1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

2: \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,enumerate,epsfig,caption2}

3: 

4: \tolerance=3000

5: \mathsurround=2pt

6: 

7: % This is to redefine the page size.

8: \setlength{\textwidth}{480pt}

9: \setlength{\textheight}{605pt}

10: \setlength{\topmargin}{15pt}

11: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-10pt}

12: \setlength{\evensidemargin}{0pt}

13: \setlength{\headheight}{0pt}

14: \setlength{\headsep}{0pt}

15: \setlength{\footnotesep}{10pt}

16: \setlength{\parskip}{9pt}

17: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}

18: \addtolength{\footskip}{10pt}

19: 

20: % This defines my itemize environment

21: \renewenvironment{itemize}

22:    {\begin{list}%

23:       {}%

24:       {\setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%

25:        \setlength{\partopsep}{0pt}%

26:        \setlength{\itemsep}{-4pt}%

27:        \setlength{\labelsep}{5pt}%

28:        \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%

29:       }%

30:    }%

31:    {\end{list}}%

32: 

33: % This is to change the style of section, sub-section and

34: % sub-sub-section headings.

35: \makeatletter

36: \renewcommand{\section}{\setcounter{equation}{0}\@startsection

37:   {section}%

38:   {1}%

39:   {0pt}%

40:   {-1\baselineskip}%

41:   {0.4\baselineskip}%

42:   {\bfseries\large}}%

43: \renewcommand{\subsection}{\@startsection

44:   {subsection}%

45:   {2}%

46:   {0pt}%

47:   {-0.75\baselineskip}%

48:   {0.2\baselineskip}%

49:   {\bfseries}}%

50: \renewcommand{\subsubsection}{\@startsection

51:   {subsubsection}%

52:   {3}%

53:   {0pt}%

54:   {-0.5\baselineskip}%

55:   {0.1\baselineskip}%

56:   {\sc}}%

57: \makeatother

58: 

59: % This is to number equations accordingly to section.

60: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}

61: 

62: %To allow figures filling 95% of page

63: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0.05}

64: 

65: %To use captions in non floating figures

66: \makeatletter

67:  \newcommand\figcaption{\def\@captype{figure}\caption}

68: \makeatother

69: 

70: 

71: % Some definitions

72: 

73: % Caligraphic letters

74: \def\cD{{\cal D}}

75: \def\cR{{\cal R}}

76: \def\cA{{\cal A}}

77: \def\cJ{{\cal J}}

78: \def\cO{{\cal O}}

79: \def\cQ{{\cal Q}}

80: \def\cX{{\cal X}}

81: \def\ren{{\cal R}}

82: 

83: %Roman letters

84: \def\A{{\rm A}}

85: \def\B{{\rm B}}

86: \def\C{{\rm C}}

87: \def\nn{{\rm n}}

88: \def\E{{\rm E}}

89: \def\F{{\rm F}}

90: \def\rP{{\rm P}}

91: \def\T{{\rm T}}

92: \def\traza{{\rm Tr}}

93: \def\U{{\rm U}}

94: 

95: \def\W{{\rm W}}

96: \def\Z{{\rm Z}}

97: 

98: % Greek letters

99: 

100: \def\a{\alpha}

101: \def\b{\beta}

102: \def\d{\delta}

103: \def\De{\Delta}

104: \def\ga{\gamma}

105: \def\gm{\Gamma}

106: \def\e{\eta}

107: \def\la{\lambda}

108: \def\La{\Lambda}

109: \def\ka{\kappa}

110: \def\m{\mu}

111: \def\n{\nu}

112: \def\r{\rho}

113: \def\s{\sigma}

114: \def\t{\tau}

115: \def\th{\theta}

116: \def\eps{\epsilon}

117: \def\ee{\varepsilon}

118: \def\om{\omega}

119: \def\Om{\Omega}

120: \def\oom{\bar\omega}

121: \def\uom{\underline\omega}

122: 

123: 

124: % slashes

125: 

126: \def\aslash{{a\mkern-9mu/}}

127: \def\vslash{{v\mkern-9mu/}}

128: \def\baslash{\bar{a\mkern-9mu/}}

129: \def\Aslash{{A\mkern-11mu/}}

130: \def\Vslash{{V\mkern-11mu/}}

131: \def\Aslashminus{{A\mkern-11mu/}^{(f)}_{-}}

132: \def\Aslashplus{{A\mkern-11mu/}^{(f')}_{+}}

133: \def\bAslash{{{\bar A}\mkern-10mu/}}

134: \def\Bslash{{\B\mkern-12mu/}}

135: \def\Dcal{{\mathfrak{D}}}

136: \def\Dirac{{D\mkern-12mu/}}

137: \def\bDirac{\bar{D\mkern-11mu/}}

138: \def\prslash{{\partial\mkern-9mu/}}

139: \def\pslash{{p\mkern-8mu/}{\!}}

140: \def\poslash{{p\mkern-8mu/}_1{\!}}

141: \def\ptwslash{{p\mkern-8mu/}_2{\!}}

142: \def\pthslash{{p\mkern-8mu/}_3{\!}}

143: \def\prslash{{\partial\mkern-9mu/}}    %%_standard_Dirac_operator

144: \def\qslash{{q\mkern-8mu/}{\!}}

145: \def\pislash{{p\mkern-8mu/}_i{\!}}

146: \def\Rslash{{R\mkern-11mu/}}

147: \def\Sslash{{S\mkern-11mu/}}

148: \def\pslash  {{p\mkern-7mu/}}

149: \def\rslash  {{r\mkern-7mu/}}

150: \def\sslash  {{s\mkern-7mu/}}

151: \def\xslash  {{x\mkern-7mu/}}

152: \def\yslash  {{y\mkern-7mu/}}

153: \def\zslash  {{z\mkern-7mu/}}

154: 

155: 

156: %momenta and indices

157: 

158: \def\pone{p_1}

159: \def\ptwo{p_2}

160: \def\pthree{p_3}

161: \def\muo{\mu_1}

162: \def\mutw{\mu_2}

163: \def\muth{\mu_3}

164: \def\mufo{\mu_4}

165: \def\bp{\text{\tiny{BPST}}}

166: \def\id{{\rm{I}\!\rm{I}}}

167:  \def\tr{\text{Tr}}

168:  \def\lin{{\text{lin}}}

169: % tildes and hats

170: 

171: \def\pt{\tilde p}

172: 

173: % integrals

174: 

175: \def\idp{\int\!\! \frac{d^4\!p}{(2\pi)^4}}

176: \def\idpn{\int\!\! \frac{d^{2n}\!p}{(2\pi)^{2n}}}

177: \def\idq{\int\!\! \frac{d^4\!q}{(2\pi)^4} \,\,}

178: \def\idqn{\int\!\! \frac{d^{2n}\!q}{(2\pi)^{2n}}}

179: \def\idpo{\int\!\! \frac{d^{2\omega}\!p}{(2\pi)^{2\omega}}}

180: \def\idpoi{\int\!\! \frac{d^{2\omega}\!p_i}{(2\pi)^{2\omega}}}

181: \def\idqo{\int\!\! \frac{d^{2\omega}\!q}{(2\pi)^{2\omega}}}

182: \def\id3x{\int\!\! d^3\!\vec{x}}

183: \def\idx{\int\!\! d^4\!x}

184: \def\iDx{\int\!\! d^D\!x}

185: \def\idxn{\int\!\! d^{2n}\!x}

186: \def\idxo{\int\!\! d^{2\omega}\!x}

187: 

188: %Miscellaneous

189: \def\dotAstar{{\overset{~\,\circ}{\cal A}_\star}}

190: \def\dotAthree{\overset{~\,\circ}{\cal A}_{\star,3}}

191: \def\dotAfour{\overset{~\,\circ}{\cal A}_{\star,4}}

192: \def\dotAfive{\overset{~\,\circ}{\cal A}_{\star,5}}

193: \def\dotAsix{\overset{~\,\circ}{\cal A}_{\star,6}}

194: \def\stardot{\overset{\circ}{\star}}

195: 

196: \def\ot{\otimes}

197: \def\ds{\displaystyle}

198: \def\scs{\scriptstyle}

199: \def\RR{{\rm I\!\!\, R}}

200: \def\MM{{\rm I\!\!\, M}}

201: \def\unit{{\rm 1\! I}}

202: \def\bracl{ [\!\!\, [}

203: \def\bracr{ ]\!\!\, ]}

204: \def\igual{{\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!}}

205: \def\rig>{\right>}

206: % additional defs

207: \newcommand{\defpar}{t}

208: \newcommand{\HA}{{\cal A}_\star^{(\defpar\theta)}}

209: \newcommand{\HB}[1]{\cB_{#1}}

210: \newcommand{\lieg}{\mathfrak{g}}

211: \newcommand{\cB}{{\cal B}}

212: \newcommand{\cF}{{\cal F}}

213: \newcommand{\cP}{{\cal P}}

214: \newcommand{\cU}{{\cal U}}

215: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}

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

217: \newcommand{\beann}{\begin{eqnarray*}}

218: \newcommand{\eeann}{\end{eqnarray*}}

219: \newcommand{\ba}{\begin{array}}

220: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{array}}

221: \newcommand{\5}{\bar }

222: \newcommand{\6}{\partial }

223: \newcommand{\7}{\hat }

224: \newcommand{\4}{\tilde }

225: \newcommand{\9}[2]{{#1}{}^{{(#2)}}}

226: \newcommand{\sfrac}[2]{\mbox{$\frac{{#1}}{{#2}}$}\,}

227: \newcommand{\f}[3]{{f_{#1#2}}^{#3}}

228: \newcommand{\Ii}{{{\mathrm i}}}

229: \newcommand{\ep}{\epsilon}

230: \newcommand{\vep}{\varepsilon}

231: \newcommand{\Tr}{\mathbf{Tr}}

232: \newcommand{\ST}{\star}

233: \newcommand{\gh}{\mathrm{gh}}

234: \newcommand{\Dim}{\mathrm{dim}}

235: \newcommand{\LA}{{\5a}}

236: \newcommand{\LB}{{\5b}}

237: 

238: \newcommand{\LC}{{\5c}}

239: 

240: 

241: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

242: %Greek Letters

243: \def\psib{\overline{\psi}}

244: \def\Psib{\bar{\Psi}}

245: \def\g5{\gamma_{5}}

246: 

247: %Slashes & others

248: \def\Dp{{\mathcal{D}\mkern-12mu/}\,}

249: \def\Rs{{R\mkern-11mu/}\,}

250: \def\prslash {{\partial\mkern-9mu/}}  %operador Dirac

251: \def\pslash  {{p\mkern-7mu/}}

252: \def\Dcal{{\mathfrak{D}}}

253: \def\RR{{\rm I}\!{\rm R}}

254: 

255: %integrals

256: \def\idx3{\int\! d^{3}\!\vec{x}\,}

257: \def\idx{\int\! d^{4}\!x\,}

258: \def\idy{\int\! d^{4}\!y\,}

259: \def\iDp{\int\! \frac{d^{D}\!p}{(2\pi)^{D}} \,\,}

260: \def\iDq{\int\! \frac{d^{4}\!q}{(2\pi)^{D}} \,\,}

261: \def\idpsi{\int\!d\psi d\psib \,\,}

262: 

263: %%%%%TAMARIT MACROS%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

264: 

265: 

266: %Greek Letters

267:  \def\Psib{\bar{\Psi}}

268: 

269: 

270:  %Slashes & others

271:  \def\Dirac{{D\mkern-12mu/}\,}

272:  \def\Dp{{\mathcal{D}\mkern-12mu/}\,}

273:  \def\Rs{{R\mkern-11mu/}\,}

274:  \def\prslash {{\partial\mkern-9mu/}}  %operador Dirac

275:  \def\pslash  {{p\mkern-7mu/}}

276: \def\qslash  {{q\mkern-7mu/}}

277:  \def\Dcal{{\mathfrak{D}}}

278:  \def\RR{{\rm I}\!{\rm R}}

279:  \def\hg {\hat{g}} %%terminos evanescentes

280:  \def\hp {\hat{p}}

281:  \def\hq {\hat{q}} \def\hgamma {\hat{\gamma}}

282:  \def\hpslash{\hat{\pslash}}

283:  \def\Di {{\partial}_{\mu_1}}%%abreviaturas derivadas parciales

284:  \def\Dii {{\partial}_{\mu_2}}

285: \def\Diii {{\partial}_{\mu_3}}

286:  \def\Div {{\partial}_{\mu_4}}

287:  \def\Ds {{\partial}_{\sigma}}

288:  \def\Dr {{\partial}_{\rho}}

289:  \def\Da {{\partial}_{\alpha}}

290:  \def\Db {{\partial}_{\beta}}

291:  \def\Dm {{\partial}_{\mu}}

292:  \def\Dn {{\partial}_{\nu}}

293:  \def\Di {{\partial}_{\mu_1}}%%abreviaturas derivadas parciales

294:  \def\Dcii {{\Dcal}_{\mu_2}}

295:  \def\Dciii {{\Dcal}_{\mu_3}}

296:  \def\Dciv {{\Dcal}_{\mu_4}}

297:  \def\Dcs {{\Dcal}_{\sigma}}

298:  \def\Dcr {{\Dcal}_{\rho}}

299:  \def\Dca {{\Dcal}_{\alpha}}

300:  \def\Dcb {{\Dcal}_{\beta}}

301:  \def\Dcm {{\Dcal}_{\mu}}

302:  \def\Dcn {{\Dcal}_{\nu}}

303:  \def\ai {a_{\mu_1}}%%abreviaturas campos gauge $a_\mu$

304:  \def\aii {a_{\mu_2}}

305:  \def\aiii {a_{\mu_3}}

306:  \def\aiv {a_{\mu_4}}

307:  \def\as {a_{\sigma}}

308:  \def\ar {a_{\rho}}

309:  \def\aa {a_{\alpha}}

310:  \def\ab {a_{\beta}}

311:  \def\am {a_{\mu}}

312:  \def\an {a_{\nu}}

313:  \def\Ai {A_{\mu_1}}

314:  \def\Aii {A_{\mu_2}}

315:  \def\Aiii {A_{\mu_3}}

316:  \def\Aiv {A_{\mu_4}}

317:  \def\As {A_{\sigma}}

318:  \def\ar {a_{\rho}}

319:  \def\g {\gamma}

320:  \def\qi {{q_1}}%abreviaturas momentos patas diagramas

321:  \def\qii {{q_2}}

322: \def\qiii {{q_3}}

323:  \def\qiv {{q_4}}

324:  \def\mi {{\mu_1}}

325: \def\mii {{\mu_2}}

326:  \def\miii {{\mu_3}}

327: \def\miv {{\mu_4}}

328:  \def\a {\alpha}

329: \def\b {\beta}

330: \def\r {\rho}

331:  \def\s {\sigma}

332: \def\Qc{{\mathcal{Q}}}

333: \def\Rc{{\mathcal{R}}}

334: \def\Sc{{\mathcal{S}}}

335: \def\RR{{\rm I}\!{\rm R}}

336: 

337: 

338:  \def\Tr{\text{Tr}}

339: \def\tr{\text{tr}}

340: 

341: 

342: %---------------------------------------------------- Title-page

343: 

344: 

345: \begin{document}

346: \begin{titlepage}

347: \rightline{FTI/UCM 90-2006} \vglue 45pt

348: 

349: \begin{center}

350: 

351: {\Large \bf The noncommutative $U(1)$ Higgs-Kibble model in the enveloping-algebra formalism and its renormalizability.}\\

352: \vskip 1.2 true cm {\rm C.P. Mart\'{\i}n}\footnote{E-mail:

353: carmelo@elbereth.fis.ucm.es},

354: D. S\'anchez-Ruiz\footnote{E-mail: domingo@toboso.fis.ucm.es}

355: and  C. Tamarit\footnote{E-mail: ctamarit@fis.ucm.es}

356: \vskip 0.3 true cm {\it Departamento de F\'{\i}sica Te\'orica I,

357: Facultad de Ciencias F\'{\i}sicas\\

358: Universidad Complutense de Madrid,

359:  28040 Madrid, Spain}\\

360: \vskip 0.75 true cm

361: 

362: 

363: 

364: \vskip 0.25 true cm

365: 

366: {\leftskip=50pt \rightskip=50pt \noindent We discuss the

367: renormalizability of the  noncommutative $U(1)$ Higgs-Kibble model

368: formulated within the enveloping-algebra approach. We consider

369: both the phase of the model with unbroken gauge symmetry and  the

370: phase with spontaneously broken gauge symmetry. We show that against all

371: odds the gauge sector of the model is always one-loop

372: renormalizable at first order in $\theta^{\m\n}$, perhaps, hinting

373: at the existence of a new symmetry of the gauge sector of the

374: model. However,  we also show that the matter sector of the model

375: is non-renormalizable whatever the phase.

376: 

377: 

378: 

379: 

380: 

381: 

382: 

383: 

384: \par }

385: \end{center}

386: 

387: \vspace{20pt} \noindent

388: {\em PACS:} 11.10.Gh, 11.10.Nx, 11.15.-q.\\

389: {\em Keywords:} Renormalization, Regularization and Renormalons, Spontaneous symmetry breaking, Non-commutative geometry. \vfill

390: \end{titlepage}

391: 

392: 

393: 

394: 

395: 

396: 

397: %----------------------------------------------------- Paper

398: 

399: \setcounter{page}{2}

400: %

401: 

402: 

403: \section{Introduction}

404: 

405: At present, there is only one available framework to formulate

406: gauge theories in noncommutative space-time for an arbitrary

407: simple gauge group in an arbitrary representation. This very

408: framework is the only known formalism where one may have fields

409: with arbitrary $U(1)$ charge. The formalism we are referring to

410: was introduced in refs.~\cite{Madore:2000en,Jurco:2000ja}

411: and~\cite{Jurco:2001rq} and led  to the formulation of the

412: noncommutative standard model~\cite{Calmet:2001na} and some Grand

413: Unification models~\cite{Aschieri:2002mc}. Some phenomenological

414: implications of these models have been studied

415: recently~\cite{Melic:2005hb, Melic:2005su, Haghighat:2005jy,

416: MohammadiNajafabadi:2006iu, Alboteanu:2006hh, Buric:2006nr}, but quite a lot of

417: work remains to be done in view of the coming of the LHC.

418: 

419: As is well known, the Seiberg-Witten map plays a central role in

420: the framework of refs.~\cite{Madore:2000en,Jurco:2000ja}

421: and~\cite{Jurco:2001rq}. Indeed, the noncommutative gauge fields

422: are defined in terms of the ordinary fields by means of the formal

423: series expansion in powers of the noncommutative matrix parameter

424: $\theta^{\m\n}$ that implements the Seiberg-Witten map. The

425: noncommutative gauge fields do not thus belong, in general, to the

426: Lie algebra of the gauge group but are valued in the enveloping

427: algebra --this is why the formalism is called the

428: enveloping-algebra formalism-- of that Lie algebra. This is quite

429: at variance with the alternative approach to model building in

430: noncommutative space-time employed in

431: refs.~\cite{Chaichian:2001py, Khoze:2004zc, Abel:2005rh}

432: and~\cite{Arai:2006ya}.

433: 

434: The renormalizability of some noncommutative field theory models

435: constructed within the enveloping-algebra formalism has been

436: studied in a number of papers: see refs.~\cite{Bichl:2001cq,

437: Wulkenhaar:2001sq, Buric:2002gm, Buric:2004ms, Buric:2005xe,

438: Buric:2006wm}. In all these papers, and throughout this one, it is

439: assumed that both the quantization procedure and the

440: renormalization program deal  with the  1PI functions of the

441: ordinary fields that define the noncommutative fields via the

442: Seiberg-Witten map. The reader is referred to

443: ref.~\cite{Calmet:2006zy} for an alternative interesting proposal.

444: The models whose UV divergences have been worked out in

445: refs.~\cite{Bichl:2001cq, Wulkenhaar:2001sq, Buric:2002gm,

446: Buric:2004ms, Buric:2005xe, Buric:2006wm} only have $U(1)$ and/or

447: $SU(N)$ gauge fields and Dirac fermions in the fundamental

448: representation. It turns out that at first order in

449: $\theta^{\m\n}$, and against all odds, the one-loop UV divergences

450: of the Green functions that only involve gauge fields in the

451: external legs are renormalizable in the models that have and have

452: not Dirac fermions. This is quite a surprising result since, as

453: already pointed out in ref.~\cite{Wulkenhaar:2001sq}, BRST

454: invariance on its own cannot account for it, thus hinting at the

455: existence of an as yet unveiled symmetry of the noncommutative

456: gauge sector of these models. The result in question is even more

457: surprising if one takes into account that the Green functions that

458: carry fermion fields in the external legs cannot all be

459: renormalized, thus rendering nonrenormalizable in the

460: enveloping-algebra approach all the noncommutative models studied

461: so far.

462: 

463: The main purpose of this paper is to see whether the results

464: summarized in the previous paragraph also hold when the matter

465: fields are not Dirac fermions but scalar fields --let us recall

466: that the Higgs field is a key ingredient of the Standard Model.

467: The simplest model that captures some of the features of the

468: noncommutative Standard Model and includes both gauge fields and

469: scalar fields is the noncommutative $U(1)$ Higgs-Kibble model.

470: This model has a phase where the $U(1)$ symmetry is spontaneously

471: broken and has also a phase where the $U(1)$ symmetry is not

472: broken. The renormalization properties of the noncommutative

473: $U(1)$ Higgs-Kibble model have never been studied when formulated

474: within the enveloping-algebra formalism, although they have been

475: analyzed within the standard noncommutative field theory formalism

476: --see ref.~\cite{Petriello:2001mp} for the $U(1)$ Higgs-Kibble

477: model and refs.~\cite{Campbell:2000ug, Liao:2001uv, Liao:2002tv, 

478: RuizRuiz:2002hh} for other models with spontaneous symmetry breaking.

479: 

480: The computation we are about to sketch is quite a daunting

481: one since it demands the calculation of 94  1PI Feynman

482: diagrams to tell whether the model is renormalizable in the phase

483: with no symmetry breaking. In this phase, we discuss both the

484: massive and massless cases. To deal with such a large number of

485: Feynman diagrams we have used the algebraic manipulation package

486: $\tt Mathematica$~\cite{mathematica}. Then, we shall  use the

487: results obtained in the phase with no symmetry breaking to analyze

488: the renormalizablity of the model in the phase with spontaneous

489: symmetry breaking.

490: 

491: 

492: The layout of this paper is as follows. In section 2, we define

493: the classical noncommutative $U(1)$ Higgs-Kibble model and work

494: out the action up to first order in $\theta^{\m\n}$. The

495: renormalizability of the model in the phase with unbroken gauge

496: symmetry is discussed in section 3. In section 4, we analyze the

497: renormalizability of the model in the phase with spontaneous

498: symmetry  breaking. A summary of the results obtained in the paper

499: is given in section 5. The Feynman rules and Feynman diagrams

500: quoted in  the paper can be found in the appendix.

501: 

502: 

503: \section{The action. The Seiberg-Witten map}

504: 

505: As it was stated in the introduction, our noncommutative field theory model will be the $U(1)$ Higgs-Kibble model.

506: The model contains a noncommutative $U(1)$ gauge field $A_\mu$ and  a

507: noncommutative complex scalar field $\Phi$ coupled to $A_\mu$.

508: The classical action of the model in terms of the noncommutative fields reads

509: \begin{equation}

510:  S_{\rm class}=\idx-\frac{1}{4} F_{\m\n}\star F^{\m\n}+(D_\mu\Phi)^* \star D^\mu \Phi-\mu^2\Phi^*\star\Phi-\frac{\lambda}{4}(\Phi^*\star\Phi)^2,

511: \label{Snc}

512: \end{equation}

513: where

514: \begin{equation*}

515:  D_\m\Phi=\Dm\Phi-i e A_\m \star\Phi,\quad F_{\m\n}=\Dm A_\n-\Dn A_\m-i e[A_\m,A_\n]_\star.

516: \end{equation*}

517: $e$ denotes the coupling constant of the gauge interaction. $\mu$

518: is the mass parameter and $\lambda$ stands for the coupling

519: constant of the scalar self-interaction, which we shall take to be

520: positive.

521: 

522: In the enveloping-algebra approach the noncommutative fields are

523: defined in terms of the ordinary fields --the ordinary $U(1)$

524: gauge field $a_\mu$ and the ordinary complex scalar $\phi$ with

525: $U(1)$ charge $e$-- by means of the Seiberg-Witten map.  It is the

526: ordinary fields $a_\mu$ and $\phi$ that will be chosen as the field

527: variables to be used to first quantize and then renormalize the theory.

528: 

529: At first order in $h\theta^{\mu\nu}$, the most general Seiberg-Witten map reads

530: \begin{equation}

531:  \begin{array}{l}

532: A_\mu=\am-\frac{e h}{2}\theta^{\alpha\beta}a_\alpha (2\partial_\beta\am-\Dm\ab)+h \partial_\mu H+hS_\mu+O(h^2),\\

533: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%

534: \Phi=\phi-\frac{e h}{2}\theta^{\alpha\beta}a_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi+i h H \phi+h F+O(h^2),\\

535: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%

536: H=x_1\, \theta^{\alpha\beta}\Da\ab\\

537: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%

538: S_\mu=\kappa_1\,\theta^{\alpha\beta}\Dm

539: f_{\alpha\beta}+\kappa_2\,{\theta_\mu}^\beta \partial^\nu f_{\n\beta}+e \ka_3\,{\theta_\m}^\n\Dn(\phi^*\phi)+i e\ka_4{\theta_\m}^\n(D_\n\phi^*\phi-\phi^*D_\n\phi) ,\\

540: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%

541: F=e\kappa_5\theta^{\a\b}f_{\a\b}\phi,

542: \end{array}

543: \label{SWmap}

544: \end{equation}

545: which has five parameters --four real parameters

546: $\kappa_1,\,\kappa_2,\,\kappa_3,\, \kappa_4$ and a complex

547: parameter $\kappa_5$-- labelling the ambiguity associated with

548: field redefinitions. The  real parameter $x_1$ parametrizes a

549: gauge transformation of the fields.

550: 

551: For convenience, we introduce next the following basis

552: $\{t_i\}_{i=1,\dots, 9}$ of independent, modulo total derivatives,

553: and gauge invariant monomials that are of order one in $h\theta^{\m\n}$

554: and have mass dimension equal to four:

555: \begin{equation}

556: \begin{array}{lll}

557:  t_1=\theta^{\a\b}f_{\a\b}f_{\r\s}f^{\r\s}     & t_2=\theta^{\a\b}f_{\a\r}f_{\b\s}f^{\r\s} & t_3=\theta^{\a\b}\phi^*\phi\,\square f_{\a\b}\\

558: %%%

559:  t_4= \theta^{\a\b}(D_\r\phi)^*\phi\,\partial^\r f_{\a\b}   & t_5=\theta^{\a\b}(D_\a\phi)^*\phi\,\partial_\r {f_\b}^\r  & t_6=\theta^{\a\b}(D_\r\phi)^*D^\r\phi f_{\a\b} \\

560: %%%

561:  t_7=\theta^{\a\b}(D_\a\phi)^*D^\r\phi f_{\b\r}      & t_8=\theta^{\a\b}f_{\a\b}\,(\phi^*\phi)^2  & t_9=\mu^2 \theta^{\a\b}f_{\a\b}\,\phi^*\phi.\\

562: \end{array}

563: \label{tbasis}

564: \end{equation}

565:     Substituting first the Seiberg-Witten map of eq.~\eqref{SWmap} in the action in eq.~\eqref{Snc} and then expanding in powers of $h\theta^{\m\n}$, one obtains

566: \begin{equation}

567:  S_{\rm class}=S^{(0)}+hS^{(1)}+O(h^2),

568: \label{Sexp}

569: \end{equation}

570: where $S^{(0)}$ is the ordinary classical contribution,

571: \begin{equation}

572:  S^{(0)}=\idx-\frac{1}{4} f_{\m\n}f^{\m\n}+(D_\mu\phi)^*  D^\mu \phi-\mu^2\phi^*\phi-\frac{\lambda}{4}(\phi^*\phi)^2,

573: \label{Sord}

574: \end{equation}

575: --now, $D_\mu=\partial_\m-iea_\mu$-- and $S^{(1)}$ has the

576: following form in terms of the $t_i$s defined in

577: eq.~\eqref{tbasis}:

578: \begin{equation}

579: S^{(1)} =\idx \frac{e}{8}\,t_1-\frac{e}{2}\,t_2+e C_3\,t_3+e C_4\,t_4+e C_5\,t_5+eC_6t_6+eC_7t_7+eC_8t_8+e\mu^2C_9t_9,\

580: \label{S1}

581: \end{equation} where

582: \begin{equation}

583: \begin{array}{lll}

584:  C_3=-\ka_5^*-i \kappa_1-\frac{i}{2}\,(\kappa_2+\ka_4)+\frac{1}{2}\,\kappa_3 & C_4=-\frac{1}{4}+2i\,\text{Im}\ka_5-2i\kappa_1 & C_5=-\frac{1}{2}+2i(\kappa_2+\ka_4)\\

585: %%%%

586:   C_6=-\frac{1}{4}+2\,\text{Re}\ka_5 & C_7=-1 & C_9=\frac{1}{4}-2\,\text{Re}\ka_5\\

587: %%%%

588: C_8=\frac{e^2}{2}\,\kappa_3-\lambda(\text{Re}\ka_5-\frac{1}{16}).

589:  \end{array}

590: \label{coeffS1}

591: \end{equation}

592: 

593: 

594: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

595: 

596: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

597: 

598: 

599: \section{The model in the phase with unbroken symmetry}

600: 

601: In this section we shall show that the gauge sector of the model with unbroken

602: gauge symmetry is one-loop renormalizable at first order in $h\theta^{\m\n}$,

603: and that the matter sector is not renormalizable.

604: 

605: \subsection{Feynman rules and one-loop UV divergences}

606: 

607: In the case at hand $\mu^2\geq0$, so that the classical vacuum of the theory is the trivial field configuration $\phi=0$ and $a_\mu=0$. To quantize the theory at first order

608: in $h\theta^{\m\n}$, we shall add to the classical action in eq.~\eqref{Sexp}

609: the gauge-fixing, $S_{\rm gf}$, and ghost, $S_{\rm gh}$, terms, to obtain

610: \begin{equation}

611: S=S_{\rm class}+S_{\rm gf}+S_{\rm gh}=S^{(0)}+hS^{(1)}+S_{\rm gf}+S_{\rm gh},

612: \label{quact}

613: \end{equation}

614: where

615: \begin{equation*}

616: S_{\rm gf}=\idx-\frac{1}{2\xi}\,(\Dm a^\m)^2,\quad S_{\rm gh}=\idx \bar{c}\partial^2\,c.

617: \end{equation*}

618: Recall that it is the ordinary fields $a_\m$ and $\phi$ that furnish the

619: field variables to be used to carry out the quantization process: in the path integral we

620: shall integrate over $a_\m$ and $\phi$. Notice that for our choice of gauge

621: fixing, the ghost fields, $c$ and $\bar{c}$, do not couple either to $a_\m$

622: or to $\phi$, and hence we will  dispose of them.

623: 

624: The Feynman rules that the action in eq.~\eqref{quact} gives rise

625: to are depicted in figure 1 of the appendix, where the following

626: notation is used for propagators and vertices:

627: 

628: {\bf Propagators}

629: \begin{equation*}

630: \begin{array}{l}

631:  a_\mu\longrightarrow G^{\mu\n}(k)=\frac{i}{k^2+i\varepsilon}\Big[-g^{\m\n}+(1-\xi)\frac{k^\mu k^\nu}{k^2}\Big]\\

632: %%%%

633: \phi \longrightarrow G(k)=\frac{i}{k^2-m^2+i\varepsilon}

634: \end{array}

635: \end{equation*}\par

636: {\bf Ordinary vertices}

637: \begin{equation*}

638: \begin{array}{lll}

639:  \Gamma^{t(0)\,\m}_{(1,1)}[r;p,q]=ie(p^\m+q^\m) &  \Gamma^{t(0)\,\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;p,q]=2 i e^2 g^{\m\n} & \Gamma^{t(0)}_{(0,2)}[r,s;p,q]=-i\lambda

640: \end{array}

641: \end{equation*}

642: \par

643: {\bf Noncommutative vertices}

644: 

645: \begin{equation}

646: \begin{array}{l}

647:  \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m}_{(1,1)}[r;p,q]=\\

648: %%%

649: e\Big[-2 C_3 \th^{\a\m}(p-q)_\a(p-q)^2+2C_4\th^{\a\m}(p-q)_\a(p-q)\cdot p-C_5\th^{\a\b}p_\a q_\b(p-q)^\m\\

650: %%%

651: \phantom{e\Big[}-C_5\th^{\a\m}p_\a(p-q)^2+2C_6\th^{\a\m}(p-q)_\a p\cdot q+C_7\th^{\a\b}p_\a(p-q)_\b q^\m-C_7\th^{\a\m}p_\a q\cdot(p-q)\\

652: %%%

653: \phantom{e\Big[}+2C_9\m^2\th^{\a\m}(p-q)_\a\Big]\\

654: %%%%%%%%%%

655: %%%%%%%%%%

656: \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m\n\e}_{(3,0)}[p,q,r]=\\

657: -\frac{e}{2}\Big[2\th^{\a\m}p_\a(q\cdot r g^{\n\e}-q^\e r^\n)+2\th^{\a\n}q_\a(r\cdot p g^{\e\m}-r^\m p^\e)+2\th^{\a\e}r_\a(p\cdot q g^{\m\n}-p^\n q^\m)\Big]\\

658: %%%

659: +e\Big[\th^{\a\b}p_\a q_\b(r^\m g^{\n\e}-r^\n g^{\e\m})+\th^{\a\b}p_\a r_\b(q^\m g^{\n\e}-q^\e g^{\m\n})+\th^{\a\b}q_\a r_\b(p^\n g^{\m\e}-p^\e g^{\n\m})\\

660: %%%

661: \phantom{e\Big[}-\th^{\a\n}p_\a q^\e r^\m-\th^{\a\e}p_\a r^\n q^\m-\th^{\a\e}q_\a r^\m p^\n-\th^{\a\m}q_\a p^\e r^\n -\th^{\a\m}r_\a p^\n q^\e-\th^{\a\n}r_\a q^\m p^\e\\

662: %%%

663: \phantom{e\Big[}-q_\b p\cdot r(\th^{\m\b}g^{\n\e}+\th^{\e\b}g^{\n\m})-r_\b p\cdot q(\th^{\m\b}g^{\e\n}+\th^{\n\b}g^{\e\m})-p_\b q\cdot r(\th^{\n\b}g^{\m\e}+\th^{\e\b }g^{\m\n})\\

664: %%%

665: \phantom{e\Big[}+\th^{\m\n}(p\cdot r q^\e-q\cdot r p^\e)+\th^{\m\e}(p\cdot q r^\n-r\cdot q p^\n)+\th^{\n\e}(q\cdot p r^\m-r\cdot p q^\m)

666: \Big]\\

667: %%%%%%%%%%%

668: %%%%%%%%%%%

669: \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;p,q]=\\

670: e^2\Big[C_4(2\th^{\a\n}s^\m s_\a+2\th^{\a\m}r^\n r_\a)+C_5(\th^{\m\b}s^\n s_\b+\th^{\n\b}r^\m r_\b-\th^{\m\n}(s^2-r^2))\\

671: %%%

672: \phantom{e\Big[}+C_6(2\th^{\a\n}(q+p)^\m s_\a+2\th^{\a\m}(q+p)^\n r_\a)+C_7(\th^{\m\b}s_\b q^\n-\th^{\m\n} q\cdot s+\th^{\a\b}p_\a s_\b g^{\m\n}-\th^{\a\n}p_\a s^\m\\

673: %%%

674: \phantom{e\Big[}+\th^{\n\b}r_\b q^\m+\th^{\m\n} q\cdot r+\th^{\a\b}p_\a r_\b g^{\m\n}-\th^{\a\m}p_\a r^\n)\Big]\\

675: %%%%%%%%%

676: %%%%%%%%%

677:   \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m\n\r}_{(3,1)}[r,s,t;p,q]=\\

678: %%%

679: e^3\Big[4C_6(\th^{\a\r}g^{\m\n}t_\a+\th^{\a\n}g^{\m\r}s_\a+\th^{\a\m}g^{\n\r}r_\a)+C_7(\th^{\m\b}g^{\n\r}(t+s)_\b+\th^{\n\b}g^{\r\m}(r+t)_\b\\

680: %%%

681: \phantom{e^3\Big[}+\th^{\r\b}g^{\m\n}(s+r)_\b-\th^{\m\r}t^\n-\th^{\m\n}s^\r-\th^{\n\m}r^\r-\th^{\n\r}t^\m-\th^{\r\n}s^\m-\th^{\r\m}r^\n)\Big]\\

682: %%%%%%%%

683: %%%%%%%%

684:  \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m}_{(1,2)}[t;p,q;r,s]=8e C_8\th^{\a\m}t_\a.

685:  \end{array}

686: \label{feynmannossb}

687: \end{equation}

688: $C_i$, $i=1\dots 9$, have been  given in eq.~\eqref{S1}.

689: 

690: Now, using the fact that the BRST transformations of $a_\mu$ and

691: $\phi$ read $sa_\m=\partial_\m c$ and $s\phi=ie\,\phi\, c$,

692: respectively, it is not difficult to conclude that in dimensional

693: regularization the pole part of the one-loop 1PI functional,

694: $\Gamma[a_\mu,\phi]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

695:  one-loop}$, must be gauge invariant. Hence, up

696: to first order in $h\theta^{\mu\n}$ this functional should read

697: \begin{equation}

698:  \Gamma[a_\mu,\phi,\phi^*]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

699:  one-loop}=\Gamma^{(0)}[a_\mu,\phi,\phi^*]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

700:  one-loop}\,+\,h\,

701: \Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu,\phi,\phi^*]_{\rm pole}^{\rm one-loop},

702: \label{1PIfun}

703: \end{equation}

704: where

705: \begin{equation}

706: \begin{array}{l}

707: \Gamma^{(0)}[a_\mu,\phi,\phi^*]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

708:  one-loop}= \idx\;-\frac{w_1}{4} f_{\m\n} f^{\m\n}+w_2\,(D_\mu\phi)^*

709: \star D^\mu \phi-

710: w_3\,\mu^2\phi^* \phi-w_4\,\frac{\lambda}{4}(\phi^* \phi)^2,\\

711: \Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu,\phi,\phi^*]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

712:  one-loop}=\idx\;\frac{e}{8}\,z_1\,t_1-\frac{e}{2}\,z_2\,t_2+\sum_{i=3}^8 e z_i\,t_i+e\mu^2z_9t_9.

713: \end{array}

714: \label{wscoeff}

715: \end{equation}

716: The $t_i$s, $i=1\dots 9$, are the nine monomials in

717: eq.~\eqref{tbasis}, and $w_i$, $i=1\dots 4$,  and  $z_i$,

718: $i=1\dots 9$, stand for  coefficients that are simple poles in

719: $\epsilon=D/2-2$.

720: 

721: Let $\Gamma_{(m,n)}^{\mu_1\dots\mu_m}[x_k;y_l;z_l]$ denote the 1PI

722: Green function corresponding to $m$ $a_\mu(x)$ fields, $n$

723: $\phi^*(y)$ and $n$ $\phi(z)$ fields. Ignoring the tree-level

724: ghost contribution, we have that the 1PI functional reads

725: \begin{equation}

726:  \Gamma[a_\mu,\phi,\phi^*]=\sum_{m,n}\frac{1}{m!(n!)^2}\int\prod_{k=1}^m\prod_{l=1}^n d^Dx_k d^Dy_l d^Dz_l

727:  \Gamma_{(m,n)}^{\mu_1\dots\mu_m}[x_k;y_l;z_l] a_{\mu_k}(x_k)\phi^*(y_l)\phi(z_l).

728: \label{fornotation}

729: \end{equation}

730: 

731: 

732: 

733: The computation of the $w_i$s, $i=1,\dots,4$, in eq.~\eqref{wscoeff} is

734: a standard exercise in introductory courses to renormalization

735: theory, so  we will just quote the result:

736: \begin{equation}

737: w_1=-\frac{e^2}{48\pi^2\epsilon},\;w_2=\frac{e^2}{16\pi^2\epsilon}\,(3-\xi),\,w_3=-\frac{e^2\xi-\lambda}{16\pi^2\epsilon},\,w_4=\frac{1}{32\pi^2\epsilon}\,\Big[24

738: \frac{e^4}{\lambda}-4 e^2\xi+5\lambda\Big]

739: \label{wpole}.

740: \end{equation}

741: The computation of the $z_i$s, $i=1,\dots, 9$, in eq.~\eqref{wscoeff}

742: is, though, a very lengthy and involved computation since the pole

743: part of a large number of topologically inequivalent diagrams --94

744: altogether-- with a single noncommutative vertex --which is in

745: general a long expression-- must  be worked out. It turns out that

746: to obtain all the $z_i$s  one must evaluate the pole part of the

747: one-loop contributions to

748: $\Gamma^{\m\n\r}_{(3,0)},\,\Gamma^{\m}_{(1,1)}$ and

749: $\Gamma^\m_{(1,2)}$ that are linear in $\theta^{\m\n}$ --see

750: eq.~\eqref{fornotation} for notation. Let us next display the

751: values of these one-loop pole parts that we shall denote,

752: respectively, by

753: $\Gamma^{(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,0)}[p_1,p_2,-p_1-p_2]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

754: one-loop}$, $\Gamma^{(1)\m}_{(1,1)}[p_1-p_2;p_1,p_2]_{\rm

755: pole}^{\rm one-loop}$ and

756: $\Gamma^{(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[p_1+p_3-p_2-p_4;p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4]_{\rm

757: pole}^{\rm one-loop}$:

758: 

759:  {\bf The $aaa$ 1PI Green function $\Gamma^{\m\n\r}_{(3,0)}$}.

760: 

761: There are 4 topologically inequivalent diagrams --see figure 2 in

762: the appendix-- contributing to the pole part of this Green

763: function at first order in $h\theta^{\m\n}$, and they  lead to the

764: following result:

765: \begin{equation}

766: \Gamma^{(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,0)}[p_1,p_2,-p_1-p_2]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

767: one-loop}=-\frac{e^2}{48\pi^2\epsilon}\,

768: \Gamma^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,0)}[p_1,p_2,-p_1-p_2],

769: \label{aaauv}

770: \end{equation}

771: where $\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,0)}$ is the tree-level contribution

772: given in eq.~\eqref{feynmannossb} coming from the contributions

773: $t_1$ and $t_2$ to $S_{\rm class}$ --see eqs.~\eqref{Sexp}

774: and~\eqref{S1}.

775: 

776:  {\bf The $a\phi^*\phi$ 1PI Green function $\Gamma^{\m}_{(1,1)}$}.

777: 

778:     The pole parts of the 11 topologically inequivalent diagrams in

779:     figure 3 of the appendix are to be computed, to obtain the following

780:     answer:

781: \begin{equation}

782: \Gamma^{(1)\m}_{(1,1)}[p_1-p_2;p_1,p_2]_{\rm pole}^{\rm one-loop}=

783: \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m}_{(1,1)}[\Delta_3,\Delta_4,\Delta_5,\Delta_6,\Delta_7,\Delta_9;\,

784: p_1-p_2;p_1,p_2], \label{1a2phi}

785: \end{equation}

786: where

787: $\Gamma^{t(1)\,\m}_{(1,1)}[\Delta_3,\Delta_4,\Delta_5,\Delta_6,\Delta_7,\Delta_9;\,

788: r;p,q]$ is obtained from $\Gamma^{t(1)\,\m}_{(1,1)}[r;p,q]$ in

789: eq.~\eqref{feynmannossb} by replacing $C_i$ with $\Delta_i$,

790: $i=3,4,5,6,7$ and $9$, where

791: \begin{equation}

792:  \begin{array}{l}

793:  \Delta_3=\frac{e^2}{192\pi^2\epsilon}[11+26 C_4-13 C_5-26 C_6+13 C_7-4C_3(1+3\xi)-\lambda(-12C_3+6C_4-3C_5-6C_6\\

794: %%%

795: \phantom{\Delta_3=\frac{e^2}{192\pi^2\epsilon}[}+2C_7)]\\

796: %%%

797:   \Delta_4=\frac{e^2}{32\pi^2\epsilon}[2-C_5+2C_7+2C_4(4-\xi)]\\

798: %%%

799: \Delta_5=\frac{e^2}{16\pi^2\epsilon}[2(1+C_7)+C_5(3-\xi)]\\

800: %%%

801: \Delta_6=\frac{e^2}{32\pi^2\epsilon}[-1+C_7+2C_6(4-\xi)]\\

802: %%%

803: \Delta_7=\frac{e^2}{16\pi^2\epsilon}[4+C_7(7-\xi)]\\

804: %%%

805: \Delta_9=\frac{1}{32\pi^2\epsilon}[8C_8+e^2(-8C_3+4C_4-2C_5-2C_6+2C_7+2C_9(2-\xi))-\lambda(-4C_6+C_7-2C_9)].

806: \end{array}

807: \label{deltais}

808: \end{equation}

809: The constants $C_i$, $i=3,4,5,6,7$ and $9$, are defined in

810: eq.~\eqref{coeffS1}.

811: 

812:  {\bf The $a\phi^*\phi\phi^*\phi$ 1PI Green function $\Gamma^{\m}_{(1,2)}$}.

813: 

814:     Let $\Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[\Delta_8;\,t;p,q;r,s]$ denote

815:     $\Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[t;p,q;r,s]$ in eq.~\eqref{feynmannossb}, once $C_8$ is replaced

816:     with $\Delta_8$. Then, the computation of the pole part of the 79 topologically inequivalent diagrams in figure 4 of the appendix leads

817:     to the following equality:

818: \begin{equation}

819: \Gamma^{(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[p_1+p_3-p_2-p_4;p_1,p_2;p_3,p_4]_{\rm

820: pole}^{\rm one-pole}=

821: \Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[\Delta_8;\,p_1+p_3-p_2-p_4;p_1,p_2;p_3,p_4], \label{1a4phi}

822: \end{equation}

823: where

824: %%%

825: \begin{equation}

826: \begin{array}{l}

827: \Delta_8=\frac{1}{256\pi^2\epsilon}\,[-4e^4(-12+4C_3 -2 C_4+C_5+26C_6-8C_7)+5\lambda^2(4C_6-C_7)\\

828: %%%

829: \phantom{\Delta_8=\frac{1}{256\pi^2\epsilon}\,[}-8e^2\lambda(8C_3-4C_4+2C_5+C_6-C_7)+32e^2C_8(2-\xi)+80\lambda

830: C_8].

831: \end{array}

832: \label{delta8}

833: \end{equation}

834: 

835: Taking into account eqs.~\eqref{aaauv},~\eqref{1a2phi} and~\eqref{1a4phi}, one

836: concludes that the $z_i$s, $i=1,\dots,9$, in eq.~\eqref{wscoeff} are given by the

837: following equalities:

838: \begin{equation}

839: z_1=z_2=-\frac{e^2}{48\pi^2\epsilon},\,z_i=\Delta_i,\;\forall\,i=3\dots 9,

840: \label{zisvalues}

841: \end{equation}

842: where the $\Delta_i$s, $i=3\dots 9$, are given in eqs.~\eqref{deltais} and~\eqref{delta8}.

843: 

844: 

845: 

846: \subsection{One-loop renormalization}

847: 

848: Let us assume that the fields and parameters of the action in eq.~\eqref{quact} are the bare fields and parameters of the model. Then, as usual, we shall say

849: that the model is one-loop multiplicatively renormalizable at first order in $h\theta^{\m\n}$, if the free coefficients of the counterterm

850: action obtained by introducing the following renormalizations of the

851: fields and parameters of the action in eq.~\eqref{quact}

852: \begin{equation}

853:  \begin{array}{lll}

854:  a_\m=Z_a^{1/2}a^R_\m   &   \phi=Z_\phi^{1/2}\phi^R & e=Z_e e^R \\

855:   \m=Z_\m^{1/2}\m^R & \lambda=Z_\lambda \lambda^R & \xi=Z_\xi\xi^R\\

856: %%%

857:   \theta=Z_\theta \theta^R  & \kappa_i=\kappa_i^R+\delta\kappa_i,\,i=1,2,3,4 & \text{Re}\kappa_5=\text{Re}\kappa_5^R+\delta\text{Re}\kappa_5^R\\

858: %%%

859: \text{Im}\kappa_5=\text{Im}\kappa_5^R+\delta\text{Im}\kappa_5^R

860: \end{array}

861: \label{mulren}

862: \end{equation}

863: can be chosen to cancel the UV divergences of the 1PI functional given in

864: eqs.~\eqref{1PIfun},~\eqref{wscoeff},\\~\eqref{wpole} and~\eqref{zisvalues}.

865: 

866: Let $\delta Z_a=Z_a-1$, $\delta Z_\phi=Z_\phi-1$, $\delta Z_e=Z_e-1$,

867: $\delta Z_\mu=Z_\mu-1$, $\delta Z_\lambda=Z_\lambda-1$, $\delta Z_\xi=Z_\xi-1$

868: and $\delta Z_\theta=Z_\theta-1$. Then,

869: the multiplicative renormalization in eq.~\eqref{mulren}, when applied to

870: the action in eq.~\eqref{quact}, yields the following one-loop counterterm

871: action up to first order in $h\theta^{\mu\n}$:

872: \begin{equation*}

873: S_{\rm ct}\,=\,S^{(0)}_{\rm ct}\,+\,h\,S^{(1)}_{\rm ct},

874: \end{equation*}

875: where

876: \begin{equation}

877: \begin{array}{l}

878:  S^{(0)}_{\rm ct}=\idx-\frac{1}{4}\delta Z_a f_{\m\n}f^{\m\n}+

879: \delta Z_\phi (\Dm\phi)^*  \partial^\mu \phi-(\delta Z_\phi+ \delta Z_\mu)\mu^2\phi^*\phi\\

880: \phantom{S^{(0)}_{\rm ct}=}-i e(\delta Z_\phi+\delta Z_e+\frac{1}{2} \delta Z_a )\Dm \phi^*a^\mu\phi

881: +i e(\delta Z_\phi+\delta  Z_e+\frac{1}{2}\delta Z_a )\phi^*a^\mu\Dm\phi\\

882: \phantom{S^{(0)}_{\rm ct}=}+e^2(2\,\delta Z_e + \delta Z_a+\delta Z_\phi)\phi^*\phi\am a^\mu

883: -\frac{\lambda}{4}(\delta Z_\lambda+2 \delta Z_\phi)(\phi^*\phi)^2

884: -\frac{1}{2\xi}\,(\delta Z_a- \delta Z_\xi)(\Dm a^\mu)^2,\\[10pt]

885:  S^{(1)}_{\rm ct}=\idx \frac{e}{8}\, (\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_a) t_1-\frac{e}{2} (\delta Z_\theta+\delta Z_a)  t_2+e\sum_{i=3}^7[\delta C_i+C_i(\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_\phi)] t_i\\

886: %%%%

887: \phantom{S^{(1)}=}+e[\delta C_8+C_8(\delta Z_\theta +2\delta Z_\phi)] t_8+e \mu^2[\delta C_9+C_9(\delta Z_\theta+\delta Z_\mu+\delta Z_\phi)]t_9.

888: \end{array}

889: \label{order1countterms}

890: \end{equation}

891:  In the previous equation the fields $a_\mu$ and $\phi$ and the parameters $\mu^2, e,\lambda$ and $\kappa_i$, $i=1,\dots 4$ are, respectively, the renormalized

892: fields and parameters of eq.~\eqref{mulren}. We have suppressed

893: the superscript ``$R$'' to make the notation simpler. To simplify the expression for $ S^{(1)}_{\rm ct}$, the identity $\delta Z_a=-2 \delta Z_e$, which is

894: a consequence of the BRST invariance of the theory, has been used. Notice that

895: as a consequence of the identities in eq.~\eqref{coeffS1} the $\delta

896: C_i$s in eq.~\eqref{order1countterms} are defined by following

897: equalities:

898: \begin{equation}

899:  \begin{array}{ll}

900:  \delta C_3=-\delta\text{Re}\ka_5+i\delta\text{Im}\ka_5-\frac{i}{2}\,(\delta\kappa_2+\delta\ka_4)+\frac{1}{2}\,\delta\kappa_3-i\delta\kappa_1 &

901: \delta C_4=2i\delta\text{Im}\ka_5-2i\delta\kappa_1\\

902: %%%

903: \delta C_5=2i(\delta\kappa_2+\delta\ka_4) & \delta C_6=2\delta\text{Re}\ka_5\\

904: %%%

905: \delta C_7=0 & \delta C_9=-2\delta\text{Re}\ka_5\\

906: %%%

907: \delta C_8=\frac{1}{2}(2 e^2 \kappa_3 \delta Z_e+e^2\delta\kappa_3)-\lambda \delta Z_\lambda(\text{Re}\ka_5-\frac{1}{16})-\lambda\delta\text{Re}\ka_5.

908: \end{array}

909: \label{deltaCs}

910: \end{equation}

911: 

912: Of course, $\delta Z_a$, $\delta Z_\phi$, $\delta Z_e$,

913: $\delta Z_\mu$, $\delta Z_\lambda $ and  $\delta Z_\xi$ are the same as in

914: the ordinary model, and in the MS scheme they read

915:  \begin{equation}

916: \begin{array}{l}

917:  \delta Z_a=\frac{e^2}{48\pi^2\epsilon}=-2\delta Ze=\delta Z_\xi,\quad

918: \delta Z_\phi=-\frac{e^2(3-\xi)}{16 \pi^2\epsilon},\\[8pt]

919: \delta Z_\mu=\frac{3 e^2-\lambda}{16\pi^2\epsilon}\quad

920: \delta Z_\lambda=-\frac{1}{32\pi^2\epsilon}\,\Big[24 \frac{e^4}{\lambda}-12 e^2+5\lambda\Big].\\

921: \end{array}

922: \label{ordZ}

923: \end{equation}

924:  Next, in the MS scheme, $\delta Z_{\theta}$ and $\delta C_i$, $i=3,\dots,9$, of $S^{(1)}_{\rm ct}$ in eq.~\eqref{order1countterms}

925: must be chosen --were it possible-- so that the sum

926: $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu,\phi,\phi^*]_{\rm pole}^{\rm one-loop}+S^{(1)}_{\rm ct}$ vanishes. $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu,\phi,\phi^*]_{\rm pole}^{\rm one-loop}$ is given

927: in eq.~\eqref{wscoeff} and the values of its coefficients --the $z_i$s--  are summarized in eq.~\eqref{zisvalues}. We thus conclude that $\delta Z_{\theta}$

928: must satisfy the following equalities:

929: \begin{equation}

930: -z_1=\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_a,\quad -z_2=\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_a,

931: \label{eqztheta}

932: \end{equation}

933: whereas for $\delta C_i$, $i=3,\dots,9$ the following set of equations must

934: hold:

935: \begin{equation}

936: \begin{array}{l}

937: -z_i\,=\,\delta C_i\,+\, C_i(\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_\phi),\quad i=3,4,5,6,7\\

938: -z_8=\delta C_8\,+\, C_8(\delta Z_\theta +2\,\delta Z_\phi),\\

939: -z_9=\delta C_9\,+\, C_9(\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_\mu+\delta Z_\phi).\\

940: \end{array}

941: \label{eqdeltaci}

942: \end{equation}

943: 

944: Taking into account eqs.~\eqref{zisvalues} and~\eqref{ordZ}, one concludes that the two equalities in eq.~\eqref{eqztheta} hold if, and only if,

945: \begin{equation}

946: \delta Z_{\theta}=0.

947: \label{vandelZ}

948: \end{equation}

949: This equation leads to the conclusion that $\theta^{\m\n}$ is not

950: renormalized at the one-loop level in the MS scheme of dimensional

951: regularization.

952: 

953: That the two equalities in eq.~\eqref{eqztheta} hold is a

954: necessary and sufficient condition for the gauge sector of our model --no matter fields in the external legs of the Green functions-- to be

955: multiplicatively renormalizable at one-loop and at first order in

956: $\theta^{\m\n}$. BRST invariance does not imply that eq.~\eqref{eqztheta} must

957: be verified, since in our case the most general BRST invariant contribution

958: involving only gauge fields reads up to first order in $h\theta^{\m\n}$:

959: \begin{equation}

960: \idx\; -\frac{1}{4}\,w_1\,f_{\m\n}f^{\m\n}\,+\,h\,\frac{e}{8}\,z_2\,t_1\,-\,h\,\frac{e}{2}\,

961: z_3\,t_2,

962: \label{3monomials}

963:  \end{equation}

964: Mark that the real numbers $w_1$, $z_2$ and $z_3$ are arbitrary.

965: Now, only if $z_2=z_3$, it is possible to renormalize the

966: $\theta^{\m\n}$ dependent part of the functional in the previous

967: equation by means of the renormalization in eq.~\eqref{mulren}. Of

968: course, we have shown by explicit computation that for our model

969: $z_2=z_3$. But there is more: we have obtained not only that

970: $z_2=z_3$, but that $z_2=z_3=w_1$. The latter train of equalities

971: has nothing to do with the the gauge sector of the model being

972: renormalizable at one loop, but with the fact that $\theta^{\m\n}$

973: is not renormalized at one-loop. We do not believe --following the

974: author of ref.~\cite{Wulkenhaar:2001sq}-- that this situation

975: --that $z_2=z_3=w_1$-- is an accident, but that it perhaps hints

976: at the existence of an as yet unknown symmetry  that mixes the

977: three monomials in eq.~\eqref{3monomials}. This symmetry must

978: depend on $\theta^{\m\n}$, for it must relate monomials with

979: different powers in $\theta^{\m\n}$. Notice that what we have

980: obtained is that the renormalizability of the gauge sector of the

981: model at one-loop and first order in $\theta^{\m\n}$ is governed

982: by the renormalization of the coupling constant $e$ --recall that

983: BRST invariance implies $\delta Z_a=-2\delta Z_e$.

984: 

985: Now, the matter sector of the model in the symmetric phase will be

986: multiplicatively renormalizable --i.e by means of the

987: renormalization transformations in eq.~\eqref{mulren}--  if, and

988: only if,  there exist $\delta \kappa_i$, $i=1,\dots,4$,

989: $Re\delta\kappa_5$ and $Im\delta\kappa_5$ such that the set of

990: eqs.~\eqref{eqdeltaci} holds for them. Taking into account  the

991: values of the $z_i$s on the r.h.s of eq.~\eqref{eqdeltaci} that

992: are given in eqs.~\eqref{zisvalues}, \eqref{deltais} and \eqref{delta8}, using the definitions of the $\delta C_i$s,

993: $i=1,\dots,9$, provided in eq.~\eqref{deltaCs}, and recalling that

994: the renormalized $C_i$s, $i=1,\dots,9$, are defined in terms of

995: the renormalized $\kappa_i$, $i=1,\dots, 5$, by the identities in

996: eq.~\eqref{coeffS1} and that  the values of the $\delta Z$s are those in

997: eqs.~\eqref{ordZ} and~\eqref{vandelZ}, one concludes, upon

998: substitution of the previous results, that there is a unique set

999: of parameters $\delta \kappa_i$, $i=1,\dots 5$, that solves the

1000: system of equations constituted by the first five --$i=3,4,5,6$

1001: and $7$-- equalities in eq.~\eqref{eqdeltaci}. This set of

1002: parameters reads

1003: \begin{equation}

1004:   \begin{array}{l}

1005:   \delta\kappa_1=\delta\text{Im}\ka_5-\frac{e^2}{32\pi^2\epsilon}(2\ka_1+\ka_2-2\text{Im}\ka_5+\ka_4)\\

1006: \delta\ka_2=-\d\ka_4\\

1007: \delta\ka_3=\frac{1}{192\pi^2\epsilon}[e^2(6+40 \ka_3)-\lambda(1+12\ka_3)]\\

1008: \delta\text{Re}\ka_5=\frac{e^2}{128\pi^2\epsilon}(5-8\text{Re}\ka_5).

1009: \end{array}

1010: \label{soldeltaC}

1011: \end{equation}

1012:     And yet, the full system of equations has no solution for

1013: $\mu^2\neq 0$, as the last equation --the equation with $z_9$ on the l.h.s-- is not satisfied by the  $\delta\kappa_i$s, $i=1,\dots,5$ in

1014: eq.~\eqref{soldeltaC}. Indeed, upon substitution of those values in this last

1015: equation one obtains the constraint $6e^2-\lambda=0$. Notice that this constraint is not even renormalization group invariant, so it cannot be imposed in a renormalization group invariant way, precluding the implementation of the reduction-of-the-couplings mechanism of ref.~\cite{Kubo:1988jc} to dispose of the unwanted

1016: UV divergences. We thus conclude that the matter sector of the theory is not multiplicatively renormalizable if the scalar field is massive.

1017: If $\mu^2=0$, the last equality of eq.~\eqref{eqdeltaci} need not be satisfied

1018: since, now, terms of the type $\mu^2t_9$ occur neither in the classical action nor in $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu,\phi,\phi^*]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

1019:  one-loop}$ --see eq.~\eqref{wscoeff}. Unfortunately, the equation

1020: $-z_8=\delta C_8+C_8(\delta Z_\theta +2\delta Z_\phi)$ is not

1021: satisfied by the parameters given in eq.~\eqref{soldeltaC}, for

1022: its substitution in the latter equation leads to the constraint

1023: $204e^2-76e^2\lambda+15\lambda^2=0$. Remarkably, all dependence on

1024: the arbitrary parameters of the Seiberg-Witten map disappears, but

1025: the previous constraint is, of course, not valid for arbitrary $e$

1026: and $\lambda$. The constraint is not even renormalization group

1027: invariant. In summary, the matter sector of our model is not

1028: multiplicatively renormalizable in the phase with no spontaneous

1029: symmetry breaking whatever the value of the mass.

1030: 

1031: 

1032: We shall next address the issue of the non-multiplicative

1033: renormalizability of the model. We shall show that turning

1034: non-multiplicative --but local at every order in $\theta^{\m\n}$--

1035: the relationship between bare and renormalized fields will be of

1036: no avail in making the model renormalizable. Let us assume that

1037: the bare fields and renormalized fields are not related as in

1038: eq.~\eqref{mulren}, but as follows

1039: \begin{equation*}

1040: a_{\mu}=a_\mu^{R}+\frac{1}{2}\,\delta Z_a \,a_\mu^{R}+ h \delta

1041: Z_\mu[a_\m^{R},\phi^{R},\phi^{R\,*},\partial,\theta^{\m\n}];\quad\phi=\phi^{R}+\frac{1}{2}\delta

1042: Z_{\phi}\,\phi^{R}+ h\delta

1043: Z[a_\m^{R},\phi^{R},\phi^{R\,*},\partial_\m,\theta^{\m\n}],

1044: \end{equation*}

1045: where

1046: \begin{equation}

1047:  \begin{array}{l}

1048:  \delta Z_\mu=x_1 {\theta_\m}^\a a_\a \phi^*\phi+x_2{\theta_\m}^\a a_\a (\phi\phi+\phi^*\phi^*) +ix_3{\theta_\m}^\a a_\a (\phi\phi-\phi^*\phi^*)+x_4{\theta_\m}^\a  (\Da\phi\phi+\Da\phi^*\phi^*)\\

1049: %%%

1050: \phantom{Z_\mu=}+ix_5{\theta_\m}^\a

1051: (\Da\phi\phi-\Da\phi^*\phi^*)+x_6 {\theta_\m}^\a a_\a a_\r

1052: a^\r+x_7{\theta_\m}^\a a_\a \partial _\r a^\r+x_8

1053: {\theta_\m}^\a\Dr a_\a a^\r +x_9{\theta_\m}^\a\partial^2

1054: a_\a\\[2pt]

1055: %%%

1056: \phantom{\delta Z_\mu=}+x_{10}{\theta_\m}^\a \Da a_\r a^\r

1057: +x_{11} \mu^2{\theta_\mu}^\alpha \aa+\mu x_{12}{\theta_\mu}^\alpha \Da(\phi+\phi^*)+i\mu x_{13}{\theta_\mu}^\alpha \Da(\phi-\phi^*)\\

1058: %%%

1059: \phantom{\delta Z_\mu=}+\mu x_{14}{\theta_\mu}^\alpha \aa(\phi+\phi^*)+i\m x_{15}{\theta_\mu}^\alpha \aa(\phi-\phi^*)+x_{16}\theta^{\a\b}\Da \ab\am+x_{17}\theta^{\a\b}\Dm\aa\ab\\

1060: \phantom{\delta Z_\mu=}+x_{18}\theta^{\a\b}\Da\am\ab,\\

1061:  \delta Z=z_{1}\theta^{\a\b}\Da \ab\phi^*+z_2\theta^{\a\b}\aa\Db\phi+z_3\theta^{\a\b}\aa\Db\phi^*+\m

1062:  z_{4}\theta^{\a\b}f_{\a\b},\\

1063:  \end{array}

1064: \label{nonmult}

1065: \end{equation}

1066: with real $x_i$s and  complex $z_{i}$s. The previous $\delta

1067: Z_\mu$ and $\delta Z$ are the most general polynomials of mass

1068: dimension one that are linear in $\theta^{\m\n}$ and do not

1069: contain any contribution that can be removed by modifying the

1070: value of the free parameters of the Seiberg-Witten map in

1071: eq.~\eqref{SWmap}.

1072: 

1073:     $\delta Z_\mu$ and $\delta Z$ in eq.~\eqref{nonmult} yield the following

1074:     sum of new counterterms

1075: \begin{equation*}

1076:  \begin{array}{l}

1077:  S^{(1)\rm new}_{\rm ct}=\!\idx [\delta Z_\m \Dr f^{\r\m}-i \delta Z_\mu(D^\mu\phi^*\phi-\phi^*D^\m\phi)-

1078:  \delta Z^*D^2\phi-\delta Z D^2\phi^*-\mu^2(\phi^*\delta Z+\phi \delta Z^*)\\

1079: %%%%

1080: \phantom{S^{\rm new}_{\rm ct}=\idx [}-\frac{\lambda}{2}(\delta

1081: Z^*\phi^*\phi^2+\delta Z\phi\phi^{*2})].

1082: \end{array}

1083: \end{equation*}

1084: Now, $S^{(1)\rm new}_{\rm ct}$ must be invariant under the BRST

1085: transformations $sa_\mu=\partial_\m c$,

1086: $s\phi=iec\phi$,$s\phi^*=-iec\phi^*$. A lengthy computation shows

1087: that $sS^{\rm new}_{\rm ct}=0$ if, and only if, $x_i=0$, $\forall

1088: i$, and $z_i=0$, $\forall i$.

1089: 

1090: \section{The model in the phase with  spontaneously  broken symmetry}

1091: 

1092: In the case $\mu^2=-m^2<0,\lambda>0$, the classical

1093: Poincar\'e-invariant vacuum of the theory with the action in

1094: eq.~\eqref{Snc} is given by $\phi^*\phi=\frac{2m^2}{\lambda}$. To

1095: perform perturbative calculations in the quantum theory we have to

1096: expand the fields around a given vacuum configuration. We choose

1097: the following parametrization:

1098: \begin{equation*}

1099:  \phi=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(v+\phi_1+i\phi_2),

1100: \end{equation*}

1101: with $v=\sqrt{\frac{4m^2}{\lambda}}$ at the classical level and

1102: with $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$ being real fields that vanish in the

1103: classical vacuum.

1104: 

1105:     Since we are interested in the renormalization properties of the model,  we shall consider the following family of

1106:     $R_\xi$-gauges to quantize it:

1107: \begin{equation}

1108:     S_{\rm gf}=\idx\; \frac{1}{2}\xi b^2\, +\,b(\Dm a^\mu+\xi \rho \phi_2),\quad S_{\rm gh}=\idx\;\overline{c}(-\partial^2-\xi\rho

1109:     e(v+\phi_1))c.

1110: \label{Rxigauge}

1111: \end{equation}

1112: $b$ is an auxiliary real field and $c$ and $\bar{c}$ are the ghost

1113: and anti-ghost fields, respectively. Recall that it is most useful

1114: to choose $\rho=ev$ at the tree-level.

1115: 

1116: Now, up to first order in $h\theta^{\m\n}$, the action that we shall use to

1117: carry out a path integral quantization of the theory reads

1118: \begin{equation}

1119: \begin{array}{l}

1120: S_{\rm SSB}=

1121: S^{(0)}[\phi=1/\sqrt{2}(v+\phi_1+i\phi_2),a_\mu,\mu^2=-m^2,\lambda]+

1122: S_{\rm gf}+S_{\rm gh}\\

1123: \phantom{S_{\rm SSB}=}+h S^{(1)}[\phi=1/\sqrt{2}(v+\phi_1+i\phi_2),a_\mu,\mu^2=-m^2,\lambda,\theta^{\m\n}],\\

1124: \end{array}

1125: \label{actionssb}

1126: \end{equation}

1127: where $S^{(0)}$ and $S^{(1)}$ have been defined in

1128: eqs.~\eqref{Sord} and~\eqref{S1}, 

1129: respectively, and $S_{\rm gf}$ and $S_{\rm gh}$ are given in

1130: eq.~\eqref{Rxigauge}. Upon integrating over the auxiliary field

1131: $b$, the previous action leads to the  set  of Feynman rules

1132: depicted in figure 5 of the appendix. The following definitions

1133: are needed to turn the Feynman rules into mathematical expressions

1134: --notice that

1135: $\tilde{\Gamma}^{t(i)\,\m_1,\mu_2,\dots,\mu_m}_{(m,n,p,q)}[{\rm

1136: momenta}]$, $i=0,1$, denotes a tree-level vertex with $m$ fields

1137: $a_\m$, $n$ fields $\phi_1$, $p$ fields $\phi_2$ and $q$ pairs,

1138: $(c,\bar{c})$, of ghost-anti-ghost fields:

1139: 

1140: {\bf Propagators}

1141: \begin{equation*}

1142: \begin{array}{l}

1143:  a_\m\longrightarrow G^{\m\n}(k)=\frac{-i}{k^2-(ev)^2+i\varepsilon}\Big[g^{\m\n}-(1-\xi)\frac{k^\mu k^\nu}{k^2-\xi(ev)^2}\Big]\\

1144: %%%%

1145:   \phi_1\longrightarrow G_1(k)=\frac{i}{k^2-2m^2+i\varepsilon}\\

1146: %%%%

1147:  \phi_2\longrightarrow G_2(k)=\frac{i}{k^2-\xi(ev)^2+i\varepsilon}\\

1148: %%%%

1149:  c\longrightarrow G(k)=\frac{i}{k^2-\xi(ev)^2+i\varepsilon}\\

1150: \end{array}

1151: \end{equation*}\par

1152: {\bf Ordinary vertices}

1153: \begin{equation*}

1154: \begin{array}{lll}

1155:  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)\,\m}_{(1,1,1,0)}[r;p;q]=e(p^\m-q^\m) &  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)\,\m\n}_{(2,1,0,0)}[p,q;r]=2 i e^2 v g^{\m\n} &

1156: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,3,0,0)}[p,q,r]=-\frac{3}{2}i\lambda v \\

1157: %%%

1158:  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,1,2,0)}[p;q,r]=-\frac{1}{2}i\lambda v & \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,1,0,2)}[p;q,r]=-i\xi e^2 v &

1159: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)\m\n}_{(2,2,0,0)}[p,q;r,s]=2ie^2g^{\m\n}\\

1160: %%%%

1161: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)\m\n}_{(2,0,2,0)}[p,q;r,s]=2ie^2g^{\m\n} & \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,4,0,0)}[p,q,r,s]=-\frac{3}{2}i\lambda & \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,0,4,0)}[p,q,r,s]=-\frac{3}{2}i\lambda\\

1162: %%%

1163: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,2,2,0)}[p,q;r,s]=-\frac{1}{2}i\lambda

1164: \end{array}

1165: \end{equation*}

1166: \par

1167: 

1168: {\bf Noncommutative vertices}

1169: 

1170: \begin{equation*}

1171:  \begin{array}{l}

1172: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,1,0,0)}[r;q]=\frac{v}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,1)}[r;0,q]+\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,1)}[r;-q,0])+\frac{v^3}{4}\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,2)}[r;0,q;0,0]\\

1173: %%%%

1174: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,0,1,0)}[r;q]=\frac{-iv}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,1)}[r;-q,0]-\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,1)}[r;0,q])\\

1175: %%%%

1176: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,0,0,0)}[r,s]=\frac{v^2}{2}\Gamma^{t(1)\mu\nu}_{(2,1)}[r,s;0,0]\\

1177: %%%%

1178: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2,0,0)}[r;p,q]=\frac{1}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,1)}[r;-p,q]+\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,1)}[r;-q,p])+\frac{3}{4}v^2\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,2)}[r;0,p;0,q] \\

1179: %%%%

1180:  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,0,2,0)}[r;p,q]=\frac{1}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,1)}[r;-p,q]+\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,1)}[r;-q,p])+\frac{1}{4}v^2\Gamma^{t(1)\mu}_{(1,2)}[r;0,p;0,q]\\

1181: %%%%

1182: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,1,1,0)}[r;q;p]=-\frac{i}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,1)}[r;-p,q]-\Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,1)}[r;-q,p])\\

1183: %%%%

1184: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n\e}_{(3,0,0,0)}[r,s,t]=\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n\e}_{(3,0)}[r,s,t]+\frac{v^2}{2}\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n\e}_{(3,1)}[r,s,t;0,0]\\

1185: %%%%

1186: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1,0,0)}[r,s;q]=\frac{v}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;0,q]+\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;-q,0])\\

1187: %%%%

1188: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,0,1,0)}[r,s;q]=\frac{-iv}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;-q,0]-\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;0,q])\\

1189: %%%%

1190: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,2,0,0)}[r,s;p,q]=\frac{1}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;-p,q]+\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;-q,p])\\

1191: %%%%

1192: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,0,2,0)}[r,s;p,q]=\frac{1}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;-p,q]+\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;-q,p])\\

1193: %%%%

1194: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1,1,0)}[r,s;q,p]=\frac{-i}{2}(\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;-p,q]-\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;-q,p])\\

1195: %%%%

1196: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,1,0,0)}[r,s,t;q]=v\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,1)}[r,s,t;0,q]\\

1197: %%%%

1198: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,3,0,0)}[s;p,q,r]=\frac{3v}{2}\Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[s;0,p;-q,r]\\

1199: %%%%

1200: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,1,2,0)}[s;p;q,r]=\frac{v}{2}\Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[s;0,p;-q,r]\\

1201: %%%%

1202: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,2,0,0)}[r,s,t;p,q]=\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,1)}[r,s,t;-p,q]\\

1203: %%%%

1204: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,0,2,0)}[r,s,t;p,q]=\Gamma^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,1)}[r,s,t;-p,q]\\

1205: %%%%

1206: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,4,0,0)}[t;p,q,r,s]=\frac{3}{2}\Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[t;-p,q;-r,s]\\

1207: %%%%

1208: \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,0,4,0)}[t;p,q,r,s]=\frac{3}{2}\Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[t;-p,q;-r,s]\\

1209: %%%%

1210:  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2,2,0)}[t;p,q;r,s]=\frac{1}{2}\Gamma^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[t;-p,q;-r,s]\\

1211:  \end{array}

1212: \label{feynmanssb}

1213: \end{equation*}

1214: with the $\Gamma^t$s as given in eq.~\eqref{feynmannossb}, but evaluated at $\mu^2=-m^2$. All momenta are taken as positive when coming out of the vertex.

1215: 

1216: Before discussing the renormalizablity at first order in

1217: $\theta^{\m\n}$ of the model in the phase with spontaneous

1218: symmetry breaking, we shall just remark the obvious fact  that the

1219: one-loop UV divergent contributions that do not depend on

1220: $\theta^{\m\n}$ --i.e., the one-loop UV divergent contributions of

1221: the ordinary model-- can be multiplicatively 

1222: renormalized --see refs.~\cite{Appelquist:1973ms, Vargas:1990nw, Petriello:2001mp} for further details-- by expressing the  bare fields and parameters--denoted by the superscript $0$-- in terms of the renormalized fields and 

1223: parameters --labelled with the superscript ``$R$''-- as follows:

1224: \begin{equation}

1225:  \begin{array}{lll}

1226:  a_\m^0=Z_a^{1/2}a^R_\m   &   \phi_1^0=Z_{\phi_1}^{1/2}\phi_1^R & \phi_2^0=Z_{\phi_2}^{1/2}\phi_2^R\\

1227: %%%

1228: v_0=Z_{\phi_1}^{1/2}(v^R+\delta v) & e^0=Z_e e^R &  m^0=Z_m^{1/2}m^R\\

1229: %%%

1230:    \lambda^0=Z_\lambda \lambda^R.\\

1231: %%%

1232: \end{array}

1233: \label{Zssb}

1234: \end{equation}

1235: In the MS scheme of dimensional regularization --recall that $D=4+2\epsilon$--

1236:  one has that $Z_{\phi_1}=Z_{\phi_2}=Z_\phi$, with $Z_\phi$ given in

1237: eq.~\eqref{ordZ}, and that $Z_a,\,Z_e,\,Z_m=Z_\mu,\, Z_\la$ take

1238: the same  values as in the phase with no spontaneous symmetry

1239: breaking -see eq.~\eqref{ordZ}--, if

1240: \begin{equation*}

1241:   \frac{\delta v}{v^R}=\frac{-e^2\xi}{16\pi^2\epsilon}. 

1242: \end{equation*}

1243: 

1244: 

1245: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1246: 

1247: \subsection{\bf One-loop renormalizability of the gauge sector}

1248: 

1249: In dimensional regularization, the pole part of  any UV divergent one-loop Feynman integral, $I_F$, is a polynomial on the external

1250: momenta of the integral and the masses of the free internal propagators, if it  is besides IR finite by power counting at

1251: non-exceptional momenta. Further, if the Feynman integral, say $I_F(m=0)$,  that is obtained from $I_F$ by setting to zero all

1252: the masses in the denominators is still IR finite by power counting at non-exceptional momenta, there happens that the

1253: pole part of $I_F$ that does not depend on the masses is  given by the pole part of the integral $I_F(m=0)$.

1254: 

1255: For the remaining of this subsection, to render both the

1256: computations and the subsequent analysis as simple as possible, we

1257: shall send to zero the gauge parameter, $\xi$, that occurs in the

1258: Feynman rules of the model --these rules are given in figure 5 of

1259: the appendix. This way the interaction vertex involving the ghost

1260: fields vanishes. Let $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{\rm

1261: SSB,\,one-loop}_{\rm pole}$ denote the one-loop pole part of the

1262: 1PI functional of the gauge sector of the model at first order in

1263: $\theta^{\m\n}$ --by definition $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{\rm

1264: SSB,\,one-loop}_{\rm pole}$ only depends on $a_\m$. Taking into

1265: account the arguments presented in the previous paragraph, one

1266: concludes that the contributions to $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{\rm

1267: SSB,\,one-loop}_{\rm pole}$ that do not depend on any dimensionful parameter 

1268: --that we shall denote with $M$-- are equal to those in the massless theory, 

1269: which were obtained  in the previous section:

1270: \begin{equation}

1271: \begin{array}{l}

1272: \Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{\rm SSB,\;one-loop}_{\rm pole}=

1273: \Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{M-{\rm independent}}_{pole}+\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{M-{\rm dependent}}_{pole},\\

1274: \Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{M-{\rm independent}}_{pole}=\idx\;\big(\frac{e}{8}\,z_1\,t_1-\frac{e}{2}\,z_2\,t_2\,\big).\\

1275: \end{array}

1276: \label{polegauge}

1277: \end{equation}

1278: $t_1$ and $t_2$ were defined in eq.~\eqref{tbasis}, and $z_1$ and $z_2$ were given in eq.~\eqref{zisvalues} --see also eq.~\eqref{deltais}.

1279: $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{M-{\rm dependent}}_{pole}$ --the $M-$dependent

1280: contribution to $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{\rm SSB,\;one-loop}_{\rm pole}$-- can be obtained from  the pole of the $M$-dependent part of the one-loop 1PI diagrams contributing to $<0|T\{a_\m(x) a_\n(y)\}|0>$ and $<0|T\{a_\m(x) a_\n(y) a_\rho(z)\}|0>$. The topologically inequivalent diagrams that contribute at first first order in $\theta^{\m\n}$ are given in figures 6 and 7 of the appendix. It turns out that

1281: \begin{equation}

1282: \begin{array}{l}

1283: \Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{M-{\rm dependent}}_{pole}=

1284: \frac{(e v)^2}{2}\,\theta^{\a\b}\idx\;\Big(i\,\Delta_4^{(\xi=0)}\,a_\rho \partial^{\rho}f_{\a\b}+

1285: i\,\Delta_5^{(\xi=0)}\,a_\a \partial_{\rho}{f_{\b}}^{\rho}+\\

1286: \phantom{\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{M-{\rm dependent}}_{pole}=

1287: (e v)^2\,\theta^{\a\b}\idx\;\big(i\,\Delta_4^{(\xi=0)}\,a_\rho +}

1288: e\,\Delta_6^{(\xi=0)}\,a_\rho a^{\rho}f_{\a\b}+

1289: e\,\Delta_7^{(\xi=0)}\,a_\a a_{\rho}{f_{\b}}^{\rho}\Big),\\

1290: \end{array}

1291: \label{vpolegauge}

1292: \end{equation}

1293: where $\Delta_4^{(\xi=0)}$, $\Delta_5^{(\xi=0)}$, $\Delta_6^{(\xi=0)}$ and $\Delta_7^{(\xi=0)}$ are obtained by substituting $\xi=0$ in $\Delta_4$, $\Delta_5$, $\Delta_6$ and $\Delta_7$, as given in eq.~\eqref{deltais}, respectively.

1294: 

1295: Let us now show that the UV divergences in eqs.~\eqref{polegauge}

1296: and eq.~\eqref{vpolegauge} can be removed by renormalizing the

1297: parameters and fields as in eq.~\eqref{Zssb}, if we also introduce

1298: the following renormalization of the parameters $\kappa_i$, $i=1,\dots,5$,

1299: of the Seiberg-Witten map in eq.~\eqref{SWmap}:

1300: \begin{equation}

1301: \kappa_i^0=\kappa_i^R+\delta\kappa_i,\,i=1,2,3,4,\quad \text{Re}\ka_5^0=\text{Re}\ka_5^R+\delta\text{Re}\ka_5^R,\quad

1302: \text{Im}\ka_5^0=\text{Im}\ka_5^R+\delta\text{Im}\ka_5^R.

1303: \label{kapparen}

1304: \end{equation}

1305: For completeness one  should also include the following renormalization of

1306: $\theta^{\m\n}$: $\theta^{0\,\m\n}=\Z_\theta \theta^{R\,\m\n}$, but as we shall see the renormalization of the gauge sector implies $Z_\theta=1$ at the order at which we are working.

1307: 

1308: The substitution of the definitions in eqs.~\eqref{Zssb} and~\eqref{kapparen}

1309: in the action in eq.~\eqref{actionssb} yields the following $\theta^{\m\n}-$dependent counterterms involving only gauge fields:

1310: \begin{equation*}

1311: \begin{array}{c}

1312: S^{(1)}_{\rm ct}[a]=\idx\, \big[\,\frac{e}{8}\, (\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_a) t_1-\frac{e}{2} (\delta Z_\theta+\delta Z_a)  t_2\,\big]\,+\\

1313: %%%

1314: \frac{(ev)^2}{2}\,\theta^{\a\b}\idx\,\big\{

1315: i\,[\delta C_4+C_4(\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_\phi)]\,a_\rho \partial^{\rho}f_{\a\b}\,+

1316: i\,[\delta C_5+C_5(\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_\phi)]\,a_\a \partial_{\rho}{f_{\b}}^{\rho}\big\}+\\

1317: %%%

1318: \frac{(ev)^2}{2}\,\theta^{\a\b}\idx\,\big\{e\,[\delta C_6+C_6(\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_\phi)]\, a_\rho a^{\rho}f_{\a\b}\,+\,

1319: e\,[\delta C_7+C_7(\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_\phi)]\,

1320: a_\a a_{\rho}{f_{\b}}^{\rho}\big\},\\

1321: \end{array}

1322: \end{equation*}

1323: where $\delta C_4$, $\delta C_5$, $\delta C_6$ and $\delta C_7$ were defined in eq.~\eqref{deltaCs}. In obtaining

1324: $S^{(1)}_{\rm ct}[a_\m]$ above, we have used the results: $\delta Z_a=-2\,\delta Z_e,\,\delta v^{(\xi=0)}=0$.

1325: 

1326: It is plain that $S^{(1)}_{\rm ct}[a_\m]$ defined in the MS scheme

1327: will cancel $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{\rm SSB,\;one-loop}_{\rm pole}$

1328: given by eqs.~\eqref{polegauge} and~\eqref{vpolegauge} if, and

1329: only if,

1330: \begin{equation*}

1331: \begin{array}{c}

1332:  \frac{e^2}{48\pi^2\epsilon}=\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_a,\\

1333: %%%%

1334: -2\Delta_4^{(\xi=0)}+\Delta_5^{(\xi=0)}=2\delta C_4-\delta C_5+(2C_4-C_5)(\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_\phi),\\

1335: %%%

1336: -\Delta_i^{(\xi=0)}\,=\,\delta C_i\,+\, C_i(\delta Z_\theta +\delta Z_\phi),\quad i=6,7.\\

1337: \end{array}

1338: \end{equation*}

1339: The previous set of equations is a subset of the set of equalities

1340: constituted by eq.~\eqref{eqztheta} and the first five equalities

1341: in eq~\eqref{eqdeltaci} evaluated at $\xi=0$. Hence, taking into

1342: account that $\delta Z_a$ and $\delta Z_{\phi}$ have the same

1343: value --given in eq.~\eqref{ordZ}-- as in the phase with unbroken

1344: symmetry but with the choice $\xi=0$, one concludes first that

1345: $\delta Z_\theta=0$ and second that by choosing $\delta \kappa_i$,

1346: $i=1,\dots, 5$, as in eq.~\eqref{soldeltaC} --i.e., as in the

1347: symmetric phase-- we will  be able to remove the UV divergences of

1348: the gauge sector at one-loop and at first order in

1349: $\theta^{\m\n}$.

1350: 

1351: Let us show next that the one-loop  renormalizability of the gauge sector of

1352: the model in the phase with spontaneous symmetry breaking that we have just

1353: discussed is a consequence of the two facts: {\it i)} that the $U(1)$ symmetry is broken spontaneously so that the action in eq.~\eqref{actionssb} is invariant under the following BRST transformations

1354: \begin{equation*}

1355: s a_\mu=\partial_{\mu}c,\quad s\phi_1=-ec\,\phi_2,\quad s\phi_2=ec\,(\phi_1\,+\,v),\quad sc=0,\quad s\bar{c}=b,\quad sb=0

1356: \end{equation*}

1357: and {\it ii)} that the pole part of the one-loop 1PI functional

1358: that does not depend on $v$ is the same as in the massless model.

1359: To use as simple as possible  linearized Slavnov-Taylor equations,

1360: we shall still keep the gauge-fixing parameter $\xi$ equal to 0.

1361: For this value of the gauge-fixing parameter the ghost and

1362: anti-ghost fields decouple and, hence, they do not contribute to

1363: the dimensionally regularized one-loop 1PI functional,

1364: $\Gamma_{\rm SSB}$, obtained from our Feynman rules in figure 5 of

1365: the appendix. Since the gauge-fixing equation

1366: \begin{equation*}

1367: \frac{\delta\Gamma_{\rm SSB}}{\delta b}=\xi\,b+\Dm a^\mu +\xi\rho\phi_2

1368: \end{equation*}

1369: holds for the dimensionally regularized 1PI functional

1370: $\Gamma_{\rm SSB}$ obtained from $S_{\rm SSB}$ in

1371: eq.~\eqref{actionssb}, it turns out that in the gauge $\xi=0$ the

1372: BRST invariance of the model implies that the one-loop

1373: contribution, $\Gamma_{\rm SSB}^{\rm one-loop}$, to $\Gamma_{\rm

1374: SSB}$ is a function of $\phi=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(v+\phi_1+i\phi_2)$

1375: and $\phi^{*}$ that must satisfy the following linearized

1376: Slavnov-Taylor equation

1377: \begin{equation}

1378: \iDx\, sa_\m(x)\;\frac{\delta\Gamma_{\rm SSB}^{\rm one-loop}}{\delta a_\m(x)}\,+\,

1379: s\phi(x)\,\frac{\delta\Gamma_{\rm SSB}^{\rm one-loop}}{\delta \phi(x)}+

1380: s\phi^{*}(x)\,\frac{\delta\Gamma_{\rm SSB}^{\rm one-loop}}{\delta \phi^{*}(x)}\,=\,0,

1381: \label{stssb}

1382: \end{equation}

1383: where $s\phi=iec\phi$ and $s\phi^{*}=-iec\phi^{*}$.

1384: eq.~\eqref{stssb} leads to the conclusion that when $\xi=0$ the

1385: pole part of the one-loop 1PI functional  $\Gamma_{\rm SSB}^{\rm

1386: one-loop}$ is given by the most general  gauge invariant local

1387: polynomial which is a functional of  $a_\m$,

1388: $\phi=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(v+\phi_1+i\phi_2)$ and $\phi^{*}$ --it

1389: must then be a local polynomial of $f_{\m\n}$, $\phi$ and $\phi^*$

1390: and their gauge covariant derivatives. This result and the

1391: analysis carried out in the first paragraph of this subsection

1392: implies that for $\xi=0$ the pole contribution to $\Gamma_{\rm

1393: SSB}^{\rm one-loop}$ that is linear in $\theta^{\m\n}$, say

1394: $\Gamma_{\rm SSB}^{(1)\,{\rm one-loop}}$, reads

1395: \begin{equation}

1396: \Gamma_{\rm SSB}^{(1)\,{\rm one-loop}}=\idx\;\frac{e}{8}\,z_1^{(\xi=0)}\,t_1-\frac{e}{2}\,z_2^{(\xi=0)}\,t_2+\sum_{i=3}^8 e z_i^{(\xi=0)}\,t_i+e

1397: r_9(m,v) t_9,

1398: \label{predict}

1399: \end{equation}

1400: where $z_i^{(\xi=0)}$, $i=1,\dots,8$, are given  by the

1401: corresponding $z_i$ in eq.~\eqref{zisvalues}, upon substituting

1402: $\xi=0$, and $t_i$, $i=1,\dots,9$, are defined as in

1403: eq.~\eqref{tbasis} but, now, with

1404: $\phi=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(v+\phi_1+i\phi_2)$. We have thus shown

1405: that, for $\xi=0$, $\Gamma_{\rm SSB}^{(1)\,{\rm one-loop}}$ is a

1406: linear combination of the basis of gauge invariant polynomials

1407: given in eq.~\eqref{tbasis} with coefficients such that, when

1408: $m$ and $v\rightarrow 0$, one recovers the corresponding object for the

1409: massless Higgs-Kibble model at $\xi=0$. Finally,

1410: eq.~\eqref{predict} leads to $\Gamma^{(1)}[a_\mu]^{\rm

1411: SSB,\;one-loop}_{\rm pole}$ as given by eqs.~\eqref{polegauge}

1412: and~\eqref{vpolegauge} upon imposing the condition $\xi=0$.

1413: 

1414: \subsection{Non-renormalizability of the matter sector}

1415: 

1416: Recall that we are in the phase with spontaneously broken gauge symmetry. 

1417: Let $\Gamma^{M-{\rm independent}}_{\rm pole}[a_\mu,\phi_1,

1418: \phi_2]$ denote the one-loop pole part of the  1PI functional of the model 

1419: that does not depend on any dimensionful parameter $M$ for arbitrary $\xi$. 

1420: Taking advantage of the discussion carried out in the first paragraph of 

1421: the previous subsection, one concludes that $\Gamma^{M-{\rm independent}}_{\rm

1422: pole}[a_\mu,\phi_1, \phi_2]$ is equal to the corresponding object

1423: computed in the massless model. We have shown in the previous

1424: section --section 3-- that there is no local way of renormalizing

1425: the fields and parameters of the model that removes the UV

1426: divergences of the matter sector of the massless model. Hence, in

1427: the phase with spontaneous symmetry breaking, there is also no

1428: local way of renormalizing the fields and parameters of the field

1429: theory that substracts the $M-$independent UV divergent

1430: contributions occurring at the one-loop level in the 1PI functional of

1431: the matter sector of the model.

1432: 

1433: \newpage

1434: 

1435: \section{Summary and conclusions}

1436: 

1437: In this paper we have shown that the noncommutative $U(1)$

1438: Higgs-Kibble model formulated within the enveloping-algebra

1439: formalism of refs.\cite{Madore:2000en,Jurco:2000ja}

1440: and~\cite{Jurco:2001rq} is non-renormalizable in perturbation

1441: theory in the phase with unbroken gauge symmetry, whatever the

1442: value of the mass of the complex scalar field. We have also shown

1443: that the same result holds when the model is in the phase with

1444: spontaneous symmetry breaking. However, the gauge sector of the

1445: model is one-loop renormalizable at first order in $\theta^{\m\n}$

1446: whatever the phase we look at. This is quite surprising --although

1447: in keeping with the results obtained in

1448: refs.\cite{Wulkenhaar:2001sq} and~\cite{Buric:2005xe} for other

1449: models-- since gauge symmetry -either noncommutative or ordinary--

1450: and power counting do not imply it --see discussion in the

1451: paragraph below eq.~\eqref{vandelZ}. This renormalizability of the

1452: gauge sector of the model appears even more surprising if we take

1453: into account that the matter sector is non-renormalizable and that

1454: all the one-loop  UV divergent diagrams that contribute to the gauge

1455: sector in the phase with unbroken gauge symmetry --see figure 2--

1456: have only scalar particles propagating along the loop. The

1457: question thus arises as to whether the renormalizability of the

1458: gauge sector of all the models studied so far, hints at the

1459: existence of an as yet unveiled new symmetry of these gauge models

1460: so that the part  of the 1PI functional that only depends on the gauge

1461: fields is constrained by it. The existence of such a symmetry

1462: will be of paramount importance in modifying the matter sector so

1463: that it becomes renormalizable. Finally, the results presented in this paper

1464: make us confident that all the one-loop UV divergent contributions to the 

1465: gauge sector of the noncommutative standard model coming from the matter sector of the model are renormalizable, at least at first order in $\theta^{\m\n}$. Hence, phenomenological results such as those obtained in ref.~\cite{Buric:2006nr} are robust due to the one-loop renormalizability of the gauge sector. 

1466: 

1467: \section{Acknowledgements}

1468: 

1469: This work has been financially suported in part by MEC through grant

1470: FIS2005-02309. The work of C. Tamarit has also received financial support

1471: from MEC through FPU grant AP2003-4034. C. Tamarit should like to thank

1472: Dr. Chong-Sun Chu for valuable conversations and the Department of

1473: Mathematical Sciences of the University of Durham, United Kingdom, where part

1474: of this work was carried out, for its kind hospitality.

1475: 

1476: 

1477: 

1478: \section{Appendix. Feynman rules and Feynman diagrams with a noncommutative vertex}

1479: 

1480: 

1481: In this appendix we collect the figures with the Feynman rules and

1482: 1PI Feynman diagrams that are referred to in the main text of the

1483: paper. In figure 1, the Feynman rules of our noncommutative Higgs-Kibble model

1484: in the phase with unbroken gauge symmetry are given. The topologically inequivalent Feynman diagrams contributing to $\Gamma^{(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,0)}[p_1,p_2,-p_1-p_2]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

1485: one-loop}$, $\Gamma^{(1)\m}_{(1,1)}[p_1-p_2;p_1,p_2]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

1486: one-loop}$ and $\Gamma^{(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[t;p,q;r,s]_{\rm

1487: pole}^{\rm one-loop}$ are depicted in figures 2, 3 and 4. The Feynman rules

1488: of our non-commutative  Higgs-Kibble model in the phase with spontaneous symmetry breaking are drawn in figure 5. Finally, in figures 6 and 7, the topologically inequivalent Feynman diagrams contributing to the pole part of the $M$-dependent part of the 1PI functions of the gauge field are shown.

1489: \newpage

1490: \begin{minipage}{0.96\textwidth}

1491: \centering

1492: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.19\textwidth}\centering

1493: \epsfig{file=foton.eps,height=0.6cm,width=3cm}

1494: \end{minipage}%

1495: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1496: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}\centering

1497: \small

1498: \flushleft

1499: \begin{equation*}

1500:     \leftrightarrow  G^{\m\n}[k]

1501: \end{equation*}

1502: \end{minipage}%

1503: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1504: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.19\textwidth}\centering

1505: \epsfig{file=complexscalar.eps,height=0.6cm,width=3cm}

1506: \end{minipage}%

1507: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1508: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1509: \small

1510: \begin{equation*}

1511:     \leftrightarrow  G[k]

1512: \end{equation*}

1513: \end{minipage}%

1514: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1515: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1516: \par\centering

1517: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1518: \epsfig{file=verticeaphiphi.eps,height=2cm}

1519: \end{minipage}%

1520: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1521: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1522: \small

1523: \begin{equation*}

1524:     \leftrightarrow\Gamma^{t(0)\,\m}_{(1,1)}[r;p,q]

1525: \end{equation*}

1526: \end{minipage}%

1527: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1528: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\textwidth}\centering

1529: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphiphi.eps,height=2cm}

1530: \end{minipage}%

1531: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.20\textwidth}

1532: \small

1533: \begin{equation*}

1534:         \leftrightarrow \Gamma^{t(0)\,\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;p,q]

1535:      \end{equation*}

1536: \end{minipage}%

1537: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1538: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}\centering

1539: \epsfig{file=verticephi4.eps,height=2cm}

1540: \end{minipage}%

1541: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.20\textwidth}

1542: \small

1543:  \begin{equation*}

1544: \leftrightarrow\Gamma^{t(0)}_{(0,2)}[r,s;p,q]

1545: \end{equation*}

1546: \end{minipage}

1547: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1548: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1549: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}\centering

1550: \epsfig{file=verticeaphiphit.eps,height=2cm}

1551: \end{minipage}%

1552: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1553: \small

1554:  \begin{equation*}

1555: \leftrightarrow \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m}_{(1,1)}[r;p,q]

1556: \end{equation*}

1557: \end{minipage}

1558: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1559: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}\centering

1560: \epsfig{file=verticeaaat.eps,height=2cm}

1561: \end{minipage}%

1562: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.18\textwidth}

1563: \small

1564:  \begin{equation*}

1565: \leftrightarrow \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m\n\e}_{(3,0)}[p,q,r]

1566: \end{equation*}

1567: \end{minipage}

1568: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1569: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\textwidth}\centering

1570: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphiphit.eps,height=2cm}

1571: \end{minipage}%

1572: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.20\textwidth}

1573: \small

1574:  \begin{equation*}

1575: \leftrightarrow \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m\n}_{(2,1)}[r,s;p,q]

1576: \end{equation*}

1577: \end{minipage}\par\centering

1578: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1579: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1580: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}\centering

1581: \epsfig{file=verticeaaaphiphit.eps,height=2cm}

1582: \end{minipage}%

1583: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.25\textwidth}

1584: \small

1585:  \begin{equation*}

1586:  \begin{array}{l}

1587: \leftrightarrow \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m\n\r}_{(3,1)}[r,s,t;p,q]

1588: \end{array}

1589: \end{equation*}

1590: \end{minipage}

1591: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1592: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}\centering

1593: \epsfig{file=verticeaphiphiphiphit.eps,height=2cm}

1594: \end{minipage}%

1595: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.22\textwidth}

1596: \small

1597:  \begin{equation*}

1598:  \begin{array}{l}

1599: \leftrightarrow \Gamma^{t(1)\,\m}_{(1,2)}[t;p,q;r,s]

1600: \end{array}

1601: \end{equation*}

1602: \end{minipage}

1603: \\[13pt]

1604:  \renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}

1605:  \renewcommand{\captionlabeldelim}{.}

1606: \figcaption{Feynman rules for the phase with unbroken symmetry.}

1607: \end{minipage}

1608: \\[\intextsep]

1609: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1610: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1611: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1612: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1613: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1614: \\[\intextsep]

1615: \begin{minipage}{0.96\textwidth}

1616: \centering

1617: \epsfig{file=aaanossb.eps,height=3cm}

1618: \\[7pt]

1619:  \renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}

1620:  \renewcommand{\captionlabeldelim}{.}

1621: \figcaption{Topologically inequivalent diagrams contributing to

1622: $\Gamma^{(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,0)}[p_1,p_2,-p_1-p_2]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

1623: one-loop}$.}

1624: \end{minipage}

1625: \\[\intextsep]

1626: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1627: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1628: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1629: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1630: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1631: \\[\intextsep]

1632: \begin{minipage}{0.96\textwidth}

1633: \centering

1634: \epsfig{file=aphiphinossb.eps,height=5cm}

1635: \\[7pt]

1636:  \renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}

1637:  \renewcommand{\captionlabeldelim}{.}

1638: \figcaption{Topologically inequivalent diagrams contributing to

1639: $\Gamma^{(1)\m}_{(1,1)}[p_1-p_2;p_1,p_2]_{\rm pole}^{\rm

1640: one-loop}$.}

1641: \end{minipage}

1642: \\[\intextsep]

1643: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1644: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1645: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1646: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1647: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1648: \begin{minipage}{\textwidth}

1649: \centering

1650: \epsfig{file=aphiphiphiphinossb.eps,width=16.8cm}

1651: \\[13pt]

1652:  \renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}

1653:  \renewcommand{\captionlabeldelim}{.}

1654: \figcaption{Topologically inequivalent diagrams contributing to

1655: $\Gamma^{(1)\m}_{(1,2)}[t;p,q;r,s]_{\rm

1656: pole}^{\rm one-loop}$.}

1657: \end{minipage}

1658: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1659: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1660: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1661: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1662: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1663: \begin{minipage}{\textwidth}

1664: \centering

1665: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.27\textwidth}\centering

1666: \epsfig{file=foton.eps,height=0.6cm,width=3cm}

1667: \end{minipage}%

1668: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1669: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1670: \small

1671: \begin{equation*}

1672:     \leftrightarrow  G^{\m\n}[k]

1673: \end{equation*}

1674: \end{minipage}

1675: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1676: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.27\textwidth}\centering

1677: \epsfig{file=scalar1.eps,height=0.6cm,width=3cm}

1678: \end{minipage}%

1679: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1680: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1681: \small

1682: \begin{equation*}

1683:     \leftrightarrow  G_1[k]

1684: \end{equation*}

1685: \end{minipage}\par\centering

1686: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1687: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.27\textwidth}\centering

1688: \epsfig{file=scalar2.eps,height=0.6cm,width=3cm}

1689: \end{minipage}%

1690: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1691: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1692: \small

1693: \begin{equation*}

1694:     \leftrightarrow  G_2[k]

1695: \end{equation*}

1696: \end{minipage}

1697: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1698: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.27\textwidth}\centering

1699: \epsfig{file=ghost.eps,height=0.6cm,width=3cm}

1700: \end{minipage}%

1701: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1702: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1703: \small

1704: \begin{equation*}

1705:     \leftrightarrow  G[k]

1706: \end{equation*}

1707: \end{minipage}\par\centering

1708: %%%%%%%%%%%

1709: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1710: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1711: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi1phi2.eps,height=2cm}

1712: \end{minipage}

1713: %%%%%%%%%%%%

1714: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.18\textwidth}

1715: \small

1716: \begin{equation*}

1717:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)\,\m}_{(1,1,1,0)}[r;p;q]

1718: \end{equation*}

1719: \end{minipage}%

1720: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1721: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1722: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphi1.eps,height=2cm}

1723: \end{minipage}%

1724: %%%%%%%%

1725: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.175\textwidth}

1726: \small

1727: \begin{equation*}

1728:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)\,\m\n}_{(2,1,0,0)}[r,s;q]

1729: \end{equation*}

1730: \end{minipage}%

1731: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1732: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1733: \epsfig{file=verticephi1phi1phi1.eps,height=2cm}

1734: \end{minipage}%

1735: %%%%%%

1736: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.175\textwidth}

1737: \small

1738: \begin{equation*}

1739:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,3,0,0)}[p,q,r]

1740: \end{equation*}

1741: \end{minipage}\\

1742: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1743: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1744: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1745: \epsfig{file=verticephi1phi2phi2.eps,height=2cm}

1746: \end{minipage}%

1747: %%%%%%

1748: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.175\textwidth}

1749: \small

1750: \begin{equation*}

1751:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,1,2,0)}[p;q,r]

1752: \end{equation*}

1753: \end{minipage}

1754: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1755: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1756: \epsfig{file=verticephi1cc.eps,height=2cm}

1757: \end{minipage}%

1758: %%%%%%

1759: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.175\textwidth}

1760: \small

1761: \begin{equation*}

1762:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,1,0,2)}[p;q,r]

1763: \end{equation*}

1764: \end{minipage}

1765: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1766: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1767: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphi1phi1.eps,height=2cm}

1768: \end{minipage}%

1769: %%%%%%

1770: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.195\textwidth}

1771: \small

1772: \begin{equation*}

1773:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)\m\n}_{(2,2,0,0)}[r,s;p,q]

1774: \end{equation*}

1775: \end{minipage}

1776: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1777: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1778: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1779: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphi2phi2.eps,height=2cm}

1780: \end{minipage}%

1781: %%%%%%

1782: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.195\textwidth}

1783: \small

1784: \begin{equation*}

1785:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)\m\n}_{(2,0,2,0)}[r,s;p,q]

1786: \end{equation*}

1787: \end{minipage}

1788: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1789: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1790: \epsfig{file=verticephi1phi1phi1phi1.eps,height=2cm}

1791: \end{minipage}%

1792: %%%%%%

1793: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.195\textwidth}

1794: \small

1795: \begin{equation*}

1796:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,4,0,0)}[p,q,r,s]

1797: \end{equation*}

1798: \end{minipage}

1799: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1800: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1801: \epsfig{file=verticephi2phi2phi2phi2.eps,height=2cm}

1802: \end{minipage}%

1803: %%%%%%

1804: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.195\textwidth}

1805: \small

1806: \begin{equation*}

1807:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,0,4,0)}[p,q,r,s]

1808: \end{equation*}

1809: \end{minipage}

1810: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1811: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1812: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1813: \epsfig{file=verticephi1phi1phi2phi2.eps,height=2cm}

1814: \end{minipage}%

1815: %%%%%%

1816: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.195\textwidth}

1817: \small

1818: \begin{equation*}

1819:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(0)}_{(0,2,2,0)}[p,q;r,s]

1820: \end{equation*}

1821: \end{minipage}

1822: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1823: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1824: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi1t.eps,width=2cm}

1825: \end{minipage}%

1826: %%%%%%

1827: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1828: \small

1829: \begin{equation*}

1830:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,1,0,0)}[r;q]

1831: \end{equation*}

1832: \end{minipage}

1833: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1834: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1835: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi2t.eps,width=2cm}

1836: \end{minipage}%

1837: %%%%%%

1838: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1839: \small

1840: \begin{equation*}

1841:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,0,1,0)}[r;q]

1842: \end{equation*}

1843: \end{minipage}

1844: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1845: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1846: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1847: \epsfig{file=verticeaat.eps,width=2cm}

1848: \end{minipage}%

1849: %%%%%%

1850: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.17\textwidth}

1851: \small

1852: \begin{equation*}

1853:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,0,0,0)}[r,s]

1854: \end{equation*}

1855: \end{minipage}

1856: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1857: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1858: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi1phi1t.eps,width=2cm}

1859: \end{minipage}%

1860: %%%%%%

1861: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.175\textwidth}

1862: \small

1863: \begin{equation*}

1864:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2,0,0)}[r;p,q]

1865: \end{equation*}

1866: \end{minipage}

1867: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1868: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1869: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi2phi2t.eps,width=2cm}

1870: \end{minipage}%

1871: %%%%%%

1872: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.175\textwidth}

1873: \small

1874: \begin{equation*}

1875:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,0,2,0)}[r;p,q]

1876: \end{equation*}

1877: \end{minipage}

1878: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1879: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1880: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1881: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi1phi2t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1882: \end{minipage}%

1883: %%%%%%

1884: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.175\textwidth}

1885: \small

1886: \begin{equation*}

1887:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,1,1,0)}[r;p;q]

1888: \end{equation*}

1889: \end{minipage}

1890: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1891: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1892: \epsfig{file=verticeaaat.eps,width=1.8cm}

1893: \end{minipage}%

1894: %%%%%%

1895: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.175\textwidth}

1896: \small

1897: \begin{equation*}

1898:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n\e}_{(3,0,0,0)}[p,q,r]

1899: \end{equation*}

1900: \end{minipage}

1901: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1902: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1903: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphi1t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1904: \end{minipage}%

1905: %%%%%%

1906: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.172\textwidth}

1907: \small

1908: \begin{equation*}

1909:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1,0,0)}[r,s;q]

1910: \end{equation*}

1911: \end{minipage}

1912: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1913: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1914: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1915: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphi2t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1916: \end{minipage}%

1917: %%%%%%

1918: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.172\textwidth}

1919: \small

1920: \begin{equation*}

1921:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,0,1,0)}[r,s;q]

1922: \end{equation*}

1923: \end{minipage}

1924: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1925: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1926: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphi1phi1t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1927: \end{minipage}%

1928: %%%%%%

1929: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.194\textwidth}

1930: \small

1931: \begin{equation*}

1932:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,2,0,0)}[r,s;p,q]

1933: \end{equation*}

1934: \end{minipage}

1935: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1936: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1937: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphi2phi2t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1938: \end{minipage}%

1939: %%%%%%

1940: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.194\textwidth}

1941: \small

1942: \begin{equation*}

1943:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,0,2,0)}[r,s;p,q]

1944: \end{equation*}

1945: \end{minipage}

1946: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1947: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1948: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1949: \epsfig{file=verticeaaphi1phi2t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1950: \end{minipage}%

1951: %%%%%%

1952: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.194\textwidth}

1953: \small

1954: \begin{equation*}

1955:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n}_{(2,1,1,0)}[r,s;q;p]

1956: \end{equation*}

1957: \end{minipage}

1958: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1959: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1960: \epsfig{file=verticeaaaphi1t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1961: \end{minipage}%

1962: %%%%%%

1963: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.194\textwidth}

1964: \small

1965: \begin{equation*}

1966:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,1,0,0)}[r,s,t;q]

1967: \end{equation*}

1968: \end{minipage}

1969: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1970: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1971: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi1phi1phi1t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1972: \end{minipage}%

1973: %%%%%%

1974: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.195\textwidth}

1975: \small

1976: \begin{equation*}

1977:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,3,0,0)}[s;p,q,r]

1978: \end{equation*}

1979: \end{minipage}

1980: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1981: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1982: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1983: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi1phi2phi2t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1984: \end{minipage}%

1985: %%%%%%

1986: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.22\textwidth}

1987: \small

1988: \begin{equation*}

1989:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,1,2,0)}[s;p;q,r]

1990: \end{equation*}

1991: \end{minipage}

1992: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

1993: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

1994: \epsfig{file=verticeaaaphi1phi1t.eps,width=1.8cm}

1995: \end{minipage}%

1996: %%%%%%

1997: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.22\textwidth}

1998: \small

1999: \begin{equation*}

2000:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,2,0,0)}[r,s,t;p,q]

2001: \end{equation*}

2002: \end{minipage}

2003: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

2004: \end{minipage}

2005: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2006: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2007: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2008: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2009: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2010: \begin{minipage}{0.96\textwidth}

2011: \centering

2012: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

2013: \epsfig{file=verticeaaaphi2phi2t.eps,width=2cm}

2014: \end{minipage}%

2015: %%%%%%

2016: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.23\textwidth}

2017: \small

2018: \begin{equation*}

2019:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m\n\r}_{(3,0,2,0)}[r,s,t;p,q]

2020: \end{equation*}

2021: \end{minipage}

2022: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2023: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2024: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

2025: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi1phi1phi1phi1t.eps,width=2cm}

2026: \end{minipage}%

2027: %%%%%%

2028: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.23\textwidth}

2029: \small

2030: \begin{equation*}

2031:     \leftrightarrow \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,4,0,0)}[t;p,q,r,s]

2032: \end{equation*}

2033: \end{minipage}

2034: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

2035: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

2036: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi2phi2phi2phi2t.eps,width=2cm}

2037: \end{minipage}%

2038: %%%%%%

2039: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.23\textwidth}

2040: \small

2041: \begin{equation*}

2042:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,0,4,0)}[t;p,q,r,s]

2043: \end{equation*}

2044: \end{minipage}

2045: %%%%%%%%%%%%%

2046: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.13\textwidth}

2047: \epsfig{file=verticeaphi1phi1phi2phi2t.eps,width=2cm}

2048: \end{minipage}%

2049: %%%%%%

2050: \begin{minipage}[c]{0.23\textwidth}

2051: \small

2052: \begin{equation*}

2053:     \leftrightarrow  \tilde{\Gamma}^{t(1)\m}_{(1,2,2,0)}[t;p,q;r,s]

2054: \end{equation*}

2055: \end{minipage}

2056: \\[13pt]

2057:  \renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}

2058:  \renewcommand{\captionlabeldelim}{.}

2059: \figcaption{Feynman rules for the phase with spontaneously broken symmetry}

2060: \end{minipage}

2061: \\[\intextsep]

2062: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2063: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2064: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2065: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2066: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2067: \begin{minipage}{0.95\textwidth}

2068:   \centering

2069: \epsfig{file=aassb.eps,height=3cm}

2070: \renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}

2071:  \renewcommand{\captionlabeldelim}{.}

2072: \\[13pt]

2073: \figcaption{  Topologically inequivalent diagrams contributing to

2074: the $M-$dependent part of the gauge field two-point function.}

2075:  \end{minipage}

2076: \\[\intextsep]

2077: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2078: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2079: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2080: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2081: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2082: \begin{minipage}{0.95\textwidth}

2083:   \centering

2084: \epsfig{file=aaassb.eps,height=5.7cm}

2085: \renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}

2086:  \renewcommand{\captionlabeldelim}{.}

2087: \figcaption{  Topologically inequivalent diagrams contributing to

2088: the $M-$dependent part of the gauge field three-point function.}

2089:  \end{minipage}

2090: 

2091: \clearpage\newpage

2092: \begin{thebibliography}{100}

2093: 

2094: %\cite{Madore:2000en}

2095: \bibitem{Madore:2000en}

2096:   J.~Madore, S.~Schraml, P.~Schupp and J.~Wess,

2097:   %``Gauge theory on noncommutative spaces,''

2098:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 16} (2000) 161

2099:   [arXiv:hep-th/0001203].

2100:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0001203;%%

2101: 

2102: %\cite{Jurco:2000ja}

2103: \bibitem{Jurco:2000ja}

2104:   B.~Jurco, S.~Schraml, P.~Schupp and J.~Wess,

2105:    ``Enveloping algebra valued gauge transformations for non-Abelian gauge

2106:   %groups on non-commutative spaces,''

2107:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 17} (2000) 521

2108:   [arXiv:hep-th/0006246].

2109:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0006246;%%

2110: 

2111:  %\cite{Jurco:2001rq}

2112: \bibitem{Jurco:2001rq}

2113:   B.~Jurco, L.~Moller, S.~Schraml, P.~Schupp and J.~Wess,

2114:   %``Construction of non-Abelian gauge theories on noncommutative spaces,''

2115:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 21} (2001) 383

2116:   [arXiv:hep-th/0104153].

2117:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0104153;%%

2118: 

2119: %cite{Calmet:2001na}

2120: \bibitem{Calmet:2001na}

2121:   X.~Calmet, B.~Jurco, P.~Schupp, J.~Wess and M.~Wohlgenannt,

2122:   %``The standard model on non-commutative space-time,''

2123:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 23} (2002) 363

2124:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0111115].

2125:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0111115;%%

2126: 

2127: 

2128: 

2129: 

2130: %\cite{Aschieri:2002mc}

2131: \bibitem{Aschieri:2002mc}

2132:   P.~Aschieri, B.~Jurco, P.~Schupp and J.~Wess,

2133:   %``Non-commutative GUTs, standard model and C, P, T,''

2134:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 651} (2003) 45

2135:   [arXiv:hep-th/0205214].

2136:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0205214;%%

2137: 

2138: 

2139: %\cite{Melic:2005hb}

2140: \bibitem{Melic:2005hb}

2141:   B.~Melic, K.~Passek-Kumericki and J.~Trampetic,

2142: %   ``Quarkonia decays into two photons induced by the space-time

2143:   %non-commutativity,''

2144:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72} (2005) 054004

2145:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0503133].

2146:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0503133;%%

2147: 

2148: 

2149: %\cite{Melic:2005su}

2150: \bibitem{Melic:2005su}

2151:   B.~Melic, K.~Passek-Kumericki and J.~Trampetic,

2152:   %``K --> pi gamma decay and space-time noncommutativity,''

2153:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72} (2005) 057502

2154:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0507231].

2155:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0507231;%%

2156: 

2157: 

2158: %\cite{Haghighat:2005jy}

2159: \bibitem{Haghighat:2005jy}

2160:   M.~Haghighat, M.~M.~Ettefaghi and M.~Zeinali,

2161:   %``Photon neutrino scattering in non-commutative space,''

2162:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 73} (2006) 013007

2163:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0511042].

2164:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0511042;%%

2165: 

2166: 

2167: %\cite{MohammadiNajafabadi:2006iu}

2168: \bibitem{MohammadiNajafabadi:2006iu}

2169:   M.~Mohammadi Najafabadi,

2170:    %``Semi-leptonic decay of a polarized top quark in the noncommutative standard

2171:   %model,''

2172:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74} (2006) 025021

2173:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0606017].

2174:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0606017;%%

2175: 

2176: 

2177: %\cite{Alboteanu:2006hh}

2178: \bibitem{Alboteanu:2006hh}

2179:   A.~Alboteanu, T.~Ohl and R.~Ruckl,

2180:   %``Probing the noncommutative standard model at hadron colliders,''

2181:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74} (2006) 096004

2182:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0608155].

2183:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0608155;%%

2184: 

2185: 

2186: 

2187: %\cite{Buric:2006nr}

2188: \bibitem{Buric:2006nr}

2189:   M.~Buric, D.~Latas, V.~Radovanovic and J.~Trampetic,

2190:   %``Improved Z --> gamma gamma decay in the renormalizable gauge sector of the

2191:   %noncommutative standard model,''

2192:   arXiv:hep-ph/0611299.

2193:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0611299;%%

2194: 

2195: 

2196: 

2197: %\cite{Chaichian:2001py}

2198: \bibitem{Chaichian:2001py}

2199:   M.~Chaichian, P.~Presnajder, M.~M.~Sheikh-Jabbari and A.~Tureanu,

2200:   %``Noncommutative standard model: Model building,''

2201:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 29} (2003) 413

2202:   [arXiv:hep-th/0107055].

2203:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0107055;%%

2204: 

2205: %\cite{Khoze:2004zc}

2206: \bibitem{Khoze:2004zc}

2207:   V.~V.~Khoze and J.~Levell,

2208:   %``Noncommutative standard modelling,''

2209:   JHEP {\bf 0409} (2004) 019

2210:   [arXiv:hep-th/0406178].

2211:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0406178;%%

2212: 

2213: %\cite{Abel:2005rh}

2214: \bibitem{Abel:2005rh}

2215:   S.~A.~Abel, J.~Jaeckel, V.~V.~Khoze and A.~Ringwald,

2216: %  ``Noncommutativity, extra dimensions, and power law running in the

2217:   %infrared,''

2218:   JHEP {\bf 0601} (2006) 105

2219:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0511197].

2220:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0511197;%%

2221: 

2222: 

2223: %\cite{Arai:2006ya}

2224: \bibitem{Arai:2006ya}

2225:   M.~Arai, S.~Saxell and A.~Tureanu,

2226:   %``A noncommutative version of the minimal supersymmetric standard model,''

2227:   arXiv:hep-th/0609198.

2228:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0609198;%%

2229: 

2230: 

2231: %\cite{Bichl:2001cq}

2232: \bibitem{Bichl:2001cq}

2233:   A.~Bichl, J.~Grimstrup, H.~Grosse, L.~Popp, M.~Schweda and R.~Wulkenhaar,

2234:    %``Renormalization of the noncommutative photon self-energy to all orders  via

2235:   %Seiberg-Witten map,''

2236:   JHEP {\bf 0106} (2001) 013

2237:   [arXiv:hep-th/0104097].

2238:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0104097;%%

2239: 

2240: 

2241: 

2242: 

2243: %\cite{Wulkenhaar:2001sq}

2244: \bibitem{Wulkenhaar:2001sq}

2245:   R.~Wulkenhaar,

2246:   %``Non-renormalizability of Theta-expanded noncommutative QED,''

2247:   JHEP {\bf 0203} (2002) 024

2248:   [arXiv:hep-th/0112248].

2249:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0112248;%%

2250: 

2251: 

2252: %\cite{Buric:2002gm}

2253: \bibitem{Buric:2002gm}

2254:   M.~Buric and V.~Radovanovic,

2255:    %``The one-loop effective action for quantum electrodynamics on noncommutative

2256:   %space,''

2257:   JHEP {\bf 0210} (2002) 074

2258:   [arXiv:hep-th/0208204].

2259:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0208204;%%

2260: 

2261: %\cite{Buric:2004ms}

2262: \bibitem{Buric:2004ms}

2263:   M.~Buric and V.~Radovanovic,

2264:   %``Non-renormalizability of noncommutative SU(2) gauge theory,''

2265:   JHEP {\bf 0402} (2004) 040

2266:   [arXiv:hep-th/0401103].

2267:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0401103;%%

2268: 

2269: %\cite{Buric:2005xe}

2270: \bibitem{Buric:2005xe}

2271:   M.~Buric, D.~Latas and V.~Radovanovic,

2272:   %``Renormalizability of noncommutative SU(N) gauge theory,''

2273:   JHEP {\bf 0602} (2006) 046

2274:   [arXiv:hep-th/0510133].

2275:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0510133;%%

2276: 

2277: %\cite{Buric:2006wm}

2278: \bibitem{Buric:2006wm}

2279:   M.~Buric, V.~Radovanovic and J.~Trampetic,

2280: %   ``The one-loop renormalization of the gauge sector in the noncommutative

2281:   %standard model,''

2282:   arXiv:hep-th/0609073.

2283:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0609073;%%

2284: 

2285: 

2286: %\cite{Calmet:2006zy}

2287: \bibitem{Calmet:2006zy}

2288:   X.~Calmet,

2289:   %``Quantum electrodynamics on noncommutative spacetime,''

2290:   arXiv:hep-th/0604030.

2291:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0604030;%%

2292: 

2293: 

2294: %\cite{Petriello:2001mp}

2295: \bibitem{Petriello:2001mp}

2296:   F.~J.~Petriello,

2297:   %``The Higgs mechanism in non-commutative gauge theories,''

2298:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 601} (2001) 169

2299:   [arXiv:hep-th/0101109].

2300:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0101109;%%

2301: 

2302: %\cite{Campbell:2000ug}

2303: \bibitem{Campbell:2000ug}

2304:   B.~A.~Campbell and K.~Kaminsky,

2305:   %``Noncommutative field theory and spontaneous symmetry breaking,''

2306:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 581} (2000) 240

2307:   [arXiv:hep-th/0003137].

2308:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0003137;%%

2309: 

2310: %\cite{Liao:2001uv}

2311: \bibitem{Liao:2001uv}

2312:   Y.~Liao,

2313:   %``One loop renormalization of spontaneously broken U(2) gauge theory on

2314:   %noncommutative spacetime,''

2315:   JHEP {\bf 0111} (2001) 067

2316:   [arXiv:hep-th/0110112].

2317:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0110112;%%

2318: 

2319: %\cite{Liao:2002tv}

2320: \bibitem{Liao:2002tv}

2321:   Y.~Liao,

2322:   %``One loop renormalizability of spontaneously broken gauge theory with a

2323:   %product of gauge groups on noncommutative spacetime: The U(1) x U(1)  case,''

2324:   JHEP {\bf 0204} (2002) 042

2325:   [arXiv:hep-th/0201135].

2326:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0201135;%%

2327: 

2328: 

2329: %\cite{RuizRuiz:2002hh}

2330: \bibitem{RuizRuiz:2002hh}

2331:   F.~Ruiz Ruiz,

2332:   %``UV/IR mixing and the Goldstone theorem in noncommutative field theory,''

2333:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 637} (2002) 143

2334:   [arXiv:hep-th/0202011].

2335:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0202011;%%

2336: 

2337: \bibitem{mathematica}

2338: S. Wolfram, {\tt Mathematica}, {\it A System for Doing Mathematics by Computer}

2339: (Addison-Wesley, New-York, 1991).

2340: 

2341: %\cite{Kubo:1988jc}

2342: \bibitem{Kubo:1988jc}

2343:   J.~Kubo, K.~Sibold and W.~Zimmermann,

2344: %   ``CANCELLATION OF DIVERGENCES AND REDUCTION OF COUPLINGS IN THE STANDARD

2345:   %MODEL,''

2346:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 220} (1989) 191.

2347:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B220,191;%%

2348: 

2349: %\cite{Appelquist:1973ms}

2350: \bibitem{Appelquist:1973ms}

2351:   T.~Appelquist, J.~Carazzone, T.~Goldman and H.~R.~Quinn,

2352:   %``Renormalization and gauge independence in spontaneously broken gauge

2353:   %theories,''

2354:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 8} (1973) 1747

2355:   [Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 6} (1973) 1747].

2356:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D8,1747;%%

2357: 

2358: 

2359: 

2360: 

2361: 

2362: 

2363: 

2364: %\cite{Vargas:1990nw}

2365: \bibitem{Vargas:1990nw}

2366:   M.~Vargas and J.~L.~Lucio,

2367:   ``One loop renormalization of the Abelian Higgs model,''

2368:  In *Oaxtepec 1990, Proceedings, Particles and fields* 485-502.

2369: %%\href{http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?irn=2698773}{SPIRES entry}

2370: 

2371: 

2372: 

2373: 

2374: \end{thebibliography}

2375: 

2376: 

2377: \end{document}

2378: