Prague 2007

QUANTUM RELATIVISTIC DYNAMICS
C. BECCHI
Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Genova,
Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Genova,
via Dodecaneso 33, 16146 Genova (Italy)
Abstract
The aim of these lectures is to describe a construction, as self-contained as possible, of the
dynamics of quantum fields.
They are based on a short description of Haag-Ruelle scattering theory and of its relation
with LSZ theory and on an introduction to renormalization theory based on Wilson-Polchinski
renormalization group method which is compared with the subtraction method. The most im-
portant results concerning e.g. Wilson operator product expansion and the origin of anomalies
are also briefly described.
1
Lectures given at Prague in June 2007
1
Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 Difficulties with quantized fundamental fields 2
3 Construction of a relativistic scattering theory 4
4 Properties of the time-ordered functions 13
5 The L.S.Z. reduction formulae 15
6 The functional formalism and the Effective Action 18
7 The construction of the theory, the Euclidean Quantum Field Theory 24
8 The Functional Integral in Euclidean Quantum Field Theory 27
9 The Wilson Effective Action in Euclidean Quantum Field Theory 30
10 The Effective Proper Generator 36
11 The subtraction method 45
12 Bases of local operators in the subtraction scheme and the Wilson operator
product expansion 53
13 The Quantum Action Principle 57
A Diagrammatic Expansions 67
A The Wilson Action 71
B Bibliography 72
1 Introduction
Quantum field theory was born from a generalization of QED to other interactions. The main
characters of the theory where:
1) a one-to-one correspondence between particles and fields, the vector potential for the
photon and the Dirac field for the electron.
2) the Lorentz invariance of a finite number of dynamical field equations with the fields
transforming according to finite dimensional representation of SL(2C), the universal covering
of the Lorentz group.
3) the locality of the field equations.
1
The most famous extensions were the Fermi theory of weak interactions, where the neutrino
field was introduced and the Yukawa theory of strong interaction where a scalar field was
introduced assuming the existence of a corresponding spin-less particle identified after the
discovery of the π meson.
This gave origin to a new branch of Physics, that of Elementary Particles. More recently,
even though the name survived, the idea of the identification of relativistic dynamics with an
elementary particle theory based on assumption (1) above was abandoned due to the discov-
ery of a large number of new particles, among which many were unstable. The idea to give
up assumption (1) and formulate a theory involving more elementary fields is rather old (cf.
e.g. W.Heisenberg) and eventually found a satisfactory fulfillment within the framework of
non-abelian gauge theories and their application to strong interactions (QCD). In fact it was
understood that, keeping the three points, one is forced to introduce unphysical fields, and the
concept of confinement excluded the identification of strong interacting fundamental fields with
particle fields in the sense of QED.
The multitude of new particles suggested the idea of abandoning a theory based on a finite
number of field equations and on a limited set of fundamental fields extending the concept of
particle to any discrete eigenvalue of the mass, thus including the bound states, and introducing
on the same ground a local operator for each particle (interpolating field). The hope was the
possibility of reducing the dynamics to direct relations among scattering amplitudes. This
possibility was strongly supported by the successful formulation of a relativistic scattering
theory by Haag and many others. This remains one of the basic foundation of relativistic
quantum mechanics and will be the subject of next sections.
On the contrary the success of QCD and a better understanding of Renormalization Theory
gave new strength to the original scheme where, however point (1) was replaced by the idea
that the dynamics be constructed in terms of fundamental fields and, in general, interpolating
fields be composite operators.
The point of view adopted in these lecture notes is coherent with the above reasoning. We
start from the relativistic scattering theory. Then we come to the dynamical construction based
on renormalized local field theory.
2 Difficulties with quantized fundamental fields

We consider the simplest case of a scalar field φ. Our metric choice is g 00 = 1. It turns out
that φ is not an operator. This can be seen using the Lehmann spectral representation for the
two point vacuum correlator:
< Ω|φ(x)φ(y)|Ω >=< Ω|φ(x − y)φ(0)|Ω >≡ C(x − y) , (1)
due to translation invariance. It is clear that C gives information about the properties of
the vector state φ(x)|Ω >. Inserting into the correlator a complete set of states labeled by
their total momentum p~, their total mass M and further quantum numbers α , excluding the
vacuum state since we assume here for simplicity < Ω|φ|Ω >= 0, one gets , without any loss of
2
generality:
XZ
C(x) = d3 p < Ω|φ(x)|~p, M, α >< p~, M, α|φ(0)|Ω >
M,α
XZ
= d3 pe−ipM x | < p~, M, α|φ(0)|Ω > |2 , (2)
M,α
where we have used translation

√ invariance and defined by pM the four vector with time and
space components EM = p2 + M 2 , p~.
Among the above states we shall distinguish single particle states, corresponding to discrete
eigenvalues of the mass and scattering states. The single particle states are assumed to be
uniquely identified by their momentum, mass and helicity. The single particle masses satisfy
0 < m1 ≤ m2 ≤ ·· ≤ mNp . In the above formulae the sum over the mass value M should be
understood as the sum over the the single particle state masses and the integral over those of
the scattering states.
Eq.(2) can be further simplified using the fact that φ is a Lorentz scalar and hence, with
the chosen normalization of vector states, that is < p~, M, α|~p0 , M, α >= δ(~p − p~0 ), one has:
s
M
< p~, M, α|φ(0)|Ω >= < ~0, M, α|φ(0)|Ω > . (3)
EM
Introducing the mass density function: ρ(M ) = 16π 3 α M | < ~0, M, α|φ(0)|Ω > |2 which is the
P
sum of a finite number of Dirac deltas corresponding to the single particle, or bound, states
and a continuous part corresponding to the scattering states, we have:
Np
X
ρ(M ) = ρa δ(M − ma ) + θ(M − 2m1 )R(M ) , (4)
a=1
so that: Z ∞ Z
d3 p −ipM x
Z ∞
(+)
C(x) = dM ρ(M ) 3
e ≡ dM ρ(M )∆M (x) . (5)
0 16π EM 0
Now it is apparent that φ(x)|Ω > has infinite norm, due to the divergence of the momentum
integral, and hence is not a state vector even if there is only a single discrete mass contribution.
This difficulty is overcome by noticing that the identification of a single space point needs an
infinite amount of energy and hence the value of a field at a point must be necessarily ill defined.
One can therefore consider the field smeared over a finite space region d r χ(~r − ~r0 )φ(~r0 , t) ≡
R 3 0
φχ (~r, t) assuming χ real, supported by a small space region and of C ∞ class, that is, infinitely
differentiable.
In this case one has:
Z ∞ Z
d3 p
||φχ (~0, 0)|Ω > ||2 = dM ρ(M ) |χ̃(~p)|2 . (6)
0 EM
Now the momentum integral converges since χ̃(~p) is a fast decreasing function at infinity due
to the smoothness of χ. However there remains the problem of the convergence of the M
3
integral which requires ρ(M ) to vanish at infinity since one has asymptotically dM
R
M
ρ(M ). As a
1−
matter of fact for purely dimensional-scale-invariance reasons one expects ρ(M )M to vanish
at infinity for any positive , since ρ(M ) has the dimension of an inverse mass, and hence the
above norm is expected to be finite.
The above result is however not general enough. Had we considered the time derivative of
the smeared field, which is of course an independent observable, we would have obtained an
infinite norm for φ̇χ (~0, 0)|Ω >, same result, of course, for the D’Alambertian of the field.
Thus one must conclude that local operators must be smeared in space and time. We shall
consider for example:
Z Z
dt0 d3 r0 χ(|~r − ~r0 |)χ(t − t0 )φ(~r0 , t0 ) ≡ φχ (~r, t) , (7)
where χ can have either compact support, such as an interval, in which case the smeared
operator is called local, or be rapidly vanishing, the resulting operator being called almost-
local. Mathematically this means that the basic fields must be considered operator valued
distributions.
As we shall see these smeared operators allow to construct a relativistic scattering theory.
However they are of no help for the construction of an interacting theory. Indeed the interacting
theory must be based on strictly local field equations, that is, equations involving strictly local
composite operators built in terms of products of fundamental fields at the same space-time
point. We shall see in the following that to overcome this difficulty one must have recourse to
a rather technical and sophisticated tool which is called Renormalization Group .
We now sketch the construction of scattering theory.
4
3 Construction of a relativistic scattering theory
We sketch Haag’s construction. Haag considers generalized local, or almost-local, operator
fields of the form:
Z Z
Q(x) = dyf (x − y)φ(y) + dy dzf (x − y, x − z)φ(y)φ(z) + ·· , (8)
where φ is the fundamental field and the coefficient functions are assumed C ∞ and, either
of compact support (denoted by D), or rapidly decreasing at infinity (denoted by S). The
presence of terms non-linear in the fundamental field may be necessary to deal with bound
states. There is however the possibility, which is consistent with renormalization theory, to
introduce renormalized, strictly local (i.e. distributions) composite operators Φ(x), by analogy
with the Wick ordered monomials of free field theory. The latter are monomials of the free fields
and their derivatives at the same space-time point ordered shifting the annihilation operators
to the right and the creation operators to the left; in this case the non linear terms in the above
expression could be unnecessary. The explicit construction of these operators is postponed
after the construction of Renormalization Theory. In general Φ is, either a fundamental, or a
composite, local field transforming according to a finite dimensional representation under the
action of the Lorentz group.
Having in mind the construction of scattering amplitudes it is convenient to introduce in
correspondence with the a-th single particle a local, and in general composite, field Φa (x) for
any 1 ≤ a ≤ Np such that the matrix element < p~, a|Φa (0)|Ω >≡ √ 1 3 ζa does not vanish.
16π Ea
If we assume that the number of discrete mass eigenvalues is finite we can, without loss of
generality, refine the choice of the Φa (x)’s by the requirement that their vacuum expectation
values vanish together with the matrix elements < p~, a|Φb (0)|Ω > for a 6= b and that |ζa | ≡ 1.
Then, if we assume time reversal invariance, ζa ≡ 1. Therefore we have:
1
< p~, a|Φb (0)|Ω >≡ √ δa,b , < Ω|Φa (0)|Ω >≡ 0 . (9)
16π 3 Ea
Notice that the second condition is trivially satisfied if the field is not scalar. In the case of a
scalar field the condition is implemented subtracting a constant, which is a trivial scalar field,
from the field operator.
Studying the scattering theory, we limit our discussion to almost local operators of the form:
Z
Qa (x) = dyf (x − y)Φa (y) , (10)
where f is a function of class D or S . For simplicity we shall consider only operators associated
with scalar fields, and we shall deal only with scalar particles and scalar bound states. However
our analysis can be extended without major difficulties to particles with any spin. With our
simple choice the Lehmann representation (5) for the two-field vacuum expectation value that
we call, as it is commonly done, 2-point Wightman functions holds true in general, however the
expected asymptotic behavior of the spectral function ρ(M ) depends on the nature of the field.
The commutator of two almost local operators is expected to vanish faster than any inverse
power of their space distance if the time distance is kept fixed.
5
The physical Hilbert space is assumed to coincide with a Fock space of scattering states.
The vacuum state |Ω > is assumed to be an isolated eigenvector of the mass operator, which
means that all the particles and bound states involved have positive mass larger than a given
mass gap m.
The core of Haag’s construction is the cluster property that we are going to describe and
which is a natural consequence of the mass gap.
Les us consider the almost-local operators (10) and consider the long distance, fixed time,
behavior of the 2-point Wightman function < Ω|Qa (x)Qb (0)|Ω >. Using an obvious general-
ization of (5) we have:
Z ∞ Z
d3 p Z
< Ω|Qa (x)Qb (0)|Ω >= dM ρa,b (M ) dx0 dy 0 fa (x − x0 )
0 16π 3 EM
0 0
fb (−y 0 )eipM (x −y ) + < Ω|Qa (0)|Ω >< Ω|Qb (0)|Ω >
Z ∞ Z
d3 p
= dM ρa,b (M ) e−ipM x fã (−pM )f˜b (pM )
0 16π 3 EM
+ < Ω|Qa (0)|Ω >< Ω|Qb (0)|Ω > (11)
where
ρa,b (M ) = δa,b δ(M − ma ) + θ(M − mNp )16π 3 M < Ω|Φa (0)|~0, M, α >< ~0, M, α|Φb (0)|Ω >
X
α
(12)
is a symmetric matrix if the interpolating fields are Hermitian. We have introduced f (p) ≡ ˜
dxe−ipx f (x) that is assumed to be of class S. It follows from the absence of mass-less particles
R
that ρa,b (~p, M )fã (−pM )f˜b (pM )/EM is C ∞ in p~ and hence from the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma
the above 2-point function tends to < Ω|Qa (0)|Ω >< Ω|Qb (0)|Ω > faster than any inverse
power of r for large r ≡ |~x|.
Notice the we have crucially exploited the mass gap condition. Indeed if the mass sum
would receive contributions from mass-less states and f would not vanish at p~ = 0 the above
integrand would not anymore belong to the C ∞ class and hence the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma
could not be used.
As a matter of fact the two-point function for space-like distance r of the points vanishes
at infinite distance as exp(−m1 r).
The above result suggests the introduction of the truncated, or connected, Wightman func-
tions. Up to 2-points we define:
< Ω|Qa (x)Qb (0)|Ω >≡< Ω|Qa (x)Qb (0)|Ω >C

+ < Ω|Qa (x)|Ω >C < Ω|Qb (0)|Ω >C
< Ω|Qa (x)|Ω >=< Ω|Qa (0)|Ω >≡< Ω|Qa (0)|Ω >C =< Ω|Qa (x)|Ω >C . (13)
In the second line we have use the translation invariance of the vacuum state. Comparing
(11) and (13) we see that the connected 2-point Wightman function vanishes at fixed time and
infinite distance faster that any inverse power of the distance.
This result can be generalized to any n-point Wightman function. Let d be a purely space-
like four-vector, d0 = 0 , d2 = −R2 , consider a set of n almost-local operators Qa , for
6
a = 1 · · , n. Let χσi be the characteristic function of a subset σ of the first n integers; χσi = 1
if i belongs to σ, χσi = 0 otherwise. If R → ∞ the n-point function:
n
Qa (xa + dχσa )|Ω >→< Ω|
Y Y Y
< Ω| Qa (xa + d) Qa (xa )|Ω > , (14)
a=1 a∈σ a6∈σ
faster that any inverse power of R since the operators at distance R commute up to negligible
corrections . Notice that the operator products appearing in (14) and in the following formulae
are ordered with the index increasing from the left to the right-hand side. Now we can treat
the right-hand side of (14) as a 2-point function:
Y Y
< Ω| Qa (xa + d) Qa (xa )|Ω >
a∈σ a6∈σ
XZ ∞ Z
d3 p < Ω|
Y
= dM Qa (xa + d)|~p, M, α >
α m a∈σ
XZ ∞ Z
d3 p e−ipM d
Y
< p~, M, α| Qa (xa )|Ω >= dM
a6∈σ α m
Y Y
< Ω| Qa (xa )|~p, M, α >< p~, M, α| Qa (xa )|Ω > . (15)
a∈σ a6∈σ
Taking into account the C ∞ smothness in P~ of the product of matrix elements in the last line
of (15), much in the same way as for (11), we conclude that
n
Qa (xa + dχσa )|Ω >→< Ω|
Y Y Y
< Ω| Qa (xa + d)|Ω >< Ω| Qa (xa )|Ω > . (16)
a=1 a∈σ a6∈σ
As a matter of fact the study of the p~ dependence of the matrix elements requires an analysis
more difficult than a simple use of Lorentz covariance. One must use the fact that in the
absence of mass-less particles the action of the Lorentz group on the Q’s is C ∞ in the strong
topology.
Thus generalizing (13) we define implicitly the connected n-point functions by the following
cluster decomposition formula:
n
Y X Y Y
< Ω| Qa (xa )|Ω >≡ < Ω| Qa (xa )|Ω >C < Ω| Qb (xb )|Ω >
a=1 σ1 a∈σ b6∈σ1
n
X X k
Y Y
= < Ω| Qa (xa )|Ω >C (17)
k=1 {Πj ,j=1,··,k} j=1 a∈Πj
where σ1 runs over all the subsets of the first n integers containing the first one and the index
sets Πj for j = 1, · · · , k are partitions of the first n integers, the second sum above running
over all such partitions. Then the connected n-point functions vanish faster than any inverse
power of the maximum space distance among the points if times are kept fixed.
This is the cluster property upon which Haag’s theory is based. For future convenience we
can translate our results into the functional language introducing a tool that will be very useful
in the following.
7
We associate to every almost-local operator Qa (x) a source J(x, θ) of class S where θ is a
variable accounting for the position of the operator in the ordered product appearing in the
left-hand side of Eq.(17). Then we can introduce Θ as the θ-ordering operator and define the
functional generator of the Wightman functions:
R
d4 xdθJ(x,θ)Q(x)
W (J) ≡< Ω|Θe |Ω >
∞ Z Z ∞ Z θ1
4 4
X
≡ < Ω| d x1 · ·d xn dθ1 J(x1 , θ1 )Q(x1 ) dθ2 J(x2 , θ2 )Q(x2 )
n=0 −∞ −∞
Z θn−1
··· dθn J(xn , θn )Q(xn )|Ω > . (18)
−∞
If the connected n-point function generator W (J)C is defined in a completely analogous way,
it is immediate to verify from (17) that:
W (J) = eW (J)C . (19)
Coming back to Haag’s construction we introduce positive/negative frequency solutions of

the Klein-Gordon equation (∂ 2 + m2a )ψa (x) = 0
1 Z
d3 p
ψa(s) (x) = 3 √ ψ̃(~p)eispma x (20)
(2π) 2 2Ema
where sk is either + or −, ψ̃(~p) is of class D and support Sψ .

We also introduce the corresponding generalized destruction (s = +)/creation (s = −)
operators;
" #
(s) s
Z
3 ∂ ∂ (s) Z
↔
Bψa (t)=i dx Q ψa(s) (x)
a (x) − Qa (x) ψ (x) ≡ i s
d3 xψa(s) (x)∂0 Qa (x) ,
x0 =t ∂x0 ∂x0 a x0 =t
(21)
and Qa (x) = dyfa (x − y)Φa (y) , with fã (Ema , p~) = 1 on Sψ .
R
One can study the vacuum expectation value:

m
Y (s )
< Ω| Bψak (t)|Ω > . (22)
k
k=1
(s)
Taking into account that < Ω|Bψb (t)|Ω >≡ 0 for all b’s, due to our choice of the local
fields, it turns out that in the limit |t| → ∞ (22) vanishes unless it contains the same number
of generalized creation and destruction operators. More precisely the asymptotic time limit
of (22) reduces to the sum over all the possible pairings of B (+) ’s and B (−) ’s of the vacuum
expectation values of the pair products.
This result can be proven applying the cluster decomposition (17) to (22) and using the
fact that ψa(±) (x) in (20) and its time derivative satisfy the following inequalities:
|ψa(±) (x)| < A|x0 |−3/2 ,

AN |~x|
|ψa(±) (x)| < 0 , f or any N if Sψ 3 . (23)
[|x | + |~x|]N |x0 |
8
The contribution of a k > 2 point connected term in the cluster decomposition of (22) is:
k
!Z
∂
d3 x1 · · · d3 xk (ψ̇a(s11 ) (x1 ) − ψa(s11 ) (x1 )
Y
−sl i )···
l=1 x0i ≡t ∂x01
∂
(ψ̇a(skk ) (xk ) − ψa(skk ) (xk ) ) < Ω|Qa1 (x1 )Qa2 (x2 ) · · · Qak (xk )|Ω >C (24)
∂x0k
which can be decomposed in the sum of 2k terms of the form:

Z k
(d3 xj ψ̂a(sjj ) (xj )) < Ω|Q̂a1 (x1 )Q̂a2 (x2 ) · · · Q̂ak (xk )|Ω >C ,
Y
(25)
x0i ≡t j=1
where the functions ψ̂ are solution of the Klein Gordon equation and satisfy (23) and the Q̂
are quasi-local operators satisfying (10).
Now, changing integration variables and exploiting translation invariance, (25) can be writ-
ten:
k
Z Y
t3k (d3 vj ψ̂a(sjj ) (~vj t, t)) < Ω|Q̂a1 (~v1 t, t)Q̂a2 (~v2 t, t) · · · Q̂ak (~vk t, t)|Ω >C
j=1
Z k
3k
d3 v1 ψ̂a(s11 ) (~v1 t, t) (d3 wj ψ̂a(sjj ) ((~v1 + w
Y
=t ~ j )t, t))
j=2
~ 2 )t, t) · · · Q̂ak ((~v1 + w

< Ω|Q̂a1 (~v1 t, t)Q̂a2 ((~v1 + w ~ k )t, t)|Ω >C
Z k
3k
d3 v1 ψ̂a(s11 ) (~v1 t, t) (d3 wj ψ̂a(sjj ) ((~v1 + w
Y
=t ~ j )t, t))
j=2
< Ω|Q̂a1 (~0, 0)Q̂a2 (w

~ 2 t, 0) · · · Q̂ak (w
~ k t, 0)|Ω >C . (26)
Due to the cluster property the connected vacuum expectation value vanishes
q Pfaster than any
inverse power of the the maximum distance among the points, that is of t2 kl=2 wl2 , (e.g. as
2
Pk 2
e−t l=2 wl ). Thus, if the supports of ψ̃ai overlap the w-integrals give a contribution propor-
tional to |t|−3(k−1) times the absolute value of the product of ψ̂’s, which, on account of the first
inequality in (23) amounts to |t|−3k/2 . Since the integral with respect to ~v1 is limited by (23) to
a sphere of radius one, we find that (26) vanishes proportionally to |t|−3(k−2)/2 . Notice however
that if the supports of ψ̃’s do not overlap (26) vanishes faster than any inverse power of |t| due
to the second inequality in (23). Notice that this is independent of the si ’s, that is of the choice
of generalized creation or destruction operators.
Therefore, in the cluster decomposition of (22) one is left with 2-point connected terms only.
Considering the 2-point cluster terms and referring for simplicity to (11) one has instead:
(s ) (s )
< Ω|Bψa11 (t)Bψa22 (t)|Ω >C
Z
∂ ∂
= (−s1 s2 ) d3 x1 d3 x2 (ψ̇a(s11 ) (x1 ) − ψa(s11 ) (x1 ) 0
)(ψ̇a(s22 ) (x2 ) − ψa(s22 ) (x2 ) 0 )
x0i ≡t ∂x1 ∂x2
9
< Ω|Qa1 (x1 )Qa2 (x2 )|Ω >C
Z
∂ ∂
= (−s1 s2 ) d3 x1 d3 x2 (ψ̇a(s11 ) (x1 ) − ψa(s11 ) (x1 ) 0
)(ψ̇a(s22 ) (x2 ) − ψa(s22 ) (x2 ) 0 )
x0i ≡t ∂x1 ∂x2
Z ∞
Z
dM
d3 p ρa ,a (~p, M )fã (−pM )f˜b (pM )e−ipM (x2 −x1 )
0 16π 3 EM 1 2
Z ∞
Z
dM
= (−s1 s2 ) d p3
ρa ,a (~p, M )fã (−pM )f˜b (pM )
0 EM 1 2
(EM + s1 Ema1 )(EM − s2 Ema2 )
q ψ̃a1 (−s1 p~)ψ̃a2 (s2 p~)e−i(s1 Ema1 +s2 Ema2 )t . (27)
4 Ema1 Ema2
From the asserted C ∞ smoothness of the functions ρa1 ,a2 (see Eq. (12)) and ψ̃a and from the
Riemann-Lebesgue lemma it turns out that (27) vanishes faster than any inverse power of |t|
unless ma1 = ma2 and s1 = −s2 and the supports of the ψ̃’s overlap, in which case (27) it is
t-independent.
Thus we conclude that the n-point functions of generalized creation/destruction operators
have non-trivial asymptotic limit only if n is even and the number of creation operators equals
that of destruction ones. In this case one has:
m 2n
Y (s ) X
lim < Ω| Bψajj (t)|Ω >= δm,2n δma1 ,mai δs1 ,−si
|t|→∞
j=1 i=2
2n
(s ) (s ) Y (s )
< Ω|Bψa11 Bψaii |Ω > lim < Ω| Bψajj (t)|Ω > . (28)
|t|→∞
j=2,j6=i
In the special case in which the destruction operators lie on the left-hand side and their number
equals that of the creation operators, one has:
n n n
Y (+) Y (−) XY (+) (−)
lim < Ω| Bψai (t) Bψaj (t)|Ω >= δai .aπi < Ω|Bψai Bψaπ |Ω > , (29)
|t|→∞ πi i=1
i
i=1 j=1
where πi is a permutation of the corresponding indices.

(−)
This equation implies that in the state vector m k=1 Bψak (t)|Ω > and in the limit |t| → ∞
Q
the order of the B (−) operators is immaterial. It is indeed immediate to verify that the norm of
the difference of two such vectors with different ordering of the same operators vanishes in the
limit. If furthermore the supports of the ψ̃’s do not overlap the norm of the difference vanishes
faster than any inverse power of |t|.
It is possible to get a stronger result with almost local operators of the form:
Z
Qma (x) ≡ dyfma ((x − y)2 )Qa (y) , (30)
2
where f˜ma (p2 ) ≡ dxfma (x2 )e−ipx has compact support contained in the region (p2 − m2a ) <
R
and small enough to include only the four momenta of single particle states with mass ma
10
and satisfies f˜ma (m2a ) = 1 , The stronger result is due to the fact that each Qma (x) acting on
the vacuum creates a single particle state of mass ma :
XZ
Qma (x)|Ω >= d3 p |~p, M, α >< p~, M, α|Φa (0)|Ω > eipM x
M,α
Z
1
f˜(pM )f˜ma (M 2 ) = d3 p √ |~p, a > eipma x f˜(pma ) (31)
16π 3 Ea
and hence from Eq. (12) we get
ρa,b (~p, M ) = δa,b δ(M − ma ) . (32)

(∓)
We label the corresponding generalized creation/destruction operators by: Cψa (t) . The crucial
new point is that:
d (−)
C (t)|Ω >= 0 , (33)
dt ψa
as it is easy to verify. This implies that;
m
d d Y (−)
Ψψa1 ,·· ψam (t) ≡ C (t)|Ω >→|t|→∞ 0 (34)
dt dt k=1 ψak
since, the derivative of each factor of the operator product can be shifted to the right up to
asymptotically vanishing contributions. Furthermore in the present case (28) becomes:
m 2n
Y (s ) X
lim < Ω| Cψajj (t)|Ω >= δm,2n δma1 ,mai δs1 ,+ δsi ,−
|t|→∞
j=1 i=2
2n
(s ) (s ) Y (s )
< Ω|Cψa11 Cψaii |Ω > lim < Ω| Cψajj (t)|Ω >
|t|→∞
j=2,j6=i
2n
X
= δm,2n δma1 ,mai δs1 ,+ δsi ,−
i=2
Z 2n
(s )
d3 p ψ̃a1 (~p)ψ̃ai (~p) lim < Ω|
Y
Cψajj (t)|Ω > . (35)
|t|→∞
j=2,j6=i
Thus
(out/in)
lim Ψψa1 ,·· ψam (t) = Ψψa1 ,·· ψam , (36)
t→±∞
and the convergence rate is faster than any inverse power of |t| if the supports of the ψ̃’s do
not overlap. Otherwise the rate is that of |t|−3/2
From (35) one can easily verify that:
n Z
(out/in) (out/in)
d3 p ψ̃a∗j (p)ψ̃b0 πj (~p)
X Y
hΨψa1 ,·· ψam |Ψψ0 ,·· ψb0 i = δn,m δaj ,bπj (37)
b1 n
πk ,k=1,··,n j=1
11
(out/in)
which implies that the asymptotic states Ψψa1 ,·· ψam must be interpreted as scattering states
and can be written in the form:
n
(out/in) Y (out/in)†
|Ψψa1 ,·· ψam >= aψaj |Ω > , (38)
j=1
(out/in)†
where aψ are the creation operators in the Fock space of the in/out scattering states and
satisfy the commutation rules:
h i Z
(out/in) (out/in)†
aψa∗ , aψb = δa,b d3 p ψ̃a∗ (~p)ψ̃b0 (~p) . (39)
It is a natural hypothesis of relativistic scattering theory that the finite linear combinations
of vectors (38) define a dense subset of the Hilbert space. This condition is called asymptotic
completeness
What we have found until now leads to a relation between scattering amplitudes and Wight-
man functions. However the explicit calculations rely more on the time-ordered functions, that
we shall introduce in next section, than on Wightman functions. The bridge between time-
ordered functions and scattering amplitudes is given by the LSZ reduction formulae. These are
based on a further important result of Haag’s scattering theory which comes from the study of
the asympotic behavior of the matrix element:
(out/in) (s) (out/in)
lim hΨψa0 ,·· ψa0 n |Bψ”c (t)|Ψψa1 ,·· ψam i . (40)
t→±∞ 1
This matrix element can be decomposed according:

(out/in) (s) (out/in) (out/in) (s) (out/in)
hΨψa0 ,·· ψa0 n |Bψ”c (t)|Ψψa1 ,·· ψam i = hΨ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa0 n (t)Bψ”c (t)Ψψa1 ,·· ψam (t)i
1 1
h i
(out/in) (s) (out/in) (out/in)
+hΨ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa
0 (t)|Bψ” (t)|
n c
Ψψa1 ,·· ψam − Ψψa1 ,·· ψam (t) i
1
h i
(out/in) (out/in) (s) (out/in)
+h Ψ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa0 n − Ψ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa0 n (t) |Bψ”c (t)|Ψψa1 ,·· ψam i . (41)
1 1
Now, using again (27), (28) and (29), and on the basis of asymptotic completeness, one can
(s)
verify that Bψ”c (t) is bounded by a positive power of E in the subspace of the Hilbert space
spanned by the scattering states with energy lower than E. It follows that the second and third
terms in the right-hand side vanish in the asymptotic limit. Thus one finds that the limit (41)
coincides with: n m
Y (+) (s) Y (−)
lim < Ω| Cψa0 (t)Bψ”c (t) Cψb (t)|Ω > , (42)
t→±∞ j i
j=1 i=1
From (35) and (29) one sees that this limit is given by:
n
X (+) (−) Y (+) (−)
δn,m+1 δs,− δc,aπ1 < Ω|Cψa0 Bψ”c |Ω > δaπi ,bi < Ω|Cψa0 Cψb |Ω >
π1 πi i
πj i=2
m
X (+) (−) Y (+) (−)
+δm,n+1 δs,+ δc,bπ1 < Ω|Bψ”c Cψbπ |Ω > δai ,bπi < Ω|Cψa0 Cψbπ |Ω > .
1 i i
πi i=2
(43)
12
Therefore one has:
(out/in) (s) (out/in) (out/in) (out/in)† (out/in)
lim hΨ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa
0 |Bψ” (t)|Ψψ ,·· ψ
c a1 am
i = δs,− hΨ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa
0 |aψ”
c
|Ψψa1 ,·· ψam i
t→±∞ 1 n 1 n
(out/in) (out/in) (out/in)

+δs,+ hΨ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa
0 |aψ”∗
n c
|Ψψa1 ,·· ψam i . (44)
1
(out/in)
Taking into account asymptotic completeness we find that we can replace either Ψ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa0 n ,
1
(out/in)
or Ψψa1 ,·· ψam with a generic vector of a finite energy subspace of the Hilbert space and hence
we have:
(out) (s) (out) (out)†
lim hΨ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa0 n |Bψ”c (t)|Ψi = δs,− hΨ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa0 n |aψ”c |Ψi
t→∞ 1 1
(out) (out)
+δs,+ hΨ0 ψa0 ,·· ψa0 n |aψ”∗c |Ψi . (45)
1
and
(s) (in) (in)† (in)
lim hΨ0 |Bψ”c (t)|Ψψa1 ,·· ψam i = δs,− hΨ0 |aψ”c |Ψψa1 ,·· ψam i
t→−∞
(in) (in)
+δs,+ hΨ0 |aψ”∗c |Ψψa1 ,·· ψam i , (46)
with fast convergence in the case of non-overlapping momentum wave functions.

This weak asymptotic limit result is the basis of the L.S.Z. construction of the scattering
amplitudes that we shall describe in next sections.
13
4 Properties of the time-ordered functions
We have thus shown how asymptotic states can be built in field theory. This implicitly allows
the construction of scattering amplitudes from Wightman functions. It turns out however that
constructive field theory is better formulated in terms of time-ordered functions, even if, as we
shall see in a moment, these functions are more difficult to define than Wightman functions.
An n-point time-ordered function is formally defined in terms of Wightman n-point functions
by the following formula:
n n−1
θ(x0πi − x0πi+1 ) < Ω|Φπ1 (xπ1 ) · ·Φπn (xπn )|Ω > ,
Y X Y
< Ω|T ( Φa (xa ))|Ω >≡ (47)
a=1 {πi },i=1,··,n i=1
where, as above, πi labels the permutations of indices. Since the Wightman functions of strictly
local operators (fields) are distributions and θ’s are discontinuous, in general the above formula
does not make sense in general even in the framework of distribution theory. We consider, for
example the case of two points.
τa,b (x) ≡< Ω|T (Φa (x)Φb (0))|Ω >= θ(x0 ) < Ω|Φa (x)Φb (0)|Ω >
0
Z ∞ Z
d3 p
+θ(−x ) < Ω|Φb (0)Φa (x)|Ω >= dM
m 2EM
Z
dq −iqx
[e−ipM x θ(x0 )ρa,b (M ) + eipM x θ(−x0 )ρa,b (M )] ≡ e τ̃a,b (q 2 )
(2π)4
Z ∞ Z
dq e−iqx
= −i dM ρa,b (M ) , (48)
m (2π)4 M 2 − q 2 − i
where we have used (5) and the fact that ρa,b (M ) is a symmetric matrix due to T-invariance.
Now, in order the last equation to make sense for distributions, the mass integral must converge
at infinity and this depends on the dimension of the fields. If e.g. they have dimension two it
is expected that, for large M , ρ(M ) ∼ M and hence the mass integral does not converge. This
implies that (48) does not define a distribution. A deeper discussionR of this point is in order
here. In order that τa,b (x) be a distribution, the integral τa,b [f ] ≡ dxf (x)τa,b (x) with f of
class D should be well defined, this corresponds to the condition that the M -integral in:
Z Z ∞ Z
f˜(q)
τa,b [f ] = dq f˜(q)τ̃a,b (q 2 ) = −i dM ρa,b (M ) dq , (49)
m M 2 − q 2 − i
be absolutely convergent. Notice that the q-integral defines a bounded function of M 2 decreas-
ing as 1/M 2 at infinity.
In the situation under discussion this is not true; however let us multiply f by xµ , we have:
Z ∞ Z
f˜(q)
τa,b [xµ f ] = −2 dM ρa,b (M ) dqqµ , (50)
m (M 2 − q 2 − i)2
which is well defined. Therefore we can conclude that τa,b is ill defined only in the origin.
However one can give an alternative definition of the two point function substituting
Z ∞
ρa,b (M )
τ̃a,b (q 2 ) = −i dM
m M 2 − q 2 − i
14
with:
2
Z ∞
ρa,b (M ) M2
τ̃R,a,b (q ) = K − i dM [ − 1]
m M 2 M 2 − q 2 − i
Z ∞
2 ρa,b (M ) 1
= K − iq dM 2
, (51)
m M M − q 2 − i
2
where K is an arbitrary constant . Now the mass integral converges and it is easy to verify
ρ (M )
that, whenever m∞ dM a,bM 2 converges the difference between τ̃R and τ̃ is just a constant and
R
hence τa,b and τR,a,b coincide everywhere except in the origin. If we define
Z
dq −iqx Z ∞ ρa,b (M ) 1
τS,a,b (x) ≡ −i 4
e dM 2
, (52)
(2π) m M M − q 2 − i
2
it is apparent that τS,a,b (x) is a distribution and one has:
τR,a,b (x) = Kδ(x) − ∂ 2 τS,a,b (x) , (53)
which is also a distribution.

This example shows which are the difficulties related with the definition of T-ordered func-
tions and in particular that these difficulties come from their lack of definition when two or
more point coincide. Finally it shows the need of supplementary conditions to identify the
T-ordered functions completely as distributions in R4n . It turns out that the construction of
a consistent set of T-ordered functions in the case in which the fields are identified with the
Wick monomials of some fundamental free field coincides with the perturbative renormalization
program. Postponing any further discussion of the construction of T-functions, we assume to
have a consistent definition of those involving the local fields defined in (9) and we proceed in
the costruction of the scattering amplitudes using the LSZ reduction formulae.
15
5 The L.S.Z. reduction formulae
Given a set of fields Φai we build a corresponding set of almost local operators Qai (x) =
dyfai (x − y)Φai (y) , where the functions fai (x) belong to the class D and their support is
R
contained in the slice |x0 | < ∆. Then we select a set ψasii of solutions of the Klein-Gordon
equation as in (20) with ψ̃ai (~p) of class D and non-overlapping support and we consider:
Z Y Z Y
Aψ(s1 ) ,··,ψ(sn ) ≡ in dyj (dxi ψa(si i ) (xi )(∂x2i + m2ai )fai (xi − yi ))
a1 an Γ i
j
n
Y
< Ω|T ( Φak (yk ))|Ω > , (54)
k
where the integration domain Γ is defined by: |x0k | ≤ Tk with Ti − Tl ≥ 2(l − i)∆.
Noticing that:
ψa(si i ) (xi )(∂x2i + m2ai )fai (xi − yi )

= ∂xµi ψa(si i ) (xi )∂xµi fai (xi − yi ) − fai (xi − yi )∂x0i ψa(si i ) (xi ) , (55)
one identifies (54) with:

P n
n− sl
Y (s ) (s )
i < Ω|T ( [Bψak (Tk ) − Bψak (−Tk )])|Ω > , (56)
k k
k
where the generalized creation and destruction operators B (sk ) are defined in (21) and the time
order refers to the ±Tk variables. Now, using (45) and (46) and taking into account that the
vectors n Y (s ) (s )
T( [Bψak (Tk ) − Bψak (−Tk )])|Ω >
k k
k=2
and #†
n
"
Y(s ) (s )
T ( [Bψak (Tk ) − Bψak (−Tk )]) |Ω >
k k
k=2
belong to a finite energy subset of the Hilbert space, we have:
lim Aψ(s1 ) ,··,ψ(sn )

T1 →∞ a1 an
P n
(s ) (s ) (s )
= lim in− sl
Y
< Ω|Bψa11 (T1 )T ( [Bψak (Tk ) − Bψak (−Tk )])|Ω >
T1 →∞ k k
k=2
P n
n− sl
Y (s ) (s ) (s )
− lim i < Ω|T ( [Bψak (Tk ) − Bψak (−Tk )])Bψa11 (−T1 )|Ω >
T1 →∞ k k
k=2
P n
(out) (s ) (s )
= δs1 ,+ in− sl
Y
< Ω|aψa1 T ( [Bψak (Tk ) − Bψak (−Tk )])|Ω >
k k
k=2
P n
(s ) (s ) (in)†
−δs1 ,− in− sl
Y
< Ω|T ( [Bψak (Tk ) − Bψak (−Tk )])aψa1 |Ω > . (57)
k k
k=2
16
Next step is the iteration of this equation with the assumption that the wave packets ψ (+) do
not overlap with the wave packets ψ (−) and reminding the above made choice: fãi (Ema , p~) = 1
(s)
on the support of the corresponding ψ̃ai . In the asymptotic limits for all Tk the Bψ at positive
time commute among themselves since, either they have the same s and hence they have the
same creation/destruction nature, or the corresponding wave packets do not overlap. Therefore
one remains with B (−) ’s on the left-hand side and −B (+) ’s on the right-hand side in the vacuum
expectation value. Taking into account Eq’s(45) and (46) one gets:
lim · · · lim Aψas1 ,··,ψasnn

Tn →∞ T1 →∞ 1
  
Y (out) Y (in)†
=< Ω|  aψa∗   aψai  |Ω >, (58)
i
i : si =+ j : sj =−
that is a transition (scattering) amplitude.

Now it is apparent from this formula that the order of limits is immaterial. Taking into
account the fast convergence rate we can write the identity:
Z Y Z Y n
n
(dxi ψasii (xi )(∂x2i m2ai )fai (xi
Y
i dyj + − yi )) < Ω|T ( Φak (yk ))|Ω >
j i k
  
Y (out) Y (in)†
=< Ω|  aψa∗   aψai  |Ω > , (59)
i
i : si =+ j : sj =−
where the xi integrals cover the whole R4n .

Computing cross sections of a process with 2 particles in the initial and f particles in the
final state, that is n = f + 2, one more comment is in order. Decomposing the time-ordered
function in the left-hand side of (59) into connected parts one finds a momentum conservation
constraint for each connected part; it follows that there is a single contribution to the transition
amplitude which comes from the connected (f + 2)-point function with s1 = s2 = − and sj = +
for j ≥ 2. The transition amplitude is given by:
2
Z Y fY
+2
f +2
(dyj ψa(−) (xj )) (dxi ψa(+) (∂x2k + m2ak )Φak (xk ))|Ω >C
Y
i j i
(xi )) < Ω|T (
j=1 i>2 k=1
≡ A2→f . (60)
The explicit computation of cross sections is made in the limit of perfect resolution which can
be simply defined choosing Gaussian wave packets and forgetting, since irrelevant, the fact
that their Fourier transforms are also Gaussian and hence do not meet the compact support
condition. In this situation one can choose the wave packets
1 p−~
(~ p0 )2
−
ψ̃(~p) = √ e 2∆2 (61)
( π∆)3/2
whose perfect resolution limit corresponds to ∆ → 0 and:
√
ψ̃(~p) → ( 4π∆)3/2 δ(~p−~p0 ) . (62)
17
A further simplification consists in choosing the same ∆ for all the wave packets. Following
Becchi and Ridolfi (cited work), one can define the production probability of f final particles
in a certain region of their momentum space through the production probability density which
is defined as the perfect resolution limit
|A2→f |2
W ≡ lim √ (63)
∆→0 ( 4π∆)3f
and one can show that;

W = L dσ , (64)
where L is the integrated luminosity of the initial state, which, of course depends on the initial
wave packets, and dσ is the differential cross section. As a matter of fact W and L are both
proportional to ∆2
18
6 The functional formalism and the Effective Action
Assuming that all needed time-ordered functions are defined, in analogy with the Wightman
function case one can define the functional generator:
∞ n n n
X i X Z Y Y
Z[J] ≡ (dxj Jaj (xj )) < Ω|T ( Φak (xk ))|Ω >
n=0 n! a1 ,··,an j=1 k
∞ n
i XZ
dxJa (x)Φa (x))n |Ω >,
X
≡ < Ω|T ( (65)
n=0 n! a
where it is understood that the ordering operator acts before time integration. Notice that,
contrary to the Wightman case, in the present case there is no operator ordering problem since
the time-ordered functions are symmetric functions. The functional generator is a formal power
series of the J’s that are chosen of class S and (65) can be formally written;
P R
Z[J] =< Ω|T (ei a
dxJa (x)Φa (x)
)|Ω > . (66)
In analogy with (19) the cluster decomposition of the time-ordered functions can be described
introducing the connected generator:
∞ n−1
i XZ
dxJa (x)Φa (x))n |Ω >C ,
X
ZC [J] ≡ < Ω|T ( (67)
n=2 n! a
where we have taken into account that the fields have null vacuum expectation value. From
(65) we can show that:
Z[J] = eiZC [J] . (68)
Indeed, on account of (17), taking a functional derivative of (65) comparing it with that of (66)
we have:
∞ n+1
δZ[J] i XZ
dxJa (x)Φa (x))n )|Ω >
X
= < Ω|T (Φa (x)(
δJa (x) n=0 n! a
∞ n+1 X
n
i n! XZ
dxJa (x)Φa (x))m )|Ω >C
X
= < Ω|T (Φa (x)(
n=0 n! m=1 m!(n − m)! a
XZ
< Ω|T ( dyJb (y)Φb (y))n−m |Ω >
b
∞
im+1 XZ
dxJa (x)Φa (x))m )|Ω >C
X
= < Ω|T (Φa (x)(
m=1 m! a
∞ n
i XZ δZC [J]
dxJa (x)Φa (x))n |Ω >= i
X
< Ω|T ( Z[J] . (69)
n=0 n! a δJa (x)
This is a first order differential equation whose solution with initial conditions Z[0] = 1 , ZC [0] =
0 is given by Eq. (68).
19
Given the connected generator, which is also a formal power series in J, one defines its
Legendre transform as follows (See Appendix A). One introduces the functional valued distri-
bution:
δZC [J]
Φa (x, J) ≡ . (70)
δJa (x)
Then one considers the Fourier transformed connected two-point function:
Z Z
(2) (2)
τ̃a,b (p2 ) ≡ dxe ipx
< Ω|T (Φa (x)Φb (0))|Ω >≡≡ dxeipx τa,b (x) . (71)
(2)−1
If τ̃a,b (p2 ) is a matrix valued tempered distribution, in the free case it is a polynomial, one
can define a further functional valued distribution Ja (x, ϕ) formal power series in J such that;
Φa (x, J(·, ϕ)) ≡ ϕa (x) . (72)
Indeed from Eq.(70) one has:

Z
(2)
Φa (x, J) = dyτa,b (x − y)Jb (y) + O(J 2 ) , (73)
this is a formal power series relation which implies, on account of the implicit function theorem:
Z
(2)−1
Ja (x, ϕ) = dy τa,b (x − y) ϕb (y) + O(ϕ2 ) (74)
where the higher order terms in ϕ are recursively defined through Eq. (72).
Then one defines the formal power series Legendre transform of ZC ;
Z X
Γ[ϕ] ≡ ZC [J(·, ϕ)] − dx ϕa (x)Ja (x, ϕ) . (75)
a
The new functional is the effective action in the following sense. Taking its functional derivative
one has:
δΓ[ϕ]
= −Ja (x, ϕ) , (76)
δϕa (x)
and hence
δΓ[Φ(·, J)]
= −Ja (x) , (77)
δϕa (x)
thus Φ(x, J) is the solution of the classical field equation induced by Γ and vanishing at J = 0.
The inverse equation to (75) is:
Z X
ZC [J] = Γ[Φ(·, J)] + dx Φa (x, J)Ja (x) . (78)
a
Now the above functional contruction is justified noticing that (60) is equivalent to:
Z fY
+2
δ
A2→f = i (dxi ψasii (xi )(∂x2i + m2ai ) )ZC [J]|J=0 . (79)
i=1 δJai (xi )
20
It can be shown (this point is discussed in some details by Becchi and Ridolfi, (cited work))
that, defining:
fX
+2
ψa(as) (x) ≡ δai ,a ψasii (x) , (80)
i=1
one can write in the limit of perfect resolution of the wave packets, that is, wave packets with
point-like support in momentum space:
R Pf +2 s δ
dx ψaii (x)(∂x2 +m2ai ) δJ
ai (x)
A2→f = ie i=1
ZC [J]|J=0
(as)
R
(x)(∂x2 +m2a ) δJ δ(x)
P
= ie dx ψ
a a a ZC [J]|J=0
≡ ieΣ ZC [J]|J=0 . (81)
Indeed the terms which are not linear in each ψasii do not contribute in the perfect resolution
limit. Let us sketch a proof of this fact.
For a generic choice of particle average momenta, p~0 in Eq. (61), translation invariance,
implying global energy-momentum conservation, selects in Eq. ( 81) contributions of the same
degree m in all the f + 2 wave packets ψasii . Indeed, for a generic choice of the particle momenta
in the 2 → f process, each f + 2-particle subset has vanishing average total energy-momentum
while it does not contain any subset with vanishing average total energy-momentum. The
m(f + 2)-particle contributions correspond to matrix elements for transition processes with 2m
initial states to mf final states . Among the m × 2 → m × f amplitudes one has contributions
corresponding to processes which factorize into m factors corresponding to 2 → f particles
transitions times m − 1 factors corresponding to forward elastic scattering between initial and
final particles of different subsets (the diagrammatic expansions of the Feynman amplitudes
are discussed in Appendix A). In this situations the average energy-momentum of forward
scattering particles are on the mass-shell and hence there are 2(m − 1) mass-shell singularities
due to vanishing denominators in 2(m − 1) propagators. For example consider the case shown
in the figure below in which one has two 2 → 2 particle processes and one final particle of the
first process forward scatters a final particle of the second process.
p~3 @ I p ~4

p~3@ p
I
@ ~3 p~4
p~4
'$ '$
I
@
@ @
&% I
@ &% I
@
p~1 p~2 @ p~1 p~2 @
The corresponding diagrams contain two lines connecting each 2 → 2 process sub-diagram
to the forward scattering sub-diagram, the small circle in the figure. The average energy-
momenta carried by these two lines lie on the corresponding particle mass-shell. However this
does not mean that the amplitude diverges since the initial and final momenta are integrated
over the support of the wave functions. This means in particular that the singularity associated
with one line is smeared by the integration over the angle between the average line momentum
21
and
R1
its fluctuations which are of order ∆. Hence one has for each line an integral analogous to
−1
−1 d cos θ/(a∆ cos θ + b + i) ∝ ∆ .
Taking into account this consideration one concludes that the dominant contributions in the
∆ → 0 limit to the m × 2 → m × f amplitudes come from the just mentioned diagrams since
these are those with the maximum number of lines with average momentum on the particle
mass-shell. Therefore a generic m × 2 → m × f amplitude scales in the limit proportionally to
∆(2+f )3m/2−2m = ∆3mf /2+m . It is therefore clear that the term with m = 1 dominates in the
perfect resolution limit.
Thus we have reached the following conclusion, if we define:
Φ̂a (x) ≡ eΣ Φa (x, J)|J=0 , (82)
using Eq.(78) we can write the 2 → f amplitude (81) in the form:

Z
ψa(as) (x)(∂x2 + m2a )Φ̂a (x)] .
X
A2→f = i[Γ[Φ̂] + dx (83)
a
In order to understand the meaning of Eq. (83) let us consider Φ̂ more closely.
δΓ[Φ(·, J)] δΓ[Φ̂]

eΣ |J=0 = = −eΣ Ja (x)|J=0
δϕa (x) δϕa (x)
Z
ψa(as) (y)(∂y2 + m2a )δ(x − y) = (∂x2 + m2a )ψa(as) (x) = 0 .
X X
=− dy (84)
a a
Thus Φ̂ satisfies the field equation induced by the effective action Γ. Therefore Eq. (83)
identifies the transition amplitude with the value taken by the modified effective action Γ[ϕ] +
dx a ψa(as) (x)(∂x2 + m2a )ϕa (x) on the solution Φ̂ of the effective field equation. This solution is
R P
uniquely identified once its asymptotic properties, that is, the boundary condition to Eq.(84),
are given. It remains to discuss these asymptotic properties of Φ̂.
Since Φ̂ is a distribution we should better discuss the asymptotic properties of Q̂a (x) =
dyfa (x − y)Φ̂a (y) however selecting, as above, fã (p) = 1 on the intersection of the particle
R
R 3 (as)
mass-shells with the support of d xψa (x) exp(isa p · x)|x0 =0 .
Taking into account the reduction formulae we have:
Σ
Z
δ
Q̂a (x) = e dyfa (x − y) ZC |J=0
δJa (y)
f
2 X m p
(out) (in)
(aψai )† ]|Ω >C
X X X Y Y
= < Ω| aψa∗ Qa (x)
kj
q=0 m=0 k1 <··<km =3,··,f +2 l1 <··<lp =1,2 j=1 i=1
+Ra (x) , (85)
where Ra (x) accounts for the terms at least quadratic in one of the ψa ’s. Considering the
asymptotic limit of the first term in the right-hand side of (85) we notice that this is the sum of
a finite number of matrix elements of Qa (x) between out-going and in-going scattering states.
22
Let us use < out|Qa (x)|in > as a symbol for the generic matrix element. It is shown in Eq.
(44) that:
Z
d3 x Z d3 p
lim is q f (~p)eispa ·x↔
∂0 < out|Qa (x)|in >C
t→±∞ (2π)3/2 2Ea (~p)
(out/in) (out/in) †
= δs,+ < out|af ∗ ,a |in >C +δs,− < out|(af,a ) |in >C . (86)
Therefore, selecting s = − in the limit t → ∞ one finds that asymptotically the right-hand
side of Eq. (85) converges to:
f
2 X m p
(out) (out) (in)
(af,a )† (aψai )† ]|Ω >C .
X X X Y Y
< Ω| aψa∗ (87)
kj
q=0 m=0 k1 <··<km =3,··,f +2 l1 <··<lp =1,2 j=1 i=1
This is related to a sum of scattering amplitudes between a q-particle initial states and a
m − 1-particle final states corresponding to all the possible choices of q initial and m final single
particle wave functions. On account of energy-momentum conservation it is immediate to verify
that, if the 2 → f transition is allowed and initial and final single particle wave functions do
not overlap, the only possibly non-vanishing matrix elements are those with q = 0 and m = 1.
That is, one is left with:
fX
+2 fX
+2 Z
(out) (out)
< Ω|aψa∗ (af,a )† |Ω >C = δa, ak d3 pf (~p)ψak (~p) . (88)
k
k=3 k=3
In much the same way if we select s = + in the limit t → −∞ the first term in the right-hand
side of Eq. (85) converges to:
f
2 X m p
(out) (in) Y (in)
(aψai )† ]|Ω >C .
X X X Y
< Ω| aψa∗ af ∗ ,a (89)
kj
q=0 m=0 k1 <··<km =3,··,f +2 l1 <··<lp =1,2 j=1 i=1
Once again, taking onto account energy-momentum conservation, one is left with:
2 2 Z
(in) (in)
Ω|af ∗ ,a (aψa )† ]|Ω d3 pf (~p)ψal (~p) .
X X
< >C = δa,al (90)
l
l=1 l=1
Therefore we have shown that

Z
d3 x Z d3 p
i s
q f (~p)eispa ·x↔
∂0 Q̂a (x) (91)
(2π)3/2 2Ea (~p)
converges for s = − in the limit t → ∞ and s = + in the limit t → −∞ to

Z
d3 x Z d3 p
i s
3/2
q f (~p)eispa ·x↔
∂0 ψ̂a(as) (x) (92)
(2π) 2Ea (~p)
23
for any f (~p) of class C ∞ and with compact support. These boundary conditions are completely
equivalent to those satisfied by the classical fields in the semi-classical approximation (see again
Becchi and Ridolfi (cited work))
Therefore the asymptotic behavior of first term in the right-hand side of Eq. (85) is that
of a linear combination of asymptotic wave packets, that is ∝ ∆3/2 . The second term Ra (x) is
by definition non-linear in some wave packets and hence if one deals with it in much the same
way as with the first term one finds results vanishing faster than the first term than ∝ ∆3/2 .
Thus these terms can be disregarded. It is clear that also in the analysis of Ra (x) one could
encounter mass singularities, however, repeating the above analysis one finds that the mass
singularities cannot compensate the vanishing degree of the further wave packet factors.
In conclusion, through (85), (88) and (90) we have shown that, up to terms not contribut-
ing to the transition amplitude in the perfect resolution limit, Φ̂a (x) satisfies the classical field
equation corresponding to the effective action Γ and the same boundary conditions . If fur-
thermore we consider the expression of the transition amplitude given by (83) in terms of Γ we
conclude that the fully quantized scattering theory coincides with its semi-classical counterpart
provided one replaces of the action with the effective action.
24
7 The construction of the theory, the Euclidean Quan-
tum Field Theory
Having so concluded the presentation of Haag-Ruelle relativistic scattering theory we shall de-
scribe in the rest of these notes a construction procedure for the connected functional generator
(67). Let us first of all consider a free scalar field theory; it is an elementary exercise to prove
that:
1Z
ZC [J] = dxdy∆F (x − y)J(x)J(y) , (93)
2
with Z
dx e−ipx
∆F (x) = (94)
(2π)4 m2 − p2 − i0+
coincides with the solution of the differential equation:
δZC [J]
(m2 + ∂ 2 ) = J(x) , (95)
δJ(x)
with the condition that ZC vanishes at J = 0 and that positive/negative frequency components
of δZ C [J]
δJ(x)
vanish in the limit x0 → ∓∞.
It was noticed by Symanzik that the above equation, and hence its generalization to non
free theories is highly simplified if one turns to its Euclidean version. In the present situation
this is obtained through the analytic continuation of the Fourier transformed 2-point function
∆;
˜
Z
1
∆(p) ≡ dxeipx ∆(x) =
m2 − p2 − i0+
1
= , (96)
(Em (~p) − i0+ − p0 )(Em (~p) − i0+ + p0 )
to the domain p0 = eiθ p4 with 0 ≤ θ < π and in particular to the Euclidean points where
θ = π/2. The Fourier transform of the analytic continuation to the Euclidean space:
P4 j
Z
d4 p ei j=1 x pj
S(x) = (97)
(2π)4 m2 + 4j=1 p2j
P
is called Schwinger 2-point function S(x1 − x2 ).

Defining
1Z
FC [J] = dxdy S(x − y)J(x)J(y) , (98)
2
one sees immediately that the equation corresponding to (95) is
δFC [J]
(m2 − ∂ 2 ) = J(x) , (99)
δJ(x)
and that it identifies FC [J] with the solution of (95) vanishing at J = 0 and at infinity of R4 .
25
It is clear from (96) that the analytic continuation to imaginary energies of the Fourier
transformed 2-point, time ordered, function is allowed due to the fact that it has singularities
in the points ±(Em (~p)−i0+ ) and, if the theory is massive, Em (~p) ≥ m > 0 for some m. It turns
out that this is a general property of the energy singularities of the Fourier transformed n-point
time-ordered functions of interacting theories, and hence one can relate the n-point Schwinger
to time-ordered functions in much the same way as the two-point functions. This is a very
important point since the analytic continuation corresponds to the equivalence of Minkowskian
and Euclidean (massive) field theories and, as we shall see in a moment, the construction of
the Euclidean theory appears simpler than that of the Minkowskian theory.
A clear, however naively formal, way of understanding the possibility of the analytic con-
tinuation starts from the decomposition of the time-ordered functions given in (47) that we
discuss, for simplicity, in the case of a single scalar field. Computing the Fourier transform of
(47) we get:
Z n−1 Pn−1
pl ·(xl −xn )
dxi ei
Y
τ̃ (p1 , · · ·, pn )|P pi =0 = l=1 < Ω|T (Φ(x1 ) · ·Φ(xn ))|Ω > (100)
i=1
Z n−1 Pn−1 Pk
i pπj ·(xπk −xπk+1 )
(dxπi θ(x0πi x0πi+1 ))e
X Y
= − k=1 j=1
< Ω|Φ(xπ1 ) · ·Φ(xπn )|Ω >
{πi },i=1,··,n i=1
where it is apparent that the contribution from every permutation does not depend on xπn
since the Wightman functions are translation invariant. Introducing the 3-dimensional Fourier
transformed Wightman functions:
Z n−1 Pn−1 Z ∞ n−1 Pn−1
Ej (x0j −x0j+1 )
−i ~k ·(~
p xk −~
xn )
dEi ρn (~p, E)e−i
Y Y
d~xi e k=1 < Ω|Φ(x1 ) · ·Φ(xn )|Ω >= j=1
i=1 m i=1
(101)
which generalizes to the n-point case the spectral properties given in (11) for the two-point
functions, we find:
τ̃ (p1 , · · ·, pn )|P pi =0
Z ∞ n−1 Z n−1 Pn−1 Pk
−i (x0k −x0k+1 )( p0πj −Eπk )
dx0i e
X Y Y
= dEπi ρn (~pπ , Eπ ) k=1 j=1
m i=1 i=1
{πi },i=1,··,n
Z ∞ n−1
ρn (~pπ , Eπ )
= in−1
X Y
dEπi Qn−1 Pl 0 +
. (102)
{πi },i=1,··,n
m i=1 l=1 ( j=1 pπj − Eπl + i0 )
This equation clearly shows the positions of the singularities in the energy variables p0i and
hence the possibility of an analytic continuation to the domain p0i = eiθ p4i with 0 ≤ θ < π.
It turns also out that for a general interacting theory the connected n-point Schwinger
functions Sn are also obtained, up to contact terms, that is, terms supported at coinciding
points, by the analytic continuation of n-point Wightman functions to imaginary times. That
is:
Sn (x1 , ··, xn ) = Wn (x01 , ··, x0n ) ≡< Ω|Φ(x01 ) · ·Φ(x0n )|Ω >
0
f or x41 > x42 > ·· > x4n and ~xi ≡ ~x0i , −ix4i ≡ xi0 . (103)
26
Notice that Sn is a symmetric function of its arguments while Wn is not.
In the case of the free theory two-point functions one has, on account of (97) and (5) and
for x4 > 0:
4
4
Z
d~p i~p·~x Z eip4 x Z
d~p i~p·~x 2πi −Ex4
S(~x, x ) = 4
e dp4 2 2
= 4
e e = W (~x, −ix4 ) . (104)
(2π) E + p4 (2π) 2iE
It turn out furthermore that a local Poincaré invariant theory goes into an Euclidean in-
variant one.
A non-trivial advantage of the Euclidean theory is that one can choose the smearing func-
tions appearing in (8) and in (10) Euclidean invariant as e.g. the Gaussian
Λ40 −Λ20 (x−y)2

e 2 ≡ gΛ0 (x − y) . (105)
(2π)2
Notice that whenever treating Euclidean functions we shall use the Euclidean scalar product
as in (97).
Osterwalder and Schrader have described a complete set of conditions (axioms) guarantee-
ing the possibility of constructing a consistent Wightman theory from a given set of Schwinger
functions. A clear account of their results is presented in Haag’s book quoted in the bibli-
ography. In Feynman perturbation theory these axioms are generally satisfied up to infrared
problems that are not discussed in these notes. Therefore in the following we shall consider the
construction problem in the framework of Euclidean field theory.
27
8 The Functional Integral in Euclidean Quantum Field
Theory
We now consider how interacting Euclidean Quantum Field Theory can be built starting from
the field equations.
In principle one should start from the equations of the fundamental fields. We shall first,
for simplicity, limit our discussion to the case of a single scalar field φ. The field equations
should relate a certain combination of derivatives of φ to a suitable local composite operator
J (φ(x), ∂φ(x), ··) ≡ J [φ(x)]. For instance we can choose
−∂ 2 φ(x) = J [φ](x) . (106)
As a matter of fact the above choice is the simplest, non trivial possible. It is worth noticing,
however, that the order of partial differential operator appearing in this equation can be reduced
adding more field components. In spite of its simplicity (106) is seriously sick since J [φ] does
not make sense being φ a distribution. Translating (106) into a functional differential equation
one should heuristically replace that of the free theory (99) with :
δ exp(FC [J]) δ
−∂ 2 = J(x) exp(FC [J]) + J [ ] exp(FC [J]) , , (107)
δJ(x) δJ(x)
where the last term should insert the operator J into the Schwinger functional. As above this
does not make sense since Schwinger functions are distributions.
Therefore we see that the construction of a non-trivial quantum field theory must be based
on the definition of local composite operators. Notice that these operators play a crucial
role, not only in the construction of the theory through the field equations, but also in the
definition of physical observables, e.g. interpolating fields, currents, energy-momentum tensors
and many others. Even if in the construction the fundamental fields, which are identified
with the dynamical variables, have a dominant role, the final goal is that of computing local
operator correlation functions. A standard formal mean to insert into the theory local composite
operators is that of adding to the interaction terms coupling local operators to classical external
fields, and hence to generate the operators through functional derivatives of the action with
respect to the corresponding external fields. This method will be used systematically when
we shall be interested in local operators and hence the dependence of the effective action on
external fields will be always understood.
In order to define composite operators overcoming the difficulties due to the distribution
character of the fields we should introduce the smeared field
Z
qΛ0 (x) ≡ dy gΛ0 (x − y)φ(y) ≡ (gΛ0 ∗ φ)(x) , (108)
where ∗ is the convolution symbol and we define J as a function of q. After this substitution
(107) should be written
δ exp(FC [J]) δ
−∂ 2 = J(x) exp(FC [J]) + J [(gΛ0 ∗ )(x)] exp(FC [J]) , , (109)
δJ(x) δJ(y)
28
However replacing as above J (φ(x), ∂φ(x), ··) with J (q(x), ∂q(x), ··) ≡ JΛ0 (x) destroys the
local character of (106) and hence one should find a method to recover the locality of the
theory. This is the Renormalization Group (RG) method.
The rough idea is that if one limits the range of momenta to a suitably bounded region it
should be possible to find an interaction built with the qΛ0 operators which, however compli-
cated, has the same effect as a local operator.
In other and more precise words, if one considers test functions J whose Fourier transform
˜
J(p) has support bounded by p < Λ Λ0 it should be possible to choose non-local, Λ0 -
dependent JΛ0 and define a suitable FC [J, Λ0 ], regular in the limit Λ0 → ∞ (that we shall call
the UV limit), such that (109) be true independently of Λ0 and JΛ0 become local, however not
necessarily regular, in this limit. In these conditions JΛ0 plays the role of a bare interaction
term in the field equation. Strictly speaking one should choose smearing functions with compact
support in p, which is not true with the Gaussian in (105) . We claim that we can use Gaussians
without any loss of generality, at least in perturbation theory.
Proceeding further we consider a sufficiently wide class of positive functionals IΛ0 [φ], that we
call bare interaction, with a range of non-locality of the order of 1/Λ0 and choose JΛ0 [φ](x) =
− dygΛ0 (x − y)(δIΛ0 [φ]/δφ(x)). The restriction of the bare interaction term term in the field
R
equation to the functional derivative of some bare interaction is ”a priori” arbitrary in contrast
with the scattering effective action whose existence is guaranteed by the reduction formulae.
However to my knowledge this restriction is a price to pay for renormalization.
With the mentioned choice it is apparent that (106) can be written:
δ Z (∂φ)2
( dy + IΛ0 [qΛ0 ]) = J(x) , (110)
δφ(x) 2
and (109) reads:
δ
δ exp(FC [J, Λ0 ]) δIΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ ]
−∂ 2 + (gΛ0 ∗ δJ
)(x) exp(FC [J, Λ0 ]) = J(x) exp(FC [J, Λ0 ]) , (111)
δJ(x) δφ
whose solution, equal to one for vanishing J and positive for J real, as it is required by the
axioms, is:
(∂φ)2
Z R
eFC [J,Λ0 ] = dµ[φ]e dy(J(y)φ(y)− 2
)−IΛ0 [qΛ0 ])
, (112)
where dµ[φ] isR a positive and translation invariant probability measure normalized according:
dµ[φ] exp(− dy(∂φ)2 /2) = 1. It is an exercise left to the reader to verify this.
R
The ”solution” (112) deserves a long list of comments that we are forced to shorten quite
drastically. Let us only mention that the condition at J = 0 fixes the field independent term
in IΛ0 . Concerning the appearance of the functional integral, consider the ordinary differential
equation:
d d
f (x) + a( )2n+1 f (x) = x , (113)
dx dx
with a real and positive, its solution:
Z ∞
y2 y 2n+2
f (x) = dy e−[ 2 +a 2n+2 +c+xy] , (114)
−∞
29
with c fixed by the condition f (0) = 1 is unique if we ask f to be real and positive. Equation
(112) is the functional version of (114). An alternative form to (114), which is equivalent in
the sense of formal power series in a is:
d2n+2
Z ∞ d2n+2
a
−[ 2n+2 +c] y2 a
−[ 2n+2 +c0 ] x2
f (x) = e (dx)2n+2 dye−[ 2 +xy] = e (dx)2n+2 e2 . (115)
−∞
It is apparent that this form is obtained from (112) by partially replacing the variable y under
integral sign with the x-derivative and exchanging the result with the integral sign. It is also
easy to see that computing (115) by expanding it in power series of a leads to a power series
in x which does not converge, at least, absolutely. It is an asymptotic series. This justifies the
caveat about the interpretation as formal power series.
In much the same way an alternative form to (112), which is equivalent in the sense of
formal power series in IΛ0 is:
δ 1
R δ 1
eFC [J,Λ0 ] = e−IΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ δJ ]) e 2 dx J(S∗J)
= eFC [J,Λ0 ] = e−IΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ δJ ]) e 2 (JS∗J) , (116)
R
where we have further simplified our notation inserting (f g) for dxf (x)g(x) and
Z
dp eipx 1
S(x) = 4 2
= , (117)
(2π) p (2π)2 x2
The formal expression given in (116) is very important since it generates the Feynman
diagram expansion. Indeed Feynman series is obtained expanding both exponentials in (116)
and performing the functional derivatives in IΛ0 which corresponds to the vertex generator on
1
e 2 (JS∗J) which plays the role of line generator. The analysis of FC as the generator of connected
Feynman diagrams is given in Appendix A.
Now the RG condition we want to require is that FC has a regular limit for Λ0 → ∞ and the
field equation becomes local in this ultra-violet (UV) limit. This is, of course, a condition on
IΛ0 . However this does not require IΛ0 to remain regular in the limit. The requirement is that
δI δ 2 IΛ0 [qΛ0 ]
FC has a regular limit and δφΛ0 , however singular, becomes local. This means that δφ(x)δφ(y) →0
2 2
when Λ0 → ∞ for (x − y) = d > 0 fixed.
30
9 The Wilson Effective Action in Euclidean Quantum
Field Theory
When one tries to construct the Schwinger functional FC in the UV limit satisfying the above
stated RG condition and using e.g. (116) one faces an obvious difficulty since FC appears
explicitly built starting from IΛ0 which is expected to be singular in this limit. Wilson’s solution
to this problem exploits the above mentioned possibility of replacing IΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ (δ/δJ)] with a
different, non local functional IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ (δ/δJ)], which is called the Wilson effective action,
when the support of J lies in the region p Λ Λ0 . The idea is that, keeping Λ fixed in the
UV limit, IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ (δ/δJ)] should have a regular IΛ,∞ [gΛ ∗ (δ/δJ)] limit, since FC is expected
to be regular in this limit. What remains to be required is IΛ,∞ [gΛ ∗ (δ/δJ)] to become local,
however singular, in the Λ → ∞ limit.
Therefore what one has to do is, first, to identify IΛ,Λ0 , then to see how it depends on Λ
and how it is related to IΛ0 , this will lead us to the RG evolution equation with the initial
condition IΛ0 ,Λ0 = IΛ0 . Using this evolution equation there remains to understand under which
conditions IΛ,∞ is regular and it has a local, however singular, in the Λ → ∞ limit.
Let us begin with the first step. Introducing ĝ = gΛ0 − gΛ , one can show that there exists a
functional IΛ,Λ0 such that
δ 1
eFC [J,Λ0 ] =: e−IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ0 ∗ δJ + ĝ∗S∗J])
: e 2 (JS∗J) , (118)
where the symbol : X[J, δ/δJ] : implements the ordering prescription according to which
functional derivatives should be placed on the right-hand side of J’s and we have shortened
dxJ(x)(gΛ0 ∗ J)(x) into (JS ∗ J). The proof of (118) is given in Appendix A. It is clear that
R
the functional built up in Appendix B it what we were looking for. Indeed, if the support of
J lies in the region p Λ Λ0 , g ∗ S ∗ J vanishes and (118) coincides with (116) after the
substitutionIΛ0 ↔ IΛ,Λ0 .
A further exercise left to the reader is to prove that −IΛ,Λ0 is the functional generator of
connected amputated diagrams corresponding to the interaction IΛ0 and to the propagator:
Ŝ ≡ gΛ0 ∗ S ∗ gΛ0 − gΛ ∗ S ∗ gΛ . (119)
Notice that, using the equivalence (116)-(118), one has:

(∂φ)2
Z R
FC [J] dy(J(y)φ(y)− )−IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗φ+ ĝ∗S∗J])
e = dµ[φ]e 2 , (120)
Having introduced IΛ,Λ0 we notice that, if this functional has a regular UV limit (Λ0 → ∞)
IΛ,∞ (this is the point that will take few pages to be verified), one has
(∂φ)2
Z R
FC [J] dy(J(y)φ(y)− )−IΛ,∞ [gΛ ∗φ+ ĝ∗S∗J])
e = dµ[φ]e 2 , (121)
which must be Λ independent. Notice that in (121) ĝ ∗ f = f − gΛ ∗ f .
31
One can derive the field equation requiring, at the first order in , the invariance of FC
under the change of functional integration variables φ → φ + :
δ
((J + ∂ 2))eFC [J]
δJ
Z
δIΛ,∞ R
dy(J(y)φ(y)−
(∂φ)2
)−IΛ,∞ [gΛ ∗φ+ ĝ∗S∗J])
= dµ[φ]( )|ϕ=gΛ ∗φ+ ĝ∗S∗J e 2 . (122)
δϕ
If the support of the Fourier transform J(p)˜ of J is kept bounded and the limit Λ → ∞ is
taken, it is clear that the right-hand side of (122) tends to ((δIΛ,∞ /δϕ)[(δ/δJ)]) exp(FC [J])
since ĝ ∗ J vanishes in the limit. Therefore we have obtained an equation strictly analogous to
(111). Furthermore, due to the Λ independence of (122), the right-hand side of this equation
corresponds to a local operator if IΛ,∞ tends to a local Λ → ∞ limit.
Next step in our program is to deduce the RG evolution equation for IΛ,Λ0 . The crucial point
is that exp(FC [J]) does not depend on Λ; therefore, taking the derivative of the right-hand side
of (118) with respect of ln(Λ2 ), that we label by a dot, that is writing:
δF (Λ)
Ḟ (Λ) ≡ Λ2 , (123)
δΛ2
one has:
!
δIΛ,Λ0 δ
: (−I˙Λ,Λ0 [φ] − ġΛ ∗ [ − S ∗ J] e−IΛ,Λ0 [φ] |φ=gΛ ∗ δ + ĝ∗S∗J :
δφ δJ 0 δJ
1
R
dxdy(J S∗J)
e2 =0 (124)
With the chosen ordering prescription the functional derivative (δ/δJ) in the second term of
this expression lies on the right-hand side and hence it can be replaced by S ∗ J. Thus at
a first sight the two terms in brackets should sum to zero. This is however not true because
the product S ∗ J induced by (δ/δJ) lies at the right of the ordered expression and hence,
before coming to any conclusion, we have to shift them to the left. What remains of the two
contributions is thus what comes re-ordering S ∗ J to the left of the J functional derivative
appearing in IΛ,Λ0 . This is given by:
Z
δIΛ,Λ0 δIΛ,Λ0 δ 2 IΛ,Λ0
dxdy(ġΛ ∗ S ∗ gΛ )(x − y)[ − ]. (125)
δφ(x) δφ(y) δφ(x)δφ(y)
Thus, asking for the resulting ordered expression to vanish, which is a sufficient condition for
(124) be satisfied, one has the evolution equation for the effective interaction IΛ.Λ0 :
Z
δIΛ,Λ0 δIΛ,Λ0 δ 2 IΛ,Λ0
I˙Λ.Λ0 [φ] = dxdy(ġΛ ∗ S ∗ gΛ )(x − y)[ − ]
δφ(x) δφ(y) δφ(x)δφ(y)
1Z ˙ δ 2 IΛ,Λ0 δIΛ,Λ0 δIΛ,Λ0
= dxdy Ŝ(x − y)[ − ]. (126)
2 δφ(x)δφ(y) δφ(x) δφ(y)
32
This equation can be easily translated in terms of Fourier transformed fields. For this we need
the Fourier transform of (119), in which the propagator (117) is S̃ = (1/p2 ). Choosing the
Gaussian smearing (105) we have:
2
− p2 p2
˜ e Λ
0 − e− Λ2
Ŝ(p) = (127)
p2
and
p2
˜˙ e− Λ2
Ŝ(p) = − 2 . (128)
Λ
Then the evolution equation reads:
p2
1 Z dp e− Λ2 δIΛ,Λ0 δIΛ,Λ0 δ 2 IΛ,Λ0
I˙Λ.Λ0 [φ] = [ − ]. (129)
2 (2π)4 Λ2 δ φ̃(p) δ φ̃(−p) δ φ̃(p)δ φ̃(−p)
It is important to notice here that this evolution equation for the effective action induces a
corresponding evolution equations for operators. Indeed a generic operator of the theory is
identified by the derivative of the effective action with respect to a parameter, which, in the
case of local operators is a space-time dependent function, that we have called external field,
and hence the above derivative is a functional derivative. For example the operator that, in
the limit Λ → Λ0 is identified with (gΛ0 ∗ φ)4 /4! corresponds to the functional derivative of the
effective action with respect to some bare coupling constant considered space-time dependent
and a conserved current is usually defined by means of the functional derivative with respect
to some external (background) vector field.
In conclusion, at the effective theory level, the operator coupled to the external field ω is
identified by
ΩΛ,Λ0 [φ] ≡ δIΛ,Λ0 [φ]/δω (130)
whose evolution equation is linear:
p2
1 Z dp e− Λ2 δIΛ,Λ0 δΩΛ,Λ0 δ 2 ΩΛ,Λ0
Ω̇Λ.Λ0 [φ] = [2 − ]. (131)
2 (2π)4 Λ2 δ φ̃(p) δ φ̃(−p) δ φ̃(p)δ φ̃(−p)
The analysis of the solutions of this operator evolution equation is identical to that of the
effective action which follows.
Equation (129) can be further elaborated introducing the scaled field variables
p
φ̃(p) ≡ Λ−3 ϕ( ) (132)
Λ
and the series expansion of IΛ,Λ0 in powers of the field;
∞ n n
X 1 Z Y X
IΛ,Λ0 [φ] = (dpi φ̃(pi ))δ( pj )In (Λ, Λ0 , p) . (133)
n=0 n! i=1 j=1
33
Setting In (Λ, Λ0 , p) ≡ Λ4−n in (Λ, Λ0 , Λp ) one can write IΛ,Λ0 as a functional of ϕ through:
∞ n n
1 Z Y
IΛ,Λ0 [φ] = IˆΛ,Λ0 [ϕ] =
X X
(dpi ϕ(pi ))δ( pj )in (Λ, Λ0 , p) . (134)
n=0 n! i=1 j=1
One has furthermore:

δIΛ,Λ0 [φ] 1 δ IˆΛ,Λ0 [ϕ]
=
δ φ̃(p) Λ δϕ( Λp )
˙ 1Z δ IˆΛ,Λ0 [ϕ]
I˙Λ,Λ0 [φ] = IˆΛ,Λ0 [ϕ] − dp(3ϕ(p)) + p · ∂p ϕ(p)) , (135)
2 δϕ(p)
and hence the evolution equation (129) becomes:
˙ 1Z δ IˆΛ,Λ0 [ϕ]
IˆΛ,Λ0 [ϕ] − dp(3ϕ(p)) + p · ∂p ϕ(p))
2 δϕ(p)
dp −p2 δ IˆΛ,Λ0 δ IˆΛ,Λ0 δ 2 IˆΛ,Λ0
" #
1 Z
= e − . (136)
2 (2π)4 δϕ(p) δϕ(−p) δϕ(p)δϕ(−p)
and the equation for exp(−IˆΛ,Λ0 [ϕ]) is:
1Z δ ˆ
2
[Λ ∂Λ2 − dp(3ϕ(p)) + p · ∂p ϕ(p)) ]e−IΛ,Λ0 [ϕ]
2 δϕ(p)
2
1 Z
dp −p2 δ ˆ
=− 4
e e−IΛ,Λ0 [ϕ] . (137)
2 (2π) δϕ(p)δϕ(−p)
which looks very much like a diffusion equation in the functional space with the time variable
identified with ln(Λ0 /Λ). A very simple way of understanding some possible consequences
of (137) is to consider its form at zero space-time dimensions. In this ultra-simplified form
the general solution of this equation is easily written and it is also easy to understand its
implications from the point of view of the renormalization program. It is obvious that the
zero dimensional field is a real variable that we identify with x after multiplication by suitable
constant factor. Thus we write (137) in the form:
∂2
Λ2 ∂Λ2 exp(−IˆΛ,Λ0 (x)) = − exp(−IˆΛ,Λ0 (x)) . (138)
(∂x)2
Setting t = ln(Λ0 /Λ)2 and F (x, t) ≡ exp(−IˆΛ,Λ0 (x)) it is easy to show that:
Z ∞
dy − (x−y)2
F (x, t) = √ e 2t F (y, 0) , (139)
−∞ 2πt
and it is apparent that F (x, t) tends to a Gaussian for t → ∞, for any integrable choice of
F (x, 0). This is a triviality property since a Gaussian corresponds to a free theory and hence
the general solution seems to suggest that our scalar field theory is necessarily free. This result
34
is however far from established, e.g. it is fake in two-dimensional filed theory, since nowhere
it is said that the solution should only depend on the ratio Λ/Λ0 . Being interested in the
construction of a non trivial effective theory at Λ in the limit Λ0 → ∞ we remain free to insert
an explicit Λ0 -dependence into F (x, 0). In this situation one would have the solution of the
evolution equation F (x, t, Λ0 ) and would be interested in the limit t → ∞ of F (x, t, Λ exp(−t/2))
whose triviality is not guaranteed. It is however clear that, in order to avoid a trivial result, it
is necessary, and not sufficient, that F (x, 0, Λ0 ) be singular in the Λ0 → ∞ limit.
The simplicity of the equations allows to see how the solution (139) appears in perturbation
theory giving an idea of what can happen in more realistic situations. With F (x, 0, Λ0 ) =
exp(−g0 (Λ0 )x4 /4!) and expanding F (x, t, Λ0 ) in power series of g0 we find:
l
∞ 2n x2
X (4n)! g0 ln(Λ0 /Λ) n X ln(Λ0 /Λ)
F (x, 2 ln(Λ0 /Λ)) = (− ) . (140)
n=0 n! 12 l=0 (2l)!(2n − l)!
Needless to say, this power series is not absolutely convergent as it appears e.g. looking at
the series corresponding to F (0, λ). Considering (140) as an asymptotic power series in g0 and
limiting the expansion to the second order one has:
g0 ln2 (Λ0 /Λ) 4 16 x2

F (x, 2 ln(Λ0 /Λ)) = + (g0 ln2 (Λ0 /Λ))2 − [g0 ln(Λ0 /Λ) − g02 ln3 (Λ0 /Λ)]
2 3 3 2
4
20 x
−[g0 − g02 ln2 (Λ0 /Λ)] + O(g03 , x6 ) . (141)
3 4!
Identifying the coefficient of x4 /4! at Λ = ΛR with the renormalized low energy coupling con-
stant gR and solving in terms of g0 we find:
 s 
3 1 ±
80gR ln2 (Λ0 /Λ) 
g0 = 2 1− . (142)
40 ln (Λ0 /Λ) 3
This means that there is no g0 corresponding to the wanted coupling constant as soon as Λ0 /ΛR
becomes large enough. Of course it is not possible to further speculate on this result since we
have chosen a particular initial condition at Λ0 . We shall see that in general this is the wrong
strategy.
Next step of our analysis consists in the search for a solution of the evolution equation
satisfying the locality constraint in the UV limit and a suitable set of normalization conditions
(as a matter of fact, initial conditions) at Λ = ΛR , the nature of these conditions and the value
of ΛR remaining to be specified. With this aim one could perfectly well continue the analysis
studying the solutions to (136), however many applications are simplified if one considers an
other functional which coincides with IΛ,Λ0 in the Λ → ∞ limit. We call this new functional
the effective proper generator
When needed we shall use the following notations to indicate the Schwinger functions with
infrared cut-off Λ in the UV limit:
< φ̃(p1 ) · · · φ̃(pn−1 )φ(0)|Λ >C (143)
35
ˆ , if the
will represent the connected n point functions and we shall replace φ , φ̃ by φ̂ , φ̃
corresponding legs are amputated (multiplied by Ŝ −1 ). We shall also use
ˆ ) · · · φ̃(p
< φ̃(p ˆ
1 n−1 )φ̂(0)|Λ >1P I (144)
for the n-point 1-PI functions. For example the field functional derivatives of IΛ,∞ [φ] are the
functions:
< φ(x1 ) · · · φ(pn )|Λ >C . (145)
36
10 The Effective Proper Generator
In this section we introduce the effective proper generator, we study its evolution equation and
we discuss its iterative solution. In order to define the effective proper generator it is convenient
to introduce the corresponding effective connected generator:
1
ZΛ,Λ0 [J] ≡ (J Ŝ ∗ J) − IΛ,Λ0 [Ŝ ∗ J] , (146)
2
that is the generator of the connected amplitudes corresponding to the interaction IΛ0 and to
the propagator Ŝ. In the UV limit these amplitudes are:
< φ(x1 ) · · · φ(pn )|Λ >C . (147)
The effective proper generator V is defined as the formal power series Legendre transform of
Z, which is built much in the same way as the Effective Action in section 6 (75) .
Assuming, in order to simplify the formulae, that IΛ,Λ0 [φ] does not contain a linear term in
its functional variable φ, we put
δIΛ,Λ0
φ ≡ Ŝ ∗ (J − [Ŝ ∗ J]) , (148)
δφ
The inverse functional J[φ] is defined as the formal power series in φ solution of:
δIΛ,Λ0
J = Ĉφ + [Ŝ ∗ J] , (149)
δφ
where
p2
Ĉ(p) ≡ (Ŝ)−1 (p) = 2 . (150)
− p2 2
− p2
e Λ
0 −e Λ
and φ̃ is chosen of class D in momentum space, since this would guarantee (φĈ ∗ φ) to be
finite.Then we define:
1
VΛ,Λ0 [φ] ≡ (φJ[φ]) − ZΛ,Λ0 [J[φ]] = (φJ[φ]) − (J[φ]Ŝ ∗ J[φ]) + IΛ,Λ0 [J[φ]] , (151)
2
It follows from this definition that V[φ] is the functional generator of the one-particle irreducible
parts of the connected functions generated by Z[J] , that is:
< φ̂(x1 ) · · · φ̂(pn )|Λ >1−IP . (152)
As already mentioned 1-PI means diagrams that cannot be broken in two disconnected parts
by cutting a single line.
It is a direct consequence of the above definitions that:
!−1
δ 2 ZΛ,Λ0 δ 2 VΛ,Λ0 δ 2 IΛ,Λ0
= = Ŝ(x − y) − (Ŝ ∗ ∗ Ŝ)(x, y)
δJ(x)δJ(y) δφ(x)δφ(y) δφ2
δVΛ,Λ0
V̇Λ,Λ0 = −ŻΛ,Λ0 , =J (153)
δφ
37
Furthermore from (126) one has:
1 ˙ ˙ δIΛΛ0
ŻΛ,Λ0 = (J Ŝ ∗ J) − I˙ΛΛ0 − (J Ŝ ∗ )
2 δφ
" ! #
1 δIΛΛ0 ˙ δIΛΛ0 δ ˙ δ
= (J − )Ŝ ∗ (J − ) − ( Ŝ ∗ )IΛΛ0
2 δφ δφ δφ δφ
= −V̇Λ,Λ0
 !−1 
1 ˙ ˙ δ 2 VΛ,Λ0
= −(φĈ ∗ φ) + T r(Ĉ[Ŝ − ]) , (154)
2 δφ2
where we have introduced: T r(AB) ≡ dxdy A(x, y)B(y, x) . Notice that on the basis of the
R
first equation in (153) one can see that the above trace is well defined in spite of the singular
behavior of Ĉ at infinite momentum.
Now it is possible to define the Effective Proper Generator VΛ,Λ0 by :
1
VΛ,Λ0 [φ] ≡ (φĈ ∗ φ) + VΛ,Λ0 [φ] . (155)
2
Then one has:
!−1 !−1
δ 2 VΛ,Λ0 δ 2 VΛ,Λ0
= Ĉ +
δφ2 δφ2
!−1 ∞
∗ Ŝ)n ) ,
X
= (1 + ∗ Ŝ) ∗ Ĉ = Ŝ ∗ ( (− ∗ (156)
δφ2 n=0 δφ2
and the evolution equation for VΛ,Λ0 [φ]:
1 ˙
V̇Λ,Λ0 [φ] = − (φĈ ∗ φ) + V̇Λ,Λ0 [φ]
2
!−1
1 ˙ δ 2 VΛ,Λ0
= − T r(Ĉ[Ŝ − ])
2 δφ2
∞
1 ˙ X δ 2 VΛ,Λ0
= T r(Ĉ Ŝ (− ∗ 2
∗ Ŝ)n )
2 n=1 δφ
2 ∞
δ 2 VΛ,Λ0 n
!
1 ˙ δ VΛ,Λ0 X
= T r Ŝ (− ∗ Ŝ ∗ )
2 δφ2 n=0 δφ2
2
!
1 ˙ δ VΛ,Λ0
= T r Ŝ( − ∗ Ŝ ∗ + ··)
2 δφ2 δφ2 δφ2
1
≡ R[φ] . (157)
2
This equation is better represented by the following figure:
38

'$ '$

Λ∂Λ =X −X + X + · · ·

&% &%

where double lines correspond to the propagator Ŝ and the crossed double one to Ṡ ˆ while
bubbles correspond to the 1-PI parts generated by V .
Taking into account that IΛ,Λ0 is the generator of amputated connected diagrams whose
skeleton vertices are generated by VΛ,Λ0 we can reformulate our renormalization program in
terms of V . We have to analyze the iterative solution of (157), discussing in particular under
which conditions the solution has regular UV limit and this limit has local Λ → ∞ limit.
Once again it is convenient to use, as above( in (132)), the scaled fields setting:
∞ n n
X 1 Z Y X
VΛ,Λ0 [φ] = (dpi φ̃(pi ))δ( pj )Vn (p1 , ··, pn , Λ, Λ0 )
n=0 n! i=1 j=1
∞ n n
X1 Z Y X
= V̂Λ,Λ0 [ϕ] = (dqi ϕ(qi ))δ( qj )vn (q1 , ··, qn , Λ, Λ0 ) . (158)
n=0 n! i=1 j=1
Notice that in the notation introduced above

ˆ ) · · · ·φ̃(p
Vn (p1 , ··, pn , Λ, ∞) = Λ4−n vn (p1 /Λ, ··, pn /Λ, Λ, ∞) =< φ̃(p ˆ
1 n−1 )φ̂(0)|Λ >1−P I . (159)
Then one finds for the coefficient functions the evolution equations:
n
Z Y n
X
(dqi ϕ(qi ))δ( qj ) [Λ∂Λ + 4 − n − q∂q ] vn (q1 , ..., qn , Λ, Λ0 )
i=1 j=1
n n
"Z
Z Y X dp −p2
=− (dqi ϕ(qi ))δ( qj ) e vn+2 (q1 , ..., qn , p, −p, Λ, Λ0 )
i=1 j=1 (2π)4
−χq 2 m 2 n
Z
dp −p2 Z
e − e−q X X n!
+ e dq δ( q j + p − q)
(2π)4 q2 j=1 m=1 m!(n − m)!
vm+2 (q1 , ..., qm , p, −q, Λ, Λ0 )vn−m+2 (qm+1 , ..., qn , q, −p, Λ, Λ0 ) + ··]
n
Z Y n
X
≡ (dqi ϕ(qi ))δ( qj )rn (q1 , .., q2n , Λ, Λ0 ) , (160)
i=1 j=1
where we have set χ = Λ2 /Λ20 and we have explicitly given the first two terms of the expansion
in (157).
This equation justifies the recourse to the scaled filed variables. Indeed if the |vn |’s are
bounded and ϕ is of class D it is apparent that all integrals in the right-hand side of (160)
˙
are absolutely convergent uniformly in χ ≥ 0 due to the the cut-off factors in Ŝ and Ŝ and to
momentum conservation which limits the range of the integration variables (e.g. p − q in the
39
second term in brackets) and hence there is no problem in taking the limit χ → 0 in the above
equation.
Now we transform (160) into a system of integral equations which will be suitable for
discussing the Λ0 → ∞ limit. We start considering the evolution equation of v0 . Then we
consider that of the coefficients of the Taylor expansion of v2 (p) up to the second order in p,
that is v2 (0, 0, Λ, Λ0 ) ≡ v2 and ∂q2 v2 (q, −q, Λ, Λ0 ))|q=0 ≡ v20 . Next we study the evolution of the
value of v4 at zero momenta. Finally we complete the set of evolution equations considering
those of the k-th momentum derivatives ∂qk vn (q, Λ, Λ0 ) for n + k > 4.
The Λ dependence of the q-independent coefficients is controlled by the evolution equations
[Λ∂Λ + 4] v0 (Λ, Λ0 ) = r0 (Λ, Λ0 )
[Λ∂Λ + 2] v2 (Λ, Λ0 ) = r2 (Λ, Λ0 )
Λ∂Λ v20 (Λ, Λ0 ) = r20 (Λ, Λ0 )
Λ∂Λ v4 (0Λ, Λ0 ) = r4 (Λ, Λ0 ) , (161)
which are solved by:
 
−4 Λ
Λ
Z
ΛR 3
v0 (Λ, Λ0 ) = c0 + dλ λ r0 (ΛR λ, Λ0 )
ΛR 1
 
−2 Λ
Λ
Z
ΛR
v2 (Λ, Λ0 ) = c2 + λdλ r2 (ΛR λ, Λ0 )
ΛR 1
 
Λ
Z
ΛR dλ 0
v20 (Λ, Λ0 ) = c02 + r (ΛR λ, Λ0 )
1 λ 2
 
Λ
Z
ΛR dλ
v4 (Λ, Λ0 ) = c4 + r4 (ΛR λ, Λ0 ) , (162)
1 λ
for some ΛR . These equations clearly show a strategy which is different from that discussed
at the end of the last section where we have computed the effective action corresponding to a
given IΛ0 . Indeed the present strategy, aiming at the construction of a V̂Λ,Λ0 [ϕ] with regular
Λ0 → ∞ (UV) limit, is based on the choice of the initial values of the evolution equation at a
fixed scale ΛR , at least for the first coefficients v0 , v2 , v20 and v4 . The advantage of this choice
is to eliminate any explicit Λ0 -dependence from (162). If the coefficients depend on Λ0 this is
due to the r’s. Had one chosen initial conditions at Λ = Λ0 there would appear an explicit
Λ0 -dependence which would influence the UV limit.
In order to continue our analysis of the UV limit we now come to the evolution of the
remaining coefficients vn . Notice that, taking a generic k-th momentum derivative ∂qk vn (q, Λ, Λ0 )
of vn , one has evolution equations completely analogous to (160); that is : :
[Λ∂Λ + 4 − n − k − q∂q ] ∂qk vn (q1 , ..., q2n , Λ, Λ0 ) = ∂qk rn (q1 , .., q2n , Λ, Λ0 ) (163)
In the cases we are studying, in which n + k > 4 it is convenient to consider the solution:

n+k−4 Z Λ
Λ Λq

Λ0
∂qk vn (q, Λ, Λ0 ) = dλ λ3−n−k ∂qk rn , Λ0 λ, Λ0
Λ0 1 Λ0 λ
40
Z Λ
Λq

= Λn+k−4 dx x3−n−k ∂qk rn , x, Λ0 . (164)
Λ0 x
Indeed the rightmost expression in (164) clearly shows that (163) has a UV regular solution if
∂qk rn is UV regular and absolutely bounded by polynomials in ln Λ uniformly in Λ0 .
Now it appears clearly in our integral equations that the crucial step of the analysis concerns
the properties of the rn ’s. It should be apparent from (160) that the momentum integrals
defining rn in terms of the vn ’s are limited by the exponential cut-off factor to a domain
contained into a R4 spherical shell of radii of order 1. Thus if the coefficients vn where absolutely
limited every integral would lead to an absolutely limited result. This is not enough to claim that
the rn ’s are absolutely limited since the number of terms contributing to each rn is potentially
infinite due to the presence of v2 . As a matter of fact summing all the possible insertions of
˜ ˜
v2 is equivalent to replace the propagator Ŝ(q) that, after rescaling and for χ = 1, is Ŝ(q) =
(1 − exp(−q 2 ))/q 2 by:
∞
˜ ˜ ˜
(−v2 (q)Ŝ(q))n
X
Ŝ(q) = Ŝ(q)
n=0
˜ q2 ˜
= Ŝ(q) 2 2
≡ Ŝ(q)Z(q) . (165)
q + v2 (q)(1 − exp(−q ))
For the same reason the Λ-derivative of the propagator gets multiplied by Z 2 (q). Now the
problem is that Z is not necessarily absolutely limited in Λ.
Indeed, summing over the v2 (p, −p, Λ, Λ0 ) insertions, the evolution equation of v2 (p, −p, Λ, Λ0 )
given in (160) becomes:
dp −p2 2
Z
[Λ∂Λ + 2 − q∂q ] v2 (q, −q, Λ, Λ0 ) = − e Z (p)v4 (q, −q, p, −p, Λ, Λ0 ) ≡ r2 (q, −q, Λ, Λ0 )
(2π)4
(166)
and it is apparent that r2 in our scalar theory is negative since v4 must be positive. Therefore,
limiting our analysis to v2 ≡ v2 (0, 0, Λ, Λ0 ), and assuming a weak, logarithmic, Λ-dependence
of r2 we find v2 ' (ΛR /Λ)2 c2 − P2 (ln Λ), that is: for large enough Λ, v2 is negative and its
absolute value increases as a power of ln Λ, and hence Z diverges for some Λ. Notice that v2
changes sign since we have chosen a finite (null) value of v2 at the initial point ΛR . Given the
value of V2 (Λ) ≡ Λ2 v2 (Λ) at Λ0 one has V2 (Λ) = V2 (Λ0 ) + (Λ20 P2 (ln Λ0 ) − Λ2 P2 (ln Λ)) with P2
positive, hence in order to have a small value of V2 at ΛR one has to choose V2 (Λ0 ) negative.
If, on the contrary, one keeps V2 (Λ0 ) positive V2 (ΛR ) diverges quadratically in the U.V. limit.2
It is worth recalling here that V2 is a mass and this is an aspect of the famous naturalness
problem with the scalar field masses, in particular with Higgs field one. There are theories
in which the masses of the fundamental fields are protected by a symmetry, this is the case
of super-symmetry, and, much more important, that of non-abelian gauge theories where the
problem we have just discussed does not exist. In the present case the mass problem forbids a
consistent construction of our scalar theory except if we limit our study to a formal perturbative
2
The situation is different in super-renormalizable theories, such as e.g. P (φ) in two dimensions in which
r2 ' −m2 /Λ2 up to log’s, and hence v2 has a similar behavior.
41
expansion in the initial data c2 , c02 and c4 . Indeed in a perturbative expansion the right-hand
side of (160) receives a finite number of contributions at any finite order.
We shall thus limit our future considerations to the iterative solution in powers of c2 , c02
and c4 (c0 is just a normalization constant which only appears in the first equation of the
system (162)). Taking into account (164) and (162) one finds coefficient functions vn (q, Λ) that
are power series of the input data c2 , c02 and c4 and the terms of order ν in c02 and c4 satisfy,
uniformly in Λ, ΛR and q, the inequality:
Λ

sup |∂qk vn(ν) (q, Λ)| ≤ Pn,k,ν log (167)
ΛR
where Pn,k,ν is a suitable polynomial of degree lower or equal to ν. A completely analogous
inequality holds true for sup |∂qk rn(ν) (q, Λ)|. Therefore the UV limit can be taken on the found
solutions and it appears regular since the x-integral in (164) and those in (160) converge uni-
formly in the limit. The inequality (167) is obtained identifying the coefficients of V̂Λ,∞ with
the solutions of the system of integral equations (162) and taking into account that, from (164),
one has: Z Λ
Λq

k n+k−4 3−n−k k
∂q vn (q, Λ, ∞) = Λ dx x ∂q rn , x, ∞ , (168)
∞ x
with rn computed from (160). In the following we shall often omit the label ∞ from the
UV limits of the coefficients and the UV limit will be understood for all functions of interest
whenever Λ0 will not explicitly appear.
The last point which remains to be discussed is the locality of limΛ→∞ V [φ, Λ] which guaran-
tees that our field theory and, in particular, that field equations be local. On a very superficial
level this is trivially verified taking into account (168) , (167) and recalling that:
p
Vn (p, Λ, Λ0 ) = Λ4−n vn ( , Λ, Λ0 ) . (169)
Λ
Indeed combining these equations it is easy to find that ∂qk Vn(ν) (q, Λ) with k + n > 4 vanishes in
the UV limit. This is however not enough, indeed one should verify that e.g. V4 has a sensible
UV limit. This is apparently true in our perturbative expansion.
The result we have reached so far is based on the construction of the solution of the RG
equations in power series of c2 , c02 and c4 . As a matter of fact we have already discussed what
happens when one sums the series in c2 and it is not a problem to sum the series in c02 that fixes
the scale of the field, for simplicity one can chose c2 and c02 vanishing and remain with c4 playing
the role of a coupling constant g. This must be positive, otherwise the theory becomes unstable
and the functional integral (112) does not make sense. One gets in this way a perturbation
theory which should be accurate for small values of c4 ≡ g.
There is however a different and, potentially, more interesting construction strategy which
is based on the smallness of V4 (Λ), rather than g, for some value of Λ > ΛR . In particular this
strategy is crucial for theories with V4 (Λ) vanishing at infinite Λ, the limit we are interested in
in order to implement locality of the theory. Indeed, if this situation that is called asymptotic
freedom, were actual, one would have a guarantee of the consistency of the theory, independently
of the possibility of producing accurate results at low energy.
42
In order to give a more precise idea of this possibility let us analyze our scalar model. If
v4 is small it is not difficult to verify that r2n ∼ O((v4 )n ). Thus, considering the evolution
equation of v4 at vanishing momenta and up to the first non-trivial order in v4 one has from
(160) and (161):
2
4! Z dp −p2 1 − e−p 2
Λ∂Λ v4 (0, Λ) = e v4 (0, Λ)
(2!)2 (2π)4 p2
6π 2 Z ∞ 3 2
= dx(e−x − e−2x )v42 (0, Λ) = v (0, Λ) , (170)
(2π) 04 (4π)2 4
where we have disregarded the term in v6 which is O((v4 )3 ) and any momentum dependence of
v4 itself which would induce further higher order corrections in v4 . Integrating this differential
equation between ΛR and Λ with v4 (0, ΛR ) = g > 0 one has:
g
v4 (0, Λ) = 3 . (171)
1− (4π)2
g ln ΛΛR
This result is apparently deceiving since, due to the sign in the rightmost term of (170), v4
increases with Λ reaching a singular point in Λ = exp((4π)2 /3g)ΛR beyond which it changes
sign. This is called the Landau singularity.
It is clear that this result confirms the belief that the only consistent scalar theory we can
build is the free one.
It has been a surprise the result found about 20 year ago that the same calculation in the
case of the Yang-Mills gauge theory gives the opposite sign in (170) and hence a v4 vanishing
in the Λ → ∞ limit.
A further comment is necessary concerning renormalized operators that appear in the con-
struction of the theory, as specified in section 8, through functional derivatives of the effective
action with respect to external fields, ω in the following, and satisfy the linear evolution equa-
tion (131). It is clear from this and from the above analysis that every operator is defined
inserting a certain number of initial parameters, analogous to c2 , c02 and c4 , into the solutions of
the evolution equation for the coefficients Ωn (p, Λ) of the field expansion of the effective operator
ΩΛ [φ](x). These solutions are strictly analogous to (162). Of course, in order to complete the
construction, one also has to extend to the local operators the equations for the derivatives of
the higher order coefficients ∂qk Ωn (p, Λ), for n + k > dΩ , that turn out to be analogous to (168).
The need of a complete identification of the operator relates the number of initial parameters
to dΩ . Indeed completeness of initial conditions requires that initial values be specified for all
the coefficient of ΩΛ [φ](x) in its expansion in powers of fields and momenta up to the total
degree dΩ ; while (168) is equivalent to the prescription that the remaining coefficients have
null values at infinity. This means that the initial conditions that are not automatically trivial
correspond to the coefficients of a local polynomial in the fields and partial derivatives whose
total degree is dΩ . Thus one has to specify the terms of mass dimension up to dΩ of the local
operator at Λ = ΛR . Considering as above an iterative solution of the evolution equations one
sees that, at the first iterative order, ΩΛ [φ](x) is identified with an operator of mass dimension
(m) (m)
dΩ ≤ dΩ . We shall call dΩ naive dimension. A further comparison with the results for the
43
effective proper generator shows that dΩ identifies the behavior of the coefficients Ωn (p, Λ) for
large Λ and hence momenta. This turns out to be given, up to logs, by Ωn (p, Λ) = O(ΛdΩ −n ).
Thus we call dΩ power counting dimension.
The question is how these parameters and dΩ are chosen. The answer depends on the
properties of the operator, that is: its naive dimension, dΩ , Lorentz transformation (tensor)
properties, and possibly charges, in case the theory has conserved charges. Just to give a simple
example, consider, in the framework of neutral scalar field theory invariant under reflection
φ → −φ, the dimension dΩ = 4 local operators transforming as a scalar field and even under
reflection. There are 4 monomials in the fields and their derivatives with the desired properties,
these are φ2 , (∂φ)2 , φ ∂ 2 φ and φ4 , while the initial conditions for the proper effective action
identifying a particular choice of an operator with the desired properties concern the 1-PI vertex
with one ω leg and 4 φ legs at zero momenta and the coefficients of the Taylor expansion up to
degree 2 in the momenta of the scalar legs of the vertex with one ω and 2 φ legs. Both vertices
must be computed at Λ = ΛR . Let a1 be the value of the 4-leg vertex. Due to the chosen
Lorentz covariance and Bose symmetry the Taylor expansion of the 2-φ vertex can be written
as: a2 + a3 p1 · p2 + a4 (p21 + p22 )). Notice that we understand, except in case of explicit warning,
the normalization condition that the vacuum expectation values of operators vanish.
It can be helpful to represent the initial values of the evolution equations in the functional
formalism, indeed in this formalism the initial value of the effective proper generator is given
by: Z
(D>4)
VΛR [φ] = dx[c02 (∂φ)2 (x)/2 + c2 φ2 (x)/2 + c4 φ4 (x)/4!] + VΛR [φ] , (172)
(D>4)
where, expanding VΛR [φ] in series of φ as in (142) and recalling that the coefficient functions
Vn(D>4) (p1 , · · ·, pn , ΛR ) are analytic functions of the momenta in the origin, one has Vn(D>4) (p1 , · ·
·, pn , ΛR ) = O(p4−n ) for n ≤ 4.
In much the same way for the effective operator corresponding to the generic 4 dimensional
operator discussed above one has:
δVΛR [φ]
ΩΛR [φ](x) ≡ = a1 φ4 (x)/4! + a2 φ2 (x)/2 − a3 (∂φ)2 (x)/2 − a4 φ(x)∂ 2 φ(x) + ΩD>4
ΛR [φ](x) .
δω(x)
(173)
Now, due to the linearity of the evolution equation, ΩD>4 ΛR [φ](x) is a linear function of the ai ’s.
Since the operators are elements of a linear space it is convenient to chose a basis for this space
which is 4 dimensional in the case under discussion. This basis can be e.g. chosen setting one of
the coefficients ai , i = 1, .., 4 equal to 1 and the rest equal to zero. It is clear that the different
choices of i identify 4 independent local operators Ωi .
At this point a further comment is in order. Suppose we are interested in the operators
with the same properties of the above operator (173) but with dΩ = 2, we should have found,
instead of the right-hand side of (173) bφ2 (x)/2 + ΩD>2 ΛR [φ](x). The linearity of the operator
space implies that this operator corresponds to a linear combination of the elements of the basis
discussed above, that is, that it can be written in the form (173) for a special choice of the ai ’s.
A more systematic construction of these bases and a deeper analysis of the properties of
renormalized local operators can be done using the subtraction method. Thus we postpone
the analysis to a dedicated section. In this section we have tried to give a general idea of the
44
renormalization group based construction of a quantum field theory transforming the differential
evolution equations for the relevant functional generators into integral equations to be solved
iteratively. The discussion has concerned a mass-less scalar field with a particular cut-off; it
should be clear that a number of generalizations are possible, introducing e.g. masses in the
propagator (117) or changing the Lorentz covariance of the field. In next section we shall
present a perturbative solution of the evolution equations, in particular of (157), based on the
Feynman diagram decomposition and on a slight variant of Zimmermann’s subtraction formula.
This states a connection between the present RG construction and the well known BPHZ one.
45
11 The subtraction method
We are going to show that the subtraction method gives a solution to the evolution equation
(157) satisfying the integral equations (162) and (168). Leaving open the possibility of fixing
the initial values at ΛR = 0 we can modify the propagator (157) introducing a mass:
2
− p2 p2
˜ e Λ
0− e− Λ2
Ŝ(p) = (174)
p2 + M 2
and hence:
p2
˜˙ p2 e− Λ2
Ŝ(p) = − (175)
Λ2 (p2 + M 2 )
and
p2 + M 2
−1
˜ ˜
Ĉ(p) ≡ Ŝ (p) = 2 . (176)
− p2 2
− p2
e −e Λ Λ
0
The details of Zimmermann’s construction can be found in the lectures notes by Lowenstein
and Zimmermann quoted in the bibliography. Owing to the fact that the subtracted Feynman
integrals are absolutely convergent also in the absence of our exponential cut-off factors, and
in agreement with our conclusions about the evolution equations in the UV ( Λ0 → ∞) limit,
we shall understand this limit setting in the following formulae:
p2
˜ 1 − e− Λ2
Ŝ(p) = 2 , (177)
p + M2
for simplicity we shall also choose once and for all c2 = c02 = 0 and c4 = g.
Considering now the generic n-point function in the UV limit: < φ̃(p1 ) · ·φ̃(pn−1 )φ(0) >
that we shorten to Sn (p, Λ), we assume the reader to be familiar with the construction of the,
possibly divergent, Feynman integrals. These are associated with to a certain set of diagrams
with vertices corresponding to the gφ4 /4! interaction (and possibly to two-leg vertices that
will be induced by the subtraction procedure) and with the propagator (177). S2n appears
(m) (m)
as a formal power series in g of the form: S2n = ∞
P
L=1 S2n where S2n gives the sum of the
contributions from the diagrams with 2n external legs and m loops. These are finite in number.
The subtraction formula refers to the integral corresponding to each of these diagrams, let us
consider the diagram Γ.
(m)
The unsubtracted, and hence possibly divergent, Feynman integral contributing to S2n and
corresponding to Γ has the form:
Z
d4m k
SΓ (p) = IΓ (p, k) , (178)
(2π)4m
where k ≡ k1 , ...., km is a basis of internal momenta of the diagram, to be better specified, and
p ≡ p1 , ...., p2n−1 a basis of external momenta. The integrand is given by:
2(m+n−1)
Y Y
IΓ (p, k) = cΓ Ŝ(p̂l + k̂l ) ≡ cΓ Ŝ(p̂l + k̂l ) , (179)
l=1 l∈L(Γ)
46
where l labels the lines of the diagram and p̂l and k̂l are linear combinations of the p’s and of
the k’s respectively giving the momentum flow through the line l. cΓ is a combinatorial factor.
Notice that we limit ourselves considering a very special and simple class of diagrams which,
e.g. excludes the presence of the polynomial factors in the momenta that appear whenever one
has fermions and/or operators depending on the field derivatives. As a matter of fact two-leg
vertices carrying factors linear in the leg squared momenta are induced by the subtraction,
these complicate the form of IΓ without changing our conclusions. We believe that the example
we are presenting are sufficient to give a clear enough idea of the subtraction procedure and of
its correspondence with the result of the RG construction. In any case students interested in
the most general situation can find every needed information in the cited references.
In order to make (179) more precise, let us remind that a diagram is identified by a set V (Γ)
of vertices joined by a set L(Γ) of lines, a trivial diagram has a single vertex and no lines, we
have already specified what we mean by 1-particle irreducible (1-PI) diagram. A sub-diagram of
a diagram corresponds to a subset of vertices and a subset of lines joining them. A sub-diagram
is, of course contained in the original diagram, two sub-diagrams of the same diagram that have
lines and/or vertices in common, either are contained into one another, or intersect, one says
they overlap. The presence of divergent overlapping divergent diagrams corresponds to that of
overlapping divergences. Let us now consider how the p’s and k’s above can be assigned. As
an example we consider the diagram in the following figure:
1
'$
A 2 B (180)
3
&%
it has three lines 1, 2, 3, two vertices A, B and a single external legs attached to each vertex,
(2)
thus it contributes to V2 . It is a 1-PI diagram that we label (A, B/1, 2, 3) indicating the sets
of vertices and lines, its 1-PI sub-diagrams are (A, B/1, 2), (A, B/1, 3) and (A, B/2, 3). They
overlap
The momentum assignment begins from the k’s whose basis is given considering two loops,
say (1, 2) and (2, 3), and two momenta: k1 flowing clockwise around the first loop and k2 flowing
clockwise around the second. In this way we have k̂1 = −k1 , k̂2 = k1 − k2 and k̂3 = k2 . We
have oriented the positive line momentum flow from B to A. Now we consider the flow of
the external momentum p entering into B. This is determined by Kirchhoff’s law of circuit
theory. The first law is lV ±p̂lV + pV = 0 for every vertex, where the sum runs over the
P
lines attached to the vertex with the sign taken positive if the line momentum flows in and
negative if it flows out, and pV is the total momentum flowing into V through the external
legs and, in the case of a sub-diagram, the lines not belonging to the sub-diagram. This law
corresponds to momentum conservation at the vertex. The second law refers to any loop L
and prescribes that lL ±p̂lL ρlL = 0 where the sum runs over the lines forming the loop with
P
the sign taken positive if the line momentum flows clockwise and negative in the opposite case.
The ρl ’s are resistances associated with the lines, they can possibly vanish or diverge with the
condition that loops formed by lines with resistance identically zero or infinite are forbidden.
47
In the example, assigning the same resistance to the three lines one has p̂l ≡ p/3. Therefore the
external momentum flow through the lines of (A, B/1, 2, 3) is p̂1 = p̂2 = p̂3 = p/3 and hence
one has in the case of our example:
1
IΓ (p, k) = Ŝ(p/3 − k1 )Ŝ(p/3 + k1 − k2 )Ŝ(p/3 + k2 ) . (181)
6
The subtraction procedure requires that a momentum routing be also assigned to each 1-PI
subdiagram keeping the same resistances and considering as external the momenta flowing into
its vertices through the external legs and the lines not belonging to the sub-diagram. Therefore
(γ) (γ) (γ) (γ)
considering e.g. γ = (A, B/1, 3) one has p̂1 = p̂2 = (p + k2 − k1 )/2 and k̂1 = −kγ , k̂2 = kγ .
Comparing this with the momentum routing of the whole diagram one finds that the new
internal momentum kγ = (k1 + k2 )/2 depends only on the k’s. This is a general consequence of
the momentum assignment procedure.
Now we come to the construction of the subtraction scheme. This is based on the introduc-
tion of the forests of sub-diagrams, these are sets of non overlapping non-trivial sub-diagrams of
Γ including possibly Γ itself. We call FΓ the set of all forests of Γ. In our example FΓ contains
eight forests, the empty forest, 4 forests with a single element, be it the whole diagram or its
sub-diagrams mentioned above, and three forests with two elements: the whole diagram and
one of its sub-diagrams.
For each diagram/sub-diagram γ we introduce the operator Sγ which replaces the momen-
tum routing of the original diagram with that of γ and the Taylor operator tdγ (d integer) whose
action on Iγ (p, k), the factor of IΓ (p, k) corresponding to the lines of γ is threefold:
• tdγ replaces Λ with ΛR in the propagators
• tdγ takes the p̂(γ) Taylor expansion up to degree dγ , of Iγ (p, k), considered as function of
p̂(γ) and k̂ (γ)
• tdγ gives zero if dγ is negative.
Finally we set dγ equal to the superficial divergence of γ, i. e. in our simple example, dγ = 4−nγ
where nγ is the number of external legs/lines of the diagram/sub-diagram γ. That is the number
of external legs and the lines not belonging to the sub-diagram attached to the vertices of γ.
In the example dΓ = 2 and dγ ≡ 0 for the three sub-diagrams.
Having set this apparatus the subtracted Feynman integral is obtained replacing into (178)
IΓ (p, k) with:
(−tdγ Sγ )IΓ (p.k) .
X Y
RΓ (p, k) ≡ SΓ (182)
F ∈FΓ γ∈F
In the case of our example:

1 h
RΓ (p, k) = (1 − t2p ) Ŝ(p/3 − k1 )Ŝ(p/3 + k1 − k2 )Ŝ(p/3 + k2 )
6
−Ŝ(p/3 − k1 )Ŝ(k1 /2 − k2 )Ŝ(k2 − k1 /2)
−Ŝ(−k1 /2 − k2 /2)Ŝ(p/3 + k1 − k2 )Ŝ(k1 /2 + k2 /2)
i
−Ŝ(k2 /2 − k1 )Ŝ(k1 − k2 /2)Ŝ(p/3 + k2 ) , (183)
48
here t2p takes the Taylor expansion in p up to the second degree.
In order to prove the absolute convergence of the Feynman integral d4m kRΓ (p, k) one has
R
to verify that, on every hyperplane of dimension 4a with a ≤ m in R4m , |RΓ (p, k)| vanishes at
infinity faster than d−4a where d is the distance from the origin. Considering our example and
e.g. the hyperplane spanned by k2 one sees immediately that the first two terms in the righ-
thand side, each of which would give a contribution d−4 , in fact combine to give a term going
as d−5 , while the remaining terms vanish as d−6 . The same holds true for the 4-dimensional
hyperplanes spanned by k1 and k1 = k2 . However on the whole R4m we see that the content
of the bracket in (183) vanishes at infinity as d−6 which is clearly not enough. Now it is clear
that asymptotically the mass and the exponential in (177) do not play any role and hence the
content of the bracket in (183) tends to a homogeneous function of the momenta p and k of
degree −6. It is also clear that the operator 1 − t2p in front of the bracket selects terms of
degree higher than 2 in p and hence, asymptotically, terms of degree lower than −8 in a generic
direction in R8 thus implementing the absolute convergence criterion on R8 . This should give
an idea of how the subtraction method works. It should be also clear that the exponential in
(177) does not play any role in the UV regime and hence the general convergence proof given
by Zimmermann works also in our case.
Therefore we see that the subtraction method systematically applied to the expansion of
the coefficient functions Vn (p, Λ) in (158) (we have omitted the ∞ label) generates formal series
expansions in g of these coefficients such that V4 (0, ΛR ) = g and V2 (p, ΛR ) = O(p4 ) and hence
corresponding to the choice c2 = c02 = 0 and c4 = g.
It remains to prove that the effective proper generator VΛ [φ] corresponding to the coefficient
functions Vn (p, Λ) so obtained satisfies the evolution equation (157) with the chosen initial
conditions. In order to prove this let us take the Λ-derivative of a generic subtracted Feynman
integral corresponding to a 1-PI diagram and hence contributing to VΛ . Due to the absolute
convergence of the momentum integral we are allowed to commute derivative with momentum
integration and hence we come to the k-integral of ∂Λ RΓ (p, k). The crucial point in this proof
is that an un-subtracted Feynman integrand depends on Λ only through the propagators Ŝ and
that the sub-diagram subtraction terms generated by the Taylor operators tdγγ are Λ-independent
since they are computed at Λ = ΛR . Thus we have to consider in (182) the contributions of
the propagators of un-subtracted sub-diagrams.
For a generic 1-PI diagram Γ one has:
RΓ (p, k) = (1 − tdΓΓ )R̂Γ (p, k) (184)
where
(−tdγ Sγ )IΓ (p.k)
X Y
R̂Γ (p, k) = SΓ (185)
F ∈FΓ0 γ∈F
and FΓ0 is the set of forests non containing Γ as an element. In other words, computing R̂Γ (p, k)
one excludes the subtraction of the whole diagram. This distinction is in order since, the
possible subtraction being made at Λ = ΛR one has:
∂Λ RΓ (p, k) = ∂Λ R̂Γ (p, k) , (186)
which is equivalent to restricting the sum over the forests in (186) to FΓ0 .
49
Now some more diagrammatic analysis is needed. For every forest F in FΓ0 , γ ∈ F is a
maximal element of F if it is not contained into other elements of F . We define the maximal
sub-forest F̄ of F , the set of maximal elements of F and we label by F̄Γ0 the set of maximal
sub-forests in FΓ0 . Notice that F̄Γ0 coincides with the set of forests made of mutually disjoint
sub diagrams of Γ.
It is clear that any forest F in FΓ0 is equal to the union of non empty forests Fγ̄ in the
elements γ̄ of F̄ , that is:
F ≡ ∪γ̄∈F̄ Fγ̄ |Fγ̄ 6=∅ . (187)
Therefore we can write (185) as:

X Y X Y
R̂Γ (p, k) = SΓ (188)
F̄ ∈F̄Γ0 γ̄∈F̄ Fγ̄ ∈Fγ̄ ,Fγ̄ 6=∅ γ∈Fγ̄
Q
Given a maximal sub-forest F̄ of Γ we define the reduced diagram Γ/( γ∈F̄ γ) which is built
with the lines and vertices of Γ not belonging to any element of F̄ and of a further set of
vertices corresponding to the elements γ̄ of F̄ shrunk to point vertices. The reduced diagram
Q
Γ/( γ∈F̄ γ) is relevant to our discussion since the corresponding integrand identifies the part
of IΓ (p.k) which is not changed by the subtraction operation corresponding to the forest F .
Indeed one can write:
 
X Y d
R̂Γ (p, k) = SΓ  ((−tγ̄γ̄ Sγ̄ )R̂γ̄ (p, k)) IΓ/(Q γ) (p, k) (189)
γ̄∈F̄
F̄ ∈F̄Γ0 γ̄∈F̄
This expression is identical to that associated with a diagram coinciding with the reduced
diagram in which the vertices corresponding to the elements γ̄ of F̄ carry a factor equal to
d
(−tγ̄γ̄ Sγ̄ )R̂γ̄ (p, k). This factor, i.e. the bracket above, is, of course, Λ-independent. Therefore,
inserting (189) into (186) one has:
 
d
Λ2 ∂Λ2 RΓ (p, k) ((−tγ̄γ̄ Sγ̄ )R̂γ̄ (p, k)) Λ2 ∂Λ2 IΓ/(Q
X Y
= SΓ 
γ̄) (p, k) (190)
γ̄∈F̄
F̄ ∈F̄Γ0 γ̄∈F̄
 
X Y d X ˙
= SΓ  ((−tγ̄γ̄ Sγ̄ )R̂γ̄ (p, k)) Ŝ(p̂l + k̂l )IΓ/(Q γ̄∪l) (p, k)
γ̄∈F̄
F̄ ∈F̄Γ0
Q
γ̄∈F̄ l∈L(Γ/( γ̄∈F̄
γ̄))
where we have also used the fact that the Λ-dependence comes from the propagators and
Γ/( γ∈F̄ γ ∪ l) means the reduced diagram Γ/( γ∈F̄ γ) deprived of the line l.
Q Q
Now we interchange the summation over the forests with that over the line l upon which
the Λ-derivative acts. This is possible since every line contributes to the above sum in corre-
spondence with the forests F in FΓ0 whose elements do not contain l. If we extend the idea of
forest to diagrams, such as Γ/l which are connected but not necessarily 1-PI, the set of forests
we are speaking of is FΓ/l which is, of course, contained in FΓ0 . Thus we get:
˙
Λ2 ∂Λ2 RΓ (p, k) = SΓ (−tdγ Sγ )IΓ/l (p, k) ,
X X Y
Ŝ(p̂l + k̂l ) (191)
l∈L(Γ) F ∈FΓ/l γ∈F
50
Let us now consider the possibility of Γ/l not being 1-PI. Γ/l is however connected and hence it
decomposes according to its skeleton structure. In the present situation, in which the diagram
is obtained cutting a line from a 1-PI diagram, Γ/l is a chain 1-PI sub-diagrams pairwise
connected by lines. Therefore IΓ/l (p, k) factorizes into a product of line and 1-PI factors, one
of the end points of the line l above being attached to the first 1-PI sub-diagram of the chain
the other one to the last. Labelling these sub-diagrams by αi , i = 0, .., n we can write:
n
Y
IΓ/l (p, k) = Iα0 (p, k) Ŝ(p̂i + k̂i ))Iαi (p, k) . (192)
i=1
If Γ/l is 1-PI, the product above reduce to a single factor. Now a forest F in Γ/l appears as the
union of, possibly trivial, forests in the 1-PI sub-diagrams, therefore the sum over the forests
in FΓ/l decomposes into the product of the sums over the Fαi ’s and hence we have:
˙ X ˙
Λ2 ∂Λ2 RΓ (p, k) (−tdγ Sγ )IΓ/l (p, k) = SΓ
X X Y
= SΓ Ŝ(p̂l + k̂l ) Ŝ(p̂l + k̂l )
l∈L(Γ) F ∈FΓ/l γ∈F l∈L(Γ)
    
n
0d0
(−tdγγ )Iα0 (p, k)
X Y Y X Y
Sα
0
Ŝ(p̂i + k̂i )) Sαi (−tγ γ )Iαi (p, k)
F ∈Fα0 γ∈F i=1 F 0 ∈Fαi γ 0 ∈F 0
n
X ˙ Yh i
= SΓ Ŝ(p̂l + k̂l )Rα0 (p, k) Ŝ(p̂i + k̂i ))Rαi (p, k) . (193)
l∈L(Γ) i=1
Summing over all the possible diagrams it clearly appears that the structure of the rightmost
term of this equation coincides with that of the right-hand side of the evolution equation of the
effective proper generator VΛ [φ] (157) and, of course, to that of its coefficient functions whose
first two terms are shown, after scaling of the fields, in (160). Indeed one finds a chain of 1-PI
˙
amplitudes connected by propagators Ŝ and closed by Ŝ.
The only point that remains to verify is the correct counting of diagrams. In general
this is automatically guaranteed by the recourse to the functional method upon which (157)
is based. Just to clarify this point with an example, let us consider the three line two leg
diagram discussed in some detail above. This diagram seems to violate what just claimed,
indeed it has three indistinguishable lines, and hence its Λ-derivative gives three identical
˙
contributions in which Ŝ is linked to a single diagram with two identical lines; in a diagrammatic
expansion of (157) this diagram should appear only once. This is however a wrong argument
since it forgets the combinatorial factors of the diagrams. A diagram with N sets of ni , i =
1, ..., N indistinguishable lines carries a combinatorial factor equal to 1/( N
Q
i=1 ni !) that is 1/6
in the example. Combining the three identical contributions from the three lines together we
get the resulting contribution to the evolution equation with weight 1/2 which is exactly the
combinatorial factor of the corresponding diagram with two identical lines.
In conclusion we have shown that, adapting the subtraction method to the Feynman di-
agrams built of the propagator Ŝ given in (177), and possibly of its spinor, or gauge field
variants, yields to a diagrammatic construction of VΛ [φ] solving the RG evolution equation
(157). Furthermore, considering the functional generator of the sum of all the subtracted 1-PI
diagrams at Λ = ΛR and comparing it with (172) we see, as already noticed, that the part
51
with dimension up to four, corresponding to the integral in (172), only receives contributions
from the trivial diagrams, since tdΓΓ RΓ = tdΓΓ (1 − tdΓΓ )R̂Γ = 0. Thus in the present case the
subtracted functional generator satisfies (172) with c2 = c02 = 0 and c4 = g. While, concern-
(D>4)
ing VΛR and recalling that the coefficients of its field expansion correspond to superficially
convergent diagrams, one easily sees that it vanishes in the Λ → ∞ limit using the inequality:
(1 − exp(−p2 /Λ2 ))/p2 ≤ 2/(p2 + Λ2 ), and pure scale arguments. Therefore we conclude that
the construction of the effective proper generator VΛ [φ] by the subtraction method leads to the
same evolution equation and the same boundary condition as the Wilson construction, thus it
leads to the same result.
At this point it is natural to ask what is the difference between the RG and the subtraction
approach? Let us disregard the choice of the infra-red cut-off, we can skip it inserting the
mass as above and setting ΛR = 0. The main difference, from the UV point of view, is
that the subtraction approach deals with one diagram at a time, the forest decomposition
solving the problem of overlapping divergences. On the contrary the RG approach groups the
contributions of many diagrams together and overlapping divergences are disentangled taking
the Λ-derivative and integrating the evolution equation. What is not clear in the RG approach
is how the diagrams should be selected. In an asymptotically free theory one would select
iteratively the asymptotically dominant contributions, this is however still to be done. Much
less ambitious is the criterion of selecting all the diagrams with the same number of loops,
which corresponds to the order in h̄, thus building an iterative solution to (157) ordered in h̄;
we have just shown that in this case what one gets is identical to what one obtains applying
the subtraction method to a loop ordered diagrammatic expansion. The problem is that very
often the need of the above selection is overlooked and hence people study arbitrarily selected
iterative solutions to (157).
Before concluding this section we have to mention the existence of further versions of the
subtraction method among which by far the most used is based on dimensional regularization
and follows the lines given by Breitenlohner and Maison in the papers quoted in the bibliog-
raphy. In dimensional regularization one transforms the momentum integral associated with a
Feynman diagram into a parametric integral writing the (massless) propagator according:
Z 1/Λ2
˜ 2
Ŝ(p) ≡ dα e−αp (194)
0
and extending the resulting Gaussian momentum integral in d dimensions through:

d
π
Z
2
d −Xp2
d pe = .
X
The resulting expression for a Feynman integral, computed for Euclidean independent momenta
without vanishing partial sums, that is in the non-exceptional situation, corresponds to a mero-
morphic function in d and the subtraction procedure consists in subtracting the pole terms in
d = 4 coming from the α-integral in the neighborhood of the origin.
A technical aspect of this procedure is related to the change of the physical dimensions
of the parameters due to the extension of the theory to d Euclidean dimensions. Let µ be a
reference mass scale. In d dimensions the fundamental scalar field φ has the mass dimension
52
of µ(d−2)/2 and hence the φ4 coupling constant g has the mass dimension of µ4−d , this means
that, in order to extend the theory to d dimensions, one has to replace g by gµ4−d . Consider
the simple example of a diagram with two identical lines joining two vertices, the rest of our
former example once a line has been taken away, the corresponding Feynman integral is:
g 2 µ8−2d Z dd k 1 g 2 µ8−2d Z dd k Z 1/Λ2 −(αk2 +β(p+k)2 )

= dαdβ e
2 (2π)d k 2 (p + k)2 2 (2π)d 0
g 2 µ8−2d 1/Λ
Z 2
dαdβ αβ 2
− α+β p 2 4−d (Λ/µ)
d−4 Z 1
dxdy xy p2
− x+y
= e = g µ e Λ2 , (195)
2(4π)d/2 0 (α + β)d/2 2(4π)d/2 0 (x + y)d/2
its minimally subtracted version is:
(Λ/µ)d−4 Z 1 dxdy
" #
2 4−d
xy p2
− x+y 1
g µ e Λ −
2
. (196)
2(4π)d/2 0 (x + y)d/2 (4π)2 (4 − d)
The general structure of the unsubtracted Feynman integral corresponding to a generic 1-PI
diagram with m loops and 2n external legs of a scalar field theory with only φ4 couplings is:
P2n−1
Q2(m−1)+n N (x)pa ·pb
g n+m−1 µd−n(d−2) m(d−4)+4−2n
Z 1
i=1 dxi − a,b=1 a,b
Λ2 D(x)
cΓ (Λ/µ) e , (197)
(4π)md/2 0 Dd/2 (x)
where the indices a and b label n + m − 2 of the n + m − 1 vertices of the diagram, pa and pb are
the external momenta entering into the corresponding vertices, D and Na,b are homogeneous
polynomials of degree m and m + 1 respectively. It can be shown that in the hypercube
xi ≤ 1 , i = 1, .., 2(m − 1) + n, Na,b ≤ D and hence the singularities of the integral come from
the vanishing of D in the origin of the x-space. A systematic description of the subtraction
procedure is given by Breitenlohner and Maison. It is clear that repeating the analysis of the
subtracted theory in the present case would lead to completely analogous evolution equations
provided the coefficient of the subtracted terms be chosen Λ-independent as above.
53
12 Bases of local operators in the subtraction scheme
and the Wilson operator product expansion
Let us now consider how the bases of independent local operators discussed in the previous
section appear in the subtraction scheme. We consider in particular the example discussed at
the end of section [10], that is: in a neutral scalar theory invariant under reflection φ → −φ
we consider a basis of dΩ = 4 local operators transforming as an, even under reflection, scalar
field. The basis has 4 elements which have been characterized in the framework of the RG
construction specifying the corresponding initial conditions at Λ = ΛR . These conditions
concern the value, a1 , of the 1-PI vertex with one ω leg and 4φ-legs at zero momenta and
the coefficients of the Taylor expansion up to degree 2 in the momenta of the φ-legs of the
vertex with one ω-leg and 2 φ-legs, this expansion is identified by three coefficients according
to a2 + a3 p1 · p2 + a4 (p21 + p22 ). Now it is apparent that three elements of the basis, that is those
corresponding to the choices ai = δi,j with j = 1, 3, 4 correspond, after subtractions, to the
operators φ4 /4!, (∂φ)2 /2 and φ∂ 2 φ . Indeed the 1-PI vertices involving one of these operators
and with n < 5 legs are superficially divergent and hence, according to (184) the corresponding
functions have the structure: Z
dk(1 − tdΓ )R̂Γ (p, k) (198)
where d = 4−n. Therefore one has zero at Λ = ΛR and zero momenta for the vertices with 2 and
4 legs together with their momentum derivatives of degree d. The only contributions which are
not subtracted are those corresponding to the trivial, single vertex zero loop, diagrams which
give the chosen values of the ai ’s.
Things are quite different if we choose ai = δi,2 since the operator that would give the wanted
initial condition is φ2 /2, which has dimension two and hence the degree of the subtraction, d
in the above formula, is reduced by 2. Thus the only subtracted 1-PI vertex is that with two
legs and hence for this operator none of the ai ’s vanishes, in particular a2 = 1. The situation
would be different if the subtraction degree d were systematically increased by two for the
vertices containing this operator as an internal vertex. This is what is called extra-subtraction.
It corresponds to considering the operator which has in fact dimension 2 as a dimension 4
operator. In Zimmemann’s notation this is N4 [φ2 /2] which, of course, differs from the normally
subtracted one, that in the same notation is N2 [φ2 /2].
Zimmemann’s notation for a generic local operator is: Nδ [M ] and specifies a polynomial
M in the fields and their derivatives, which identifies the structure of the Feynman diagram
vertex associated with the operator, and an index δ from which the subtraction degrees of the
1-PI vertices is computed. In the scalar field case the subtraction degree dγ for a diagram γ
with n external legs is δ minus the number of external legs (dγ = δ − n). In the case of local
operators δ must be larger or equal to the dimension of M in order the Feynman integrals be
absolutely convergent. Comparing this discussion to the analysis in section [10] we see that δ
(m)
coincides with dΩ while dΩ is the naive mass dimension of the operator. We also see that M
identifies the initial conditions of the operator evolution at Λ = ΛR . Thus extra subtractions
(m)
appear whenever dΩ < dΩ .
As a matter of fact one could have introduced many other ways of increasing the subtraction
54
degrees of sub-diagrams containing an operator as a vertex. For example one could have chosen
a subtraction degree dependent on how the operator vertex is connected to the rest of the
diagram, in particular in the cases in which some of the lines attached to the operator vertex
are external lines of the sub-diagram one could choose a subtraction degree dependent on the
number and choice of these lines. In this case one speaks of anisotropic subtractions, they lie
outside the scope of this text.
Coming back to our example we notice that we have found two different bases, the first
one with elements N4 [φ4 /24], N4 [(∂φ)2/2], N4 [φ∂ 2 φ] and N4 [φ2 /2], while in the second one the
last element is replaced by N2 [φ2 /2]. It is clear that the elements of the second basis can be
written as linear combinations of the elements of the first one. In particular this holds true for
N2 [φ2 /2] which can be written in the form:
N2 [φ2 /2] = e1 N4 [φ4 /24] + e2 N4 [φ2 /2] + e3 N4 [(∂φ)2/2] + e4 N4 [φ∂ 2 φ] . (199)
In order to make this linear relation explicit we must compute the coefficients ei . With this
purpose we introduce the notation < N2 [φ2 /2(0)]φ̃(p1 ) · · · φ̃(pn )|Λ >1−P I , for the sum of the
perturbative contributions to the 1-PI function containing a vertex corresponding to the oper-
ator φ2 /2 with the subtraction degree corresponding to the N2 prescription and we notice that
these functions can be computed using both sides of (199). In particular the functions obtained
using the right-hand side of (199) are easily computed taking into account the definition of
N4 [M ] operators. Indeed, for example, choosing the amplitude < N2 [φ2 /2(0)](φ̃(0))4 |Λ >1−P I
one has immediately that the contribution of the right-hand side is only due to N4 [φ4 /24] and
hence this gives the value of e1 . Thus the complete decomposition is given by:
N2 [φ2 /2] = N4 [φ2 /2]+ < N2 [φ2 /2(0)](φ̃(0))4 |Λ >1−P I N4 [φ4 /24]
1
+ ∂p1 · ∂p2 < N2 [φ2 /2(0)]φ̃(p1 )φ̃(p2 )|Λ >1−P I |pi ≡0 N4 [(∂φ)2/2]
4
1
+ ∂p21 < N2 [φ2 /2(0)]φ̃(p1 )φ̃(p2 )|Λ >1−P I |pi ≡0 N4 [φ∂ 2 φ] . (200)
8
This is Zimmermann’s reduction formula applied to the present example.
The use of operator bases that has led us to the above reduction formula can be extended
to analyze properties of products of operators. This can lead to the formal proof of the renown
Wilson operator product expansion (OPE) which has been given by Zimmermann. We shall
discuss the simplest possible example of OPE with the aim of giving an idea of the method of
the general proof and, at the same time, showing how the coefficients should be computed.
Consider the operator φ(x)φ(0), this is an operator whose Feynman amplitudes have already
been defined in the framework of our renormalized theory. What is ill-defined is its x →
0 limit. Instead of φ(x)φ(0) let us introduce N2 [φ(x)φ(0)] applying our modified version of
Zimmermann’s subtraction prescriptions to the 1-PI diagrams containing φ(x)φ(0) considered
as a single vertex (operator) of dimension dΩ = 2. This is a new operator which is expected
to have regular x → 0 limit since N2 [φ2 /2(0)] is a well defined operator and the subtracted 1-
PI functions containing it, or else N2 [φ(x)φ(0)], correspond to absolutely convergent Feynman
integrals uniformly in x. It is therefore allowed the exchange of the x → 0 limit with the
momentum integral.
55
Let us now consider the difference:
∆(x) ≡ φ(x)φ(0) − N2 [φ(x)φ(0)] . (201)
It is clear from the above comments that this difference does not vanish due to the extra-
subtractions that we have inserted into the definition of N2 [φ(x)φ(0)]. Let us consider the
set of subtracted, but not necessarily connected, Feynman diagrams involving the product
φ(x)φ(0). These diagrams are clearly not 1-PI, however one can still define the set of their
forests FΓ and one finds for the subtracted n-point functions expressions completely analogous
to the integral of (182).
On the contrary, if the two-point operator is N2 [φ(x)φ(0)], and thus is considered as a
single vertex, the un-subtracted integrand IΓ (x, p, k) does not change, while, whenever both
points belong to the same connected part of the whole diagram, the set of forests F̄Γ is larger
than FΓ and contains it. Indeed, if one considers the two-point operator as a single vertex,
all the connected sub-diagrams containing both fields give rise to 1-PI sub-diagrams which
were not included in any forest of FΓ . Among these diagrams are considered divergent those
which are disconnected from the rest of the diagram, which thus factorizes into the product
of the two-point function < φ(x)φ(0)|ΛR >C and the rest, and those which are connected
to the rest of the diagram by two lines. The diagrams contributing to the first set are just
disregarded, if the two-point operator is N2 [φ(x)φ(0)], since the two point factor is considered
as the vacuum expectation value of N2 [φ(x)φ(0)] which must be subtracted. If instead the split
vertex N2 [φ(x)φ(0)] is contained in sub-diagrams connected to the rest through two lines, these
sub-diagrams are subtracted at vanishing momenta of the two lines while this subtraction does
not appear for the field product.
Therefore the Green functions containing ∆ receive contributions from two kinds of dia-
grams, the first kind corresponds to diagrams which factorize into a diagram with only two
external legs corresponding to φ(x) and φ(0) and the rest, while in the diagrams of the second
kind the field product is connected to the rest by two external lines. Of course one excludes
from the second kind diagrams which belong to the first one.
Considering diagrams of the second kind let us call F̄Γ,2 the sub-set of F̄Γ whose elements
are forests containing at least one 1-PI sub-diagram including the split vertex and connected
to the rest by two lines, let us call γ2 the sub-diagrams satisfying this condition. It is clear that
the contribution of a diagram of the second kind to a Green functions containing ∆ corresponds
to the subtracted integrand:

X Y
∆RΓ (x, p, k) = SΓ (202)
F ∈F̄Γ,2 γ∈F
Now let γ(F )2 be the smallest γ2 in the forest F in F̄Γ,2 , let F< be the sub-forest of F strictly
contained in γ(F )2 and F> = F (F< ⊕ γ(F )2 ) , let furthermore IΓ/γ(F )2 (p.k) be the integrand
of the reduced diagram Γ/γ(F )2 we have:
(−tdγ Sγ )IΓ/γ(F )2 (p, k) (t0γ(F )2 Sγ(F )2 ) (−tdγ 0 Sγ 0 )Iγ(F )2 (x, p, k) .

X Y Y
∆RΓ (x, p, k) = SΓ
F ∈F̄Γ2 γ∈F> γ 0 ∈F<
(203)
56
Once again we can exchange the sum over the forests in F̄Γ,2 with a sum over the sub-diagrams
γ2 combined with the sum over the forests in Γ/γ2 , that is in FΓ/γ2 , and the sum over the
forests in Fγ0 2 where, keeping the notation used in section [11], the apex 0 excludes the forests
containing γ2 as an element. It is clear that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the
elements of FΓ/γ2 and the F> appearing in (203).
The two summation procedures are equivalent and using the second procedure we get:
(−tdγ Sγ )IΓ/γ2 (p, k) (t0γ2 Sγ2 ) (−tdγ 0 Sγ 0 )Iγ2 (x, p, k) . (204)

X X X Y
∆RΓ (x, p, k) = SΓ
γ2 F ∈FΓ/γ F 0 ∈Fγ0 2 γ 0 ∈F 0
2
Now it is apparent that (t0γ2 Sγ2 ) d

γ 0 ∈F 0 (−tγ 0 Sγ 0 )Iγ2 (x, p, k)
P Q
F 0 ∈Fγ0 2 is the subtracted integrand of
ˆ
the contribution of γ2 to < φ(x)φ(0)(φ̃(0))2
|ΛR >C , indeed the selection of forests corresponds
to considering the field product as it is and not as a single vertex since F 0 ∈ Fγ0 2 does not
contain any element containing the split vertex. On the contrary the reduced diagram Γ/γ2 is
subtracted with the rules corresponding to the identification of the vertex corresponding to γ2
with a N2 [φ2 ] operator.
Therefore considering ∆(x) defined above, we have that a Green function with a ∆(x) vertex
just corresponds to the contributions coming from the subtractions due to the N2 [φ(x)φ(0)]
vertex considered before. Summing over all possible diagrams containing the split vertex this
result can be expressed by the operator relation:
ˆ
∆(x) =< φ(x)φ(0)|ΛR >C I+ < φ(x)φ(0)(φ̃(0))2
|ΛR >C N2 [φ2 (0)/2] , (205)
where I represents the identity operator whose insertion into a diagram reproduces the same
diagram. Recalling (201) this last equation can be written according:
φ(x)φ(0) =< φ(x)φ(0)|ΛR >C I+ < φ(x)φ(0)(φ̃(0)) ˆ 2

|ΛR >C N2 [φ2 (0)/2] + N2 [φ(x)φ(0)] ,
(206)
where the first term of the right-hand side gives the most divergent part of the operator product
φ(x)φ(0) in the x → 0 limit, this term diverges since < φ(x)φ(0)|ΛR >C ' x−2 . The second
term contributes as ln x2 and the last term is regular.
This is Wilson’s OPE applied to the product φ(x)φ(0). This procedure can easily be gen-
eralized to the case in which the fields are replaced by renormalized composite operators. If
needed the expansion can also be pushed further, by replacing N2 [φ(x)φ(0)] with Nd [φ(x)φ(0)]
with d > 2 and using Zimmermann’s reduction procedure.
57
13 The Quantum Action Principle
An important result which is easily reached in the functional approach is the quantum action
principle. The basic idea is to exploit the invariance of the functional integral under change of
integration variables. We consider in particular the change of variable:
φ → φ + gΛ0 ∗ σΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ φ] , (207)
into the functional (112). Here, in the limit Λ0 → ∞, σΛ0 [φ] is a polynomial in the fields and
their derivatives and g0 is the smearing Gaussian introduced in (105). At the first order in ,
using the short notation introduced in Eq. (116) we get:
! !
Z
δ δ
dµ[φ] gΛ0 ∗ IΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ φ] + C ∗ gΛ0 ∗ φ − gΛ0 ∗ (J + ) σΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ φ]
δφ δφ
(φC ∗ φ)
exp{(φJ) − − IΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ φ]} = 0 . (208)
2
Notice that the term containing the φ functional derivative of σΛ0 corresponds to the first order
in variation of the measure, that is of the Jacobian of the transformation. This equation
can be translated into a functional differential equation inserting into the effective action σΛ0
coupled to the source ω:
Z
1
exp FC [J, ω] = dµ[φ] exp{−[IΛ0 + (ωσΛ0 )][gΛ0 ∗ φ]} exp{− (φC ∗ φ) + (Jφ)} , (209)
2
getting:
! !
Z
δ δ
dµ[φ] gΛ0 ∗ [IΛ0 + (ωσΛ0 )][gΛ0 ∗ φ] + C ∗ gΛ0 ∗ φ − gΛ0 ∗ σΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ φ]
δφ δφ
(φC ∗ φ) δ
exp{(φJ) − − IΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ φ]} + (JgΛ0 ∗ ) exp FC [J, ω] = 0 . (210)
2 δω
Now let IΛ,Λ0 [φ, ω] be the solution of the evolution equation corresponding to the bare, local,
operator[IΛ0 + (ωσΛ0 )][φ]. We have (see (120) ):
Z
1
exp FC [J, ω] = dµ[φ] exp{−IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ φ + ĝ ∗ S ∗ J, ω]} exp{− (φC ∗ φ) + (Jφ)} , (211)
2
performing the change of variable:
δ
φ → φ + gΛ ∗ IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ φ + ĝ ∗ S ∗ J, ω] , (212)
δω
at the first order in , we get:
!
Z
δ δ
dµ[φ] gΛ ∗ IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ φ + ĝ ∗ S ∗ J, ω] + C ∗ gΛ ∗ φ − gΛ ∗ (J + )
δφ δφ
!
δ (φC ∗ φ)
IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ φ + ĝ ∗ S ∗ J, ω] exp{(φJ) − − IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ φ + ĝ ∗ S ∗ J, ω]}
δω 2
Z
(φC ∗ φ)
≡ dµ[φ]BΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ φ + ĝ ∗ S ∗ J, ω] exp{(φJ) − − IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ φ + ĝ ∗ S ∗ J, ω]}
2
δ
+(JgΛ0 ∗ ) exp FC [J, ω] = 0 . (213)
δω
58
where, of course:
! !
δ δ δ
BΛ,Λ0 [φ, ω] = gΛ ∗ IΛ,Λ0 [φ, ω] + C ∗ gΛ ∗ φ − gΛ ∗ IΛ,Λ0 [φ, ω] , (214)
δφ δφ δω
is the solution of the evolution equation corresponding to the bare operator:

! !
δ δ
BΛ0 [φ, ω] = gΛ0 ∗ [IΛ0 + (ωσΛ0 )][φ] + C ∗ φ − gΛ0 ∗ σΛ0 [φ] . (215)
δφ δφ
The most important property of the symmetry breaking operator BΛ is that it appears as an
integrated operator which is local in the Λ0 → ∞ limit and whose dimension is equal to that
of the naive variation of a generic bare action under the transformation (207). Equation (213)
represents what is usually called the quantum action principle. From the RG point of view one
could wonder if in some special situation the theory could be fine tuned at Λ = ΛR so that
BΛ , that is, its initial value, vanishes. As a matter of fact, in the Λ0 → ∞ limit, due to the
linearity of the operator evolution equations, if the initial value of the symmetry breaking term
BΛR vanishes, BΛ identically vanishes and the theory satisfies the Ward-like identity:
δ
(J )) exp FC [J, ω] = 0 . (216)
δω
Notice that it is apparent from (214) that the vanishing condition for BΛR is in fact a condition
on the effective action and hence on its initial value. BΛ vanishes in many physically interesting
situations, while in other cases it turns out that, however vanishing in the semiclassical limit,
the breaking BΛ appears at the quantum correction level and cannot be fine-tuned to zero.
This is the case of anomalies.
The above comments hold clearly true in the subtraction scheme in which the breaking
operator can be decomposed into the sum of the elements of the suitable operator basis and
its vanishing condition can be analized using the so called algebraic method that one can find
presented in some details in the book by Piguet and Sorella quoted in the bibliography. We
shall come back to this method at the end of this section.
It is interesting to apply the above analysis to the case of free fermion current algebra; in
the simplest possible non-trivial case one considers a massless fermion field ψ in an abelian
axial vector field background Aµ . The bare Lagrangian is:
/ψ + iω̄γ 5 αψ − iψ̄γ 5 αω + l0 [A] ,

L0 = −iψ̄∂/ψ + ψ̄A (217)
where the terms in α define the field gauge transformation and l0 [A] represents terms which
only depend on the background field Aµ .
In this theory the cut-off Feynman functional (112) is:
Z h
FC [A,η̄,η,ω̄,ω,Λ0 ]
e = dµ[ψ]dµ̄[ψ̄] exp −i(ψ̄∂/ψ) + (ψ̄ gΛ0 ∗ γ 5 A
/ gΛ0 ∗ ψ) + l0 [A]
i
+i(ω̄γ 5 α gΛ0 ∗ ψ) − i(ψ̄ gΛ0 ∗ γ 5 αω) + (η̄ψ) − (ψ̄ω) , (218)
59
R
where we have understood space-time integrals and l0 = dx l0 . Considering the spinor field
change:
ψ → ψ + igΛ0 ∗ γ 5 α gΛ0 ∗ ψ
ψ̄ → ψ̄ + iψ̄ gΛ0 ∗ γ 5 α ∗ gΛ0 , (219)
and that of A:
A → A + ∂α , (220)
at the first order in α we have:
Z
dµ[ψ]dµ̄[ψ̄] δA l0 [A] + i(ψ̄ gΛ0 ∗ [α gΛ0 ∗ gΛ0 ∗ A
/−A
/ gΛ0 ∗ gΛ0 ∗ α] gΛ0 ∗ ψ)
h i
exp −i(ψ̄∂/ψ) + (ψ̄ gΛ0 ∗ γ 5 A
/ gΛ0 ∗ ψ) + l0 [A] + (η̄ψ) − (ψ̄ω)
" #
δ δ
+ (η̄ gΛ0 ∗ )−( gΛ0 ∗ η) exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω, Λ0 ]
δ ω̄ δω
δ
= (∂α ) exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω, Λ0 ] ≡ δA exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω, Λ0 ] , (221)
δA
where one does not find contributions from the Jacobian of the functional measure since γ 5 is
traceless. Notice that, if l0 [A] only depends on ∂µ Aν − ∂ν Aµ ≡ Fµν , the bare breaking term
reduces to:
i(ψ̄ gΛ0 ∗ [α (gΛ0 ∗)2 A
/−A/ (gΛ0 ∗)2 α] gΛ0 ∗ ψ) , (222)
and tends in the Λ0 → ∞ limit to the commutator [α, A] which, of course, vanishes. Thus
naively one would say that in the UV limit one recovers the exact Ward identity:
" #
δ δ
(η̄ ) − ( η) exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω] = δA exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω] , (223)
δ ω̄ δω
this result is however not guaranteed since the naive functional integral does not make sense.
To verify the validity of (223) one has to discuss the UV limit of the effective theory.
The effective action of this theory can be computed directly taking into account its in-
terpretation as the functional generator of connected-amputated functions corresponding to a
suitable cut-off propagator. In the present case the propagator is:
gΛ2 0 − gΛ2
Σ̃Λ,Λ0 (p) ≡ , (224)
/p
and the effective action:
IΛ,Λ0 [A, ψ̄, ψ, ω̄, ω] = −(ψ̄ΓΛ,Λ0 ψ) − i(ω̄γ 5 α(1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 )ψ)
+i(ψ̄(1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )αγ 5 ω) − WΛ,Λ0 [A] + II [Fµν ] , (225)
where: ∞
(−1)n−1
T r((γ 5 A
/ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗)n ) + VΛR [A] .
X
WΛ,Λ0 [A] = (226)
n=1 n
60
The functional VΛR [A] accounts for possible terms introduced through the initial conditions of
the evolution equation and hence it is a space-time integrated local operator of dimension 4.
ΓΛ,Λ0 satisfies:
ΓΛ,Λ0 = γ 5 A
/(1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 ) = (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 A
/. (227)
Now from (220) one has:
δA ΓΛ,Λ0 = γ 5 [∂/, α](1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 ) − γ 5 A

/ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ δA ΓΛ,Λ0
5
= (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ [∂/, α](1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 )
= i(1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 [p
/, α](1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 ) , (228)
where we have used:

(1 + γ 5 A
/ ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗)(1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 ) = 1 , (229)
which follows from (227). One also has:
∞
(−1)n T r γ 5 [∂/, α]ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ (γ 5 A
/ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗)n
X
δA WΛ,Λ0 [A] − δA VΛR [A] =
n=1
= −i T r(γ 5 [p
/, α]ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 ) (230)

= −i T r ((gΛ0 ∗)2 − (gΛ ∗)2 )∗

[ΓΛ,Λ0 γ 5 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 α − αΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 γ 5 ] .
Now we apply (213) to our model starting from:

Z h i
eFC [A,η̄,η,ω̄,ω,Λ0 ] = dµ[ψ]dµ̄[ψ̄] exp −i(ψ̄∂/ψ) − IΛ,Λ0 [A, Ψ̄, Ψ, ω̄, ω] + (η̄ψ) − (ψ̄ω) , (231)
where we have set:

1 1
Ψ = gΛ ψ + ĝ ∗ η , Ψ̄ = ψgΛ − η ∗ ĝ . (232)
/p /p
First of all we evaluate the contribution in the functional integral (213) of the Jacobian of the
field transformations:
ψ → ψ + igΛ ∗ γ 5 α(1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 ) ∗ Ψ

ψ̄ → Ψ̄ (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 α ∗ gΛ , (233)
this is given by:

δ δ δ δ
δJΛ,Λ0 [A] ≡ T r( gΛ ∗ IΛ,Λ0 ) − T r( gΛ ∗ IΛ,Λ0 )
δψ δ ω̄ δ ψ̄ δω

= −i T r gΛ ∗ [γ 5 α(1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 ) + (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 α] ∗ gΛ

= −iT r [ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ α(gΛ ∗)2 − (gΛ ∗)2 αΣΛ,Λ0 ∗]ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ γ 5 , (234)
61
once again we have taken into account that γ 5 is traceless. Thus we can write (221) according:
Z h
δA exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω, Λ0 ] = dµ[ψ]dµ̄[ψ̄] δA JΛ,Λ0 [A] + δA WΛ,Λ0 [A] + Ψ̄δA ΓΛ,Λ0 Ψ

+i Ψ̄[(1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 α(gΛ ∗)2 ΓΛ,Λ0 + ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ (gΛ ∗)2 αγ 5 (1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 )]Ψ
i
− Ψ̄(1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 αgΛ ∗ (p / + iη̄)gΛ ∗ αγ 5 (1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 )Ψ
/ψ − iη) + (ψ̄p
h i
exp −i(ψ̄∂/ψ) − IΛ,Λ0 [A, Ψ̄, Ψ, ω̄, ω] + (η̄ψ) − (ψ̄η)
Z h
≡ dµ[ψ]dµ̄[ψ̄] δA JΛ,Λ0 [A] + δA WΛ,Λ0 [A] + i Ψ̄BΛ,Λ0 [A]Ψ
i
+i η̄gΛ0 ∗ αγ 5 (1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 )Ψ − i Ψ̄(1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 αgΛ0 ∗ η
h i
exp −i(ψ̄∂/ψ) − IΛ,Λ0 [A, Ψ̄, Ψ, ω̄, ω] + (η̄ψ) − (ψ̄ω)
Z h i
= dµ[ψ]dµ̄[ψ̄] δA JΛ,Λ0 [A] + δA WΛ,Λ0 [A] + i Ψ̄BΛ,Λ0 [A]Ψ
h i
exp −i(ψ̄∂/ψ) − IΛ,Λ0 [A, Ψ̄, Ψ, ω̄, ω] + (η̄ψ) − (ψ̄ω)
" #
δ δ
+ (η̄ gΛ0 ∗ )−( gΛ0 ∗ η) exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω, Λ0 ] , (235)
δ ω̄ δω
where we have set:
BΛ,Λ0 [A] = −iδA ΓΛ,Λ0 + (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 α(gΛ ∗)2 ΓΛ,Λ0 + /pγ 5 α(1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 )
+ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ (gΛ ∗)2 αγ 5 (1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 ) + (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )αγ 5/p
= (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 [p/, α](1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 )
+(1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ α(gΛ ∗)2 ΓΛ,Λ0 + ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ (gΛ ∗)2 αγ 5 (1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 )
5
/αγ 5 (1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 ) + (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ 5 αp

+p /
5 2
= (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )γ α(gΛ ∗) ΓΛ,Λ0 + ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ (gΛ ∗)2 αγ 5 (1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 )(236)
.
Now, taking into account (227) one finds:

h i
BΛ,Λ0 [A] = (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 ) α(gΛ0 ∗)2 A /(gΛ0 ∗)2 α (1 − ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΓΛ,Λ0 ) .
/−A (237)
In order to evaluate the contribution of this term to the Ward identity (235) in the UV limit, let
us notice that the operator corresponding to the square bracket contributes by a vertex factor
/(k)[exp(−(p + q)2 /Λ20 ) − exp(−(p + k)2 /Λ20 )] where p is the momentum entering into the
α̃(q)Ã
vertex from the left. We are keeping the Fourier transform conventions of the first chapter (11),
that is: Z
dp ip·x ˜
f (x) = e f (p) . (238)
(2π)4
If Ã, and η̃ and η̄˜ are fast decreasing functions at high momenta, the momenta p, q and k
remain limited uniformly in Λ0 and hence we can take the U.V. limit directly on the vertex
factor getting a vanishing result.
62
It remains to compute: δA JΛ,Λ0 [A] + δA WΛ,Λ0 [A]. Using (231) and (234) and, once again,
(227), one gets:
δA JΛ,Λ0 [A] + δA WΛ,Λ0 [A] = δA VΛR [A] − iT r{[ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ α(gΛ0 ∗)2 − (gΛ0 ∗)2 αΣΛ,Λ0 ∗]ΓΛ,Λ0 γ 5 }
= δA VΛR [A] + iT r{[α(gΛ0 ∗)2 A
/−A /(gΛ0 ∗)2 α]ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ (1 − ΓΛ,Λ0 ∗ ΣΛ,Λ0 )} . (239)
The crucial point of this analysis is that, even if the content of the square bracket in the right
most term of this equation seems to vanish in the UV limit, the trace does not vanish, as we
can see in a moment, since it involves the difference of momentum integrals that are divergent
in the UV limit.
Notice that the same term in brackets appears in (237), (239) and (222). This is by no means
surprising since the term breaking the Ward identity at the effective theory level must be that
generated by the evolution of (222). In other words until now we have just verified that the
operator breaking the Ward identity (235), which is the sum of (237) and (239) is the effective
operator corresponding the the bare operator (222), i.e. that the effective breaking operator is
the functional generator of connected and amputated diagrams containing the vertex (222) and
built with the propagator (224). Thus what we have done until now is just a lengthy exercise
verifying Wilson effective theory.
Now we have to analyze what remains of the breaking in the Λ0 → ∞ limit taking into
account that it is contained in (239) and depends on the choice of VΛR [A]. One has to keep in
mind that VΛR [A], is the initial value (at Λ = ΛR ) of the background field part of the effective
action. It remains to be determined in particular asking, if possible, that the Ward identity
remains unbroken.
We expand the trace in the right-hand side of (239) in powers of A and compute one term
at a time. Let us start considering T r{[α(gΛ0 ∗)2 A/−A /(gΛ0 ∗)2 α]ΣΛ,Λ0 }. Putting:
∆Λ,Λ0 (p) ≡ (exp(−p2 /Λ20 ) − exp(−p2 /Λ2 ))/p2 , (240)
we find:
T r{[α(gΛ0 ∗)2 A /−A /(gΛ0 ∗)2 α]ΣΛ,Λ0 }

Z
dpdq
= 4i 8
α̃(q p · Ã(−q)[exp(−(p + q)2 /Λ20 ) − exp(−(p − q)2 /Λ20 )]∆Λ,Λ0 (p2 )
(2π)
Z
dq 2 2 2
Z
=i 4
α̃(q q · Ã(−q)[aΛ 0 + bq + O(1/Λ 0 )] = dx[aΛ20 A · ∂α − b∂ 2 A · ∂α]
(2π)
Z
+O(1/Λ20 ) = δA dx[aΛ20 A2 /2 − b A · ∂ 2 A/2] + O(1/Λ20 ) . (241)
This result shows that the considered contribution to the breaking can be fine-tuned to zero
inserting the term dx[−aΛ20 A2 /2 + b A · ∂ 2 A/2] into VΛR [A]. Indeed, after this insertion, what
R
remains linear in A in δA JΛ,Λ0 [A] + δA WΛ,Λ0 [A] is just O(1/Λ20 ).

Let us now study the terms of higher degree in A. These terms are contained in:
∞
(−1)n T r{[α(gΛ0 ∗)2 A /(gΛ0 ∗)2 α]ΣΛ,Λ0 ∗ (γ 5 A
/ ΣΛ,Λ0 )n } .
X
i /−A (242)
n=1
63
Taking into account that, due to the factor in square brackets, in the UV limit only the mo-
mentum region where p ' Λ0 gives non-vanishing contributions to the trace integral, we see
that we can limit our analysis to the terms with n = 1 and 2 in the above sum since the higher
order terms give contributions vanishing in the U.V. limit. We begin with the terms with n = 2
getting:
Z
dpdq1 · · · dq3
qi )2 /Λ20 ) − exp(−(p + q1 )2 /Λ20 )]
X X
i 16
α̃(− qi )[exp(−(p −
(2π)
X
/(q1 )Σ̃Λ,Λ0 (p + q1 −
T r{Ã /(q2 )Σ̃Λ,Λ0 (p − q3 )Ã
qi )Ã /(q3 )Σ̃Λ,Λ0 (p)} . (243)
In this expression we have to select the terms with non-vanishing UV limit. Under the integral
sign these correspond to terms of order Λ−40 for p ' Λ0 . Thus we get:
Z
dpdq1 · · · dq3 −p2 ˜ 3
8i exp ∆ (p)[4pµ pν pρ − (pµ δ νρ + pν δ µρ + pρ δ µν )p2 ]
(2π)16 Λ20 Λ20 Λ,Λ0
X X
p · (q1 + qi )α̃(− qi )Ãµ (q1 )Ãν (q2 )Ãρ (q3 )
2 dpdq1 · · · dq3
Z
−4p2 X X
=− i 2
exp 2
α̃(− q i )(q 1 + qi ) · Ã(q1 )Ã( q2 ) · Ã(q3 )
3 (2π)16 p2 Λ0 Λ0
4Z dp −p2 −p2 −p2 Z
= 4 2 2
exp 2 (exp 2 − exp 2 ) dx ∂ · α(x)A2 (x)
3 (2π) p Λ0 Λ0 Λ0 Λ
1
Z
= + O(Λ2 /Λ20 ) dx ∂ · α(x)A2 (x) . (244)
12π 2
Once again we find a term which can be written as the variation under (220) of Ran integrated
local functional of the background field A. Indeed we have found δA [1/(32π 2 ) dx(A2 (x))2 ].
Therefore, much in the same way as the already found terms linear in A, we can fine-tune the
corresponding breaking terms to zero by a suitable choice of VΛR [A]. Finally we consider the
n = 1 term in (242):
Z
dpdq1 dq2
α̃(−q1 − q2 )[exp(−(p − q1 − q2 )2 /Λ20 ) − exp(−(p + q1 )2 /Λ20 )]
(2π)12
/(q1 )Σ̃Λ,Λ0 (p − q2 )γ 2 Ã
T r{Ã /(q2 )Σ̃Λ,Λ0 (p)}
Z
dpdq1 dq2
= −4i α̃(−q1 − q2 )[exp(−(p − q1 − q2 )2 /Λ20 ) − exp(−(p + q1 )2 /Λ20 )]
(2π)12
˜ Λ,Λ0 (p − q2 )∆
µνρσ Ãµ (q1 )q2ν Ãρ (q2 )∂σ ∆ ˜ Λ,Λ0 (p) , (245)
selecting under the integral sign the terms of order Λ−4
0 for p ' Λ0 , we get:
Z
dpdq1 dq2
−8i 12 2 4
α̃(−q1 − q2 )(p · (2q1 + q2 )) exp(−3p2 /Λ20 )µνρσ )Ãµ (q1 )q2ν Ãρ (q2 )pσ
(2π) Λ0 p
Z
dpdq1 dq2
= −4i α̃(−q1 − q2 ) exp(−3p2 /Λ20 )µνρσ )Ãµ (q1 )q2ν Ãρ (q2 )q1σ
(2π)12 Λ20 p2
Z
dp 2 2
Z
= −4i exp(−3p /Λ 0 ) dxα(x)µνρσ )∂µ Aν (x)∂ρ Aσ (x)
(2π)4 Λ20 p2
i Z
=− dxα(x)µνρσ )∂µ Aν (x)∂ρ Aσ (x) ≡ A[α, A] . (246)
12π 2
64
This last term cannot be written as the variation under (220) of an integrated local functional
of the background field A and hence it cannot be fine tuned to zero. It is an unavoidable
breaking term in the Ward identity, that is an anomaly analogous, but not identical, to the
ABJ anomaly. The final form of the Ward identity is:
" #
δ δ δ
(∂α ) exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω] − (η̄ ) − ( η) exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω]
δA δ ω̄ δω
= A[α, A] exp FC [A, η̄, η, ω̄, ω] , (247)
The lengthy exercise we have now concluded contains a remarkable amount of information
useful to study the general case.
However, before considering the general case let us spend some comment on the fine-tuning
that we have repeatedly appealed to in order to recover the wanted identity. Our example
is particularly suitable for a simple discussion since what remains at the effective level of the
bare breaking is restricted to terms which only depend of the background field A. Let us,
first of all, remark that we could have considered the UV limit of our model before trying to
implement the Ward identity. Indeed there is no problem with the UV limit since the model
is power counting renormalizable, however for a generic choice of the effective action initial
conditions, and in particular of VΛR [A], we should have obtained a broken identity. What we
have tried to do is to search for a VΛR [A] for which the breaking vanishes. From this point of
view the fine-tuning process appears as a compensation between the effective breaking induced
by the radiative corrections and the gauge variation of VΛR [A], the initial value of the effective
action (more precisely on the pure background part of it.) This is in principle possible since the
effective breaking and have the same dimension: 4 in the example. In order that the fine-tuning
be complete, one needs a one-to-one correspondence between the effective breaking terms and
the independent ones in δA VΛR [A]. This appears to be almost true in our example, the only
exception being the last term which has originated the anomaly. One could wonder about the
reason of this quasi-complete correspondence. The answer to this question turns out to be quite
simple due to the pure background character of the breaking. Indeed one is in fact limiting the
study of (221) to vanishing η̄, η, ω̄, ω. With this choice for a generic choice of the low energy
normalization conditions this equation can be written:
δ
(∂α )FC [A] = B[α, A] , (248)
δA
where B[α, A] represents the breaking part. In principle B[α, A] should depend on Λ and one
should limit the discussion to Λ = ΛR , however in the present case it does not depend, since
the left-hand side of (248) is Λ-independent. Now (248) is a functional differential equation
which admits a consistency condition for B[α, A]. Indeed the generators of two independent
δ δ
infinitesimal gauge transformation (∂α δA ) and (∂β δA ) obviously commute, thus one has:
δ δ
(∂α )B[β, A] = (∂β )B[α, A] . (249)
δA δA
Let us now consider how B[α, A] is constrained by dimensional, covariance and parity constraints
65
(due to parity conservation it must have positive parity being α a pseudo-scalar and A a pseudo-
vector). Its general form is:
Z
B[α, A] = dxα(x)[c1 ∂ · A + c2 ∂ 2 ∂ · A + c3 A2 ∂ · A + c4 A · ∂ A2 + c5 µνρσ ∂µ Aν ∂ρ Aσ ](x) + δA V [A] .
(250)
and hence:
δ Z h
(∂β )B[α, A] = dxα(x) c1 ∂ 2 β + c2 (∂ 2 )2 + c3 (2∂ · AA · ∂β + A2 + ∂ 2 β)
δA
i δ δ
+c4 (∂β · ∂ A2 + 2A · ∂(A · ∂β)) (x) + (∂β )(∂α )V [A] , (251)
δA δA
which must be symmetric in α and β. We leave as an exercise to the reader to verify that this
expression is symmetric in α and β if and only if c3 = c4 . Under this condition one has:
δ Z c3
B[α, A] = (∂α ){ dx[−c1 ∂ · A + c2 (∂ · A)2 − (A2 )2 ](x) + V [A]}
Z δA 2
+c5 dxα(x)[µνρσ ∂µ Aν ∂ρ Aσ ](x) , (252)
and it is clear that the first term in the right-hand side can be fine-tuned to zero by a suitable
choice of V [A] while the last cannot. Our former calculations add to this result the actual value
of c5 = −i/12π 2 .
I think that this is the most convenient point for a crucial remark on Wilson approach. It
appears in the literature the idea that the presence of the infra-red cut-off induces symmetry
violations and breakings of gauge invariance. We have just shown that this is a completely
wrong idea. If the bare theory were invariant, that is the bare breaking operator in (221) were
null, also the effective breaking would be null and the Ward identity would have an unbroken
UV limit. As a matter of fact, the cut-off and other non-local effects appearing in the effective
action, would be completely compensated by the variation of the field transformation laws,
much as it partially appears in the present case.
We have discussed a simple example of a non-trivial application of the already mentioned
algebraic method. Let us try to put into evidence the aspects which have general validity. I
think that the main points to be accounted for are the following.
A local quantized/external field transformation analogous to (219) and (220) which naively
leaves invariant the bare action induces at the effective level a symmetry breaking BΛ whose
value at Λ = ΛR has the same general properties, that is, Lorentz covariance, dimension and
symmetry properties, of the variation δ[VΛR ] of a generic choice of the initial value of the
effective action V . As a matter of fact BΛR = Br + δ[VΛR ] where Br accounts for the radiative
correction terms.
In our example δ is a linear functional differential operator, however in general it is not. In
particular it turn out to be non linear whenever the field are transformed non-linearly. BRS
transformations are a typical example of non linear transformations. In the framework of loop
ordered perturbation theory, if the classical (zero loop) value V0 of V is uniquely identified by
the invariance constraint δ[V0 ] = 0, the n-th order contribution of δ[V ]n is linear in Vn , let it
be δV0 Vn and hence one has δ[V ]n = δV0 Vn + ρ[V ]n where ρ[V ]n is independent of Vn .
66
Thus in this situation the recursive symmetry condition is:
BΛR ,n = Br,n + δV0 Vn + ρ[V ]n = 0 . (253)
In complete analogy with our example one can deduce directly from (213) a consistency condi-
tion for BΛR ,n which is recursively written as a linear functional differential equation:
δV0 ∧ BΛR ,n = 0 , (254)
with δV0 ∧ δV0 = 0.

The algebraic method is directly based on the analysis of the solutions of this equation and
guarantees the possibility of extending the wanted invariance to all orders of perturbation theory
whenever the general solution to the consistency condition (254) has the form BΛR ,n = δV0 Cn .
The advantage of this method is that the possibility of recovering the wanted symmetry
fine-tuning the effective action initial values can be proven without computing Feynman di-
agrams of increasing complexity, and hence the method allows rigorous proofs of all order
renormalizability.
67
A Diagrammatic Expansions
We have shown in section 8 that the generator of Schwinger functions can be computed by the
functional integral (112):
(∂φ)2
Z R
FC [J,Λ0 ] dy(J(y)φ(y)− )−IΛ0 [qΛ0 ])
e = dµ[φ]e 2 , (255)
whose Feynman expansion is generated by (116):

δ 1
R δ 1
eFC [J,Λ0 ] = e−IΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ δJ ]) e 2 dx J(S∗J)
= eFC [J,Λ0 ] = e−IΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ δJ ]) e 2 (JS∗J) . (256)
Notice that here and in the following we use the shortened notation introduced in section 8.
We want to show in this appendix that FC [J, Λ0 ] is the generator of connected Feynman
diagrams, that is, the coefficient of its J-expansions can be expanded in Feynman integrals
corresponding to connected diagrams, and that the Legendre transform of FC is the generator
of the one-particle irreducible diagrams, that is, of the diagrams which cannot be divided in
two disconnected parts cutting a single line.
It turns out that it is convenient to start form the field equation (111):
δ
δ exp(FC [J, Λ0 ]) δIΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ ]
−∂ 2 + gΛ0 ∗ δJ
(x) exp(FC [J, Λ0 ]) = J(x) exp(FC [J, Λ0 ]) , (257)
δJ(x) δφ
that we convert into integral form:
δ
δ exp(FC [J, Λ0 ]) Z δIΛ0 [gΛ0 ∗ δJ
]
= dyS(x − y)[J(y) − (gΛ0 ∗ )(x)] exp(FC [J, Λ0 ]) , (258)
δJ(x) δφ
and simplify omitting the smearing functions and choosing IΛ0 [φ] = λ0 /4! dxφ4 (x)
R
δ exp(FC [J]) Z λ0 δ
= dyS(x − y)[J(y) − ( )3 (x)] exp(FC [J]) , (259)
δJ(x) 3! δJ
that is, in terms of FC [J]:
 !3
δ Z
λ0 δFC [J]
FC [J] = dyS(x − y) J(y) −
δJ(x) 3! δJ(y)
δ 2 FC [J] λ0 δ 3 FC [J]
! #
λ0 δFC [J]
+i + . (260)
2 δJ(y) δj 2 (y) 3! δJ 3 (y)
We can translate this equation into graphical form defining the following symbols:
1
δ n FC [J] @@y
≡ , S(x − y) ≡ (261)
δJ(x1 ), .., δJ(xn )
n
68
(260) becomes:
y y

y = J− λ0 y +i λ0 $
+ λ0 y
3! @ 2 3!
@y &y
(262)
It is apparent that the iterative solution of (262) naturally generates Feynman diagrams
with four line vertices corresponding to the interaction IΛ0 and two kind of lines: those joining
vertices that we call internal and those ending in a J, external. A sketch of the terms of FC [j]
produced by the first iterations is given in the following figure:
J J J
1 λ0 λ0 i λ20
FC [j] = J J − J J − J J+ J J + ··· , (263)
2 4! J
4 72 J J
from which it clearly appears that the terms of the J and λ0 expansion of FC [J] correspond
to connected diagrams and hence exponentially vanish when the end points of the external
lines are taken apart. This is, of course, consistent with the cluster decomposition of the time-
ordered functions discussed in section 6 and justifies the definition of FC [J] as generator of the
connected Schwinger functions.
Now we consider the Legendre transform of FC [J].
Let f (x) be a convex function, F (y) ≡ Infx (yx − f (x)) also is convex and is called the
Legendre transform of f . If f (x) has continuous first derivative f 0 (x) the equation f 0 (x) = y
has a unique solution x(y) and one has: F (y) = x(y)y − f (x(y)) and F 0 (y(x)) ≡ x. This is
trivially extended to any number of variables and hence to the functionals.
In thermodynamics the internal energy U (V ), considered as a function of the volume and
minus the free energy −F (V ) are Legendre transforms of one another and ∂U/∂V = −p. In
the case of phase equilibrium U can fail to be convex, consider e.g. U (V ) = λ2 V 4 − µ2 V 2 , using
the first definition one gets a convex −F (−p) with however discontinuous first derivative in
the origin. A second Legendre transform generates a different Û (V ) which is convex and, as in
the example, flat in the region in which U (V ) is not convex, that is, in the mixed phase region
where the Maxwell criterion is automatically fulfilled.
Going back to field theory, FC [J] could be convex, it is in the free situation, and hence it is in
the sense of formal power series in J. In the same sense it has continuous functional derivative,
while this is not guaranteed in the general situation, as it is apparent in the thermodynamic
example. Therefore, at least in the sense of formal power series, we can define the inverse
functional J[φ](x) such that:
δ δ
φ(x) ≡ FC [J[φ]] − FC [0] , (264)
δJ(x) δJ(x)
and the Legendre transform:

Z
δ
U [φ] ≡ dx(φ(x) + FC [0])J[φ](x) − FC [J[φ]] . (265)
δJ(x)
69
It is apparent that:
δU [φ]
= J[φ](x) . (266)
φ(x)
δ
Notice that in the case we are now studying δJ(x) FC [0] = 0 and that the same condition can
be implemented in any scalar field theory. In the case of non scalar fields this condition follows
from Euclidean invariance.
Now we want to study the functional U [φ] in the framework of the diagrammatic expansion
of FC . In this framework we notice that we can single out the first term of the expansion
sketched in (263)
1
FC [J] = (J, S ∗ J) + F̄C [J] , (267)
2
thus writing:
δ F̄C [J[φ]]
J[φ](x) = −∂ 2 (φ(x) − ), (268)
δJ(x)
from which one gets:
δ F̄C [J[φ]] 1 δ F̄C [J[φ]] 2 δ F̄C [J[φ]]
U [φ] = (φ(−∂ 2 (φ − ))) + ((φ − )∂ (φ − )) − F̄C [J[φ]]
δJ 2 δJ δJ
1 1 δ F̄C [J[φ]] 2 δ F̄C [J[φ]]
= − (φ∂ 2 φ) − F̄C [J[φ]] + ( ∂ ). (269)
2 2 δJ δJ
In the last expression it appears rather clearly that the third term subtracts from the second
one the contributions from the diagrams that are one particle reducible, i.e. that can be divided
into two disconnected parts cutting a single line. To verify this result let us have again recourse
to a graphical representation. We decompose U = − 21 (φ∂ 2 φ) + Ū [φ]. This allows us to write
(266) according:
δU [φ] δ Ū [φ]
= J[φ](x) = −∂ 2 φ(x) + , (270)
φ(x) δφ(x)
and hence
δ Ū [φ[J]]
φ[J(x)] = S ∗ (J(x) − ), (271)
δφ(x)
In analogy with (268) we define:
1 n
δ n Ū [J] @ y
≡ . . φ[J](x) ≡ S(x − y) ≡ (272)
δφ(x1 ), .., δφ(xn )
. @.
and we translate (271) into the form:
y2n + 1 y .
@
y y.
P∞
= J− n=0

y1 @y .
(273)
70
whose iterative solution begins with:
J J

y = J − J − J + J + ··· ·

J J
(274)
The point to be put into evidence is that following the iteration procedure one gets a complete
set of tree skeleton diagrams representing a complete Feynman expansion of the whole set of
connected diagrams. Now the tree skeleton decomposition of a connected Feynman diagram is
unique and identifies the vertices of the skeleton diagram with one-particle irreducible parts.
Thus U is the generator of one-particle irreducible diagrams.
δ2 U δ 2 FC
A further comment is in order: the coefficient δφ̃(p)δφ(0) |φ=0 is the inverse of δJ(p)δJ(0)
˜ |J=0 ,
indeed the above iterative solution (273) gives:
∞
!n #−1
δ 2 FC δ2U δ2U
"
2
|φ=0 /p2 2
X
|J=0 = 1/p [ − ]= p + |φ=0 . (275)
˜
δ J(p)δJ(0) n=0 δ φ̃(p)δφ(0) δ φ̃(p)δφ(0)
71
A The Wilson Action
To prove (118) we introduce a simplified notation understanding space-time integrals and vari-
δ δ
ables and introducing the symbol ∂1 for gΛ ∗ δJ and ∂2 for ĝΛ ∗ δJ . It is then apparent that
δ δ δ
gΛ0 ∗ = gΛ ∗ + ĝ ∗ ≡ ∂1 + ∂2 . (276)
δJ δJ δJ
Thus we write (116) as:
∞
FC [J,Λ0 ] −IΛ0 [∂1 +∂2 ])
(JS∗J) (JS∗J) X Fn+m n m (JS∗J)
e =e e 2 ≡ F [∂1 + ∂2 ]e 2 ≡ ∂1 ∂2 e 2 . (277)
n,m=0 n!m!
Then we notice that:

m
(JS∗J) (JS∗J) m!
∂2m e ∂2k (S ∗ J)m−k
X
2 =e 2
2
k=0 k!(m − k)!
[m]
(JS∗J)
2
m!
(SJ∗)2m−2k S2,2
k
X
=e 2 , (278)
k=0 k!(m − 2k)!
where we have introduced (SJ)2 ≡ ĝ ∗ S ∗ J, and S2,2 ≡ ĝ ∗ S ∗ ĝ and by[ n2 ] we mean the integer
part of n2 . Now from (277) and (278) we get:
∞ X [n]
FC [J,Λ0 ]
2
Fn+m (JS∗J)
∂1m e 2 (S ∗ J)2n−2k S2,2
k
X
e =
n,m=0 k=0 k!m!(n − 2k)!
∞ k
Fn+m+2k S2,2 (JS∗J)
∂1m (S ∗ J)n2 e 2
X
=
n,m,k=0 k!m!n!
∞ k q
Fn+m+2q+2k S2,2 S1,2 (JS∗J)
(S ∗ J)n2 ∂1m e 2
X
=
n,m,k,q=0 q!k!m!n!
δ 1
≡: e−IΛ,Λ0 [gΛ ∗ δJ + ĝ∗S∗J])
: e 2 (JS∗J) , (279)
where we have introduced S1,2 ≡ gΛ ∗ S ∗ ĝ.
72
B Bibliography
• The major reference for the first part on the scattering theory is:
R. Haag Local Quantum Physics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag 1992
• Further information, in particular concerning reduction formulae can be found in:

J.Glimm and R. Jaffe Quantum Physics. A functional integral point of view. Berlin:
Springer-Verlag 1987
• and for what concerns the calculation of cross-sections:

C. Becchi and G. Ridolfi An introduction to relativistic processes and the Standard Model
of electro-weak interactions Berlin: Springer-Verlag 2005
• an introduction to the effective action is given in:

C. Becchi Lectures on the renormalization of gauge theories. In Les Houches 1983 -
Relativity, groups and topology B. S. De Witt and R. Stora Eds. Amsterdam: North
Holland 1984.
• An introduction to the Euclidean Theory can be found in:

K. Symanzik Euclidean Quantum Field Theory. In Local Quantum Theory. Scuola In-
ternaz. di Fisica ”Enrico Fermi”, Corso 45. R. Jost Ed. New York: Academic Press
1969
• For the Renormalization Group Method the basic reference is: K. Wilson and J. Kogut,
Phys. Reports 12 (1974) 75.
• An account of the Wilson-Polchinski approach with application to gauge theories is given

by:
C.Becchi On the construction of renormalized quantum field theory using renormalization
group techniques. In Elementary Particles, Quantum Fields and Statistical Mechanics.
Seminario Nazionale di Fisica Teorica M.Bonini, G. Marchesini, E. Onofri Eds. Parma
1993 (hep-th/9607188 )
• The evolution equation for the effective proper generator was first obtained by: M. Bonini,
M. D’Attanasio, G. Marchesini, Nucl.Phys.B409 (1993) 441.
• A general reference for basic quantum field theory is

C. Itzykson and J.-B. Zuber: Quantum Field Theory. New-York: Mc Graw-Hill 1980.
• More specialized seminal contributions are:

R.Haag, Phys.Rev.112 (1958) 669.
P.Ruelle, Helv. Phys. Acta 35 (1962) 147.
H. Araki, R. Haag. Commun. Math. Phys. 4 (1967) 77.
73
B. Simon. The P (φ)2 Euclidean (Quantum) Field Theory. Princeton U.P. 1973.
K. Gawedzki, A. Kupiainen, in Les Houches 84 Ed’s Osterwalder and Stora.
D.J. Gross, F. Wilczek, Phys.Rev.D9 (1974) 980.
G. Gallavotti, Rev. Mod. Phys. 57 (1985) 471.
• On the BPHZ subtraction method the basic references are:

J. H. Lowenstein BPHZ renormalization. and
W. Zimmermann The power counting theorem for Feynman integrals with massless prop-
agators.
in Renormalization Theory. Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute held at
the International School of Mathematical Physics at the ’Ettore Majorana’ Center for
Scientific Culture in Erice (Italy) G. Velo and A. Wightman Ed.s - D.Reidel Publishing
Company , Boston 1976.
• The basic reference for dimensional regularization is:

P.Breitenlohner and D.Maison, Commun. Math. Phys. 52(1977)11, ibid. pg. 39, ibid
pg. 55.
• An account of the algebraic method can be found in:

O. Piguet, S. Sorella Algebraic renormalization: Perturbative renormalization, symmetries
and anomalies. in Lect.Notes Phys.M28 Berlin: Springer-Verlag 1995.
74

Prague 2007

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prague 2007

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prague 2007

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

QUANTUM RELATIVISTIC DYNAMICS

2 Difficulties with quantized fundamental fields 2

3 Construction of a relativistic scattering theory 4

4 Properties of the time-ordered functions 13

5 The L.S.Z. reduction formulae 15

6 The functional formalism and the Effective Action 18

7 The construction of the theory, the Euclidean Quantum Field Theory 24

8 The Functional Integral in Euclidean Quantum Field Theory 27

9 The Wilson Effective Action in Euclidean Quantum Field Theory 30

10 The Effective Proper Generator 36

11 The subtraction method 45

13 The Quantum Action Principle 57

A The Wilson Action 71

2 Difficulties with quantized fundamental fields

< Ω|φ(x)φ(y)|Ω >=< Ω|φ(x − y)φ(0)|Ω >≡ C(x − y) , (1)

where we have used translation

< Ω|Qa (x)Qb (0)|Ω >≡< Ω|Qa (x)Qb (0)|Ω >C

W (J) = eW (J)C . (19)

Coming back to Haag’s construction we introduce positive/negative frequency solutions of

where sk is either + or −, ψ̃(~p) is of class D and support Sψ .

One can study the vacuum expectation value:

|ψa(±) (x)| < A|x0 |−3/2 ,

which can be decomposed in the sum of 2k terms of the form:

~ 2 )t, t) · · · Q̂ak ((~v1 + w

< Ω|Q̂a1 (~0, 0)Q̂a2 (w

where πi is a permutation of the corresponding indices.

and hence from Eq. (12) we get

ρa,b (~p, M ) = δa,b δ(M − ma ) . (32)

This matrix element can be decomposed according:

(out/in) (out/in) (out/in)

with fast convergence in the case of non-overlapping momentum wave functions.

it is apparent that τS,a,b (x) is a distribution and one has:

τR,a,b (x) = Kδ(x) − ∂ 2 τS,a,b (x) , (53)

which is also a distribution.

ψa(si i ) (xi )(∂x2i + m2ai )fai (xi − yi )

one identifies (54) with:

belong to a finite energy subset of the Hilbert space, we have:

lim Aψ(s1 ) ,··,ψ(sn )

lim · · · lim Aψas1 ,··,ψasnn

that is a transition (scattering) amplitude.

where the xi integrals cover the whole R4n .

and one can show that;

Φa (x, J(·, ϕ)) ≡ ϕa (x) . (72)

Indeed from Eq.(70) one has:

Φ̂a (x) ≡ eΣ Φa (x, J)|J=0 , (82)

using Eq.(78) we can write the 2 → f amplitude (81) in the form:

δΓ[Φ(·, J)] δΓ[Φ̂]

+Ra (x) , (85)

Therefore we have shown that

converges for s = − in the limit t → ∞ and s = + in the limit t → −∞ to

is called Schwinger 2-point function S(x1 − x2 ).

Λ40 −Λ20 (x−y)2

−∂ 2 φ(x) = J [φ](x) . (106)

Ŝ ≡ gΛ0 ∗ S ∗ gΛ0 − gΛ ∗ S ∗ gΛ . (119)

Notice that, using the equivalence (116)-(118), one has:

which must be Λ independent. Notice that in (121) ĝ ∗ f = f − gΛ ∗ f .

One has furthermore:

and hence the evolution equation (129) becomes:

and the equation for exp(−IˆΛ,Λ0 [ϕ]) is: