1: \documentclass[aps,prd,preprint,tightenlines,groupedaddress,nofootinbib,showpacs,byrevtex]{revtex4}

2: \usepackage{amssymb,latexsym}

3: \usepackage{amsmath,amsbsy}

4: \usepackage{epsfig,bm}

5: \usepackage{graphicx,comment}

6: \unitlength=1mm

7: \DeclareMathOperator{\st}{str}

8: \DeclareMathOperator{\tr}{tr}

9: 

10: 

11: \begin{document}

12: \def\a{{\alpha}}

13: \def\b{{\beta}}

14: \def\d{{\delta}}

15: \def\D{{\Delta}}

16: \def\e{{\varepsilon}}

17: \def\g{{\gamma}}

18: \def\G{{\Gamma}}

19: \def\k{{\kappa}}

20: \def\l{{\lambda}}

21: \def\L{{\Lambda}}

22: \def\m{{\mu}}

23: \def\n{{\nu}}

24: \def\o{{\omega}}

25: \def\O{{\Omega}}

26: \def\S{{\Sigma}}

27: \def\s{{\sigma}}

28: \def\th{{\theta}}

29: 

30: \def\ol#1{{\overline{#1}}}

31: 

32: 

33: \def\Dslash{D\hskip-0.65em /}

34: 

35: \def\CPT{{$\chi$PT}}

36: \def\QCPT{{Q$\chi$PT}}

37: \def\PQCPT{{PQ$\chi$PT}}

38: \def\tr{\text{tr}}

39: \def\str{\text{str}}

40: \def\diag{\text{diag}}

41: \def\order{{\mathcal O}}

42: 

43: 

44: \def\cC{{\mathcal C}}

45: \def\cB{{\mathcal B}}

46: \def\cT{{\mathcal T}}

47: \def\cQ{{\mathcal Q}}

48: \def\cL{{\mathcal L}}

49: \def\cO{{\mathcal O}}

50: \def\cA{{\mathcal A}}

51: \def\cQ{{\mathcal Q}}

52: \def\cR{{\mathcal R}}

53: \def\cH{{\mathcal H}}

54: \def\cW{{\mathcal W}}

55: \def\cM{{\mathcal M}}

56: \def\cJ{{\mathcal J}}

57: 

58: 

59: \def\eqref#1{{(\ref{#1})}}

60: 

61: %\preprint{DUKE-TH-04-XXX}

62:  

63: \title{Baryon masses at $\cO(a^2)$ in chiral perturbation theory}

64: \author{ Brian C.~Tiburzi}

65: \email[]{bctiburz@phy.duke.edu}

66: \affiliation{Department of Physics\\

67: Duke University\\

68: P.O.~Box 90305\\

69: Durham, NC 27708-0305}

70: 

71: \date{\today}

72: 

73: 

74: \pacs{12.38.Gc}

75: 

76: \begin{abstract}

77: The chiral Lagrangian for the Symanzik action through $\cO(a^2)$ for baryons is obtained.

78: We consider two flavor unquenched and partially quenched lattice theories, allowing for mixed 

79: actions in the latter. As an application, we calculate masses to $\cO(a^2)$ for the 

80: nucleons and deltas, and investigate the corrections due to the violation of $O(4)$ rotational invariance. 

81: These results are contrasted with those in the meson sector for lattice 

82: simulations using mixed and unmixed actions of Wilson and Ginsparg-Wilson quarks.

83: \end{abstract}

84: 

85: 

86: \maketitle

87: 

88: \section{Introduction}

89: Lattice gauge theory provides first principles calculations of strong 

90: interaction physics, where QCD is non-perturbative, and quarks and gluons are confined 

91: in color-neutral hadronic states. 

92: These calculations, however, are severely limited by available computing power, 

93: necessitating the use of quark masses $m_q$ that are much larger than those in reality. 

94: To make physical predictions, one must extrapolate from the quark masses used on the lattice to those of nature.

95: A model independent tool for this extrapolation is to study QCD at hadronic scales 

96: using its low-energy effective theory, 

97: chiral perturbation theory (\CPT).

98: Because \CPT\ provides a systematic expansion involving $m_q/\L_{QCD}$, 

99: one can understand how QCD observables 

100: behave, in principle, as functions of the quark mass. 

101: To address the quenched and partially quenched approximations employed by

102: lattice calculations, \CPT\ has been extended to quenched chiral 

103: perturbation theory (\QCPT)~% 

104: \cite{Morel:1987xk,Sharpe:1992ft,Bernard:1992mk,Labrenz:1996jy,Sharpe:1996qp}

105: and partially quenched chiral perturbation theory (\PQCPT)~%

106: \cite{Bernard:1994sv,Sharpe:1997by,Golterman:1998st,Sharpe:2000bc,Sharpe:2001fh,Sharpe:2003vy}.

107: 

108: 

109: While lattice calculations are limited to unphysically large quark masses, they are restricted further by

110: two additional parameters: the size of the lattice $L$, that is not considerably larger than the system under investigation; 

111: and the lattice spacing $a$, that is not considerably smaller than the relevant hadronic distance scale.

112: To address the issue of finite lattice spacing,

113: \CPT\ has been extended (following the earlier work of~\cite{Sharpe:1998xm,Lee:1999zx})

114: in the meson sector

115: to $\cO(a)$ for the Wilson action~\cite{Rupak:2002sm}, and for mixed lattice actions~\cite{Bar:2002nr}.

116: Corrections at $\cO(a^2)$ in \CPT\ have been pursued~\cite{Bar:2003mh,Aoki:2003yv}.

117: There have also been parallel developments in addressing lattice spacing artifacts 

118: in staggered \CPT\ for mesons~\cite{Aubin:2003mg,Aubin:2003uc,Sharpe:2004is},

119: and heavy mesons~\cite{Aubin:2004xd}; and in twisted mass 

120: QCD~\cite{Munster:2003ba,Munster:2004dj,Scorzato:2004da,Sharpe:2004ps,Sharpe:2004ny}.

121: Corrections to baryon observables in \CPT\ and \PQCPT, too, have been recently investigated~\cite{Beane:2003xv,Arndt:2004we}. 

122: To consider finite lattice spacing corrections, one must formulate the underlying lattice theory and match

123: the new operators that appear onto those in the chiral effective theory. This can be done by utilizing a dual 

124: expansion in quark mass and lattice spacing. For an overview, see~\cite{Baer:2004xp}. 

125: Following~\cite{Bar:2003mh,Beane:2003xv}, we assume a hierarchy of energy scales

126: \begin{equation}

127: m_q \ll \L_{QCD} \ll \frac{1}{a}

128: .\end{equation}

129: We shall further choose a power counting scheme in which

130: the small dimensionless expansion parameters are\footnote{%

131: In practice the power counting scheme and subsequent ordering of the dual expansion in 

132: quark mass and lattice spacing should be organized based the on the actual sizes of $m_q$ and $a$. 

133: }

134: \begin{equation} \label{eqn:pc}

135: \e^2 \sim 

136: \begin{cases}

137:  m_q/\L_{QCD}, \\

138:  a \, \L_{QCD}

139: \end{cases}

140: .\end{equation}

141: Thus we have a systematic way to calculate $a$-dependent corrections

142: in \CPT\ for the observables of interest. Such expressions allow one to perform the quark mass extrapolation

143: before the continuum extrapolation. 

144: 

145: 

146: 

147: In this work we address the extension of \CPT\ and \PQCPT\ at finite lattice spacing to $\cO(a^2)$ in 

148: the baryon sector. Specifically we detail the operators which must be included to determine

149: the baryon masses to $\cO(\e^4)$ in the above power counting. Unlike the extension of \CPT\ and \PQCPT\ 

150: to $\cO(a^2)$ in the meson sector, the baryon sector suffers from a proliferation of new operators. 

151: Despite this fact, the number of free independent parameters entering expressions for the masses

152: is still relatively small. Moreover in contrast to the meson sector at $\cO(a^2)$, heavy baryon 

153: operators that break the $O(4)$ rotational symmetry of Euclidean space are required at this order in 

154: the chiral expansion. Such operators are required for particles that are heavy compared to $\L_{QCD}$. 

155: 

156: 

157: 

158: This paper has the following organization. First in Sec.~\ref{s:sym}, we review the Symanzik Lagrangian

159: at $\cO(a^2)$ for a partially quenched, mixed lattice action, where the valence and sea quarks

160: are either Wilson or Ginsparg-Wilson fermions. We focus on the symmetries of the Symanzik Lagrangian because

161: these are essential in constructing the effective theory. Next in Sec.~\ref{s:mesons}, we review the finite lattice

162: spacing corrections at $\cO(a)$ in the meson sector of \PQCPT.  Higher-order corrections are not needed for 

163: baryon observables to the order we work. In Sec.~\ref{s:baryons}, we extend heavy baryon \PQCPT\ to $\cO(\e^4)$. 

164: This includes the addition of operators at $\cO(m_Q \, a)$ and $\cO(a^2)$. Applications of this development

165: are pursued in Sec.~\ref{s:mass}, where we obtain the lattice spacing corrections to the masses of nucleons and deltas. 

166: The unquenched two-flavor theory is addressed in Appendix~\ref{s:2}.

167: Corrections from $O(4)$ breaking operators are treated in detail for particles of spin less than two in Appendix~\ref{s:RPI}.

168: A summary (Sec.~\ref{s:summy}) highlights the lattice spacing corrections in the baryon sector. 

169: Here we contrast the number of independent parameters entering expressions at $\cO(\e^4)$ for baryon masses in the various

170: mixed and unmixed partially quenched theories, as well as in the unquenched theory. 

171: 

172: 

173: 

174: 

175: 

176: 

177: \section{\label{sec:PQCPT}\PQCPT\ at $\cO(a^2)$}

178: 

179: 

180: 

181: To extend the baryon chiral Lagrangian to $\cO(a^2)$, we first review 

182: the Symanzik Lagrangian at $\cO(a^2)$ and the construction of \PQCPT\ in the meson sector. 

183: In this and the following sections, we consider a partially quenched theory with a mixed action. 

184: The result for unquenched simulations is contained in Appendix~\ref{s:2}.

185: 

186: 

187: 

188: 

189: 

190: 

191: \subsection{Symanzik Lagrangian}  \label{s:sym}

192: 

193: 

194: The Symanzik action is the continuum effective theory of the lattice 

195: action~\cite{Symanzik:1983dc,Symanzik:1983gh}. As such it is constructed from continuum 

196: operators based on the symmetries of the underlying lattice theory. The Symanzik 

197: Lagrangian is organized in powers of the lattice spacing $a$, namely

198: \begin{equation}

199: \cL = 

200: \cL^{(4)} 

201: + 

202: a \, \cL^{(5)} 

203: + 

204: a^2 \, \cL^{(6)} 

205: + 

206: \dots \label{eq:syman}

207: ,\end{equation}

208: where $\cL^{(n)}$ represents contributions for dimension-$n$ operators.\footnote{%

209: Not all of the $a$-dependence is parametrized in Eq.~\eqref{eq:syman}. The coefficients of 

210: terms in the Lagrangian $\cL^{(n)}$ depend upon the gauge coupling and thus can have a 

211: weak logarithmic dependence on $a$. Such dependence is beyond the scope of this work. 

212: } 

213: In the continuum limit, $a \to 0$, only the dimension-four operators survive.

214: The Symanzik Lagrangian for the Wilson action was discussed to $\cO(a^2)$ 

215: in~\cite{Sheikholeslami:1985ij} and the analysis to $\cO(a)$ was refined by~\cite{Luscher:1996sc}. 

216: Here we consider the general case of a mixed action in partially quenched QCD (PQQCD). Such an action

217: allows the valence and sea quarks to have different masses. Additionally the valence and sea quarks 

218: can be different types of lattice fermions. 

219: The mixed lattice action has the usual parity invariance, charge conjugation invariance and $SU(N_c)$ gauge symmetry. 

220: Accordingly the Symanzik Lagrangian $\cL$ respects these symmetries order-by-order in $a$. 

221: Because spacetime has been discretized, the $O(4)$ rotational symmetry of continuum Euclidean

222: field theory has been reduced to the hypercubic group.

223: 

224: 

225: The flavor symmetry group of the mixed lattice 

226: action $G$ is generally a direct product of flavor symmetry groups for the particular species of 

227: fermion at hand~\cite{Bar:2002nr}. The mixed action contains different forms of the Dirac 

228: operator for each species of fermion, thus there is no symmetry transformation between the 

229: valence and sea sectors.  At zero quark mass, the flavor symmetry group of the mixed lattice action is 

230: \begin{equation} 

231: G = G_{\text{valence}} \otimes G_{\text{sea}}

232: \label{eq:mixsym}

233: ,\end{equation}

234: where for two quark flavors

235: \begin{equation}

236: G_{\text{valence}} = SU(2|2)_L \otimes SU(2|2)_R

237: ,\end{equation}

238: and

239: \begin{equation}

240: G_{\text{sea}} = SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_R

241: .\end{equation}

242: For simplicity we have included the ghost quarks in the valence sector. 

243: The quark mass term breaks these respective chiral symmetries in the valence and sea sectors 

244: down to vector symmetries.  

245: 

246: 

247: 

248: For Wilson fermions~\cite{Wilson:1974sk}, the breaking of chiral symmetry persists even at zero quark mass 

249: due to lattice discretization effects. These effects can be tamed to enter at $\cO(a^2)$ by the so-called $\cO(a)$ improvement.  

250: For fermions satisfying the Ginsparg-Wilson relation~\cite{Ginsparg:1982bj}

251: (e.g., Kaplan fermions~\cite{Kaplan:1992bt}, or overlap fermions~\cite{Narayanan:1993ss}), 

252: the chiral symmetry on the lattice at zero quark mass remains exact at finite $a$~\cite{Luscher:1998pq}.

253: For a recent review of chiral symmetry in lattice theories, see~\cite{Chandrasekharan:2004cn}. 

254: We have left unspecified which species lives in which sector of the theory. As a result of this generality, 

255: we are building the Symanzik Lagrangian for the four possible combinations of valence and sea fermions.

256: Part of this generality is an academic pursuit because we do not anticipate lattice calculations employing 

257: Wilson valence quarks in a Ginsparg-Wilson sea, whereas GW valence quarks with dynamical Wilson fermions

258: is a scenario with potential computational benefits. It is likely, however,  that  

259: Wilson quark masses may never reach the chiral regime~\cite{Beane:2004ks} in which case one must deal with alternate methods

260: to modify~\cite{Leinweber:1999ig} or to improve~\cite{Bernard:2003rp} baryon \CPT.

261: These reservations aside, our goal is to contrast the situation at $\cO(a^2)$

262: in the baryon sector with that of the mesons. We will find comparatively that the mesons are rather

263: special with respect to lattice spacing corrections in \CPT.

264: 

265: 

266: Having discussed the symmetries of $\cL$, we now turn to the contributions near the continuum limit.

267: The terms of the $\cL^{(4)}$ Lagrangian are the most familiar and so we discuss them first. 

268: At dimension four, we have the familiar kinetic and Dirac mass terms for the quarks. To be specific, 

269: we work in a partially quenched theory for two light flavors. 

270: The quark part of the leading-order Symanzik Lagrangian reads

271: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:LPQQCD}

272: \cL^{(4)}

273: =

274: \ol Q \, \Dslash \, Q  +  \ol Q \, m_Q \, Q

275: .\end{equation}

276: The six quarks of PQQCD are in the fundamental representation of

277: the graded group $SU(4|2)$%

278: ~\cite{BahaBalantekin:1981kt,BahaBalantekin:1981qy,BahaBalantekin:1982bk}

279: and appear in the vector

280: \begin{equation}

281:   Q=(u,d,j,l,\tilde{u},\tilde{d})^{\text{T}}

282: ,\end{equation}

283: which obeys the graded equal-time commutation relation

284: \begin{equation} \label{eqn:commutation}

285:   Q^\a_i({\bf x}){Q^\b_j}^\dagger({\bf y})

286:   -(-1)^{\eta_i \eta_j}{Q^\b_j}^\dagger({\bf y})Q^\a_i({\bf x})

287:   =

288:   \d^{\a\b}\d_{ij}\d^3({\bf x}-{\bf y})

289: ,\end{equation}

290: where $\a$ and $\b$ are spin, and $i$ and $j$ are flavor indices.

291: The vanishing graded equal-time commutation relations can be written analogously.

292: The grading factor 

293: \begin{equation}

294:    \eta_k

295:    = \left\{ 

296:        \begin{array}{cl}

297:          1 & \text{for } k=1,2,3,4 \\

298:          0 & \text{for } k=5,6

299:        \end{array}

300:      \right.

301: ,\end{equation}

302: incorporates the different statistics of the quarks. 

303: The quark mass matrix in the isospin limit ($m_d = m_u$) of $SU(4|2)$ is given by 

304: \begin{equation}

305:   m_Q=\text{diag}(m_u, m_u, m_j, m_j, m_u, m_u)

306: .\end{equation}

307: In the limit $a \to 0$, and when $m_j=m_u$, one recovers the isospin limit of QCD.

308: The symmetry of $\cL^{(4)}$ in the zero mass limit is $SU(4|2)_L \otimes SU(4|2)_R$,   

309: i.e.~the effects of the mixed action do not show up in the effective theory at leading order. 

310: The mass term in $\cL^{(4)}$ explicitly breaks the graded chiral symmetry down to the graded vector symmetry 

311: $SU(4|2)_V$. 

312: 

313: 

314: 

315: 

316: 

317: 

318: Let us next consider the dimension-five Lagrangian. After field redefinitions, it consists of only the Pauli term given by

319: \begin{equation} \label{eqn:Pauli}

320: \cL^{(5)} 

321: = 

322: c_{SW} \, \ol Q \, \sigma_{\mu \nu} G_{\mu \nu} w_Q \, Q

323: .\end{equation}

324: This term breaks chiral symmetry in precisely the same 

325: way as the quark mass term. 

326: The Sheikholeslami-Wohlert (SW)~\cite{Sheikholeslami:1985ij} 

327: coefficient is $c_{SW}$ and it is accompanied by the Wilson matrix $w_Q$

328: defined by

329: \begin{equation} \label{eqn:sw}

330: w_Q = \text{diag}

331: (w_v,w_v,w_s,w_s,w_v,w_v)

332: .\end{equation}

333: This matrix accounts for 

334: the chiral symmetry properties of the mixed action.  

335: If the quark $Q_i$ is a Wilson fermion, 

336: then $(w_Q)_i = 1$.  Alternately, if $Q_i$ is of the 

337: Ginsparg-Wilson (GW) variety then $(w_Q)_i = 0$. 

338: Since one expects simulations to be performed with 

339: valence quarks that are all of the same species as well as sea quarks 

340: all of the same species, we have labeled the entries in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:sw}

341: by valence ($v$) and sea ($s$) instead of flavor.\footnote{%

342: It is conceivable that three flavor simulations might employ Wilson up and down quarks but with a GW strange

343: quark in order to eliminate the rather large $\cO( a\, m_s)$ corrections. The development in this

344: work for partially quenched theories is general enough to handle this situation by a 

345: modification of Eq.~\eqref{eqn:sw}. I thank W.~Detmold for bringing this to my attention.} 

346: 

347: 

348: To work at $\cO(a^2)$, we must consider the dimension-six Lagrangian. The exact form of $\cL^{(6)}$ 

349: is irrelevant in constructing the chiral effective theory. We need only know which symmetries 

350: are broken and how. We explicitly list terms of the Lagrangian when it is illustrative to do so. 

351: In describing these operators, we introduce the flavor matrix 

352: $\ol w_Q \equiv 1 - w_Q$, which projects onto the GW sector of the theory.  

353: 

354: 

355: 

356: The terms of $\cL^{(6)}$ fall into five classes.

357: The first class of operators consists of  higher-dimensional quark bilinears. 

358: These operators do not break chiral symmetry but have the flavor symmetry 

359: of the mixed action, i.e.~there are distinct operators involving only the valence sector and only the sea sector.

360: Typical examples are $\ol Q \, \Dslash \, {}^3 w_Q \, Q$, and $\ol Q \, \Dslash \, {}^3 \ol w_Q \, Q$. 

361: In class two, there are quark bilinear operators that break chiral symmetry. Simple dimensional counting

362: indicates that there must be an $m_Q$ insertion for these operators to be in $\cL^{(6)}$. Examples include

363: $\ol Q \, m_Q \, D^2 w_Q \, Q$, and $\ol Q \, m_Q \, D^2 \ol w_Q \, Q$. 

364: Class three consists of all four-quark operators that do not break the chiral symmetry

365: of the valence and sea sectors. These class three operators

366: come in three forms due to the different sectors of the theory, e.g.~$(\ol Q \, w_Q \, \gamma_\mu Q)^2$, 

367: $(\ol Q \, \ol w_Q \, \gamma_\mu Q)^2$,  and $ (\ol Q \, w_Q \, \gamma_\mu Q) (\ol Q \, \ol w_Q \, \gamma_\mu Q)$. 

368: Class four operators are four-quark operators that break chiral symmetry. Since there are four fields, chiral 

369: symmetry is broken in a different way than the quark mass term. A typical class four operator is $(\ol Q \, w_Q \, Q)^2$. 

370: Unlike class three, there are no class four operators involving the flavor matrix $\ol w_Q$. 

371: Finally class five operators are those that break $O(4)$ rotation symmetry. There are two such operators 

372: for the mixed lattice action, namely $\ol Q \, w_Q \, \gamma_\mu D_\mu D_\mu D_\mu Q$, and 

373: $\ol Q \, \ol w_Q \, \gamma_\mu D_\mu D_\mu D_\mu Q$.  These classes are summarized in Table~\ref{t:class}. 

374: 

375: 

376: 

377: \begin{table}

378: \caption{Description of the classes of operators in $\cL^{(6)}$. Each representative 

379: class of operator is classified as to whether it is bilinear, chiral symmetry breaking ($\chi$SB),

380: or $O(4)$ breaking. Operators in $\cL^{(6)}$ that are not bilinears are thus four-quark operators. 

381: Additionally the flavor matrices involved for the mixed action are listed.  

382: }

383: %\begin{ruledtabular}

384: \begin{tabular}{c | c c c c c c   }

385: Class & $\qquad$ Bilinear? $\quad$ & $\qquad \chi$SB? $\qquad$ & $O(4)$ breaking? & Flavor Structure  \\

386: \hline

387: $1$ & Yes & No  & No  & $w_Q$, $\ol w_Q$ & \\ 

388: $2$ & Yes & Yes & No  & $m_Q \otimes w_Q$, $m_Q \otimes \ol w_Q$ & \\ 

389: $3$ & No  & No  & No  & $w_Q \otimes w_Q$, $w_Q \otimes \ol w_Q$, $\ol w_Q \otimes \ol w_Q$ & \\ 

390: $4$ & No  & Yes & No  & $w_Q \otimes w_Q$ & \\ 

391: $5$ & Yes & No  & Yes & $w_Q$, $\ol w_Q$ & 

392: \end{tabular}

393: %\end{ruledtabular}

394: \label{t:class}

395: \end{table}

396: 

397: 

398: 

399: 

400: 

401: \subsection{Mesons} \label{s:mesons}

402: 

403: 

404: For massless quarks at zero lattice spacing,

405: the Lagrangian in Eq.~(\ref{eqn:LPQQCD}) exhibits a graded symmetry

406: $SU(4|2)_L \otimes SU(4|2)_R \otimes U(1)_V$ that is assumed 

407: to be spontaneously broken to $SU(4|2)_V \otimes U(1)_V$. 

408: The low-energy effective theory of PQQCD that results from 

409: perturbing about the physical vacuum is \PQCPT.

410: The pseudo-Goldstone mesons can be described at $\cO(\e^2)$ by a Lagrangian 

411: that accounts for the two sources of explicit chiral symmetry breaking:

412: the quark mass term in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:LPQQCD}, and the Pauli term in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:Pauli}

413: \cite{Sharpe:1998xm,Rupak:2002sm,Bar:2002nr}:

414: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:Lchi}

415:   {\cal L} =

416:    \frac{f^2}{8}

417:     \str\left(\partial_\mu\Sigma^\dagger \partial_\mu\Sigma\right)

418:     - \l_m\,\str\left(m_Q\Sigma^\dagger+m_Q^\dagger\Sigma\right)

419:     - a \l_a\,\str\left(w_Q\Sigma^\dagger+w_Q^\dagger\Sigma\right) 

420: \end{equation}

421: where

422: \begin{equation} \label{eqn:Sigma}

423:   \Sigma=\exp\left(\frac{2i\Phi}{f}\right)

424:   = \xi^2

425: ,\end{equation}

426: \begin{equation}

427:   \Phi=

428:     \left(

429:       \begin{array}{cc}

430:         M & \chi^{\dagger} \\ 

431:         \chi & \tilde{M}

432:       \end{array}

433:     \right)

434: ,\end{equation}

435: $f=132$~MeV, and the str() denotes a graded flavor trace.  

436: The $M$, $\tilde{M}$, and $\chi$ are matrices

437: of pseudo-Goldstone bosons 

438: and pseudo-Goldstone fermions,

439: see, for example,~\cite{Chen:2001yi}.

440: Expanding the Lagrangian in \eqref{eqn:Lchi} one finds that

441: to lowest order mesons with quark content $Q\bar{Q'}$

442: have mass\footnote{%

443: The quark masses $m_Q$ above are not those customarily used on the lattice~\cite{Sharpe:1998xm,Aoki:2003yv}, 

444: because one usually defines the quark mass in terms of a critical parameter for which the meson masses vanish.  

445: If this is indeed the way one defines the renormalized quark mass, 

446: then the parameter $\l_a$ in the Lagrangian can be set to zero and the issue of $a$-dependent 

447: loop-meson masses in baryonic observables will never confront us.  Allowing for other definitions 

448: of the lattice renormalized quark mass to avoid this fine-tuning, we keep $\l_a \neq 0$ and deal with the possibility that 

449: the loop-meson masses remain $a$-dependent. Notice this issue only arises for Wilson quarks.

450: }

451: \begin{equation}\label{eqn:mqq}

452:   m_{QQ'}^2=\frac{4}{f^2} \left[ \l_m (m_Q+m_{Q'}) + a \l_a (w_Q + w_{Q'}) \right]

453: .\end{equation}

454: The flavor singlet field is rendered heavy by the $U(1)_A$ anomaly

455: and has been integrated out in \PQCPT, however,

456: the propagator of the flavor-neutral field deviates from a simple pole 

457: form~\cite{Sharpe:2001fh}. 

458: For $a,b = u,d,j,l,\tilde u,\tilde d$, the leading-order $\eta_a \eta_b$ propagator is given by

459: \begin{equation}

460: {\cal G}_{\eta_a \eta_b} =

461:         \frac{i \epsilon_a \delta_{ab}}{q^2 - m^2_{\eta_a} +i\epsilon}

462:         - \frac{i}{2} \frac{\epsilon_a \epsilon_b \left(q^2 - m^2_{jj}

463:             \right) }

464:             {\left(q^2 - m^2_{\eta_a} +i\epsilon \right)

465:              \left(q^2 - m^2_{\eta_b} +i\epsilon \right)}\, ,

466: \end{equation}

467: where

468: \begin{equation}

469: \epsilon_a = (-1)^{1+\eta_a}

470: .\end{equation}

471: The flavor neutral propagator can be conveniently rewritten as

472: \begin{equation}

473: {\cal G}_{\eta_a \eta_b} =

474:          \e_a \d_{ab} P_a +

475:          \e_a \e_b {\cal H}_{ab}\left(P_a,P_b\right),

476: \end{equation}

477: where

478: \begin{eqnarray}

479:      P_a &=& \frac{i}{q^2 - m^2_{\eta_a} +i\e},\ 

480:      P_b = \frac{i}{q^2 - m^2_{\eta_b} +i\e},\, 

481: \nonumber\\

482: \nonumber\\

483:      {\cal H}_{ab}\left(A,B\right) &=& 

484:            -\frac{1}{2}\left[

485:              \frac{m^2_{\eta_a} - m^2_{jj}}{m^2_{\eta_a} - m^2_{\eta_b}}

486:                  A

487:             -\frac{m^2_{\eta_b} - m^2_{jj}}{m^2_{\eta_b} - m^2_{\eta_a}}

488:                  B \ \right].

489: \label{eq:Hfunction2}

490: \end{eqnarray}

491: 

492: 

493: 

494: 

495: 

496: At $\cO(\e^4)$, one has contributions to the meson Lagrangian from

497: operators of $\cO(p^4)$, $\cO(p^2 \, m_Q)$, and $\cO(m_Q^2)$. These are

498: the Gasser-Leutwyler terms. Additionally there are terms of $\cO( p^2 \, a)$, 

499: $\cO(m_Q \, a)$, and $\cO(a^2)$ that are generalizations of the Gasser-Leutwyler

500: terms for the Symanzik lattice action.  These have been determined 

501: in~\cite{Bar:2003mh,Aoki:2003yv} and we do not duplicate them here. Since our concern 

502: does not lie in the meson sector, mesons will only enter via loop calculations. Retaining

503: the meson masses to $\cO(\e^4)$ in a typical baryon calculation leads to corrections of 

504: $\cO(\e^5)$ or higher. These are beyond the order we work, thus the 

505: Lagrangian in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:Lchi} is sufficient for our purposes.

506: 

507: 

508: 

509: 

510: 

511: 

512: 

513: \subsection{Baryons} \label{s:baryons}

514: 

515: 

516: 

517: Having reviewed the Symanzik Lagrangian through $\cO(a^2)$ and the relevant pieces of meson \PQCPT\ at finite $a$, 

518: we now extend \PQCPT\ in the baryon sector to $\cO(a^2)$. First let us detail the situation at $\cO(a)$. 

519: In $SU(4|2)$ \PQCPT, the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ baryons 

520: are embedded in the $\bf{70}$-dimensional super-multiplet $\cB^{ijk}$, that

521: contains the nucleons, while the spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ baryons

522: are embedded in the $\bf{44}$-dimensional super-multiplet $\cT_\mu^{ijk}$, that 

523: contains the deltas~\cite{Labrenz:1996jy,Beane:2002vq}. 

524: To $\cO(\e^2)$, the free Lagrangian for the $\cB^{ijk}$ and $\cT^{ijk}_\mu$ fields is given 

525: by~\cite{Labrenz:1996jy,Beane:2002vq,Beane:2003xv}

526: \begin{eqnarray} \label{eqn:L}

527:   {\mathcal L}

528:   &=&

529:    i\left(\ol\cB v\cdot{\mathcal D}\cB\right)

530:   -2\a_M\left(\ol\cB \cB{\mathcal M}_+\right)

531:   -2\b_M\left(\ol\cB {\mathcal M}_+\cB\right)

532:   -2\sigma_M\left(\ol\cB\cB\right)\str\left({\mathcal M}_+\right)

533:                               \nonumber \\

534:   &&

535:   - 2 \a_W\left(\ol\cB \cB{\mathcal W}_+\right)

536:   - 2 \b_W\left(\ol\cB {\mathcal W}_+\cB\right)

537:   - 2 \sigma_W\left(\ol\cB\cB\right)\str\left({\mathcal W}_+\right)

538:                               \nonumber \\

539:   &&+i\left(\ol\cT_\mu v\cdot{\mathcal D}\cT_\mu\right)

540:     +\D\left(\ol\cT_\mu\cT_\mu\right)

541:     +2\g_M\left(\ol\cT_\mu {\mathcal M}_+\cT_\mu\right)

542:     -2\ol\sigma_M\left(\ol\cT_\mu\cT_\mu\right)\str\left({\mathcal M}_+\right) 

543: 				\nonumber \\

544:   &&

545:   + 2 \g_W\left(\ol\cT_\mu {\mathcal W}_+\cT_\mu\right)

546:   - 2 \ol\sigma_W\left(\ol\cT_\mu\cT_\mu\right)\str\left({\mathcal W}_+\right)

547: ,\end{eqnarray}

548: where the mass operator is defined by

549: \begin{equation}

550: {\mathcal M}_\pm = \frac{1}{2}\left(\xi^\dagger m_Q \xi^\dagger\pm\xi m_Q \xi\right)

551: ,\end{equation}

552: and the Wilson operator is defined by\footnote{%

553: Technically the SW coefficient $c_{SW}$, with its possible weak logarithmic dependence on $a$, 

554: also enters into the spurion construction. We are ignoring this dependence and do not distinguish between 

555: spurions of the same form which come from different operators in the Symanzik action largely because at $\cO(a^2)$ 

556: the analysis becomes extremely cumbersome.

557: }

558: \begin{equation} \label{eq:Wilson}

559: \mathcal{W}_\pm = \frac{a \L_{QCD}^2}{2} \left(\xi^\dagger w_Q \xi^\dagger\pm\xi w_Q \xi\right)

560: .\end{equation}

561: Here $\D \sim \e$ is the mass splitting between the $\bf{70}$ and $\bf{44}$ in the chiral limit.

562: The parenthesis notation used in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:L} is that of~\cite{Labrenz:1996jy} and is defined 

563: so that the contractions of flavor indices maintain proper transformations under chiral rotations.

564: Notice that the presence of the chiral symmetry breaking SW operator in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:LPQQCD} 

565: has lead to new $\cO(a)$ operators and new dimensionless constants $\a_W$, $\b_W$, $\sigma_W$, $\g_W$, 

566: and $\ol\sigma_W$ in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:L}. 

567: %Notice in our power counting $a \L_\chi^2 \sim m_Q$. 

568: The Lagrangian describing the interactions of the $\cB^{ijk}$ 

569: and $\cT_\mu^{ijk}$ with the pseudo-Goldstone mesons is

570: \begin{equation} \label{eqn:Linteract}

571:   {\cal L} =   

572: 	  2 \a \left(\ol \cB S_\mu \cB A_\mu \right)

573: 	+ 2 \b \left(\ol \cB S_\mu A_\mu \cB \right)

574: 	- 2{\mathcal H}\left(\ol{\cT}_\nu S_\mu A_\mu \cT_\nu\right) 

575:     	+ \sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}\cC

576:   		\left[

577:     			\left(\ol{\cT}_\nu A_\nu \cB\right)+ \left(\ol \cB A_\nu \cT_\nu\right)

578:   		\right]  

579: .\end{equation}

580: The axial-vector and vector meson fields $A_\mu$ and $V_\mu$

581: are defined by: $ A_\mu=\frac{i}{2}

582: \left(\xi\partial_\mu\xi^\dagger-\xi^\dagger\partial_\mu\xi\right)$  

583: and $V_\mu=\frac{1}{2} \left(\xi\partial_\mu\xi^\dagger+\xi^\dagger\partial_\mu\xi\right)$.

584: The latter appears in  Eq.~\eqref{eqn:L} for the

585: covariant derivatives of $\cB_{ijk}$ and $\cT_{ijk}$ 

586: that both have the form

587: \begin{equation}

588:   ({\mathcal D}_\mu \cB)_{ijk}

589:   =

590:   \partial_\mu \cB_{ijk}

591:   +(V_\mu)_{il}\cB_{ljk}

592:   +(-)^{\eta_i(\eta_j+\eta_m)}(V_\mu)_{jm}\cB_{imk}

593:   +(-)^{(\eta_i+\eta_j)(\eta_k+\eta_n)}(V_\mu)_{kn}\cB_{ijn}

594: .\end{equation}

595: The vector $S_\mu$ is the covariant spin operator~\cite{Jenkins:1991jv,Jenkins:1991es,Jenkins:1991ne}.

596: The interaction Lagrangian in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:Linteract} also receives finite $a$ corrections. 

597: In calculating the octet and decuplet masses, however, these lead to effects that are of $\cO(\e^5)$ or higher. 

598: 

599: 

600: At $\cO(\e^4)$, there are contributions to the \PQCPT\ Lagrangian from two insertions of the mass operator $\cM_+$,

601: and contributions from two insertions of the axial current $A_\mu$. 

602: The former contribute to the baryon masses at tree level, the latter at one-loop level. 

603: These operators have been written down in \cite{Walker-Loud:2004hf,Tiburzi:2004rh,Tiburzi:2005na}.

604: There are also operators with an insertion of $v \cdot A \otimes \cM_-$. These do not contribute to the masses at $\cO(\e^4)$. 

605: To extend baryon \PQCPT\ for mixed lattice actions to $\cO(\e^4)$, we must first include all higher-order operators that are 

606: linear in $a$. Secondly we must map the operators in $\cL^{(6)}$ onto the baryon sector. To achieve the former, 

607: we realize that the relevant operators can be formed from the existing $\cO(a)$ operators by insertion of the mass operator $\cM_+$ 

608: (insertion of a derivative is ruled out because the only possibility is $v \cdot D$ which can be eliminated using

609: the equations of motion~\cite{Arzt:1993gz}). For spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ baryons, there are eleven such operators

610: \begin{eqnarray}

611: \cL &=&

612: -\frac{1}{\L_\chi} 

613: \Bigg[ 

614:  b_1^{WM} (-)^{(\eta_i + \eta_j)(\eta_k + \eta_{k'})} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \{\cM_+, \cW_+ \}^{kk'} \cB^{ijk'} 

615: + 

616: b_2^{WM} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \{\cM_+, \cW_+ \}^{ii'} \cB^{i'jk}  

617: \notag \\

618: && + 

619: b_3^{WM} (-)^{\eta_{i'}(\eta_j + \eta_{j'})} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \cM_+^{ii'} \cW_+^{jj'} \cB^{i'j'k} 

620: + 

621: b_4^{WM} (-)^{\eta_{i}(\eta_j + \eta_{j'})} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \cM_+^{jj'} \cW_+^{ii'} \cB^{i'j'k} 

622: \notag \\

623: && + 

624: b_5^{WM} (-)^{\eta_j \eta_{j'} + 1} \ol \cB {}^{kji} 

625: \left(\cM_+^{ij'} \cW_+^{ji'} + \cW_+^{ij'} \cM_+^{ji'} \right) \cB^{i'j'k} 

626: \notag \\

627: && +

628: b_6^{WM} \left( \ol \cB \cB \cM_+\right) \str (\cW_+) 

629: + 

630: b_7^{WM} \left( \ol \cB  \cM_+ \cB \right) \str (\cW_+)

631: + 

632: b_8^{WM} \left( \ol \cB \cB \right) \str ( \cW_+ \cM_+ ) 

633: \notag \\

634: && + 

635: b_9^{WM} \left( \ol \cB \cB \right) \str( \cW_+ ) \str (\cM_+) 

636: + 

637: b_{10}^{WM} \left( \ol \cB \cB \cW_+ \right) \str (\cM_+)

638: + 

639: b_{11}^{WM} \left( \ol \cB \cW_+ \cB \right) \str (\cM_+)

640: \Bigg],

641: \notag \\

642: \label{eq:BAMs}

643: \end{eqnarray}

644: involving $\cW_+ \otimes \cM_+$. 

645: Additionally there are eleven analogous operators involving the operator combination $\cW_- \otimes \cM_-$, however

646: these terms do not contribute to the baryon masses at this order. 

647: Similarly the eight operators containing $v \cdot A \otimes \cW_-$

648: do not contribute to baryon masses to $\cO(\e^4)$. 

649: 

650: 

651: For the spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ baryons, there are six operators at $\cO( m_Q \, a )$ that contribute to the baryon masses. 

652: These terms are  

653: \begin{eqnarray}

654: \cL &=&

655:  \frac{1}{\L_\chi} \Bigg[ 

656: t_1^{WM} \ol \cT {}^{kji}_\mu \{\cM_+, \cW_+ \}^{ii'} \cT^{i'jk}_\mu  

657: +

658: t_2^{WM} (-)^{\eta_{i'}(\eta_j + \eta_{j'})} \ol \cT  {}^{kji}_\mu \cM_+^{ii'} \cW_+^{jj'} \cT^{i'j'k}_\mu

659: \notag \\ 

660: && + 

661: t_3^{WM} \left( \ol \cT_\mu  \cM_+ \cT_\mu \right) \str (\cW_+)

662: + 

663: t_4^{WM} \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cT_\mu \right) \str ( \cW_+ \cM_+ ) 

664: \notag \\

665: && + 

666: t_5^{WM} \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cT_\mu \right) \str( \cW_+ ) \str (\cM_+) 

667: + 

668: t_{6}^{WM} \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cW_+ \cT_\mu \right) \str (\cM_+)

669: \Bigg].

670: \label{eq:TAMs}

671: \end{eqnarray}

672: Additionally there are six analogous terms involving the operator combination $\cW_- \otimes \cM_-$ and four terms containing

673: $v \cdot A \otimes \cW_-$,  but these operators do not 

674: contribute to the baryon masses at this order. 

675: 

676: 

677: Next we must assess the contribution from the different classes of operators in $\cL^{(6)}$. 

678: Class one operators are quark bilinears that do not break chiral symmetry in the valence and sea sectors. 

679: These operators, however, break the full graded chiral symmetry down to the chiral symmetry group $G$

680: of the mixed lattice action. To describe such operators in the effective theory, 

681: we rewrite the class one operators of the Symanzik Lagrangian in a different form. Instead of describing the

682: bilinears in terms of $w_Q$ and $\ol w_Q$ matrices, we use the linear combinations $w_Q + \ol w_Q$ and 

683: $w_Q - \ol w_Q$. The former combination is just the identity and terms in the effective theory

684: that stem from it are trivial to construct because they are chirally invariant. Those with $w_Q - \ol w_Q$

685: have the flavor symmetry of the mixed action. Let us write out one such term from $\cL^{(6)}$, 

686: \begin{equation}

687: \ol Q \Dslash {}^3 (w_Q - \ol w_Q) Q

688: =

689: \ol Q_L \Dslash {}^3 (w_Q - \ol w_Q) Q_L

690: + 

691: \ol Q_R \Dslash {}^3 (w_Q - \ol w_Q) Q_R 

692: \end{equation}

693: To make these terms $SU(4|2)$ chirally invariant, we introduce two spurions $\cO_1$ and $\cO_2$ transforming as

694: \begin{eqnarray}

695: \cO_1 &\to& L \cO_1 L^\dagger \notag \\

696: \cO_2 &\to& R \cO_2 R^\dagger,  

697: \end{eqnarray}

698: that will be assigned the values $\cO_1 = \cO_2 = w_Q - \ol w_Q$. 

699: In the effective field theory, the operators $\cO = \xi^\dagger \cO_{1} \xi$, and $\xi \cO_2 \xi^\dagger$ both  

700: transform as $U \cO U^\dagger$. Instead of using these operators, we work with 

701: linear combinations of definite parity, namely

702: \begin{equation}

703: \cO_\pm = \frac{1}{2} 

704: \left[ 

705: \xi^\dagger (w_Q - \ol w_Q ) \xi \pm \xi (w_Q - \ol w_Q) \xi^\dagger

706: \right]

707: .\end{equation}

708: Thus class one operators get mapped into the effective theory as terms contained in the Lagrangian

709: \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:A2s}

710: \cL &=& - a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 \Bigg[ 

711: b_0  \left( \ol \cB \cB \right) 

712: +

713: b_1^\cO  \left( \ol \cB \cB \cO_+ \right)

714: + 

715: b_2^\cO \left( \ol \cB \cO_+ \cB \right)

716: + 

717: b_3^\cO \left( \ol \cB \cB \right) \str \left( \cO_+ \right) \notag \\

718: &&

719: -

720: t_0 \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cT_\mu \right) 

721: - 

722: t_1^\cO \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cO_+ \cT_\mu \right) 

723: - 

724: t_2^\cO \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cT_\mu \right) \str \left( \cO_+ \right)

725: \Bigg].

726: \end{eqnarray}

727: When the action is unmixed, the operator $\cO_+$ is proportional to the identity matrix and hence

728: there is only one independent operator for the $\cB$-field and one for the $\cT^\mu$-field 

729: in Eq.~\eqref{eq:A2s}. 

730: 

731: 

732: 

733: 

734: All class two operators have an insertion of the quark mass matrix $m_Q$. Thus these operators are at least 

735: of $\cO( m_Q \, a^2) = \cO(\e^6)$ in our power counting and can be neglected to the order we are working. 

736: Class three operators are four-quark operators that do not break chiral symmetry in the valence and sea sectors.

737: They do break the $SU(4|2)$ chiral symmetry down to the chiral symmetry $G$ of the mixed action.

738: The requisite spurions for these class three operators are $\cO_1 \otimes \cO_1$, $\cO_1 \otimes \cO_2$, $\cO_2 \otimes \cO_1$, 

739: and $\cO_2 \otimes \cO_2$. Hence operators in the effective theory will involve the products $\cO_+ \otimes \cO_+$ and

740: $\cO_- \otimes \cO_-$. The latter do not contribute to baryon masses to the order we work, while the former

741: baryon operators are contained in the Lagrangian

742: \begin{eqnarray}

743: \cL &=&

744: - a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 \Bigg[

745: b_1^{\cO\cO} (-)^{(\eta_i + \eta_j)(\eta_k + \eta_{k'})} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \left( \cO_+ \cO_+ \right)^{kk'} \cB^{ijk'}

746: +

747: b_2^{\cO\cO} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \left( \cO_+ \cO_+ \right)^{ii'} \cB^{i'jk}

748: \notag \\

749: && + 

750: b_3^{\cO\cO} (-)^{\eta_{i'} ( \eta_j + \eta_{j'})} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \cO_+^{ii'} \cO_+^{jj'} \cB^{i'j'k}

751: + 

752: b_4^{\cO\cO} (-)^{\eta_j \eta_{j'} +1} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \cO_+^{ij'} \cO_+^{ji'} \cB^{i'j'k}

753: \notag \\

754: && + 

755: b_5^{\cO\cO} \left( \ol \cB \cB  \cO_+ \right) \str (\cO_+)

756: + 

757: b_6^{\cO\cO} \left( \ol \cB \cO_+ \cB \right) \str (\cO_+) 

758: +

759: b_7^{\cO\cO} \left( \ol \cB \cB \right) \str (\cO_+ \cO_+) 

760: \notag \\

761: && + 

762: b_8^{\cO\cO} \left( \ol \cB \cB \right) \str (\cO_+) \str (\cO_+) 

763: \Bigg] 

764: ,\label{eq:OOBs}\end{eqnarray}

765: for the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ fields, and 

766: \begin{eqnarray}

767: \cL &=&

768: a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 \Bigg[

769: t_1^{\cO\cO} \ol \cT {}^{kji}_\mu \left( \cO_+ \cO_+ \right)^{ii'} \cT^{i'jk}_\mu

770: +

771: t_2^{\cO\cO} (-)^{\eta_{i'} ( \eta_j + \eta_{j'})} \ol \cT {}^{kji}_\mu \cO_+^{ii'} \cO_+^{jj'} \cT^{i'j'k}_\mu

772: \notag \\

773: && + 

774: t_3^{\cO\cO} \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cO_+ \cT_\mu \right) \str (\cO_+) 

775: + 

776: t_4^{\cO\cO} \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cT_\mu \right) \str (\cO_+ \cO_+)

777: + 

778: t_5^{\cO\cO} \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cT_\mu \right) \str (\cO_+ ) \str (\cO_+)

779: \Bigg],

780: \notag \\

781: \label{eq:OOTs}

782: \end{eqnarray}

783: for the spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ fields. 

784: When considering unmixed actions, all of the operators in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:OOBs} and \eqref{eq:OOTs} become 

785: redundant compared to those in Eq.~\eqref{eq:A2s}, because $\cO_+$ is proportional to the identity. 

786: 

787: 

788: 

789: 

790: Class four operators are four-quark operators that break chiral symmetry in the Wilson sector of the theory.

791: Such terms involve the flavor structure $w_Q \otimes w_Q$, which must be promoted to various spurions.  

792: In the Symanzik Lagrangian, for example, we have the operator

793: \begin{eqnarray}

794: \left( \ol Q w_Q Q \right)^2 

795: &=&  

796: \left( \ol Q_L w_Q Q_R \right)^2 

797: +  

798: \left( \ol Q_L w_Q Q_R \right) \left( \ol Q_R w_Q Q_L \right) \notag \\

799: && + 

800: \left( \ol Q_R w_Q Q_L \right) \left( \ol Q_L w_Q Q_R \right)

801: +

802: \left( \ol Q_R w_Q Q_L \right)^2

803: ,\end{eqnarray}

804: and so we require the spurions~\cite{Bar:2003mh}

805: \begin{eqnarray}

806: B_1 \otimes B_2 &\to& L B_1 R^\dagger \otimes L B_2 R^\dagger \notag \\

807: B_1^\dagger \otimes B_2^\dagger &\to& R B_1^\dagger L^\dagger \otimes R B_2^\dagger L^\dagger \notag \\

808: C_1 \otimes C_2 &\to& R C_1 L^\dagger \otimes L C_2 R^\dagger \notag \\

809: C_1^\dagger \otimes C_2^\dagger &\to& L C_1^\dagger R^\dagger \otimes R C_2^\dagger L^\dagger, 

810: \end{eqnarray}

811: that will ultimately be given the values $B_1 = B_2 = C_1 = C_2 = a \L_{QCD}^2 w_Q$, and similarly for their

812: Hermitian conjugates. Now the operators $\cO = \xi^\dagger B_{1,2} \xi^\dagger$, $\xi B_{1,2}^\dagger \xi$, 

813: $\xi C_1 \xi$, $\xi^\dagger C_1^\dagger \xi^\dagger$, $\xi^\dagger C_2 \xi^\dagger$, and

814: $\xi C_2^\dagger \xi$ all transform as $U \cO U^\dagger$  under their respective spurion transformations. 

815: Moreover when assigned constant values for their spurions, the operators involving $C$'s and $B_2$'s become indistinguishable from those 

816: involving $B_1$ and $B_1^\dagger$. 

817: Finally instead of working with the operators $\xi w_Q \xi$ and $\xi^\dagger w_Q \xi^\dagger$, we work with linear 

818: combinations that are parity even and odd, which are the $\cW_\pm$ operators, respectively, that were introduced previously.  

819: Thus our spurion analysis shows  

820: terms in the effective theory will involve products of Wilson operators 

821: $\cW_+ \otimes \cW_+$, and  $\cW_- \otimes \cW_-$.\footnote{%

822: As spurions, these have the same effect as squares of the $\cO(a)$ spurions. Thus

823: we need not consider such higher-order effects from lower order terms.

824: } 

825: The latter products do not contribute to the baryon masses at this order. 

826: Thus for the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ baryons, we have the eight terms from class 

827: four operators

828: \begin{eqnarray}

829: \cL &=&

830: - \frac{1}{\L_{QCD}} \Bigg[

831: b_1^W (-)^{(\eta_i + \eta_j)(\eta_k + \eta_{k'})} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \left( \cW_+ \cW_+ \right)^{kk'} \cB^{ijk'}

832: +

833: b_2^W \ol \cB {}^{kji} \left( \cW_+ \cW_+ \right)^{ii'} \cB^{i'jk}

834: \notag \\

835: && + 

836: b_3^W (-)^{\eta_{i'} ( \eta_j + \eta_{j'})} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \cW_+^{ii'} \cW_+^{jj'} \cB^{i'j'k}

837: + 

838: b_4^W (-)^{\eta_j \eta_{j'} +1} \ol \cB {}^{kji} \cW_+^{ij'} \cW_+^{ji'} \cB^{i'j'k}

839: \notag \\

840: && + 

841: b_5^W \left( \ol \cB \cB  \cW_+ \right) \str (\cW_+)

842: + 

843: b_6^W \left( \ol \cB \cW_+ \cB \right) \str (\cW_+) 

844: +

845: b_7^W \left( \ol \cB \cB \right) \str (\cW_+ \cW_+) 

846: \notag \\

847: && + 

848: b_8^W \left( \ol \cB \cB \right) \str (\cW_+) \str (\cW_+) 

849: \Bigg] 

850: ;\label{eq:WBs}\end{eqnarray}

851: while in the spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ sector, we have five terms

852: \begin{eqnarray}

853: \cL &=&

854: \frac{1}{\L_{QCD}} \Bigg[

855: t_1^W \ol \cT {}^{kji}_\mu \left( \cW_+ \cW_+ \right)^{ii'} \cT^{i'jk}_\mu

856: +

857: t_2^W (-)^{\eta_{i'} ( \eta_j + \eta_{j'})} \ol \cT {}^{kji}_\mu \cW_+^{ii'} \cW_+^{jj'} \cT^{i'j'k}_\mu

858: \notag \\

859: && + 

860: t_3^W \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cW_+ \cT_\mu \right) \str (\cW_+) 

861: + 

862: t_4^W \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cT_\mu \right) \str (\cW_+ \cW_+)

863: + 

864: t_5^W \left( \ol \cT_\mu \cT_\mu \right) \str (\cW_+ ) \str (\cW_+)

865: \Bigg].

866: \notag \\

867: \label{eq:WTs}

868: \end{eqnarray}

869: 

870: 

871: Class five operators break the $O(4)$ rotational symmetry of Euclidean space. 

872: The lowest-order hypercubic invariants that are parity even are: $v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu$, 

873: $v_\mu v_\mu S_\mu S_\mu$,  and $S_\mu S_\mu S_\mu S_\mu$. The latter two are both redundant

874: because, suspending the Einstein summation convention, we have 

875: $S_\mu S_\mu = \frac{1}{4} (\delta_{\mu \mu} + v_\mu v_\mu )$.

876: There is an additional hypercubic invariant for the spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ fields since they 

877: carry a vector index. 

878: Furthermore, these class five operators have the chiral symmetry of the group $G$ of the mixed action, not 

879: the full graded chiral symmetry of $\cL^{(4)}$. 

880: As with class one operators, class five operators in the effective theory 

881: require the insertion of the operator $\cO_+$. Thus the $O(4)$ breaking operators are

882: \begin{eqnarray}

883: \cL 

884: &=& 

885: - a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 \Bigg[

886: b^v_0 \, \left( \ol \cB  v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cB \right)

887: +

888: b^v_1 \, \left( \ol \cB  v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cB \cO_+\right)

889: +

890: b_2^v \, \left( \ol \cB  v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cO_+ \cB \right)

891: \notag \\

892: && + 

893: b_3^v \, \left( \ol \cB  v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cB \right) \str \left( \cO_+ \right) 

894: -

895: t_0^{v} \, \left(  \ol \cT_\nu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cT_\nu \right)

896: -

897: t_1^{v} \, \left(  \ol \cT_\nu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cO_+ \cT_\nu \right)

898: \notag \\

899: && 

900: -

901: t_2^v \, \left(  \ol \cT_\nu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cT_\nu \right) \str \left( \cO_+ \right)

902: - 

903: t_0^{\ol v} \,  \left( \ol \cT_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cT_\mu \right)

904: - 

905: t_1^{\ol v} \,  \left( \ol \cT_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cO_+ \cT_\mu \right)

906: \notag \\

907: && 

908: - 

909: t_2^{\ol v} \,  \left( \ol \cT_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \cT_\mu \right) \str \left( \cO_+ \right)

910: \Bigg].

911: \label{eq:vA2s}

912: \end{eqnarray}

913: 

914: 

915: 

916: 

917: The mixing of classes of operators is only possible through linear superpositions. This 

918: is accounted for in the effective theory by linear superpositions of effective operators 

919: and thus need not be addressed separately. 

920: This completes the (nearly) exhaustive listing of $\cO(\e^4)$

921: \PQCPT\ terms for the mixed lattice action. 

922: Despite the large number of operators (over one hundred), many terms do not contribute

923: to baryon masses at tree level and have already been omitted. 

924: Additionally many of the contributing terms are not linearly 

925: independent at leading order. 

926: In the following section we calculate the masses of the nucleons and deltas to $\cO(a^2)$,

927: and thereby determine the number of new free parameters that are required. 

928: 

929: 

930: 

931: 

932: 

933: 

934: \section{Baryon masses to $\cO(a^2)$} \label{s:mass}

935: 

936: 

937: In this section we calculate the masses of the nucleons and deltas in $SU(4|2)$. 

938: Baryon masses in $SU(2)$ are presented in Appendix~\ref{s:2}.

939: 

940: 

941: 

942: 

943: 

944: \subsection{Nucleon mass} \label{s:nm}

945: 

946: In Euclidean lattice field theory, the baryon self energy $\Sigma(\gamma_\mu p_\mu)$ is 

947: no longer rotationally invariant; it is a hypercubic invariant function of the baryon momentum and 

948: gamma matrices. With this functional dependence in mind, we can now calculate the mass of the nucleon. 

949: %

950: %

951: The nucleon mass in the combined lattice spacing and chiral expansion can be written as

952: \begin{eqnarray}

953:      M_{N} = M_0 \left(\mu \right) -  M_{N}^{(2)}\left(\mu \right)

954:                 - M_{N}^{(3)}\left(\mu \right)

955:                 - M_{N}^{(4)}\left(\mu \right) + \ldots

956: \label{eq:Bmassexp}

957: \end{eqnarray}

958: Here, $M_0 \left(\mu \right)$ is the renormalized nucleon

959: mass in the continuum and chiral limits, 

960: which is independent of $m_Q$.

961: $M_{N}^{(n)}$ is the contribution to the mass of order $\e^{n}$, and $\mu$ is the

962: renormalization scale.

963: 

964: 

965: 

966: At order $\e^2$ in the combined lattice spacing and chiral expansion, we have 

967: contributions at tree level from the $\cO(m_Q)$ and $\cO(a)$ operators in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:L}.

968: These contributions to the nucleon mass read

969: \begin{equation}

970: M_N^{(2)} 

971: = 

972: 2 (\a_M  + \b_M ) m_u   + 4  \sigma_M \, m_j  

973: +

974: 2 a \L_{QCD}^2 

975: \left[

976: ( \a_W + \b_W) w_v 

977: + 2 \sigma_W \, w_s 

978: \right] \label{eq:Bmass2}

979: .\end{equation}

980: From this expression, we see that the $\cO(a)$ mass corrections vanish only if

981: both the valence and sea quarks are GW. This is in contrast to the meson sector

982: where only the valence quarks need be GW to ensure the vanishing of linear $a$ contributions.

983: At $\cO(\e^3)$ there are contributions from loop graphs to $M^{(3)}_N$. 

984: These have been determined for $SU(4|2)$ in~\cite{Beane:2002vq} and we 

985: do not duplicate the expressions here because the only modification necessary

986: is to include the $a$-dependence of the loop meson masses via Eq.~\eqref{eqn:mqq}.\footnote{% 

987: Additionally there are local operators that contribute at this order. The form of these operators, 

988: however, is the same as those in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:L} but multiplied by a factor of $\D / \L_\chi$. 

989: We can thus trivially include the effect of these operators by promoting the 

990: LECs to arbitrary polynomial functions of $\D / \L_\chi$ expanded out to the appropriate order.  

991: We do not spell this out explicitly since the determination of these polynomial coefficients requires

992: the ability to vary $\D$. } 

993: 

994: 

995: 

996: \begin{figure}

997: \epsfig{file=amass.eps}

998: \caption{Loop diagrams contributing to the $a$-dependence of the nucleon mass at $\cO(\e^4)$. 

999: Mesons are denoted by a dashed line, flavor neutrals (hairpins) by a crossed dashed line, 

1000: and a thin solid line denotes an octet baryon. The square denotes an $\cO(a)$ vertex. 

1001: }

1002: \label{F:amass}

1003: \end{figure}

1004: 

1005: 

1006: At $\cO(\e^4)$, we have the usual continuum contributions from tree-level $\cO(m_Q^2)$ operators and from 

1007: loop diagrams. These have been detailed for $SU(4|2)$ in \cite{Tiburzi:2005na} and we do not duplicate these

1008: lengthy expressions here. The only modification necessary at finite lattice spacing is the inclusion 

1009: of the $a$-dependence of the loop meson masses from Eq.~\eqref{eqn:mqq}.  The remaining finite lattice spacing corrections

1010: arise at tree level from the $\cO(m_Q \, a)$ operators in Eq.~\eqref{eq:BAMs} and the $\cO(a^2)$ operators in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:A2s}, 

1011: \eqref{eq:WBs}, and \eqref{eq:vA2s}. 

1012: Additionally there are loop diagrams arising from the operators in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:L}, where

1013: either the Wilson operator in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Wilson} is expanded to second order or is inserted

1014: on an internal baryon line. These diagrams are shown in Fig.~\ref{F:amass}. Lastly there are wavefunction

1015: renormalization corrections that are linear in $a$. 

1016: The contribution to the nucleon mass from these operators and loops appears in $M_N^{(4)}$ as a correction of the form

1017: \begin{eqnarray}

1018: \delta M_N^{(4)} 

1019: &=& 

1020: \frac{a \L_{QCD}^2}{\L_\chi} 

1021: \Big[

1022: A  w_v  m_u

1023: + 

1024: B  w_s m_u

1025: + 

1026: C  w_v  m_j

1027: + 

1028: D  w_s  m_j

1029: \Big]

1030: \notag \\

1031: && - 4 \frac{a \L_{QCD}^2}{\L_\chi^2}

1032: \Bigg\{

1033: (\a_W + \b_W)  

1034: \left[ 

1035: (w_v + w_s)

1036: \cL(m_{ju}, \mu)

1037: + 

1038: w_v

1039: \cL(m_{\eta_u}, m_{\eta_u}, \mu)

1040: \right]

1041: \notag \\

1042: && \phantom{spacer} + 

1043: 2 \sigma_W \, w_s

1044: \left[ 

1045: 2 \cL(m_{jj}, \mu)

1046: + 

1047: \cL(m_{\eta_j}, m_{\eta_j}, \mu)

1048: \right]

1049: +

1050: A^N_{ju} \left[ \cL(m_{ju}, \mu) + \frac{2}{3} m_{ju}^2 \right]

1051: \notag \\

1052: && \phantom{spacer} + 

1053: g_{\D N}^2 [B^N_\pi \cJ(m_\pi, \D, \mu) + B^N_{ju} \cJ(m_{ju}, \D, \mu) ]

1054: \Bigg\}

1055: \notag \\

1056: && +

1057: a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 

1058: \Big[E+ E' w_v +E'' w_s+E''' w_v w_s

1059: \notag \\

1060: && \phantom{spacer}

1061: + 

1062: \ol u(p) v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \, u(p)

1063: ( F + F' w_v + F'' w_s )

1064: \Big] \label{eq:Bmass4}

1065: .\end{eqnarray}

1066: The non-analytic functions appearing in this expression are defined by

1067: \begin{eqnarray}

1068: \cL (m_\phi, \mu) &=& m_\phi^2 \log \frac{m_\phi^2}{\mu^2}, \\

1069: \cJ ( m_\phi, \delta, \mu ) &=&

1070: (m_\phi^2 - \d^2) \log \frac{m_\phi^2}{\mu^2} + 2 \d \sqrt{\d^2 - m_\phi^2} \log \left( \frac{\d - \sqrt{\d^2 - m_\phi^2 + i \epsilon}}

1071: {\d + \sqrt{\d^2 - m_\phi^2 + i \epsilon}} \right), \\

1072: %\cM^2(m_\phi, m_{\phi'}) &=& \cH_{\phi \phi'} \left[ m_\phi^2, m_{\phi'}^2 \right] \\

1073: \cL(m_\phi, m_{\phi'}, \mu) &=& \cH_{\phi \phi'} \left[ \cL(m_\phi,\mu), \cL(m_{\phi'},\mu) \right], \\

1074: \cJ(m_\phi, m_{\phi'},\d,\mu) &=& \cH_{\phi \phi'} \left[ \cJ(m_\phi,\d, \mu), \cJ(m_{\phi'},\d, \mu) \right] 

1075: ,\end{eqnarray}

1076: and one should keep in mind the $a$-dependence of the meson masses. 

1077: The parameters $A$--$F$ are 

1078: replacements for particular combinations of LECs.\footnote{%

1079: For clarity in comparing with the operators written down in Sec.~\ref{s:baryons}, these combinations are:

1080: $A = 2 b_1^{WM} + 2 b_2^{WM} +  b_3^{WM}+  b_4^{WM} + 2 b_5^{WM}$, 

1081: $B = 2 b_6^{WM} + 2 b_7^{WM}$, 

1082: $C = 2 b_{10}^{WM} + 2  b_{11}^{WM}$, 

1083: $D = 2 b_8^{WM} + 2 b_9^{WM}$, 

1084: $E = b_0 - b_1^\cO - b_2^\cO - 2 b_3^\cO + b_1^{\cO \cO} + b_2^{\cO \cO} + b_3^{\cO \cO} + b_4^{\cO \cO} + 2 b_5^{\cO \cO} 

1085: + 2 b_6^{\cO \cO} + 2 b_7^{\cO \cO} + 4 b_8^{\cO \cO}$, 

1086: $E' = b_1^W + b_2^W + b_3^W + b_4^W + 2 b_1^\cO + 2 b_2^\cO - 4 b_5^{\cO \cO} - 4 b_6^{\cO \cO}$, 

1087: $E'' = 2 b_7^W + 4 b_8^W + 4 b_3^\cO - 4 b_5^{\cO \cO} - 4 b_6^{\cO \cO}$, 

1088: $E''' = 2 b_5^W + 2 b_6^W + 8 b_5^{\cO \cO} + 8 b_6^{\cO \cO}$, 

1089: $F = b^v_0 - b_1^v - b_2^v - 2 b_3^v$,

1090: $F' = 2 b_1^v + 2 b_2^v$,

1091: and

1092: $F'' = 4 b_3^v$.  

1093: }

1094: The meson loop coefficients $A^N_{ju}$, $B^N_\pi$, and $B^N_{ju}$ are given by

1095: \begin{eqnarray}

1096: A^N_{ju} &=& -\frac{1}{4} \Bigg\{ 2 w_v \left[ - 2 g_A^2 \a_W + g_A g_1 \b_W - \frac{1}{2} g_1^2 (\a_W + 3 \b_W) \right] 

1097: \notag \\

1098: && \phantom{spac}

1099: + w_s \left[ ( 2 g_A^2 + g_A g_1) \a_W + g_1^2 ( \a_W + 3 \b_W)  \right] \Bigg\}, \notag \\

1100: B^N_\pi &=& w_v ( \a_W + \b_W + \gamma_W ) + 2 w_s ( \sigma_W - \ol \sigma_W ), \notag \\

1101: B^N_{ju} &=& w_v \left( \a_W + \b_W + \frac{2}{3} \gamma_W \right) + w_s \left( 2 \sigma_W - 2 \ol \sigma_W + \frac{1}{3} \gamma_W \right) 

1102: .\end{eqnarray}

1103: 

1104: 

1105: Despite the complicated form of Eq.~\eqref{eq:Bmass4}, there are at most only four free parameters depending 

1106: on the mixed action considered. The reason for the complicated form is that the above equation

1107: shows the interplay between all possible theories with mixed actions.  Precisely which operators 

1108: are present or, on the other hand, can be eliminated is perhaps of academic interest because

1109: at this order many of the individual contributions cannot be resolved from lattice data. 

1110: For example, in a theory with Wilson valence and sea quarks, the contribution $A + B$ cannot be further resolved. 

1111: %

1112: %

1113: %

1114: %

1115: %

1116: %

1117: In Table~\ref{t:summary}, we

1118: summarize the number of free parameters introduced by $\cO(a)$, $\cO(m_Q \,a)$, 

1119: and $\cO(a^2)$ operators in the baryon sector for various partially quenched theories. 

1120: Of course, the simplest situation occurs in a theory with GW valence and sea quarks. Here

1121: we see that there are $\cO(a^2)$ corrections to the nucleon self energy of two forms, one

1122: of which violates $O(4)$ symmetry. 

1123: 

1124: 

1125: Let us investigate the violation of $O(4)$ rotational invariance in detail. For an on-shell nucleon

1126: at rest, the $O(4)$ breaking operator merely contributes an additive $a^2$ shift to the mass. 

1127: This correction with $F$ coefficients becomes indistinguishable from the $a^2$ corrections 

1128: which respect $O(4)$ [these have $E$ coefficients in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Bmass4}]. 

1129: For any particle with non-relativistic three-momentum $\bm{p}$, 

1130: however, we can see the effects of $O(4)$ violation in the dispersion relation.

1131: To write the dispersion relation compactly, let us assume both valence and sea quarks are GW.

1132: The same form of the dispersion relation holds for actions involving Wilson quarks with the addition

1133: of various $\cO(a)$ contributions. First let us ignore the contributions from $O(4)$ breaking operators. 

1134: The dispersion relation has the familiar form

1135: \begin{equation} \label{eq:familiar}

1136: E_{\bm{p}} = M(a) + \frac{\bm{p}^2}{2 M(a)} + \ldots

1137: ,\end{equation}

1138: where $M(a) = M(0) - a^2 \L_{QCD}^2 E$, and $M(0)$ denotes the particle mass in the continuum 

1139: limit (which remains quark mass dependent). 

1140: 

1141: 

1142: 

1143: 

1144: To add the $O(4)$ breaking terms to the dispersion relation, we can use a 

1145: non-relativistic expansion for the particle four-velocity or utilize reparameterization 

1146: invariance to deduce the corrections to the dispersion relation. We relegate this 

1147: discussion to Appendix~\ref{s:RPI}, where we address particles with spin less than two. 

1148: Using the result in the Appendix for the spin-$1/2$ nucleon, 

1149: the relation between the particle energy and momentum is then given by

1150: \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:dispersion}

1151: E_{\bm{p}} 

1152: &=& 

1153: M(0) 

1154: -

1155: a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 (E + F) 

1156: + 

1157: \frac{\bm{p}^2}{2 M(0)} \left[ 1 + \frac{a^2 \L_{QCD}^3}{M(0)} ( E + 5 F ) \right] 

1158: .\end{eqnarray}

1159: Here we have written the non-relativistic expansion to second order and have retained the leading lattice-spacing 

1160: correction for each term. Notice for a particle at rest, we recover the simple result of an $a^2$ shift. 

1161: The kinetic energy receives corrections at $\cO(a^2)$, these are due to the $a^2$ shift in mass as well 

1162: as the $O(4)$ contribution in Eq.~\eqref{eq:vvvv}. If it were not for the latter contribution, the dispersion

1163: relation would retain the form in Eq.~\eqref{eq:familiar} with $M(a) = M(0) - a^2 \L_{QCD}^2 ( E + F)$. 

1164: Additionally the relativistic correction to the kinetic energy will be modified with a coefficient 

1165: proportional to $a^2$ and a different linear combination of $E$ and $F$. Also the energy 

1166: is only a cubic invariant function of the spatial momenta $p_i$. Because four factors of the momentum are required, 

1167: the leading $O(3)$ breaking term in the energy occurs at $\cO(a^2 M^{-4})$ with a coefficient $- F$.   

1168: 

1169: 

1170: 

1171: 

1172: 

1173: 

1174: \subsection{Delta mass} \label{s:dm}

1175: 

1176: 

1177: 

1178: For the masses of spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ baryons, there is an additional feature on a hypercube due to the fact

1179: that the Rarita-Schwinger fields themselves carry a vector index. 

1180: The one-particle irreducible self energy for a spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ field on a hypercube has the form

1181: \begin{equation}

1182: \ol u_\mu(p) \, \Sigma_{\mu \nu} \, u_\nu (p) 

1183: = 

1184: \ol u_\mu(p) \, 

1185: \left( 

1186: \Sigma + \ol \Sigma_{\mu \mu} 

1187: \right) u_\mu (p) 

1188: ,\end{equation}

1189: where $\Sigma$ and $\ol \Sigma_{\mu\mu}$ are both hypercubic invariant functions. 

1190: With this in mind, we can now calculate $\cO(a)$, $\cO(m_Q \, a)$ and $\cO(a^2)$ 

1191: contributions to the delta mass.

1192: %

1193: %

1194: %

1195: %

1196: %

1197: The mass of the delta in the combined lattice spacing and chiral expansion can be written as

1198: \begin{eqnarray}

1199:      M_{\D} = M_0 \left(\mu \right) + \D(\mu) +  M_{\D}^{(2)}\left(\mu \right)

1200:                 + M_{\D}^{(3)}\left(\mu \right)

1201:                 + M_{\D}^{(4)}\left(\mu \right) + \ldots

1202: \label{eq:Tmassexp}

1203: \end{eqnarray}

1204: Here, $M_0 \left(\mu \right)$ is the renormalized baryon mass 

1205: in the continuum and chiral limits and $\D(\mu)$ is the renormalized mass splitting between the spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ and spin-$\frac{1}{2}$

1206: baryons in the continuum and chiral limits. Both of these quantities are independent of $a$ and $m_Q$.

1207: $M_{\D}^{(n)}$ is the contribution of order $\e^{n}$, and $\mu$ is the

1208: renormalization scale.  

1209: 

1210: 

1211: At order $\e^2$ in the expansion, we have contributions to the delta mass 

1212: at tree level from the $\cO(m_Q)$ and $\cO(a)$ operators in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:L}.

1213: These lead to

1214: \begin{equation}

1215: M_\D^{(2)} 

1216: = 

1217: 2 \gamma_M  \, m_u 

1218: - 

1219: 4 \ol \sigma_M \, m_j

1220: + 

1221: 2 a \L_{QCD}^2

1222: \left[

1223: \gamma_W \, w_v

1224: - 

1225: 2 \ol \sigma_W \, w_s

1226: \right] \label{eq:Tmass2}

1227: .\end{equation}

1228: Again in contrast with the mesons,  we note that both valence and sea quarks must be GW for the $\cO(a)$ delta mass corrections to vanish.

1229: At $\cO(\e^3)$ there are contributions from loop graphs to $M^{(3)}_\D$. 

1230: These have been determined for $SU(4|2)$ in~\cite{Tiburzi:2005na} and we 

1231: do not duplicate the expressions here, because the only modification necessary

1232: is to include the $a$-dependence of the loop meson masses via Eq.~\eqref{eqn:mqq}. 

1233: 

1234: 

1235: 

1236: \begin{figure}

1237: \epsfig{file=decmass.eps}

1238: \caption{Loop diagrams contributing to the $a$-dependence of the delta mass. 

1239: Mesons are denoted by a dashed line, flavor neutrals (hairpins) by a crossed dashed line, 

1240: and a thick solid line denotes an decuplet baryon. The square denotes an $\cO(a)$ vertex. 

1241: }

1242: \label{F:decmass}

1243: \end{figure}

1244: 

1245: 

1246: 

1247: Finally at $\cO(\e^4)$ there are the usual contributions from tree-level $\cO(m_Q^2)$ operators and from 

1248: loop diagrams. For the delta, these have been detailed for $SU(4|2)$ in \cite{Tiburzi:2005na}.

1249: The remaining finite lattice-spacing corrections

1250: arise at tree level from the $\cO(m_Q \, a)$ operators in Eq.~\eqref{eq:TAMs} and the $\cO(a^2)$ operators in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:A2s}, 

1251: \eqref{eq:WTs}, and \eqref{eq:vA2s}. Additionally there are loop contributions stemming from the 

1252: operators in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:L}. These loop diagrams are depicted in Fig.~\ref{F:decmass}. Lastly 

1253: we must include wavefunction renormalization corrections that are linear in $a$.  

1254: The contribution to the delta mass from these operators and loops yields

1255: \begin{eqnarray}

1256: \delta M_\D^{(4)} 

1257: &=& 

1258: \frac{a \L_{QCD}^2}{\L_\chi} \Big[

1259: A  w_v   m_u

1260: + 

1261: B  w_s m_u

1262: + 

1263: C w_v m_j

1264: + 

1265: D w_s m_j

1266: \Big]

1267: \notag \\

1268: && 

1269: - 4 \frac{a \L_{QCD}^2}{\L_\chi^2} 

1270: \Bigg\{

1271: \g_W 

1272: \left[ 

1273: (w_v + w_s) \cL(m_{ju}, \mu)

1274: + 

1275: w_v

1276: \cL(m_{\eta_u}, m_{\eta_u}, \mu)

1277: \right]

1278: \notag \\

1279: && \phantom{spacs} \, - 

1280: 2 \ol \sigma_W \, w_s

1281: \left[ 

1282: 2 \cL(m_{jj}, \mu)

1283: + 

1284: \cL(m_{\eta_j}, m_{\eta_j}, \mu)

1285: \right]

1286: \notag \\

1287: && \phantom{spacs}

1288: + \frac{5}{27} \gamma_W g_{\D \D}^2 (w_v - w_s) \left[ \cL (m_{ju},\mu) + \frac{26}{15} m_{ju^2} \right]

1289: \notag \\

1290: && \phantom{spacs}

1291: - 

1292: \frac{1}{2}  g_{\D N}^2 \left[ B^\D_\pi \cJ(m_\pi, -\D, \mu) + B^\D_{ju} \cJ(m_{ju}, - \D, \mu) \right]

1293: \Bigg\}

1294: \notag \\

1295: && +

1296: a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 

1297: \Big[

1298: E 

1299: + 

1300: E'  w_v 

1301: +

1302: E'' w_s

1303: + 

1304: E''' w_v w_s

1305: \notag \\

1306: && \phantom{spacs}

1307: + 

1308: \ol u(p)_\nu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \, u_\nu(p)

1309: \Big(

1310: F + F' w_v + F'' w_s

1311: \Big)

1312: \notag \\

1313: && \phantom{spacs}

1314: + 

1315: \ol u_\mu (p) v_\mu v_\mu \, u_\mu(p) 

1316: \Big( 

1317: G + G' w_v + G'' w_s

1318: \Big) 

1319:  \Big] \label{eq:Tmass4}

1320: .\end{eqnarray}

1321: The meson loop coefficients $B^\D_\pi$ and $B^\D_{ju}$ are given by

1322: \begin{eqnarray}

1323: B^\D_\pi &=& w_v ( \a_W + \b_W + \gamma_W ) + 2 w_s ( \sigma_W - \ol \sigma_W ),  \notag \\

1324: B^\D_{ju} &=& - \frac{1}{3} [w_v ( 5 \a_W + 2 \b_W + 6 \gamma_W ) + w_s (\a_W + 4 \b_W + 12 \sigma_W - 12 \ol \sigma_W)] \notag

1325: .\end{eqnarray} 

1326: The complicated nature of this expression results from considering general theories with mixed actions. 

1327: The formula retains book-keeping factors that indicate which operators contribute in particular mixed action theories. 

1328: Notice, for example, that for a theory with Wilson valence and sea quarks, the combination $A + B$ 

1329: cannot be further resolved from lattice data. Here the parameters $A$--$G$ depend on particular linear combinations

1330: of the LECs in the spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ sector.\footnote{%

1331: For clarity in comparing with Sec.~\ref{s:baryons}, these combinations of LECs are:

1332: $A = 2 t_1^{WM} +  t_2^{WM}$, 

1333: $B = 2 t_3^{WM}$, 

1334: $C = 2 t_6^{WM}$, 

1335: $D = 2 t_4^{WM} + 4 t_5^{WM}$, 

1336: $E = t_0 - t_1^\cO - 2 t_2^\cO + t_1^{\cO \cO} + t_2^{\cO \cO} +2 t_3^{\cO \cO} + 2 t_4^{\cO \cO} + 4 t_5^{\cO \cO}$, 

1337: $E' = t_1^W + t_2^W + 2 t_1^\cO - 4 t_3^{\cO \cO}$, 

1338: $E'' = 2 t_4^W + 4 t_5^W+ 4 t_2^\cO - 4 t_3^{\cO \cO}$, 

1339: $E''' =2 t_3^W + 8 t_3^{\cO \cO}$, 

1340: $F = t^{v}_0 - t^{v}_1 - 2 t^{v}_2$,

1341: $F' = 2 t^{v}_1$, 

1342: $F'' = 4 t^{v}_2$.

1343: $G = t^{\ol v}_0 - t^{\ol v}_1 - 2 t^{\ol v}_2$, 

1344: $G' = 2 t^{\ol v}_1$,

1345: and

1346: $G'' = 4 t^{\ol v}_2$,

1347: }

1348: The number of free parameters introduced for Wilson valence and sea quarks from

1349: $\cO(a)$, $\cO(m_Q\, a)$, and $\cO(a^2)$ operators is six.

1350: Table~\ref{t:summary} lists the number of free parameters

1351: introduced from finite lattice spacing effects for delta mass in mixed action theories. 

1352: The simplest expression results from an unmixed action of GW quarks. Corrections of 

1353: course start at $\cO(a^2)$, but are of three distinct forms given the possible hypercubic invariants.

1354: 

1355: 

1356: 

1357: As we know from determining the nucleon mass above, the $O(4)$ violating terms proportional to 

1358: $v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Tmass4} with coefficients $F$ give rise to corrections

1359: to the dispersion relation. There are additional corrections with coefficients $G$ that are tied 

1360: to the Rarita-Schwinger spinors in the form $\ol u_\mu(p) v_\mu v_\mu \, u_\mu(p)$. 

1361: Because of the constraint $v_\mu \, u_\mu(p) = 0$, these new terms

1362: do not contribute for a particle at rest. To consider a particle moving with non-relativistic three momentum $\bm{p}$, 

1363: we must use explicit forms for the Rarita-Schwinger spinors to obtain the modification to the energy-momentum 

1364: relation, see Appendix~\ref{s:RPI}. For GW valence and sea quarks, we find a similar dispersion relation

1365: given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:dispersion} but with an additional term 

1366: \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:new}

1367: E^\l_{\bm{p}} &=&

1368: M(0) 

1369: +

1370: a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 (E + F) 

1371: + 

1372: \frac{\bm{p}^2}{2 M(0)} \left[ 1 - \frac{a^2 \L_{QCD}^3}{M(0)} ( E - 3 F ) \right] 

1373: \notag \\ 

1374: && +

1375: \frac{a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 G}{3 M(0)^2} 

1376: \left[

1377: |\l| \bm{p}_\perp^2 - \left( 2 |\l| - 3 \right) \bm{p}_\l^2

1378: \right]

1379: ,\end{eqnarray} 

1380: where $\lambda = \pm 3/2, \pm 1/2$ refer to the delta spin states quantized with respect to an axis,

1381: $\bm{p}_\l$ is the momentum along that axis, 

1382: and $\bm{p}_\perp$ is the momentum transverse to that axis. 

1383: We have retained only the leading term

1384: in the non-relativistic expansion and its $a^2$ correction. Unlike the nucleon, the delta

1385: dispersion relation is more sensitive to $O(3)$ violation which enters at $\cO(a^2 M^{-2})$ as opposed

1386: to $\cO(a^2 M^{-4})$. The splitting of spin states is proportional to $|\l|$ because one has 

1387: invariance under rotations of the quantization axis by $\pi$. For an unpolarized state, however,

1388: the $O(3)$ violation in Eq.~\eqref{eq:new} averages out. 

1389: 

1390: 

1391: 

1392: 

1393: 

1394: 

1395: 

1396: \begin{table}

1397: \caption{Summary of the new free parameters entering particle masses in chiral perturbation theory

1398: for non-zero lattice spacing. Listed for \PQCPT\ and \CPT\ are the number of linearly independent

1399: operators contributing to the masses of the pion ($m_\pi$), nucleon ($M_N$), and delta ($M_\D$). These operators

1400: are classified as $\cO(a)$, $\cO(m_Q \,a)$, or $\cO(a^2)$. For each theory

1401: the quarks are grouped by species and for partially quenched theories are grouped by 

1402: pairs of valence and sea quark species. The species are labeled W for Wilson, and GW for Ginsparg-Wilson.}

1403: %\begin{ruledtabular}

1404: \begin{tabular}{c | c c c | c c c | c c c }

1405: \PQCPT\ & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{$m_\pi$} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{$M_N$} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{$M_\D$} \\

1406: $(v)$ $(s)$ & $\; \cO(a)$ & $\; \cO(m_Q \, a) \;$ & $\; \cO(a^2) \;$ 

1407: 	    & $\; \cO(a)$ & $\; \cO(m_Q \, a) \;$ & $\; \cO(a^2) \;$  

1408:             & $\; \cO(a)$ & $\; \cO(m_Q \, a) \;$ & $\; \cO(a^2) \;$  \\

1409: \hline

1410: W W   & $1$ & $2$ & $1$ & $1$ & $2$ & $2$ & $1$ & $2$ & $3$ \\

1411: W GW  & $1$ & $1$ & $1$ & $1$ & $2$ & $2$ & $1$ & $2$ & $3$ \\

1412: GW W  & $0$ & $1$ & $0$ & $1$ & $2$ & $2$ & $1$ & $2$ & $3$ \\

1413: GW GW & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $2$ & $0$ & $0$ & $3$ \\

1414: \multicolumn{10}{c}{} \\

1415: \hline

1416: $SU(2)$ \CPT\ & $\; \cO(a)$ & $\; \cO(m_Q \, a) \;$ & $\; \cO(a^2) \;$  

1417: 	      & $\; \cO(a)$ & $\; \cO(m_Q \, a) \;$ & $\; \cO(a^2) \;$  

1418:               & $\; \cO(a)$ & $\; \cO(m_Q \, a) \;$ & $\; \cO(a^2) \;$  \\

1419: W      & $1$ & $1$ & $1$ & $1$ & $1$ & $2$ & $1$ & $1$ & $3$ \\

1420: GW     & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $2$ & $0$ & $0$ & $3$ \\

1421: \end{tabular}

1422: %\end{ruledtabular}

1423: \label{t:summary}

1424: \end{table}

1425: 

1426: 

1427: 

1428: 

1429: 

1430: \section{\label{s:summy}Summary}

1431: 

1432: 

1433: Above we have extended heavy baryon chiral perturbation theory for the Wilson action to $\cO(a^2)$. 

1434: In our power counting, we have included all operators that are at least of $\cO(\e^4)$, 

1435: this includes operators of $\cO(m_Q \, a)$ and $\cO(a^2)$. We have considered partially quenched $SU(4|2)$ 

1436: with a mixed action, as well as $SU(2)$ in Appendix~\ref{s:2}.

1437: To this order in the combined lattice spacing and

1438: chiral expansion, we saw the necessity for the introduction of a large number of new operators. For the case

1439: of a partially quenched theory with a mixed lattice action, there are well over one hundred operators in the

1440: free Lagrangian containing the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ and spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ baryons. 

1441: 

1442: 

1443: Despite the introduction of a large number of terms with undetermined LECs, observables calculated to $\cO(a^2)$ 

1444: depend on still relatively few independent parameters. This is because many of the operators introduced

1445: for mixed lattice actions act differently depending on the number of sea quarks contained in particular states of the multiplet. 

1446: Each level of the multiplet must be treated differently in the effective theory because there are no symmetry transformations

1447: between the valence and sea sectors of the theory. This distinction is important if the level-dependent 

1448: operators act on baryons within loops and such a situation only occurs at higher orders in the chiral expansion. 

1449: Moreover, most of the remaining operators for baryons which consist of only valence quarks  

1450: are not independent at leading order and hence 

1451: cannot have their LECs disentangled from lattice data. To make these points clear, we have calculated 

1452: the finite lattice-spacing corrections to baryon masses in various theories. In Table~\ref{t:summary},

1453: we summarize the number of free parameters due to lattice spacing artifacts 

1454: that enter into expressions for baryon masses and can be determined from lattice data.  

1455: The table is separated for the pion, nucleon, and delta into contributions from independent $\cO(a)$, 

1456: $\cO(m_Q \, a)$ and $\cO(a^2)$ operators. 

1457: 

1458: 

1459: There are some further points to observe about the baryon sector at $\cO(a^2)$. 

1460: While there are considerably more operators in the partially quenched theories for mixed actions

1461: as compared to the unquenched theories, the number of independent parameters entering 

1462: into the determination of baryon masses from lattice data is the same for $\cO(a)$ and $\cO(a^2)$ operators;

1463: there is only one additional $\cO(m_Q \, a)$ parameter which stems from the different sea quark mass. 

1464: Nonetheless, the computational benefits of partially quenching are not hindered by the explosion 

1465: in the number of new baryon operators because most are not independent to $\cO(\e^4)$. 

1466: 

1467: 

1468: On the other hand, based on studies in the meson sector~\cite{Bar:2003mh}, one would expect

1469: the number of free parameters to be reduced when considering theories with Ginsparg-Wilson

1470: valence quarks and Wilson sea quarks compared to the Wilson action, \emph{cf}. Table~\ref{t:summary}. 

1471: While there is a clear and sizable reduction in the number 

1472: of baryon operators for actions employing Ginsparg-Wilson valence quarks and Wilson sea quarks

1473: compared to the unmixed Wilson action, 

1474: there is no reduction in the number of free parameters involved in the baryon masses. 

1475: The only reduction in the number of free parameters comes about in simulations employing Ginsparg-Wilson 

1476: quarks in both the valence and sea sectors. Another notable difference for heavy baryon fields is that operators which

1477: reduce the $O(4)$ symmetry to the hypercubic group are present in the effective theory. Such operators were suppressed 

1478: in the pseudoscalar meson sector because the absence of a large mass scale implies

1479: the pseudoscalar momenta are small. For heavy baryon fields, however, there is a large mass scale and the momenta

1480: are automatically large, thus such operators are not suppressed when multiplied by powers of the lattice spacing.  

1481: Similar operators must then enter at $\cO(\e^4)$ for other heavy particles. 

1482: We have spelled out the form of $O(4)$ breaking corrections for particles of spin less than two in Appendix~\ref{s:RPI}. 

1483: 

1484: 

1485: In this work we have seen that near the continuum limit, the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ baryon self energy has the 

1486: behavior\footnote{For GW quarks, the coefficients $\a$, $\b$, and $\gamma$ are identically zero.}

1487: \begin{equation}

1488: M(a) = M(0) + \a \, a + \b \, a \, m_q \, \log m_q + \g \, a \, m_q + \d \, a^2 

1489: + \epsilon \, \ol u(p) \, v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \, u(p) + \ldots

1490: ,\end{equation}

1491: where the omitted terms are of order $\e^5$ and higher. 

1492: In writing the above expression, we have assumed for simplicity that one fine tunes the quark mass so that the pion mass vanishes

1493: in the chiral limit. In this case there are only polynomial corrections in $a$. The influence of the $O(4)$ breaking term  

1494: on the baryon energy was determined in Sec.~\ref{s:nm}.

1495: For spin-$\frac{3}{2}$ baryons, the behavior of the self energy has the same form, however there is an additional 

1496: contribution to the self energy of the form

1497: \begin{equation}

1498: \ol u_\mu(p) \, \ol \Sigma_{\mu \mu} \, u_\mu(p) = \omega \, a^2 \, \ol u_\mu(p) \, v_\mu v_\mu \, u_\mu(p) + \ldots

1499: ,\end{equation}

1500: and we have detailed the form of this correction in Sec.~\ref{s:dm}. 

1501: A similar such additional term is present for vector mesons as well.

1502: 

1503: 

1504: Knowledge of the quark mass dependence of baryon observables is crucial to perform the

1505: chiral extrapolation of lattice data, extract physical LECs, and make predictions for QCD. 

1506: Artifacts of approximating spacetime on a discrete lattice make the chiral extrapolation 

1507: more challenging because of the introduction of additional error. With \CPT\ and \PQCPT\ 

1508: formulated for the Symanzik action, one can parametrize the dependence on the lattice

1509: spacing and considerably reduce the uncertainty surrounding lattice artifacts. 

1510: The formalism set up here is straightforward to extend to other Wilson-type fermion actions,

1511: twisted mass QCD~\cite{Walker-Loud:2005bt}, for example. 

1512: On the other hand, due to the proliferation of operators, it is doubtful that partially 

1513: quenched baryon staggered \CPT\ would provide much analytic insight at $\cO(a^2)$. 

1514: 

1515: 

1516: 

1517: 

1518: 

1519: 

1520: 

1521: \begin{acknowledgments}

1522: We are indebted to Martin Savage for alerting us to \cite{Savage}. 

1523: We would also like to acknowledge Shailesh Chandrasekharan, Will Detmold,  and Andr\'e Walker-Loud for helpful discussions.

1524: This work is supported in part by the U.S.\ Department of Energy under 

1525: Grant No.\ DE-FG02-96ER40945, and we thank the Institute for Nuclear Theory

1526: at the University of Washington for its hospitality during the final stages of this work. 

1527: \end{acknowledgments}

1528: 

1529: 

1530: 

1531: 

1532: 

1533: \appendix 

1534: 

1535: 

1536: 

1537: \section{Baryon masses to $\cO(a^2)$ in $SU(2)$ \CPT} \label{s:2}

1538: 

1539: In this Appendix, we detail the case of finite lattice-spacing corrections 

1540: to baryon masses in $SU(2)$ \CPT. First we write down all finite lattice spacing terms that arise

1541: to $\cO(\e^4)$ from the Symanzik Lagrangian. Next we determine the corrections

1542: from these operators to the masses of the nucleon and delta. 

1543: 

1544: 

1545: 

1546: The form of the Symanzik Lagrangian for $SU(2)$ flavor is mainly the same 

1547: as in the main text. Of course there is no separation of the 

1548: theory into valence and sea sectors.  The mass matrix for two light flavors

1549: in the isospin limit is given by $m_Q = \diag (m_u , m_u)$, while the Wilson matrix appears as

1550: $w_Q = \diag (w_v, w_v)$. The subscript $v$ now has no particular significance 

1551: in $SU(2)$ \CPT\ other than to maintain the definition of $w_v$ used in above. 

1552: 

1553: 

1554: 

1555: At zero lattice spacing and zero quark mass, two flavor QCD has an $SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_R \otimes U(1)_V$

1556: chiral symmetry that is broken down to $SU(2)_V \otimes U(1)_V$. \CPT\ is the low-energy 

1557: effective theory that emerges from perturbing about the physical vacuum. 

1558: The pseudo-Goldstone bosons can be described by a Lagrangian that takes into account

1559: the two sources of chiral symmetry breaking and is given in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:Lchi}, 

1560: with the exception that $\Phi$ is an $SU(2)$ matrix containing just the familiar pions, and 

1561: the $\str$'s are now $\tr$'s. Their masses are given in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:mqq}. 

1562: 

1563: 

1564: In $SU(2)$ \CPT, the delta baryons are contained in the flavor tensor $T^{ijk}_\mu$ which 

1565: is embedded in the \PQCPT\ tensor $\cT^{ijk}_\mu$ simply as $\cT^{ijk}_\mu = T^{ijk}_\mu$,  when all indices

1566: are restricted to $1$--$2$. Consequently the form of the \CPT\ Lagrangian for the delta fields 

1567: has a form very similar to that of \PQCPT.

1568: The nucleons, however, are conveniently described by an $SU(2)$ doublet

1569: \begin{equation}

1570: N = 

1571: \begin{pmatrix}

1572: p \\

1573: n

1574: \end{pmatrix}

1575: .\end{equation}

1576: These states are contained in the \PQCPT\ flavor tensor $\cB^{ijk}$

1577: as~\cite{Beane:2002vq}

1578: \begin{equation}

1579: \cB^{ijk} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}} 

1580: \left( 

1581: \e^{ij} N^{k} + \e^{ik} N^{j}

1582: \right)

1583: ,\end{equation}

1584: when all of the indices are restricted to $1$--$2$. Consequently operators involving the nucleons

1585: will appear differently in $SU(2)$. 

1586: 

1587: 

1588: 

1589: 

1590: To $\cO(\e^2)$ the free Lagrangian for the nucleons and deltas reads

1591: \begin{eqnarray}

1592: \cL 

1593: &=& 

1594: i \ol N  v \cdot D N 

1595: - 

1596: 2 \sigma

1597: \ol N N \tr (\cM_+)

1598: - 

1599: 2 \sigma_w 

1600: \ol N N \tr ( \cW_+ ) 

1601: \notag \\

1602: && +

1603: i \ol T_\mu v \cdot D T_\mu 

1604: + 

1605: \D \ol T_\mu T_\mu 

1606: - 

1607: 2 \ol \sigma \, \ol T_\mu T_\mu \tr (\cM_+)

1608: -

1609: 2 \ol \sigma_w \ol T_\mu T_\mu \tr (\cW_+)

1610: .\end{eqnarray}

1611: The LECs for the nucleons and deltas in $SU(4|2)$ are related by the matching equations

1612: \begin{eqnarray}

1613: \sigma     &=&   \frac{1}{2} ( \a_M + \b_M) + \sigma_M, \notag \\

1614: \ol \sigma &=& - \frac{1}{2} \gamma_M + \ol \sigma_M 

1615: ,\end{eqnarray}

1616: and completely analogous equations that relate 

1617: $\sigma_w$, and $\ol \sigma_w$ to the \PQCPT\ parameters 

1618: $\a_W$, $\b_W$, $\sigma_W$, $\gamma_W$, and $\ol \sigma_W$. 

1619: The interaction Lagrangian of $SU(2)$ appears as

1620: \begin{equation}

1621: \cL = 2 g_A \ol N S \cdot A N + 2 g_{\D N} \left( \ol T_\mu A_\mu N + \ol N A_\mu T_\mu \right)

1622: - 2 g_{\D \D} \ol T_\mu S \cdot A T_\mu  

1623: .\end{equation}

1624: The relation of the parameters appearing in the \PQCPT\ Lagrangian in the main text to those in \CPT\

1625: can be found from matching. One finds \cite{Beane:2002vq}: $g_A = \frac{2}{3} \a_M - \frac{1}{3} \b_M$, 

1626: $g_{\D N} = - \cC$, and $g_{\D \D} = \cH$.   

1627: 

1628: 

1629: The first lattice spacing corrections at $\cO(\e^4)$ arise from the $\cO( m_Q \, a)$ operators. In degenerate $SU(2)$, we have

1630: only two such baryon operators

1631: \begin{eqnarray}

1632: \cL 

1633: &=&

1634: - \frac{1}{ \L_\chi} \Bigg[

1635: n^{WM} \, \ol N N \, \tr( \cW_+) \, \tr (\cM_+)  

1636: -

1637: t^{WM} \, \ol T_\mu T_\mu \, \tr( \cW_+) \, \tr (\cM_+)

1638: \Bigg]

1639: .\end{eqnarray}

1640: The remaining terms are of order $\cO(a^2)$ and appear in the Lagrangian

1641: \begin{eqnarray}

1642: \cL &=&

1643: - \frac{1}{\L_{QCD}} \Bigg[

1644: n^W \, \ol N N \, \tr(\cW_+) \tr (\cW_+ ) 

1645: -

1646: t^W \, \ol T_\mu T_\mu \, \tr(\cW_+) \tr (\cW_+ ) 

1647: \Bigg] \notag \\

1648: && - 

1649: a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 \Big[ n \, \ol N N + n^v \ol N v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu N 

1650: - t \, \ol T_\mu T_\mu - t^v \, \ol T_\nu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu T_\nu 

1651: - t^{\ol v} \, \ol T_\mu v_\mu v_\mu T_\mu \Big]

1652: .\end{eqnarray}

1653: The coefficients of operators in the $SU(2)$ theory are contained in $SU(4|2)$, but 

1654: because $SU(4|2)$ contains considerably more operators, the matching yields 

1655: algebraically cumbersome expressions that relate the LECs.  

1656: 

1657: 

1658: Having written down all of the relevant operators for the nucleon and delta masses, we now calculate their lattice

1659: spacing corrections. We do not write down the loop contributions from $a$-independent operators because the only 

1660: modification necessary is to include the lattice spacing dependence of the meson masses that appears in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:mqq}. 

1661: For the mass of the nucleon, at $\cO(\e^2)$ we find

1662: \begin{equation}

1663: M_N^{(2)} = 4 \sigma \, m_u  

1664: + 4 a \L_{QCD}^2 \sigma_w \, w_v

1665: ,\end{equation}

1666: The finite lattice spacing corrections to $M_N^{(4)}$ read

1667: \begin{eqnarray}

1668: \delta M_N^{(4)} 

1669: &=& 

1670: 4 w_v \frac{a \L_{QCD}^2}{\L_\chi^2} \Big\{

1671: \L_\chi \, n^{WM} m_u

1672: - 

1673: 3 \sigma_w \cL(m_\pi, \mu)

1674: +

1675: 4 g_{\D N}^2 (\ol \sigma_w - \sigma_w ) 

1676: \left[ \cJ(m_\pi, \D, \mu) + m_\pi^2  \right]

1677: \Big\}

1678: \notag \\

1679: && +

1680: a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 

1681: \Big( n + 4 n^W w_v + n^v \ol u(p) v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \, u(p) \Big)

1682: .\end{eqnarray}

1683: %

1684: %%

1685: %

1686: For the deltas, similar calculations yield the $\cO(\e^2)$ result

1687: \begin{equation}

1688: M_\D^{(2)} 

1689: = 

1690: - 

1691: 4 \ol \sigma \, m_u

1692: -

1693: 4 a \L_{QCD}^2 

1694: \ol \sigma_w \, w_v 

1695: \label{eq:Tmass6}

1696: .\end{equation}

1697: At $\cO(\e^4)$ the remaining finite lattice spacing corrections to delta mass are

1698: \begin{eqnarray}

1699: \delta M_\D^{(4)} 

1700: &=& 

1701: 4 w_v \frac{a \L_{QCD}^2}{\L_\chi^2} \Big[ 

1702: \L_\chi  \, t^{WM} m_u

1703: + 

1704: 3 \ol \sigma_w \cL(m_\pi, \mu)

1705: + 

1706: g_{\D N}^2 (\ol \sigma_w -  \sigma_w) \cJ(m_\pi , - \D, \mu)

1707: \Big]

1708: \notag \\

1709: && +

1710: a^2 \L_{QCD}^3 

1711: \Big( 

1712: t + 4 t^{W} \, w_v + t^v \ol u_\nu(p) v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \, u_\nu(p) + t^{\ol v} \ol u_\mu(p) v_\mu v_\mu \, u_\mu(p)

1713: \Big)

1714: .\label{eq:Tmass7}

1715: \end{eqnarray}

1716: 

1717: 

1718: 

1719: 

1720: \section{$O(4)$ breaking operators} \label{s:RPI}

1721: 

1722: 

1723: Above we addressed $\cO(a^2)$ corrections in the baryon sector. At this order

1724: we saw that $O(4)$ breaking operators are present in the chiral effective theory. 

1725: In this Appendix, we detail the form of these corrections in heavy particle effective

1726: theories for particles of spin less than two. 

1727: 

1728: 

1729: We consider the simplest case first, that of a heavy scalar field $\phi$. 

1730: At $\cO(a^2)$, we have an $O(4)$ breaking operator of the form

1731: \begin{equation} \label{eq:scalar}

1732: \cL = a^2 c_0 \, \phi^\dagger \, v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \, \phi

1733: .\end{equation}

1734: We can either treat the four-velocity $v^\mu$ as the physical velocity of the $\phi$ field, or 

1735: consider the four-velocity to be fixed in the rest frame, for example. Clearly when

1736: the particle is at rest, both descriptions are identical; and with $v_\mu = (0,0,0,i)$, 

1737: we obtain a trivial $a^2$ dependent shift to the $\phi$ mass. Away from rest the effects 

1738: of $O(4)$ breaking are no longer trivial. 

1739: 

1740: First let us consider $v_\mu$ to be the physical velocity of the $\phi$. In terms of 

1741: the particle's spatial momentum $\bm{p}$, we have $v_\mu = (\gamma \bm{p}/M, i \gamma)$, 

1742: where $M$ is the mass of the $\phi$ and $\gamma$ is the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction factor. 

1743: In a non-relativistic expansion, we can express the particle's four-velocity in terms of the 

1744: spatial momentum. This enables us to write

1745: \begin{equation} \label{eq:vvvv}

1746: \sum_{\mu = 1}^{4} v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu  

1747: = 

1748: 1 

1749: + 

1750: 2 \frac{\bm{p}^2}{M^2} 

1751: + 

1752: \frac{1}{M^4} \left( \sum_{i=1}^{3} p_i p_i p_i p_i + \bm{p}^4 \right)

1753: + 

1754: \cO(M^{-6})

1755: .\end{equation}

1756: Thus the operator in Eq.~\eqref{eq:scalar}, besides shifting the mass by $a^2 c_0$, modifies

1757: the particle's kinetic energy as well as the relativistic correction to the kinetic energy. 

1758: The energy of the $\phi$ is now a cubic invariant function of the spatial momentum.

1759: The breaking of $O(3)$ rotational symmetry for a particle's energy-momentum relation

1760: is, however, small for non-relativistic momenta. 

1761: 

1762: 

1763: Extending the above analysis to non-zero spin involves boosting the various spin

1764: wavefunctions. On the other hand, if one treats the four-velocity as fixed and one can 

1765: derive a string of fixed coefficient operators using reparameterization invariance ~\cite{Luke:1992cs}.

1766: For a fixed four-velocity, we write

1767: the heavy scalar momentum $P$ as $P_\mu = M v_\mu + p_\mu$. This decomposition is arbitrary as one can make 

1768: a reparameterization of the form

1769: \begin{equation}

1770: \begin{cases}

1771: v_\mu \to v_\mu +  q_\mu / M \notag \\

1772: k_\mu \to k_\mu - q_\mu

1773: \end{cases}

1774: \label{eq:RPS}

1775: .\end{equation}

1776: Accordingly the field $\phi(x)$ changes to $e^{i q_\mu x_\mu} \phi(x)$, and

1777: to maintain the normalization of the new four-velocity, we require $v \cdot q = - q^2 / (2 M)$.

1778: The physics is unchanged by this transformation and this is referred to as reparameterization invariance. 

1779: In order for the Lagrangian in Eq.~\eqref{eq:scalar} to be reparameterization invariant (RPI), there must 

1780: be additional operators with fixed coefficients. These can all be written compactly in the manifestly

1781: RPI form

1782: \begin{equation} \label{eq:scalarRPI}

1783: \cL = a^2 c_0 \, \phi^\dagger \, 

1784: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1785: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1786: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1787: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1788: \phi

1789: .\end{equation}

1790: %where $\partial_{\perp,\mu} = \partial_\mu + v_\mu v \cdot \partial$. 

1791: Expanding out the terms of Eq.~\eqref{eq:scalarRPI} and acting between states of residual momentum $p_\mu$

1792: taken in the non-relativistic limit, we recover the result of Eq.~\eqref{eq:vvvv}. 

1793: 

1794: 

1795: 

1796: For a heavy spin-$1/2$ particle $\psi$, we have the $O(4)$ breaking Lagrangian

1797: \begin{equation} \label{eq:half}

1798: \cL = a^2 c_{1/2} \ol \psi \, v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \, \psi

1799: ,\end{equation}

1800: which is not RPI. Unlike the scalar case, we have a further constraint on the field

1801: due to the spin degrees of freedom. To maintain the condition $- i \rlap \slash v \psi = \psi$, 

1802: the field $\psi(x)$ must change 

1803: %to $e^{i q_\mu x_\mu} [ 1 - i \rlap \slash q / (2 M)] \psi(x)$ 

1804: under the reparameterization in Eq.~\eqref{eq:RPS}.  

1805: To order $M^{-2}$, we have reparameterization invariant spinor $\Psi$ given by~\cite{Manohar:1997qy} 

1806: \begin{equation}

1807: \Psi = \left( 1 - \frac{\Dslash_\perp}{2 M } - \frac{D^2}{8 m^2} \right) \psi

1808: ,\end{equation}

1809: where $D_{\mu,\perp} = D_\mu + v_\mu v_\nu D_\nu$.  

1810: Since the bilinear $\ol \Psi \Psi = \ol \psi \psi + \cO(M^{-3})$, the RPI form of Eq.~\eqref{eq:half} is

1811: \begin{equation} \label{eq:halfRPI}

1812: \cL = a^2 c_{1/2} \ol \psi 

1813: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1814: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1815: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1816: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1817: \psi

1818: ,\end{equation}

1819: and hence the correction to the energy to $\cO(M^{-2})$ has the same form as in Eq.~\eqref{eq:vvvv}.

1820: If we were to write the covariant spinor to fourth order, we could ascertain the coefficient of

1821: the $\bm{p}^4/M^4$ term in Eq.~\eqref{eq:vvvv} for a spin-$1/2$ particle. 

1822: The $O(3)$ breaking term, however, is unchanged. 

1823: 

1824: 

1825: 

1826: 

1827: 

1828: 

1829: The correction for a heavy vector particle, the rho meson $\rho_\mu$ for example, is deduced similarly.

1830: The $\cO(a^2)$ Lagrangian contains two terms 

1831: \begin{equation} \label{eq:rho}

1832: \cL = a^2 c_1 \, \rho_\nu^\dagger \, v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \, \rho_\nu 

1833: + 

1834: a^2  \ol c_1 \, \rho^\dagger_\mu \, v_\mu v_\mu \, \rho_\mu 

1835: ,\end{equation}

1836: and hence there is a new type of contribution to the energy proportional to $\epsilon^*_\mu (p) \, v_\mu v_\mu \, \epsilon_\mu (p)$, 

1837: where $\epsilon_\mu(p)$ is the rho's polarization vector. This correction vanishes for a rho at rest. 

1838: The terms in Eq.~\eqref{eq:rho} are not RPI. To deduce the RPI form of the Lagrangian, we must now also 

1839: maintain the constraint $v_\mu \rho_\mu = 0$. We can build the RPI Lagrangian from RPI vector field $R_\mu$.

1840: %

1841: %transform the field $\rho_\mu(x)$ according to $e^{- i q_\mu x_\mu} (\d_{\mu \nu} - v_\mu q_\nu / M ) \rho_\nu(x)$

1842: %in order to preserve $v_\mu \rho_\mu = 0$ under the reparametrization Eq.~\eqref{eq:RPS}.

1843: To $\cO(M^{-2})$, we have 

1844: \begin{equation} \label{eq:rhocov}

1845: R_\mu = \left(\d_{\mu \nu} - v_\mu \frac{i D_\nu }{M} + \frac{D_\mu D_\nu}{M^2}\right) \rho_\nu

1846: ,\end{equation}

1847: and hence the RPI form of the Lagrangian in Eq.~\eqref{eq:rho} can be deduced from combinations of $R^\dagger_\mu \Gamma R_\mu$. 

1848: Because we are addressing the corrections at tree level, the states are on-shell and 

1849: the additional terms in Eq.~\eqref{eq:rhocov} vanish. In loops the off-shell degrees of freedom

1850: propagate and the additional terms are necessary. 

1851: The on-shell RPI Lagrangian is thus given by

1852: \begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:one}

1853: \cL &=& a^2 c_1 \, \rho_\nu^\dagger 

1854: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1855: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1856: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1857: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1858: \rho_\nu \notag \\

1859: && + 

1860: a^2 \ol c_1 \, \rho_\mu^\dagger 

1861: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1862: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1863: \rho_\mu

1864: .\end{eqnarray}

1865: 

1866: 

1867: We can use the above Lagrangian to determine the $\cO(a^2)$ corrections

1868: to the vector particle's dispersion relation. Let us denote $M(a)$ 

1869: as the particle mass including lattice discretization contributions. 

1870: One such contribution is $a^2 c_1$ that arises from the above Lagrangian. There 

1871: are many others, however, that we have not spelled out. Modification of the

1872: dispersion relation only arises from the terms in Eq.~\eqref{eq:one}.

1873: Utilizing the non-relativistic expansion for the momentum $\bm{p}$ 

1874: and explicit forms of the polarization vectors, 

1875: we arrive at the energy of a spin-one particle

1876: \begin{equation}

1877: E^\l_{\bm{p}} = M(a) + \frac{\bm{p}^2}{2 M(a)} \left( 1 + \frac{4 a^2 c_1}{M(0)}\right) +

1878: \frac{a^2 \ol c_1}{2 M(0)^2} \left[ |\l| \bm{p}_\perp^2 + 2 (|\l| - 1) \bm{p}_\l^2 \right]

1879: ,\end{equation}

1880: where $M(0)$ is the rho mass in the continuum limit, $\lambda = \pm 1, 0$ is the 

1881: spin along an axis, $\bm{p}_\l$ is the momentum along that axis, 

1882: and $\bm{p}_\perp$ is the momentum transverse to that axis.

1883: For a vector particle of given polarization, the energy-momentum relation breaks

1884: $O(3)$ rotational invariance at $\cO(a^2 M^{-2})$. Notice for an unpolarized state,

1885: the rotational symmetry breaking from this term is averaged out and then does not enter until $\cO(a^2 M^{-4})$

1886: as with scalar and spin-$1/2$ particles. 

1887: 

1888: 

1889: 

1890: Finally we address the corrections for the case of a spin-$3/2$ particle represented by a Rarita-Schwinger

1891: field $\psi_\mu$. At $\cO(a^2)$ terms that break $O(4)$ appear in the Lagrangian as

1892: \begin{equation} \label{eq:3/2}

1893: \cL = 

1894: a^2 c_{3/2} \, \ol \psi_\nu \, v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu v_\mu \, \psi_\nu

1895: +

1896: a^2 \ol c_{3/2} \, \ol \psi_\mu \, v_\mu v_\mu \, \psi_\mu 

1897: .\end{equation}

1898: To deduce the corrections to the energy, we cast this Lagrangian into its RPI form. 

1899: Under a reparameterization, one must maintain the conditions $- i \rlap \slash v \psi_\mu = \psi_\mu$ and $v_\mu \psi_\mu = 0$. 

1900: The RPI field $\Psi_\mu$ is a combination of terms from RPI invariant spinor and vector fields and is given by

1901: \begin{equation}

1902: \Psi_\mu 

1903: = 

1904: \left[

1905: \d_{\mu \nu} - \frac{1}{2 M} 

1906: \left( 

1907: \Dslash {}_\perp + i v_\mu D_\nu

1908: \right) 

1909: - \frac{1}{8 M^2}

1910: \left( 

1911: D^2 - 4 i v_\mu \Dslash {}_\perp D_\nu

1912: - 8 D_\mu D_\nu 

1913: \right)

1914: \right] 

1915: \psi_\nu

1916: ,\end{equation}

1917: up to $\cO(M^{-2})$. Half of the terms in the RPI spin-$3/2$ field vanish on shell. The remaining terms 

1918: are identical to those for a spin-$1/2$ particle. Thus for an on-shell particle, we have

1919: $\ol \Psi_\mu \Psi_\mu = \ol \psi_\mu \psi_\mu + \cO(M^{-3})$. Thus the on-shell RPI Lagrangian

1920: corresponding to Eq.~\eqref{eq:3/2} is given by

1921: \begin{eqnarray}

1922: \cL &=& 

1923: a^2 c_{3/2} \, \ol \psi_\nu 

1924: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1925: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1926: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1927: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1928: \psi_\nu \notag \\

1929: && + 

1930: a^2 \ol c_{3/2} \, \ol \psi_\mu 

1931: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1932: \left(v_\mu + \frac{i D_\mu}{M}\right)

1933: \psi_\mu \label{eq:RS}

1934: .\end{eqnarray}

1935: As with the spin-one case, we can evaluate the corrections to the spin-$3/2$ energy in the non-relativistic limit

1936: using the Lagrangian Eq.~\eqref{eq:RS} and explicit forms of the Rarita-Schwinger vectors. The result for the $\D$ mass

1937: is presented in the main text, see Eq.~\eqref{eq:new}.

1938: 

1939: 

1940: \bibliography{hb}

1941: 

1942: \end{document}

1943: