arxiv: v2 [hep-th] 12 Mar 2018

Transcription

1 RENORMALIZABILITY OF N = SUPER YANG-MILLS THEORY IN LANDAU GAUGE WITH A STUECKELBERG-LIKE FIELD M. A. L. Capri, D.M. van Egmond, M. S. Guimaraes, O. Holanda, S. P. Sorella, R. C. Terin, and H. C. Toledo Departamento de Física Teórica, Rua São Francisco Xavier 54, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, , Maracanã, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. arxiv: v [hep-th Mar 0 We construct a vector gauge invariant transverse field configuration V H, consisting of the wellknown superfield V and of a Stueckelberg-like chiral superfield Ξ. The renormalizility of the Super Yang Mills action in the Landau gauge is analyzed in the presence of a gauge invariant mass term m MV H, MV H a power series in V H. Unlike the original Stueckelberg action, the resulting action turns out to be renormalizle to all orders. I. INTRODUCTION In this work we study the renormalizility properties of a N = non-elian gauge theory defined by a multiplet containing a massive vectorial excitation. The model we study is the supersymmetric version of a Stueckelberg-like action, in the sense that the massive gauge field is constructed by means of a compensating scalar field, thus preserving gauge invariance. The history of Stueckelberg-like models is very well reviewed in [. Traditionally, most of the investigations have studied such models as potential alternative to the Higgs mechanism of mass generation, but as discussed in [ there seems to be an unavoidle clash between renormalizility and unitarity in non-elian Stueckelberg-like models. The original Stueckelberg model is elian and has been rigorously proved [3 to be renormalizle and unitary, but its non-elian version is known to be perturbatively non-renormalizle [4 6. Physically, the problem is due to the high energy behavior of the longitudinal vector degree of freedom. In the elian case it is perfectly compensated by the dynamics of the Stueckelberg field but in non-elian theories this seems to be not so, resulting in incurle divergent interacting amplitudes or unbounded cross sections. Nevertheless there have been recent interests in the study of massive vector models out the Higgs. The main motivation comes here from the continuous efforts to understand the low energy behavior of strongly interacting gauge theories, such as QCD. Confinement is a very important phenomenon in this context, but the physical mechanism behind it is still an open problem. A way to obtain information out this phenomenon is through lattice investigations which have revealed that the gluon propagator shows a massive behavior in the deep infrared non-perturbative region, while also displaying positivity violations which precludes a proper particle propagation interpretation [7 3. Therefore, in a confining theory, the issue of the physical unitarity is a quite complex and difficult topic. Of course, physical unitarity must hold in terms of the physical excitations of the spectrum which are bound states of quarks and gluons like, for instance, mesons, barions, glueballs, etc. Though, the positivity violation of the two-point gluon correlation functions is taken as a strong evidence of confinement, signalling that gluons are not excitations of the physical spectrum of the theory. Nevertheless, renormalizility should be expected to hold since one wants to recover the good UV behavior of QCD. This trend of investigations led to many works that proposed modifications of the Yang-Mills theory to accommodate the lattice results [4. Recent developments along these lines involve the introduction of modified Stueckelberg-like models[9 33 constructed as a generalization of a class of confining effective theories known as Gribov-Zwanziger scenarios [34, 35, see [36 for a review. Unlike the standard Stueckelberg action, these modified models enjoy the pleasant property of being renormalizle to all orders, see [9 33 for a detailed account on the construction of these modified models and on their differences the standard Stueckelberg theory. Let us also also mention here that, recently, a BRST invariant reformulation of the Gribov-Zwanziger theory has been achieved [3, 33, allowing its extension from the Landau gauge to an arbitrary covariant gauge. Electronic address: caprimarcio@gmail.com Electronic address: duifjemaria@gmail.com Electronic address: msguimaraes@uerj.br Electronic address: ozorio.neto@uerj.br Electronic address: silvio.sorella@gmail.com Electronic address: rodrigoterin3003@gmail.com Electronic address: henriqcouto@gmail.com

2 In this work we will carry out a supersymmetric generalization of the Stueckelberg-like model proposed in [9 33. We prove that the present supersymmetric generalization is renormalizle, a task that will be done by means of a set of suitle Ward identities. Supersymmetric generalizations of Stueckelberg-like models was studied since very early [7 but mostly concentrated on the better behaved elian models see [ 0, for instance, for a proposal of an elian Stueckelberg sector in MSSM, some constructions of non-elian theories tensor multiplets [,, 4 and also composite gauge fields [3. The work is organized as follows. In Section II we construct the N = Supersymmetric massive classical action. In Section III we discuss the gauge fixing and the ensuing BRST symmetry. Sections IV and V are devoted to the derivation of a set of suitle Ward identities and to the characterization of the most general invariant local counterterm following the setup of the algebraic renormalization. In Section VI we provide a detailed analysis of the counterterm by showing that it can be resorbed into the starting classical action through a redefinition of the fields and parameters, thus estlishing the all orders renormalizility of the model. Section VII contains our conclusion. The final Appendices collect the conventions and a few additional technical details. II. PURE N = SUSY STUECKELBERG-LIKE YANG-MILLS THEORY In order to define the N = Supersymmetric Stueckelberg-like Yang-Mills theory, we start a real elian gauge superfield, Vx,θ,θ = C iθχ iθχθσ µ θa µ i θθm in i θθm iniθθ θ λ i σµ µ χ iθθθ λ i σµ µ χ θθθθ D C, and a massless chiral superfield that acts as a Stueckelberg field Ξx,θ,θ = ξx θψxiθσ µ θ µ ξx θθfx i θθ µ ψxσ µ θ 4 θθθθ ξx Ξx,θ,θ = ξx θψx iθσ µ θ µ ξx θθfx i θθθσ µ µ ψx 4 θθθθ ξx. 3 It is then possible to construct a gauge-invariant superfield which is invariant under the elian gauge transformations V H x,θ,θ = Vx,θ,θiΞx,θ,θ iξx,θ,θ, 4 V V iφ iφ, Ξ Ξ φ, Ξ Ξ φ. 5 We now need a generalization of the definition of V H to the non-elian case. We start the gauge-invariant superfield 4 every component now in the adjoint representation of the gauge group G, V H V Ha T a, a =,...,dimg where the T a are the generators in the adjoint. Now, the fundamental object is e V H instead of V H. The non-elian generalization of 4 is e V H = He V H, 6 where H = e iξ, U = e iφ and V is a usual gauge superfield. The gauge transformations then have to be e V Ue V U, H U H, H H U, 7

3 3 such that V H is gauge invariant. For infinitesimal transformations, this explicitly yields gauge V = i L Vφφ i L V cothl V/ φ φ = iφ φ i [V,φφ i [V,[V,φ φov 3, gauge Ξ = i L Ξφ L ΞcotL Ξ/ φ = φ i [Ξ,φ [Ξ,[Ξ,φOΞ3, 9 gauge Ξ = i L Ξ φ L Ξ cotl Ξ/ φ = φ i [Ξ,φ [Ξ,[Ξ,φOΞ3, 0 L A X = [A,X. To first order elian gauge limit in φ this reproduces 5. Now, using all of the ove definitions we can construct a gauge invariant N = Supersymmetric Stueckelberg-like Yang-Mills model and L SYM = g tr W α W α m tr MV H, W α D e V D α e V, M = V Ha V Ha σ c V Ha V Hb V Hc σ cd V Ha V Hb V Hc V Hd..., 3 where σ c,σ cd,... are a set of infinite arbitrary dimensionless parameters. As one can figure out, the fact that the generalized mass term MV H is an infinite power series V H follows from the dimensionless character of V H itself. Though, from the pertubative point of view, only the first quadratic terms of the series 3, i.e. m V Ha V Ha will enter the expression of the superfield propagator. The remaining terms represent an infinite set of interaction vertices, a feature which is typical of the non-elian Stueckelberg-like theories. Notice that the first term of the action, the pure supersymmetric Yang-Mills term W α W α, is invariant under V V H. III. SUPERSYMMETRIC GAUGE INVARIANT STUECKELBERG-LIKE YANG-MILLS ACTION IN THE LANDAU GAUGE The supersymmetric extension of the Landau gauge is [ D D V = 0. 4 We thus need to add the following terms to the action L SGF = Tr AD D V c.c. = Tr AD V AD V, 5 where we introduced the auxiliary superfield A, the following field equations A L SGF = D D V = 0, A L SGF = D D V = 0. 6 Following the standard BRST procedure, the gauge fixing condition can be implemented in a BRST invariant way by defining the auxiliary field as the BRST variation of the anti-ghost field c,, namely sc = A, so that we can add the following BRST invariant term to the action in order to fix the gauge. [ L SGF = s tr c D V c.c. = tr [AD D V c D D sv c.c.. 7

4 Looking at the gauge fixing 7, it is important to realize that for any local quantum field theory involving dimensionless fields, one has the freedom of performing arbitrary re-parametrization of these fields. Examples of this are the two-dimensional non-linear sigma model [3,[39 and quantum field theories a Stueckelberg field entering the gauge fixing term [40. In the case of the gauge fixing 7, this means that we have the freedom of replacing V a by an arbitrary dimensionless function of V a 4 V a F a V = V a α c V b V c α cd V b V c V d α cde 3 V b V c V d V e..., where α c,αcd,α cde 3,... are free dimensionless coefficients. This freedom, inherent to the dimensionless nature of V a, is evident at the quantum level because of the fact that this field renormalizes in a non-linear way [37, 4. Therefore, is expressing precisely the freedom one has in the choice of a re-parametrization for V a. In our case, this means that instead of equation 7 we could have just as well started a term [ s tr [ c D V c.c. s tr c D FVc.c., 9 and this would not have affected the correlation functions of the gauge invariant quantities. The coefficients α c,α cd,α cde 3.. are gauge parameters, not affecting the correlation functions of the gauge invariant quantities. The freedom that we have in the gauge fixing term will become apparent when performing the renormalization analysis. In fact, in section V, we will use a generalized gauge-fixing term S gen gf [ = s tr = tr c D FVc.c. [ AD D V c D D FV V sv c.c., 0 and by employing the corresponding Ward identities, we can handle the ambiguity that is inherent to the gauge fixing. The counterterm will then correspond to a renormalization of the gauge parameters α c,α cd,α cde 3.., as will become clear in section VI. One of the striking features ensuring the renormalizility of the non-supersymmetric modified Stueckelberg-like models introduced in [9 33, 40 was the implementation of a transversality constraint on the analogue of the gauge invariant field V H. This transversality constraint gives rise to a deep difference between the modified models constructed in [9 33, 40 and the conventional non-renormalizle Stueckelberg model. It is precisely the implementation of this transversality constraint which ensures the UV renormalizility of the modified model. We remind here the reader to reference [40 for a detailed account on the differences between the conventional and the modified Stueckelberg action. We then pursue here the same route outlined in [9 33, 40 and impose the transversality constraint also in the supersymmetric case. More precisely, this amounts to require that the superfield V H obeys the constraint D D V H = 0, which, at the level of the action, can be implemented by introducing the following terms L T = BD D V H η a D D G a V Hη,η c.c., G a V H η,η = η a η a i fc V H,b η c η c i famr f mpq η p η p V Hq V Hr OV H3. The field B is a Lagrange multiplier implementing the transversality constraint, while the fields η, η are a set of ghost fields needed to compensate the Jacobian which arises from the functional integral over B and Ξ in order to get a unity, see [9 33, 40 for the non-supersymmetric case. Thus, adopting the Landau gauge, as well as the transversality condition, the total action becomes

5 5 Σ SPY M = d 4 xl SYM L SP L SGF L T = g tr W a W a m tr MV H [ s tr c D D V BD D V H η a D D G av Hη,η c.c. = g tr W a W a m tr MV H [ A a D D V a c a D D G a V BD D V H η a D D G av Hη,η c.c.. 3 This action enjoys the exact BRST nilpotent symmetry sv a = G a Vc,c, sv Ha = 0, sξ a = G a Ξc, sξ a = G a Ξ c, and sc a = i fc c b c c, sη a = 0 sc a = i fc c b c c sη a = 0 sc a = A a, sa a = 0, sη a = 0, sb a = 0, sc a = A a, sη a = 0, G a V c,c = ca c a fc V b c c c c i famr f mpq c p c p V q V r OV 3, G a Ξ c = ca fc Ξ b c c famr f mpq c p Ξ q Ξ r OΞ 3, G a Ξ c = ca fc Ξ b c c famr f mpq c p Ξ q Ξ r OΞ 3 4 ss SPYM = 0, s = 0. 5 IV. RENORMALIZABILITY ANALYSIS In order to analyze the renormalizility of the action 3, we start by estlishing the set of Ward identities that will be employed for the study of the quantum corrections. Following the algebraic renormalization procedure [37, we have first to add some external sources coupling to non-linear BRST transformations of the fields and of the composite operators entering the classical action. Therefore, we need to introduce a set of external BRST invariant sourcesω a,λ a,λ a,l a,l a coupledtothenon-linearbrstvariationsofv a,ξ a,ξ a,c a,c a aswellassourcesπ a,ψ a coupled to the BRST invariant composite operators V H,G a V H,

6 6 sω a = sψ a = sπ a = sλ a = sλ a = sl a = sl a = 0. 6 We shall thus start the BRST invariant complete action Σ defined by Σ SPY M = Σ SYM Σ SP Σ SGF Σ T Σ EXT 7 Σ SPYM = g tr W a W a m MV H { } A a D D V a c a D D G a V c.c. } {BD D V H η a D D G av c.c. H } {Ω a G av Π a V H,a Ψ a G av H { Λ a G aξ i facb L a c b c c } c.c.. All quantum numbers, dimensions and R-weights of all fields and sources are displayed in tles IV A and IV B. TABLE IV A: Quantum numbers of the fields θ a D a V a V Ha Ξ a Ξ a c a c a c a c a A a B a η a η a η a η a dimension -/ / c-ghost # η -ghost # R-weight TABLE IV B: Quantum numbers of the sources Ω a Ψ a Λ a Λ a L a L a Π a dimension c-ghost # η-ghost # R-weight A. Ward identities and algebraic characterization of the invariant counterterm The complete action Σ SPY M obeys a large set of Ward identities, being: The Slavnov-Taylor identity: SΣ = [ Ω a V a Λ a Ξ a L a Aa ca c a c.c. = 0 9 The gauge-fixing equations: A a = D D V a, Ā = D D V a 30

7 7 The equation for the Lagrange multiplier B a : B a = D D Π a, B a = D D Π a 3 The anti-ghost equations: G a Σ = 0, Ḡ a Σ = 0, 3 G a = c a D D Ω a and Ḡ a = c a D D Ω a 33 The η Ward identities F a Σ = 0, Fa Σ = 0, 34 F a = η a D D Ψ a and F a = η a D D Ψ a 35 The linearly broken ghost equation [6 G Σ = clas, 36 G = c c ifc c a A b c c ifc c a A b, 37 and clas = if c Ω a V b if c L a c b if c L a c b. 3 Notice that the breaking term clas is purely linear in the quantum fields. As such, it will be not affected by the quantum corrections [6, 37. The linear symmetries under supersymmetry, translations, R-transformations and rigid transformations are expressed by the Ward identities W X Σ = i φ X φ φ Σ = 0, X = Q α,p µ,r and rigid transformations 39

8 V. THE ALGEBRAIC CHARACTERIZATION OF THE INVARIANT COUNTERTERM AND RENORMALIZABILITY In order to characterize the most general invariant counterterm which can be freely added to all order in perturbation theory, we follow the setup of the algebraic renormalization [37 and perturb the classical action 3, by adding an integrated local quantity in the fields and sources, Σ CT, that has R-weight 0, ghost number 0,0, is hermitian and has dimension 3 in case of a chiral superfield, or in case of a vector superfield. We demand thus that the perturbed action, ΣεΣ CT, where ε is an expansion parameter, fulfills, to the first order in ε, the same Ward identities obeyed by the classical action Σ, i.e. equations 9 to 39. This amounts to impose the following constraints on Σ CT : B Σ Σ ct = 0, 40 ct A a = ct A a = 0 4 CT B a CT = D D Π a, B a = D D Π a 4 G a Σ CT = G a Σ CT = 0 43 F Σ a CT = F a Σ CT = 0 44 G a Σ CT = 0, 45 where B Σ is the so-called nilpotent linearized Slavnov-Taylor operator [37, defined as { B Σ = Ω a V a } { V a Ω a Λ a Ξ a Ξ a Λ a L a c a c a L a Aa c } c.c. a, 46 B Σ B Σ = 0. From equation 40 one learns that Σ CT belongs to the cohomology [37 of the linearized Slavnov- Taylor operator B Σ in the space of the integrated local quantities in the fields and sources ghost number 0,0, R-weight 0 and dimension 3 in case of a chiral superfield, or in case of a vector superfield. Therefore, we can set Σ CT = cohom B Σ, 47 where denotes a zero-dimensional integrated quantity in the fields and sources ghost number -,0 and R-weight 0. The term B Σ in equation 47 corresponds to the trivial solution, i.e. to the exact part of the cohomology of B Σ. On the other hand, the quantity cohom identifies the non-trivial solution, i.e. the cohomology of B Σ, meaning that cohom B Σ Q, for some local integrated Q. In its most general form, cohom is given by cohom = a 0V H g Wα W α m MV H b V H B a D D V H,b b V H V H,b D D B a d η a D D η b c c V H η a V H,b D D η c c c 3 V H η a V H,b D D η c η a η b V H,c D D c c 4 V H c c 6 V H η a V H,b D D η c η a η b V H,c D D c c 7 V H c.c. b 4 V H Π a V H,b d Ψ a η b c c V H V Hc Ψ a η b d 3 Ψa η b B a V H,b D D b 3 V H c c V H η a η b D D V H,c c c 5 V H η a η b D D V H,c c c 9 V H V c Ψ a η b, 4 M = b 0 V Ha V Ha σ c V Ha V Hb V Hc σ cd V Ha V Hb V Hc V Hd..., 49

9 and a 0 V H,b i V H,c c i V H,d i arbitrary coefficients. Then, after implementing the constraints 4 and 43 we find cohom = a 0V H g Wα W α m MV H d Ψa η b d ηa D D η b c.c. d Ψ a η b d η a D D η b c.c. c c V H Ψ a V Hb η c c c V H η a V Hb D D η c c.c. c c V H Ψ a V Hb η c c c V H η a V Hb D D η c c.c. b V H V Hb Π a b V H V Hb D D B a c.c.. 50 Let us now discuss the trivial part of the counterterm, B Σ. The term, taking into account the quantum numbers of the fields and sources, can be parametrized in its most general form as: = F V b Ω a F V b D c a F3 D V b c a D F4 V b c a c.c. [ a L a c b a Ξ b Λ a c.c., 5 9 where, F,..,4 a = [ Fa,..,4 V,Ξ,Ξ a = a [Ξ a = a [Ξ. 5 Imposing the constraint 4 A ab Σ = A a B Σ = 0, 53 and observing from eq. 5 that we can use the relation A a = A a = 0 B Σ A a = B Σ A a = 0, 54 [ A a,b Σ = c a D D Ω, 55 to impose c a D D = D D F Ω V b D F3 D V b D D F4 V b D D F V b = From eq. 56 we find the relations F = F F 3 = 0 F 4 = a, 57

10 0 so that = [ F V b Ω a D c a D c a a La c b a Ξb Λ a c.c.. 5 We can further reduce the number of parameters in Σ CT by noticing that if we set [3 in, the resulting action is Σ SPYM = g tr W a W a [ [ m = Π = Ψ = Λ = Λ = 0, 59 A a D D V a c a D D G a V c.c. B a D D V H,a η a D D G av H Ω a G a V [ i facb L a c b c c c.c. c.c., 60 which is nothing but the Super Yang-Mills gauge-fixed action in the Landau gauge see appendix B, the addition of the following terms [ BD D V H η a D D G av c.c.. 6 H However, upon integration over B,η,η,Ξ, these terms give rise to a unity. Thus, in the limit 59, the counterterm Σ CT has to reduce to the standard counterterm of N = Super Yang-Mills, which we can be found in appendix B. Implementing this condition, we find the following restrictions on the coefficients in equation 50 and for equation 65 so that cohom = a 0 V H = a 0 d η b d η b c c η c c c η c V Hb = b G a V Hη,η b V H = b, 6 a 0 g Wα W α b V Ha Π a [ F a,..,4[ V,Ξ,Ξ = F a,..,4 [V a [Ξ = a a [Ξ = a m MV H [Ξ, 63 b V Ha D D B a η a D D G a V Hη,η c.c. b Ψ a G a V Hη,η, 64 and = [ F VV b Ω a D c a D c a a La c b a ΞΞb Λ a c.c.. 65

11 For the purpose of the analysis of the renormalization factors at the end of this section, we will rewrite the counterterm Σ CT of the action in its parametrized form, namely as contact terms written in terms of the starting classical action Σ, being given by the following expression Σ CT = a 0 g g b 0 m [ m b b Ψ a Σ Ψ a [ b η a Σ η a σ c σ c σ cd σ cd σ 3 cde F [ F V c V b F a Ξb Ξ a bc a B a Σ B a [ b... c.c. σ cde 3 Ω a Ω c F V b V a V Ξ c Ξ b a Ξbc Λ a Λ c c.c. b c.c. a Σ η η a Π a Σ Π a c.c. V V c V b F Vbc G c V D c a D c a Aa D F V b Aa D F V b. 66 VI. ANALYSIS OF THE COUNTERTERM AND RENORMALIZATION FACTORS Having determined the most general form of the local invariant counterterm, eq.66, we observe, however, that the terms on the last line, S Σc a D F V b c a D F V b = F V V c V b F V bc G c VD c a D c a Aa D F V b Aa D F V b, 67 cannot be rewritten in an exact parametric form in terms of the starting action Σ. This feature is due to dependence of the gauge fixing on the dimensionless field V. As a consequence, the renormalization of the gauge fixing itself is determined up to an ambiguity of the type of eq.. As was mentioned before, this term can be handled by starting the generalized gauge fixing of eq.. This means that we could have equally started a term in the action like [ s tr [ c D V c D V s tr c D FVc D F a V, 6 F a given by eq.. Since F a is now a composite field, we need to introduce it into the starting action through a suitle external source. In order to maintain BRST invariance, we make use of a BRST doublet of external sources R a,p a, of dimension, R-weight 0 and ghost number,0 sr a = P a, sp a = 0 69 and introduce the term sr a F a V = P a F a V R a Fa V cgc V, 70

12 so that the full action is now given by Σ SPYM = g tr W a W a m MV H [ } {A a D D F a V c a D D F a V cgc V c.c. } {BD D V H η a D D G av c.c. H { } Λ a G a Ξ i fc L a c b c c c.c The action Σ SPYM obeys the following Ward identities: The Slavnov-Taylor identity: Ω a G a V Π a V H,a Ψ a G a V H Pa F a V R a Fa V V c G c V. 7 SΣ = { Ω a Pa V a R a } Λ a Ξ a L a c Aa a c c.c. a = 0 7 The gauge-fixing equations: A a = D D P a, The equation for the Lagrange multiplier B a : B a = D D Π a, Ā = D D P a B a = D D Π a 73 The anti-ghost equations: G a Σ = 0, Ḡ a Σ = 0, 74 The η Ward identities G a = c a D D R a and Ḡ a = c a D D R a 75 F a Σ = 0, Fa Σ = 0, 76 F a = η a D D Ψ a and F a = η a D D Ψ a 77 The linear symmetries under supersymmetry, translations, R-transformations and rigid transformations are expressed by the Ward identities W X Σ = i φ X φ φ Σ = 0, X = Q α,p µ,r and rigid transformations. 7

13 Since R and P are a pair of BRST doublet, they do not appear in the non-trivial part of the counterterm [37, so this will remain as in equation 64. On the other hand, the -term becomes 3 = F V b Ω a F V b D c a F 3 D V b c a D F 4 V b c a F V b R a c.c [ a L a c b a Ξ a Λ b c.c.. 79 In a similar fashion as in the analysis of eqs.53 56, we can use the relation [ A a D D P,S a Σ = D D R, to find c a c a D D = D D F V b D F3 D V b D D F4 V b R D D F V b = 0, 0 from which we obtain the relations so that 79 becomes We now set = [ F = F F 3 = 0 F 4 = a, F V b Ω a F V b R a D c a D c a a L a c a a Ξb Λ a c.c.. F V = F 0 F V, F V = α c V c α cd V c V d α cde V c V d V e..., 3 where F 0 = F 0 is the first, V-independent term of the Taylor expansion of F V in powers of V, and F V denotes the remaining V-dependent terms. We find that F 0 is connected to the renormalization of the fields in the gauge-fixing, while F V renormalizes the gauge parameters in eq.. Employing the generalized gauge-fixing 6, we can now write the full counterterm in a complete parametric form, namely Σ CT = a 0 g g b 0 m [ m b B a B a c.c. b Π a Π a b Ψ a Ψ a [ b η a η a c.c. [ b a η η a c.c. σ c σ c σ cd σ cd σ 3 cde σ3 cde... F V c V b F bc Ω a Ω c F V b V a F 0P a P a F 0A a A a F 0A a A a F 0R a R a F a 0c c a F a 0c c a [ a La L b a ca c b a Ξ Ξ c Ξ b a Ξbc Λ a α c F 0a c α c α cd F 0α cd α cd Λ c a ΞΞb Ξ a c.c. α cde 3 F 0α cde 3 α cde 3..., 4

14 where the dots... in the last line denote the infinite set of terms of the kind j α cde.. j F 0α cde.. j α cde j 4, j = 4,...,. 5 The usefulness of rewriting the counterterm 4 in the parametric form becomes clear by casting it into the form R = a 0 g [ g b 0 m m b b Ψ a Ψ a [ b η a η a σ c σ cd σ 3 cde σ c σ cd RΣ = 0, 6 c.c. B a B a [ b... σ cde 3 c.c. b η a η a Π a Π a c.c. F V c V b F bc Ω a Ω c F V b V a F 0P a P a F 0A a A a F 0A a A a F 0R a R a F 0c a c a F 0c a [ a L a L b a c a c b α c F 0α c α c c a a Ξ Ξ c Ξ b a Ξ bc Λ a Λ c a ΞΞ b Ξ a α cd F 0α cd α cd Now, in order to determine the renormalization factors we can use that α cde 3 F 0α cde 3 c.c. α cde ΣΦεΣ CT Φ = ΣΦεRΣΦ = ΣΦ 0 Oε, Φ 0 = Z Φ Φ = εrφoε, 9 where Φ 0 is a short-hand notation for all renormalized quantities: fields, parameters and external sources. We thus find the the following renormalization factors Z g = a 0 Z m = b 0 Z B = Z B = Z Π = Z Ψ = Z η = Z η = Z η = Z η = b ZΩ = Fac V b V c F ZV = F Z P = Z A = Z A = Z R = Z c = Z c = F 0 ZL = Z L = Z c = Zc = a Λ = aac Ξ b Ξc a Ξ Z Λ = aac Ξ b Ξc a Ξ Z ZΞ = a Ξ Z Ξ = a Ξ, 90

15 as well as a multiplicative renormalization of the infinite set of gauge parameters σ c α c,α cd,α cde 3 of equations 3 and, being and σ c 0 = ε σ c σ c σ cd 0 = ε σ ce σ cd,σ cd,σ cde 5 3 and σ3 cde 0 = ε σ 3 cde σ3 cde... 9 α c 0 = F 0α c ε α c α cd 0 = F 0α cd ε α cd α cde 3 0 = F 0α cde 3 ε α cde This shows that the inclusion of the generalized field FV in the gauge fixing leads to the standard renormalization of the fields, parameters and sources. The renormalization of FV itself is encoded in the renormalization of the infinite set of gauge parameters α c,α cd,α cde 3,..., as in eq. 9. Note that both V and Ξ, as well as their sources Ω and Λ, are renormalized in a non-linear way through a power series in V and Ξ, respectively. This is expected, due to the fact that both superfields are dimensionless. However, one has to note that the dimensionless superfield V contains a massive supermultiplet A µ,λ. Despite the fact that V itself renormalizes in a non-linear way due to its dimensionless nature, the component fields A µ,λ do renormalize in fact in a standard multiplicative way through a constant i.e. field independent renormalization factors, a feature which can be checked out by employing the the Wess-Zumino gauge. VII. CONCLUSION In this work we took a first step towards the understanding of Stueckelberg-like models in supersymmetric noneliangaugetheories. The gaugeinvarianttransversefield configurationv H has been investigatedin supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory the Landau gauge. An auxiliary chiral superfield Ξ was introduced that compensates the gauge variation of the vector superfield V, thus preserving gauge invariance of the composite field V H. This gauge invariant composite field allows the construction of a local BRST-invariant massive model, summarized by the action 3. Both V and Ξ are dimensionless, which leads to ambiguities in defining both the mass term and the gauge fixing term. However, working a generalized gauge fixing term, we find that the model turns out to be renormalizle to all orders of perturbation theory, as was discussed in sections V and VI. As a possible future application of the present result, let us mention that the possibility of having constructed a manifestly BRST invariant supersymmetric renormalizle version of the modified Stueckelberg models introduced in [9 33, 40 can open the possibility to investigate the important issue of the non-perturbative phenomenon of the Gribov copies directly in superspace, by generalizing to N = the Gribov-Zwanziger setup. This would enle us to study aspects of the non-perturbative region of N = confining supersymmetric theories, see also [4 for a preliminary attempt in this direction. Acknowledgements The Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico CNPq-Brazil, the Faperj, Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, the SR-UERJ and the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior CAPES are gratefully acknowledged for financial support. S. P. Sorella is a level PQ- researcher under the program Produtividade em Pesquisa-CNPq, 30069/009-7; M. A. L. Capri is a level PQ- researcher under the program Produtividade em Pesquisa-CNPq, 30773/04-6. M. S. Guimaraes is supported by the Jovem Cientista do Nosso Estado program - FAPERJ E-6/0.44/05, is a level PQ- researcher under the program Produtividade em Pesquisa-CNPq, /04-4 and is a Procientista under SR-UERJ.

16 6 Appendix A: Notation V H = V H a T a [ T a,t b = if acb T c = d 4 xd θd θ = d 4 xd θ d S = d 4 xd θ A Appendix B: N = Supersymmetric Yang-Mills For the benefit of the reader, we provide in this appendix a short overview of the well known renormalizility of pure N = standard massless Super Yang-Mills in the Landau gauge. Let us start by giving the complete BRST invariant action, namely Σ SYM = Σ SY M Σ SGF Σ EXT = [ g tr W a W a s c a D V a c a D V a Ω a G a Vc,c i f c L a c b c c i f c La c b c c. B The full action Σ SPYM obeys the Ward identities 30,3,36,39 as well as the Slavnov-Taylor identity: SΣ = { } [ Ω a V a L a Aa ca c a c.c. = 0. B As usual, the counterterm Σ CT can be written as Σ CT = B Σ, B3 = a 0 Tr W α W α, B4 and = F VV b Ω a [ F VV b D c a D c a a La c b c.c.. B5 When constructing the counterterm, we will run into to same parametrizing problem as in section V. Repeating the procedure of section VI, we introduce a doublet R a,p a and the full action is now given by Σ SPYM = g tr W a i W a [ fc L a c b c c c.c. B6 [ } {A a D F a c a D F a V cgc V c.c. Ω a G avc,cp a F a V R a Fa V cgc Vc,c. B7

17 The action obeys the Ward identities 73,74,7 as well as the Slavnov-Taylor identity: { } [ SΣ = Ω a Pa V a R a L a Aa ca c a c.c. = 0. B 7 Making use of the relation [ A a D D P,S a Σ = c a D D R, we find = F V b Ω a F V b R a D c a D c a [ a La c b c.c.. B9 Defining we find the counterterm to be Σ CT = V = F 0 F V F V = αc V c α cd V d α cde 3 V e..., B0 F a 0 g g F 0P a P a F 0A a A a F 0A a A a F 0R a R a F 0c F V b F V a V c V b F ac [ α L a Σ L a α c a Σ c a c.c. α c F 0 α c α cd a c a F 0c Ω a Ω c F 0 α cd a c a α cde 3 F 0 Following the analysis at the end of section VI, for the renormalization factors we obtain Z g = a 0 ZΩ = Fac V b V c F ZV = F Z P = Z A = Z A = Z R = Z c = Z c = F 0 α cde B ZL = Z L = Z c = Zc = a. B Thereby concluding the proof of the renormalizility of N = pure massless Super Yang-Mills action.

18 [ H. Ruegg and M. Ruiz-Alta, The Stueckelberg field, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 9, doi:0.4/s0775x [hep-th/ [ R. Delbourgo, S. Twisk and G. Thompson, Massive Yang-mills Theory: Renormalizility Versus Unitarity, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 3, doi:0.4/s0775x00063 [3 J. H. Lowenstein and B. Schroer, Gauge invariance and Ward identities in a massive vector meson model, Phys. Rev. D 6, doi:0.03/physrevd [4 T. Kunimasa and T. Goto, Generalization of the Stueckelberg Formalism to the Massive Yang-Mills Field, Prog. Theor. Phys. 37, doi:0.43/ptp [5 A. A. Slavnov and L. D. Faddeev, Massless and massive yang-mills field. in russian, Theor. Math. Phys. 3, [Teor. Mat. Fiz. 3, 970. doi:0.007/bf00355 [6 A. A. Slavnov, Massive gauge fields, Teor. Mat. Fiz. 0, [7 R. Delbourgo, A Supersymmetric Stuckelberg Formalism, J. Phys. G, doi:0.0/ ///003 [ B. Kors and P. Nath, A Stueckelberg extension of the standard model, Phys. Lett. B 56, doi:0.06/j.physletb [hep-ph/ [9 B. Kors and P. Nath, A Supersymmetric Stueckelberg U extension of the MSSM, JHEP 04, doi:0.0/6-670/004//005 [hep-ph/ [0 B. Kors and P. Nath, Aspects of the Stueckelberg extension, JHEP 0507, doi:0.0/6-670/005/07/069 [hep-ph/ [ H. Nishino and S. Rajpoot, Variant N= Supersymmetric Non-Abelian Proca-Stueckelberg Formalism in Four Dimensions, Nucl. Phys. B 7, 3 03 doi:0.06/j.nuclphysb [arxiv: [hep-th. [ H. Nishino and S. Rajpoot, N = supersymmetric ProcaStueckelberg mechanism for extra vector multiplet, Nucl. Phys. B 7, doi:0.06/j.nuclphysb [arxiv: [hep-th. [3 H. Nishino and S. Rajpoot, Supersymmetric composite gauge fields compensators, Phys. Lett. B 757, doi:0.06/j.physletb [4 E. Sezgin and L. Wulff, Supersymmetric Proca-Yang-Mills System, JHEP 303, doi:0.007/jhep [arxiv:.305 [hep-th. [5 O. Piguet, Supersymmetry, supercurrent and scale invariance, hep-th/ [6 O. Piguet and S. P. Sorella, The Antighost equation in N= superyang-mills theories, Phys. Lett. B 37, doi:0.06/ [hep-th/ [7 A. Cucchieri, T. Mendes and A. R. Taurines, Positivity violation for the lattice Landau gluon propagator, Phys. Rev. D 7, doi:0.03/physrevd [hep-lat/ [ A. Cucchieri and T. Mendes, What s up IR gluon and ghost propagators in Landau gauge? A puzzling answer from huge lattices, PoS LAT007, [arxiv: [hep-lat. [9 A. Cucchieri and T. Mendes, Constraints on the IR behavior of the gluon propagator in Yang-Mills theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 00, [arxiv: [hep-lat. [0 A. Cucchieri and T. Mendes, Constraints on the IR behavior of the ghost propagator in Yang-Mills theories, Phys. Rev. D 7, [arxiv: [hep-lat. [ A. Cucchieri and T. Mendes, Infrared behavior and infinite-volume limit of gluon and ghost propagators in Yang-Mills theories, PoS C ONFINEMENT, [arxiv:0.36 [hep-lat. [ D. Dudal, O. Oliveira and P. J. Silva, Källén-Lehmann spectroscopy for unphysical degrees of freedom, Phys. Rev. D 9, no., doi:0.03/physrevd [arxiv: [hep-lat. [3 J. M. Cornwall, Positivity violations in QCD, Mod. Phys. Lett. A, doi:0.4/s [arxiv: [hep-ph. [4 R. Alkofer, W. Detmold, C. S. Fischer and P. Maris, Analytic properties of the Landau gauge gluon and quark propagators, Phys. Rev. D 70, doi:0.03/physrevd [hep-ph/ [5 D. Dudal, S. P. Sorella, N. Vandersickel and H. Verschelde, New features of the gluon and ghost propagator in the infrared region from the Gribov-Zwanziger approach, Phys. Rev. D 77, [arxiv: [hep-th. [6 D. Dudal, J. A. Gracey, S. P. Sorella, N. Vandersickel and H. Verschelde, A refinement of the Gribov-Zwanziger approach in the Landau gauge: infrared propagators in harmony the lattice results, Phys. Rev. D 7, [arxiv: [hep-th. [7 M. Tissier and N. Wschebor, Infrared propagators of Yang-Mills theory from perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D, doi:0.03/physrevd..070 [arxiv: [hep-ph. [ S. Strauss, C. S. Fischer and C. Kellermann, Analytic structure of the Landau gauge gluon propagator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 09, doi:0.03/physrevlett [arxiv:0.639 [hep-ph. [9 M. A. L. Capri et al., Exact nilpotent nonperturbative BRST symmetry for the Gribov-Zwanziger action in the linear covariant gauge, Phys. Rev. D 9, no. 4, doi:0.03/physrevd [arxiv: [hep-th. [30 M. A. L. Capri et al., More on the nonperturbative Gribov-Zwanziger quantization of linear covariant gauges, Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 6, doi:0.03/physrevd [arxiv: [hep-th. [3 M. A. L. Capri et al., Local and BRST-invariant Yang-Mills theory in the Gribov horizon, Phys. Rev. D 94, no., doi:0.03/physrevd [arxiv: [hep-th. [3 M. A. L. Capri, D. Fiorentini, M. S. Guimaraes, B. W. Mintz, L. F. Palhares and S. P. Sorella, Local and renormalizle

19 framework for the gauge-invariant operator A min in Euclidean Yang-Mills theories in linear covariant gauges, Phys. Rev. D 94, no. 6, doi:0.03/physrevd [arxiv: [hep-th. [33 M. A. L. Capri, D. Dudal, A. D. Pereira, D. Fiorentini, M. S. Guimaraes, B. W. Mintz, L. F. Palhares and S. P. Sorella, Nonperturbative aspects of Euclidean Yang-Mills theories in linear covariant gauges: Nielsen identities and a BRSTinvariant two-point correlation function, Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 4, doi:0.03/physrevd [arxiv: [hep-th. [34 V. N. Gribov, Quantization of Nonelian Gauge Theories, Nucl. Phys. B 39, 97. doi:0.06/ X [35 D. Zwanziger, Action From the Gribov Horizon, Nucl. Phys. B 3, doi:0.06/ [36 N. Vandersickel and D. Zwanziger, The Gribov problem and QCD dynamics, Phys. Rept. 50, 75 0 doi:0.06/j.physrep [arxiv:0.49 [hep-th. [37 O. Piguet and S. P. Sorella, Lect. Notes Phys. M 995. [3 A. Blasi, F. Delduc and S. P. Sorella, Nucl. Phys. B 34, doi:0.06/ [39 C. Becchi and O. Piguet, Nucl. Phys. B 35, doi:0.06/ [40 M. A. L. Capri, D. M. van Egmond, G. Peruzzo, M. S. Guimaraes, O. Holanda, S. P. Sorella, R. C. Terin, H. C. Toledo 07 [arxiv: [hep-th [4 S.T. Gates, M.T. Grisaru, M. Rocek 93 [arxiv: 0000 [hep-th [4 M. M. Amaral, Y. E. Chifarelli and V. E. R. Lemes, J. Phys. A 47, no. 7, doi:0.0/75-3/47/7/07540 [arxiv:30.50 [hep-th. 9