂ (x )S provides an equivalent parametrization of the group). The

new fields z transform under global G-transformations and local H -transformations:

z ′ = g z h −1 (x ) , g ϵG , h ϵH (3.10.34)
118 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

(where again we can use an exponential parametrization for g and h(x ) if we wish).

The local H transformations can be used to gauge away the compensators φ and
reduce z to the coset variables y. If we choose the gauge φ = 0, then the global G-trans-
formations will induce local gauge-restoring H -transformations needed to maintain
φ = 0: For g ϵH , due to (3.10.32), we use h(x ) = g:

e ζ T = g e ζT g −1
′
(3.10.35)

and thus the fields y transform linearly under H . For g ϵG/H , the gauge restoring trans-
formation is complicated and depends nonlinearly on ζ, and thus the fields y transform
nonlinearly under G/H .

To find a globally G- and locally H -invariant Lagrangian, we consider the following

quantity:

z −1 ∂ a z ≡ ∂ a + Aa S + B aT ≡ ∇a + B aT . (3.10.36)

Under global G-transformations, both ∇a and B a are invariant; under local H -transfor-
mations we have

(z −1 ∂ a z )′ = h z −1 ∂ a (z h −1 )

= h∂ a h −1 + h z −1 (∂ a z )h −1

= h∂ a h −1 + h(Aa S + B aT )h −1 = h(∇a + B aT )h −1 (3.10.37)

Because of (3.10.31), h S h −1 ∼ S and h∂ a h −1 ∼ S ; because of (3.10.32), h T h −1 ∼T ;

hence Aa transforms as a connection for local H transformations (∇a transforms as a
covariant derivative), and B a transforms covariantly. Therefore, an invariant Lagrangian
is

1
IL = − tr (B a B a ) (3.10.38)
4

If we choose the gauge φ(x ) = 0, this becomes a complicated nonlinear Lagrangian for
the fields y(x ). We can also couple this system to other fields transforming linearly
under H by replacing all derivatives with ∇a .

Finally, from (3.10.33) we have

z −1 ∂ a z = ∂ a + e −φS (∂ a e φS ) + e −φS (e −ζT ∂ a e ζT )e φS

 3.10. Compensators 119

= ∂ a + (∂ a φ)S + (∂ a ζ)T + . . . (3.10.39)

and hence ∇a = ∂ a + ∂ a φS + . . . and B a = ∂ a ζT + . . . = ∂ a yT + . . .. This is what we

expect: The covariant derivative has the usual dependence on the compensator, and the
1
Lagrangian (3.10.38) has a term − tr (∂ a y)2 , which is appropriate for a physical field.
2
120 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

3.11. Projection operators

a. General

The analysis of many aspects of the superspace formulation of supersymmetric

theories requires an understanding of the irreducible representations of (off-shell) super-
symmetry (physical and auxiliary components). We need to know how to decompose an
arbitrary superfield or product of superfields into such representations. In this section
we describe a procedure for constructing projection operators onto irreducible represen-
tations of supersymmetry for general N .

The basic idea is that a general superfield can be expanded into a sum of chiral
superfields. A chiral superfield that is irreducible under the Poincaré and internal sym-
metry groups is also irreducible under off-shell supersymmetry (except for possible sepa-
ration into real and imaginary parts, which we call bisection). Thus, this expansion per-
forms the decomposition.

To show that chiral superfields are irreducible under supersymmetry up to bisec-

tion, we try to reduce a chiral superfield Φ by imposing some covariant constraint
Ω Φ = 0. If we do not consider reality conditions (bisection), we cannot allow constraints
relating Φ to Φ. The only covariant operators available for writing constraints are the
spinor derivatives D a α , D a α• and the spacetime derivative ∂ αβ• . In momentum space,
since we are off-shell, all relations must be true for arbitrary momentum, and hence we
can freely divide out any spacetime derivative factors. Therefore, any constraint we
write down can be reduced to a constraint that is free of spacetime derivatives. If the
constraint contained any D spinor derivatives, since Φ is chiral, DΦ = 0, by moving the
D’s to the right we could convert them to spacetime derivatives, which we have just
argued can be removed. (For example DDDΦ = iD∂Φ.)

We thus conclude that any possible constraint on Φ involves only products of the
spinor derivatives D a α . However, by applying a sufficient number of D’s to the con-
straint, we can convert all of the D’s to spacetime derivatives; hence, any constraint on
Φ independent of Φ would set Φ itself to zero (off-shell!). Therefore Φ must be irre-
ducible. This argument is analogous to the proof in section 3.3 that irreducible represen-
tations of supersymmetry can be obtained by repeatedly applying the generators Q a α• to
the Clifford vacuum |C > defined by Q aα |C > = 0: instead of |C >, Q, and Q with
 3.11. Projection operators 121

Q|C > = 0, we have Φ, D, and D with DΦ = 0, respectively.

The only further reduction we can perform is to impose a reality condition on the
superfield. A chiral superfield of superspin s (the spin content of its external Lorentz
1
indices) has a single maximum spin component of spin s max = s + N residing at the
2
θ N [a 1 ...a N ](α1 ...αN ) level of the superfield. (This is most easily seen in the chiral representa-
tion, where a chiral superfield depends only on θ. The reduction of products of θ’s into
irreducible representations is done by the method described for the reduction of products
of spinor derivatives in sec. 3.4. Since the maximum spin component has the maximum
number of symmetrized SL(2C ) indices, it must have the maximum number of antisym-
metrized SU (N ) indices, i.e., it must have N indices of each type. Terms with fewer θ’s
have fewer SL(2C ) indices, whereas terms with more θ’s cannot be antisymmetric in N
SU (N ) indices, and hence cannot be symmetric in N SL(2C ) indices. For examples see
(3.6.1-4)). Only if we can impose a reality condition on the highest spin component can
we impose a reality condition on the entire superfield. This is possible when s max is an
integer. (A component field with an odd number of Weyl indices cannot satisfy a local
reality condition.)

a.1. Poincaré projectors

We begin with the decomposition of an arbitrary spinor into irreducible representa-

tions of the Poincaré group in ordinary spacetime, both because it is one of the steps in
the superspace decomposition, and because it illustrates some of the superspace features.
This reduction is most easily performed by converting dotted indices into undotted ones
1
with the formal operator ∆αβ• = −i ∂ αβ• −
2 , reducing under SU (2) (by symmetrizing and
antisymmetrizing, i.e., taking traces), and converting formerly dotted indices back with
1
∆. (This insures that no fractional powers of remain. We generally consider −
2 to
2
be hermitian, since we mainly are concerned with = m > 0.) Explicitly, we write for
each index
•

Ψ̂α = ∆α β Ψβ• , Ψ̂α• = ∆β α• Ψβ ,

ˆ
(Ψα † ) = (Ψα )† , Ψ̂α = Ψα . (3.11.1)

Thus, for example, a vector Ψa decomposes in the following manner:

122 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1
Ψa = ∆γ α• Ψ̂αγ = ∆γ α• (C αγ Ψ̂δ δ + Ψ̂(αγ) )
2

1
•
•
= ∆γ α• (∆δ ϵC αγ Ψδ ϵ• + ∆(γ δ Ψα)δ• )
2

1 • •

= −1
[∂ αα• (∂ γ δ Ψγ δ• ) − ∂ γ α• (∂ (α δ Ψγ)δ• )]
2

= [(ΠL + ΠT )Ψ]a , (3.11.2)

where ΠL and ΠT are the longitudinal and transverse projection operators for a four-vec-
tor.

The projections can be written in terms of field strengths S and F αγ :

1 •

(ΠLΨ)a = −1
∂ αα• S , S = ∂ γδ Ψγ δ• ,
2

1
•

(ΠT Ψ)a = −1 γ
∂ α• F αγ , F αγ = ∂ (αδ•Ψγ) δ . (3.11.3)
2

The field strengths are themselves irreducible representations of the Poincaré group.
The projections ΨL = ΠLΨ and ΨT = ΠT Ψ are invariant under gauge transformations
δΨ = ΠT χ and δΨ = ΠL χ respectively. The field strengths have the same gauge invari-
ance as the projections: δΨLa = −1
∂ a δS = 0 implies δS = 0 , and similarly
δΨT a = ∂ α• δF αγ = 0 implies δF αγ = 0.
−1 γ

a.2. Super-Poincaré projectors

Projections of superfields can be written in terms of field strengths in superspace

as well. We will find that projections of a general superfield can be expressed in terms
of chiral field strengths with gauge invariances determined by the projection operators.
,
Thus, for a superfield with decomposition Ψ = ( Πn )Ψ, any single term Ψn = Πn Ψ has
n
,
a gauge invariance δΨ = Πi χi . Each projection can be written in the form
i ̸=n

Ψn = D 2N −n Φ(n) where the chiral field strengths Φ(n) = D 2N D n Ψ are Poincaré and
SU (N ) irreducible and have the same gauge invariance as Ψn : 0 = δΨn = D 2N −n δΦ(n)
implies δΦ(n) = 0 because Φ and hence δΦ are irreducible.
 3.11. Projection operators 123

The same index conversion used in (3.11.1) can be used to define the operation of
rest-frame conjugation on a component field or general superfield Ψα ...α • •
β i+1 ...β 2s
by
1 i

= ∆α1 γ 1 . . . ∆αi γi ∆δi+1 β• . . . ∆δ 2s • Ψδ ...δ γ• ...γ• ,

• •
Ψ̃α ...α β• •
... 2s i +1 i 1
1 i i+1 β 2s i+1 β 2s

˜
Ψ̃ = Ψ . (3.11.4)

For example, we have:

• •
Ψ̃ = Ψ , Ψ̃α = ∆α β Ψβ• , H̃ αβ• = ∆α γ ∆δ β• H δγ• . (3.11.5)

We extend this to chiral superfields and define a rest-frame conjugation operator K

1
− N
which preserves chirality, by using an extra factor 2 D 2N to convert the antichiral
(complex conjugated chiral) superfield back to a chiral one (and similarly for antichiral
superfields). We define

˜Φα ...α β
1
b 1 ...b i − N b 1 ...b i
K Φα ...α β• ...
•
... = D 2N 2 • •
...β 2s a 1 ...a i ,
1 i i+1 β 2s a 1 a i 1 i i+1

1
− N
K Φ... = D 2N 2 Φ̃... , K (Φ... ) = (K
KΦ... ) ,

1 1
K2 = 1 , [ (1 ± K )]2 = (1 ± K ) , (3.11.6)
2 2

where D α• Φ... = D α Φ... = 0. For example, for an N = 1 chiral spinor Φα ,

•

−D 2i ∂ α β
K Φα = Φβ• , (3.11.7)

We can define self-conjugacy or reality under K if we restrict ourselves to superfields

N
that are real representations of SU (N ) with s max = s + integral (the latter is required
2
to insure that only integral powers of appear). The reality condition is KΦ... = ± Φ...
and the splitting of a chiral superfield into real and imaginary parts is simply

1
Φ±... = (1 ± K )Φ... . (3.11.8)
2

In the previous example, if we impose the reality condition KΦα = Φα , contract both
sides with D α and use the antichirality of Φα• , we find the equivalent condition:
•
D αΦα = D αΦα• (3.11.9)
124 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

These ‘‘real’’ chiral superfields appear in many models of interest. For example, isoscalar
‘‘real’’ chiral superfields with 2 − N undotted spinor indices describe N ≤ 2 Yang-Mills
gauge multiplets. Similar superfields with 4 − N undotted spinor indices describe the
conformal field strength of N ≤ 4 supergravity.

To decompose a general superfield into irreducible representations, we first expand

it in terms of chiral superfields. In the chiral representation (D α• = ∂ α• ) a Taylor series in
θ gives

2N
, 1 n α• 1 ...α• n (n)
Ψ(x , θ, θ ) = θ Φ α• n ...α• 1 (x , θ) , (3.11.10a)
n=0
n!

where Φn can be rewritten as

Φ(n) α• 1 ...α• n (x , θ) = D n α• 1 ...α• n Ψ(x , θ, θ )|θ = 0 , (3.11.10b)

• • • •

or, using {D α• , θ β } = δ α• β and {θ α , θ β } = 0 (which implies θ 2N +1 = 0),

Φ(n) α• 1 ...α• n (x , θ) = (−1)N D 2N θ 2N D n α• 1 ...α• n Ψ(x , θ, θ) . (3.11.10c)

However, θ is not covariant, and hence neither is the expansion (3.11.10). We can gen-
•
eralize (3.11.10): For any operator ζ α (θ ) which obeys
• • • •

{D α• , ζ β } = δ α• β , {ζ α , ζ β } = 0 , (3.11.11)

we can write

2N
, 1 n α• 1 ...α• n (n)
Ψ̂(x , θ, ζ ) = ζ Φ̂ α• n ...α• 1 (x , θ) , (3.11.12a)
n=0
n!

where

Φ̂(n) α• n ...α• 1 (x , θ) = (−1)N D 2N ζ 2N D n α• n ...α• 1 Ψ̂(x , θ, ζ ) . (3.11.12b)

If we choose Ψ(x , θ, θ ) ≡ Ψ̂(x , θ, ζ (θ )), we obtain, substituting (3.11.12b) into (3.11.12a):

2N
,
N1 n α• 1 ...α• n 2N 2N n
Ψ(x , θ, θ ) = (−1) ζ D ζ D α• n ...α• 1 Ψ(x , θ, θ ) , (3.11.13)
n=0
n!

for any ζ satisfying (3.11.11). A manifestly supersymmetric operator satisfying (3.11.11)

 3.11. Projection operators 125

is
• •
• ∂ βα • ∂βα
ζ = −i
α
Dβ = θ − iα
∂β . (3.11.14)

Substituting (3.11.14) into (3.11.13), we find

2N
. • / . • /
, 1 n −i ∂ α1 β 1 −i ∂ αn βn
Ψ(x , θ, θ ) = −N
D α1 ...αn ...
n=0
n!

× D 2N D 2N D n β• ...β 1 Ψ(x , θ, θ
• ) , (3.11.15)
n

•
−i ∂ β α
where we have used ( D β )2N = (− )−N D 2N . Pushing D n through D 2N to the

D 2N , we find (reordering the sum by replacing n → 2N − n)

2N
, ! "
1 α1 ...α2N n 2N
Ψ= −N
C (−1) D 2N −n α2N ...αn+1 D 2N D n αn ...α1 Ψ(x , θ, θ )
(2N )! n=0
n

2N
, 1 ...
= −N
(−1)n D 2N −nα1 αn D 2N D n α1 ...αn Ψ(x , θ, θ ) . (3.11.16)
n=0
n!

This final expression can be compared to the noncovariant θ expansion in (3.11.10).

The chiral fields D 2N D n Ψ are the covariant analogs of the Φ(2N −n) ’s. We thus obtain

2N
, 1 ...αn
1= (−1)n −N
D 2N −nα1 D 2N D n α1 ...αn . (3.11.17)
n=0
n!

For example, in N = 1 this is the relation

D 2D 2 D αD 2D α D 2D 2
1= − + . (3.11.18)

Each term in the sum is a (reducible) projection operator which picks out the part
of a superfield Ψ appearing in the chiral field strength D 2N D n Ψ (which is irreducible
⃝Poincaré, and possibly also under K ).
under SL(2N ,C ) but reducible under SU (N )×
We thus have the projection operators Πn , n = 0, 1, . . . , 2N :

1 ...αn
Πn = (−1)n −N
D 2N −nα1 D 2N D n α1 ...αn ,
n!
126 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

2N
,
Πn = 1 . (3.11.19)
n=0

In particular, Π0 = −N
D 2N D 2N and Π2N = −N
D 2N D 2N project out the antichiral and
chiral parts of Ψ respectively. The projectors (3.11.19) satisfy a number of relations:
Orthonormality

Πm Πn = δmn Πm (not summed) (3.11.20)

follows from D 2N D n D 2N = 0 unless n = 2N and hence Πm Πn = 0 for m ̸= n; then

, ,
Πm = 1 implies Πn = Πn Πm = Πn2 . There are relations between the Π’s: Πn is
equal to the transpose and to the complex conjugate of Π2N −n

Πn = Πt 2N −n

1 ...α2N −n
= −N
D 2N −n α1 ...α2N −n D 2N D n α1 , (3.11.21)
(2N − n)!

Πn = Π* 2N −n

1 •
... α• 2N −n
= (−1)n −N
D n α1 D 2N D 2N −n α• 1 ...α• 2N −n . (3.11.22)
(2N − n)!

Combining (3.11.21) and (3.11.22), we find another form of Πn :

1 •
...α• n
Πn = Π† n = −N
D n α• 1 ...α• n D 2N D 2N −n α1 . (3.11.23)
n!
The complex conjugation relation (3.11.22) implies that half of the Π’s are redundant for
real superfields: V = V → Π2N −nV = Π*nV = (ΠnV ).

Reduction of the Π’s into irreducible projection operators is now easy:

(1) Algebraically reduce D 2N D n Ψ under SU (N )×

⃝Poincaré (where Ψ may have further

isospinor and Weyl spinor indices);

(2) When the reduced chiral field strength D 2N D n Ψ is in a real representation of SU (N )

1 1
and has s + N integral, further reduce by bisection, i.e. multiplication by (1 ± K ).
2 2

To perform (1) it is convenient to first reduce D 2N D n by using the total antisymmetry of

the D’s (see sec. 3.4), and then reduce the tensor product of the irreducible
 3.11. Projection operators 127

representations of D 2N D n with the representation of the superfield Ψ as usual. If we

only want to preserve SO(N ), further reduction is performed in step 1; for step 2,
D 2N D n Ψ is always in a real representation of SO(N ).

Although Πn contains the product of 2N D’s and 2N D’s and is thus in its sim-
1
plest form, Πn± , obtained by directly introducing (1 ± K ) in front of the D 2N , contains
2
2N D’s and 4N D’s in the K term, and can be further simplified. After some algebra
we find:

For n ≥ N :
1
...b n ...β n
K D 2N D n α1 ...αn Ψb 1 = (−1)2ŝ n 2
(n−N )
D 2N D 2N −n β 1 C β 1 α1 . . . C βn αn Ψ̃a 1 ...a n , (3.11.24)

or
...α2N −n
K D 2N D n α1 Ψb 1 ...b 2N −n

1
...a 2N −n
= (−1)2ŝ n 2
(n−N )
D 2N C α1 β 1 . . . C α2N −n β 2N −n D 2N −n β 1 ...β 2N −n Ψ̃a 1 , (3.11.25)

where 2ŝ extra Weyl spinor indices, and extra isospinor indices, reduced as in step 1, are
implicit on Ψ.

For n ≤ N :
1 •
(N −n) ... a 1 ...
K D 2N D 2N −n α• 1 ...Ψb 1 ... = (−1)2ŝ n 2 D 2N D n β 1 C β• •
...Ψ̃ , (3.11.26)
1 α1

or
1 •
•
... ... (N −n) •
...
K D 2N D 2N −n α1 Ψb 1 = (−1)2ŝ n 2 D 2N C α1 β 1 D n β• ...Ψ̃a 1 ... . (3.11.27)
1

As an example of this simplification, we consider the N = 1 chiral field above (3.11.7) for
the special case when it is a field strength of a real superfield V : Φα = D 2 D αV
•

−D 2i ∂ α β
K Φα = D 2 D β•V = D 2 D αV = Φα . (3.11.28)

We now collect our results: The superprojectors take the final form

If bisection is possible:

1 1 •
...α• n
n ≤ N: Πn,i± = −N
D n α• 1 ...α• n (1 ± K )IP i D 2N D 2N −n α1 ,
n! 2
128 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1 1 ...α2N −n
n ≥ N: Πn,i± = −N
D 2N −n α1 ...α2N −n (1 ± K )IP i D 2N D nα1 , (3.11.29)
(2N − n)! 2

If bisection is not possible:

1
Πn,i = either of the above with (1 ± K ) dropped , (3.11.30)
2

where the IP i are SU (N )×

⃝Poincaré projectors acting on the explicit indices (including

those of the superfield). We have chosen the particular forms of Πn from (3.11.19,21-23)
that minimize the number of indices that the IP i act on. The chiral expansion, besides
its simplicity, has the advantage that the chiral field strengths appear explicitly, and the
superspin and superisospin of the representation onto which Π projects are those of the
chiral field strength.

b. Examples

b.1. N=0

We begin by giving a few Poincaré projection operators. The procedure for find-
ing them was discussed in considerable detail in subsec. 3.11.a.1, so here we simply list
results. Scalars and spinors are irreducible (no bisection is possible for a spinor:
N 1
s+ = is not an integer). A (real) vector decomposes into a spin 1 and a spin 0 pro-
2 2
jection (see (3.11.2,3)). For a spinor-vector ψ αβ,γ
• = ∆β β• ψ αβ,γ we have:

1 1 1
ψ αβ,γ = ψ (αβ,γ) + (ψ (αδ) δC βγ + ψ (βδ) δC αγ ) + C αβ ψ δ δ ,γ
3! 3! 2

and hence

ψ αβ,γ
• = (Π 3 + ΠT 1 + ΠL 1 )ψ αβ,γ
• ,
2 2 2

where

1
•

Π 3 ψ αβ,γ
• =− −1 β
∂ β• w αβγ , w αβγ = ∂ (α δ ψ βδγ)
• ;
2 6

1
•

ΠT 1 ψ αβ,γ
• =− −1 β
∂ β• [C βγ r α + C αγ r β ] , rα = ∂ (α δ ψ β)δ• β ;
2 6

1 a
ΠL 1 ψ αβ,γ
• = −1
∂ αβ• s γ , sγ = ∂ ψa,γ . (3.11.31)
2 2
 3.11. Projection operators 129

For a real two-index tensor h a c = ∆β α• ∆δ γ• h αβ,γδ we have

1
h αβ,γδ = h (αβ,γδ) + (C γ(αq β)δ + C δ(αq β)γ ) + C αβC γδ q + C γ(αC β)δ r
4!

1
+ (C αβ h ϵ(γ, |ϵ| δ) + C γδ h (α|ϵ|,β) ϵ ) , (3.11.32)
4

where

1
q αβ = − ( h (α |α| ,β)δ + h (α|δ|,β) α + h (α |α| ,δ)β + h (α|β|,δ) α ) ,
32

1 1
r =− h (α (α ,β) β) , q= h ϵ ϵ ,ζ ζ . (3.11.33)
24 4

Therefore the complete decomposition of the the two-index tensor is given by

L T +
h αβ,γ
• • = (Π
δ 2,S + Π1,S + Π 0,S + Π 0,S + Π1,A + Π1,A )h αβ,γ
− • • ,
δ

where the projectors are labeled by the spin (2, 1, 0), the symmetric and antisymmetric
part of h a b (S and A), longitudinal and transverse parts (L and T ), and self-dual and
anti-self-dual parts (+ and −). The explicit form of the projection operators is

1
• •

Π2,S h αβ,γ
• • =
−2 β
∂ β• ∂ δ δ•w αβγδ , w αβγδ = ∂ (α β ∂ β δ h γβ,δ)
• • ;
δ 4! δ

Π1,S h αβ,γ
• • =
δ
−2 β
∂ β• ∂ δ δ• [C γ(αw β)δ + C δ(αw β)γ ] ,

1 • • •

w βδ = − ∂ α(β [∂ δ δ) h (αβ,β)
• • + ∂
β h (αβ,δ)
δ) • • ] ;
32 δ δ

1 • •

ΠL 0,S h αβ,γ
• • =
−2
∂ αβ• ∂ γ δ• S , S = ∂ αβ ∂ γδ h αβ,γ
• • ;
δ 4 δ

1 • •

ΠT 0,S h αβ,γ
• • =
−2
(C γαC β•δ• + ∂ γβ• ∂ αδ• )T , T = − ∂ (αβ ∂ γ)δ h αβ,γ
• • ;
δ 12 δ

1 •
Π1,A + h αβ,γ
• • =
−1 β
∂ β• ∂ γδ•l + (αβ) , l + (αβ) = − h (αγ,β)
•
γ
;
δ 4

1 • •

Π1,A − h αβ,γ
• • =
−2
∂ αβ• ∂ δ δ•l − (γδ) , l − (γδ) = − ∂ (γ β ∂ δ) δ h αβ,• α δ• . (3.11.34)
δ 4

(The field strengths w αβγδ and T are proportional to the linearized Weyl tensor and
scalar curvatures respectively.) From this decomposition, we see that the two-index
130 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

tensor field consists of irreducible spins 2+

⃝1+
⃝1+
⃝1+
⃝0+
⃝0.

b.2. N=1

We construct the irreducible projection operators for a complex scalar superfield

1 1
Ψ. From (3.9.26-32) we have, for the cases without bisection (s + N =s+ is half-
2 2
integral, so that s is integral)

Π0 = −1
D 2D 2 , Π1 = − −1
D αD 2D α , Π2 = −1
D 2D 2 . (3.11.35)

Since Ψ has no external indices we can go directly to step 2. The chiral field strengths
1
D 2Ψ and D 2 D 2Ψ do not satisfy the condition that s + is integral, whereas D 2 D αΨ
2
does. For N = 1, the condition of being in a real isospin representation is trivially satis-
fied, and that means that Π1 needs to be bisected:

Π1 = Π1+ + Π1− ,

1
Π1± = − −1
Dα (1 ± K )D 2 D α . (3.11.36)
2

Therefore, from (3.11.26-7),

1
Π1±Ψ = − −1
D αD 2D α (Ψ ± Ψ) , (3.11.37)
2

and thus Π0 , Π1± and Π2 completely reduce Ψ. These irreducible representations turn
out to describe two scalar and two vector multiplets, respectively.

We give next the decomposition of the spinor superfield Ψα . To find the irre-
ducible parts of Π1Ψα we Poincaré reduce the chiral field strength
1
D 2 D αΨβ = [C αβ D 2 D γ Ψγ + D 2 D (αΨβ) ]. This gives the projections Πn,s for superspin s
2
of this chiral field strength:

1 1
Π1,0Ψα = −1
D α D 2 D β Ψβ , Π1,1Ψα = − −1
D β D 2 D (αΨβ) . (3.11.38)
2 2

3
The latter irreducible representation is a ‘‘conformal’’ submultiplet of the ( , 1) multi-
2
plet (see section 4.5). For Π0 and Π2 we must bisect:

1 1
•

Π0 1 ±Ψα = −1
(1 ± K )D 2 D 2Ψα = −1
D2 (D 2Ψα ± i ∂ αβ• Ψβ ) ,
2 2 2
 3.11. Projection operators 131

1 1
•

Π2 1 ±Ψα = −1
(1 ± K )D 2 D 2Ψα = −1
D2 (D 2Ψα ± i ∂ αβ• Ψβ ) . (3.11.39)
2 2 2

Equivalent forms are:

1
•

Π0 1 ±Ψα = − −1
Dα (D β D 2Ψβ ± D β D 2Ψβ• ) ,
2 2

1
•

Π2 1 ±Ψα = −1
D 2D α (D β Ψβ ± D β• Ψβ ) . (3.11.40)
2 2

Finally we decompose the real vector superfield H αβ• . Because of its reality bisec-
tion is unnecessary. Poincaré projection is performed by writing H αβ• = ∆γ β• H αγ and
(anti)symmetrizing in the indices of the chiral field strengths. To ensure that the projec-
tion operators maintain the reality of H αβ• , we combine the Π2 ’s with the Π0 ’s, since
from (3.9.24) Π2 H αβ• = (Π0 H β α• )† . We obtain

1
ΠT 0,1 H αβ• = −1
∆γ β• {D 2 , D 2 }H (αγ) ,
2

1
ΠL 0,0 H αβ• = −1
∆αβ• {D 2 , D 2 }H γ γ ,
2

1
ΠT 1, 3 H αβ• = − −1
∆γ β• D δ D 2 D (α H γδ) ,
2 6

1
ΠT 1, 1 H αβ• = −1
∆γ β• (D α D 2 D δ H (γδ) + D γ D 2 D δ H (αδ) ) ,
2 6

1
ΠL 1, 1 H αβ• = − −1
∆αβ• D γ D 2 D γ H δ δ , (3.11.41)
2 2

where T and L denote transverse and longitudinal. Reexpressing H αβ in terms of H αβ• ,

we find

1
•

ΠT 0,1 H αβ• = −2 γ
∂ β• {D 2 , D 2 }∂ (αδ• H γ) δ ,
2

1
ΠL 0,0 H αβ• = −2
∂ αβ• {D 2 , D 2 }∂ c H c ,
2

1 •
ΠT 1, 3 H αβ• = −2 γ
∂ β• D δ D 2 D (α ∂ γ ϵ H δ)ϵ• ,
2 6
132 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1 • •
ΠT 1, 1 H αβ• = ∂ β• (D α D 2 D δ ∂ (γ ϵ• H δ) ϵ + D γ D 2 D δ ∂ (α ϵ• H δ) ϵ ) ,
−2 γ
2 6

1
ΠL 1, 1 H αβ• = − −2
∂ αβ• D γ D 2 D γ ∂ d H d . (3.11.42)
2 2

b.3. N=2

We begin by giving the expressions for SL(4,C ) C ’s in terms of those of SU (2) and
SL(2,C ):

C αβγδ = C abC cd C αδC βγ − C ad C cbC αβC δγ ,

C α• β•γ•δ• = C abC cd C α• δ•C β•γ• − C ad C cbC α• β•C δ•γ• ,

C αβγδ = C abC cd C αδC βγ − C ad C cbC αβC δγ ,

• • •• • • • • • • ••

C αβ γ δ = C abC cd C αδC β γ − C ad C cbC αβC δ γ . (3.11.43)

⃝Poincaré reduction of D 2 αβ as follows:

We define the SU (2)×

D 2 αβ = C βα D 2ab + C ba D 2 αβ ,

D 2 α• β• = C β• α• D 2 ab + C ba D 2 α• β• ,

D 2 αβ = C βαC acC db D 2cd + C ba D 2 αβ ,

1
D 2ab = D a α D bα = D 2ba = (D 2 ab )† ,
2

1
D 2 αβ = C ba D aα D bβ = D 2 βα = − (D 2 α• β• )† . (3.11.44)
2

The set of (possibly) reducible projection operators is:

Π0,0 = −2
D 4D 4 , Π4,0 = −2
D 4D 4 ,

Π3, 1 = −2
D αD 4D 3 α , Π1, 1 = − −2
D 3 αD 4D α ,
2 2

Π2,0 = −2
C caC bd D 2ab D 4 D 2cd ,
 3.11. Projection operators 133

Π2,1 = −2
D 2 αβ D 4 D 2 αβ . (3.11.45)

In writing Π2,0 and Π2,1 we have taken Π2 defined by (3.11.19) and used (3.11.44) to fur-
ther reduce it. We can now decompose N = 2 superfields.

We start with a complex N = 2 scalar superfield Ψ. We need not bisect the terms
obtained from Π1, 1 and Π3, 1 . Bisecting the rest, we find eight more irreducible projec-
2 2

tions.

1 1
Π0,0±Ψ = −2
(1 ± K )D 4 D 4Ψ = −2
D4 (D 4Ψ ± Ψ) ,
2 2

1 1
Π4,0±Ψ = −2
(1 ± K )D 4 D 4Ψ = −2
D4 (D 4Ψ ± Ψ) ,
2 2

1 1
Π2,0±Ψ = −2
C ca D 2ab (1 ± K )D 4C bd D 2cd Ψ = −2
C caC bd D 2ab D 4 D 2cd (Ψ ± Ψ) ,
2 2

1 1
Π2,1±Ψ = −2
D 2αβ (1 ± K )D 4 D 2 αβ Ψ = −2
D 2αβ D 4 D 2 αβ (Ψ ± Ψ) . (3.11.46)
2 2

We give two more results without details: For the N = 2 vector multiplet, described by
a real scalar-isovector superfield V a b we find

Π0,0,1±V a b = −2
D 4 (D 4 ± )V a b ,

1
Π1, 1 , 3V a b = −2
C db D 3cγ D 4C e(a D cγV d )e ,
2 2 3!

1
Π1, 1 , 1V a b = −2
C db D 3cγ D 4 D eγC c(aV d )e ,
2 2 3

Π2,1,1V a b = −2
D 2 αβ D 4 D 2 αβV a b ,

1
Π2,0,2V a b = − −2
C bg C ceC fd D 2ef D 4 D 2 (cdV a hC g)h ,
4!

1
Π2,0,1V a b = − −2
C cd C be D 2d (a| D 4 (D 2 |e) f V c f + D 2cf V |e) f ) ,
4

1
Π2,0,0V a b = −2
C bc D 2ac D 4C fe D 2deV f d , (3.11.47)
3

where the projection operators are labeled by projector number, superspin, superisospin,
and K conjugation ±. Again, to construct real projection operators, the complex
134 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

conjugate must be added for the Π0 ’s and Π1 ’s (Π0 → Π0 + Π4 , Π1 → Π1 + Π3 ). Finally,

for the spinor-isospinor superfield Ψaα (the unconstrained prepotential of N = 2 super-
gravity) we find

Π0, 1 , 1 Ψa α = −2
D 4 D 4Ψa α ,
2 2

Π4, 1 , 1 Ψa α = −2
D 4 D 4Ψa α ,
2 2

1
Π2, 1 , 3 Ψa α = −2
D 2de D 4C b(d C e|c D 2bc Ψ|a) α ,
2 2 3!

2
Π2, 1 , 1 Ψa α = −2
C ad C ec D 2de D 4 D 2cb Ψb α ,
2 2 3

1
Π2, 3 , 1 Ψa α = −2
D 2 βγ D 4 D 2 (αβ Ψa γ) ,
2 2 3!

2
Π2, 1 , 1 Ψa α = −2
D 2 αβ D 4 D 2βγ Ψa γ ,
2 2 3

1 •

D 3 (b(β• ∂ ϵ γ)• Ψa) ϵ −

•
Π1,1,1±Ψa α = −2
Dbβ D 4∂αγ ( −1
+i D (a (β• Ψb)γ)• ) ,
8

1 •

D 3b(β• ∂ ϵ γ)• Ψb ϵ −
•
Π1,1,0±Ψa α = −2
Daβ D 4∂αγ ( −1
+i D b (β• Ψb γ)• ) ,
8

1 •

∂ D 3 (b γ•Ψa) ϵ −
• •
Π1,0,1±Ψa α = − −2
D b β D 4 ∂ αβ• ( −1 ϵγ
+i D (a γ•Ψb) γ ) ,
8

1 •

∂ D 3b γ•Ψb ϵ −
• •
Π1,0,0±Ψa α = − −2
D a β D 4 ∂ αβ• ( −1 ϵγ
+i D b γ•Ψb γ ) ,
8

1 •
Π3,1,1±Ψa α = −2
D b β D 4 D 2 αβC c(a (D cγ Ψb)γ ± D b) γ•Ψc γ ) ,
4

1 •
Π3,1,0±Ψa α = −2
C ab D b β D 4 D 2 αβ (D eγ Ψeγ ± D e γ•Ψe γ ) ,
4

1 •
Π3,0,1±Ψa α = −2
C bd D bα D 4C ac D 2dc (D eγ Ψeγ ± D e γ•Ψe γ ) ,
4

1 •
Π3,0,0±Ψa α = −2
C ab D bα D 4C cd D 2ce (D d γ Ψeγ ± D e γ•Ψd γ ) . (3.11.48a)
12
 3.11. Projection operators 135

There are 22 irreducible representations. One simplification is possible: Using (3.9.21)

instead of (3.9.25) for just the first term in 1 ± K , we find

1 •

(−D 3 bβ D 4 D (b(αΨa) β) −
•
Π1,1,1±Ψa α = −2
+i ∂ α γ D b β D 4 D (a (β• Ψb)γ)• ) ,
8

1 •

(−D 3 aβ D 4 D e(αΨe β) −
•
Π1,1,0±Ψa α = −2
+i ∂ α γ D a β D 4 D e (β• Ψe γ)• ) ,
8

1 •

(D 3 b α D 4 D (bγ Ψa)γ −
•
Π1,0,1±Ψa α = − −2
+i ∂ αβ• D b β D 4 D (a γ•Ψb) γ ) ,
8

1 •

(D 3 a α D 4 D eγ Ψeγ −
•
Π1,0,0±Ψa α = − −2
+i ∂ αβ• D a β D 4 D e γ•Ψe γ ) . (3.11.48b)
8

b.4. N=4

We begin by defining a set of irreducible D-operators:

D 2 αβ = C βα D 2ab + D 2 [ab]αβ ,

D 3 αβγ = C dcba D 3 d αβγ + (C αβ D 3 [ac]bγ − C αγ D 3 [ab]cβ )

1
D 4 αβγδ = C dcba D 4 αβγδ + (C αδC βγC cdef D 4 [ab] [ef ] − C αβC δγC bcef D 4 [ad ] [ef ] )
2

+ (C αβC eacd D 4b e γδ − C αγC eabd D 4c e βδ + C αδC eabc D 4d e βγ )

D 5 αβγ = C dcba D 5d αβγ + (C αβ D 5[ac]bγ − C αγ D 5[ab]cβ )

D 6 αβ = C βα D 6 ab + D 6 [ab]αβ . (3.11.49)

They satisfy the following algebraic relations

D 2ab = D 2ba , D 6ab = D 6ba ,

D 4a a αβ = D 4 [ab] [cb] = C abcd D 3 [ab]cα = C abcd D 5 [ab]c α = 0 . (3.11.50)

All SL(2,C ) indices on the D n ’s are totally symmetric. We also have

1 ...
D 4 α1 ...α4 = C α1 ...α8 D 4α5 α8 ,
4!
136 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

...α4 1 α1 ...α8 4
D 4 α1 = C D α5 ...α8 , (3.11.51)
4!

and these imply

1
D 4 αβγδ = C dcba D 4 αβγδ + (C αδC βγC cdef D 4 [ef ] [ab] − C αβC δγC bcef D 4 [ef ] [ad ] )
2

+ (C αβC eacd D 4e bγδ − C αγC eabd D 4e cβδ + C αδC eabc D 4e d βγ ) , (3.11.52)

as can be verified by substituting explicit values for the indices.

We consider now a complex scalar N = 4 superfield Ψ and find first

Π0,0,1 = −4
D 8D 8 , Π8,0,1 = −4
D 8D 8 ,

•
Π1, 1 ,4 = −4
D α• D 8 D 7 α , Π7, 1 ,4 = −4
D αD 8D 7 α
2 2

Π2,0,10 = −4
D 2 ab D 8 D 6ab ,

1 • •
Π2,1,6 = −4
D 2 [ab] α• β• D 8 D 6 [ab] αβ ,
2

• • •
Π3, 3 ,4 = −4
D 3a α• β•γ• D 8 D 5 a αβ γ ,
2

1 •
Π3, 1 ,20 = −4
D 3 [ab]c α• D 8 D 5 [ab]c α ,
2 3!

• • ••
Π4,2,1 = −4
D 4 α• β•γ•δ• D 8 D 4αβ γ δ ,

• •
Π4,1,15 = −4
D 4a b α• β• D 8 D 4b a αβ ,

Π4,0,20′ = −4
D 4 [cd ] [ab] D 8 D 4[cd ] [ab] ,

Π5, 3 ,4 = −4
D 3a αβγ D 8 D 5a αβγ ,
2

1
Π5, 1 ,20 = −4
D 3 [ab]cα D 8 D 5 [ab]cα ,
2 3!

Π6,0,10 = −4
D 2ab D 8 D 6 ab ,
 3.11. Projection operators 137

1
Π6,1,6 = −4
D 2 [ab]αβ D 8 D 6 [ab]αβ , (3.11.53)
2

where the superisospin quantum number here refers to the dimensionality of the SU (4)
representation. The only projectors that need bisection are the real representations of
SU (4): the 1, 6, 15, and 20’. We find:

1
Π0,0,1±Ψ = −4
D8 (D 8Ψ ± 2
Ψ) ,
2

1
Π8,0,1±Ψ = −4
D8 (D 8Ψ ± 2
Ψ) ,
2

• • ••
1
Π4,2,1±Ψ = −4
D 4 α• β•γ•δ• D 8 D 4 αβγ δ (Ψ ± Ψ) ,
2

1 1 • •
1 • •
Π2,1,6±Ψ = −4
D 2 [ab] α• β• D 8 (D 6 [ab] αβ Ψ ± C abcd D 2 [cd ]αβ Ψ) ,
2 2 2

1 1 1
Π6,1,6±Ψ = −4
D 2 [ab]αβ D 8 (D 6 [ab]αβ Ψ ± C abcd D 2 [cd ] αβ Ψ) ,
2 2 2

• • 1
Π4,1,15±Ψ = −4
D 4a b α• β• D 8b a αβ (Ψ ± Ψ) ,
2

1
Π4,0,20′±Ψ = −4
D 4 [cd ] [ab] D 8 D 4 [ab] [cd ] (Ψ ± Ψ) , (3.11.54)
2

and a total of 22 irreducible representations. The 6 is a real representation only if we

use a ‘‘duality’’ transformation in the rest-frame conjugation (3.11.4):
1 [cd ] 1
X̃ [ab] = C abcd X . This occurs for rank N antisymmetric tensors of SU (N ) when N
2 2
is a multiple of 4.
138 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

3.12. On-shell representations and superfields

In section 3.9 we discussed irreducible representations of off-shell supersymmetry

in terms of superfields; here we give the corresponding analysis of on-shell representa-
tions. We first discuss the description of on-shell physical components by means of field
strengths. We then describe a (non-Lorentz-covariant) subgroup of supersymmetry,
which we call on-shell supersymmetry, under which (reducible or irreducible) off-shell
representations of ordinary (or off-shell) supersymmetry decompose into multiplets that
contain only one of the three types of components discussed in sec. 3.9. By considering
representations of this smaller group in terms of on-shell superfields (defined in a super-
space which is a non-Lorentz-covariant subspace of the original superspace), we can con-
centrate on just the physical components, and thus on the physical content of the theory.

a. Field strengths

For simplicity we restrict ourselves to massless fields. (Massive fields may be

treated similarly.) It is more convenient to describe the physical components in terms of
field strengths rather than gauge fields: Every irreducible representation of the Lorentz
group, when considered as a field strength, satisfies certain unique constraints (Bianchi
identities) plus field equations, and corresponds to a unique nontrivial irreducible repre-
sentation of the Poincaré group (a zero mass single helicity state). On the other hand, a
given irreducible representation of the Lorentz group, when considered as a gauge field,
may correspond to several representations of the Poincaré group, depending on the form
of its gauge transformation.

Specifically, any field strength ψ α1 ...α2A α• 1 ...α• 2B , totally symmetric in its 2A undotted
indices and in its 2B dotted indices, has mass dimension A + B + 1 and satisfies the con-
straints plus field equations
• •
∂ α1 β ψ α1 ...α2A α• 1 ...α• 2B = ∂ β α1 ψ α1 ...α2A α• 1 ...α• 2B = 0 , (3.12.1a)

ψ α1 ...α2A α• 1 ...α• 2B = 0 . (3.12.1b)

The Klein-Gordon equation (3.12.1b) projects onto the mass zero representation, while
(3.12.1a) project onto the helicity A − B state. The Klein-Gordon equation is a conse-
quence of the others except when A = B = 0. To solve these equations we go to
 3.12. On-shell representations and superfields 139

momentum space: Then (3.12.1b) sets p 2 to 0 (i.e., ψ∼δ(p 2 )), and we may choose the
• • •
Lorentz frame p ++ = p +− = 0, p −− ̸= 0. In this frame (3.12.1a) states that only one com-
1
ponent of ψ is nonvanishing: ψ +...++• ...+• . Since each ‘‘+’’ index has a helicity and each
2
1
‘‘+’’ has helicity − , the total helicity of ψ is A − B, and of its complex conjugate
•

2
B − A. In the cases where A = B we may choose ψ real (since it has an equal number
of dotted and undotted indices), so that it describes a single state of helicity 0.

The most familiar examples of field strengths have B = 0: A = 0 is the usual

1
description of a scalar, A = a Weyl spinor, A = 1 describes a vector (e.g., the photon),
2
3
A= the gravitino, and the case A = 2 is the Weyl tensor of the graviton. Since we are
2
describing only the on-shell components, we do not see field strengths that vanish on
shell: e.g., in gravity the Ricci tensor vanishes by the equations of motion, leaving the
Weyl tensor as the only nonvanishing part of the Riemann curvature tensor. (This hap-
pens because, although these theories are irreducible on shell, they may be reducible off
shell; i.e., the field equations may eliminate Poincaré representations not eliminated by
(off-shell) constraints.) The most familiar example of A, B ̸= 0 is the field strength of
1 1
the second-rank antisymmetric tensor gauge field: (A, B) = ( , ) (see sec. 4.4.c). Some
2 2
3 1 1
less familiar examples are the spin- representation of spin , (A, B) = (1, ), the spin-2
2 2 2
representation of spin 0, (A, B) = (1, 1), and the higher-derivative representation of spin
3 1
1, (A, B) = ( , ). Generally, the off-shell theory contains maximum spin indicated by
2 2
the indices of ψ: A + B.

Although the analogous analysis for supersymmetric multiplets is not yet com-
pletely understood, the on-shell content of superfields can be analyzed by component
projection. In particular, a complete superfield analysis has been made of on-shell multi-
plets that contain only component field strengths of type (A, 0). This is sufficient to
describe all on-shell multiplets: Theories with field strengths (A, B) describe the same
on-shell helicity states as theories with (A − B, 0), and are physically equivalent. They
only differ by their auxiliary field content. Furthermore, type (A, 0) theories allow the
most general interactions, whereas theories with B ̸= 0 fields are generally more
restricted in the form of their self-interactions and interactions with external fields. (In
some cases, they cannot even couple to gravity.)
140 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

Before discussing the general case, we consider a specific example in detail. The
3
multiplet of N = 2 supergravity (see sec. 3.3.a.1) with helicities 2, , 1, is described by
2
5
component field strengths ψ αβγδ (x ), ψa αβγ (x ), ψab αβ (x ). They have dimension 3, , 2
2
respectively, and satisfy the component Bianchi identities and field equations (3.12.1).
We introduce a superfield strength F (0)ab αβ (x , θ) that contains the lowest dimension com-
ponent field strength at the θ = 0 level:

F (0)ab αβ (x , θ)| = C ab F (0)αβ (x , θ)| = ψab αβ (x ) . (3.12.2)

We require that all the higher components of F (0) are component field strengths of the
theory (or their spacetime derivatives; superfield strengths contain no gauge components
and, on shell, no auxiliary fields). Thus, for example, we must have D a(γ F (0)ab αβ) | ̸= 0,
whereas C c(d D cγ F (0)ab) αβ | = D γ• F (0)ab αβ | = 0. Since a superfield that vanishes at θ = 0
vanishes identically (as follows from the supersymmetry transformations, e.g., (3.6.5-6))
C c(d D cγ F (0)ab) αβ = D γ• F (0)ab αβ = 0. From these arguments it follows that the superfield
equations and Bianchi identities are:

D β• F (0)ab αβ = 0 ,

D γ F (0)ab αβ = δc [a F (1)b] αβγ ,

D δ D γ F (0)ab αβ = δc [a δd b] F (2)αβγδ ,

D ϵ D δ D γ F (0)ab αβ = 0 ; (3.12.3)

where F (1) (x , θ) and F (2) (x , θ) are superfields containing the field strengths ψb αβγ (x ) and
ψ αβγδ (x ) at the θ = 0 level. By applying powers of D α and D α• to these equations we
recover the component field equations and Bianchi identities, and verify that F (0)ab αβ
contains no extra components.

Generalization to the rest of the supermultiplets in Table 3.12.1 is straightforward:

We introduce a set of superfields which at θ = 0 are the component field strengths (as in
(3.12.1)) that describe the states appearing in Table 3.3.1: These superfields satisfy a set
of Bianchi identities plus field equations (as in the example (3.12.3)) that are uniquely
⃝SU (N ) covariance.
determined by dimensional analysis and Lorentz ×
 3.12. On-shell representations and superfields 141

helicity scalar multiplet super-Yang-Mills supergravity

+2 F αβγδ
+3/2 F a αβγ
+1 F αβ F ab αβ
+1/2 Fα Faα F abc α
0 Fa F ab F abcd
-1/2 F ab α• F abc α• F abcde α•
-1 F abcd α• β• F abcdef α• β•
-3/2 F abcdefg α• β•γ•
-2 F abcdefgh α• β•γ•δ•

Table 3.12.1. Field strengths in theories of physical interest

We now consider arbitrary supermultiplets of type (A, 0). There are two cases:
For an on-shell multiplet with lowest spin s = 0, the superfield strength has the form
...a m N
F (0)a 1 , ≤ m ≤ N , and is totally antisymmetric in its m SU (N ) isospin indices. If
2
the lowest spin s > 0, the superfield strength has the form F (0)α1 ...α2s and is totally sym-
metric in its 2s Weyl spinor indices. To treat both cases together, for s > 0 we write
...a N ...a N
F (0)a 1 α1 ...α2s = C a1 F (0)α1 ...α2s . Then the superfield strength has the form
a 1 ...a m
F (0) α1 ...α2s and is totally antisymmetric in its isospinor indices and totally symmetric
in its spinor indices. It has (mass) dimension s + 1.

This superfield contains all the on-shell component field strengths; in particular, at
θ = 0, it contains the field strength of lowest dimension (and therefore of lowest spin).
m −N m −N +1 ... m
For s = 0, the superfield strength describes helicities , , , , and its
2 2 2
m −m + 1 . . . N − m
hermitian conjugate describes helicities − , , , . Since m ≤ N , some
2 2 2
helicities appear in both F (0) and F (0) . For s ≥ 0, the superfield strength describes helic-
1 N
ities s, s+ ,...,s + , and its hermitian conjugate describes helicities
2 2
N ...
−(s + ), , − s. In this case, positive helicities appear only in F (0) and negative
2
helicities only in F (0) . For both cases the superfield strength together with its conjugate
1 m
describe (perhaps multiple) helicities ±s , ±(s + ) , . . . , ± (s + ).
2 2
142 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

The higher-spin component field strengths occur at θ = 0 in the superfields F (n)

obtained by applying n D’s (for n > 0) or −n D’s (for n < 0) to F (0) . They are totally
antisymmetric in their m − n isospinor indices and totally symmetric in their 2s + n spin
indices, and satisfy the following Bianchi identities and field equations:

1
n > 0 : D n βn ...β 1 F (0)a 1 ...a m α1 ...α2s = δ [a 1 . . . δb n a n F (n)a n+1 ...a m ] α1 ...α2s β 1 ...βn , (3.12.4a)
(m − n)! b 1

n < 0 : D n β• • F (0)a 1 ...a m = F (n)a 1 ...a m b 1 ...b −n β• • , (3.12.4b)

−n ...β 1 1 ...β −n

with m − N ≤ n ≤ m; in particular, for s > 0, DF (0) = 0. These equations follow from

the requirement that all components of the on-shell superfield strength (defined by pro-
jection) are on-shell component field strengths. The θ = 0 component of the superfield
F (0) is the lowest dimension component field strength; this determines the dimension and
index structure of the superfield. The higher components of the superfield are either
higher dimension component field strengths, or vanish; this determines the superfield
equations and Bianchi identities. Note that the difference between maximum and mini-
1
mum helicities in the F (n) is always N.
2
1
In the special case s = 0, m even, and m = N we have in addition to (3.12.4a,b)
2
the self-conjugacy relation

a 1 ...a 1 N 1
F (0) 2 = 1 C a 1 ...a N F (0)a 1 ...a N . (3.12.4c)
( N )! 2
N

For this case only, F (+n) is related to F (−n) ; this relation follows from (3.12.4c) for n = 0,
and from spinor derivatives of (3.12.4c), using (3.12.4a,b), for n > 0. Eqs. (3.12.4a,b)
are U (N ) covariant, whereas, because the antisymmetric tensor C a 1 ...a N is not phase
invariant, (3.12.4c) is only SU (N ) covariant; thus, self-conjugate multiplets have a
smaller symmetry.

b. Light-cone formalism

When studying only the on-shell properties of a free, massless theory it is simpler
to represent the fields in a form where just the physical components appear. As
described in sec. 3.9, we use a light-cone formalism, in which an irreducible representa-
tion of the Poincaré group is given by a single component (complex except for zero
 3.12. On-shell representations and superfields 143

helicity). For superfields we make a light-cone decomposition of θ as well as x . We use

the notation (see (3.1.1)):
• • • •
(x ++ , x +− , x −+ , x −− ) ≡ (x + , xT , xT , − x − ) , (θa + , θa − ) ≡ (θa , ζ a ) , (3.12.5a)

(∂ ++• , ∂ +−• , ∂ −+• , ∂ −−• ) ≡ (∂ + , ∂T , ∂T , − ∂ − ) , (∂ a + , ∂ a − ) ≡ (∂ a , δa ) . (3.12.5b)

(The spinor derivative ∂ a should not be confused with the spacetime derivative ∂ a ).
Under the transverse SO(2) part of the Lorentz group the coordinates transform as
x ± ′ = x ± , xT ′ = e 2iη xT , θa ′ = e iη θa , ζ a ′ = e −iη ζ a , and the corresponding derivatives trans-
form in the opposite way.

In sec. 3.11 we described the decomposition of general superfields in terms of chiral

field strengths, which are irreducible gauge invariant representations of supersymmetry
off shell. Although they contain no gauge components, they may contain auxiliary fields
that only drop out on shell. To analyze the decomposition of an irreducible off-shell rep-
resentation of supersymmetry into irreducible on-shell representations, we perform a
nonlocal, nonlinear, nonunitary similarity transformation on the field strengths Φ and all
operators X :

∂T
Φ ′ = e iH Φ , X ′ = e iH Xe −iH ; H = (ζ a i ∂ a ) . (3.12.6a)
∂+

We use this transformation because it makes some of the supersymmetry generators

independent of ζ a in the chiral representation. Dropping primes, we have

Q a + = i ∂a , Q a +• = i (∂ a − θa i ∂ + ) ,

∂T
Q a − = i (δa + ∂ a ) , Q a −• = i (δ a − θa i ∂T + i ζ a ) . (3.12.6b)
∂+ ∂+

Thus Q + and Q +• are local and depend only on ∂ a , θa , and ∂ + , but not on δa , ζ a , ∂ − , and
∂T , whereas Q − and Q −• are nonlocal and depend on all ∂ α and ∂ a . We expand the
transformed superfield strength Φ in powers of ζ a (the external indices of Φ are sup-
pressed):

,N
•
a a 1 m a 1 ...a m •
Φ(x αα
,θ ,ζ ) = ζ φ(m)a m ...a 1 (x αα , θa ) , (3.12.7)
m=0
m!
144 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

where the m th power ζ m , and thus φ(m) , is totally antisymmetric in isospinor indices.

Each φ(m) is a representation of a subgroup of supersymmetry that we call ‘‘on-

shell’’ supersymmetry, and that includes the Q + transformations, the transverse SO(2)
part of Lorentz transformations (and a corresponding conformal boost), SU (N ) (or
U (N )), and all four translations (as well as scale transformations in the massless case).
Although each φ(m) is a realization of the full supersymmetry group off-shell as well as
on-shell, on-shell supersymmetry is the maximal subgroup that can be realized locally
(and in the interacting case, linearly).

The remaining generators of the full supersymmetry group (including the other
Lorentz generators, that mix θa with ζ a ) mix the various φ(m) ’s. In particular, Q − and
Q −• allow us to distinguish physical and auxiliary on-shell superfields: Auxiliary fields
vanish on-shell, and hence must have transformations proportional to field equations.
We go to a Lorentz frame where ∂T = 0. In this frame, Q a − = i δa and

Q −• = i (δ a + i ζ a ). The Q − and Q −• supersymmetry variation of the highest ζ a compo-

∂+
nent of Φ,

φ′(N ) − φ(N ) ∼ i φ(N −1) (3.12.8a)

∂+

is proportional to , which identifies it as an auxiliary field. Setting φ(N ) to zero on-

shell, we iterate the argument: the variation of the next component of Φ,

φ′(N −1) − φ(N −1) ∼ i φ(N −2) (3.12.8b)

∂+

is again proportional to , etc. We find that only φ(0) has a variation not proportional
to . This identifies it as the physical on-shell superfield.

Thus, on-shell, Φ reduces to φ(0) . (All other φ(m) vanish.) In the Lorentz frame
chosen above (∂T = 0), Q − and Q −• vanish when acting on φ(0) , and thus this superfield is
a local representation of the full supersymmetry algebra on shell, namely, it describes
the multiplet of physical polarizations. By expanding actions in ζ, it can be shown that
φ(0) represents the multiplet of physical components while the other φ(m) ’s represent mul-
tiplets of auxiliary components.
 3.12. On-shell representations and superfields 145

We can also define (chiral representation) spinor derivatives D a , D a that are

covariant under the on-shell supersymmetry:

D a = ∂ a + θ a i ∂ + , D a = ∂ a ; {D a , D b } = δa b i ∂ + . (3.12.9)

When a bisection condition is imposed on the chiral field strength Φ (i.e., Φ is real,
as discussed in sec. 3.11), we can express the condition in terms of the on-shell super-
fields. For superspin s = 0, the condition
1
N
D 2N Φ = 2 Φ (3.12.10)

becomes
1
m− N 1
D N φ(m)a 1 ...a m = i N 2 (i ∂ + )N −m C a N ...a 1 φ(N −m) a N ...a m+1 (3.12.11)
(N − m)!

1
(where D N ≡ C a N ...a 1 D N a 1 ...a N ) and similarly for superspin s > 0. In general, an on-
N!
1
shell representation can be reduced by a reality condition of the form D N φ ∼ (i ∂ + ) 2 N φ
1
when the ‘‘middle’’ (θ 2 N ) component of φ has helicity 0 (i.e., is invariant under trans-
verse SO(2) Lorentz transformations ). (Compare the discussion of reality of off-shell
representations in sec. 3.11.)

Putting together the results of sec. 3.11 and this section, we have the following
reductions: general superfields (4N θ’s; physical + auxiliary + gauge) → chiral field
strengths (2N θ’s; physical + auxiliary = irreducible off-shell representations) → chiral
on-shell superfields (N θ’s; physical = irreducible on-shell representations). All three
types of superfields can satisfy reality conditions; therefore, the smallest type of each has
24N , 22N , and 2N components, respectively (when the reality condition is allowed), and is
a ‘‘real’’ scalar superfield. All other representations are (real or complex) superfields
with (Lorentz or internal) indices, and thus have an integral multiple of this number of
components. These counting arguments for off-shell and on-shell components can also
be obtained by the usual operator arguments (off-shell, the counting is the same as for
on-shell massive theories, since p 2 ̸= 0), but superfields allow an explicit construction,
and are thus more useful for applications.

Similar arguments apply to higher dimensions: We can use the same numbers
there (but taking into account the difference in external indices), if we understand ‘‘4N ’’
to mean the number of anticommuting coordinates in the higher dimensional superspace.
146 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

For simple supersymmetry in D < 4, because chirality cannot be defined, the counting of
states is different.
 3.13. Off-shell field strengths and prepotentials 147

3.13. Off-shell field strengths and prepotentials

We have shown how superfields can be reduced to irreducible off-shell representa-

tions (sec. 3.11), which can be reduced further to on-shell superfield strengths (sec.
3.12). To find a superfield description of a given multiplet of physical states, we need to
reverse the procedure: Starting with an on-shell superfield strength F (0) that describes
the multiplet, we need to find the off-shell superfield strength W that reduces to F (0) on
shell, and then find a superfield prepotential Ψ in terms of which W can be expressed.
There is no unambiguous way to do this: The same F (0) is described by different W ’s,
and the same W is described by different Ψ’s. However, for a class of theories that
includes many of the models that are understood, we impose additional requirements to
reduce the ambiguity and find a unique chiral field strength and a family of prepotentials
for a given multiplet.

The multiplets we consider have on-shell superfield strengths of Lorentz representa-

tion type (A, 0) (superspin s = A) and are isoscalars: F (0)α1 ...α2s . From (3.12.4b), this
implies that the F (0) ’s are chiral and therefore can be generalized to off-shell irreducible
(up to bisection) field strengths W α1 ...α2s , D β•W α1 ...α2s = 0. Physically, the W ’s correspond
to field strengths of conformally invariant models. (They transform in the same way as
...a N
C a1 : as SU (N ) scalars, but not U (N ) scalars). In the physical models where these
superfields arise, the chirality and bisection conditions on W are linearized Bianchi
identities. We can use the projection operator analysis of sec. 3.11 to solve the identities
by expressing the W ’s in terms of appropriate prepotentials.
1
When there is no bisection (s + N not an integer), the W ’s are general chiral
2
superfields: W α1 ...α2s = D 2N Ψ̃α1 ...α2s . The Ψ̃α1 ...α2s ’s may be expressed in terms of more fun-
damental superfields. An interesting class of prepotentials are those that contain the
lowest superspins: In that case, the W ’s have the form

1 • •

N ≤ 2s − 1: W α1 ...α2s = D 2N D N (α1 ...αN ∂ αN +1 β 1 . . . ∂ αN +M β M Ψα • •

...α2s ) β 1 ...β M ,
(2s)! N +M +1

1 ...b −M ] a 1 ...a −M
N ≥ 2s − 1: W α1 ...α2s = D 2N D N [a 1 ...a −M ] [b 1 (α1 ...α2s−1 Ψα2s )b 1 ...b −M (3.13.1)
(−M )!(2s)!

1
where Ψ is an arbitrary (complex) superfield and M = s − (N + 1).
2
148 3. REPRESENTATIONS OF SUPERSYMMETRY

1
If W is bisected (s + N integer, (1 − K )W = 0), then Ψ̃ must be expressed in
2
terms of a real prepotential V that has maximum superspin s. W has a form similar to
(3.13.1):

1 • •

N ≤ 2s: W α1 ...α2s = D 2N D N (α1 ...αN ∂ αN +1 β 1 . . . ∂ αN +M β M V α • •

...α2s ) β 1 ...β M ,
(2s)! N +M +1

1 ...b −M ] a 1 ...a −M
N ≥ 2s: W α1 ...α2s = D 2N D N [a 1 ...a −M ] [b 1 α1 ...α2sV b 1 ...b −M (3.13.2)
(−M )!

1
where M = s − N.
2

Whether or not W is bisected, ambiguity remains in the prepotentials Ψ̃ ,V , since

they may still be expressed as derivatives of more fundamental superfields: This leads to
‘‘variant off-shell multiplets’’ (see sec. 4.5.c). Our expression (3.13.1) for Ψ̃ in terms of Ψ
is an example of such an ambiguity: There is no a priori reason why Ψ̃ must take the
special form, unless it is obtained as a submultiplet of a bisected higher-N multiplet (as,
3
for example, in the case of the N = 1 spin , 1 multiplet (sec. 4.5.e), which is a submul-
2
tiplet of the N = 2 supergravity multiplet). Modulo such ambiguities, the expressions
for W in terms of Ψ̃ and V are the most general local solutions to the Bianchi identities
constraining W (i.e., chirality, and if possible, bisection).
Contents of 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

4.1. The scalar multiplet 149

a. Renormalizable models 149
a.1. Actions 149
a.2. Auxiliary fields 151
a.3. R-invariance 153
a.4. Superfield equations 153
b. Nonlinear σ-models 154
4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 159
a. Prepotentials 159
a.1. Linear case 159
a.2. Nonlinear case 162
a.3. Covariant derivatives 165
a.4. Field strengths 167
a.5. Covariant variations 168
b. Covariant approach 170
b.1. Conventional constraints 171
b.2. Representation-preserving constraints 172
b.3. Gauge chiral representation 174
c. Bianchi identities 174
4.3. Gauge-invariant models 178
a. Renormalizable models 178
b. CP(n) models 179
4.4. Superforms 181
a. General 181
b. Vector multiplet 185
c. Tensor multiplet 186
c.1. Geometric formulation 186
c.2. Duality transformation to chiral multiplet 190
d. Gauge 3-form multiplets 193
d.1. Real 3-form 193
d.2. Complex 3-form 195
e. 4-form multiplet 197
4.5. Other gauge multiplets 198
a. Gauge Wess-Zumino model 198
 b. The nonminimal scalar multiplet 199
c. More variant multiplets 201
c.1. Vector multiplet 201
c.2. Tensor multiplet 203
d. Superfield Lagrange multipliers 203
e. The gravitino matter multiplet 206
e.1. Off-shell field strength and prepotential 206
e.2. Compensators 208
e.3. Duality 211
e.4. Geometric formulations 212
4.6. N-extended multiplets 216
a. N=2 multiplets 216
a.1. Vector multiplet 216
a.2. Hypermultiplet 218
a.2.i. Free theory 218
a.2.ii. Interactions 219
a.3. Tensor multiplet 223
a.4. Duality 224
a.5. N=2 superfield Lagrange multiplier 227
b. N=4 Yang-Mills 228
b.1. Minimal formulation 228
b.2. Lagrange multiplier formulation 229
4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

In this chapter we discuss interacting field theories that can be built out of the
superfields of global N = 1 Poincaré supersymmetry. This restricts us to theories
describing particles with spins no higher than 1. The simplest description of such theo-
ries is in terms of chiral scalar superfields for particles of the scalar multiplet (spins 0
1 1
and ), and real scalar gauge superfields for particles of the vector multiplet (spins
2 2
and 1). However, other descriptions are possible; we treat some of these in a general
framework provided by superforms. We describe N = 1 theories and also extended
N ≤ 4 theories in terms of N = 1 superfields. Our primary goal is to explain the struc-
ture of these theories in superspace. We do not discuss phenomenological models.

4.1. The scalar multiplet

a. Renormalizable models

The lowest superspin representation of the N = 1 supersymmetry algebra is car-

ried by a chiral scalar superfield. In sec. 3.6 we described its components and transfor-
mations. In the chiral representation we have Φ(+) = A + θ α ψ α − θ 2 F , with complex
1 1
scalar component fields A = 2− 2 (A+iB), F = 2− 2 (F+iG), and the transformations of
(3.6.6).

a.1. Actions

To find superspace actions for the chiral superfield we use dimensional analysis:
The superfield contains two complex scalars differing by one unit of dimension (recall
1
that θ has dimension − ); however, it contains only one spinor, and we require this
2
3
spinor to have the usual physical dimension . Therefore, we should assign the super-
2
field dimension 1. This leads us to a unique choice for a free (quadratic) massless action
with no dimensional parameters:
#
S kin = d 4 x d 4 θ ΦΦ (4.1.1)

(see sec. 3.7.a for a description of the Berezin integral). Up to an irrelevant phase there
150 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

is a unique mass term and a unique interaction term with dimensionless coupling con-
stant:
# #
4 2 1 λ 3 1 λ 3
S (m,λ) = d xd θ ( mΦ2 + Φ) + d 4 x d 2 θ ( mΦ2 + Φ) . (4.1.2)
2 3! 2 3!

The resulting action describes the ‘‘Wess-Zumino model’’.

All of the integrals are independent of the representation (vector, chiral or antichi-
ral) in which the fields are given; the integrands in different representations differ by
total x -derivatives (from the eU factors, see (3.3.26)), that vanish upon x -integration.

We can express the action in its component form either by straightforward

θ-expansion and integration, or by D-projection. In the former approach, we write for
example, in the antichiral representation for Φ = Φ(−) , and Φ(−) = eU Φ(+) :
#
S kin = d 4 x d 4 θ Φ(−)eU Φ(+)

# •
•
d 4 x d 4 θ [A + θ α ψ α• − θ 2 F ] e θ
α θ αi∂
= •
αα [A + θ α ψ α − θ 2 F ] , (4.1.3a)

and after some algebra obtain

#
•
S kin = d 4 x [A A + ψ αi ∂ α α• ψ α + F F ] . (4.1.3b)

# #
4 4
It is simpler to use the projection technique; we write d xd θ = d 4 x D 2 D 2 and
# #
4 4
S kin = d x d θ ΦΦ = d 4 x D 2 [ΦD 2Φ]|

#
•
= d 4 x [ΦD 2 D 2Φ + (D 2Φ)(D 2Φ) + (D αΦ)(D α• D 2Φ)]| . (4.1.4)

Using the identities DD 2Φ = Di ∂Φ and D 2 D 2Φ = Φ, which follow from the chirality of

Φ, and the definition of the components (3.6.7), we obtain (4.1.3b).

To evaluate chiral integrals by projection we write, for any function f (Φ)

# #
d x d θ f (Φ) = d 4 x D 2 f (Φ)
4 2
 4.1. The scalar multiplet 151

#
= d 4 x [ f ′ ′(Φ)(DΦ)2 + f ′(Φ)D 2Φ]|

#
= d 4 x [ f ′ ′(A)ψ 2 + f ′(A)F ] . (4.1.5)

In particular we obtain for the mass and interaction terms

#
1
S (m,λ) = d 4 x {m[ψ 2 + AF ] + λ [Aψ 2 + FA2 ] + h. c. } . (4.1.6)
2

(Without loss of generality, we can choose m and λ real.)

We could add a linear term ξΦ and its hermitian conjugate to the action (4.1.2).
Such a term would add to the component action a linear ξF + ξ F term. However, in
the Wess-Zumino model such a term can always be eliminated from the action by a con-
stant shift Φ → Φ + c. Linear terms do however play an important role in constructing
models with spontaneous supersymmetry breaking (see sec. 8.3).

a.2. Auxiliary fields

The component field F does not describe an independent degree of freedom; its
equation of motion is algebraic:

1
F = − mA − λA2 . (4.1.7)
2

If we eliminate the auxiliary field F from the action and the transformation laws, we find
#
•
S = d 4 x [A( − m 2 )A + ψ αi ∂ α α• ψ α + m(ψ 2 + ψ 2 )

1 1
− mλ(AA2 + AA2 ) − λ2 A2 A2 + λ(Aψ 2 + Aψ 2 )] , (4.1.8)
2 4

and

δA = − ϵα ψ α ,

•
1
δψ α = − ϵ αi ∂ α α• A − ϵα (mA + λA2 ) . (4.1.9)
2

Therefore the Wess-Zumino action gives equal masses to the scalars and the spinor,
cubic and quartic self-interactions for the scalars, and Yukawa couplings between the
152 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

scalars and the spinor, all governed by a common coupling constant.

After eliminating F , the supersymmetry transformations of the spinor are nonlin-

ear; this makes an analysis of the supersymmetry Ward identities without the auxiliary
fields difficult. This is not the only problem caused by eliminating auxiliary component
fields: The transformations are not only nonlinear, but also dependent on parameters in
the Lagrangian, and it is difficult to discover further supersymmetric terms that could be
added to the component Lagrangian (e.g., gauge couplings). Furthermore, equation
(4.1.7) is not itself supersymmetric unless the equation of motion of the spinor is satis-
fied; only then is
•
δF = − ϵ αi ∂ α α• ψ α (4.1.10a)

the same as

1 •
δF (A) = δ(−mA − λA2 ) = (m + λA)ϵ α ψ α• . (4.1.10b)
2

For this reason, formulations of supersymmetric theories that lack the component auxil-
iary fields are often called ‘‘on-shell supersymmetric’’. Indeed, if we calculate the com-
mutator of two supersymmetry transformations acting on the spinor, we find that the
fields A, ψ, form a representation of the algebra (i.e., the algebra closes) only if the
spinor equation of motion is satisfied.

The Wess-Zumino model can be generalized to include several chiral superfields.

The most general action that leads to a conventional renormalizable theory is
# #
S = d x d θ Φi Φ + d 4 x d 2 θ P(Φi ) + h. c. ,
4 4 i
(4.1.11)

where P is a polynomial of maximum degree 3 in the fields. The component action has
the form
#
•
S = d 4 x [Ai Ai + ψi αi ∂ α α• ψ αi + F i F i ]

#
1
+ d 4 x [Pi (A)F i + Pij (A) ψ αi ψ α j + h. c. ] , (4.1.12)
2

where
 4.1. The scalar multiplet 153

∂P ∂2P
Pi = , Pij = . (4.1.13)
∂Ai ∂Ai ∂Aj
In particular, elimination of the auxiliary fields gives the scalar interaction terms (the
scalar potential U ):
,
−U (Ai ) = − |Pi |2 . (4.1.14)
i

As a consequence of supersymmetry (see (3.2.10)) the potential is positive semidefinite.

The action (4.1.11) can also be invariant under a global internal symmetry group carried
by the Φ’s.

a.3. R-invariance

An additional tool used to study these models is R-symmetry (3.6.14). This is the
#
chiral symmetry generated by rotating θ and θ by opposite phases (so that d 4 θ is
#
invariant but d 2 θ is not) and by rotating different chiral superfields by related phases:

Φ(x , θ, θ ) → e −iwr Φ(x , e ir θ, e −ir θ) . (4.1.15)

It may be, but is not always, possible to assign appropriate weights w to the various
superfields to make the total action R-invariant. For example, with only one chiral mul-
tiplet, R-invariance holds if either a mass or a dimensionless self-coupling is present, but
2
not both: The appropriate transformations weights are w = 1 and w = respectively.
3
With more than one chiral multiplet, it is possible to write R-symmetric Lagrangians
having both mass and interaction terms: A chiral self-interaction term is R-invariant if
its total R-weight w = 2 (i.e., the sum of the R-weights of each superfield factor is 2).

a.4. Superfield equations

From the action for a chiral superfield, we obtain the equations of motion by func-
tional differentiation (see (3.8.10,11)). For example, including sources, we have
# #
S = d x d θ ΦΦ + { d 4 x d 2 θ [P(Φ) + J Φ] + h. c. } ,
4 4
(4.1.16)

from which, using (3.8.9-12), we derive the equations

D 2 Φ + P ′(Φ) + J = 0 , (4.1.17a)
154 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

D 2Φ + P ′(Φ) + J = 0 . (4.1.17b)

1
We consider first the massive noninteracting case P(Φ) = mΦ2 . Multiplying (4.1.17a)
2
by D 2 , we find

D 2 D 2 Φ + mD 2Φ + D 2 J = 0 . (4.1.18)

Substituting (4.1.17b) into (4.1.18) and using the chirality of Φ (D 2 D 2 Φ = Φ), we

obtain

( − m 2 )Φ = mJ − D 2 J . (4.1.19)

Similarly, we find

( − m 2 )Φ = mJ − D 2 J . (4.1.20)

and these equations can be readily solved.

For arbitrary P(Φ), we derive the equations of motion for the component fields by
projection from the superfield equations. Successively applying D’s to (4.1.17a) we find

F + P ′(A) + J A = 0

•
i ∂ αα ψ α• + P ′ ′(A)ψ α + J ψ α = 0

A + P ′ ′ ′(A)ψ 2 + P ′ ′F + J F = 0 (4.1.21)

as would be obtained from the component Lagrangian.

b. Nonlinear σ-models

If renormalizability is not an issue, we can construct general supersymmetric

actions by taking arbitrary functions of Φ, Φ, and their derivatives, and integrating over
superspace. An interesting class of supersymmetric models that can be constructed out
of chiral superfields is the generalized nonlinear σ-model. In ordinary spacetime, a gen-
eralized nonlinear σ-model is described by fields φi that are the coordinates of an arbi-
trary manifold. The action of such a model is
#
1
Sσ = − d 4 x g ij (∂ a φi )(∂ a φj ) , (4.1.22)
4
 4.1. The scalar multiplet 155

where g ij (φi ) is the metric tensor defined on the manifold. The supersymmetric general-
ization of these models is described by chiral superfields Φi and their conjugates Φi
which are the complex coordinates of an arbitrary Kähler manifold (see below). (We use
a group theoretic convention: Upper and lower indices are related by complex conjuga-
tion, and all factors of the metric are kept explicit.) The action depends on a single real
function IK (Φ, Φ) defined up to arbitrary additive chiral and antichiral terms that do
not contribute:
#
Sσ = d 4 x d 4 θ IK (Φi , Φ j ) . (4.1.23)

The component content of this action can be worked out straightforwardly using the
projection technique; we find
#
1 ∂ 2 IK
Sσ = − 4
d x (∂ a Ai )(∂ a Aj ) + . . . . (4.1.24)
2 i
∂A ∂Aj

∂ 2 IK
This has the form (4.1.22) if we identify as the metric g ij . A complex manifold
∂Ai ∂A j
whose metric can be written (locally) in terms of a potential IK is called Kähler; thus all
four-dimensional supersymmetric nonlinear σ-models are defined on Kähler manifolds.
Conversely, any bosonic nonlinear σ-model whose fields reside on a Kähler manifold can
be extended to a supersymmetric model. The remaining terms in (4.1.24) provide cou-
plings between the scalar fields and the spinor fields.

Kähler geometry is an interesting branch of complex manifold theory that mathe-

maticians have investigated extensively. Here we discuss only those aspects relevant to
subsequent topics (e.g., sec. 8.3.b). We define

... ∂ ... ∂ ∂ ... ∂

IK ij11...ijmn = i i
IK . (4.1.25a)
∂Φ 1 ∂Φ m ∂Φ j 1 ∂Φ j n

In particular, the metric is

∂ 2 IK
IK i j = . (4.1.25b)
∂Φi ∂Φ j

Equivalently, we can write the line element as

ds 2 = IK i j dΦi dΦ j . (4.1.25c)
156 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

The metric, like the action (4.1.23), is invariant under Kähler gauge transformations

IK → IK + Λ(Φ) + Λ(Φ) (4.1.26)

of the Kähler potential IK . Field redefinitions Φ ′ = f (Φ) define holomorphic coordinate

transformations on the manifold; under these, the form of the metric (4.1.25b,c) is pre-
served, whereas under arbitrary nonholomorphic coordinate transformations, in general
terms of the form g ij dΦi dΦ j and g ij dΦi dΦ j are generated in the line element. The
nonhermitian metric coefficients g ij , g ij are not related to IK ij and IK ij . When working
with superfields, since Φi is chiral, only holomorphic coordinate transformations make
obvious sense; however, we can perform arbitrary coordinate transformations on the
scalar fields Ai .

Using the gauge transformations (4.1.26) and holomorphic coordinate transforma-

tions, it is possible to go to a normal gauge where, at any given point Φ0 , Φ0 , evaluated
at θ = θ = 0,
... j n
IK i 1 ...i m = IK j 1 =0 for all n, m , (4.1.27a)

... j n
IK ij1 ...i m = IK ij 1 =0 for all n, m > 1 , (4.1.27b)

IK i j = ηi j , (4.1.27c)

with ηi j = (1, 1, . . . −1, −1, . . . ) depending on the signature of the manifold. If the Φi
describe physical matter multiplets, ηi j = δi j . In a normal gauge, all the connections
vanish at the point Φ0 , the Riemann curvature tensor has the form:

Ri j k l = IK ik jl , (4.1.28a)

with all other components related by the usual symmetries of the Riemann tensor or
zero, and hence the Ricci tensor is simply:

R k j = IK ik ji . (4.1.28b)

In a general gauge, the connection is

Γij k = IK ij l (IK −1 )l k (4.1.29a)

where (IK −1 )l k is the inverse of the metric IK k l ; all other components are related by
complex conjugation or are zero. The contracted connection is, as always,
 4.1. The scalar multiplet 157

Γi ≡ Γij j = [ ln det IK k l ]i . (4.1.29b)

The Riemann tensor in a general gauge is

Ri j k l = IK ik jl − (IK −1 )m n IK ik m IK n jl (4.1.30a)

and the Ricci tensor has the simple form

R k j ≡ Ri j k l IK l i = [ ln det IK i l ]k j . (4.1.30b)

Manifolds can have symmetries, or isometries. On a Kähler manifold, an isometry

of the metric is, in general, an invariance of the Kähler potential IK up to a Kähler
gauge transformation (4.1.26). One can require the isometry to be an invariance of the
potential. (Actually, this is only true if there is a point on the manifold where the isom-
etry group is unbroken, i.e., the transformations do not shift the point.) This (partially)
fixes the Kähler gauge invariance: It is no longer possible to go to a normal gauge
(4.1.27). However, holomorphic coordinate transformations still make it possible to
choose normal coordinates, where the metric IK i j satisfies (4.1.27c), and its holomorphic
derivatives (IK i 1 j )i 2 ...i m ≡ IK ij1 ...i m satisfy (4.1.27b) (likewise for the antiholomorphic
derivatives) but the conditions (4.1.27a) are not satisfied.

In arbitrary coordinate systems, the isometries act on the coordinates as

δΦi = ΛA k A i , δΦi = ΛA k A i (4.1.31)

where the Λ’s are infinitesimal parameters (Λ = Λ are constant unless we introduce
gauge fields and gauge the isometry group; supersymmetric gauge theories are discussed
in the remainder of this chapter), and the k (Φ, Φ)’s are Killing vectors. These satisfy
Killing’s equations:

k A i;j + k A j ;i = k A i;j + k A j ;i = 0 (4.1.32a)

k A i ;j + (IK −1 )i k k A l ;k IK l j = 0 . (4.1.32b)

where

∂k i
k i;j = k i,j = (4.1.32c)
∂Φ j

and
158 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

i i k i ∂k i
k ;j =k ,j + k Γjk = j
+ k k IK jk l (IK −1 )l i (4.1.32d)
∂Φ
For holomorphic Killing vectors k i = k i (Φ) , k i = k i (Φ), (4.1.32a) is a triviality and
(4.1.32b) follows directly from

IK i k A i + IK i k A i = 0 , (4.1.33)

which is just the statement that the Kähler potential is invariant under the isometries.
(Actually, invariance up to gauge transformations (4.1.26) suffices to imply (4.1.32b).)
We can also write the transformations (4.1.31) as

∂ ∂
δΦi = ΛA k A j Φi , δΦi = ΛA k A j Φi ; (4.1.34a)
∂Φ j ∂Φ j

This form exponentiates to give the finite transformation:

∂ ∂
Φ ′i = exp ( ΛA k A j ) Φi , Φ ′i = exp ( ΛA k A j ) Φi . (4.1.34b)
∂Φ j ∂Φ j

For the cases when there exists a fixed point on the manifold, we can choose a special
coordinate system (that in general is not compatible with normal coordinates) where the
transformations (4.1.31,34) take the familiar form

δΦi = i ΛA (T A )i j Φ j , δΦi = − i Φ j ΛA (T A ) j i (4.1.35a)

or, for finite transformations,

Φ ′i = (e iΛ TA i
) j Φj , TA j
A A
Φ ′i = Φ j (e −iΛ ) i . (4.1.35b)

In arbitrary coordinates, the notion of multiplying vectors by i is represented by

multiplication by a two index tensor called the complex structure. It has the property
that its square is −1 × a Kronecker delta. For a Kähler manifold, the complex structure
is covariantly constant and preserves the metric.

It may happen that there exist nontrivial nonholomorphic coordinate transforma-

tions that do preserve the form of the metric (4.1.25b,c); then one can show that the
manifold is hyperKähler. Such manifolds have three linearly independent complex struc-
tures and are locally quaternionic. They are even (complex) dimensional; all
hyperKähler manifolds are Ricci flat, though the converse is true only in four (real)
dimensions (two complex dimensions).
 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 159

4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories

a. Prepotentials

In general, we can find a formulation of any supersymmetric gauge theory either

by studying off-shell representations to derive the free (linear) theory in terms of uncon-
strained gauge superfields or prepotentials, or by postulating covariant derivatives and
imposing covariant constraints on them until all quantities can be expressed in terms of
a single irreducible representation of supersymmetry. In the former case, we must con-
struct covariantly transforming derivatives out of the unconstrained fields and generalize
to the nonlinear case, whereas in the latter case we must solve the covariant constraints
in terms of prepotentials. We study both approaches and exhibit the relation between
them.

a.1. Linear case

From the analysis of sec. 3.3.a.1, the N = 1 vector multiplet consists of massless
1
spin and spin 1 physical states. We denote the corresponding component field
2
strengths by λα , f αβ . According to the discussion of sec. 3.12.a, these lie in an irre-
ducible on-shell chiral superfield strength Ψ(0)α , which satisfies the field equations and
Bianchi identities D αΨ(0)α = 0. The corresponding irreducible off-shell field strength is a
1 1 1
chiral superfield W α , D α•W α = 0, satisfying the bisection condition (s + N = + is
2 2 2
an integer) KW α = −W α , which can be written (see (3.11.9))
•
D αW α = − D αW α• . (4.2.1)

(We have a − sign in the bisection condition to obtain usual parity assignments for the
components.) Therefore, by (3.13.2), it can be expressed in terms of an unconstrained
real scalar superfield by

W α = i D 2 D αV , W α• = − iD 2 D α•V , V =V , (4.2.2)

and this turns out to be the simplest description of the corresponding multiplet.

The definition of W α is invariant under gauge transformations with a chiral param-

eter Λ
160 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

V ′ = V + i (Λ − Λ) , D α• Λ = D α Λ = 0 . (4.2.3)

Later we generalize this to a nonabelian gauge invariance, but for the moment we ana-
lyze the simplest case. The prepotential V can be expanded in components by projec-
tion:

C =V | , χα = iD αV | , χα• = − i D α•V | ,

1
M = D 2V | , M = D 2V | , Aαα• = [D α• , D α ]V | ,
2

1
λα = iD 2 D αV | , λ α• = − iD 2 D α•V | , D′ = D α D 2 D αV | . (4.2.4a)
2

(To avoid confusion with D α , we denote the ‘‘D’’ auxiliary field by D ′.) As discussed in
sec. 3.6.b, there is some choice in the order of the D’s which simply amounts to field
redefinitions. The particular form we chose in (4.2.4a) is such that the physical compo-
nents are invariant under the Λ gauge transformations (except for an ordinary gauge
transformation of the vector component field). By making a similar component expan-
sion

Λ1 = Λ| , Λα = D α Λ| , Λ2 = D 2 Λ| , (4.2.4b)

we find

δC = i (Λ1 − Λ1 ) ,

δχα = Λα ,

δM = − i Λ2 ,

1
δAαα• = ∂ αα• (Λ1 + Λ1 ) ,
2

δλα = 0 ,

δD ′ = 0 . (4.2.5)

Thus, all the components of V can be gauged away by nonderivative gauge transforma-
tions except for Aa , λα and D ′. The vector and spinor are the physical component fields
of the multiplet; D ′ is an auxiliary field. They (and their derivatives) are the only
 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 161

components appearing in W α :

λα = W α | ,

1 1
f αβ = D (αW β) | , D′ = − iD αW α | ,
2 2

•
i ∂ α α λ α• = D 2W α | . (4.2.6)

The symmetric bispinor f αβ and its conjugate f α• β• are the self-dual and anti self-dual
parts of the component field strength of the gauge field Aa . The gauge in which A, λ, D ′
are the only nonzero components of V is called the Wess-Zumino gauge. The remaining
gauge freedom is the usual abelian gauge transformation of the vector component field.

The Wess-Zumino (‘‘WZ’’) gauge breaks supersymmetry: The supersymmetry vari-

ations of χα and M violate the gauge condition C = χα = M = 0, e.g.,
•
1
δχα = i ϵα M + i ϵ α (i ∂ αα•C − Aαα• ) , (4.2.7)
2

does not vanish in the WZ gauge. We can define transformations that preserve the WZ
gauge by augmenting the usual supersymmetry transformations with ‘‘gauge-restoring’’
gauge transformations. Thus, instead of
•
δ ϵV = i (ϵ αQ α• + ϵαQ α )V , (4.2.8)

we take
•
δ ϵWZV = i (ϵ αQ α• + ϵαQ α )V + i (Λ − Λ)WZ

•
= i (ϵ αQ α•WZ + ϵαQ αWZ )V , (4.2.9)

where ΛWZ is chosen to restore the WZ gauge condition by canceling the terms in δ ϵV
that violate it. Specifically, δ ϵWZ χα = 0 requires

δ ϵWZ (D αV )| = 0 . (4.2.10)

Using D 2V | = 0 and {D α• , D α }V | = ∂ aV | = 0 (in the WZ gauge), we have

• •
ΛαWZ = D α ΛWZ | = i ϵ α D α• D αV | = i ϵ α Aαα• . (4.2.11)

Similarly, from δ ϵWZ M = 0 we find

162 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

•
Λ2WZ = D 2 ΛWZ | = − ϵ α λ α• . (4.2.12)

Finally, from δ ϵWZ C = 0, we find that Λ1WZ = Λ1WZ . The remaining real scalar in ΛWZ is
the usual component gauge parameter for the vector gauge field (see (4.2.5)).

The WZ gauge preserving ‘‘supersymmetry’’ transformations are

δAa = − i (ϵ α• λα + ϵα λ α• ) ,

δλα = − ϵβ f βα + i ϵα D ′ ,

1 • •
δD ′ = ∂ αα• (ϵ α λα − ϵα λ α ) . (4.2.13)
2

The commutator algebra of these transformations closes only up to gauge transforma-

tions of the vector field. The need for gauge-restoring Λ transformations makes super-
symmetric quantization in the WZ gauge impossible. The (vector) gauge-fixing proce-
dure, by breaking gauge invariance, also breaks supersymmetry.

From the requirement that the physical components Aa and λα have canonical
dimension, we conclude that V has dimension zero. By dimensional analysis and gauge
invariance under the Λ transformations we find the action
# #
4 2 2 1
S = d x d θW = d 4 x d 4 θ VD α D 2 D αV . (4.2.14)
2

Replacing d 2 θ by D 2 and using (4.2.6), we obtain the component action

#
1 •
S = d 4 x [− f αβ f αβ + λ αi ∂ α α• λα + D ′2 ] . (4.2.15)
2

We have not added the hermitian conjugate to S ; Im S is a total derivative and con-
#
tributes only a surface term (∼ d 4 x ϵabcd f ab f cd + spinorial terms). The field D ′ is
clearly auxiliary.

a.2. Nonlinear case

The nonabelian generalization can be motivated by starting with a global internal

symmetry and making it local. For this purpose we consider a multiplet of chiral scalar
fields Φ transforming according to some representation of a global group with generators
T A and constant parameters λA :
 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 163

Φ ′ = e iλΦ , λ = λAT A , TA =TA† . (4.2.16)

We extend this to a local transformation in superspace. Clearly, to maintain the chiral-

ity of Φ the local parameters should be chiral. We therefore consider transformations of
the form

Φ ′ = e iΛ Φ , Λ = ΛAT A , D α• Λ = 0 , (4.2.17)

and correspondingly, for the antichiral Φ, transforming with the complex conjugate rep-
resentation,

Φ ′ = Φe −iΛ , Λ = ΛAT A , D αΛ = 0 . (4.2.18)

The Lagrangian ΦΦ is invariant if the parameters λA are real. For local transfor-
mations Λ ̸= Λ and we must introduce a gauge field to covariantize the action. The sim-
plest procedure is to introduce a multiplet of real scalar superfields V A transforming in
the following fashion:

eV = e i ΛeV e −iΛ ,
′
V = V AT A . (4.2.19)

In the abelian case, this transformation is just (4.2.3). We covariantize the action by
#
d 4 x d 4 θ ΦeV Φ . (4.2.20)

The gauge field V acts as a "converter", changing a Λ representation to a Λ repre-

sentation of the group. Thus,

(eV Φ) ′ = e i Λ (eV Φ) , (4.2.21a)

and similarly

(ΦeV ) ′ = (ΦeV )e −iΛ . (4.2.21b)

In the nonabelian case, even the infinitesimal gauge transformations of V are

highly nonlinear. Nonetheless, as in the abelian case they can be used to algebraically
gauge away all but the physical components of V A and take us to the Wess-Zumino
gauge: Starting with an arbitrary V , we perform successive gauge transformations to
gauge away C , χα , and M . Requiring that the first transformation gauge away C we
find, by evaluating (4.2.19) at θ = 0:
164 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

(1) (1) (1) (1)

1 = eV | = e iΛ eV e −iΛ | = (e iΛ |)eC (e −iΛ |) ,
′
(4.2.22)

1
and hence we must choose Λ(1) 1 = Λ(1) | = − i C . The gauge C ′ = 0 is preserved by all
2
further transformations with ImΛ1 = 0. To gauge away χα we choose a second gauge
transformation Λ(2) (with Λ(2) 1 = 0) by requiring
(2) (2)
0 = D αeV | = D α (e i Λ eV e −iΛ )|
′′ ′

= D αV ′| − iD α Λ(2) | = − i χ ′α − i Λ(2) α , (4.2.23)

and hence Λ(2) α = D α Λ(2) | = − χ′α . Finally, we can find a third transformation Λ(3) to
gauge away M . In the WZ gauge, the only gauge freedom left corresponds to ordinary
gauge transformations of the vector field Aa , with parameter Λ = Λ = ω(x ).

As in the abelian case, the WZ gauge is not supersymmetric, and gauge-restoring

transformations are required to define the WZ gauge ‘‘supersymmetry’’ transformations.
The parameter of the transformations is still (4.2.11-12), but the transformations now
become nonabelian and hence nonlinear. To find them, we compute the infinitesimal
gauge transformations of V : We begin by defining the symbol

LV X = [V , X ] , (4.2.24)

so that

eV X e −V = e LV X . (4.2.25)

From [V , eV ] = 0 we obtain

(δV )eV + V (δeV ) − eV (δV ) − (δeV )V = 0 , (4.2.26a)

or
1 1 1 1 1 1
e − 2V (δV )e 2V − e 2V (δV )e − 2V + e − 2V [V , δeV ]e − 2V = 0 , (4.2.26b)

and hence

1 1 1
2 sinh ( LV )(δV ) = e − 2V LV (δeV )e − 2V
2

1 1 1 1
= LV [e − 2V i Λe 2V − e 2V i Λe − 2V ]
 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 165

1 1
= iLV [cosh ( LV )(Λ − Λ) − sinh ( LV )(Λ + Λ)] , (4.2.27)
2 2

from which it follows

1 1
δV = − iLV [Λ + Λ + coth ( LV )(Λ − Λ)]
2 2

1
= i (Λ − Λ) − i [V , Λ + Λ] + O(V 2 ) . (4.2.28)
2

From the transformations (4.2.28) and the parameter (4.2.11-12) we find the non-
abelian WZ gauge-preserving ‘‘supersymmetry’’ transformations:

δAa = − i (ϵ α• λα + ϵα λ α• ) ,

δλα = − ϵβ f βα + i ϵα D ′ ,

1 • •
δD ′ = ∇αα• (ϵ α λα − ϵα λ α ) , (4.2.29)
2

where now f αβ is the self-dual part of the nonabelian field strength and
∇αα• = ∂ αα• − iAαα• . The nonlinearity comes from the gauge-covariantization of the linear
transformations (4.2.13). The components of the nonabelian vector multiplet are covari-
ant generalizations of the abelian components; in the WZ gauge, they are the same as
(4.2.4a) (see also (4.3.5)).

a.3. Covariant derivatives

The gauge field V can be used to construct derivatives, gauge covariant with
respect to Λ transformations

∇A = D A − i ΓA = (∇α , ∇α• , ∇αα• ) , (4.2.30)

defined by the requirement

(∇AΦ) ′ = e iΛ (∇AΦ) , (4.2.31)

i.e.,

∇ ′A = e iΛ ∇Ae −iΛ , (4.2.32a)

or
166 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

δ∇A = i [Λ , ∇A ] . (4.2.32b)

Since Λ is chiral, ∇α• ≡ D α• is covariant without further modification:

∇ ′α• = e iΛ D α• e −iΛ = ∇α• . (4.2.33)

The undotted spinor derivative D α is covariant with respect to Λ transformations. We

can use eV to convert it into a derivative covariant with respect to Λ (see (4.2.21));
∇α ≡ e −V D αeV transforms correctly:

∇ ′α = (e iΛ e −V e −i Λ )D α (e iΛeV e −iΛ )

= e iΛ e −V D αeV e −iΛ

= e iΛ ∇αe −iΛ . (4.2.34)

Finally, we construct ∇a by analogy with (3.4.9): ∇a = ∇αα• ≡ − i {∇α , ∇α• }. Its covari-
ance follows from that of ∇α and ∇αα• .

We summarize:

∇A = (e −V D αeV , D α• , − i {∇α , ∇α• }) . (4.2.35)

These derivatives are not hermitian. Their conjugates ∇ A are covariant with
respect to Λ transformations:

∇ A = (D α , eV D α• e −V , − i {∇ α , ∇ α• }) ,

∇ ′A = e i Λ ∇ Ae −iΛ . (4.2.36)

The derivatives ∇A (∇ A ) are called gauge chiral (antichiral) representation covariant

derivatives. They are related by a nonunitary similarity transformation

∇ A = eV ∇Ae −V . (4.2.37)

This is analogous to the relation between global supersymmetry chiral and antichiral
representations

D A (−) = eU D A (+)e −U (4.2.38)

of (3.4.8).
 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 167

The gauge covariant derivatives are usually defined in terms of vector representa-
tion D A ’s; if we express these in terms of ordinary derivatives, (4.2.35) becomes
1 1 1 1
∇A = (e −V e − 2U ∂ α e 2U eV , e 2U ∂ α• e − 2U , − i {∇α , ∇α• }) . (4.2.39)
1 1
By a further similarity transformation ∇A → e − 2U ∇A e 2U , we go to a new representation
that is chiral with respect to both global supersymmetry and gauge transformations:
1 1 1 1
∇A = (e − 2U e −V e − 2U ∂ α e 2U eV e 2U , ∂ α• , − i {∇α , ∇α• }) . (4.2.40)

We define Ṽ by
1 1
e 2U eV e 2U = eU +Ṽ . (4.2.41)
•
In this form, it is clear that Ṽ gauge covariantizes U: i θ α θ α ∂ αα• →
. . . + i θ α θ α (∂ αα• − iAαα• ) + . . .. This combination transforms as
•

(eU +Ṽ ) ′ = e i Λ (eU +Ṽ )e −iΛ , ∂ α Λ = ∂ α• Λ = 0 . (4.2.42)

There also exists a symmetric gauge vector representation that treats chiral and antichi-
ral fields on the same footing. Such a representation uses a complex scalar gauge field
Ω, and requires a larger gauge group. We discuss the vector representation in subsec.
4.2.b, where the covariant derivatives are defined abstractly, and where it enters natu-
rally.

a.4. Field strengths

The covariant derivatives define field strengths by commutation:

[∇A , ∇B } = T AB C ∇C − iF AB , (4.2.43)

with V = V A T A , and T A in the adjoint representation. From the explicit form of the
covariant derivatives (4.2.35) we find that the torsion T AB C is the same one as in flat
global superspace (3.4.19), and some field strengths vanish:

F αβ = F α• β• = F αβ• = 0 . (4.2.44)

The remaining field strengths are

2 −V
F α,β
• • = C • • D (e
β βα
D β eV ) = iC α• β•W β ,
168 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

1
F αα,β
• • = (C α• β• ∇(αW β) + C αβ ∇(α•W β)
• ) ,
β 2

W α ≡ iD 2 (e −V D αeV ) ,

W α• ≡ e −V W α• eV ≡ e −V (−W α )†eV . (4.2.45)

•
(Recall that W α ≡ (W α )† implies W α• = (−W α )† (3.1.20).) Thus all the field strengths of
the theory are expressed in terms of a single spinor W α that is the nonlinear version of
(4.2.2). It satisfies Bianchi identities analogous to (4.2.1):
•
∇αW α = − ∇αW α• . (4.2.46)

3
It is chiral, has dimension , and can be used to construct a gauge invariant action
2
# #
1 4 2 2 1
S = tr d x d θW = − tr d 4 x d 4 θ (e −V D αeV )D 2 (e −V D αeV ) ,
g2 2g 2

V = V AT A , trT AT B = δ AB . (4.2.47)

As in the abelian case, this action is hermitian up to a surface term (see discussion fol-
lowing (4.2.15)).

a.5. Covariant variations

To derive the field equations from the action (4.2.47), we need to vary the action
with respect to V . However, since V is not a covariant object, this results in noncovari-
ant field equations (although multiplication by a suitable (but complicated) invertible
operator covariantizes them). In addition, variation with respect to V is complicated
because V appears in eV factors. We therefore define a covariant variation of V by

1 − e −LV
∆V ≡ e −V δeV = δV = δV + . . . . (4.2.48)
LV

∆V satisfies the chiral representation hermiticity condition as in (4.2.37). In practice,

we always vary an action with respect to V by expressing its variation in terms of δeV ,
and then rewriting that in terms of ∆V . We thus define a covariant functional deriva-
∆F [V ]
tive by (cf. (3.8.3))
∆V
 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 169

∆F [V ]
F [V + δV ] − F [V ] ≡ (∆V , ) + O((∆V )2 ) . (4.2.49)
∆V
We now obtain the equations of motion from:
#
g δS = i tr d 4 x d 4 θ δ(e −V D αeV )W α
2

#
= i tr d 4 x d 4 θ [e −V D αeV , ∆V ]W α

#
= − i tr d 4 xd 4 θ ∆V ∇αW α , (4.2.50)

which gives

∆S
g2 = − i ∇αW α = 0 . (4.2.51)
∆V

* * *

At the end of sec. 3.6 we expressed supersymmetry transformations in terms of the

spinor derivatives D α . Using the covariant derivatives that we have constructed, we can
write manifestly gauge covariant supersymmetry transformations by using the form
(3.6.13) (for w = 0) and adding the gauge transformation

Λ = iD 2 (Γα D α ζ) , (4.2.52a)

where ΓA is defined in (4.2.30). We then find

•
e −V δ ζ eV = (W α ∇α +W α ∇ α• )ζ = (W αe −V D αeV + e −V W α• eV D α• )ζ (4.2.52b)

(where ζ is a real x -independent superfield that commutes with the group generators,
e.g., ∇α ζ = D α ζ). Since (4.2.52b) is manifestly gauge covariant, it preserves the Wess-
Zumino gauge (but it is not a symmetry of the action after gauge-fixing). The corre-
sponding supersymmetry transformations for covariantly chiral superfields Φ, ∇ α• Φ = 0
with arbitrary R-weight w are

δΦ = − i ∇ 2 [(∇α ζ)∇α + w (∇2 ζ)]Φ . (4.2.52c)

170 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

b. Covariant approach

In this subsection we discuss another approach to supersymmetric Yang-Mills

theory that reverses the direction of the previous section. We postulate derivatives
transforming covariantly under a gauge group, impose constraints on them, and discover
that they can be expressed in terms of prepotentials. This procedure will prove espe-
cially useful in studying supergravity and extended super-Yang-Mills, so we give a
detailed analysis for the simpler case of N = 1 super-Yang-Mills.

We start with the ordinary superspace derivatives DA satisfying

[D A , D B } = T AB C D C , where T AB C is the torsion and has only one nonzero component
T αβ• c (see(3.4.19)). For a Lie algebra with generators T A we covariantize the derivatives
by introducing connection fields

∇A = D A − i ΓA , (4.2.53)

where ΓA = ΓA BT B is hermitian and ∇ A = − (−)A ∇A . At the component level we have

i
θ αv αα• + . . . , Γa = w a + . . . ,
•
Γα = v α + (4.2.54a)
2

and hence

i
θ α (∂ αα• − iv αα• ) + . . . ,
•
∇α = ∂ α − iv α +
2

i α
∇α• = ∂ α• − iv α• + θ (∂ αα• − iv αα• ) + . . . ,
2

∇a = ∂ a − iw a + . . . , (4.2.54b)

so that the component derivatives are covariantized.

Under gauge transformations the covariant derivatives are postulated to transform

as

∇ ′A = e iK ∇Ae −iK , (4.2.55)

where the parameter K = K AT A is a real superfield.

K = ω(x ) + θ α K (1) α (x ) + θ α K (1) α• (x ) + . . . .

•
(4.2.56)

This is very different from what emerged in the previous section: Instead of chiral
 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 171

representation derivatives transforming with the chiral parameter Λ, we have vector rep-
resentation hermitian derivatives, transforming with the hermitian parameter K . The
asymmetric form of the previous section will emerge when we make a similarity transfor-
mation to go to the chiral representation.

For infinitesimal K , we find the component transformations:

δv αα• = [∂ αα• − iv αα• , ω] − i ω αα• ,

δw αα• = [∂ αα• − iw αα• , ω] , (4.2.57)

where ω ≡ K |, ω αα• ≡ [D α• , D α ]K | = ω αα• . The component gauge parameter ω αα• can be

used to gauge away Im v αα• algebraically; however, the component fields Re v αα• and w αα•
both remain as two a priori independent gauge fields for the same component gauge
transformation. To avoid this we impose constraints on the covariant derivatives.

b.1. Conventional constraints

Field strengths F AB are defined by (4.2.43). Substituting (4.2.53) we find

F AB = D [A ΓB ) − i [ΓA , ΓB } − T AB C ΓC . (4.2.58)

In particular,

F αα• = D α Γα• + D α• Γα − i {Γα , Γα• } − i Γαα• . (4.2.59)

If we impose the constraint

F αα• = 0 , (4.2.60)

(4.2.59) defines the vector connection Γαα• in terms of the spinor connections. (In com-
ponents, this expresses w αα• in terms of v αα• and v α .)

In any theory one can add covariant terms to the connections (e.g., (3.10.22))
without changing the transformation of the covariant derivatives. If we did not impose
the constraint (4.2.60) on the connections ΓA , we could define equally satisfactory new
connections Γ ′A = (Γα , Γα• , Γαα• − iF αα• ) that identically satisfy the constraints. For this
reason (4.2.60) is called a conventional constraint. It implies

∇A = (∇α , ∇ α• , − i {∇α , ∇ α• }) . (4.2.61)

172 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

The theory now is expressed entirely in terms of the connection Γα . However, it

contains spin s > 1 gauge covariant component fields, for example

ψ (αβ)β• ≡ F (α,β)β• | = i [D β• , D (α ]Γβ) | + . . . . (4.2.62)

It also contains a superfield strength F αβ whose θ-independent component

f αβ = F αβ | = D (α Γβ) | + . . . , (4.2.63)

is a dimension one symmetric spinor (equivalent to an antisymmetric second rank ten-

sor). Because of its dimension, it cannot be the Yang-Mills field strength. Although in
principle the theory might contain such fields (as auxiliary, not physical, components), in
the covariant approach there are generally further types of constraints that eliminate
(many) such components.

b.2. Representation-preserving constraints

To couple scalar multiplets described by chiral scalar superfields to super-Yang-

Mills theory, we must define covariantly chiral superfields Φ: The covariant derivatives
transform with the hermitian parameter K , and all fields must either be neutral or
transform with the same parameter. However, K is not chiral, and gauge transforma-
tions will not preserve chirality defined with D α• . Instead we define a covariantly chiral
superfield by

∇ α• Φ = 0 , Φ ′ = e iK Φ ,

∇α Φ = 0 , Φ ′ = Φe −iK . (4.2.64)

This implies

0 = {∇ α• , ∇ β• }Φ = − iF α• β• Φ . (4.2.65)

Consistency requires that we impose the representation-preserving constraint

F αβ = F α• β• = 0 . (4.2.66)

This can be written as

{∇α , ∇β } = 0 . (4.2.67)

The most general solution is

 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 173

∇α = e −Ω D αe Ω , Ω = ΩA T A , (4.2.68)

where ΩA is an arbitrary complex superfield. Eq. (4.2.67) states that ∇α satisfies the
same algebra as D α , and the solution expresses the fact that they are equivalent up to a
complex gauge transformation. Hermitian conjugation yields

∇ α• = e Ω D α• e −Ω . (4.2.69)

Thus ∇A is completely expressed in terms of the unconstrained prepotential Ω by the

solutions (4.2.61,68,69) to the constraints (4.2.60,66).

The K gauge transformations are realized by

(e Ω ) ′ = e Ωe −iK . (4.2.70)

However, the solution to the constraint (4.2.67) has introduced an additional gauge
invariance: The covariant derivatives (4.2.68) are invariant under the transformation

(e Ω ) ′ = e iΛe Ω , D α• Λ = 0 . (4.2.71)

Therefore, the gauge group of Ω is larger than that of ΓA .

We define the K -invariant hermitian part of Ω by

eV = e Ωe Ω . (4.2.72)

The K gauge transformations can be used to gauge away the antihermitian part of Ω.
1
In this gauge, Ω = Ω = V , and Λ transformations must be accompanied by gauge-
2
restoring K transformations:

(e Ω ) ′ = e iΛe Ωe −iK (Λ) ,

1
e −iK (Λ) = e −Ωe −iΛ (e iΛe 2Ωe −iΛ ) 2 . (4.2.73)

In any gauge, the transformation of V is

(eV ) ′ = e i ΛeV e −iΛ . (4.2.74)

We have defined covariantly chiral superfields Φ by (4.2.64). We can use Ω (see

(4.2.69)) to express them in terms of ordinary chiral superfields Φ0 (which we called Φ in
sect. 4.2.a):
174 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

Φ = e Ω Φ0 , D α• Φ0 = 0 . (4.2.75)

The factor e Ω converts K -transforming fields into Λ-transforming fields:

(Φ0 ) ′ = (e −ΩΦ) ′ = e iΛΦ0 . (4.2.76)

* * *

A useful identity that follows from the explicit form (4.2.68) expresses δ∇α in
terms of an arbitrary variation δΩ:

δ∇α = (δe −Ω )e Ω ∇α + ∇αe −Ω δe Ω = [∇α , e −Ω δe Ω ] . (4.2.77)

b.3. Gauge chiral representation

We can also use Ω to go to gauge chiral representation in which all quantities are
K -inert and transform only under Λ. This is analogous to and not to be confused with
the supersymmetry chiral representation (3.3.24-27), (3.4.8). We make a similarity
transformation

∇0A = e −Ω ∇Ae Ω = (e −V D αeV , D α• , − i {∇0α , ∇0α• }) ,

Φ0 = e −ΩΦ ,

˜Φ0 = Φe Ω = (Φ0 )eV . (4.2.78)

The quantities ∇0A and Φ0 are the chiral representation ∇A and Φ of the previous sub-
section. We sometimes write the chiral representation hermitian conjugate of Φ0 as ˜
Φ0
to avoid confusion with the ordinary hermitian conjugate Φ0 ≡ (Φ0 ).

In the chiral representation we see no trace of Ω or K : Only V and Λ appear.

However, we necessarily have an asymmetry between chiral and antichiral objects.

c. Bianchi identities

In subsection 4.2.a we analyzed the physical content of the theory using compo-
nent expansions and the Wess-Zumino gauge. Alternatively, we can find the field con-
tent of the theory by ‘‘solving’’ the Bianchi identities. These follow from the Jacobi
 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 175

identities:

[∇[A [∇B , ∇C ) }} = 0 , (4.2.79a)

which imply

∇[A F BC ) − T [AB | D F D|C ) = 0 . (4.2.79b)

Normally these equations are trivial identities. However, once constraints have been
imposed on some field strengths, they give information about the remaining ones, and in
particular allow one to express all the fields strengths in terms of a basic set. We now
describe the procedure.

We solve the equations (4.2.79) subject to the constraints (4.2.60,66) starting with
the ones of lowest dimension. For each equation, we consider various pieces irreducible
under the Lorentz group, and see what relations are implied among the field strengths.
Thus, for example, the relation [{∇(α , ∇β } , ∇γ) ] = 0 is identically satisfied when
F α,β = 0. From [{∇α , ∇β } , ∇ γ• ] + [{∇ γ• , ∇(α } , ∇β) ] = 0, we find

F (α,β)β• = 0 , (4.2.80)

which implies, for some spinor superfield W β ,

F α,β β• = − iC βαW β• . (4.2.81)

From [{∇α , ∇β } , ∇c ] + {[∇c , ∇(α ], ∇β) } = 0 we find

C γ(α ∇β)W γ• = 0 , (4.2.82)

which implies

∇αW β• = 0 . (4.2.83)

From [{∇α , ∇ β• } , ∇c ] + {[∇c , ∇α ] , ∇ β• } + {[∇c , ∇ β• ] , ∇α } = 0 we obtain

F αβ,γ
• • + C γα ∇ βW γ + C • • ∇αW γ = 0
γ
• •
γβ
, (4.2.84)

which separates into two equations:

1
F αα,β
• • = (C αβ ∇ (α•W β)
• + C • •∇ W
αβ (α β) ) ≡ C αβ f α• β• + C α• β• f αβ , (4.2.85)
β 2

and
176 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

•
∇αW α + ∇ αW α• = 0 . (4.2.86)

These can be reexpressed as

i
∇αW β = iC βα D ′ + f αβ , D′ = D′ = − ∇αW α . (4.2.87)
2

Finally, [[∇α , ∇[b ], ∇c] ] + [[∇b , ∇c ], ∇α ] = 0 and [[∇[a , ∇b ], ∇c] ] = 0 are automatically sat-
isfied as a consequence of the previous identities. From (4.2.87) we also obtain

1
∇ α• D ′ = ∇β α•W β ,
2

1
∇ α• f αβ = i ∇(αα•W β) , (4.2.88)
2

and

1
•

∇α f βγ = C α(β i ∇γ)δ•W δ . (4.2.89)

2

Therefore, all the field strengths are expressed in terms of the chiral field strength
W α . In particular, the commutators of the covariant derivatives can be written as:

{∇α , ∇β } = 0 ,

{∇α , ∇ β• } = i ∇αβ• ,

[∇ α• , i ∇β β• ] = − iC β• α•W β ,

[i ∇a , i ∇b ] = i (C α• β• f αβ + C αβ f α• β• ) . (4.2.90)

Furthermore, the set

F = {W α , D ′ , f αβ } , (4.2.91)

is closed under the operation of applying ∇α and ∇ α• : Only spacetime derivatives ∇a of

F are generated. These superfields are the nonlinear off-shell extension of the superfield
strengths Ψ(n) of sec. 3.12. The covariant components are the θ = 0 projections of these
superfields. Thus the constraints and the Bianchi identities directly determine the field
content of the theory.

* * *
 4.2. Yang-Mills gauge theories 177

The existence of a ‘‘geometric’’ superspace formulation in terms of a (constrained)

connection ΓA is important. For quantized super Yang-Mills theories, the geometric (or
covariant) formulation can be combined with the background field method to derive
improved superfield power-counting laws. We can also use ΓA to generalize the concept
of the path-ordered phase factor to superspace:
#
(i dz A ΓA )
IP [e ] , (4.2.92)

∂dz A
where the differential superspace element dz A is to be interpreted as d τ for τ some
#
∂τ
parametrization of the path. (In particular, d θα is not a Berezin integral.) If we
choose a closed path, this quantity defines a supersymmetric Wilson loop. Thus nonper-
turbative studies of ordinary Yang-Mills theories based on the properties of the Wilson
loop should be extendible into superspace. (There is also a manifestly covariant form of
path ordering, expressed directly in terms of covariant derivatives: see sec. 6.6.)
178 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

4.3. Gauge-invariant models

a. Renormalizable models

In this subsection we consider properties of systems of interacting chiral and real

gauge superfields with actions of the form
# # #
S = d x d θ Φ j (e ) i Φ + tr d x d θ W + [ d 4 x d 2 θ P(Φi ) + h. c. ] (4.3.1)
4 4 V j i 4 2 2

(in the gauge-chiral representation), invariant under a group G. Here V i j = V A (T A )i j

and (T A )i j is a (in general reducible) matrix representation of the generators T A of G.
In the vector representation, (4.3.1) takes the form
# # #
S = d x d θ Φi Φ + tr d x d θ W + [ d 4 x d 2 θ P(Φi ) + h. c. ]
4 4 i 4 2 2
(4.3.2)

where we have used tr e −Ω fe Ω = tr f in the chiral integral, and rewritten the action in
terms of covariantly chiral superfields. The gauge coupling has been set to 1, but can be
restored by the rescalings W α → g −1W α . S may be R-symmetric, with the gauge super-
field transforming as V ′(x , θ, θ ) = V (x , e −ir θ, e ir θ ).

Another term can be added to the action: If G is abelian, or has an abelian sub-
group, the Fayet-Iliopoulos term
# #
4 4
S FI = tr d x d θ νV = tr d 4 x νD ′ , (4.3.3)

is gauge invariant.

Component actions can be obtained by the projection techniques we have dis-

cussed before. A more efficient and, up to field redefinitions, totally equivalent proce-
dure is to define covariant components by projecting with covariant derivatives. Thus,
for a covariantly chiral superfield we define

A = Φ| , ψ α = ∇αΦ| , F = ∇2Φ| . (4.3.4)

Similarly, the covariant components of the gauge multiplet can be obtained by projection
from W α (here f αβ denotes the component field strength):

1
λα = W α | , f αβ = {∇(α ,W β) }| ,
2
 4.3. Gauge-invariant models 179

•
1 i
i ∇α α λ α• = [∇β , {∇β ,W α }]| , D′ = − {∇α ,W α }| . (4.3.5)
2 2

The covariant derivative ∇αβ• | is the covariant space-time derivative. To obtain compo-
nent actions by covariant projection, we use the fact that on a gauge invariant quantity
D 2 D 2 = ∇ 2 ∇2 .

The component action that results from (4.3.1) plus (4.3.3) takes the form
#
• •
S = d 4 x [Ai Ai + Ψαi i ∇α αΨαi• + i Ai (λα )i j Ψα j − iΨαi (λ α• )i j Aj

•
1
+ Ai (D ′)i j Aj + F i F i + tr ( λα [i ∇α α , λ α• ] − f αβ f αβ + D ′2 )
2

1
+ tr νD ′ + (Pi F i + Pij Ψαi Ψα j + h. c. )] (4.3.6)
2

1
where ≡ ∇a ∇a , Pi , Pij are defined in (4.1.13), (λ)i j = λAT A , etc. The auxiliary
2
field D ′ can be eliminated algebraically using its field equations. This leads to interac-
tion terms for the spin-zero fields of the chiral multiplets:

1
−U D ′ = −
4
[Ai (T A )i j Aj + νtrT A ]2 (4.3.7)

in addition to those obtained by eliminating F (see (4.1.14)).

b. CP(n) models

In sec. 4.1.b we discussed supersymmetric nonlinear σ-models written in terms of

chiral and antichiral superfields that are the complex coordinates of a Kähler manifold.
Some nonlinear σ-models can be written linearly if we introduce a (classically) non-prop-
agating gauge field. We consider here supersymmetric extensions of the bosonic CP (n)
models. The bosonic models are straightforward generalizations of the CP (1) model of
sec. 3.10. They are written in terms of (n + 1) complex scalar fields z i constrained by
z i z i = c; the action is written by introducing an abelian gauge field with no kinetic
term:
#
S = d 4 x [|(∂ αβ• − i Aαβ• )z i |2 + D ′(|z i |2 − c)] , (4.3.8)

where D ′ is a Lagrange multiplier field. Eliminating Aαβ• by its classical field equation,
180 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

we find the action given in (3.10.23). This action is still invariant under the local U(1)
gauge transformation z → e iα z , z → e −iα where α(x ) is a real parameter. It can be
rewritten in terms of n + 1 unconstrained fields Z i in the form (3.10.30).

In the supersymmetric case, the model is most conveniently described in terms of

(n + 1) chiral fields Φ (and their complex conjugates Φ), and a single abelian gauge field
V . The action, which is globally supersymmetric, SU (n + 1) invariant, and locally
gauge invariant, is:
#
S = d 4 x d 4 θ (Φi Φi eV − cV ) . (4.3.9)

Note the presence of the Fayet-Iliopoulos term. Upon eliminating the gauge field V by
its field equation we find
#
S = d 4 x d 4 θ c ln(Φi Φi ) . (4.3.10)

This action is still invariant under the (local) abelian gauge transformation Φ → e iΛΦ.
We can use this invariance to choose a gauge, e.g., Φi = (c , u a ). In components, (4.3.10)
gives the action generalizing (3.10.30) for the CP (n) nonlinear σ-model coupled to a
spinor field.

The action (4.3.9) has a straightforward generalization:

#
S = d 4 x d 4 θ (Φi (eV )i j Φ j − c tr V ) , (4.3.11)

where, as in (4.3.1), V = V AT A and (T A )i j is a (in general reducible) matrix representa-

tion of the generators T A of some group. However, in contrast to (4.3.9), when we vary
(4.3.11) with respect to V , we get an equation that in general does not have an explicit
solution:

Φ eV T A Φ − c tr T A = 0 . (4.3.12)

(To derive (4.3.12), we use the covariant variation (4.2.48) ∆V = ∆V AT A ≡ e −V δeV , and
tr ∆V = tr δV .)
 4.4. Superforms 181

4.4. Superforms

a. General

In ordinary spacetime, there is a family of gauge theories that can be constructed

systematically; these theories are expressed in terms of p-forms
1 . . . /\ dx m p Γm
Γp = dx m 1 /\ dx m 2 /\ 1m 2
...m p where the differentials satisfy
p!
dx m /\ dx n = −dx n /\ dx m . The ‘‘tower’’ of theories based on forms is: Γ0 = scalar, Γ1 =
vector gauge field, Γ2 = tensor gauge field, Γ3 = auxiliary field, and Γ4 = ‘‘nothing’’
field. Their gauge transformations, field strengths, and Bianchi identities are given by

gauge transformation : δΓp = dK p−1 ,

field strength : F p+1 = d Γp ,

Bianchi identity : dF p+1 = 0 . (4.4.1)

Here K p , Γp , F p are p-form gauge parameters, gauge fields, and field strengths respec-
tively, and d = dx m ∂ m . By definition, −1-forms vanish, and 5-forms (or (D+1)-forms in
D dimensions) vanish by antisymmetry. The Bianchi identities and the gauge invariance
of the field strengths are automatic consequences of the Poincaré lemma dd = 0.

In superspace the same construction is possible, using super p-forms:

1 1 . . . /\ dz M p ΓM
Γp = (−1) 2 p(p−1) dz M 1 /\ ...M 1 (4.4.2a)
p! p

(note the ordering of the indices), where now

dz M /\ dz N = − (−)MN dz N /\ dz M , (4.4.2b)

the coefficients of the form are superfields, and d = dz M ∂ M . The same tower of gauge
parameters, gauge fields, field strengths, and Bianchi identities can be built up (now
using the super Poincaré lemma dd = 0). An advantage of this description of flat super-
space theories is that it generalizes immediately to curved superspace and determines
the coupling of these global multiplets to supergravity.

However, superforms do not describe irreducible representations of supersymmetry

unless we impose constraints. To maintain gauge invariance, these constraints should be
182 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

imposed on the coefficients of the field strength form; when the constraints are solved,
the coefficients of the (gauge) potential form are expressed in terms of prepotentials. In
table 4.4.1 the prepotentials Âp correspond to the constrained super p-form Ap and the
expressions dAp correspond to dAp .

p Âp dAp
0 Φ i (Φ − Φ)
1 V i D 2 D αV
1 •
2 Φα (D αΦα + D α• Φα )
2
3 V D 2V
4 Φ 0

Table 4.4.1. Simple superfields (prepotentials) corresponding to superforms

In this Table Φ and Φα are chiral and V is real. The relation Âp = Â 4−p corresponds to
Hodge duality of the component forms.

The constrained super p-forms correspond to particular prepotentials Âp whether

Ap is a gauge parameter K p , a potential Γp , a field strength F p , or a Bianchi identity
(dF )p . The explicit expressions for Ap in terms of Âp take the same form whether A is
K ,Γ,F ,or dF . Thus the prepotentials give rise to a tower of theories that mimics (4.4.1):
The gauge field strength and Bianchi identities at one level are the gauge parameter and
field strength at the next level. If Ap−1 , Ap , and Ap+1 are the gauge parameter K p−1 , the
gauge field Γp , and the field strength F p+1 superforms, respectively, then the gauge
transformation, field strength, and Bianchi identities of the prepotentials are

gauge transformation : δ Γ̂p = dK p−1 ,

field strength : F̂ p+1 = d Γp ,

Bianchi identity : dF p+1 = 0 . (4.4.3)

The Lagrangians for all p-form theories are quadratic in the field strengths, without
extra derivatives. We discuss details in the subsections that follow.
 4.4. Superforms 183

Under a supersymmetry transformation the superforms are defined to transform as

Γ ′(z ′ , dz ′) = Γ(z , dz ) , (4.4.4)

where (cf. (3.3.15))

• • • • i • •
dz ′ = (d θ ′µ , dθ ′µ , dx ′µµ ) = (d θ µ , d θ µ , dx µµ − (ϵ µd θ µ + ϵµd θ µ )) . (4.4.5)
2

Consequently, the coefficients ΓMN ... mix under supersymmetry transformations and this
makes it difficult to impose supersymmetric constraints on them. To maintain manifest
supersymmetry, we therefore go to a ‘‘tangent space’’ basis, parametrized by the duals of
the covariant derivatives D A rather than the duals of ∂ M . We use the flat superspace
vielbeins D A M (3.4.16):

D A = D A M ∂ M = (D α , D α• , ∂ αα• ) , (4.4.6)

and the dual forms

ω A ≡ dz M (D −1 )M A . (4.4.7)

From (3.4.18), the D’s satisfy

D [A D B ) M = T AB C D C M , (4.4.8)

and hence

1
d ωA = ωC /\ ω BT BC A . (4.4.9)
2

In this ω-basis we write a superform as

1 1
Γp = (−1) 2 p(p−1) ω A1 /\ . . . /\ ω Ap ΓAp ...A1 . (4.4.10)
p!

We also have d ≡ dz M ∂ M = ω A D A . The tangent space coefficients ΓAp ...A1 of the p-form
do not mix under supersymmetry transformations because ω A is invariant. We can now
impose supersymmetric constraints on individual coefficients of a form.

In this basis, the coefficients of the field strength form (on which we impose the
constraints) F p+1 = d Γp have the following expression in terms of the gauge fields:

1 1 B
F A1 ...Ap+1 = D [A1 ΓA2 ...Ap+1 ) − T ΓB |A3 ...Ap+1 ) , (4.4.11)
p! 2(p − 1)! [A1 A2 |

where the torsion terms come from (4.4.9). The Bianchi identity on F takes a similar
184 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

appearance. Equation (4.4.11) is the essential result we need for the discussion of sub-
secs. 4.4.b-e.

We now summarize some of the results of subsecs. 4.4.b-e. In particular, we give

the explicit expressions for the coefficients of the superforms Ap in terms of the prepo-
tentials Âp (of table 4.4.1) for all p. In the case of Γp , these expressions are found by
solving the constraints on certain coefficients of F p+1 and choosing a suitable K -gauge
(δΓ = dK ). The expressions for K follow from the new invariance found when solving
these constraints. The expressions for F follow from solving those Bianchi identities dF
that explicitly express one part of F in terms of another in the presence of the con-
straints. Finally, for dF , the explicit expressions correspond to the remaining part of the
Bianchi identities that are not algebraically soluble. (For clarification, see subsecs. 4.4.b-
e, where the expressions are worked out in detail.) We find:

1
p = 0: A= (Â + Â) ;
2

1 1
p = 1: Aα = i D α Â , Aa = [D α• , D α ]Â ;
2 2

p = 2: Aαβ = Aαβ• = 0 , Aαb = iC αβ Â β• ,

1
Aa b = (C α• β• D (α Â β) + C αβ D (α• Â β)
• ) ;
2

p = 3: Aαβγ = Aαβ γ• = Aαβc = 0 , Aαβc

• = T αβc
• Â ,

Aαbc = − C β•γ•C α(β D γ) Â , Aabc = ϵdabc [D δ , D δ ]Â ;

p = 4: Aαβγδ = Aαβγ δ• = Aαβ γ•δ• = Aαβγd = Aαβ γd

• = Aαβcd
• =0 ,

Aαβcd = 2C γ•δ•C α(γC δ)β Â ,

•
Aαbcd = 2ϵabcd D α Â , Aabcd = 2i ϵabcd (D 2 Â − D 2 Â) , (4.4.12)

where for even p, D α• Â = 0, and for odd p, Â = Â.

 4.4. Superforms 185

For example, in the case of the vector multiplet of sec. 4.2, we found the vector
representation potentials ΓA given by the case p = 1 above, with  = V (in the vector
1 1
representation, and in the gauge where Ω = Ω = V ; then K = (Λ + Λ), as given
2 2
above by p = 0); the field strengths F AB by p = 2 above, with  α = W α = iD 2 D αV (by
table 4.4.1); and the remaining Bianchi identity dF on W α by p = 3 above, with
1 •
 = (D αW α + D α•W α ) (again by table 4.4.1; dF = 0 thus reduces to Â(W α ) = 0). Fur-
2
ther examples will be derived in the remainder of this section. (Note that an action
written in terms of a super 0-form does not describe the most general chiral multiplet
theory: The field strength F A = D A Γ always has the invariance δΓ = k , where k is a
real constant. Here δ F̂ = δ[i (Φ − Φ)] = 0 for δΦ = k . This invariance excludes mass
terms, and has consequences even for the free massless multiplet when it is coupled to
supergravity.)

b. Vector multiplet

As an introduction, we describe the abelian vector multiplet in the language of

superforms. We begin with a real super 1 −form
•
Γ1 = ω α Γα + ω α Γα• + ωa Γa , (4.4.13)

with gauge transformation δΓ1 = dK 0 , where K 0 is a 0 −form (scalar). The field

strength is a super 2 −form F 2 = d Γ1 , with superfield coefficients that follow from
(4.4.11):

F α,β = D (α Γβ) ,

F α,β• = D α Γβ• + D β• Γα − i Γαβ• ,

F α,b = D α Γb − ∂ b Γα ,

1 •
F a,b = − C α• β• ∂ (α γ Γβ)γ• + h. c. . (4.4.14)
2

We impose a conventional constraint F α,β• = 0 which algebraically determines Γαα• . We

further restrict the form by imposing the constraint (4.2.44) F α,β = 0. The solution to
the constraints is
186 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

Γα = iD α Ω , Γα• = − iD α• Ω ,

Γa = − i (D α Γα• + D α• Γα ) , (4.4.15)

and the prepotential Ω transforms as

δΩ = − iK 0 + Λ . (4.4.16)

The Λ transformations are an invariance of Γ1 introduced by solving the constraints.

It is always obvious, by examining equations such as (4.4.14), what conventional

constraints can be imposed. Finding additional constraints is more difficult. In general,
if we wish to describe a multiplet that contains a component p-form, we require that it
be the θ = 0 component of a super p-form coefficient with only vector indices (e.g., in
(4.4.14) F a,b | is the Yang-Mills field strength), and therefore we will not constrain this
coefficient. For the same reason we assign dimension 2 to this coefficient, and this deter-
mines the dimension of the superform. As a consequence, coefficients with more than
two spinor indices have too low dimension to contain component field strengths (or aux-
iliary fields), and must be constrained to zero. We also constrain to zero coefficients
that contain at the θ = 0 level component forms that are not present in the multiplet.

c. Tensor multiplet

c.1. Geometric formulation

The antisymmetric-tensor gauge multiplet contains among its component fields a

second-rank antisymmetric tensor (2-form). To describe it in superspace we consider a
super 2-form Γ2 :

1 1
•

−Γ2 = ω β /\ ω α Γα,β + ω β /\ ω α Γα,β• + ωb /\ ω α Γα,b + ωb /\ ωaC α• β• Γ(αβ) + h. c. ,

2 2

(4.4.17)
where we have used the symmetries of Γ to write Γab = C α• β• Γ(αβ) + h. c.. The gauge
variations δΓ2 = dK 1 are

δΓα,β = D (α K β) ,

δΓα,β• = D α K β• + D β• K α − iK αβ• ,
 4.4. Superforms 187

δΓα,b = D α K b − ∂ b K α ,

1 •
δΓ(αβ) = − ∂ (α γ K β)γ• . (4.4.18)
2

The field strengths follow from the definition (4.4.11):

1
F α,β,γ = D (α Γβ,γ) ,
2

F α,β,γ• = D (α Γβ)γ• + D γ• Γα,β + i Γ(α,β)γ• ,

F α,β,c = D (α Γβ)c + ∂ c Γα,β ,

F α,β,c
• = D α Γβ,c
• + D β• Γα,c + ∂ c Γα,β• − iC β•γ• Γ(αγ) − iC αγ Γ(β•γ)• ,

1 1
•

F α,b,c = C β•γ• (D α Γ(βγ) − ∂ (β δ Γγ)δ,α

• ) + C βγ (D α Γ(β•γ)• + ∂ δ(β• Γδ γ),α
• ) ,
2 2

F a,b,c ≡ − ϵabcd F d = − i (C α• γ•C βγ F αβ• − C αγC β•γ• F β α• ) ,

•
F αβ• = − i (∂ α γ Γ(β•γ)• − ∂ γ β• Γ(αγ) ) . (4.4.19)

where we have used (3.1.22).

We can impose two conventional constraints. The first,

F α,β,γ• = 0 , (4.4.20)

gives

Γ(α,β)β• = i [D (α Γβ)β• + D β• Γα,β ] , (4.4.21)

which implies

1
Γα,β β• = i C αβ Φβ• + i [D α Γβ,β• + D β• Γα,β ] , (4.4.22)
2

for an arbitrary spinor Φγ• . The second conventional constraint,

•

F (α,β,β)
•
β
=0 , (4.4.23)

gives
188 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

1
• • •

Γ(αβ) = − i [D (α Γβ,β)
•
β
+ D β• Γ(α,β) β − ∂ (αβ• Γβ) β ] , (4.4.24)
4

which implies

1 1 1
•

Γ(αβ) = D (αΦβ) − D 2 Γα,β − i∂ βΓ • . (4.4.25)

2 2 2 (α β),β

The potential Γα,β• is pure gauge: It can be gauged to zero using (4.4.18). To eliminate
the remaining unwanted physical states we choose two additional constraints

F α,β,γ = F α,β,c = 0 . (4.4.26)

The first implies Γα,β is pure gauge, and the second imposes

D α Φβ• = 0 , D α• Φβ = 0 . (4.4.27)

In the gauge Γα,β = Γα,β• = 0, all of ΓAB is expressed in terms of Φα ; thus the superfield
Φα is the chiral spinor prepotential that describes the tensor gauge multiplet.

The constraints also imply that all the nonvanishing field strengths can be
expressed in terms of a single independent field strength

1 •
G =− (D αΦα + D αΦα• ) . (4.4.28)
2

For example,
•
F α,β• c = i δ α γ δ β• γG = T αβ• cG . (4.4.29)

G is a linear superfield: D 2G = 0. It is invariant under gauge transformations of the pre-

potential

δΦα = iD 2 D α L , L=L . (4.4.30)

Projecting the components of Φα we have:

χα = Φα | , A + i B = − D α Φα | ,
1 (4.4.31)
t αβ = D (αΦβ) | = Γ(αβ) | , ψ̃ α = D 2Φα | .
2

The components of the gauge parameter that enter δΦα are:

Lα = iD 2 D α L| ,
 4.4. Superforms 189

L(1) = D α D 2 D α L| = L(1) ,

1 1 •
L(α,β) = i D (α D 2 D β) L| = ∂ (β α [D α) , D α• ]L|
2 2

1 •
≡− ∂ (β α Lα)α• , Lαα• = Lαα• . (4.4.32)
2

The components χα and B can be algebraically gauged away by Lα and L(1) respectively,
whereas Lαα• is the parameter of the usual gauge transformation for the tensor gauge
field t αβ . The spinor ψ̃ α is the physical spinor of the theory (up to terms that vanish in
the WZ gauge). The gauge invariant components are found by projecting from the field
strength G:

A = G| ,

1 •
ψ α = D αG| = (ψ̃ α − i ∂ α α χα• ) ,
2

f a = F a | = [D α• , D α ]G| = i (∂ β α• t αβ − ∂ α β t α• β• ) ,

D 2G = D 2G = 0 . (4.4.33)

Since there is only one physical spinor in the multiplet, G has dimension one. This
determines the kinetic action uniquely:
#
1
Sk = − d 4x d 4θ G 2 . (4.4.34)
2

The corresponding component action is

#
1 1 •
S k = d 4 x [ A A + ( f a )2 + ψ αi ∂ α α• ψ α ] . (4.4.35)
4 4

Note that none of the fields is auxiliary. The physical degrees of freedom are those of
the scalar multiplet. On shell, the only difference is the replacement of the physical
pseudoscalar by the field strength of the antisymmetric tensor.
190 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

c.2. Duality transformation to chiral multiplet

We can write two first order actions that are equivalent to S k . Introducing an
auxiliary superfield X , we define
#
1
S ′
k = d 4 x d 4 θ [ X 2 − GX ] . (4.4.36a)
2

Varying X and substituting the result back into S ′k , we reobtain S k . We also see that
the tensor multiplet is classically equivalent to a chiral scalar multiplet: Varying Φα , we
obtain D 2 D α X = 0, which is solved by X = χ + χ, D α• χ = 0. Substitution back into S ′k
yields the usual kinetic action for a chiral scalar χ (because χ is chiral and G is linear,
#
d 4 x d 4 θ χG = 0). Because the same first order action can be used to describe the ten-

sor multiplet and the chiral scalar multiplet, we say that they are dual to each other.

Alternatively, we can write

#
1
S k = d 4 x d 4 θ [− X 2 + (χ + χ)X ] .
′′
(4.4.36b)
2

Varying X and substituting the result back into S ′ ′k , we obtain the usual kinetic action
for the chiral scalar χ; varying χ , χ, we find D 2 X = D 2 X = 0, which is solved by
X = G. Substitution back into S ′ ′ yields S k (4.4.34).

The tensor multiplet admits arbitrary (nonrenormalizable) self-interactions with a

dimensional coupling constant µ:
#
2
S =µ d 4 x d 4 θ f (µ−1G) . (4.4.37)

The component action contains quartic fermion self-interactions and ‘‘Yukawa’’ terms
•
ψ α ψ α F αα• , multiplied by derivatives of f (µ−1 A). Remarkably, we can perform the dual-
ity transformation to a chiral scalar multiplet even in the interacting theory. The first
order action equivalent to S is:
#
2
S =µ
′
d 4 x d 4 θ [ f (X ) − µ−1 (χ + χ)X ] . (4.4.38)

Varying χ , χ, we find X = µ−1G (the normalization can be chosen arbitrarily), and reob-
tain the interacting action (4.4.37). Varying X , we find the dual action in terms of χ , χ:
 4.4. Superforms 191

#
2
S̃ = µ d 4 x d 4 θ IK (µ−1 (χ + χ)) (4.4.39)

where IK is the Legendre transform of f :

IK (µ−1 (χ + χ)) = f (X (µ−1 (χ + χ))) − µ−1 (χ + χ)X (µ−1 (χ + χ)) ,

∂ f (X )
≡ µ−1 (χ + χ) . (4.4.40)
∂X
The dual action (4.4.39) is recognizable as the action for a nonlinear σ-model (see sec.
4.1.b, e.g. (4.1.23)).

We can also perform the reverse duality transformation, that is, start with a the-
ory described by a chiral scalar superfield and find an equivalent theory described by a
tensor multiplet. Although we can find the model dual to an arbitrary tensor multiplet
model, the reverse is not true: For a chiral scalar model, possibly with interactions to
other chiral and/or gauge multiplets, we can find the dual tensor model only if the origi-
−1 χ
nal action depends only on χ + χ, or equivalently, defining η ≡ µe µ , on ηη. Thus,
starting with an action
#
2
Sχ = µ d 4 x d 4 θ IK (µ−1 (χ + χ)) (4.4.41)

we can write the first order action

#
2
S =µ
′′
d 4 x d 4 θ [IK (X ) + µ−1GX ] (4.4.42)

Varying G yields X = µ−1 (χ + χ) and (4.4.41), whereas varying X leads to (4.4.37),

where now f is the (inverse) Legendre transform of IK :

f (µ−1G ) = IK (X (µ−1G)) + µ−1GX (µ−1G ) ,

∂IK (X )
= − µ−1G . (4.4.43)
∂X

We can now find a second tensor multiplet model dual to the free chiral scalar mul-
tiplet. We begin with
# #
2 4 4
d 4x d 4θ e µ
−1 (χ+χ)
Sη = µ d x d θ ηη = (4.4.44)
192 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

We write this in first order form as

#
2
S ′
imp =µ d 4 x d 4 θ [e X − GX ] , (4.4.45)

and find the dual action

#
2
S imp = − µ d 4 x d 4 θ G ln G , (4.4.46)

where now G has a nonvanishing classical vacuum expectation value. This duality holds
even in the presence of supergravity, where the equivalence is to the superconformal
form of the scalar multiplet (ηη), as opposed to the (χ + χ)2 form obtained from
(4.4.36); in general curved superspace, these two Lagrangians are different. The model
described by the action S imp (4.4.46) is called the improved tensor multiplet, because,
unlike the unimproved action (4.4.34), S imp is conformally invariant. (Both are globally
scale invariant, but the action for an antisymmetric tensor by itself is not invariant
under conformal boosts.)

It is interesting to study what happens to the interactions of a chiral multiplet

after a duality transformation. Here we consider interactions with a gauge vector multi-
plet (for other examples, see secs. 4.5e, 4.6, 5.5). For an action of the form
# #
S gauge = d x d θ IK (χ + χ +V ) + d 4 x d 2 θ W 2
4 4
(4.4.47)

where V is an abelian gauge superfield, W is its field strength, and

IK (χ + χ +V ) ≡ IK (ln (ηeV η)), we can write the first order action
# #
S gauge = d x d θ [IK (X +V ) + GX ] + d 4 x d 2 θ W 2 .
′ 4 4
(4.4.48)

Varying G gives (4.4.47); varying X gives

# #
S G = d x d θ [ f (G ) − GV ] + d 4 x d 2 θ W 2 .
′ 4 4
(4.4.49)

Thus the gauge interactions of the original theory are described by the single term GV
in the dual theory (this coupling is gauge invariant because G is linear). Observe that
for the usual kinetic term IK = ηeV η, the dual theory has the improved Lagrangian
1
−G ln G − GV (4.4.46) rather than − G 2 − GV (4.4.34). It is straightforward to verify
2
 4.4. Superforms 193

that the latter theory describes a massive vector multiplet rather than a scalar coupled
to a vector. Another way to describe a massive vector multiplet, but without vector
fields, is in terms of the chiral spinor Φα alone by adding a mass term (which breaks the
gauge invariance (4.4.30)) to S k (4.4.34):
#
1 2
Sm = − m d 4 x d 2 θ (Φα )2 + h. c. . (4.4.50)
2

S k + S m describes a massive vector multiplet. The component antisymmetric tensor

describes a massive spin 1 field, χα and ψ α describe a massive Dirac spinor, A is a mas-
sive scalar, and B is auxiliary.

d. Gauge 3-form multiplets

d.1. Real 3-form

We begin by considering a real 3-form. It has the following independent coeffi-

cient superfields

Γα,β,γ , Γα,β,γ• , Γα,β,c , Γα,β,c

• ,

Γα,(βγ) , Γα,(β•γ)• , Γa , (4.4.51)

where we have used the symmetries of Γ to write it in terms of Lorentz irreducible coeffi-
cients.

Γα,b,c = C β•γ• Γα,(βγ) + C βγ Γα,(β•γ)• ,

Γa,b,c = − ϵabcd Γd = − i (C α• γ•C βγ Γαβ• − C αγC β•γ• Γβ α• ) , (4.4.52)

The independent field strengths are

F α,β,γ,δ , F α,β,γ,δ• , F α,β,γ,• δ• ,

F α,β,γ,d , F α,β,γ,d
• ,

F α,β,(γδ) , F α,β,(γ•δ)• , F α,β,(γδ)

• ,
194 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

F α,b , F . (4.4.53)

The last five field strengths are Lorentz irreducible coefficients, e.g. (see 3.1.22)),

F a,b,c,d = F ϵa,b,c,d = i (C αδC βγC α• γ•C β•δ• − C αγC βδC α• δ•C β•γ• )F . (4.4.54)

We impose the following constraints on the field strengths:

F α,β,γ,δ = F α,β,γ,δ• = F α,β,γ,• δ• = 0 ,

F α,β,γ,d = F α,β,γ,d
• = F α,β,(γ•δ)• = F α,β,(γδ)
• =0 ,

F α,β,(γδ) = 2C α(γC δ)β Π , (4.4.55)

where Π is an undetermined gauge invariant superfield. Solving the constraints gives

Γα,β,γ = Γα,β,γ• = Γα,β,c = Γα,(β•γ)• = 0 ,

Γα,β,c
• = iC αγC β•γ•V ,

Γα,(βγ) = − C α(β D γ)V ,

Γαα• = [D α• , D α ]V , V =V , (4.4.56)

up to a pure gauge transformation of ΓABC . Given the solution, we find

Π = D 2V . (4.4.57)

The prepotential V has gauge transformations

1 •
δV = − (D α ω α + D α ω α• ) , D α ω α• = 0 . (4.4.58)
2

The physical component fields of this multiplet are

φ = Π| = D 2V | , ψ α = D α Π| = D α D 2V ,

h = (D 2 Π + D 2 Π)| = {D 2 , D 2 }V | ,

1 1 •
f = − i (D 2 Π − D 2 Π)| = ∂ Γa | = ∂ αα [D α• , D α ]V | . (4.4.59)
2 a 2
 4.4. Superforms 195

The quantity f is the field strength of the component gauge three-form l αα• = Γαα• |. The
component three-form transforms as (cf. (4.4.33) for f a )

1
•

δl αα• = i (∂ β α• D (β ω α) − ∂ α β D (β• ω α)
• )| , (4.4.60)
2

so that its field strength f is invariant.

The field strength Π is a chiral field of dimension one (determined by ψ α ), and

hence the kinetic action is
#
S = d 4 x d 4 θ ΠΠ . (4.4.61)

It gives conventional kinetic terms for the components φ and ψ α ; the scalar field h is an
auxiliary field and the gauge field l αα• enters the action through the square of its field
strength f . Such a field does not propagate physical states in four dimensions.

The only difference between this multiplet, described by Π, and the usual chiral
scalar multiplet Φ is the replacement of the imaginary part (the pseudoscalar field) of
the F auxiliary field by the field strength of the component gauge three-form. Mass and
interaction terms for Φ can also be used for Π. However, at the component level, after
elimination of the auxiliary fields the theories differ: We no longer obtain algebraic
equations, since f is the derivative of another field l αα• . Another difference is that the
super three-form gauge multiplet cannot be coupled to Yang-Mills multiplets.

d.2. Complex 3-form

A complex super three-form multiplet can be treated in the same way. It has more
independent coefficient superfields:

Γα,β,γ , Γα,β,γ• , Γα,β,• γ• , Γα,• β,• γ• ,

Γα,β,c , Γα,β,c
• , Γα,• β,c
• ,

Γα,(βγ) , Γα,(β•γ)• , Γα,(βγ)

• , Γα,(
• • •
β γ)
,

Γa . (4.4.62)

(For example, Γα(β•γ)• ̸= Γα(βγ)

• .) Correspondingly, there are more independent field
196 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

strengths. These are

F α,β,γ,δ , F α,β,γ,δ• , F α,β,γ,• δ• , F α,β,• γ,• δ• , F α,• β,• γ,• δ• ,

F α,β,γ,d , F α,β,γ,d
• , F α,β,• γ,d
• , F α,• β,• γ,d
• ,

F α,β,(γδ) , F α,β,(γ•δ)• , F α,β,(γδ)

• , F α,β,(
• ••
γ δ)
, F α,• β,(γδ)
• , F α,• β,(
• ••
γ δ)
,

F α,b , F α,b
• , F , (4.4.63)

The constraints however, set more field strengths to zero. The nonzero ones are

F α,β,(γδ) , F α,b , F , (4.4.64)

and we still impose the constraint:

F α,β,(γδ) = 2C α(γC δ)β Π . (4.4.65)

The only form coefficients that are not pure gauge are given by
•
Γα,(βγ) = − C α(β D γ) D ϵ Ψ ϵ• ,

•
2
Γα,(
• • • = − C • •D • D Ψ • = C • •D Ψ •
β γ) α(β γ)
ϵ
ϵ α(β γ) ,

•
Γα,β,c
• = iC αγC β•γ• D ϵ Ψ ϵ• ,

•
Γa = [D α• , D α ]D ϵ Ψ ϵ• , (4.4.66)

(up to arbitrary gauge transformation terms). These expressions allow us to compute Π;

we find that it is expressed in terms of the prepotential Ψα as follows:

Π = D 2 D αΨα , D α• Π = 0 . (4.4.67)

The gauge transformations of the prepotential Ψα are

δΨα = Λα + D β L(αβ) , D α• Λβ = 0 . (4.4.68)

The components contained in the field strength are

A = Π| = D 2 D αΨα | ,
 4.4. Superforms 197

ζ α = D α Π| = D α D 2 D β Ψβ | ,

i •
f = D 2 Π| = ∂ αα [D α• , D α ]D β Ψβ | , (4.4.69)
2

where f is the field strength of a complex 3-form.

This multiplet can be described in terms of two real super 3-form multiplets:
Γ = Γ1 + i Γ2 . The constraints imposed above are the ones given in sec. 4.4.d.1 for Γ1
and Γ2 , plus the additional constraint F α,• β,(
• • • = 0.
γ δ)
This is simply the constraint
•
Π1 + i Π2 = D 2 (V 1 + iV 2 ) = 0, which implies V 1 + iV 2 = D ϵ Ψ ϵ• .

The field strength Π is chiral and of dimension one. Therefore all of the action for-
mulae for the usual chiral scalar can be used for Π. As for the real gauge three-form
multiplet, the equations of motion for the auxiliary fields are no longer purely algebraic.
Again, this multiplet cannot be coupled to Yang-Mills multiplets.

e. 4-form multiplet

The final superform we consider has no physical degrees of freedom. It is

described by a real super 4-form ΓABCD . The field strength supertensor is a super 5-form
F ABCDE . Therefore the field strength with all five vector indices vanishes by antisymme-
try.

As constraints we ‘‘impose’’ the equations F ABCDE = 0. This implies that all of

ΓABCD is pure gauge. Since all field strengths vanish, no gauge invariant action is possi-
ble at the classical level. However, this multiplet (and the corresponding component
form) has some unusual properties at the quantum level, because its gauge fixing term is
not zero.
198 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

4.5. Other gauge multiplets

a. Gauge Wess-Zumino model

In (3.5.3) we noted that a chiral superfield can be expressed in terms of an

unconstrained superfield

Φ = D 2Ψ . (4.5.1)

The field Ψ provides an alternate description of the scalar multiplet. The actions we
considered in secs. 4.1-2 can be expressed in terms of Ψ. For example, the Wess-Zumino
action (4.1.1-2) becomes
#
1
S = d 4 x d 4 θ [(D 2Ψ)(D 2Ψ) + m(ΨD 2Ψ + ΨD 2 Ψ)
2

λ
+ (Ψ(D 2Ψ)2 + Ψ(D 2Ψ)2 )] , (4.5.2a)
3!

where we have used

# #
4 2 2 2
d x d θ (D Ψ) = d 4 x d 4 θ ΨD 2Ψ , (4.5.2b)

etc.

The solution (4.5.1) of the chirality constraint introduces the abelian gauge invari-
ance
•
δΨ = D α ω α• (4.5.3)

where ω α is an unconstrained superfield. The gauge invariant superfield Φ is the chiral

field strength of the gauge superfield Ψ, and the action is obviously invariant. The
gauge transformation can be used to go to a WZ gauge, by algebraically removing all the
components of Ψ except those that appear in Φ. In this formulation the coupling to
super Yang-Mills can be achieved by covariantizing the derivatives: If Φ is covariantly
•
chiral, then Φ = ∇ 2Ψ, δΨ = ∇ α ω α• . Under Yang-Mills gauge transformations Ψ trans-
forms in the same way as Φ.
 4.5. Other gauge multiplets 199

b. The nonminimal scalar multiplet

This multiplet has a number of interesting features: (a) It is a multiplet where

the spin of auxiliary fields exceeds that of the physical fields; (b) none of the component
fields (in a Wess-Zumino gauge) of this multiplet are gauge fields, even though the multi-
plet is described by a gauge superfield; (c) this multiplet, unlike other scalar multiplets,
forms a reducible representation of supersymmetry.

We introduce a general spinor superfield Ψα with the gauge transformation

δΨα = D β L(αβ) , L(αβ) arbitrary. An action that is invariant under this gauge transforma-
tion is
#
•
S =− d 4 x d 4 θ ΣΣ , Σ = D αΨα• , (4.5.4)

The field strength Σ satisfies D 2 Σ = 0, so that it is a complex linear superfield; in con-

trast, the field strength of the tensor gauge multiplet is a real linear superfield.

The component fields of the multiplet are

A = Σ| , ζ α• = D α• Σ| ,

λα = D α Σ| , P αβ• = D β• D α Σ| ,

1
F = D 2 Σ| , χα• = D α D α• D α Σ| . (4.5.5)
2

The component action is

# •

S = d 4 x [A A + ζ β i ∂ α β• ζ α − |F |2

•
+ 2|P αα• |2 + χα λα + χα λ α• ] , (4.5.6)

with propagating complex A and ζ α . All the other fields are auxiliary.

In terms of superfields we can see that the action (4.5.4) describes a scalar multi-
plet. The constraint and field equations for Σ are:

D 2Σ = 0 , D α• Σ = 0 . (4.5.7)

These are the same as those for the on-shell chiral scalar multiplet, but with constraint
and field equation interchanged.
200 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

To see the reducibility of this multiplet we use the superprojectors of sec. 3.11.
The action can be written
# •

S = d 4 x d 4 θ Ψβ i ∂ α β• [2Π1,0 + (Π2, 1 + + Π2, 1 − )]Ψα ,

2 2

1
Π1,0Ψα = − −1
D α D 2 D γ Ψγ ,
2

1 •
Π2, 1 ±Ψα = −1
D 2D α (D γ Ψγ ± D γ•Ψγ ) . (4.5.8)
2 2

Thus the multiplet consists of three irreducible submultiplets: one of superspin 0, and
1
two of superspin .
2

In contrast to the chiral scalar multiplet, it is not possible to introduce arbitrary

mass and nonderivative self-interaction terms. However, we can write down the action
#
S = d 4 x d 4 θ f (Σ , Σ) , (4.5.9)

where f (z , z ) = f (z , z ). Thus, for example, it is possible to formulate supersymmetric

nonlinear σ-models in terms of the nonminimal scalar multiplet. Furthermore, the non-
minimal multiplet can be coupled to Yang-Mills multiplets by covariantizing the deriva-
tives: Σ = ∇αΨα .

* * *

Just as for the tensor multiplet (sec. 4.4.c), we can exhibit the duality of the non-
minimal scalar and chiral multiplets by writing a first order action. Most of the discus-
sion of sec. 4.4.c.2 has an analog for the nonminimal scalar multiplet, except, since the
multiplet is described by a linear superfield, the Legendre transform is two dimensional
and hence there is no restriction on the form of the nonlinear σ-model that can be
described. The two first order actions equivalent to (4.5.9) are (see (4.4.38,42)):
#
S = d 8 z [ f (X , X ) − ΦX − ΦX ] ,
′

D α• Φ = 0 , (4.5.10a)

and
 4.5. Other gauge multiplets 201

#
S =′′
d 8 z [IK (X , X ) + ΣX + ΣX ] ,

D 2Σ = 0 , (4.5.10b)

where X is a complex unconstrained superfield and IK is the Legendre transform of f .

Just as for the tensor multiplet, this duality transformation can be performed even in
the presence of interactions with other multiplets (e.g., supergravity).

c. More variant multiplets

As we have seen, several inequivalent superfield formulations can describe the

1
same set of physical states. The (0, ) multiplet can be described by a chiral scalar, a
2
gauge two-form, real (or complex) gauge three-forms, or a gauge spinor. The chiral
scalar provides the simplest representation. All but one of the other representations are
obtained by replacing either the physical or auxiliary field by component 2-forms or
3-forms respectively. We call these ‘‘variant’’ representations of the scalar multiplet. In
general, variant representations are very restricted in either their self-interactions or cou-
plings to other multiplets. In this subsection we discuss variant vector and tensor multi-
plets.

c.1. Vector multiplet

We have described super Yang-Mills theories in terms of a hermitian gauge prepo-

tential V . It contains a component vector as its highest spin component:
1
Aa = [D α• , D α ]V |. There is, however, a smaller superfield that contains a component
2
vector: A chiral dotted spinor Φα• (D α• Φβ• = 0), has as its highest spin component

Aa ≡ − i (D α• Φα + D αΦα• )| . (4.5.11)

The superfield Φα• is reducible; it can be bisected (see (3.11.7)

1 1
(1 ± K )Φα• = (Φα• −
+ −1
D 2i ∂ α α• Φα ) . (4.5.12)
2 2

Since we want to describe a gauge theory, we gauge away one of the representations
instead of constraining it. The transformation
202 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

δΦα• = D α• (D β Λβ + D β• Λβ ) = D 2 Λα• − i ∂ α α• Λα = (1 + K )D 2 Λα• ,

D α Λβ• = 0 , (4.5.13)

can be used to gauge away (1 + K )Φα• , and leaves (1 − K )Φα• inert. The gauge parame-
•

ter D β Λβ + D β• Λβ describes the tensor multiplet of sec. 4.4.

The field strength for Φα is the lowest dimension local gauge invariant superfield:
•
W α = D 2 (1 − K )Φα = D 2Φα + i ∂ α αΦα• . (4.5.14)

The field strength W α is the familiar chiral field strength of the gauge multiplet
described by V , but now with Γα = Φα , Γα• = Φα• , Γa = − i (D α• Φα + D αΦ α• ), and
Aa = Γa |. Its components are the same, except for the auxiliary field D′:

λα ≡ W α | ,

1 1 •
f αβ ≡ D (αW β) | = ∂ (αγ• Aβ) γ ,
2 2

1 1 • 1 •
D≡ iD αW α = ∂ αα (D α• Φα − D αΦα• )| = ∂ αα B αα• . (4.5.15)
2 2 2

We thus see the auxiliary pseudoscalar has been replaced by the field strength of a gauge
three-form. The action is still (4.2.14), and in components differs from the usual vector
1 •
multiplet only by the replacement D′ → ∂ αα B αα• .
2

This variant form of the vector multiplet can also be obtained from the covariant
approach of sec. 4.2: In the abelian case, we can solve the constraint F αβ = D (α Γβ) = 0
1
by Γα = Φα . Just as the usual solution Γα = − i D αV directly in terms of the real
2
scalar prepotential fixed some of the K invariance (corresponding to a gauge condition
•
1
D α D 2 Γα = − D α D 2 Γα• , which implies K = (Λ + Λ)), the variant solution fixes some of
2
the K invariance with the gauge condition D α Γα = 0 (which, together with the con-
•
straint, implies that Γα is antichiral), reducing it to K = D α Λα + D α• Λα .

The covariant derivatives can be used to couple this abelian multiplet to matter.
However, Γα = Φα is not a solution to the nonabelian constraints, nor to the abelian
ones in general curved superspace. Thus, like other variant multiplets, it is limited in
the types of interactions it can have.
 4.5. Other gauge multiplets 203

c.2. Tensor multiplet

The variant representation for the tensor multiplet is described by the same chiral
spinor superfield Φα as the usual one (4.4.27), but the gauge transformation is changed.
In place of the real scalar parameter L (4.4.30), we use the chiral dotted spinor Λα• .
Explicitly, the modified gauge variation is (cf. (4.5.14))
•
δΦα = D 2 Λα + i ∂ α α Λα• . (4.5.16)

This leads to the usual transformations for t (αβ) and leaves A and ψ α invariant (see
1 •
(4.4.31)). But the variation of the component field B = i (D α• Φα − D αΦα )| is
2

1 •
δB = − ∂ ααv αα• . (4.5.17)
2

Therefore this component field is a gauge four-form.

The action for Ψα is the usual one proportional to G 2 , and the four-form does not
appear in G 2 and in the action. However, at the quantum level, the four-form would
reappear in gauge fixing terms, and chiral dotted spinors would appear as ghosts.

d. Superfield Lagrange multipliers

We have given a number of examples of supersymmetric theories that describe

the scalar multiplet on shell (same physical states) but are inequivalent off shell. They
differ primarily in the types of interactions they can have. So far, we have found that
the simplest formulation of the scalar multiplet, a chiral scalar superfield (or, equiva-
lently even off shell, D 2 on a general scalar), has the most general interactions. How-
ever, in extended supersymmetry none of the known N = 2 theories equivalent on-shell
to the N = 2 scalar multiplet can have all the interactions known from on-shell formula-
tions. We now introduce a form of the N = 1 scalar multiplet that is a submultiplet of
an off-shell formulation of the N = 2 scalar multiplet. Its most distinctive feature is a
superfield that appears only as a Lagrange multiplier. This formulation has some draw-
backs in common with the tensor multiplet (another theory equivalent to the scalar mul-
tiplet on shell), to which it is closely related: (1) It does not have renormalizable self-
#
interactions (i.e, those corresponding to terms d 4 xd 2 θ P(Φ)), (2) it is restricted in its
couplings to supergravity, and (3) it is not an off-shell representation of the (chiral) U (1)
symmetry which the scalar multiplet has on shell (corresponding to Φ ′ = e iλΦ). On the
204 4. CLASSICAL, GLOBAL, SIMPLE (N=1) SUPERFIELDS

other hand, unlike the tensor multiplet (and most variant forms of the scalar multiplet),
it does couple to Yang-Mills. However, because of (3), it can only be a real representa-
tion of any internal symmetry group, and couples to Yang-Mills accordingly (e.g., it can
couple to a U (1) vector multiplet only as a doublet of opposite charges).

The formulation is described by a general spinor gauge superfield with a term in

the action like that of the chiral spinor gauge superfield of the tensor multiplet, and a
real scalar superfield Lagrange multiplier with a term in the action that constrains to
zero the submultiplets in the former term that don’t occur in the tensor multiplet.
Explicitly, the action is
#
1
S =− d 4 x d 4 θ ( F 2 + Y G) ,
2

1 •
1 •
F = (D αΨα + D αΨα• ) , G = i (D αΨα − D αΨα• ) ; (4.5.18)
2 2

with gauge invariance

δΨα = D β L(αβ) (4.5.19)

in terms of a general superfield gauge parameter. The Bianchi identities and field equa-
tions are:

Bianchi identities : D 2 (F − iG) = 0 , (4.5.20a)

field equations : D α• (F + iY ) = G = 0 . (4.5.20b)

If we make a ‘‘duality’’ transformation by switching the Bianchi identities with the field
equations, we obtain the usual formulation of the scalar multiplet, with the identifica-
tions

1 1
F = (Φ + Φ) , Y = i (Φ − Φ) , G =0 . (4.5.21)
2 2

In terms of irreducible representations of supersymmetry, this theory contains

1 1 1
superspins +
⃝ + ⃝0 in Ψα and +0
⃝ in Y . The representations in Y set the corre-
2 2 2
sponding ones in Ψ to zero on shell, leaving the remaining one as a tensor multiplet.
However, unlike the tensor multiplet, the physical spin zero states are all represented by
scalars: The vector obtained by projection from [D α• , D α ]F is an unconstrained
 4.5. Other gauge multiplets 205

auxiliary field, appearing at θ 2 θ order in Ψ, whereas the corresponding vector in the ten-
sor multiplet is the transverse field strength of the tensor appearing at θ order in the
chiral spinor Φα . This theory has the same component-field content as the nonminimal
scalar multiplet plus an auxiliary real scalar superfield.

Coupling to Yang-Mills is straightforward; however, since both Ψ and Ψ appear in

F and in G, Ψ must transform under a real representation of the Yang-Mills group. We
covariantize by replacing the spinor derivatives i