1: \documentclass[12pt]{JHEP3}

2: \usepackage{epsfig}

3: \preprint{ {\tt{ hep-th/0502186}}\\ {  SPIN-05/06} \\ {ITP-05/08}}

4: \newcommand{\be}[1]{ \begin{equation}\label{#1} }

5: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}

6: \newcommand{\bea}[1]{\begin{eqnarray}\label{#1} }

7: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}

8: \newcommand{\eq}[1]{(\ref{#1})}

9: \newcommand{\fig}[1]{fig.\,\ref{#1}}

10: \newcommand{\del}{\partial}

11: \newcommand{\ra}{\rangle}

12: 

13: 

14: \title{  Structure constants of planar

15: ${\cal N} =4$ Yang Mills at one loop }

16: \author{ Luis F. Alday$^{a}$, 

17: Justin R. David$^b$, Edi Gava$^{b,c}$ , K. S. Narain$^b$ \\

18: $^a$Institute for Theoretical Physics and Spinoza Institute, \\

19: Utrecht University, 3508 TD Utrecht, \\

20: The Netherlands. \\

21: $^b$High Energy Section, \\

22: The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics,

23: \\Strada Costiera, 11-34014 Trieste, Italy.\\

24: $^c$Instituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, sez. di Trieste, \\

25: and SISSA, Italy. \\

26: \email{L.F.Alday@phys.uu.nl, 

27: justin, gava, narain@ictp.trieste.it} 

28: }

29: \abstract{ 

30: We study structure constants of 

31: gauge invariant operators in planar ${\cal N}=4$ Yang-Mills 

32: at one loop with the motivation of determining features of 

33: the string dual of weak coupling Yang-Mills. 

34: We derive a simple  

35: renormalization group invariant formula

36: characterizing the corrections to structure constants of any

37: primary operator in the planar limit. Applying this to the scalar

38: $SO(6)$ sector we find that the one loop corrections to  

39: structure constants of gauge invariant operators is 

40: determined by the one loop anomalous dimension Hamiltonian in this

41: sector. We then evaluate the one loop corrections to structure constants for 

42: scalars with arbitrary number of derivatives in a given holomorphic 

43: direction. We find that the corrections can be characterized by

44: suitable derivatives on the four point 

45: tree function of  a massless 

46: scalar with  quartic coupling. 

47: We show that 

48: individual diagrams violating conformal invariance can be combined

49: together to restore it using a linear inhomogeneous partial

50: differential equation satisfied by this function. 

51: }

52: 

53: 

54: 

55: \begin{document}

56: \baselineskip 4ex

57: 

58: \section{Introduction}

59: 

60: By far, the most precise realization  of  field theories being

61: dual to  string theories  occurs in examples of the AdS/CFT

62: correspondence proposed by Maldacena 

63: \cite{Maldacena:1997re,Witten:1998qj,Aharony:1999ti}. 

64: Among these examples, 

65: the most  studied case is the duality between ${\cal N}=4$

66: Yang-Mills theory in four dimensions with 

67: gauge group $U(N)$ and type IIB string

68: theory on $AdS_5\times S^5$. 

69: Let us briefly recall the map between the basic parameters of

70: the string theory and ${\cal N}=4$ Yang-Mills. 

71: It is convenient to set the radius of $AdS$ to one so that in such units

72: the string length is related to the t'Hooft coupling

73: of the gauge theory  by

74: \be{diction}

75: \alpha' = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{g_{YM}^2

76: N}},\;\;\;\; \;\;\;\;\;\;\; G_N = \frac{1}{N^2},

77: \ee

78: here $g_{YM}$ is

79: the Yang-Mills coupling constant, $\alpha'$ refers to the

80: string length and $G_N$ is the Newton's constant in these units

81: which is the effective string loop counting parameter.

82: 

83: The regime in which this duality has been

84: mostly explored is when the type IIB string theory can be approximated

85: by type IIB supergravity. 

86: To decouple all the string modes, 

87: the t'Hooft coupling has to be large. 

88: Furthermore, 

89: to suppress string loops we need to work at large

90: $N$. One can then set up a precise correspondence of gauge invariant

91: operators and supergravity fields. 

92: Another interesting limit, which has received a lot of attention

93: recently,

94: is when the t'Hooft coupling $\lambda$ is 

95: small but with $N$ still being large. In this limit especially 

96: when $\lambda$ is strictly zero, all string modes are equally important

97: but string loops are suppressed.

98: From \eq{diction} we see that $\lambda$ 

99: being zero implies the string length is infinity, 

100: the $AdS_5\times S^5$  string  sigma model is strongly coupled.

101: At present there are no known methods to extract any information

102: regarding the spectrum or the correlation functions from the strongly 

103: coupled sigma model. On the other hand, the dual field theory is best

104: understood in this limit since at $\lambda =0$ the theory is free and 

105: planar perturbation theory in  the 

106: t'Hooft coupling is sufficiently easy to

107: perform. This has led to many efforts in trying to 

108: rewrite  the spectrum of the ${\cal N}=4$ Yang-Mills theory

109: as a spectrum in a string theory 

110: \cite{Bianchi:2003wx,Beisert:2003te,Bianchi:2004xi}.

111: There has also been an effort  at

112: reconstructing the 

113: string theory  world sheet by rewriting the 

114: correlation function of gauge invariant operators of the free theory

115: as amplitudes in $AdS$ \cite{Gopakumar:2003ns,Gopakumar:2004qb}.

116: 

117: In this paper, with the motivation to find

118: features of the string theory 

119: at weak coupling Yang-Mills 

120: we study structure constants of certain class of gauge

121: invariant operators in planar ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills, at 

122: one loop in t'Hooft coupling. 

123: To indicate which features of the string theory one would

124: expect to see by studying the structure constants, 

125: we  first need to provide the  picture of the string theory 

126: at  $\lambda =0$ limit that we have in mind. 

127: From \eq{diction} we see that at $\lambda=0$

128: the string essentially becomes tensionless, therefore there is 

129: no coupling between neighboring points 

130: on the string which  breaks up into non interacting bits. 

131: In fact this picture of the string has already been

132: noticed in the plane wave limit \cite{Berenstein:2002jq}

133: and has been discussed in the context of

134: string theory in small radius AdS \cite{Dhar:2003fi}.

135: From studies of correlation functions of gauge invariant operators 

136: in the plane wave limit,

137: it is seen  that 

138: each Yang-Mills letter can be thought of

139: as a bit in a light cone gauge fixed string theory, 

140: and a single trace gauge invariant operator is a sequence of bits 

141: with cyclic symmetry

142: \cite{Constable:2002hw,Kristjansen:2002bb,

143: Verlinde:2002ig,Vaman:2002ka,Zhou:2002mi}

144: A universal feature of any  string field theory is that

145: interactions are described by  delta function overlap

146: of  strings. 

147: Therefore the structure constants of gauge invariant operators,

148: which in the planar limit are proportional to $1/N$, should be

149: seen as joining or splitting of strings.

150: Indeed, it is possible to formulate a bit string theory in which all

151: features of the two point functions  and 

152: structure constants of gauge invariant operators, 

153: including position dependence, can

154: be reproduced by the delta function overlap \cite{adgn:2005}.

155: 

156: Now let us ask the question of what would be the modifications in the

157: above picture when one makes $\lambda$ finite. 

158: From \eq{diction} we see that  rendering 

159: $\alpha'$ finite  would introduce 

160: interactions between the bits. 

161: At first order in $\lambda$

162: and in the planar limit, only nearest neighbor bits would

163: interact. Therefore, turning on $\lambda$ modifies  

164: the free propagation of

165: the bits in the bit string theory.

166: The one loop corrected 

167: two point function and the structure constants  

168: should still be determined by the geometric delta function overlap,

169: but with the modification in the propagation of the bits 

170: taken into account. 

171: Thus identifying the precise operator which is responsible for the

172: propagation of the bits at

173: first order in $\lambda$, should be 

174: sufficient to 

175: determine the modified two point  functions and the structure

176: constants at one loop.

177: It is this feature of Yang-Mills theory 

178: we hope to uncover by studying 

179: the structure constants.

180: 

181: Apart from the above motivations, from a purely field theoretic point

182: of view

183: a conformal field theory is completely specified by the

184: the two point functions and the structure constants of the operators.

185: A lot of effort have been made to understand the structure of the 

186: two point functions of gauge 

187: invariant operators  of ${\cal N}=4$ Yang-Mills in the planar limit.

188: In fact  the anomalous dimension  Hamiltonian at one loop in

189: $\lambda$ 

190: is known to be integrable \cite{Minahan:2002ve,Beisert:2003tq,

191: Beisert:2003jj,Beisert:2003yb}, 

192: and   signatures of integrability

193: in the form of the existence of an infinite number of nonlocal

194: conserved charges has been shown for

195: the world sheet theory on $AdS_5\times S^5$

196: \cite{Mandal:2002fs,Bena:2003wd,Vallilo:2003nx,Alday:2003zb,

197: Wolf:2004hp}.

198: Furthermore, the relation between these approaches to integrabilty

199: have been studied in \cite{Dolan:2003uh,Dolan:2004ps,Dolan:2004ys}.

200: On the other hand structure constants of operators in  ${\cal N}=4$ 

201: theory are considerably less explored 

202: \cite{Bianchi:2001cm,Okuyama:2004bd,Roiban:2004va}.

203: One difficulty in studying corrections to structure constants is

204: that one needs to find the right renormalization group

205: invariant quantity which characterizes the corrections 

206: 

207: In this paper we derive a 

208: simple formula which characterizes the

209: renormalization group invariant quantity  which determines the

210: corrections to structure constants of  primary gauge invariant

211: operators. Then we use this to study the one loop corrections to

212: structure constants in the scalar $SO(6)$ sector and a sector of

213: operators with derivatives in a given holomorphic direction. 

214: We find that in the $SO(6)$ sector the renormalization invariant

215: quantity, which determines 

216: the one loop correction to the structure

217: constants, is the one loop anomalous dimension Hamiltonian itself. 

218: Evaluation of the structure constants 

219: for operators with derivatives is

220: considerably more involved. 

221: Feynman graphs contributing to the corrections can be obtained by

222: a suitable combination of 

223: derivatives acting on the  function $\phi(r,s)$, 

224: which refers to  the tree level

225: four point function of  a massless scalar with

226: a quartic coupling and  $r,s$ are the

227: two conformal cross ratios. 

228: There are individual 

229: Feynman diagrams contributing

230: to the one loop corrections to structure constants 

231: which seem at first to violate conformal

232: invariance, but we find that the violating 

233: diagrams can be combined together using the fact that

234:  $\phi(r,s)$ satisfies a linear

235: inhomogeneous partial differential equation ensuring conformal

236: invariance \footnote{After completion of this work 

237: it was pointed out to us by G. Arutyunov, 

238: that similar differential equations have been studied in 

239: \cite{Eden:2000bk,Arutyunov:2002fh}}.

240: 

241: 

242: 

243: This paper is organized as follows. In section 2. we derive the

244: renormalization group invariant formula characterizing the

245: corrections to structure constants of primary operators. 

246: In section 3. we apply this to the 

247: scalar $SO(6)$ sector and show that corrections are captured by the

248: one loop anomalous dimension Hamiltonian. 

249: The fact that the anomalous dimension 

250: Hamiltonian captures the correction to the structure constants

251: was observed in \cite{Okuyama:2004bd}. 

252: Their observation relied on certain

253: examples and the statement that only the $F$ terms occur in the

254: Feynman diagrams. The proof given here is direct and 

255: the method is suitable for extension 

256: for  classes of operators in other sectors.

257: In section 4. we compute the corrections to structure

258: constants for operators with derivatives

259: in one holomorphic direction. We show that conformal invariance

260: in the  three point function is ensured by the differential equation

261: satisfied by $\phi(r,s)$. The summary of the results which enables one

262: to calculate the structure constants to any operator in this sector is

263: given in  section 4.4.

264: Appendix A. contains the  notations adopted in the 

265: paper,  Appendix B discusses the properties of the

266: function $\phi(r,s)$, in particular it contains the proof of the 

267: differential equation it satisfies. 

268: Appendix C. contains tables which are required

269: in the evaluation of the structure constants in the derivative sector.

270: 

271: \section{General form of structure constants at one loop}

272: 

273: Our aim 

274: in this section is to  

275: derive a formula which gives a renormalization

276: group invariant characterization of one loop corrections to structure

277: constants at large $N$. 

278: Consider a set of conformal primary operators  labelled by

279: $O_{i}^{\mu_1 \ldots \mu_{n_i}}$, 

280: here $\mu_1 \ldots \mu_{n_i}$ indicate the tensor structure of the primary

281: \footnote{In this paper will restrict our attention to primaries which

282: are tensors, but our methods can be generalized to other classes

283: of operators.}.

284: For simplicity, let us suppose the basis of  operators is such that

285: their one loop anomalous dimension matrix is diagonal, 

286: we will relax this assumption later. Then, by

287: conformal invariance, the general form for the 

288: two point function of

289: these operators at one loop is given by: 

290: \be{g2pt}

291: \langle O_{i}^{\mu_1 \ldots \mu_{n_i}} (x_1) 

292: O_{j}^{\nu_1 \ldots \nu_{n_j} } (x_2) \rangle

293: = \frac{ J^{\mu_1\ldots \mu_{n_i} ;

294: \nu_1\ldots \nu_{n_i} } }{(x_1 -x_2)^{2\Delta_i  } }

295: \left( \delta_{ij} + \lambda g_{ij} - \lambda \gamma_{i} \delta_{ij} 

296: \ln ((x_1 -x_2)^2 \Lambda^2 ) \right).

297: \ee

298: Here $J^{\mu_1 \ldots \mu_{n_i} ; \nu_1 \ldots \nu_{n_i} }$ is the 

299: invariant tensor 

300: constrained by conformal invariance and 

301: constructed by  products of the following

302: tensor:

303: \be{defj}

304: J^{\mu\nu} = \delta_{\mu\nu} - 2 \frac{ (x_1- x_2)^\mu ( x_1- x_2)^\nu

305: } { ( x_1 - x_2) ^2 }.

306: \ee

307: Since we are interested in the one loop correction in the planar limit, 

308: the expansion parameter in \eq{g2pt} $\lambda = g_{YM}^2 N /32 \pi^2$ 

309: is the t' Hooft coupling. In \eq{g2pt}  we have used the fact that 

310: it is possible to choose a basis of operators such that 

311: they are orthonormalized at tree level and that their anomalous

312: dimension matrix is diagonal. 

313: $\Delta_i$ are the bare dimensions and 

314: $\gamma_i$ refer to the anomalous dimensions of the respective

315: operators. For non zero tree level two point function in \eq{g2pt}

316: $\Delta_i =\Delta_j$ and $n_i =n_j$. 

317: The constant mixing matrix at one loop $g_{ij}$ is

318: renormalization group scheme dependent, for instance if the cut off

319: $\Lambda$ is scaled to $ e^\alpha \Lambda$,  the mixing matrix 

320: changes as follows: 

321: \be{cgmix}

322: g_{ij} \rightarrow g_{ij} - 2\alpha \gamma_i\delta_{ij}. 

323: \ee

324: The three point function of three tensor primaries is given by:

325: \bea{3ptdef}

326: \langle 

327: & &O_i^{\mu_1 \ldots \mu_{n_i} } (x_1) 

328: O_j^{\nu_1 \ldots \nu_{n_j} } (x_2)

329: O_k^{\rho_1 \ldots \rho_{n_k} } (x_3) \rangle 

330: \\ \nonumber

331: &=& \frac{ J^{ \mu_1 \ldots \mu_{n_i} ;\nu_1 \ldots \nu_{n_j};

332: \rho_1 \ldots \rho_{n_k}}  }{

333: |x_{12}|^{\Delta_i + \Delta_j - \Delta_k }

334: |x_{13}|^{\Delta_i + \Delta_k - \Delta_j }

335: |x_{23}|^{\Delta_j + \Delta_k - \Delta_i }

336: } \times \\ \nonumber

337: & &\left( C_{ijk}^{(0)} \left[ 1 - 

338: \lambda \gamma_i 

339: \ln | \frac{ x_{12} x_{13} \Lambda }{ x_{23}} |

340: - \lambda \gamma_j 

341: \ln | \frac{ x_{12} x_{23} \Lambda }{ x_{13}} |

342: - \lambda \gamma_k 

343: \ln | \frac{ x_{13} x_{23} \Lambda }{ x_{12}} | \right]

344: + \lambda \tilde C_{ijk}^{(1)} \right),

345: \eea

346: where $x_{12} = x_1 -x_2, x_{13} = x_1 - x_3, x_{23} = x_2 - x_3$.

347: Note, that from large $N$ counting it is easy to see that both 

348: $C_{ijk}^{(0)}$ and the one loop correction $ \tilde C_{ijk}^{(1)} $

349: are order $1/N$. Again the constant one loop correction to the 

350: $\tilde C_{ijk}^{(1)}$ is 

351: renormalization scheme dependent, scaling $\Lambda$ by $e^\alpha

352: \Lambda$,  we see that: 

353: \be{cg3pt}

354: \tilde C_{ijk}^{(1)} \rightarrow \tilde C_{ijk}^{(1)} - \alpha\left(

355: \gamma_i C_{ijk}^{(0)} +\gamma_j C_{ijk}^{(0)} +\gamma_k

356: C_{ijk}^{(0)}\right).

357: \ee

358: Here there is no summation of repeated indices.

359: Therefore from \eq{cgmix} and \eq{cg3pt} we see that the following

360: combination is renormalization scheme independent

361: \be{cgind}

362: C_{ijk}^{(1)} = \tilde C_{ijk}^{(1)} 

363: - \frac{1}{2} g_{ii'} C_{i'jk}^{(0)} - \frac{1}{2} g_{jj'}

364: C_{ij'k}^{(0)} 

365: - \frac{1}{2} g_{kk'} C_{ijk'}^{(0)}, 

366: \ee

367: where summation over the primed indices is implied.

368: Essentially, the renormalization scheme independent 

369: one loop correction to the

370: structure constant is obtained by first normalizing all the two point

371: function to order $\lambda$.

372: We now write the  equation \eq{cgind} 

373: using an arbitrary basis of primaries.

374: Let the transformation matrix 

375: which takes the orthonormalized basis of

376: primaries to an arbitrary basis, be given by $U_{\alpha i}$, where

377: $\alpha, \beta \ldots$ label the arbitrary basis, of primaries. This

378: transformation is $\lambda$ independent  since it is possible to

379: choose a basis of operators which are orthonormalized at tree level

380: and their one loop anomalous dimension matrix is diagonal. The

381: transformation matrix $U_{\alpha i}$ satisfies the following

382: relations:

383: \be{propu}

384: \sum_{i} U_{\alpha i} U_{\beta i} = h_{\alpha\beta}, \;\;\;\;\;\;\;

385: \sum_{i} U_{\alpha i} \gamma_i U_{\beta i} = \gamma_{\alpha\beta}.

386: \ee

387: Here $h_{\alpha\beta}$ is the tree level mixing matrix and 

388: $\gamma_{\alpha\beta}$ is the anomalous dimension matrix at one loop.

389: It is usually convenient to chose a basis with $h_{\alpha\beta} =

390: \delta_{\alpha\beta}$, in standard literature the anomalous dimension

391: matrix is specified in such a basis.

392: But here we will work with an arbitrary basis,

393: performing change of  basis in \eq{cgind} we obtain:

394: \be{3ptbind}

395: C^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma} = \tilde 

396: C_{\alpha\beta\gamma}^{(1)}

397: - \frac{1}{2} g_{\alpha\alpha'} C^{(0)\alpha'}_{\;\;\beta\gamma}

398: -\frac{1}{2} g_{\beta\beta'} C^{(0)\;\;\beta'}_{\alpha\;\;\;\;\gamma}

399: - \frac{1}{2} g_{\gamma\gamma'} C^{(0)\;\;\;\;\gamma'}_{\alpha\beta},

400: \ee

401: where:

402: \bea{def3ptnew}

403: \tilde C^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma} = U_{\alpha i} U_{\beta j}

404: U_{\gamma k} \tilde C^{(1)}_{ijk},  &\;&\;\;

405:  C^{(0)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma} = U_{\alpha i} U_{\beta j}

406: U_{\gamma k} \tilde C^{(0)}_{ijk}, \\ \nonumber

407: C^{(0) \alpha}_{\;\;\beta\gamma} = h^{ \alpha\alpha'}

408: C^{(0)}_{\alpha'\beta\gamma}, &\;&\;\;

409: C^{(0)\;\; \beta}_{\alpha\;\;\;\;\gamma}

410: = h^{ \beta\beta'} C^{(0)}_{\alpha\beta'\gamma},

411: \;\;\;

412: C^{(0) \;\;\;\gamma}_{\alpha\beta}

413: = h^{\gamma\gamma'} C^{(0)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma'}, \\ \nonumber

414: h^{ \alpha\alpha'} h_{\alpha' \beta} &=& \delta^\alpha_\beta.

415: \eea

416: We will call the subtractions in \eq{3ptbind} as metric subtractions.

417: 

418: \subsection{The slicing argument}

419: 

420: We work towards a useful characterization of the formula given in

421: \eq{3ptbind}. Local

422: gauge invariant  operators can be constructed by  products of the 

423: fundamental letters of ${\cal N}=4$ Yang Mills and finally taking a

424: trace.  We represent a general Yang Mills letter by $W^A$, then a

425: gauge invariant operator is $\rm Tr( W^A W^B \cdots W^Z)$. 

426: The tree level contractions which contribute to 

427: $C^{(0)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}$ 

428: of three gauge invariant primaries at the planar level 

429: are all possible Wick contractions which can be drawn on a plane

430: using the double line notation. We can represent a given contraction

431: by the diagram in \fig{pwick}, the corresponding double line notation is

432: given adjacent to it. 

433: \FIGURE{

434: \label{pwick}

435: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{new1.eps}}

436: \caption{Planar Wick contractions contributing to

437: $C^{(0)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}$}

438: }

439: In \fig{pwick} we have used single lines to represent the double

440: line. The lines end on letters of the operators, these are points on

441: the horizontal lines in the diagram.

442: 

443: Consider the one loop correction $\tilde C^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}$,

444: contributions to this can arise from two types of terms: 

445: (i) two body terms represented by  $U_{\alpha\beta}, 

446: U_{\alpha\gamma}$ and $U_{\beta\gamma}$  in

447: \fig{2bdy}

448: (ii) genuine three body terms represented by 

449: $U^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma}, 

450: U^{\beta}_{\gamma\alpha},

451: U^{\gamma}_{\alpha\beta}$  as shown in \fig{3bdy}.

452: \FIGURE{

453: \label{2bdy}

454: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{new2.eps}}

455: \caption{A generic diagram contributing to $U_{\alpha\beta}$ }

456: }

457: \FIGURE{

458: \label{3bdy}

459: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{new3.eps}}

460: \caption{Diagrams contributing to $U^\alpha_{\beta\gamma}$ and

461: $U^\beta_{\alpha\gamma}$ }

462: }

463: As we are 

464: interested in planar corrections at one loop, it is easy to see that 

465: the two body interactions can  occur only  between nearest neighbour

466: letters of 

467: any two of the operators with the remaining contractions performed at

468: the free level. There is an exception to this rule, when the structure

469: constant of interest is length conserving, for instance when say, the length 

470: of  operator $O_\alpha$ equals the sum of the lengths of the 

471: operators $O_\beta$ and $O_\gamma$. We will discuss this case later in 

472: the paper, but for now 

473: and for most of the discussions in this paper 

474: we assume that the structure constants of interest 

475: are length non-conserving. 

476: Two body interactions can also consist of 

477: planar self energy interactions

478: between letters of any two different operators, 

479: and the rest of the operators contracted with free Wick contractions.

480: Thus $U_{\alpha\beta}$

481: represents the sum of all the constants due to all possible nearest

482: neigbour interactions among operators $O_\alpha$ and $O_\beta$, 

483: and all possible

484: constants from the 

485: self energy interactions between letters of these operators. 

486: A similar definition holds for $U_{\alpha\gamma}$ and $U_{\beta\gamma}$. 

487: The genuine three body term $U^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma}$ consists of 

488: constants from all possible 

489: interactions between any two nearest neighbour letters of

490: the operator $O_\alpha$ and two letters of operators $O_\beta$ and 

491: $O_\gamma$ such

492: that all contractions are planar. An example of such an interactions

493: are shown in \fig{3bdy}. 

494: It is easy to see from this diagram that one is forced to choose nearest

495: neighbour letters in operator $O_\alpha$ to ensure that the interaction is 

496: planar. 

497: Similar definitions hold for $U_{\gamma\alpha}^\beta,

498: U^\gamma_{\alpha\beta}$. From these definitions we have:

499: \be{3ptbrek}

500: \tilde C^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma} = U^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma}

501: + U^\beta_{\gamma\alpha} + U^\gamma_{\alpha\beta} +

502: U_{\alpha\beta} + U_{\beta\gamma} + U_{\gamma\alpha}.

503: \ee

504: 

505: We show now that  the two body terms of

506: $\tilde C^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}$ cancel with the  metric

507: subtractions in the equation \eq{3ptbind}.

508: Consider a generic two body interaction in $U_{\alpha\beta}$, imagine

509: slicing the diagram as in \fig{slice}  

510: by inserting a complete set of operators

511: $O_{\alpha'}$. 

512: \FIGURE{

513: \label{slice}

514: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{new4.eps}}

515: \caption{The slicing argument }

516: }

517: Thus the diagram decomposes into

518: two halves, the upper half which contains the one loop corrections 

519: which can now be viewed as  contributions 

520: to the  one loop correction

521: $g_{\alpha\alpha'}$. The

522: lower half which is just the tree level structure constant

523: $C^{(0)\alpha'}_{\;\; \beta\gamma}$. 

524: From this slicing we see that

525: exactly the same one loop interaction term occurs in 

526: $g_{\alpha\alpha'} C^{(0)\alpha'}_{\;\;\beta\gamma}$ 

527: \footnote{In the first

528: diagram  in \fig{slice} we have shown only one interaction diagram

529: which on slicing gives a contribution to $g_{\alpha\alpha'}$, other

530: contributions to $g_{\alpha\alpha'}$ also comes from interactions

531: in lines running between $O_\alpha$ and $O_\beta$ in this slicing.}. 

532: Now, slice the same diagram as indicated in the second figure of 

533: \fig{slice} 

534: by inserting a complete set of 

535: operators $O_{\beta'}$. The one loop correction can be seen as a term in 

536: $g_{\beta\beta'}$, while the rest of the diagram as the tree level

537: structure constant $C^{(0) \;\;\beta'}_{\alpha\;\;\gamma}$.

538: Thus  this diagram also

539: occurs in 

540: $g_{\beta\beta'} C^{(0)\;\;\beta'}_{\alpha\;\;\gamma}$. In 

541: \eq{3ptbind}, the metric subtractions 

542: $g_{\alpha\alpha'} C^{(0)\alpha'}_{\;\;\beta\gamma}$ 

543: and 

544: $g_{\beta\beta'} C^{(0)\;\;\beta'}_{\alpha\;\;\gamma}$ 

545: are weighted by a factor of $1/2$, thus 

546: we conclude that a generic two body interaction

547: in $U_{\alpha\beta}$ is canceled off by the subtractions in 

548: \eq{3ptbind}. This cancellation includes  both the nearest

549: neighbour two body interactions as well as the self energy type of

550: interactions which we have not shown in \fig{slice}.

551: Similar reasoning can be used to conclude that 

552: the all the constants in the two body terms $U_{\beta\gamma}$ and

553: $U_{\gamma\alpha}$ also are canceled by the metric subtractions in 

554: \eq{3ptbind}. 

555: 

556: From the slicing argument we see that 

557: the constants from a genuine three body terms in 

558: $U^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma}, 

559: U^{\beta}_{\gamma\alpha}, U^{\gamma}_{\alpha\beta}$ 

560: cannot be canceled of the metric subtractions. 

561: Thus these terms and the 

562: corresponding subtraction in \eq{3ptbind} is what is left behind. 

563: This is indicated in the \fig{leftover}. 

564: \FIGURE{

565: \label{leftover}

566: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{new5n.eps}}

567: \caption{Renormalization scheme independent contribution}

568: }

569: Therefore computation of 

570: $C^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}$ reduces to the evaluation of

571: constants from diagrams with 4 letters: 2 letters on one operator, 

572: say $O_\alpha$, and the remaining 2 letters on operators $O_\beta$ and 

573: $O_\gamma$. From this we subtract half the constants which occur when

574: the same diagram is thought of as the two body interaction, that is 

575: 2 letters on one operator say $O_\alpha$  and the 

576: remaining $2$ letters on the operator $O_\alpha'$. Summing over all

577: such contributions gives $C^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}$. 

578: We write this compactly as 

579: \bea{3ptfin}

580: C^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma} &=&

581: \left( U^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma} ({\rm 3pt } ) - 

582: \frac{1}{2} U^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma} ({\rm 2pt } )  \right)

583: + \left( U^{\beta}_{\gamma\alpha} ({\rm 3pt} ) 

584: -\frac{1}{2} U^{\beta}_{\gamma\alpha} ({\rm 2pt} ) \right) \\

585: \nonumber

586: &+& \left( U^{\gamma}_{\alpha\beta} ({\rm 3pt})

587: -\frac{1}{2} U^{\gamma}_{\alpha\beta} ({\rm 2pt}) \right)

588: \eea

589: Here $U^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma} (3{\rm pt})$ contains constants from

590: genuine three body interactions, that is there are no self energy

591: diagram. $U^{\alpha}_{\beta\gamma}( 2{\rm pt})$ contains the constants

592: from the same diagrams but now thought of as occurring in a two point

593: function, to emphasize again,  this also has no self energy diagrams.

594: Therefore, to compute one loop corrections to structure constants for any

595: arbitrary operator it is sufficient to give the 

596: one loop corrections  occurring in 

597: the computation of any $4$ Yang Mills letters, 

598: firstly thought of as genuine 3 body interaction and then thought of

599: as a two body interaction. 

600: 

601: \subsection{An example}

602: 

603: We illustrate the slicing argument using a simple example by explicitly

604: evaluating all the terms occurs in \eq{3ptbind} 

605: and showing that it reduces to \eq{3ptfin}.

606: Consider the  structure constant when the operators are given by

607: \be{defop}

608: O_\alpha = O_\beta= O_\gamma = \frac{1}{N} {\rm Tr} (Z\bar{Z}).

609: \ee

610: Here $Z$ is a

611: complex scalar in the one of the Cartan of  $SO(6)$, for instance

612: $ Z = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} ( \phi^1 + i \phi^2)$.  

613: Thus the $Z$ , $\bar{Z}$ 

614: Wick contraction is normalized to $1$, which implies that the 

615: tree level two point function $h_{\alpha\alpha}$  is normalized to $1$. 

616: Evaluating the tree level structure constant 

617: we obtain $C_{\alpha\alpha\alpha} = 2/N$. 

618: 

619: Now consider the one loop corrections to the structure constants. The 

620: two body terms consists only of self energy diagrams, these are given

621: by 

622: \be{2body}

623: U_{\alpha\beta}+ U_{\beta\gamma} + U_{\gamma\alpha} 

624: = \frac{\lambda}{N} \left(  2 S_{\alpha\beta} + 2S_{\alpha\gamma} +

625: 2S_{\beta\gamma}\right)  =

626: \frac{\lambda}{N} 6 S.

627: \ee

628: The subscripts in the $S$ are just used to indicate the origin of the 

629: constants from the self

630: energy diagrams, for instance there are two self energy diagrams between

631: the $Z$ and $\bar Z$ of the $O_\alpha$ and $O_\beta$. 

632: Since all the self energy diagrams are same they can be summed to give $6S$. 

633: We have also

634: kept track of the order of the t' Hooft coupling and $N$. 

635: The genuine three body terms are

636: \be{3body}

637: U^\alpha_{\beta\gamma} + 

638: U^\beta_{\gamma\alpha} + 

639: U^\gamma_{\alpha\beta}  

640: = \frac{\lambda}{N} \left[

641: 4 H(\alpha;\beta\gamma) + 

642: 4 H(\beta;\gamma\alpha) + 4 H(\gamma;\alpha\beta) \right] 

643: = \frac{\lambda}{N} 12 H( {\rm 3pt}).

644: \ee

645: Here the $H$ basically refers to the constant from the diagram with 

646: $Z$ and $\bar{Z}$ on one operator and with $\bar{Z}$ and $Z$ on the

647: remaining two operators. The labels in each of the $H$ just refer to

648: which of the operator has the two letters and which of the rest has a

649: letter each. The factor 4 arises out of the combinatorics of the

650: diagrams. Therefore we have

651: \be{ex3pt}

652: \tilde C^{(1)}_{\alpha\alpha\alpha}  

653: =\frac{\lambda}{N} \left[  6S + 12 H( {\rm 3pt}

654: ) \right]. 

655: \ee

656: 

657: Now we subtract out the metric contributions in \eq{3ptbind}.

658: We have to sum over all the metric contributions

659: $g_{\alpha\beta'}C^{(0) \beta'}_{\;\;\alpha\alpha}$, 

660: but this sum reduces to 

661: evaluating only one term when $\beta' =\alpha$, this is because all other 

662: tree level structure constants vanish. 

663: Now $g_{\alpha\alpha}$ is given by

664: \be{forg}

665: g_{\alpha\alpha} = \lambda[ 2 S + 2 H({\rm 2pt}) ],

666: \ee

667: thus we see that

668: \bea{opf}

669: C^{(1)}_{\alpha\alpha\alpha} &=& \tilde C^{(1)}_{\alpha\alpha\alpha}

670: - \frac{1}{2} 3 g_{\alpha\alpha}

671: C^{(0)\alpha}_{\;\;\alpha\alpha}, \\ \nonumber

672: &=&  12 \frac{\lambda}{N} \left( H( {\rm 3pt}) - \frac{1}{2} H({\rm

673: 2pt}) \right),

674: \eea

675: where we have used \eq{ex3pt} , \eq{forg} and substituted the value of

676: $C^{(0)\alpha}_{\;\;\alpha\alpha} =

677: h^{\alpha\alpha}C^{(0)}_{\alpha\alpha\alpha} = 2/N$. 

678: Note that the self energies which are  the only two body 

679: terms in $\tilde C^{(1)}_{\alpha\alpha\alpha}$ 

680: have canceled on subtracting the 

681: metric contributions.

682: The last formula in \eq{opf} is precisely

683: the equation one would have obtained if  one uses the formula in

684: \eq{3ptfin}.

685: 

686: 

687: 

688: 

689: 

690: 

691: 

692: \section{The scalar $SO(6)$ sector}

693: 

694: 

695: Consider three  operators belonging only

696: to the scalar $SO(6)$ sector given by 

697: \bea{defsop}

698: O_\alpha = \frac{1}{N^{l_\alpha/2} }

699: {\rm Tr} ( \phi^{i_1} \phi^{i_2} \ldots \phi^{i_{l_\alpha}} )

700: \\ \nonumber

701: O_\beta = \frac{1}{N^{l_\beta/2} }

702: {\rm Tr} ( \phi^{j_1} \phi^{j_2} \ldots \phi^{j_{l_\beta}} )

703: \\ \nonumber

704: O_\gamma = \frac{1}{N^{l_\gamma/2} }

705: {\rm Tr} ( \phi^{k_1} \phi^{k_2} \ldots \phi^{k_{l_\alpha}} )

706: \eea

707: In this section we show that the renormalization scheme independent

708: correction to the structure constants of this

709: class of operators is essentially dictated by the 

710: anomalous dimension Hamiltonian. 

711: The invariant one loop correction is  given by

712: \be{s3pt}

713: C^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma} =

714: \sum_{a,b,c} {\cal H}^{i_a i_{a+1} }_{j_{b+1} k_c} {\cal I}  +

715: \sum_{a,b,c} {\cal H}^{j_b j_{b+1} }_{k_{c+1} i_a} {\cal I}  +

716: \sum_{a,b,c} {\cal H}^{k_c k_{c+1} }_{i_{a+1} j_b} {\cal I} 

717: \ee

718: where ${\cal H}$ is the anomalous dimension Hamiltonian given by 

719: \cite{Minahan:2002ve,Beisert:2003tq}

720: \be{anhamil}

721: {\cal H}^{ij}_{kl} = 2 \delta^j_k\delta^i_l - 2 \delta^i_k\delta^j_l -

722: \delta^{ij}\delta_{kl}.

723: \ee

724: ${\cal I}$  in \eq{s3pt} refers to the remaining free planar contractions as

725: shown in \fig{leftover}.

726: The summation over $a, b, c$ runs over all distinct

727: cyclic permutations of the diagram over the indices $i$, $j$ and $k$ of

728: the three operators. In \eq{s3pt} and 

729: through out the rest of the paper we will suppressed the 

730: $\lambda/N$ factor

731: which occurs in the normalization of the one loop corrected structure

732: constant.

733: 

734: From the slicing argument it is clear that to show \eq{s3pt} one needs

735: to evaluate  the following

736: \bea{basic}

737: \nonumber

738: & & \left( U^{i_a i_{a+1} }_{j_{b+1}   k_c} ({\rm 3pt}) - 

739: \frac{1}{2} U^{i_a i_{a+1} }_{j_{b+1} k_c} ({\rm 2pt})\right)

740: \delta^{j_b}_{k_{c+1}}

741: +

742: \left( U^{j_b j_{b+1} }_{k_{c+1}   i_a} ({\rm 3pt}) - 

743: \frac{1}{2} U^{j_b j_{b+1} }_{k_{c+1} i_a} ({\rm 2pt})\right)

744: \delta^{k_c}_{i_{a+1}} \\ 

745: &+&

746: \left( U^{k_c k_{c+1} }_{i_{a+1}   j_b} ({\rm 3pt}) - 

747: \frac{1}{2} U^{k_c k_{c+1} }_{i_{a+1} j_b} ({\rm 2pt})\right)

748: \delta^{i_a}_{j_{b+1}}

749: \eea

750: In the above formula 

751: $U^{i_a i_{a+1}}_{j_{b+1} k_c}( {\rm 3pt} )$ 

752: refers to the

753: constant from the diagram with  adjacent 

754: letters $\phi^{i_a}$, $\phi^{i_{a+1}}$ on the operator $O_\alpha$ and

755: the letters $\phi^{j_{b+1}}$ and $\phi^{k_c}$ on the operators

756: $O_\beta$ and $O_\gamma$ respectively. While 

757: $U^{i_a i_{a+1}}_{j_{b+1} k_c}( {\rm 2pt} )$ refers to the constant of

758: the same diagram but thought of as an interaction in  a two point

759: calculation. 

760: A similar definition holds for the rest of the $U$'s in \eq{basic}.

761: We have written down the Kr\"{o}necker delta in each of the terms in

762: \eq{basic} to denote the adjacent free Wick contractions. 

763: The terms in \eq{basic} are the generic terms that occur when the

764: equation \eq{3ptfin} is applied to the $SO(6)$ scalars. 

765: We will show that after evaluation of the terms in \eq{basic}, the

766: expression reduces to that given in \eq{s3pt}, essentially the $U$'s

767: are replaced by the anomalous dimension Hamiltonian ${\cal H}$. 

768: 

769: The claim that the anomalous dimension Hamiltonian dictates the 

770: renormalization scheme independent corrections to the structure

771: constants might at first be puzzling to the reader. 

772: The anomalous dimension

773: Hamiltonian arises after including self energy diagrams 

774: \cite{Minahan:2002ve,Beisert:2003tq} but as we 

775: have emphasized 

776: in the previous section, the renormalization scheme independent 

777: corrections to the three point functions do not contain any two body

778: terms and  in particular, there are no self energy terms. 

779: Therefore there is an apparent puzzle: we show below, the fact that

780: even the corrections to structure constants are determined by 

781: the anomalous dimension Hamiltonian is due to important cancellations

782: which take place in the evaluation of \eq{basic}

783: 

784: 

785: \subsection{Evaluation of corrections to structure constants }

786: 

787: We first evaluate the diagram $U^{ij}_{kl}$ thought of as a 3 body

788: term.

789: Consider $4$ scalars, 2 of them with indices $i$ and $j$ being nearest

790: neighbour letters on the operator $O_\alpha$, 

791: As they belong to the same operator they are at the same position.

792: But to regularize the resulting diagrams we 

793: use the method of point split regularization, therefore we split them 

794: such that the operator with index $i$ is at $x_1$, while the operator

795: with index $j$ is at $x_2$ with 

796: $x_2 - x_1 = \epsilon$, and $\epsilon \rightarrow 0$. 

797: Let

798: the index $k$ label the  letter of operator $O_\beta$ at position $x_3$ and

799: the index $l$ label the letter of operator $O_\gamma$ at position 

800: $x_4$.

801: 

802: The two process that contribute to $U^{ij}_{kl}({\rm 3 pt})$ are 

803: the quartic interaction of scalars and the interaction due to the

804: intermediate gauge exchange. Therefore

805: \be{defu}

806: U^{ij}_{kl} = Q^{ij}_{kl} + G^{ij}_{kl},

807: \ee

808: where $Q^{ij}_{kl}$ refers to the quartic interaction and

809: $G^{ij}_{kl}$ refers to the gauge exchange diagram. 

810: Evaluating each of the diagrams we obtain:

811: \be{squart}

812: Q^{ij}_{kl} = 

813: \lim_{x_2 \rightarrow x_1} 

814: \left( 2 \delta^{j}_k \delta^i_l -

815: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l - \delta^{ij}\delta_{kl} \right)

816: \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 } \phi(r, s),

817: \ee

818: here the $SO(6)$ structure arises from the quartic potential of 

819: the scalars in ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills, 

820: $\phi(r,s)$ is the quartic tree interaction 

821: given by 

822: \be{defiphi}

823: \int d^4u \frac{1}{(x_1 -u)^2 (x_2-u)^2 (x_3 -u)^2 (x_4 -u)^2 } = 

824:  \frac{\pi^2 \phi(r,s)} {x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 },

825: \ee

826: and 

827: $r$ and $s$ are the conformal cross ratios given by

828: \be{defrs}

829: r= \frac{x_{12}^2 x_{34}^2 }{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2}, \;\;\;\;

830: s= \frac{x_{14}^2 x_{23}^2 }{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2}. \;\;\;\;

831: \ee

832: Note that as $x_2\rightarrow x_1$, $r\rightarrow 0$ and

833: $s\rightarrow1$. Therefore to evaluate the limit in \eq{squart} we can

834: use the expansion 

835: of $\phi(r,s)$ given in \eq{usexp}, substituting this expansion in

836: \eq{squart} we obtain

837: \be{fsquart}

838: Q^{ij}_{kl} =

839: \left( 2 \delta^{j}_k \delta^i_l -

840: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l - \delta^{ij}\delta_{kl} \right) 

841: \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 } \left( \ln (\frac{x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2

842: }{x_{34}^2 \epsilon^2 } ) +2 \right),

843: \ee

844: where we have also kept the log term for completeness.

845: The gauge interaction is given by 

846: \be{gint}

847: G^{ij}_{kl} = \lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1}  \delta^{i}_k\delta^j_l

848: H

849: \ee

850: where

851: \be{defh}

852: H = 

853: (\del_1-\del_3) \cdot

854: (\del_2-\del_4) \int \frac{ d^4 u d^4v}{\pi^2 (2\pi)^2} \frac{1}{ 

855: (x_1 -u)^2 (x_3 -u)^2} \frac{1}{ (u -v)^2} 

856: \frac{1}{ (x_2 -v)^2 (x_3-v)^2 }.

857: \ee

858: It can be shown that $H(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)$ 

859: in the above expression can be rewritten 

860: entirely in terms of $\phi(r,s)$ by the following identity used in  

861: \cite{Beisert:2002bb}:

862: \bea{heq}

863: H  &=& E + C_1 + C_2 + C_3 + C_4, \\ \nonumber

864: &=&

865: (r-s) \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 } \phi(r,s)  \\ \nonumber

866: &+& (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

867: \;\;

868: r' = \frac{x_{34}^2}{x_{24}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{23}^2}{x_{24}^2}

869: ;\;1\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse} 

870: \\ \nonumber

871: &+& (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

872: \;\;

873: r' = \frac{x_{34}^2}{x_{13}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{13}^2}

874: ;\;2\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse} 

875: \\ \nonumber

876: &+& (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

877: \;\;

878: r' = \frac{x_{12}^2}{x_{24}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{24}^2}

879: ;\;3\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse} 

880: \\ \nonumber

881: &+& (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

882: \;\;

883: r' = \frac{x_{12}^2}{x_{13}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{23}^2}{x_{13}^2}

884: ;\;4\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse}. 

885: \eea

886: $E, C_1, C_2, C_3, C_4$ are defined respectively by the remaining

887: lines of the above equation. 

888: We have labelled $r'$ and $s'$ that occur in the second line of the above

889: equation by $1\rightarrow \infty$ collapse since these values are 

890: obtained by taking the indicated limit in $r$ and $s$ 

891: given in \eq{defrs}. All other values of $r'$ and $s'$ are obtained

892: using the corresponding limits mentioned above. We will refer to these

893: terms as collapsed diagrams. 

894: On substituting  \eq{heq} in the formula for the gauge interaction

895: given in \eq{gint} we need to take the limit $x_2\rightarrow x_1$. 

896: Under this limit $r' \rightarrow 0, s'\rightarrow 1$ for the 

897: $C_3$ and $C_4$ collapsed diagrams, but the 

898: $r'$ and $s'$ of the remaining

899: $C_1$ and $C_2$  collapses do not

900: tend of these values. On examining the expansion of $\phi(r', s')$ given

901: in \eq{usexp} we see that these collapsed diagrams do not reduce to 

902: either logarithms or constants under the limit

903: $x_2\rightarrow x_1$, but remain  nontrivial functions. 

904: Thus the collapses $C_1$ and $C_2$  seem

905: to violate conformal invariance, since conformal invariance of the 

906: 3 point function predicts that the one loop correction terms must be

907: either logarithms or constants. We will call these collapses dangerous

908: collapses. 

909: However in the next subsection 

910: we will show  that on summing over all the terms given in

911: \eq{basic}, these dangerous collapses cancel leaving behind only

912: logarithms or constants.  For the present, let us assume that these

913: collapses cancel and evaluate the remaining terms, they are given by

914: \bea{gintan}

915: G^{ij}_{kl} ({\rm 3pt}) &=&  \delta^i_k\delta^j_l 

916: \left( 

917:  - \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2} \left[ \ln \left(\frac {x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2

918: }{x_{34}^2 \epsilon^2} \right) + 2  \right] \right.  \\ \nonumber

919: &+&

920: \left.  \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 } \left[\ln\left( 

921: \frac{x_{14}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right) + 2 \right]

922: +  \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 }\left[ \ln\left( 

923: \frac{x_{13}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right) + 2 \right] \right).

924: \eea

925: The first term in the square bracket is obtained by taking the limit

926: $x_2\rightarrow x_1$ in the first term $E$ of  \eq{heq} and the last two

927: terms are obtained by taking the same limit in the

928: $C_3$ and $C_4$ collapsed diagrams of

929: \eq{heq}. Here we have ignored the 

930: $C_1$ and $C_2$ collapses of of \eq{heq}, as we will show 

931: that in the combination in \eq{basic} they cancel.

932: Combining all the constants to write $U^{ij}_{kl}( {\rm

933: 3pt})$ we obtain

934: \be{u3ptfin}

935: U^{ij}_{kl}({\rm 3pt} ) =   \left[ 

936: 2 \left( 2 \delta^{j}_k \delta^i_l -

937: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l - \delta^{ij}\delta_{kl} \right)  +

938: (-2 +2 +2) \delta^i_k \delta^j_l \right].

939: \ee

940: In the second term we have written the constant  contributions from the

941: first term in \eq{gintan} and the two collapses separately. 

942: 

943: We now evaluate $U^{ij}_{kl}({\rm 2pt})$: the calculation

944: is similar to the $3$ body case, except that we also need to take the

945: limit $x_4 - x_3 = \epsilon$ and $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$. This is

946: because  in the 

947: present calculation the letters $\phi^k$ and $\phi^l$ are

948: nearest neighbours on the same operator. Going through the same steps we

949: obtain the following contributions for the quartic term

950: \be{q2pt}

951: Q^{ij}_{kl} ({\rm 2pt}) = 

952: \lambda 

953: 2 \left( 2 \delta^{j}_k \delta^i_l -

954: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l - \delta^{ij}\delta_{kl} \right) . 

955: \ee

956: This contribution is identical to the case of the 3 body calculation.

957: For the gauge exchange interaction, all the $4$ collapses, 

958: including $C_1$ and $C_2$,  will give

959: rise to logarithms and constants. 

960: This is because under  the 

961: limit $x_4\rightarrow x_3$, the corresponding $r'$ and $s'$ of 

962: $C_1$ and $C_2$ tends to $0$ and $1$ respectively.

963: Therefore the constants from the

964: collapses will be twice that of the 3 body calculation.

965: This is is given by

966: \be{g2ptc}

967: G^{ij}_{kl} ({\rm 2pt}) = 

968:  (-2 +2 +2+2+2) \delta^i_k \delta^j_l ,

969: \ee

970: where we have separated out the contribution of $E$ in

971: \eq{heq} and the 4 collapses. Thus the sum of quartic interaction and

972: the gauge exchange to the two body terms is given by 

973: \be{ufin2pt}

974: U^{ij}_{kl} ({\rm 2pt}) = 

975: 2 

976: \left( 2 \delta^{j}_k \delta^i_l -

977: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l - \delta^{ij}\delta_{kl} \right)  +

978:  (-2 +2 +2+2+2) \delta^i_k \delta^j_l .

979: \ee

980: With all the ingredients in place, we can evaluate the renormalization

981: scheme independent correction to the structure constant.

982: This is given by

983: \bea{finind}

984: U^{ij}_{kl}({\rm 3pt} ) -\frac{1}{2} U^{ij}_{kl} ({\rm 2pt}) 

985: &=&  \left( 2 \delta^{j}_k \delta^i_l -2

986: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l - \delta^{ij}\delta_{kl} \right),   \\ \nonumber

987: &=&  {\cal H}^{ij}_{kl},

988: \eea

989: where we have substituted \eq{u3ptfin} and \eq{ufin2pt}. Note that

990: since the constant contribution of the collapses in the 2 body 

991: diagram are double that of the 3 body, they cancel in the renormalization

992: scheme independent combination.  

993: The gauge exchange diagram finally just contributes an additional

994: $-\delta^{i}_k\delta^j_l$ to give precisely 

995: the anomalous dimension Hamiltonian.

996: Substituting \eq{finind} in \eq{basic} and summing over all possible

997: planar contractions we will obtain \eq{s3pt} which is what we set out

998: to prove.  

999: 

1000: Let us compare this calculation with the

1001: anomalous dimension calculation of \cite{Minahan:2002ve} and

1002: \cite{Beisert:2003tq}. There 

1003: one focuses on the  terms proportional to the logarithm 

1004: of  the quartic, the gauge exchange and

1005: the self energy diagrams.

1006: The way the Hamiltonian ${\cal H}$

1007: appears is because the self energy contributions cancel 

1008: all the 4 collapsed diagrams of the gauge exchange leaving

1009: behind only the quartic $Q$ and the diagram $E$, which results in 

1010: the anomalous dimension Hamiltonian ${\cal H}$. 

1011: As we have seen the appearance of the anomalous dimension calculation 

1012: in the one loop calculation of the structure constants is 

1013: entirely due to a different mechanism.

1014: 

1015: 

1016: \subsection{Cancellation of the dangerous collapsed diagrams}

1017: 

1018: In this subsection we show that the dangerous collapses in \eq{heq}

1019: cancel out when one adds all the three terms in \eq{basic}.

1020: The dangerous collapses when two of the indices $i_a$ and $i_{a+1}$ 

1021: are on the same operator $O_\alpha$ is given by

1022: \bea{dc1}

1023: D(1;34) &=& \lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1} 

1024: \delta^{i_a}_{j_{a+1}} \delta^{i_{a+1} }_{k_a}

1025: \delta^{j_a}_{k_{a+1}} \times \\ \nonumber

1026: & & \left(

1027:  (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

1028: \;\;

1029: r' = \frac{x_{34}^2}{x_{24}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{23}^2}{x_{24}^2}

1030: ;\;1\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse}  \right.

1031: \\ \nonumber

1032:  &+& \left. (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

1033: \;\;

1034: r' = \frac{x_{34}^2}{x_{13}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{13}^2}

1035: ;\;2\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse} \right).

1036: \eea

1037: The dangerous collapse when the indices $j_a$ and $j_{a+1}$ are on the

1038: same operator $O_\beta$ is given by

1039: \bea{dc2}

1040: D(3;41) &=& \lim_{x_2 \rightarrow x_3}

1041: \delta^{i_a}_{j_{a+1}} \delta^{i_{a+1} }_{k_a}

1042: \delta^{j_a}_{k_{a+1}} \times \\ \nonumber

1043: & & \left(

1044:  (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

1045: \;\;

1046: r' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{34}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{13}^2}{x_{34}^2}

1047: ;\;2\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse}  \right.

1048: \\ \nonumber

1049:  &+& \left. (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

1050: \;\;

1051: r' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{12}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{24}^2}{x_{12}^2}

1052: ;\;3\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse} \right).

1053: \eea

1054: Note that, here the limit is such $x_2\rightarrow x_3$, this

1055: is because two letters are on operator $O_\beta$

1056: which is at $x_3$. The index structure is identical to that of

1057: previous case in \eq{dc1}. Finally, the values of $r'$ and $s'$ is

1058: such that the on taking the limit in \eq{dc2} and \eq{dc1}, the last

1059: line of the \eq{dc2} identically cancels the 1st line of \eq{dc1} when

1060: one uses the fact $\phi(r,s)$ is a symmetric function in $r$ and $s$

1061: \footnote{$\phi(r,s) = \phi(s,r)$ is shown in appendix B.}.

1062: Basically the $r'$ and $s'$ of the  collapse

1063: $2\rightarrow\infty$ of \eq{dc1} exchanges with that of the dangerous

1064: collapse $3\rightarrow\infty$  of \eq{dc2}.

1065: Let us now write the dangerous collapses when the indices $k_a$ and

1066: $k_{a+1}$ are on operator $O_\gamma$ which is at position $x_4$.

1067: \bea{dc3}

1068: D(4;13) &=& \lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_4}

1069: \delta^{i_a}_{j_{a+1}} \delta^{i_{a+1} }_{k_a}

1070: \delta^{j_a}_{k_{a+1}} \times \\ \nonumber

1071: & & \left(

1072:  (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

1073: \;\;

1074: r' = \frac{x_{13}^2}{x_{34}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{34}^2}

1075: ;\;2\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse}  \right.

1076: \\ \nonumber

1077:  &+& \left. (s'-r') \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }   \;\;{\rm with}

1078: \;\;

1079: r' = \frac{x_{13}^2}{x_{12}^2}, s' = \frac{x_{23}^2}{x_{12}^2}

1080: ;\;4\rightarrow \infty \;\;{\rm collapse} \right)

1081: \eea

1082: It is now clear from 

1083: \eq{dc1}, \eq{dc2} and \eq{dc3}, 

1084: that after taking the limits indicated and using the 

1085: fact $\phi(r,s)$ is a symmetric function in $r$ and $s$ we see that

1086: the sum of the dangerous collapses among all the three body terms

1087: cancel

1088: \be{sumdan}

1089: D(1;34) + D(3;41) + D(4;13) =0

1090: \ee

1091: 

1092: This mechanism of cancellation of dangerous collapses cannot

1093: hold when structure constant of interest is of a length conserving

1094: process. This is because in a length conserving process the only 

1095: genuine three body diagrams are when the two nearest neighbour

1096: letters are on the longest operator  say on $O_\alpha$ and the

1097: rest of the letters are on $O_\beta$ and $O_\gamma$. Therefore 

1098: we cannot possibly have the last two terms in \eq{sumdan}. 

1099: But, as we have mentioned in the previous section, in a length

1100: conserving process there is a possibility of non-nearest neighbour

1101: interactions which are planar. This is shown in \fig{leco}. 

1102: \FIGURE{

1103: \label{leco}

1104: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{nonnearest.eps}}

1105: \caption{Cancellations in a length conserving process}

1106: }

1107: If one keeps track of the $U(N)$ group theoretical factors, it is

1108: easy to show that there is a relative negative sign between the 

1109: diagrams in \fig{leco}. Therefore such diagrams cancel, though

1110: we will not go into details

1111: in this paper, we have checked that for length

1112: conserving process such diagrams ensure that 

1113: the dangerous collapses in a length conserving process also cancel.

1114: 

1115: 

1116: 

1117: 

1118: 

1119: \subsection{An example}

1120: 

1121: In this subsection we consider a simple example to illustrate the

1122: calculation of one loop corrections to structure constants.

1123: We consider the following operators:

1124: \be{defsopp}

1125: O_\alpha = \frac{1}{\sqrt{N^3}} {\rm Tr} ( \phi^1\phi^2\phi^3) , 

1126: \;\;\;\;

1127: O_\beta = \frac{1}{\sqrt{N^3}} {\rm Tr} ( \phi^1\phi^2\phi^4) , 

1128: \;\;\;\;

1129: O_\gamma = \frac{1}{N} {\rm Tr} ( \phi^3\phi^4), 

1130: \ee

1131: the operators are at positions $x_1$, $x_3$  and $x_4$ respectively. 

1132: The tree level correlation function of these operators are given by

1133: \be{treescal}

1134: \langle O_\alpha O_\beta O_\gamma \rangle ^{(0)} 

1135: = \frac{1}{N} \frac{1}{x_{13}^4 x_{14}^2 x_{34}^2 }.

1136: \ee

1137: The one loop corrections will all have the above position dependent

1138: factor multiplying the $\lambda$ dependent corrections. 

1139: Below we write down the corrections from various diagrams, we divide

1140: the contributions from genuine three body terms and two body terms. 

1141: As we have seen in the previous section, we do not have to keep track

1142: of the constants from the two body terms as they cancel in the metric

1143: subtractions. Therefore we need to look at only the terms proportional 

1144: to the logarithm in the

1145: two body terms. The corrections to the structure constant will be

1146: evaluated by \eq{s3pt}.

1147: 

1148: 

1149: \vspace{.5cm}

1150: \noindent

1151: { \emph{Three body terms} }

1152: 

1153: The three body terms consist of: 

1154: \bea{3bodyscal}

1155: &2& \left[  ( Q  + E + C_3 + C_4) (1;34) 

1156: +  (Q + E + C_3 + C_4) (3;41) \right. \\ \nonumber

1157: & +& \left.  (C_3 + C_4) (4;13)  \right],

1158: \eea

1159: here the labels $(1;34)$ refers to the diagram with two letters on 

1160: the operator $O_\alpha$ and the remaining two letters on the operators

1161: $O_\beta$ and $O_\gamma$ respectively. We have also suppressed the

1162: $SO(6)$ index structure of each diagram for convenience, they can easily be

1163: reinstated and evaluated.

1164: Note that among the collapsed

1165: diagrams we have written down only  the contributions of the

1166: $3\rightarrow \infty$ and $4\rightarrow \infty$ collapse since

1167: the remaining collapses are dangerous and cancel out.

1168: For the diagrams of the type $(4;13)$ we have not written the quartic

1169: term $Q$ and $E$, this is is because on examining the $SO(6)$

1170: structure of these diagrams we see that they cancel among each other.

1171: There is an overall factor of $2$ because of 

1172: the presence of the outer three body diagrams.

1173: We now give the  terms proportional to the logarithm 

1174: of the above diagrams:

1175: \bea{log3body}

1176: &2& \left( -2 

1177: \log\left( \frac{ x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 }{x_{34}^2 \epsilon^2 } \right)  

1178: + \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right)

1179: + \log \left( \frac{x_{14}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right)  \right. \\

1180: \nonumber

1181: &-&2 \log\left( \frac{ x_{34}^2 x_{13}^2 }{x_{14}^2 \epsilon^2 } \right)  

1182: + \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right)

1183: + \log \left( \frac{x_{34}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right) \\ \nonumber

1184: &+& \left. \log \left( \frac{x_{14}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right)

1185: + \log \left( \frac{x_{34}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right)  \right).

1186: \eea

1187: The logarithms in the above equation are the contributions of the respective

1188: terms in \eq{3bodyscal}. 

1189: Using \eq{s3pt}, 

1190: the renormalization group invariant correction to the structure

1191: constant is given by

1192: \be{strcon}

1193:  {\cal H}^{23}_{23} + {\cal H}^{24}_{24} + {\cal H}^{34}_{34} +{\cal

1194: H}^{43}_{34} 

1195: + {\cal H}^{13}_{13} +{\cal H}^{14}_{14} +{\cal H}^{34}_{34} 

1196: +{\cal H}^{43}_{13} = -8.

1197: \ee

1198: The indices on ${\cal H}$ refer to $SO(6)$ indices of the letters

1199: involved.

1200: Here the extra terms ${\cal H}^{43}_{34}$ is because of the fact that

1201: the operator $O_\gamma$ is an operator of two letters whose position

1202: can be interchanged. 

1203: 

1204: 

1205: \vspace{.5cm}

1206: 

1207: \noindent

1208: { \emph{Two body terms} }

1209: 

1210: As mentioned before, for the two body terms we have to focus only on

1211: the log terms. The diagrams which contribute to this are:

1212: \bea{2bodylog}

1213: (Q + E + C_1 + C_2 + C_3 + C_4 ) (1;3) 

1214: &+& 2 S(1;3) + S(1;4) + S(3;4),

1215: \eea

1216: where the labels $(1;3)$ indicate which two operators the

1217: contributions arise from, we have again suppressed the $SO(6)$ indices

1218: for convenience. Note that here all the $4$ collapses contribute, 

1219: $S$ refers to the self energy contributions.

1220: Evaluating these contributions we obtain

1221: \bea{f2blog}

1222: &-&2 \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^4}{\epsilon^4}\right) +  

1223: 4 \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^2 }{\epsilon^2 } \right)  

1224: \\ \nonumber

1225: &+& 

1226: -8 \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^2 }{ \epsilon^2} \right) 

1227: -4 \log \left( \frac{x_{14}^2 }{ \epsilon^2} \right) 

1228: -4 \log \left( \frac{x_{34}^2 }{ \epsilon^2} \right). 

1229: \eea

1230: 

1231: Combining \eq{log3body}, and \eq{f2blog} and \eq{strcon} we find that 

1232: the log correction and the renormalization group invariant one loop

1233: correction to the structure constant is given by

1234: \be{allscalcor}

1235: \frac{\lambda}{N} \left( -12 \log\left(\frac{x_{13}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right)  -8

1236: \right).

1237: \ee

1238: Here we have reinstated the factor $\lambda/N$ which occurs in the

1239: corrections to the structure constants.

1240: 

1241: \section{ Operators with derivatives}

1242: 

1243: In the previous section we showed that the anomalous dimension

1244: Hamiltonian controls the corrections to structure constants in the

1245: $SO(6)$ sector. There were basically three reasons for this: 

1246: (i) the $SO(6)$ spin dependent term factorizes out in the calculations,

1247: (ii) ${\cal N}=4$ supersymmetry ensures that quartic term and the 

1248: gauge exchange terms comes with the same coupling constant, 

1249: (iii) contributions of all collapsed diagrams canceled.

1250: As we have argued in the introduction,  since ${\cal N}=4$ super

1251: Yang-Mills admits a string dual, the structure constants of 

1252: the theory should be determined 

1253: basically by the geometric delta function overlap

1254: of the dual string theory. One can see that at 

1255: $\lambda =0$ and at large $N$ ensures that three point functions of 

1256: single trace gauge invariant operators can be written as delta

1257: function overlap in a string bit theory \cite{adgn:2005}. 

1258: Turning on finite $\lambda$ renders $\alpha'$  of 

1259: the string theory finite, and induces

1260: nearest neighbour interactions between the bits. Thus, the 

1261: modifications to structure constants must be 

1262: only due to effects of 

1263: interaction in the propagation of the bits, the geometric 

1264: delta function overlap of the string is invariant.

1265: The fact that in the $SO(6)$ sector the one loop corrections to 

1266: the structure constants 

1267: is dictated by the anomalous dimension

1268: Hamiltonian indicates the possibility that it is only the 

1269: world sheet Hamiltonian in the bit string theory 

1270: which is necessary to compute corrections to structure

1271: constants. 

1272: To verify this and to 

1273: identify the precise operator 

1274: which is responsible for the propagation of 

1275: the bits we need to compute one loop corrections to structure

1276: constants

1277: with more general operators outside the $SO(6)$ scalar sector.

1278: Among the three simplifications in the $SO(6)$ sector discussed above, 

1279: the  factorization of $SO(6)$ spin dependent term 

1280: will not be present if there are

1281: derivatives in the letters. 

1282: This motivates the  evaluation of  one loop corrections to structure

1283: constants of operators with derivatives. 

1284: 

1285: 

1286: \subsection{Primaries with derivatives}

1287: 

1288: Before we start the one loop calculation, we need to specify the 

1289: operators with derivatives which are conformal primaries that

1290: we will be dealing with.

1291: We work with operators having $SO(6)$ scalars with arbitrary number of

1292: derivatives in  a fixed complex direction.

1293: For example the following

1294: operator 

1295: \be{exop}

1296: {\rm Tr} ( D^{m_1}_z \phi^{i_1} D_z^{m_2} \phi^{i_2}\cdots   \cdot D^{m_j}_z

1297: \phi^{i_j} \cdots ),

1298: \ee

1299: where $D_z = \partial_z + i g

1300: [A_z, \;\cdot \;]$ \footnote{In our notation $g^2 =

1301: \frac{g_{YM}^2}{2(2\pi)^2}$, see appendix A. }

1302: is the covariant derivative in a given complex

1303: direction $z= x^2 + i x^3$, $m_j$ refers to the number of

1304: derivatives on the $j^{{\rm th}}$ letter. To construct the primaries 

1305: at tree level we can ignore the commutator term in the covariant

1306: derivative.  

1307: To construct a conformal primary from such operators we need to know

1308: the action of the special conformal transformations

1309: $K_\mu$ on these states. The action of $K_\mu$ on a scalar is given by

1310: \be{actk}

1311: [K_\mu, \phi] = (2x_\mu x\cdot \partial     +  2x_\mu - x^2

1312: \partial_\mu)

1313: \phi.

1314: \ee

1315: Since all the fields are at the origin and the derivatives are only in

1316: the holomorphic direction we can set all other coordinates in $K_z$ to

1317: zero, this gives 

1318: \be{kz}

1319: K^z = z^2\partial_z + z,

1320: \ee

1321: similarly the other generators are given by

1322: \be{othsl2}

1323: P_z = \partial_z, \;\;\; D = 1+

1324: z\partial_z.

1325: \ee

1326: They satisfy the algebra

1327: \be{kalg}

1328: [D, K^z] = K^z, \;\;\; [D, P_z] = -P_z \;\;\; [P_z, K^z] = 

1329: 2z \partial_z +1  = D + M_{z\bar{z} }

1330: \ee

1331: where $M_{z\bar{z}} = z\partial_z$ is the angular momentum generator

1332: on the $z$ plane when $\bar{z}$ is set to zero. 

1333: The above algebra forms an $SL(2)$ algebra, to see

1334: this identify 

1335: \be{sl2}

1336: J_3 = -\frac{1}{2} \left( D+ M_{z\bar{z}} \right)  , \;\;\;\;\; 

1337: J_+ = P_z,\;\;\;\;\;\; J_- = K^z,

1338: \ee

1339: then we have

1340: \be{sl2alg}

1341: [J_3, J_{\pm} ] = \pm J_{\pm}, \;\;\;\;  [J_+, J_-] = -2 J_3.

1342: \ee

1343: Thus scalars with derivatives in  a given holomorphic sector form

1344: representations of the $SL(2)$ algebra.

1345: The action of  $K_z$  a scalar with $m$  derivatives is given by

1346: \be{act}

1347: [K_z,  \frac{\partial^m}{m!} \phi^i] = 

1348: m\frac{1}{(m-1)!} \partial^{m-1}\phi^i.

1349: \ee

1350: Here we have divided the $m$th derivative by $m!$ to ensure the 

1351: two point function of these derivatives are normalized to $1$, 

1352: we have also suppressed the subscript $z$ on the derivatives which 

1353: will be understood for the rest of paper.

1354: It is easy to construct primaries by suitably taking  linear

1355: combinations of these operators. For example a simple class of

1356: primaries with derivatives only on two of the scalars is given by

1357: \be{priclas}

1358: \sum_{m=0}^n  (-1)^m {\;}^{n}C_m {\rm Tr} \left(

1359:  \frac{ \partial^m \phi^{i_1}}{m!} \phi^{i_2} \cdots  

1360: \frac{ \partial^{n-m} \phi^{i_j} }{(n-m)!} \phi^{i_{j+1} } \cdots 

1361: \right).

1362: \ee

1363: Similarly,  combinations of operators with derivatives only in

1364: the anti-holomorphic direction $\bar{z}$ can be chosen so that

1365: they are primaries.

1366: 

1367: Three point functions as well as two point functions

1368: of primaries have definite tensor structure 

1369: as given in \eq{3ptdef} and \eq{g2pt} respectively.

1370: Therefore it is sufficient to focus

1371: terms proportional to products of 

1372: of the identity $\delta_{\mu\nu}$ in the tensor structure.

1373: For operators with derivatives only in the holomorphic or the

1374: anti-holomorphic direction it is sufficient to look at terms

1375: proportional to products of the identity $\delta_{z\bar{z}}  $. 

1376: This simplifies calculations considerably: for instance in the

1377: calculation of the interaction  with 4 letters, the number of

1378: holomorphic derivatives must equal the number of anti-holomorphic

1379: derivatives. 

1380: Finally, another useful fact about the $SL(2)$ sector is that 

1381: when the scalars are in a given Cartan direction of $SO(6)$, the

1382: detailed calculation of the 

1383: the anomalous dimension Hamiltonian has been done in

1384: \cite{Beisert:2003jj}.

1385: 

1386: 

1387: 

1388: 

1389: 

1390: \subsection{The processes}

1391: 

1392: From the slicing argument and our detailed discussion for the $SO(6)$

1393: sector, the 

1394: corrections to the structure constants are governed by the constants

1395: in the following basic quantity

1396: \bea{dbasic}

1397: & & \left( U^{(i_a,m_a) ( i_{a+1}, m_{a+1}) }

1398: _{(j_{b+1}, n_{b+1}) (k_c, s_c) } ({\rm 3pt}) - 

1399: \frac{1}{2} U^{(i_a , m_a) (i_{a+1}, m_{a+1}) }

1400: _{(j_{b+1}, n_{b+1})( k_c, s_c)} ({\rm 2pt})\right)

1401: \delta^{j_b}_{k_{c+1}}\delta(n_b, s_{c+1}) \\ \nonumber

1402: &+&

1403: \left( U^{(j_b, n_b) ( j_{b+1}, n_{b+1})  }

1404: _{(k_{c+1}, s_{c+1})  (i_a, m_a) } ({\rm 3pt}) - 

1405: \frac{1}{2} U^{(j_b, n_b) (j_{b+1}, n_{b+1}) }

1406: _{(k_{c+1}, s_{c+1})(i_a, m_a)} ({\rm 2pt})\right)

1407: \delta^{k_c}_{i_{a+1}} \delta(s_c, m_{a+1}) \\ \nonumber

1408: &+&

1409: \left( U^{(k_c, s_c)(k_{c+1}, s_{c+1}) }

1410: _{(i_{a+1}, m_{a+1})( j_b, n_b)} ({\rm 3pt}) - 

1411: \frac{1}{2} 

1412: U^{(k_c, s_c)(k_{c+1}, s_{c+1}) }

1413: _{(i_{a+1}, m_{a+1})( j_b, n_b)} ({\rm 2pt})  \right)

1414: \delta^{i_a}_{j_{b+1}} \delta (m_a, n_{b+1}).

1415: \eea

1416: In the above formula $i, j, k$ label $SO(6)$ indices and  $m, n, s$

1417: label the number of derivatives which could be either holomorphic or

1418: anti-holomorphic.

1419: $a, b, c$ refers to the position of

1420: the letters in each of the operators. $\delta(m , n)$ refers to the

1421: delta function which is one when either the number of holomorphic

1422: $m$ equals the number of anti-holomorphic derivatives $n$ or vice

1423: versa. 

1424: To further simplify our analysis we will restrict our attention

1425: to the cases  when the total number of holomorphic derivatives on the

1426: operator with $2$ letters adjacent to each other

1427: in the interaction, is always greater

1428: that the number of anti-holomorphic derivatives on either of the

1429: letters of the remaining two operators. But, the methods developed

1430: here can be applied to study the other cases also.

1431: Let us work with only holomorphic derivatives on $O_\alpha$ and 

1432: anti-holomorphic derivatives on $O_\beta$ and $O_\gamma$. Then, our

1433: restriction implies that for the first term in \eq{dbasic}

1434: $m_a +m_{a+1} \geq n_{b+1}, s_c$.

1435: 

1436: We now detail all the processes involved in the evaluation of  the

1437: constants in the interaction

1438: $U^{(i, m)(j n)}_{(k, s)(l, t)}$.

1439: We again use the point splitting scheme to evaluate the diagrams. 

1440: For the 3pt contribution 

1441: the letters $D^m \phi^i/m!$ and $D^n \phi^j/n!$ are at positions

1442: $x_1$ and $x_2$ respectively such that $x_2 - x_1=\epsilon$ with $\epsilon

1443: \rightarrow 0$ and the letters $\bar{D}^s \phi^k/s!$ and $\bar{D}^t

1444: \phi^l/t!$ are at $x_3$ and $x_4$ respectively. 

1445: For the 2pt contribution one further takes the  limit

1446: $x_4 \rightarrow x_3 =\epsilon$. In all the diagrams we will first

1447: perform the relevant derivatives and then take the appropriate limits.

1448: Since we are looking for only the term proportional to the identity

1449: we have the constraint $m + n = s + t $, the number of

1450: holomorphic derivatives must be equal to the number of 

1451: anti-holomorphic derivatives. 

1452: \vspace{.5cm}

1453: 

1454: \noindent

1455: {\emph{ (i) The quartic interaction}}

1456: 

1457: The contribution of the quartic interaction of scalars to 

1458: $U^{(i, m)(j ,n)}_{(k, s)(l, t)}$ is shown in the \fig{gaexc}. 

1459: \FIGURE{

1460: \label{gaexc}

1461: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{figure8.eps}}

1462: \caption{The quartic and the gauge exchange with

1463: $x_2\rightarrow\infty$ collapse }

1464: }

1465: We first focus on the $3$ pt contribution: 

1466: the constant and the log part of this interaction 

1467: can be extracted by  evaluating the

1468: limits in 

1469: \be{dquart}

1470: Q^{(i,m), (j,n)}_{(k,s)(l,t)}({\rm 3 pt} ) =

1471:  \left( 2 \delta^{j}_k \delta^i_l -

1472: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l - \delta^{ij}\delta_{kl} \right)  

1473: \lim_{x_2 \rightarrow x_1}

1474: \frac{\partial_1^m \partial_2^n \bar\partial_3^s \bar\partial_4^t}{

1475: m! n!s! t!}

1476: \left( \frac{\phi(r,s) }{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }  \right).

1477: \ee

1478: Now one can use the expansions of $\phi(r,s)$ in 

1479: \eq{usexp} and perform the appropriate derivatives.

1480: In the above equation $\partial_1$ 

1481: and $\partial_2$ refers to the holomorphic

1482: derivative in the $z_1$ and $z_2$ direction respectively, while

1483: $\bar\partial_3$ and $\bar\partial_4$ refers to the 

1484: anti-holomorphic derivative in the $\bar{z}_1$ and $\bar{z}_2$

1485: directions respectively.

1486: Taking the derivatives is sufficiently simple as one has to focus only

1487: on the term proportional to the 

1488: identity $\delta_{z\bar{z}}$ 

1489: since we are  dealing  with primaries, finally one has

1490: to take the limit $x_2\rightarrow x_1$.

1491: The general form of the quartic term is given by

1492: \be{genquart}

1493: Q^{(i,m), (j,n)}_{(k,s)(l,t)}({\rm 3 pt} ) =

1494:  \left( 2 \delta^{j}_k \delta^i_l -

1495: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l - \delta^{ij}\delta_{kl} \right)  

1496: \frac{1}{x_{13}^{2( s+1) } x_{14}^{2(t+1)} } \left(

1497: {\cal A}_Q  

1498: \log \left(\frac{ x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 } { x_{34}^2 \epsilon^2} \right) 

1499: +  {\cal C}_Q \right).

1500: \ee

1501: The coefficient of the log  ${\cal A}_Q$ 

1502: and the constant ${\cal C}_Q$ for the various cases 

1503: can be read from 

1504: table 3.  of  appendix C. 

1505: The quartic interaction contribution to the corresponding

1506: 2pt term is given by further taking the limit $x_4\rightarrow x_3$, 

1507: thus the constant obtained for the 2pt term will be  the same as constants

1508: of the 3pt term. 

1509: \vspace{.5cm}

1510: 

1511: \noindent

1512: {\emph{ (ii) Gauge exchange}}

1513: 

1514: The gauge exchange contribution to $U (3 {\rm pt} )$ 

1515: can be found by evaluating the limit in 

1516: \bea{dgex}

1517: G^{(i,m), (j,n)}_{(k,s)(l,t)}({\rm 3 pt} ) &=& 

1518: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l \lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1} 

1519: \frac{\partial_1^m \partial_2^n \bar\partial_3^s \bar\partial_4^t

1520: }{ m!n!s!t!} H, \\

1521: \nonumber

1522: &=& \delta^i_k \delta^j_l \lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1} 

1523: \frac{\partial_1^m \partial_2^n \bar\partial_3^s \bar\partial_4^t }{

1524: m!n!s!t!}

1525: \left( E + C_1 + C_2 + C_3 + C_4 \right),

1526: \eea

1527: where 

1528: \be{defec}

1529: E = ( r- s) \frac{\phi(r,s)}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 },

1530: \ee

1531: and $C_1, C_2, C_3, C_4$ are the 

1532: collapsed diagrams given in \eq{heq}. In \eq{dgex} we have basically used the

1533: \eq{heq} to write the gauge exchange diagram in terms of the various

1534: collapses and \eq{defec}. The equation \eq{heq} is  true

1535: when all the points $x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4$ are strictly distinct.

1536: Therefore, we use the equation when all the points are distinct, 

1537: take the appropriate derivatives and then finally take the limit

1538: $x_2 \rightarrow x_1$. 

1539: Just as the quartic diagram,

1540: the general form for  the diagram $E(3{\rm pt})$  is given by

1541: \be{genex}

1542: E ( 3{\rm pt} ) = \delta^i_k \delta^j_l 

1543: \frac{1}{x_{13}^{2( s+1) } x_{14}^{2(t+1)} } \left(

1544: {\cal A}_E  

1545: \log \left(\frac{ x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 } { x_{34}^2 \epsilon^2} \right) 

1546: +  {\cal C}_E \right).

1547: \ee

1548: In tables 4. and 5 of 

1549: appendix C. we tabulate the values of 

1550: ${\cal A}_E$ and ${\cal C}_E$

1551: for the various cases.

1552: 

1553: 

1554: We now 

1555: examine the structure of the derivatives in each of the

1556: collapses and  list the

1557: conditions under which they contribute to the identity.

1558: Consider the $1\rightarrow\infty$ collapse, which is given by

1559: \bea{c1}

1560: C_1 &= &

1561: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l \lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1} 

1562: \frac{\partial_1^m \partial_2^n \bar\partial_3^s \bar\partial_4^t }{

1563: m!n!s!t!}\left(  (r'-s')  \frac{\phi(r', s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2}

1564: \right),

1565: \\ \nonumber

1566: & & {\rm with} \;\;\;\;\; r' = \frac{x_{34}^2}{x_{24}^2} 

1567: , \;\;\;\; s' = \frac{x_{23}^2 }{ x_{24}^2}.

1568: \eea

1569: Note that if $m>s$ and therefore $n<t$, there is no possibility of

1570: saturating the derivatives in the $z_1$ direction to give 

1571: a term proportional to the identity, since $r'$ and

1572: $s'$ are independent of $x_1$. Therefore, this collapse diagram

1573: contributes to terms proportional to the identity only when 

1574: $m\leq s$ and therefore $n\geq t$. A similar analysis with all the

1575: collapses leads to the following table: 

1576: \vspace{.5cm}

1577: \begin{center}

1578: \begin{tabular}{l | l | l|  l }

1579: Diagram & $m>s;\;\; t>n$ & $m <s; \;\;t<n$ & $m=s; \;\; n=t$ \\ \hline

1580: $C_1$ & No & Yes & Yes \\ \hline

1581: $C_2$ & Yes & No& Yes \\ \hline

1582: $C_3$ & Yes & No & Yes \\ \hline

1583: $C_4$ & No & Yes & Yes \\ \hline

1584: \end{tabular}

1585: \\

1586: \vspace{.5cm}

1587: {\bf\small {Table 1.}} Conditions for the contribution of the

1588: collapsed diagrams.

1589: \end{center}

1590: It details the conditions

1591: on $m, n,s,t$ under which various collapse diagrams contribute to the

1592: term proportional to the identity.

1593: 

1594: Just as in the case of the 

1595: $SO(6)$ sector discussed in

1596: the previous section, the collapses $C_1$ and $C_2$ are

1597: potentially dangerous as the values of $r'$ and $s'$ for these

1598: collapses do not tend to either $0$ and $1$ respectively under the

1599: limit $x_2 \rightarrow x_1$. 

1600: Therefore, $C_1$ and $C_2$ 

1601: are non trivial functions not just logarithms  or constants 

1602: which are required by conformal invariance.  

1603: As discussed in the previous section for the 

1604: $SO(6)$ sector, these potentially dangerous

1605: collapses must cancel out leaving behind only logarithms or constants. 

1606: The detailed mechanisms which are responsible for this 

1607: in this sector will be

1608: discussed in the next subsection.

1609: 

1610: For the evaluation of 

1611: $G^{(i,m), (j,n)}_{(k,s)(l,t)}({\rm 2 pt} )$ we have to also take 

1612: $x_4\rightarrow x_3$ limit in addition to the $x_2\rightarrow x_1$

1613: limit. On taking both these limits 

1614: it is easy to see that $r'$ and $s'$ for the

1615: $1\rightarrow \infty$ and $2\rightarrow\infty$ collapse 

1616: also tend to $0$ and $1$ respectively. 

1617: Therefore all the collapses reduce to 

1618: logs and constants. 

1619: \vspace{.5cm}

1620: 

1621: 

1622: \noindent

1623: { \emph{ (iii) Gauge bosons on one external leg} }

1624: 

1625: The covariant derivatives on the letters also have gauge bosons, at

1626: one loop one such external gauge boson from say $D^{m}\phi^i$ can

1627: interact with the letters $D^n \phi^j$, $D^t\phi^l$ 

1628: as show in \fig{onextg}.  

1629: \FIGURE{

1630: \label{onextg}

1631: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{figure9.eps}}

1632: \caption{Diagrams with gauge boson on one external leg.}

1633: }

1634: To evaluate this diagram it is convenient to expand the covariant

1635: derivative

1636: to  order one in the $g_{YM}$ as:

1637: \be{defcovder}

1638: D^m \phi = \partial^m \phi + i g \sum_{p=1}^m  {\;}^{m}C_p [

1639: \partial^{m-1}A_z, \partial^{m-p} \phi].

1640: \ee

1641: Other similar process with one external gauge boson on the other 3

1642: letters exist,

1643: these are shown in \fig{onextg}. 

1644: We now write the interaction term of each

1645: such diagram.  The contribution of the diagram with the gauge boson on

1646: the letter $D^m \phi^i$ is given by

1647: \bea{dexg1}

1648: A_3(3{\rm pt} )  

1649: &=&\delta^{i}_{k} \delta^j_l 

1650: \frac{1}{ m!n!s!t!} \times \\ \nonumber

1651: & &\lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1} 

1652: \sum_{p=1}^m  {\;}^mC_p 

1653: \left( \partial_1^{m-p} \bar\partial_3^s \frac{1}{x_{13}^2}  \right)

1654: \left( \partial_1^{p-1} ( 2\partial_2 + \partial_1 ) \partial_2^n

1655: \bar\partial_4^t

1656: \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{24}^2}\right) ,  \\ \nonumber

1657: &\;&\; {\rm where} \;\;\;r' = \frac{x_{12}^2 }{x_{24}^2}, \;

1658: s' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{24}^2}.

1659: \eea

1660: We have labelled this diagram $A_3$ as the values of $r'$ and $s'$

1661: that occur are the values of the $3\rightarrow \infty$ collapse. Note

1662: that we have used momentum conservation on the vertex of a gauge boson

1663: with two scalars. From the structure of the derivatives in the first

1664: bracket of \eq{dexg1}, it is clear the term proportional to identity

1665: occurs only when $m>s$.

1666: Similarly the diagram with the external gauge boson on the letter

1667: $D^n \phi^j$ is given by

1668: \bea{dexg2}

1669: A_4(3{\rm pt} ) 

1670: &=&\delta^{i}_{k} \delta^j_l  

1671: \frac{1}{ m!n!s!t!} \times \\ \nonumber

1672: & &\lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1} 

1673: \sum_{p=1}^n  {\;}^nC_p 

1674: \left( \partial_2^{n-p} \bar\partial_4^t \frac{1}{x_{24}^2}  \right)

1675: \left( \partial_2^{p-1} ( 2\partial_1 + \partial_2 ) \partial_1^m

1676: \bar\partial_3^s

1677: \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2}\right) ,  \\ \nonumber

1678: &\;&\; {\rm where} \;\;\;r' = \frac{x_{12}^2 }{x_{13}^2}, \;

1679: s' = \frac{x_{23}^2}{x_{13}^2}.

1680: \eea

1681: This diagram contributes to terms proportional to the identity only

1682: when $n>t$.

1683: If the external gauge boson is from the letter $D^s \phi^k$ 

1684: the interaction is given by

1685: \bea{dexg3}

1686: A_1(3{\rm pt} ) 

1687: &=&\delta^{i}_{k} \delta^j_l 

1688: \frac{1}{ m!n!s!t!} \times \\ \nonumber

1689: & &\lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1} 

1690: \sum_{p=1}^s  {\;}^sC_p 

1691: \left( \bar\partial_3^{s-p} \partial_1^m \frac{1}{x_{13}^2}  \right)

1692: \left( \bar\partial_3^{p-1} 

1693: ( 2\bar\partial_4 + \bar\partial_3 ) \partial_2^n

1694: \bar\partial_4^t

1695: \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{24}^2}\right) ,  \\ \nonumber

1696: &\;&\; {\rm where} \;\;\;r' = \frac{x_{34}^2 }{x_{24}^2}, \;

1697: s' = \frac{x_{23}^2}{x_{24}^2}.

1698: \eea

1699: Here the above diagram contributes only when $s>m$.

1700: Finally when the external gauge boson is from the  letter

1701: $D^t\phi^l$, the diagram is given by

1702: \bea{dexg4}

1703: A_2(3{\rm pt} ) 

1704: &=&\delta^{i}_{k} \delta^j_l 

1705: \frac{1}{ m!n!s!t!} \times \\ \nonumber

1706: & &\lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1} 

1707: \frac{1}{ m!n!s!t!}

1708: \sum_{p=1}^t  {\;}^tC_p 

1709: \left( \bar\partial_4^{t-p} \partial_2^n \frac{1}{x_{24}^2}  \right)

1710: \left( \bar\partial_4^{p-1} 

1711: ( 2\bar\partial_3 + \bar\partial_4 ) \partial_1^m

1712: \bar\partial_3^s

1713: \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2}\right) ,  \\ \nonumber

1714: &\;&\; {\rm where} \;\;\;r' = \frac{x_{34}^2 }{x_{13}^2}, \;

1715: s' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{13}^2}.

1716: \eea

1717: This contributes only when $t>n$. We summarize  the conditions

1718: on $m, n, s, t$ under which all these diagrams contribute to the 

1719: term proportional to identity in the following table:

1720: \vspace{.5cm}

1721: \begin{center}

1722: \begin{tabular}{l | l | l|  l }

1723: Diagram & $m>s;\;\; t<n$ & $m <s; \;\;t<n$ & $m=s; \;\; n=t$ \\ \hline

1724: $A_1$ & No & Yes & No \\ \hline

1725: $A_2$ & Yes & No& No \\ \hline

1726: $A_3$ & Yes & No & No \\ \hline

1727: $A_4$ & No & Yes & No \\ \hline

1728: \end{tabular}

1729: \\

1730: \vspace{.5cm}

1731: {\bf\small {Table 2.}} Contributions of diagrams

1732: with gauge boson on one leg.

1733: \end{center}

1734: 

1735: Note that the external gauge boson contribution 

1736: $A_1$ and $A_2$ given in \eq{dexg3} and

1737: \eq{dexg4} respectively 

1738: are non trivial functions of the respective $r'$ and $s'$,

1739: as these do not reduce to either logarithms or constants under the

1740: limit $x_2\rightarrow x_1$. Therefore

1741: contributions from these diagrams can potentially violate conformal

1742: invariance. But, we will show that  contributions from these

1743: terms add up with the 

1744: dangerous collapses $C_1$ and $C_2$ of \eq{dgex}

1745: to finally give only logarithms and constants ensuring conformal

1746: invariance. 

1747: As an indication of this we see  that from table 2. and table 1. that

1748: whenever $A_1$ or $A_2$ contributes to the term proportional to the

1749: constant $C_1$ or $C_2$ also contributes. 

1750: The mechanism of how this comes about will be discussed

1751: in detail in the next subsection.

1752: \vspace{.5cm}

1753: 

1754: \noindent

1755: { \emph{ (iv) Gauge bosons on two legs} }

1756: 

1757: Diagrams with  gauge bosons on two different legs contribute constants 

1758: at one loop. These diagrams are just planar Wick contractions with

1759: the gauge bosons on the respective external legs. 

1760: The ones which contribute to $U$ are the first two diagrams of

1761: \fig{gbtl}. 

1762: \FIGURE{

1763: \label{gbtl}

1764: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{figure10.eps}}

1765: \caption{Gauge bosons on two legs}

1766: }

1767: The ones with

1768: the external gauge boson from the letter $D^m \phi^i$ and $\bar{D}^t\phi^l$

1769: is given by

1770: \bea{d2g1}

1771: B_1 &=& - 2\delta^i_k \delta^j_l \frac{1}{m!n!s!t!}  \times \\

1772: \nonumber

1773: & & \sum_{p=1}^m \sum_{p'=1}^t {\;}^mC_p

1774: {\;}^tC_{p'} \bar\partial_3^s \partial_1^{m-p} 

1775: \left( \frac{1}{x_{13}^2}  \right) \partial_1^{p-1}

1776: \bar\partial_4^{p'-1} \left( \frac{1}{x_{14}^2} \right)

1777: \partial_2^n \bar\partial_4^{t-p'} \frac{1}{x_{24}^2}.

1778: \eea

1779: The presence of the negative sign in the above formula is due to the

1780: fact that the gauge fields on the two legs 

1781: come on two different sides of the

1782: commutator. The factor of $2$ occurs in \eq{d2g1} if one keeps track

1783: the factors of $2$ in $g^2$  and uses the fact that

1784: \be{propaz}

1785: \langle A_z^a (x_1) A_{\bar z}^a (x_2) \rangle = 

1786: \delta^{ab} \frac{1}{2 (x_1 -x_1)^2 }.

1787: \ee

1788: Looking for the term proportional to the identity, we see that

1789: the above  diagram contributes only when $m >s$ and therefore

1790: $n<t$, evaluating the constant we obtain

1791: \be{d2g1c}

1792: B_1 = - 2\delta^i_k \delta^j_l\frac{1}{(m -s)^2},

1793: \ee

1794: where we have used  $m+n=s+t =q$. 

1795: Similarly the contribution 

1796: with the external gauge boson from the

1797: letter $D^n\phi^j$ and $\bar{D}^s\phi^k$  is given by

1798: \bea{d2g2}

1799: B_2 &=& -2\delta^i_k\delta^j_l \frac{1}{m!n!s!t!} \times \\ \nonumber

1800: \lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1}

1801: & &\sum_{p=1}^s \sum_{p'=1}^n {\;}^sC_p

1802: {\;}^nC_{p'} \bar\partial_3^{s-p} \partial_1^{m} 

1803: \left( \frac{1}{x_{13}^2}  \right) \bar\partial_3^{p-1}

1804: \partial_2^{p'-1} \left( \frac{1}{x_{23}^2} \right)

1805: \partial_2^{n-p'} \bar\partial_4^{t} \frac{1}{x_{24}^2}.

1806: \eea

1807: Again looking for the term proportional to the identity we see that

1808: the above term contributes only when $s>m$ and $n>t$. Keeping track of

1809: the constant term we see that it is given by

1810: \be{d2g22}

1811: B_2 = - 2\delta^i_k\delta^j_l\frac{1}{(s-m)^2}.

1812: \ee

1813: Note that both these diagrams do not contribute if $m=s$ or $n=t$.

1814: 

1815: 

1816: Consider the remaining contributions from the gauge boson on two legs

1817: (see \fig{gbtl}.), 

1818: for instance the diagram with the external gauge boson from the

1819: letter $D^m\phi^i$ and $D^s\phi^k$. These diagrams are 

1820: two body terms and their contribution 

1821: to the renormalization scheme independent corrections to the

1822: three point functions cancel by the slicing argument.

1823: 

1824: 

1825: 

1826: 

1827: \subsection{Mechanisms ensuring conformal invariance}

1828: 

1829: \vspace{.5cm}

1830: \noindent

1831: {\emph{ Case 1. $m>s$; $t>n$ } }

1832: 

1833: From table 1. and table 2.  it is clear that only 

1834: the collapsed diagram $C_2$ and 

1835: the external gauge boson on one leg 

1836: $A_2$ are the potentially dangerous diagrams which can

1837: violate conformal invariance for this case.

1838: We show that both these diagrams combine in 

1839: a non-trivial way to give only logarithms or constants.

1840: To simplify matters we first discuss the case of $m=1, s=0, n=0, t

1841: =1$, then $C_2$ is given by

1842: \bea{mcic2}

1843: C_2 &=& \delta^{i}_k \delta^j_l \partial_1\bar\partial_4 \left(

1844: \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2} ( s'-r') \phi(r', s') \right), 

1845: \;\;\;\;\; r' =\frac{x_{34}^2}{x_{13}^2}, \;\; s'

1846: =\frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{13}^2}, \\ \nonumber

1847: &=& \delta^i_k \delta^j_l \frac{1}{x_{13}^4 x_{24}^2 }

1848: \left[ - \phi -  (s'-r')\partial_{s'} \phi \right],

1849: \eea

1850: here, in writing the second line 

1851: we have kept only the terms proportional to the identity while

1852: performing the differentiation.

1853: The contribution of $A_2$ can be read out from \eq{dexg4}, it is given by

1854: \bea{mcia2}

1855: A_2 &=& \delta^i_k\delta^j_l

1856: \frac{1}{x_{24}^2} \left[  ( 2 \bar\partial_3 \partial_1 +

1857: \bar\partial_4 \partial_1 ) \frac{\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2} \right], \\

1858: \nonumber

1859: &=& \delta^i_k\delta^j_l

1860: \frac{1}{x_{24}^2 x_{13}^4} \left[

1861: 2 \phi + 2 ( r'\partial_{r'} + s'\partial_{s'} ) \phi

1862: -\partial_{s'} \phi \right].

1863: \eea

1864: Adding $C_2$ and $A_2$  form \eq{mcic2} and \eq{mcia2} we obtain

1865: \be{sumci}

1866: C_2 + A_2 = \delta^i_k \delta^j_l \frac{1}{x_{24}^2 x_{13}^4 } 

1867: \left( \phi + ( r'+s'-1) \partial_{s'} \phi 

1868: + 2 r' \partial_{r'} \phi \right) .

1869: \ee

1870: Note that on adding $C_2$ and $A_2$, the combination of $\phi(r',s')$

1871: in the bracket of the above equation

1872: is precisely that of  \eq{de}. In appendix B. it is shown that

1873: $\phi(r',s')$ satisfies the 

1874: inhomogeneous partial differential equation

1875: \be{deaux}

1876:  \phi + ( r'+s'-1) \partial_{s'} \phi 

1877: + 2 r' \partial_{r'} \phi  = - \frac{\log r'}{s'}.

1878: \ee

1879: The differential equation ensures that though $\phi(r',s')$ is a

1880: nontrivial function of $r'$ and $s'$ not just logarithms or constants, the

1881: combination which occurs in $A_2$ and $C_2$ is such that it reduces to

1882: a logarithm  ensuring conformal invariance. 

1883: Substituting this in \eq{sumci} we obtain

1884: \be{sumci2}

1885: C_2 + A_2 =

1886: \delta^i_k \delta^j_l \frac{1}{x_{24}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 } \ln \left( \frac{

1887: x_{13}^2}{x_{34}^2} \right). 

1888: \ee

1889: Now it is also clear that one needs the additional $1/s'$ on the right

1890: hand side  

1891: of\eq{deaux} to obtain the right powers of $x$ dictated by conformal

1892: invariance.

1893: Finally taking the limit $x_2\rightarrow x_1$ we obtain

1894: \be{sumci3}

1895: C_2 + A_2 = \delta^i_k\delta^j_l\frac{1}{x_{14}^4 x_{13}^2 } \log \left(

1896: \frac{ x_{13}^2}{x_{34}^2} \right).

1897: \ee

1898: We have illustrated this mechanism of ensuring conformal invariance

1899: in \fig{diffpi}

1900: \FIGURE{

1901: \label{diffpi}

1902: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{figure7p.eps}}

1903: \caption{Differential equation ensuring conformal invariance}

1904: }

1905: 

1906: It is now easy to generalize to the case of arbitrary $m>s; t>n$. 

1907: For this case, the $2\rightarrow \infty$ collapse is given by

1908: \bea{cic2}

1909: C_2 &=& 

1910: \delta^i_k\delta^j_l 

1911: \frac{1}{m!n!s!t!} \partial_1^m \partial_2^n \bar\partial_3^s

1912: \bar\partial_4^t \left( \frac{(s'-r') \phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2

1913: } \right), \\ \nonumber

1914: &=& 

1915: \delta^i_k\delta^j_l 

1916: \frac{ {\;}^tC_n }{m!n!s!t!}

1917: \left( (\partial_2\bar\partial_4)^n \frac{1}{x_{24}^2 } \right)

1918: \partial_1^m \bar\partial_3^s \bar\partial_4^{t-n-1}  \times \\

1919: \nonumber

1920: & &\left[ \frac{1}{x_{13}^4 } ( - z_{14} \phi - z_{14} (s'-r')

1921: \partial_{s'} \phi ) \right].

1922: \eea

1923: In the second line of the above equation we have first used the Leibnitz

1924: rule 

1925: to move the $n$ derivatives in the direction of $\bar z_4$ to act

1926: on the term in the round bracket, then we have focussed only on the 

1927: term which contributes to the identity $\delta_{z\bar{z}}$.  

1928: the term in the square bracket is obtained by the action of one of

1929: the remaining $t-n$

1930: $\bar\partial_4$ derivatives on the collapsed term.

1931: Now consider $A_2$, again focusing on the term which contributes to

1932: the identity we get

1933: \bea{cia2}

1934: A_2 &=&

1935: \delta^i_k\delta^j_l 

1936: \frac{ {\;}^tC_n }{m!n!s!t!}

1937: \left( (\partial_2\bar\partial_4)^n \frac{1}{x_{24}^2 } \right)

1938: \partial_1^m \bar\partial_3^s \bar\partial_4^{t-n-1}  \times \\

1939: \nonumber

1940: & & \left[ \frac{1}{x_{13}^4} (

1941: 2 z_{13} \phi + 2 z_{13} (r'\partial_{r'} + s'\partial_{s'} ) \phi

1942: - z_{14} \partial_{s'} \phi ) \right].

1943: \eea

1944: Here we have only looked at the term $p=t-n$ as it is the only one

1945: term in the summation of  \eq{dexg4}  which

1946: contributes to the identity. The last line in the above equation is

1947: obtained by the action of the operator $ (2\bar\partial_3 +

1948: \bar\partial_4)$ on $\phi(r',s')/x_{13}^2$. 

1949: From the structure of derivatives in \eq{cic2} \eq{cia2}, it is easy

1950: to see that only holomorphic derivatives 

1951: acting on the term in the square brackets of these equations 

1952: is $\partial_1$,

1953: Therefore, for the purposes of identifying the term proportional to

1954: the identity one can just treat the  $z's$  in these brackets as

1955: $z_1$. Then adding \eq{cic2} and \eq{cia2}, we see that we can use

1956: the differential equation in \eq{deaux} to obtain

1957: \be{sumcica}

1958: C_2 + A_2 = 

1959:  \frac{\delta^i_k\delta^j_l }{m! s! (t-n)!x_{24}^{2(1+n)}

1960: } 

1961: \partial_1^m \bar\partial_3^s \bar\partial_4^{t-n-1} \left[

1962: \frac{z_1}{x_{13}^2  x_{14}^2 } \log\left( \frac{x_{13}^2

1963: }{x_{34}^2} \right) \right]. 

1964: \ee

1965: To perform the differentiation in the above equation it is

1966: convenient to first 

1967: do all the $\bar\partial_4$ and the $\bar\partial_3$

1968: derivatives before finally performing the $\partial_1$ derivatives.

1969: This gives

1970: \bea{sumcicaf}

1971: C_2 + A_2 &=&  

1972: \lim_{x_2\rightarrow x_1}

1973: \frac{\delta^i_k\delta^j_l}{(m-s) x_{24}^{2(1+n)}

1974: x_{14}^{2(m-s)} x_{13}^{2(1+ s)} } \left( \log 

1975: \left( \frac{x_{13}^2 }{x_{34}^2 } \right) + h(s) \right), \\

1976: \nonumber

1977: &=&  \frac{\delta^i_k\delta^j_l} 

1978: { (m-s)  x_{14}^{2(1 + t)} x_{13}^{2(1+s)}  }

1979: \left( \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^2 }{x_{34}^2 } \right) + h(s) \right). 

1980: \eea

1981: Here we have also written down the final limit to be taken, note that

1982: powers of $x$ and the presence of the log 

1983: or the constant agrees with conformal invariance. Thus, using the

1984: differential equation in \eq{deaux} we have shown that 

1985: the terms $A_2$ and $C_2$ which can potentially violate conformal

1986: invariance combine together using \eq{deaux} to restore it.

1987: In \eq{sumcicaf} $h(s)$ refers to the harmonic number

1988: \be{defharmo}

1989: h(s) = \sum_{j=1}^s \frac{1}{s}, \;\;s \neq 0, 

1990: \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; h(0) =0.

1991: \ee

1992: From the tables 1. and 2.  we see that the collapse $C_3$ and the

1993: diagram $A_3$ also contributes when $m>s$. Though these are not

1994: dangerous diagrams one can use similar manipulations to sum these. 

1995: This gives

1996: \be{sumcia3}

1997: C_3 + A_3 = \frac{\delta^i_k\delta^j_l}{ (m-s) x_{14}^{2(1+t)}

1998: x_{13}^{2(1+s)} } \left( \log \left( \frac{x_{14}^2 }{\epsilon^2}

1999: \right) + h(n) \right).

2000: \ee

2001: The total contribution from these graphs is thus obtained by adding

2002: \eq{sumcicaf} and \eq{sumcia3}. Note that on adding these terms, the

2003: argument of the log is precisely that of what is expected for a three

2004: body term. 

2005: 

2006: \vspace{.5cm}

2007: \noindent

2008: { {\emph Case 2. $m<s, \;\; t<n $} }

2009: 

2010: From table 1. and table 2. we see that the potentially dangerous 

2011: diagrams are $C_1$ and $A_1$. 

2012: This case is similar to the previous one, going through similar

2013: manipulations we can combine these diagrams use \eq{deaux} to give

2014: \bea{cic1a1}

2015: C_1 + A_1 &=&

2016: - \frac{ \delta^i_k\delta^j_l{\;}^s C_m}{m!n!s!t!} \left( 

2017: (\partial_1\bar\partial_3 )^m \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 } \right)

2018: \partial_2^n \bar\partial_4^t \bar\partial_3^{s-m-1} 

2019: \left( \frac{ z_2 }{x_{24}^2 x_{23}^2 } \log 

2020: \left( \frac{x_{34}^2 }{x_{24}^2} \right) \right),  \\ \nonumber

2021: &=& \frac{ \delta^i_k\delta^j_l }

2022: {(s-m) x_{13}^{2(1+m)} x_{24}^{2(1+t)} x_{23}^{2(s-m)} }

2023: \left( \log \left( \frac{x_{24}^2}{x_{34}^2} \right) + h(t) \right).

2024: \eea

2025: Now taking the $x_2\rightarrow x_1$ limit one obtains

2026: \be{cic1f}

2027: C_1 + A_1 =

2028:  \frac{ \delta^i_k\delta^j_l }{(s-m) x_{13}^{2 (1 +s) }x_{14}^{2( 1+t) }} 

2029: \left( \log \left( \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{34}^2} \right) + h(t) \right).

2030: \ee

2031: Again we see that the terms which can possibly violate conformal

2032: invariance add up together to restore conformal invariance.

2033: The diagrams $C_4$ and $A_4$ for this case can also be combined using

2034: similar manipulations to give

2035: \be{cicia4}

2036: C_4 + A_4 =

2037:  \frac{ \delta^i_k\delta^j_l }{(s-m) x_{13}^{2 (1 +s) }x_{14}^{2( 1+t) }} 

2038: \left( \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right) + h(m) \right).

2039: \ee

2040: 

2041: \vspace{.5cm}

2042: \noindent

2043: { \emph { Case 3. $m =s, \;\; n=t$ }}

2044: 

2045: From table 1. and table 2. we see that for this case the only

2046: diagrams that are potentially dangerous are $C_1$ and $C_2$. The

2047: mechanisms of how these diagrams are removed is similar to the one

2048: for the $SO(6)$ sector discussed in section 2.2. 

2049: The sum of all the dangerous collapses among  the 

2050: three terms in \eq{dbasic} cancel among each other. 

2051: For notational convenience we choose $m_a =m, m_{a+1} = n, n_{b+1} =

2052: s, s_c =t$ in \eq{dbasic}. Then if the first term has to contribute,

2053: we must have $n_b = s_{c+1} =0$. This is because the operator

2054: $O_\beta$ and $O_\gamma$ have only anti-holomorphic derivatives and

2055: the only way  

2056: the last free contraction can contribute 

2057: to the term proportional to the identity is when there are 

2058: no derivatives present on the corresponding letters. 

2059: The $SO(6)$ structure of all the three terms

2060: involving the 

2061: dangerous collapses \eq{dbasic} is identical so for 

2062: convenience we suppress them. 

2063: The dangerous terms from the first term in \eq{dbasic}

2064: are given by

2065: \bea{ddc1}

2066: D(1;34) 

2067: &=& \lim_{x_2 \rightarrow x_1} \frac{1}{(m!)^2 (s!)^2 } 

2068: \frac{1}{x_{34}^2 }\times \\

2069: \nonumber

2070: & &\left[ 

2071: (\partial_1\bar\partial_3)^m \left( \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 }

2072: \right) ( \partial_2\bar\partial_4)^n 

2073: \left( \frac{(s'-r')\phi(r',s')}{x_{24}^2} \right) \;\;\;

2074: {\rm with}\;\; r' = \frac{x_{34}^2 }{x_{24}^2 }, \;\; s' =

2075: \frac{x_{23}^2}{x_{24}^2 }  \right. \\ \nonumber

2076: &+&

2077: \left. (\partial_2\bar\partial_4)^n \left( \frac{1}{x_{24}^2 }

2078: \right) ( \partial_1\bar\partial_3)^m 

2079: \left( \frac{(s'-r')\phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2} \right) \;\;\;

2080: {\rm with}\;\; r' = \frac{x_{34}^2 }{x_{13}^2 }, \;\; s' =

2081: \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{13}^2 }  \right]. 

2082: \eea

2083: Note that in the above equation 

2084: we have arranged the derivatives so that it contains the term

2085: proportional to the identity.

2086: Similarly the dangerous terms from the second term in \eq{dbasic} are

2087: given by

2088: \bea{dcc2}

2089: D(3;41)  

2090: &=& \lim_{x_2 \rightarrow x_3} \frac{1}{(m!)^2 (s!)^2 }

2091: (\partial_1\bar\partial_4)^n \left( \frac{1}{x_{14}^2 } \right)

2092: \times \\ \nonumber

2093: & & \left[

2094: ( \partial_1 \bar\partial_3)^m \left ( 

2095: \frac{(s'-r') \phi(r',s')}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 } \right)

2096: \;\;\;

2097: {\rm with} \;\; r' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{13}^2 }, \;\; s' =

2098: \frac{x_{34}^2 }{x_{13}^2 } \right. \\ \nonumber

2099: &+& 

2100: \left. 

2101: ( \partial_1 \bar\partial_3)^m \left ( \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 }\right)

2102: \left( \frac{(s'-r') \phi(r',s')}{x_{24}^2 } \right)

2103: \;\;\;

2104: {\rm with} \;\; r' = \frac{x_{14}^2 }{x_{24}^2 }, \;\;

2105: s' = \frac{x_{12}^2}{ x_{24}^2} \right].

2106: \eea

2107: Note that on taking the respective limits 

2108: we see that the first term of \eq{dcc2} cancels the second term of

2109: \eq{ddc1} as $\phi(r,s)$ is a symmetric function in $r$ and $s$.

2110: Finally the dangerous terms from the last term of \eq{dbasic} is

2111: given by

2112: \bea{dcc3}

2113: D(4;13) &=& C_2 + A_2 \\ \nonumber

2114: &=& \lim_{x_2 \rightarrow x_4} \frac{1}{(m!)^2 (s!)^2 }

2115: (\partial_1\bar\partial_3)^m \left( \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 } \right)

2116: \times \\ \nonumber

2117: & & \left[

2118: ( \partial_1 \bar\partial_4)^n \left ( 

2119: \frac{(s'-r') \phi(r',s')}{x_{23}^2 x_{14}^2 } \right)

2120: \;\;\;

2121: {\rm with} \;\; r' = \frac{x_{13}^2}{x_{14}^2 }, \;\; s' =

2122: \frac{x_{34}^2 }{x_{14}^2 } \right. \\ \nonumber

2123: &+& 

2124: \left. 

2125: ( \partial_1 \bar\partial_4)^n \left ( \frac{1}{x_{14}^2 }\right)

2126: \left( \frac{(s'-r') \phi(r',s')}{x_{24}^2 } \right)

2127: \;\;\;

2128: {\rm with} \;\; r' = \frac{x_{13}^2 }{x_{23}^2 }, \;\;

2129: s' = \frac{x_{12}^2}{ x_{23}^2} \right].

2130: \eea

2131: It is now clear that on taking the limits in \eq{ddc1}, \eq{dcc2} and 

2132: \eq{dcc3} the sum vanishes due to pair wise cancellations.

2133: \be{sumddc}

2134: D(1;34) + D(3;41) + D(4;13) =0.

2135: \ee

2136: Thus the dangerous collapses completely cancel restoring conformal

2137: invariance. We have show this cancellations schematically in the 

2138: \fig{fulcan}

2139: \FIGURE{

2140: \label{fulcan}

2141: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{figure6.eps}}

2142: \caption{Cancellations among dangerous collapses}

2143: }

2144: 

2145: From table 1. and table 2. we see that for this case of $m=s$ and

2146: $n=t$ the collapse diagrams $C_3$ and  $C_4$ also contribute. These

2147: diagrams are not dangerous. They are given by

2148: \bea{c3c4}

2149: C_3 +C_4 &=& \lim_{x_2 \rightarrow x_1} \frac{

2150: \delta^i_k\delta^j_l }{(m!)^2 (n!)^2 } \times \\ \nonumber

2151: & & 

2152: \left[ (\partial_1\bar\partial_3)^m \left( \frac{1}{x_{13}^2 } \right)

2153: (\partial_2 \bar\partial_4)^n 

2154: \left( \frac{ (s'-r') \phi(r',s') } {x_{24}^2} \right) \right. \;\;\;{\rm with} \;\;

2155: r' = \frac{x_{12}^2 } {x_{24}^2 }, \;\; s' = \frac{x_{14}^2}{x_{24}^2

2156: } \\ \nonumber

2157: & & 

2158: \left.  (\partial_2\bar\partial_4)^n \left( \frac{1}{x_{24}^2 } \right)

2159: (\partial_1 \bar\partial_3)^m 

2160: \left( \frac{  (s'-r') \phi(r',s') } {x_{13}^2} \right) \right] \;\;\;{\rm with} \;\;

2161: r' = \frac{x_{12}^2 } {x_{13}^2 }, \;\; s' = \frac{x_{23}^2}{x_{13}^2

2162: } 

2163: \eea

2164: We can extract the log term and the constant by performing the

2165: required differentiations and focusing on the contributions to the

2166: identity. For the diagram $C_3$ and $C_4$,  

2167: we do not need to keep track of the

2168: constants. The reason is due to a similar phenomenon discussed for the 

2169: $SO(6)$ sector. To obtain the renormalization group independent

2170: constant one needs to subtract the constants from the corresponding

2171: two body term. But, for the two body terms all the collapses

2172: $C_1, C_2, C_3, C_4$ contribute. To find these we just write

2173: the diagrams $C_1$ as in \eq{c1} and further take the

2174: $x_4\rightarrow x_3$ limit. It is then easily seen that the constants

2175: from $C_1$ is identical to the constants from $C_3$ and the constants

2176: from $C_2$ is identical to the constants from $C_4$. 

2177: Therefore in the renormalization group independent contribution

2178: \be{colrgin}

2179: C_3 (3 \rm{pt}) + C_4 ( 3\rm{pt}) 

2180: - \frac{1}{2} \left(

2181: C_1 (2 \rm{pt}) + C_4 ( 2\rm{pt}) +

2182: C_3 (2 \rm{pt}) + C_4 ( 2\rm{pt})\right), 

2183: \ee

2184: one finds that the constants cancel. Thus we write  just the log terms

2185: of \eq{c3c4} which contribute to the identity, these are given by

2186: \be{c3c4l}

2187: C_3 + C_4 = \frac{\delta^i_k\delta^j_l} { x_{13}^{2(m+1)}

2188: x_{14}^{2(n+1)} } \left[ h(m+1) \log\left( \frac{x_{13}^2}{\epsilon^2}

2189: \right) + h(n+1) \log\left( \frac{x_{14}^2 }{\epsilon^2} \right)

2190: \right].

2191: \ee

2192: 

2193: Though we have not 

2194: emphasized length conserving processes in this paper, we mention that 

2195: the above mechanism of ensuring conformal invariance for the

2196: case of $m=s, n=t$ will not hold for such processes. 

2197: For a length conserving process,  

2198: if $O_\alpha$ is the longest operator, then there is only the first

2199: term of \eq{sumddc}, therefore there can be no possibility of 

2200: cancellation of the dangerous collapses. But, as we have discussed for

2201: the case of the $SO(6)$ sector, there are non nearest neighbour

2202: interactions which ensure cancellations of the dangerous collapses.

2203: This is shown schematically in \fig{lccan}

2204: \FIGURE{

2205: \label{lccan}

2206: \centerline{\epsfxsize=16.truecm \epsfbox{figure5p.eps}}

2207: \caption{Cancellations in a length conserving process}

2208: }

2209: 

2210: 

2211: 

2212: 

2213: \subsection{Summary of the calculation} 

2214: 

2215: Here we summarize the results of our 

2216: discussion in the previous subsections  

2217: to give a recipe for the evaluation of one loop

2218: corrections to structure constants for the class of operators 

2219: with derivatives we are dealing with.

2220: We will give the recipe to evaluate 

2221: the constants in 

2222: $U( 3{\rm pt}) -\frac{1}{2} U(2{\rm pt} ) $

2223: for the various cases we have discussed.

2224: 

2225: \vspace{.5cm}

2226: \noindent

2227: { \emph{ (i) Case 1. $m>s, \;\; t>n$ }}

2228: 

2229: For this case the renormalization group invariant correction to

2230: structure constant is given by

2231: \bea{sumfin1}

2232: U ^{(i, m)(j,n)}_{(ks)(lt)} ( 3{\rm pt})

2233: &-&\frac{1}{2} U ^{(i, m)(j,n)}_{(ks)(lt)} ( 2{\rm pt}) \\ \nonumber

2234: &=& \frac{1}{2} \left( 

2235: V^{ij}_{kl} {\cal C}_Q  + \delta^i_k\delta^j_l \left( 

2236: {\cal C}_E  

2237: + C_2 + A_2 + C_3 + A_3 + B_1 \right) \right), \\ \nonumber

2238: &=& 

2239: \frac{1}{2} \frac{\lambda}{N}

2240: \left( V^{ij}_{kl} {\cal C}_Q + \delta^i_k\delta^j_l \left( 

2241: {\cal C}_E  +  \frac{h(s)}{m-s} + \frac{h(n)}{m-s} - \frac{2}{(m-s)^2

2242: } \right)\right).

2243: \eea

2244: Here ${\cal C}_Q$ refers to the constant from the quartic diagram,

2245: which can be read out from table 3. of appendix C. ${\cal C}_E$ refers

2246: to the constant from the diagram E, this can be read out from 

2247: the tables 4. and 5. $V^{ij}_{kl}$ stands for the $SO(6)$ structure of

2248: the quartic given by

2249: \be{defvijkl}

2250: V^{ij}_{kl} = 2\delta^j_k\delta^i_l - \delta^i_k\delta^j_l -

2251: \delta^{ij} \delta_{kl} 

2252: \ee

2253: In the last line of \eq{sumfin1} we have substituted the values 

2254: constants of the diagrams  

2255: $C_2+A_2$, $C_3+A_3$ and $B_1$ from \eq{sumcica}, \eq{sumcia3} and 

2256: \eq{d2g1c} respectively. We have also reinstated the t'Hooft coupling

2257: and the $1/N$ factor of the normalization of the structure constant.

2258: 

2259: \vspace{.5cm}

2260: \noindent

2261: { \emph{ (ii) Case 1. $m<s, \;\; t<n$ }}

2262: 

2263: The renormalization group invariant correction to the structure

2264: constant is given by

2265: \bea{sumfin2}

2266: U ^{(i, m)(j,n)}_{(ks)(lt)} ( 3{\rm pt})

2267: &-&\frac{1}{2} U ^{(i, m)(j,n)}_{(ks)(lt)} ( 2{\rm pt}) \\ \nonumber

2268: &=& \frac{1}{2} \left( 

2269: V^{ij}_{kl} {\cal C}_Q  + \delta^i_k\delta^j_l \left( 

2270: {\cal C}_E  

2271: + C_1 + A_1 + C_4 + A_4 + B_2 \right) \right), \\ \nonumber

2272: &=& 

2273: \frac{1}{2} \frac{\lambda}{N} 

2274: \left( V^{ij}_{kl} {\cal C}_Q + \delta^i_k\delta^j_l \left( 

2275: {\cal C}_E  +  \frac{h(t)}{s-m} + \frac{h(m)}{s-m} - \frac{2}{(m-s)^2

2276: } \right)\right).

2277: \eea

2278: Here we have substituted the values of $C_1 +A_1$, $C_4 +A_4$ and

2279: $B_2$ from \eq{cic1f}, \eq{cicia4} and \eq{d2g22}. The rest of the

2280: constants can be read out from the tables in appendix C.

2281: 

2282: \vspace{.5cm}

2283: \noindent

2284: { \emph{ (iii) Case 2. $m=s, \;\; t=n$ }}

2285: 

2286: As we have discussed earlier for this case the constants from all the

2287: collapses cancel in the renormalization group invariant combination 

2288: given in \eq{colrgin}. There are no contributions from gauge bosons on

2289: two external legs, 

2290: thus we are left with constants only from the 

2291: quartic $Q$ and the diagram $E$, therefore we have

2292: \bea{sumfin3}

2293: U ^{(i, m)(j,n)}_{(ks)(lt)} ( 3{\rm pt})

2294: &-&\frac{1}{2} U ^{(i, m)(j,n)}_{(ks)(lt)} ( 2{\rm pt}) \\ \nonumber

2295: &=& \frac{1}{2} \frac{\lambda}{N} \left( 

2296: V^{ij}_{kl} {\cal C}_Q  + \delta^i_k\delta^j_l \left( 

2297: {\cal C}_E  \right) \right).

2298: \eea

2299: Again the constants occurring above can be read out from appendix C. 

2300: As a simple check note that when the number of derivatives are set to

2301: zero, evaluating ${\cal C}_Q$ and ${\cal C}_E$ in the above we obtain 

2302: the anomalous dimension Hamiltonian ${\cal H}$ which determines the 

2303: corrections to structure constants in the $SO(6)$ sector.

2304: 

2305: \subsection{An example}

2306: 

2307: To illustrate the methods developed we compute the one loop

2308: corrections for  

2309: a simple example of three point function.

2310: Consider the following three operators:

2311: \bea{defderop}

2312: O_\alpha &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{N^3} } \sum_{k=0}^n {\;}^nC_k (-1)^k

2313: {\rm Tr}  ( \partial^{n-k} \phi^1 \partial^k \phi^2 \phi^3 ),

2314: \\ \nonumber

2315: O_\beta &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{N^3} } \sum_{k=0}^n {\;}^nC_k (-1)^k

2316: {\rm Tr}  ( \bar\partial^{n-k} \phi^1 \bar\partial^k \phi^2 \phi^4 ),

2317: \\ \nonumber

2318: O_\gamma &=& \frac{1}{N} {\rm Tr} ( \phi^3 \phi^4).

2319: \eea

2320: where $O_\alpha$ is at position $x_1$, $O_\beta$ at $x_3$ and

2321: $O_\gamma$ at $x_4$. 

2322: The tree level correlation function of these operators is given by

2323: \be{treeder}

2324: \langle O_\alpha O_\beta O_\gamma \rangle ^{(0)} =

2325: \frac{1}{N} \sum_{k=0}^n \frac{ ({\;}^n C_k)^2 }{x_{13}^{2(n+1)} x_{14}^2

2326: x_{34}^2} 

2327: \ee

2328: 

2329: Now we compute the one loop corrections to this structure constant. 

2330: All the corrections, the log terms as well as the renormalization

2331: group invariant correction will multiply the 

2332: position dependent prefactor

2333: \be{ppred}

2334: \frac{1}{{x_{13}^{2(n+1)} x_{14}^2 x_{34}^2}},

2335: \ee

2336: which is determined by the tree level dimensions of the three

2337: operators in \eq{defderop}. 

2338: We write below the log corrections and the renormalization group

2339: invariant correction to the structure constant arising from the

2340: various diagrams.

2341: 

2342: \vspace{.5cm}

2343: \noindent

2344: { \emph {Three body terms} }

2345: 

2346: The three body interactions consists of the following diagrams:

2347: \bea{f3body}

2348: & & 2 \sum_{k=0}^n ({\;}^nC_k)^2

2349: \left( Q^{k0}_{k0} + E^{k0}_{k0} + (C_3 + C_4)^{k0}_{k0} (1;34)

2350: \right. \\ \nonumber

2351: &+& \left.

2352: Q^{k0}_{k0} + E^{k0}_{k0} + (C_3 + C_4)^{k0}_{k0} (3;41)

2353: + (C_3 + C_4)^{00}_{00} (4;13)  \right).

2354: \eea

2355: Here we have suppressed the $SO(6)$ indices but kept the indices

2356: which indicate the number of derivatives on the letters involved. 

2357: There are no contributions of $(Q + E) (4;13)$ as the $SO(6)$ 

2358: structure of these diagrams ensures that they cancel each other. 

2359: Evaluating the log terms of these diagrams  using the tables in appendix

2360: C. we find: 

2361: \bea{f3logbody}

2362: \nonumber

2363: & &2 \sum_{k=0}^n   {\;}^n C_k)^2  \left(

2364:  \left[ -\frac{2}{k+1} - h(k) \right]

2365: \log\left( \frac{x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 }{ x_{34}^2 \epsilon^2 } \right)  

2366: + h(k+1) \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^2} {\epsilon^2 } \right)

2367: + \log \left( \frac{x_{14}^2 }{\epsilon^2 } \right) 

2368: \right. \\

2369: \nonumber

2370: &+&

2371: \left[ -\frac{2}{k+1} - h(k) \right] \log 

2372: \left( \frac{x_{13}^2 x_{34}^2 }{ x_{14}^2 \epsilon^2 } \right) 

2373: + h(k+1) \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^2} {\epsilon^2 } \right)

2374: + \log \left( \frac{x_{34}^2 }{\epsilon^2 } \right) \\ 

2375: &+& \left. \log\left( \frac{x_{14}^2}{\epsilon^2 }\right) + 

2376:  \log\left(\frac{x_{34}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right) \right).

2377: \eea

2378: We have written down  each contribution in \eq{f3logbody}, so that

2379: they appear in the order of the diagrams in \eq{f3body}.

2380: To write the renormalization group invariant correction to the 

2381: structure constants we need to find the constant in each of the terms

2382: in \eq{f3body} and perform the metric subtractions. We

2383: have already shown that the  constants form all the collapses 

2384: in \eq{f3body} cancel. Therefore we have to look for constants of only the 

2385: $Q$'s and $E$'s which are listed in appendix C. The metric

2386: contributions to these are identical and since they are

2387: weighted by $1/2$, the final result is just half of the corresponding

2388: values listed in appendix C. Writing down these for each of the terms

2389: in \eq{f3body} we get

2390: \be{conresu}

2391: {\cal K} = - 4\sum_{k=0}^n ({\;}^nC_k)^2  

2392: \times\left( 

2393: \sum_{l=0}^{k} 

2394:  (-1)^l {\;}^kC_l \frac{l+k+2}{(l+1)^2}  h(l+1) \right). 

2395: \ee

2396: Note that if the number of derivatives $n$ is set to zero in the above

2397: expression we obtain $-8$ which agrees with \eq{strcon}.

2398: 

2399: 

2400: \vspace{.5cm}

2401: \noindent

2402: {\emph{ Two body terms}}

2403: 

2404: As we have discussed before, because of the slicing argument one needs

2405: to evaluate only the  terms proportional to the 

2406: logarithm in the two body diagrams. The diagrams

2407: are given by

2408: \bea{d3blog}

2409: & \sum_{k, k' =0}^n {\;}^nC_k {\;}^nC_k' 

2410: (-1)^{k+k'} 

2411:  \left( Q + E  \right. \\ \nonumber   

2412: &+ \left. C_1 + C_2 + C_3 + C_4 + A_1 + A_2 + A_3 + A_4

2413: \right)^{k n-k}_{k' n-k'} ( 1;3 ) \\ \nonumber

2414: &+ \sum_{k=0}^n ({\;}^n C_k )^2 

2415:  \left( S_k( 1; 3) + S_{n-k} (1;3) + S_0(1;4) + S_0(3;4) \right),

2416: \eea

2417: where $S_k$ refers to the self energy contribution of a scalar with 

2418: $k$ derivatives. The contribution of these 

2419: self energy diagrams can be read out from

2420: \cite{Beisert:2003jj}.

2421: Evaluating the  terms proportional to the logarithm 

2422: of these diagrams we obtain

2423: \bea{and3blog}

2424: & &\sum_{k=0}^n ({\;}^nC_k)^2 \left(

2425: ( -2 h(k)  - \frac{2}{n+1} ) 

2426: \log\left( \frac{x_{13}^4}{ \epsilon^4 } \right)

2427: +   4 h(k+1)   \log\left( \frac{x_{13}^2}{\epsilon^2}

2428: \right) \right) \\ \nonumber

2429: &+& \sum_{k, k', k\neq k'}^n   

2430: {\;}^nC_k {\;}^n C_{k'} (-1)^{k+k'}

2431: \left(

2432: ( \frac{1}{|k-k'|} - \frac{2}{n+1} ) 

2433: \log\left( \frac{x_{13}^4}{ \epsilon^4 } \right) 

2434: + \frac{2}{|k-k'| } 

2435: \log \left( \frac{x_{13}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right) \right)

2436: \\ \nonumber

2437: &-& 4 \sum_{k=0}^n ({\;}^n C_k)^2  \left[

2438: \left(  h(k) + h(k+1)    +1 \right) 

2439: \log\left( \frac{x_{13}^2 }{\epsilon^2} \right) 

2440: +  \log\left( \frac{x_{14}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right)

2441: +  \log\left( \frac{x_{34}^2}{\epsilon^2} \right).

2442: \right]

2443: \eea

2444: Adding the log terms in \eq{f3logbody} and \eq{and3blog} we obtain

2445: only terms with  $\log( { {x_{13}^2}}/ {\epsilon^2} )$. The rest of the

2446: log terms cancel, this coefficient is given by:

2447: \bea{fdlogan}

2448: & &-4\sum_{k=0}^n ({\;}^nC_k)^2 

2449: \left(

2450:  \frac{1}{ k+1}  +2 h(k)  +1 \right) 

2451:  - 4 \delta_{n,0} 

2452:  \\ \nonumber

2453: &+& \sum_{k, k', k\neq k' }^n {\;}^nC_k {\;}^n C_{k'} (-1)^{k+k'} \left( 

2454: \frac{4}{|k-k'|} \right).

2455: \eea

2456: As a simple check, note that on setting $n=0$ the above expression

2457: reduces to $-12$ which was obtained in \eq{allscalcor}.

2458: 

2459: \section{Conclusions}

2460: 

2461: We have evaluated one loop corrections to the structure constants in

2462: planar ${\cal N}=4$ Yang-Mills for two classes of operators, the 

2463: $SO(6)$ sector and for operators with derivatives in 

2464: one holomorphic direction. The summary of the results which enables

2465: one to evaluate these structure constants for any operator in these

2466: sectors are given in section 4.4. For the $SO(6)$  

2467: scalar sector we find that the one loop

2468: anomalous dimension Hamiltonian determines the corrections to the

2469: structure constants. The reasons for this are: ${\cal N}=4$

2470: supersymmetry which relates the quartic coupling of scalars to the 

2471: gauge coupling, the $SO(6)$ spin dependent term factorizes in the 

2472: calculations and contributions of all the collapsed diagrams

2473: canceled. 

2474: For the sector with derivatives we noticed that essentially the

2475: structure  constants are determined by a suitable combination of derivatives

2476: acting on the fundamental tree function $\phi(r,s)$. 

2477: Conformal invariance in the calculation was ensured by a linear

2478: inhomogeneous partial differential equation satisfied by $\phi(r,s)$

2479: which enabled us to combine the diagrams violating conformal

2480: invariance to restore it. The methods developed in this paper

2481: can be generalized to the all classes of operators in ${\cal N}=4$

2482: Yang-Mills.

2483: 

2484: The fact that in the $SO(6)$ sector the one loop corrections to

2485: the structure constants are determined by the 

2486: one loop anomalous dimension

2487: Hamiltonian indicates the possibility that 

2488: in a string bit theory the one loop corrected structure constants

2489: can be determined by the delta function overlap with

2490: modification in the propagation

2491: of the bits taken into account.

2492: The immediate suggestion would be that it is the anomalous dimension 

2493: Hamiltonian which determines the propagation of the bits. 

2494: In \cite{adgn:2005} we address this question in detail.

2495: 

2496: \acknowledgments

2497: 

2498: J.R.D would like to thank the 

2499: discussions and  hospitality at CERN;

2500: Harish Chandra Research Institute,

2501: Allahabad; Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai  and 

2502: Tata Institute of Fundamental research, Mumbai; during the course of

2503: this project. We thank the organizers of the 

2504: Indian strings meeting, 2004 at  Khajuraho for the opportunity to present

2505: this work. We would like to thank Avinash Dhar in particular for

2506: stimulating discussions and criticisms

2507: The work of the authors is partially supported by the RTN European

2508: program: MRTN-CT-2004-503369.

2509: 

2510: \appendix

2511: 

2512: \section{Notations}

2513: 

2514: The action of ${\cal N}=4$

2515: supersymmetric Yang-Mills is best thought of as dimensional reduced

2516: maximal supersymmetric Yang-Mills from 10 dimensions. The action is

2517: given by

2518: \bea{ymaction}

2519: S = \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2 } \int

2520: d^4 x {\rm Tr} \left( 

2521: \frac{1}{4} F_{\mu\nu}^{\mu\nu} + 

2522: \frac{1}{2} D_\mu \phi^i D^\mu \phi^i

2523: -\frac{g^2 }{4} [\phi^i, \phi^j][\phi^i, \phi^j ]  

2524: \right. \\ \nonumber

2525: \left. + \frac{1}{2} \bar{\psi} \Gamma_\mu D^\mu \psi 

2526: - g\frac{i}{2} \bar{\psi} \Gamma_i[\phi^i,\psi] \right),

2527: \eea

2528: where $A_\mu$ with  $\mu = 1, \ldots, 4$  is the gauge field in 

2529: 4 dimensions, $\psi$ is a 16 component Majorana-Weyl spinor obtained

2530: from the Majorana-Weyl spinor in 10 dimensions. $\phi^i$, $i =1,\ldots

2531: 6$ are scalars which transform as a vector under the R-symmetry group

2532: $SO(6)$. $(\Gamma_\mu, \Gamma_i)$ are the ten-dimensional Dirac

2533: matrices in the Majorana-Weyl representation.

2534: All the fields transform in the adjoint representation of 

2535: the gauge group $U(N)$, to be specific they are $N\times N$ matrices

2536: which can be expanded in terms of the generators $T^a$ of the gauge 

2537: group as

2538: \be{gexpfie}

2539: \phi^i = \sum_{a=0}^{N^2 -1} \phi^{i (a)} T^a, \;\;\;\;

2540: A_\mu = \sum_{a=0}^{N^2 -1} A_\mu^{ (a)} T^a, \;\;\;\;

2541: \psi = \sum_{a=0}^{N^2 -1} \psi^{ (a)} T^a. 

2542: \ee

2543: The generators $T^a$ satisfy

2544: \be{condgen}

2545: {\rm Tr}(T^a T^b) = \delta^{ab}, 

2546: \;\;\;\;\; \sum_{a=0}^{N^2-1}

2547: (T^a)^\alpha_\beta (T^a)^\gamma_\delta = \delta^\alpha_\delta

2548: \delta^\gamma_\beta.

2549: \ee

2550: In \eq{ymaction} $g^2 = g_{YM}^2 /2(2\pi)^2$, 

2551: \footnote{Our

2552: convention differs from 

2553: \cite{Beisert:2002bb} in that we have scaled the fields by

2554: $g_{YM}/2\pi\sqrt{2} $}

2555: the covariant derivatives are given by $D_\mu = \partial_\mu + i

2556: g [A_\mu, \;\cdot\;] $, and $F_{\mu\nu} = \partial_\mu A_\nu

2557: -\partial_\nu A_\mu + i g^2 [A_\mu , A_\nu]$. All our

2558: calculations are done in the Feynman gauge. 

2559: Using the normalization of the action given in \eq{ymaction}, the 

2560: tree level two point functions 

2561: of the scalar and the vector  are given by

2562: \bea{tree2ptact}

2563: \langle \phi^{i(a)}(x_1) \phi^{j(b)} (x_2)\rangle &=&

2564: \frac{\delta^{ij}

2565: \delta^{ab}}

2566: {(x_1 -x_2)^2}, \\ \nonumber

2567: \langle A_\mu^{(a)}(x_1) A_\nu^{(b)}(x_2) \rangle &=&

2568: \frac{\delta_{\mu\nu}

2569: \delta^{ab}}

2570: {(x_1 -x_2)^2}. 

2571: \eea

2572: 

2573: \section{Properties of the fundamental tree function}

2574: 

2575: In this appendix we will prove various properties of the

2576: fundamental tree function $\phi(r,s)$ defined in \eq{defiphi} which

2577: are used at various instances in the paper.

2578: To obtain a series expansion of $\phi(r,s)$ and to show that it

2579: satisfies the partial differential equation \eq{deaux} 

2580: we will use is its integral

2581: representation shown in \cite{Usyukina:1992jd} 

2582: \be{intrephi}

2583: \phi(r,s)=\int_0^1 \frac{-\log{(r/s)}-2\log \xi}{s-\xi (r+s-1)+

2584: \xi^2 r }~d\xi .

2585: \ee

2586: From this integral representation we can find a series expansion of

2587: $\phi(r,s)$ around $r=0,s=1$, by 

2588: expanding the denominator in \eq{intrephi} as

2589: \be{denexp}

2590: \frac{1}{s-\xi (r+s-1)+ \xi^2 r }=\sum_{k,l=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{k+l}

2591: \xi^k (\xi-1)^{k+l} \frac{(k+l)!}{k!~l!}r^k (1-s)^l.

2592: \ee

2593: To perform the series expansion

2594: we need the following integrals

2595: \bea{useinte}

2596: \int_0^1 \xi^k (\xi-1)^{k+l}~ d \xi &=& (-1)^{k+l} \frac{k!

2597: (k+l)!}{(2k+l+1)!},\\ \nonumber

2598: \int_0^1 \xi^k (\xi-1)^{k+l}\log \xi ~ d \xi &=& (-1)^{k+l} \frac{k!

2599: (k+l)!}{(2k+l+1)!}\left(h(k)-h(2k+l+1)\right),

2600: \eea

2601: where $h(n)$ is the harmonic number defined in \eq{defharmo}. Substituting

2602: \eq{useinte} and \eq{denexp} in \eq{intrephi} we obtain

2603: \begin{eqnarray}

2604: \phi(r,s) &=& -\sum_{k,l=0}^{\infty} \frac{(k+l)!^2}{l! (2k+l+1)!}r^k

2605: (1-s)^l \log{(r/s)}\\ \nonumber

2606: &+&2\sum_{k,l=0}^{\infty} \frac{(k+l)!^2}{l!

2607: (2k+l+1)!}\left(h(2k+l+1)-h(k)\right)r^k (1-s)^l.

2608: \end{eqnarray}

2609: Through out the paper we need the expansion of $\phi(r,s)$ at $r=0$,

2610: this is given by

2611: \bea{usexp}

2612: \phi(0,s) &=& - \sum_{l=0}^\infty \frac{1}{l+1} ( 1-s)^l \ln (\frac{r}{s}

2613: ) + 2 \sum_{l=0}^\infty h(l+1) \frac{1}{l+1} (1-s)^l , \\ \nonumber

2614: & =& - \sum_{l=0}^\infty \frac{1}{l+1} (1-s)^l  \ln(r) + 2

2615: \frac{(1-s)^l}{(l+1)^2}

2616: \eea

2617: 

2618: Now we show that 

2619: $\phi(r,s)$ satisfies the following inhomogeneous linear partial

2620: differential equations which ensures conformal

2621: invariance in the three point function calculations of the paper.

2622: \bea{de}

2623: \phi(r,s)+(s+r-1)\partial_s \phi(r,s)+2 r \partial_r

2624: \phi(r,s)=-\frac{\log{r}}{s},\\

2625: \phi(r,s)+(s+r-1)\partial_r \phi(r,s)+2 s \partial_s

2626: \phi(r,s)=-\frac{\log{s}}{r}.

2627: \eea

2628: To, simplify matters, we  introduce  the notation

2629: \be{defnota}

2630: D(r,s,\xi)=s-\xi(r+s-1)+\xi^2 r, 

2631: \ee

2632: then substituting the integral representation 

2633: \eq{intrephi} of $\phi(r,s)$ in 

2634: the first equation of \eq{de} we obtain 

2635: \begin{eqnarray}

2636: & &(1+(s+r-1)\partial_s +2 r

2637: \partial_r)\phi(r,s) = \\ \nonumber

2638: & &

2639: \int^1_0 d\xi \frac{1}{D(r,s,\xi)}

2640: \left(-\log{r/s}-2\log{\xi}+(s+r-1)/s-2\right) 

2641: \\ \nonumber

2642: &+&\int_0^1 d\xi

2643: \frac{\log{r/s}+2\log{\xi}}{(D(r,s,\xi))^2}((s+r-1)\partial_s

2644: D(r,s,\xi)+2r \partial_r D(r,s,\xi)) .

2645: \end{eqnarray}

2646: We can integrate the expression on the second line of the above

2647: equation by parts by

2648: using the following identity

2649: \begin{equation}

2650: (s+r-1)\partial_s D(r,s,\xi)+2r \partial_r

2651: D(r,s,\xi)=-(1-\xi)\partial_\xi D(r,s,\xi).

2652: \end{equation}

2653: which results in 

2654: \begin{eqnarray}

2655: \label{splitdiv}

2656: (1+(s+r-1)\partial_s +2 r

2657: \partial_r)\phi(r,s)&=& \left. \frac{(1-\xi)(\log{r/s}+2\log{\xi}))}{D(r,s,\xi)}

2658: \right|^1_\epsilon+ \nonumber\\

2659: &+&\int_\epsilon^1 d\xi \frac{(s+r-1)/s-2/\xi)}{D(r,s,\xi)}

2660: \end{eqnarray}

2661: Note that we have introduced and parameter $\epsilon$ since $\log \xi$

2662: in the first term is divergent at the lower limit. Similarly there is 

2663: a log divergence in the second term of the above equation.

2664: We now show that these divergences cancel each other. 

2665: Let us write the term contributing to the divergence in the second

2666: term of \eq{splitdiv} as

2667: \begin{eqnarray}

2668: \int_\epsilon^1 d\xi \frac{-2/\xi}{D(r,s,\xi)}=\int^1_\epsilon d\xi

2669: \frac{-2/s}{\xi}+\int^1_\epsilon d\xi \frac{-2(r+s-1 -r

2670: \xi)/s}{D(r,s,\xi)}

2671: \end{eqnarray}

2672: Substituting this in \eq{splitdiv} we obtain

2673: \begin{eqnarray}

2674: (1+(s+r-1)\partial_s +2 r

2675: \partial_r)\phi(r,s)&=&

2676: \left. \frac{\log{r/s}-\xi(\log{r/s}+2\log{\xi})}{D(r,s,\xi)}\right|^1_0

2677: \nonumber\\

2678: &+&\int^1_0\frac{(-(r+s-1)+2r \xi)/s}{D(r,s,\xi)},\\ \nonumber

2679: &=&-\left. \frac{\log{r/s}}{s}+\frac{\log{D(r,s,\xi)}}{s}\right|^1_0,

2680: \\ \nonumber

2681: &=&-\frac{\log{r}}{s}.

2682: \end{eqnarray}

2683: Using similar manipulations one can show that $\phi(r,s)$ also

2684: satisfies the second partial differential equation in \eq{de}.

2685: 

2686: We also use the fact that $\phi(r,s)$ is a symmetric function in $r$

2687: and $s$. This is best shown using the defining expression of 

2688: $\phi(r,s)$

2689: \be{definephi}

2690: \phi(r,s) = \frac{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2}{\pi^2} \int 

2691: d^4 u \frac{1}

2692: { (x_1 -u)^2  (x_2 -u)^2  (x_3 -u)^2 (x_4 -u)^2 },

2693: \ee

2694: where $r$ and $s$ are given by

2695: \be{apdefrs}

2696: r = \frac{x_{12}^2 x_{34}^2}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 } , \;\;\;\;\;\;

2697: s = \frac{x_{14}^2 x_{23}^2}{x_{13}^2 x_{24}^2 }. 

2698: \ee

2699: From the definition of $r$ and $s$ above we see that interchange of

2700: $x_1$ and $x_3$ brings about an interchange of $r$ and $s$. 

2701: But the definition \eq{definephi} is easily seen to be invariant under

2702: $x_1$ to $x_3$.  Therefore, we conclude $\phi(r,s)$ is a symmetric

2703: function of $r$ and $s$. $\phi(r,s)$ also satisfies the property

2704: \be{hydensym}

2705: \phi(r,s)=\frac{1}{r}

2706: \phi(1/r,s/r).

2707: \ee

2708: This can be shown from the fact $r \leftrightarrow 1/r$ and 

2709: $s\leftrightarrow s/r$ when $x_2\leftrightarrow x_3$. 

2710: Then it is easy to see that the symmetry \eq{hydensym} is manifest in

2711: \eq{definephi}. Though these symmetry properties of $\phi(r,s)$ are

2712: not manifest in its integral representation given in \eq{intrephi}, 

2713: we have seen that through a series of manipulations it is possible

2714: to derive these symmetry properties from \eq{intrephi}.

2715: 

2716: 

2717: 

2718: 

2719: 

2720: 

2721: 

2722: 

2723: \newpage

2724: 

2725: 

2726: 

2727: 

2728: 

2729: 

2730: 

2731: 

2732: \section{Tables}

2733: 

2734: In the table below we given the values of the coefficient of 

2735: the logarithm  ${\cal A}_Q$ and the constant ${\cal C}_Q$ of the 

2736: quartic $Q$ in \eq{genquart}.

2737: 

2738: \begin{center}

2739: \begin{tabular}{l | l | l | l| l| l}

2740: $m$ & $n$ & $s$ & $t$ & ${\cal A}$  & ${\cal C}$ \\

2741: \hline

2742: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2743: $m$ & $0$ & $m$ & 0& $\frac{1}{m+1}$  & 

2744: $  \sum_{l=0}^m \frac{2h(l+1)}{l+1} (-1)^l {\;} ^m C_l$

2745: \\ 

2746: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2747: \hline

2748: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2749: $m$ & $0$ & $0$ & $m$ & $\frac{1}{m+1}$ & $ \frac{2}{(m+1)^2}$

2750: \\ 

2751: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2752: \hline

2753: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2754:  $0$  & $m$ & $m$ & $0$  & $\frac{1}{m+1}$ &  $  \frac{2}{(m+1)^2

2755:  }$ \\

2756: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2757: \hline

2758: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2759: $m$ & $n$ & $s$ & $0$ & $\frac{1}{s+1}$ & $  

2760: -\frac{h(s)}{ s+1} + {\;}^sC_m 

2761: \sum_{l=0}^m (-1)^{m-l} {\;}^mC_l \left( \frac{ h(s-l)}{s-l+1}  +

2762: \frac{2}{(s-l+1)^2}  \right)$ \\ 

2763: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2764: \hline

2765: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2766: $m$ & $n$ & $0$ & $t$ & $\frac{1}{t+1}$ & $  

2767: -\frac{h(t)}{ t+1} + {\;}^tC_n 

2768: \sum_{l=0}^n (-1)^{n-l} {\;}^nC_l \left( \frac{ h(t-l)}{t-l+1}  +

2769: \frac{2}{(t-l+1)^2}  \right)$ \\ 

2770: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2771: \hline

2772: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2773: $m$ & $0$ & $s$ & $t$ & $\frac{1}{m+1}$ & $  

2774: -\frac{h(m)}{ m+1} + {\;}^mC_s 

2775: \sum_{l=0}^s (-1)^{s-l} {\;}^sC_l \left( \frac{ h(m-l)}{m-l+1}  +

2776: \frac{2}{(m-l+1)^2}  \right)$ \\ 

2777: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2778: \hline

2779: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2780: $0$ & $n$ & $s$ & $t$ & $\frac{1}{m+1}$ & $  

2781: -\frac{h(n)}{ n+1} + {\;}^nC_t 

2782: \sum_{l=0}^t (-1)^{t-l} {\;}^tC_l \left( \frac{ h(n-l)}{n-l+1}  +

2783: \frac{2}{(n-l+1)^2}  \right)$ \\ 

2784: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ \\ 

2785: \hline

2786: \end{tabular}

2787: 

2788: \vspace{.5cm}

2789: {\small{\bf{ Table 3: } } } ${\cal A}_Q$ and ${\cal C}_Q$ for the quartic

2790: $Q$.

2791: \end{center}

2792: 

2793: Note that we have not given the values of ${\cal A}_Q$ and ${\cal C}_Q$

2794: for the most general case of $m, n, s, t$.  

2795: The value of the term proportional to the logarithm ${\cal A}_Q$, is 

2796: always $1/(m+n+1)$ for arbitrary values of $m, n,s, t$. 

2797: The manipulations to extract the constant from 

2798: \eq{genquart} for arbitrary values of $m, n,s,t$ are considerably

2799: more involved, but one

2800: can in principle extract  the value of

2801: ${\cal C}_Q$ using Mathematica routines, 

2802: we have not attempted to do so. 

2803: 

2804: 

2805: \newpage

2806: 

2807: In the table below we list the coefficient of 

2808: the logarithm and the constant for the gauge exchange diagram $E$ 

2809: of \eq{genex}.

2810: \begin{center}

2811: \begin{tabular}{ l | l | l | l| l| l}

2812: $m$ & $n$ & $s$ & $t$ & ${\cal A}_E$ &  ${\cal C}_E$

2813: \\ \hline

2814: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2815: $m$ & $0$ & $m$ & $0$ & $-h(m) - \frac{1}{m+1}$ & 

2816: $ -(m+1) \sum_{l=0}^m 

2817: \frac{2h(l+1)}{(l+1)^2}(-1)^l {\;}^mC_l  $ \\

2818: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2819: \hline

2820: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2821: $0$ & $n$ & $0$ & $n$ & $-h(n) - \frac{1}{n+1}$ & 

2822: $ -(n+1) \sum_{l=0}^n 

2823: \frac{2h(l+1)}{(l+1)^2}(-1)^l {\;}^nC_l  $ \\

2824: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2825: \hline

2826: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2827: $m$ & $0$ & $0$ & $m$ &  $ \frac{1}{m} - \frac{1}{m+1} $ & 

2828: $\frac{2}{m^2} - \frac{2}{(m+1)^2}$  \\

2829: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$  \\ 

2830: \hline

2831: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2832: $0$ & $n$ & $n$ & $0$ & $ \frac{1}{n} - \frac{1}{ n+1} $ & 

2833: $\frac{2}{n^2} - \frac{2}{(n+1)^2}$  \\

2834: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2835: \hline

2836: \end{tabular}

2837: \\

2838: \vspace{.5cm}

2839: {\small{\bf{ Table 4: } } } ${\cal A}_E$ and ${\cal C}_E$ for the gauge

2840: exchange $E$.

2841: \end{center}

2842: 

2843: 

2844: To write down the value of the gauge exchange term $E$ for the other

2845: case, it is more convenient to consider $E+ Q$, where $Q$ is the

2846: corresponding quartic contribution. 

2847: Since the values of the quartic term is known from table 3.

2848: the value of $E$ is also known. Below is the table which lists the

2849: contribution of $E+Q$ for the remaining cases of $m$, $n$, $s$, $t$.

2850: 

2851: \begin{center}

2852: \begin{tabular}{ l | l | l | l| l| l}

2853: $m$ & $n$ & $s$ & $t$ & ${\cal A}$ & ${\cal C}$

2854: \\ \hline

2855: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2856: $m$ & $n$ & $s$ & $0$ & $\frac{1}{s-m}$ &

2857: $ -\frac{h(m)}{s-m} + {\;}^sC_m 

2858: \sum_{l=0}^m (-1)^{m-l}  {\;}^m C_l \frac{1} { (s-l)^2 }$ \\

2859: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2860: \hline

2861: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2862: $m$ & $n$ & $0$ & $t$ &  $\frac{1}{t-n}$ & 

2863: $ -\frac{h(n)}{t-n} + {\;}^tC_n 

2864: \sum_{l=0}^n (-1)^{n-l}  {\;}^n C_l \frac{1} { (t-l)^2 }$ \\

2865: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$\\ 

2866: \hline

2867: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2868: $m$ & $0$ & $s$ & $t$ & $\frac{1}{ m-s}$ & 

2869: $ -\frac{h(s)}{m-s} + {\;}^mC_s 

2870: \sum_{l=0}^s (-1)^{s-l}  {\;}^s C_l \frac{1} { (m-l)^2 }$ \\

2871: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2872: \hline

2873: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2874: $ 0$ & $n$ & $s$ & $t$ & $ \frac{1}{n-t}$ &

2875: $ -\frac{h(t)}{n-t} + {\;}^nC_t 

2876: \sum_{l=0}^s (-1)^{t-l}  {\;}^t C_l \frac{1} { (n-l)^2 }$ \\

2877: $\;$ & $\;$& $\;$& $\;$& $\;$ & $\;$ \\ 

2878: \hline

2879: \end{tabular}

2880: \\

2881: \vspace{.5cm}

2882: {\small{\bf{ Table 4: } } } ${\cal A}$ and ${\cal C}$ for  

2883: $Q+E.$

2884: \end{center}

2885: 

2886: If $m\neq s$

2887: the log term for $Q+E$ for arbitrary values of $m, n, s, t$ is given by

2888: $1/|m-s|$ and for $m=s$ it is given by $- h(m) - h(n)$.

2889: Again we have not listed the values of ${\cal C}$  for arbitrary

2890: values of the derivatives, but they can be in principle be obtained

2891: from \eq{genex} using routines in Mathematica. 

2892: 

2893: 

2894: 

2895: 

2896: 

2897: 

2898: 

2899: 

2900: \bibliographystyle{utphys}

2901: \bibliography{3pt}

2902: 

2903: \end{document}

2904: 

2905: