1: %% This document created by Scientific Word (R) Version 3.0
2:
3: \documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{article}
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5: \usepackage{cite}
6: \usepackage{amsmath}
7: \usepackage{myart}
8: \usepackage{amsfonts}
9: \usepackage{amssymb}
10: %TCIDATA{OutputFilter=latex2.dll}
11: %TCIDATA{CSTFile=article.cst}
12: %TCIDATA{LastRevised=Thu Mar 08 18:22:47 2007}
13: %TCIDATA{<META NAME="GraphicsSave" CONTENT="32">}
14: %TCIDATA{Language=American English }
15: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0.0in}
16: \setlength{\textwidth}{6.5in}
17: \setlength{\topmargin}{0.0in}
18: \setlength{\textheight}{8.5in}
19:
20:
21:
22: \begin{document}
23: \hfill PTA/07-02
24:
25: \bigskip\
26:
27: \hfill In memory of Yasha Belavin
28:
29: \bigskip
30:
31: \begin{center}
32: {\Large \textbf{Bootstrap in Supersymmetric Liouville Field Theory.}}
33:
34: {\Large \textbf{I. NS Sector}}
35:
36: \vspace{1.0cm}
37:
38: {\large A.Belavin}
39:
40: \vspace{0.2cm}
41:
42: L.D.Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics RAS,
43:
44: 142432 Chernogolovka, Russia
45:
46: \vspace{0.2cm}
47:
48: {\large V.Belavin}\footnote{Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics
49: (ITEP) B. Cheremushkinskaya 25, 117259 Moscow, Russia}
50:
51: \vspace{0.2cm}
52:
53: International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA)
54:
55: Via Beirut 2-4, 34014 Trieste, Italy
56:
57: INFN, Sezione di Trieste
58:
59: \vspace{0.3cm}
60:
61: {\large A.Neveu}
62:
63: \vspace{0.2cm}
64:
65: {\large \ }and
66:
67: \vspace{0.2cm}
68:
69: {\large Al.Zamolodchikov}\footnote{On leave of absence from: Service de
70: Physique Th\'eorique, CNRS - URA 2306, C.E.A. - Saclay, F-91191,
71: Gif-sur-Yvette, France}
72:
73: \vspace{0.2cm}
74:
75: Laboratoire de Physique Th\'eorique et Astroparticules, UMR-5207 CNRS-UM2,
76:
77: Universit\'e Montpellier II, Pl.E.Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier, France
78: \end{center}
79:
80: \vspace{1.0cm}
81:
82: \textbf{Abstract}
83:
84: A four point function of basic Neveu-Schwarz exponential fields is constructed
85: in the $N=1$ supersymmetric Liouville field theory. Although the basic NS
86: structure constants were known previously, we present a new derivation, based
87: on a singular vector decoupling in the NS sector. This allows to stay
88: completely inside the NS sector of the space of states, without referencing to
89: the Ramond fields. The four-point construction involves also the NS blocks,
90: for which we suggest a new recursion representation, the so-called elliptic
91: one. The bootstrap conditions for this four point correlation function are
92: verified numerically for different values of the parameters.
93:
94: \section{The $N=1$ super Liouville}
95:
96: Construction of the super Liouville field theory (SLFT) is motivated by the
97: following action, which appeared in the non-critical superstring theory in
98: 1981 \cite{Polyakov}
99: \begin{equation}
100: \mathcal{L}_{\text{SLFT}}=\frac1{8\pi}\left( \partial_{a}\phi\right)
101: ^{2}+\frac1{2\pi}\left( \psi\bar\partial\psi+\bar\psi\partial\bar\psi\right)
102: +2i\mu b^{2}\bar\psi\psi e^{b\phi}+2\pi b^{2}\mu^{2}e^{2b\phi}\label{SL}%
103: \end{equation}
104: where $b$ is the standard ``quantum'' parameter related through the
105: ``background charge'' $Q=b^{-1}+b$ to the central charge
106: \begin{equation}
107: \widehat{c}=1+2Q^{2}\label{cQ}%
108: \end{equation}
109: of the superconformal algebra generated by the supercurrent $S(z)$, $\bar
110: S(\bar z)$ and the stress tensor $T(z)$, $\bar T(\bar z)$. Traditionally the
111: scale parameter $\mu$ is called the (super) cosmological constant.
112:
113: Let us recall some details about SLFT necessary for the forthcoming discussion
114: (see e.g., \cite{ZP, MSS, DHK, AG, Rubik}). The space of fields splits into
115: the so called Neveu-Schwarz\cite{NS} (NS) and Ramond\cite{R} (R) sectors, the
116: supercurrent components $(S$,$\bar S)$ being respectively single or double
117: valued near the point where the corresponding operator is located. Apparently
118: the first, NS sector, is closed under the operator product expansions (OPE).
119: It is completely consistent to consider it separately. This is what we're
120: going to do in the present publication, meaning to include the R sector in the future.
121:
122: Respectively, the NS fields belong to highest weight representation of the NS
123: superconformal algebra
124: \begin{align}
125: \{G_{k},G_{l}\} & =2L_{k+l}+\frac{\widehat{c}}2\left( k^{2}-\frac14\right)
126: \delta_{k+l}\nonumber\\
127: \lbrack L_{n},G_{k}] & =\left( \frac n2-k\right) G_{n+k}\label{SVir}\\
128: \lbrack L_{m},L_{n}] & =(m-n)L_{m+n}+\frac{\widehat{c}}8(m^{3}-m)\delta
129: _{m+n}\nonumber
130: \end{align}
131: where the subscripts $m,n$ are integer and $k,l$ are half-integer. In fact
132: there are two copies of algebra (\ref{SVir}), the ``right'' one $SVir$
133: generated by $S(z)$ and $T(z),$ and the ``left'' $\overline{SVir}$ constructed
134: from the left-moving components $\bar S(\bar z)$ and $\bar T(\bar z)$. The
135: space is classified in the highest weight representations of $SVir\otimes
136: \overline{SVir}$. The basic NS fields are the scalar primary fields $V_{a}(x)$
137: corresponding to the highest weight vectors
138: \begin{align}
139: L_{n}V_{a} & =0\,;\;\;\,\,\bar L_{n}V_{a}=0\,;\;\text{for}\;n>0\nonumber\\
140: \;\;G_{k}V_{a} & =0\,;\;\;\;\bar G_{k}V_{a}=0\,;\;\text{for}%
141: \;k>0\label{highest}\\
142: L_{0}V_{a} & =\bar L_{0}V_{a}=\Delta_{a}V_{a}\nonumber
143: \end{align}
144: where
145: \begin{equation}
146: \Delta_{a}=\frac{a(Q-a)}2\label{Da}%
147: \end{equation}
148: and $a$ is a (complex) continuous parameter. It is sometimes instructive to
149: think of these basic operators as of the properly regularized exponentials
150: $V_{a}=\exp(a\phi)$ of the fundamental bosonic field entering the Lagrangian
151: (\ref{SL}). This is particularly useful in the region of the configuration
152: space where $\phi\rightarrow-\infty$. Here one can neglect the interaction
153: terms in the action (\ref{SL}), the fields $\phi$ and $(\psi,\bar\psi)$ behave
154: as a free boson and a free Majorana fermion and the exponential expression can
155: be given an exact sense.
156:
157: All other NS fields are the $SVir\otimes\overline{SVir}$ descendents of these
158: basic ones. It will prove convenient to distinguish the descendents of integer
159: and half-integer level, for which we reserve (somewhat loosely) the terms
160: ``even'' descendents, often marked by the index ``e'', and the ``odd'' ones,
161: referred to as ``o''. It will be also useful to introduce special notations
162: for the components of the multiplets under the standard super Poincare
163: algebra, a subalgebra of $SVir\otimes\overline{SVir}$ generated by $G_{-1/2}$,
164: $\bar G_{-1/2}$ and $L_{0}-\bar L_{0}$. From this point of view $V_{a}$ is the
165: ``bottom'' component of the supermultiplet, which includes also
166: \begin{align}
167: \Lambda_{a} & =G_{-1/2}V_{a}=-ia\psi e^{a\,\phi}\nonumber\\
168: \bar\Lambda_{a} & =\bar G_{-1/2}V_{a}=-ia\bar\psi e^{a\,\phi}\label{W}\\
169: W_{a} & =G_{-1/2}\bar G_{-1/2}V_{a}=a^{2}\bar\psi\psi e^{a\,\phi}-2i\pi\mu
170: abe^{(a+b)\phi}\nonumber
171: \end{align}
172: Here we partially borrow apt notations from ref.\cite{Fukuda} and also give a
173: ``free field'' interpretations of the corresponding components. The basic Ward
174: identities are
175: \begin{align}
176: T(z)V_{a}(0) & =\frac{\Delta_{a}}{z^{2}}V_{a}(0)+\frac1z\partial
177: V_{a}(0)+\text{reg}\nonumber\\
178: T(z)\Lambda_{a}(0) & =\frac{\Delta_{a}+1/2}{z^{2}}\Lambda_{a}(0)+\frac
179: 1z\partial\Lambda_{a}(0)+\text{reg}\label{WI}\\
180: S(z)V_{a}(0) & =\frac1z\Lambda_{a}(0)+\text{reg}\nonumber\\
181: S(z)\Lambda_{a}(0) & =\frac{2\Delta_{a}}{z^{2}}V_{a}(0)+\frac1z\partial
182: V_{a}(0)+\text{reg}\nonumber
183: \end{align}
184: We explicitly present the holomorphic relations and quote them for $V_{a}$ and
185: $\Lambda_{a}$ only. The ``right'' superconformal properties of the doublet
186: $\bar\Lambda_{a},W_{a}$ are the same as of $V_{a},\Lambda_{a}$ and the
187: ``left'' ones of $V_{a},\bar\Lambda_{a}$ and $\Lambda_{a},W_{a}$ are similar
188: to (\ref{WI}) with obvious modifications caused by the anticommutativity of
189: the right and left ``fermionic'' generators $G_{k}$ and $\bar G_{k}$.
190:
191: Local properties of SLFT in the NS sector are encoded in the basic operator
192: product expansion (here and below for the sake of brevity we denote
193: $\Delta=\Delta_{Q/2+iP}$ and $\Delta_{i}=\Delta_{a_{i}}$, wherever it cannot
194: cause any misunderstanding)
195: \begin{align}
196: \ & V_{a_{1}}(x)V_{a_{2}}(0)=\label{VV}\\
197: & \ \ \ \ \int\frac{dP}{4\pi}\left( x\bar x\right) ^{\Delta-\Delta
198: _{1}-\Delta_{2}}\left( \mathbb{C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}^{Q/2+iP}\left[
199: V_{Q/2+iP}(0)\right] _{\text{ee}}+\mathbb{\tilde C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}%
200: ^{Q/2+iP}\left[ V_{Q/2+iP}(0)\right] _{\text{oo}}\right) \nonumber
201: \end{align}
202: This OPE is continuous and involves integration over the ``momentum'' $P$.
203: Precisely as in the bosonic Liouville field theory \cite{LFT} the integration
204: contour is basically along the real axis, but should be deformed sometimes
205: under analytic continuation in the parameters $a_{1}$ and $a_{2}$. It is a
206: good idea to make such deformations explicit collecting the result in the form
207: of the so called discrete terms \cite{LFT}. In (\ref{VV}) $\left[
208: V_{p}\right] $ denotes the contribution of the primary field $V_{p}$ and its
209: superconformal descendents to the operator product expansion. Unlike the
210: standard conformal symmetry, not all these contributions are prescribed
211: unambiguously by the superconformal invariance, the even and the odd ones
212: entering independently. From here come two different structure constants
213: $\mathbb{C}_{a_{1}a_{2}}^{p}$ and $\mathbb{\tilde C}_{a_{1}a_{2}}^{p}$ in the
214: OPE (\ref{VV}), while $\left[ V_{a}\right] _{\text{ee}}$ and $\left[
215: V_{a}\right] _{\text{oo}}$ denote respectively the collections of
216: ``even-even''\footnote{This means even in the left and even in the right
217: sector. Terms ``odd-odd'', ``even-odd'' etc. have similar sense.} and
218: ``odd-odd''descendents. As usual \cite{BPZ} both towers of descendents enjoy
219: the factorization in the product of holomorphic and antiholomorphic
220: ``chains''
221: \begin{align}
222: \left[ V_{a}(0)\right] _{\text{ee}} & =\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}^{\Delta
223: _{1},\Delta_{2}}(\Delta_{a},x)\;\overline{\mathcal{C}}_{\text{e}}^{\Delta
224: _{1},\Delta_{2}}(\Delta_{a},\bar x)\;V_{a}(0)\label{eodesc}\\
225: \left[ V_{a}(0)\right] _{\text{oo}} & =\mathcal{C}_{\text{o}}^{\Delta
226: _{1},\Delta_{2}}(\Delta_{a},x)\;\overline{\mathcal{C}}_{\text{o}}^{\Delta
227: _{1},\Delta_{2}}(\Delta_{a},\bar x)\;V_{a}(0)\nonumber
228: \end{align}
229: where each of the ``chain operators''
230: \begin{align}
231: \mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}^{\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2}}(\Delta,x) & =1+x\frac
232: {\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}}{2\Delta}L_{-1}+O(x^{2})\label{Chains}\\
233: \mathcal{C}_{\text{o}}^{\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2}}(\Delta,x) & =\frac{x^{1/2}%
234: }{2\Delta}G_{-1/2}+O\left( x^{3/2}\right) \nonumber
235: \end{align}
236: (and the same for $\overline{\mathcal{C}}_{\text{e}}$ and $\overline
237: {\mathcal{C}}_{\text{o}}$ with the ``right'' $SVir$ operators $G_{k}$ and
238: $L_{n}$ replaced by the ``left'' ones $\bar G_{k}$ and $\bar L_{n}$) is
239: determined uniquely by superconformal symmetry once the normalization of the
240: first term is fixed, e.g., as in (\ref{Chains}), essentially in the same way
241: as it occurs in the usual CFT case.
242:
243: The basic NS structure constants $\mathbb{C}_{a_{1}a_{2}}^{Q/2-iP}$ and
244: $\mathbb{\tilde C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}^{Q/2-iP}$ in (\ref{VV}) have been evaluated
245: through the bootstrap technique quite a while ago in refs. \cite{Rubik,
246: Marian}. Here we quote their result in terms of the three-point functions
247: \begin{align}
248: \left\langle V_{a_{1}}(x_{1})V_{a_{2}}(x_{2})V_{a_{3}}(x_{3})\right\rangle &
249: =\frac{C_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}}{(x_{12}\bar x_{12})^{\Delta_{1+2-3}}(x_{23}\bar
250: x_{23})^{\Delta_{2+3-1}}(x_{31}\bar x_{31})^{\Delta_{3+1-2}}}\label{threep}\\
251: \left\langle W_{a_{1}}(x_{1})W_{a_{2}}(x_{2})W_{a_{3}}(x_{3})\right\rangle &
252: =\frac{(1/2-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}-\Delta_{3})^{2}\tilde C_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}%
253: }{(x_{12}\bar x_{12})^{\Delta_{1+2-3}+1/2}(x_{23}\bar x_{23})^{\Delta
254: _{2+3-1}+1/2}(x_{31}\bar x_{31})^{\Delta_{3+1-2}+1/2}}\nonumber
255: \end{align}
256: Here and henceforth we denote $x_{ij}=x_{i}-x_{j}$ and also use the
257: abbreviations like $\Delta_{1+2-3}=\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}-\Delta_{3}$ etc. All
258: the other three point functions of different supermultiplet components are
259: expressed through these via the superprojective invariance $SL(2|1)\otimes
260: \overline{SL(2|1)}$. For example
261: \begin{align}
262: \left\langle W_{a_{1}}(x_{1})W_{a_{2}}(x_{2})V_{a_{3}}(x_{3})\right\rangle &
263: =\frac{(\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}-\Delta_{3})^{2}C_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}}%
264: {(x_{12}\bar x_{12})^{\Delta_{1+2-3}+1}(x_{23}\bar x_{23})^{\Delta_{2+3-1}%
265: }(x_{31}\bar x_{31})^{\Delta_{3+1-2}}}\label{oc}\\
266: \left\langle W_{a_{1}}(x_{1})V_{a_{2}}(x_{2})V_{a_{3}}(x_{3})\right\rangle &
267: =\frac{\tilde C_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}}{(x_{12}\bar x_{12})^{\Delta_{1+2-3}%
268: +1/2}(x_{23}\bar x_{23})^{\Delta_{2+3-1}-1/2}(x_{31}\bar x_{31})^{\Delta
269: _{3+1-2}+1/2}}\nonumber
270: \end{align}
271: The superconformal symmetry allows to express all three point functions with
272: different components (\ref{W}) of the supermultiplets through the two
273: constants $C_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}}$ and $\tilde C_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}}$\footnote{A
274: derivation based on the superprojective Ward identities, which does not
275: exploit a superfield formalism, is presented in Appendix A.}. Both constants
276: $C_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}}$ and $\tilde C_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}}$ are symmetric in all
277: their arguments and related to the structure constants as (normalizations
278: chosen in (\ref{Chains}) are important in these relations)
279: \begin{align}
280: \mathbb{C}_{a_{1}a_{2}}^{Q-p}=C_{a_{1}a_{2}p}\,;\;\;\;\;\;\mathbb{\tilde
281: C}_{a_{1}a_{2}}^{Q-p}=-\tilde C_{a_{1}a_{2}p}\label{CCC}%
282: \end{align}
283: Following \cite{Rubik, Marian} they have the following explicit form ($a$
284: stands here for $a_{1}+a_{2}+a_{3}$)
285: \begin{align}
286: C_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}} & =\left( \pi\mu\gamma\left( \frac{Qb}2\right)
287: b^{1-b^{2}}\right) ^{(Q-a)/b}\frac{\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}^{\prime}%
288: (0)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{2})\Upsilon
289: _{\text{NS}}(2a_{3})}{\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(a-Q)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}%
290: (a_{1+2-3})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(a_{2+3-1})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(a_{3+1-2}%
291: )}\label{C3}\\
292: \tilde C_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}} & =\left( \pi\mu\gamma\left( \frac{Qb}2\right)
293: b^{1-b^{2}}\right) ^{(Q-a)/b}\frac{2i\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}^{\prime}%
294: (0)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{2})\Upsilon
295: _{\text{NS}}(2a_{3})}{\Upsilon_{\text{R}}(a-Q)\Upsilon_{\text{R}}%
296: (a_{1+2-3})\Upsilon_{\text{R}}(a_{2+3-1})\Upsilon_{\text{R}}(a_{3+1-2}%
297: )}\nonumber
298: \end{align}
299: where we make use of convenient notations from ref.\cite{Fukuda} for the
300: special functions
301: \begin{align}
302: \Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(x) & =\Upsilon_{b}\left( \frac x2\right) \Upsilon
303: _{b}\left( \frac{x+Q}2\right) \label{YNSR}\\
304: \Upsilon_{\text{R}}(x) & =\Upsilon_{b}\left( \frac{x+b}2\right)
305: \Upsilon_{b}\left( \frac{x+b^{-1}}2\right) \nonumber
306: \end{align}
307: expressed in terms of the standard in the Liouville field theory ``upsilon''
308: function $\Upsilon_{b}$ (see \cite{DO, LFT}). For us the following functional
309: relations are important
310: \begin{align}
311: \Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(x+b) & =b^{-bx}\gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{bx}2\right)
312: \Upsilon_{\text{R}}(x)\label{Yshift}\\
313: \Upsilon_{\text{R}}(x+b) & =b^{1-bx}\gamma\left( \frac{bx}2\right)
314: \Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(x)\nonumber
315: \end{align}
316: and the same with $b$ replaced by $b^{-1}$. Finally
317: \begin{equation}
318: \Upsilon_{\text{NS}}^{\prime}(0)=\frac12\Upsilon_{b}\left( \frac b2\right)
319: \Upsilon_{b}\left( \frac1{2b}\right) \label{Y0}%
320: \end{equation}
321:
322: All these expressions correspond to the ``natural'' normalization of the
323: exponential fields, where the two-point function reads
324: \begin{equation}
325: \left\langle V_{a}(x)V_{a}(0)\right\rangle =\frac{D_{\text{NS}}(a)}{(x\bar
326: x)^{2\Delta_{a}}}\label{C2}%
327: \end{equation}
328: with
329: \begin{equation}
330: D_{\text{NS}}(a)=\left( \pi\mu\gamma\left( \frac{bQ}2\right) \right)
331: ^{(Q-2a)b^{-1}}\frac{b^{2}\gamma\left( ba-\frac12-\frac{b^{2}}2\right)
332: }{\gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{b^{-2}}2-ab^{-1}\right) }\label{D}%
333: \end{equation}
334: As usual, in the natural normalization the fields $V_{a}$ and $V_{Q-a}$ are
335: identified through the following ``reflection relations''
336: \begin{equation}
337: V_{a}=D_{\text{NS}}(a)V_{Q-a}\label{reflection}%
338: \end{equation}
339:
340: In refs.\cite{Rubik, Marian} (see also \cite{Fukuda}) expressions (\ref{C3})
341: were derived on the basis of the singular vector decoupling in the singular
342: Ramond representation. This approach has many advantages, being the simplest
343: known and giving simultaneously the OPE structure constants in the whole space
344: of fields, Neveu-Schwarz and Ramond. In this note we find it instructive,
345: however, to rederive (\ref{C3}) with the help of pure NS bootstrap, requiring
346: the NS null-vector decoupling. Albeit technically more complicated, this
347: derivation allows to stay completely inside the NS sector of SLFT and provides
348: a good exercise in classical analysis. This program is described in the
349: following section.
350:
351: Once the structure constants are determined, expression (\ref{VV}) gives
352: directly the integral representation for the four point function of four
353: ``bottom'' NS primary fields
354: \begin{align}
355: \ & \left\langle V_{a_{1}}(x_{1})V_{a_{2}}(x_{2})V_{a_{3}}(x_{3})V_{a_{4}%
356: }(x_{4})\right\rangle =\label{fourp}\\
357: & \ \left( x_{41}\bar x_{41}\right) ^{-2\Delta_{1}}\left( x_{24}\bar
358: x_{24}\right) ^{\Delta_{1+3-2-4}}\left( x_{34}\bar x_{34}\right)
359: ^{\Delta_{1+2-3-4}}\left( x_{23}\bar x_{23}\right) ^{\Delta_{4-1-2-3}%
360: }G\left( \left.
361: \begin{array}
362: [c]{cc}%
363: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
364: a_{2} & a_{4}%
365: \end{array}
366: \right| x,\bar x\right) \nonumber
367: \end{align}
368: where
369: \begin{equation}
370: x=\frac{x_{12}x_{34}}{x_{23}x_{41}}\label{x}%
371: \end{equation}
372: and the ``reduced'' four point function admits the following ``s-channel''
373: representation
374: \begin{align}
375: G\left( \left.
376: \begin{array}
377: [c]{cc}%
378: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
379: a_{2} & a_{4}%
380: \end{array}
381: \right| x,\bar x\right) & =\int\frac{dP}{4\pi}\mathbb{C}_{a_{1}a_{2}%
382: }^{Q/2-iP}\mathbb{C}_{a_{3}a_{4}}^{Q/2+iP}\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left(
383: \begin{array}
384: [c]{cc}%
385: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
386: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
387: \end{array}
388: \left| \Delta\right| x\right) \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left(
389: \begin{array}
390: [c]{cc}%
391: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
392: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
393: \end{array}
394: \left| \Delta\right| \bar x\right) \label{schan}\\
395: & \ -\int\frac{dP}{4\pi}\mathbb{\tilde C}_{a_{1}a_{2}}^{Q/2-iP}\mathbb{\tilde
396: C}_{a_{3}a_{4}}^{Q/2+iP}\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}\left(
397: \begin{array}
398: [c]{cc}%
399: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
400: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
401: \end{array}
402: \left| \Delta\right| x\right) \mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}\left(
403: \begin{array}
404: [c]{cc}%
405: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
406: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
407: \end{array}
408: \left| \Delta\right| \bar x\right) \nonumber
409: \end{align}
410: For simplicity we omit possible discrete terms. Superconformal NS blocks
411: $\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}$ and $\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}$ effectively sum up
412: respectively ``even'' and ``odd'' descendants of the primary NS field of
413: dimension $\Delta=Q^{2}/8+P^{2}/2$. Notice the minus sign in front of the
414: second term in (\ref{schan}). It is due to the anticommutativity of the
415: ``right'' and ``left'' odd chain operators in (\ref{eodesc})\footnote{This
416: convention is consistent with the minus sign in the second relation in
417: eq.(\ref{CCC}). The pure imaginary structure constant $\mathbb{C}_{a_{1}a_{2}%
418: }^{p}$ in (\ref{C3}) assures positive sign before the net contribution of the
419: odd levels (see below).}. The blocks are constructed unambiguously on the
420: basis of superconformal invariance. The problem of their evaluation has been
421: addressed recently in refs.\cite{vbelavin, leshek} and will be reconsidered
422: below in sections 3, 4 and 5. First we recapitulate the so-called recursive
423: ``c-representation'' \cite{cblock}, which has been developed in
424: \cite{vbelavin, leshek} and allows to effectively reconstruct the blocks
425: iteratively as a series in the parameter $x$. Better convergent is the
426: so-called ``delta'', or ``elliptic'' representation, whose recursions give a
427: much faster convergent series in the elliptic parameter $q$. Such
428: representation has been constructed in \cite{dblock} for the ordinary
429: conformal algebra. Presently in section 5 we suggest a generalization of the
430: elliptic representation for the $N=1$ superconformal case. In this paper we
431: restrict ourselves only to the blocks with all four external fields ``bottom''
432: supermultiplet components (and those related to this case by the
433: superprojective symmetry).
434:
435: An important property of a consistent euclidean quantum field theory is the
436: associativity of the algebra of operator product expansions. This property
437: ensures the correlation functions to be single-valued over the euclidean slice
438: of the complex space-time. It is commonly believed to give an euclidean
439: interpretation of the standard Minkowskian locality. In particular, the
440: four-point function is single-valued (or, enjoys the crossing symmetry) if the
441: following two identities hold
442: \begin{align}
443: G\left( \left.
444: \begin{array}
445: [c]{cc}%
446: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
447: a_{2} & a_{4}%
448: \end{array}
449: \right| x,\bar x\right) & =[(1-x)(1-\bar x)]^{-2\Delta_{1}}G\left(
450: \left.
451: \begin{array}
452: [c]{cc}%
453: a_{1} & a_{4}\\
454: a_{2} & a_{3}%
455: \end{array}
456: \right| \frac x{x-1},\frac{\bar x}{\bar x-1}\right) \nonumber\\
457: G\left( \left.
458: \begin{array}
459: [c]{cc}%
460: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
461: a_{2} & a_{4}%
462: \end{array}
463: \right| x,\bar x\right) & =G\left( \left.
464: \begin{array}
465: [c]{cc}%
466: a_{1} & a_{2}\\
467: a_{3} & a_{4}%
468: \end{array}
469: \right| 1-x,1-\bar x\right) \label{cross}%
470: \end{align}
471: In the form (\ref{schan}) the first relation is a trivial consequence of the
472: transformation properties of the blocks. The second, however, becomes a
473: non-trivial relation for the structure constants. Its closed formulation in
474: terms of the structure constants requires explicit knowledge of the fusion (or
475: crossing) matrix for a general superconformal block, which is not currently
476: available (see \cite{Ponsot} for an explicit construction in the bosonic
477: case). Under these circumstances, we find it of value to verify this relation
478: numerically, taking the explicit form of the structure constants and using the
479: fast convergent elliptic representation for the superconformal blocks. This we
480: perform in section 6 and find a reasonable numerical support for the relations
481: (\ref{cross}) for certain randomly chosen values of the parameters.
482:
483: Section 7 is devoted to the discussion and outlook.
484:
485: \section{Singular vector bootstrap in NS sector}
486:
487: At certain values of the parameter $a$ the SLFT operator $V_{a}$ is a highest
488: vector of a singular representation of $SVir$. In the NS sector, which we only
489: consider in this paper, the simplest singular representation has dimension
490: $\Delta_{1,3}=-1/2-b^{2}$ with the primary field $V_{-b}$ as the highest
491: weight vector. The singular vector appearing at the level $3/2$ reads
492: \begin{equation}
493: \left( G_{-1/2}^{3}+b^{2}G_{-3/2}\right) V_{-b}\label{SV13}%
494: \end{equation}
495: There is also a singular vector of the same form in the left $\overline{SVir}
496: $ sector. Vanishing of all singular vectors in the singular representations
497: can be taken as the basic dynamical principle of SLFT, precisely like in the
498: ordinary bosonic LFT. In particular, setting (\ref{SV13}) and its ``left''
499: counterpart to zero leads to non-trivial equations for the correlation
500: functions. It is easy to see, e.g., considering the three point function with
501: the field $V_{-b}$, that such ``decoupling equation'' restricts the form of
502: the operator product expansion of a product of this degenerate field and
503: arbitrary primary $V_{a}$ to the following ``discrete'' form
504: \begin{align}
505: \ & V_{-b}V_{a}=\label{OPE13}\\
506: & \ \ \ \ (x\bar x)^{ab}C_{-}(a)\left[ V_{a-b}\right] _{\text{ee}}+(x\bar
507: x)^{1/2+b^{2}}\tilde C_{0}(a)\left[ V_{a}\right] _{\text{oo}}+C_{+}(a)(x\bar
508: x)^{1-ba+b^{2}}\left[ V_{a+b}\right] _{\text{ee}}\nonumber
509: \end{align}
510: where $C_{-}(a)$, $\tilde C_{0}(a)$ and $C_{+}(a)$ are ``special'' (unlike the
511: ``generic'' ones in the OPE (\ref{VV})), or ``discrete'' structure constants.
512: It is instructive to understand how the general OPE (\ref{VV}) with the
513: structure constants (\ref{C3}) results in the discrete expansion (\ref{OPE13})
514: if one of the parameters $a_{1}$ or $a_{2}$ is set to the singular value $-b$.
515: This calculation is performed in the Appendix B.
516:
517: Below in this section we will use the bootstrap conditions together with the
518: ``decoupling principle'' to derive unambiguously the generic NS structure
519: constants (\ref{C3}). In particular, the values of the special structure
520: constants in (\ref{OPE13}) are recovered uniquely up to an overall scale. It
521: is instructive, however, to give a ``perturbative'' derivation, similar to
522: that presented e.g., in \cite{FZZ}, because firstly it is simpler and more
523: transparent, and secondly it gives a heuristic link with the SLFT Lagrangian
524: (\ref{SL}), in particular relates the scale parameter to the cosmological
525: constant $\mu$. The idea is simply a version of the ``screening'' calculus,
526: invented by B.Feigin and D.Fuchs (and further developed by V.Fateev and
527: V.Dotsenko \cite{DF}) where the role of the screening operator is played by
528: the interaction term $2i\mu W_{b}$ in (\ref{SL}). E.g., neglecting formally
529: this term, one considers $\phi$ and $\psi$ as free fields, so that the
530: exponentials $V_{-b}$ and $V_{a}$ enjoy the free field fusion to $V_{a-b}$
531: with
532: \begin{equation}
533: C_{-}(a)=1\label{Cm}%
534: \end{equation}
535: The next term with $\left[ V_{a}\right] _{\text{oo}}=(2\Delta_{a}%
536: )^{-2}(x\bar x)^{1/2}W_{a}+\ldots$ requires one insertion of the perturbation
537: $2i\mu b^{2}\int\bar\psi\psi e^{b\phi}d^{2}x$. Thus
538: \begin{align}
539: \tilde C_{0}(a) & =-2i\mu b^{2}(Q-a)^{2}\int\left\langle \bar\psi\psi
540: e^{b\phi}(y)V_{a}(0)V_{-b}(1)\bar\psi\psi e^{(Q-a)\phi}\left( \infty\right)
541: \right\rangle \nonumber\\
542: \ & =\frac{2\pi i\mu\gamma(ab-b^{2})}{\gamma(-b^{2})\gamma(ab)}\label{C0}%
543: \end{align}
544: Finally, we need to make two perturbative insertions in order to create the
545: last term $\left[ V_{a+b}\right] _{\text{ee}}=V_{a+b}+\ldots$ in the OPE
546: (\ref{OPE13}). This results in
547: \begin{align}
548: C_{+}(a) & =\frac{\left( -2i\mu b^{2}\right) ^{2}}2\int\left\langle
549: \bar\psi\psi e^{b\phi}(y_{1})\bar\psi\psi e^{b\phi}(y_{2})V_{a}(0)V_{-b}%
550: (1)V_{Q-a-b}(\infty)\right\rangle \label{Cp}\\
551: \ & =2\mu^{2}b^{4}\int[(y_{1}-y_{2})(\bar y_{1}-\bar y_{2})]^{-b^{2}-1}%
552: \prod_{i=1}^{2}(y_{i}\bar y_{i})^{-ab}\left[ (1-y_{i})(1-\bar y_{i})\right]
553: ^{b^{2}}d^{2}y_{i}\nonumber\\
554: \ & =\pi^{2}\mu^{2}b^{4}\gamma^{2}\left( \frac12+\frac{b^{2}}2\right)
555: \gamma\left( -\frac12-\frac{b^{2}}2+ab\right) \gamma\left( \frac
556: 12-\frac{b^{2}}2-ab\right) \nonumber
557: \end{align}
558: In the last calculation we have used the following integration formula
559: \begin{align}
560: & \ \ \ \ \ \frac1{n!}\int\prod_{i=1}^{n}(z_{i}\bar z_{i})^{\mu-1}%
561: [(1-z_{i})(1-\bar z_{i})]^{\nu-1}d^{2}z_{i}\prod_{i>j}[(z_{i}-z_{j})(\bar
562: z_{i}-\bar z_{j})]^{2g}\label{DFintegral}\\
563: \ & =\left( \pi\gamma(1-g)\right) ^{n}\prod_{k=0}^{n-1}\gamma
564: (g+kg)\gamma(\mu+kg)\gamma(\nu+kg)\gamma(\lambda+kg)\nonumber
565: \end{align}
566: where $\mu+\nu+\lambda=1-2(n-1)g$. This formula belongs to Dotsenko and Fateev
567: \cite{FD2}.
568:
569: It is a simple exercise in operator product expansion (see e.g. \cite{FZZ}) to
570: show that the two-point function (\ref{C2}) satisfies the functional relation
571: \begin{equation}
572: \frac{D_{\text{NS}}(a)}{D_{\text{NS}}(a+b)}=C_{+}(a)\label{DDC}%
573: \end{equation}
574: This is indeed the case for (\ref{D}) together with (\ref{Cp}). The ``dual''
575: functional relation
576: \begin{equation}
577: \frac{D_{\text{NS}}(a)}{D_{\text{NS}}(a+b^{-1})}=\pi^{2}\tilde\mu^{2}%
578: b^{4}\gamma^{2}\left( \frac12+\frac{b^{-2}}2\right) \gamma\left(
579: -\frac12-\frac{b^{-2}}2+ab^{-1}\right) \gamma\left( \frac12-\frac{b^{-2}%
580: }2-ab^{-1}\right) \label{DDual}%
581: \end{equation}
582: is also satisfied if the ``dual cosmological constant'' $\tilde\mu$ is related
583: to $\mu$ as
584: \begin{equation}
585: \pi\tilde\mu\gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{b^{-2}}2\right) =\left( \pi\mu
586: \gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{b^{2}}2\right) \right) ^{b^{2}}\label{mudual}%
587: \end{equation}
588:
589: Now, let us turn to the four point function with one singular primary field
590: $V_{-b}$ and three arbitrary ones. It is natural to renumber the operators,
591: setting in (\ref{fourp}) $V_{a_{1}}$ to be $V_{-b}$ and denoting $V_{a_{2}}$,
592: $V_{a_{3}}$ and $V_{a_{4}}$ as $V_{1}$, $V_{2}$ and $V_{3}$, their dimensions
593: being $\Delta_{1}$, $\Delta_{2}$ and $\Delta_{3}$ respectively. Thus, in the
594: notations of (\ref{fourp})
595: \begin{equation}
596: g(x,\bar x)=G\left( \left.
597: \begin{array}
598: [c]{cc}%
599: -b & a_{2}\\
600: a_{1} & a_{3}%
601: \end{array}
602: \right| x,\bar x\right) \label{g}%
603: \end{equation}
604: It has been shown in \cite{vbelavin} that this function satisfies the
605: following third order linear differential equation
606: \begin{align}
607: & \ \ \ \frac1{b^{2}}g^{\prime\prime\prime}+\frac{1-2b^{2}}{b^{2}}\frac
608: {1-2x}{x(1-x)}g^{\prime\prime}+\left( \frac{b^{2}+2\Delta_{1}}{x^{2}}%
609: +\frac{b^{2}+2\Delta_{2}}{(1-x)^{2}}+\frac{2-3b^{2}+2\Delta_{1+2-3}}%
610: {x(1-x)}\right) g^{\prime}+\label{diffeq}\\
611: \ & +\left( \frac{2\Delta_{2}(1+b^{2})}{(1-x)^{3}}-\frac{2\Delta_{1}%
612: (1+b^{2})}{x^{3}}+\frac{\Delta_{2-1}+(1-2x)(b^{4}+b^{2}(1/2-\Delta
613: _{1+2-3})-\Delta_{1+2})}{x^{2}(1-x)^{2}}\right) g=0\nonumber
614: \end{align}
615: The same equation holds with respect to $\bar x$. Near $x\rightarrow0$ it has
616: three exponents $ba_{1}$, $1+b^{2}$ and $1-ba_{1}+b^{2}$, which correspond,
617: respectively, to the dimensions $\Delta_{a_{1}-b}$, $\Delta_{a_{1}}+1/2$ and
618: $\Delta_{a_{1}+b}$. They give rise to three s-channel blocks
619: \begin{align}
620: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}^{(-)}(x) & =x^{a_{1}b}\left( 1+\ldots\right)
621: \nonumber\\
622: \mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}^{(0)}(x) & =x^{1+b^{2}}\left( \frac1{2\Delta_{a_{1}}%
623: }+\ldots\right) \label{blocks13}\\
624: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}^{(+)}(x) & =x^{1-ba_{1}+b^{2}}\left( 1+\ldots\right)
625: \nonumber
626: \end{align}
627: where in the brackets stand regular series in $x$ and the normalization
628: correspond to the general convention of (\ref{Chains}). The correlation
629: function is combined as
630: \begin{align}
631: g(x,\bar x) & =-\tilde C_{0}(a_{1})\tilde C_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}%
632: \mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}^{(0)}(x)\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}^{(0)}(\bar
633: x)\label{gFF}\\
634: & +C_{-}(a_{1})C_{a_{1}-b,a_{2},a_{3}}\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}^{(-)}%
635: (x)\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}^{(-)}(\bar x)+C_{+}(a_{1})C_{a_{1}+b,a_{2},a_{3}%
636: }\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}^{(+)}(x)\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}^{(+)}(\bar x)\nonumber
637: \end{align}
638:
639: It turns out that (\ref{diffeq}) is of the type considered by Dotsenko and
640: Fateev in \cite{DF} and can be solved in terms of two-fold contour integrals.
641: Explicitly
642: \begin{align}
643: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}^{(-)}(x) & =\frac{x^{a_{1}b}(1-x)^{a_{2}b}%
644: \Gamma\left( -\frac12-\frac{b^{2}}2\right) \Gamma\left( \frac12-\frac
645: {b^{2}}2+ba_{1}\right) \Gamma(ba_{1}-b^{2})F_{-}(A,B,C,g;x)}{\Gamma
646: (-1-b^{2})\Gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{ba_{1+3-2}}2\right) \Gamma\left(
647: \frac{ba_{1+3-2}}2-\frac{b^{2}}2\right) \Gamma\left( \frac12+\frac
648: {ba_{1+2-3}}2\right) \Gamma\left( \frac{ba_{1+2-3}}2-\frac{b^{2}}2\right)
649: }\nonumber\\
650: \mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}^{(0)}(x) & =\frac{x^{1+b^{2}}(1-x)^{a_{2}b}b^{2}%
651: \Gamma\left( 1-ba_{1}+b^{2}\right) \Gamma(ba_{1})F_{0}(A,B,C,g;x)}%
652: {\Gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{ba_{2+3-1}}2\right) \Gamma\left( \frac
653: 12+\frac{ba_{1+3-2}}2\right) \Gamma\left( \frac32-\frac{ba_{1+2+3}}%
654: 2+b^{2}\right) \Gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{ba_{1+2-3}}2\right) }\label{FI12}%
655: \end{align}
656: and
657: \begin{align}
658: \ & \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}^{(+)}(x)=\label{FI3}\\
659: & \ \ \frac{x^{1-ba_{1}+b^{2}}(1-x)^{a_{2}b}\Gamma\left( -\frac12-\frac
660: {b^{2}}2\right) \Gamma\left( \frac32-ba_{1}+\frac{b^{2}}2\right)
661: \Gamma\left( 1-ba_{1}\right) F_{+}(A,B,C,g;x)}{\Gamma(-1-b^{2})\Gamma\left(
662: \frac12+\frac{ba_{2+3-1}}2\right) \Gamma\left( \frac{ba_{2+3-1}}%
663: 2-\frac{b^{2}}2\right) \Gamma\left( \frac32-\frac{ba_{1+2+3}}2+b^{2}\right)
664: \Gamma\left( 1-\frac{ba_{1+2+3}}2+\frac{b^{2}}2\right) }\nonumber
665: \end{align}
666: Functions $F_{\pm}(A,B,C,g;x)$ and $F_{0}(A,B,C,g;x)$ are regular series in $x
667: $ and admit the following integral representations
668: \begin{align}
669: F_{-}(x) & =%
670: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{0}^{1}}%
671: %BeginExpansion
672: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{1}}
673: %EndExpansion
674: dt_{1}%
675: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{0}^{t_{1}}}%
676: %BeginExpansion
677: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{t_{1}}}
678: %EndExpansion
679: dt_{2}(t_{1}-t_{2})^{2g}(t_{1}t_{2})^{-A-B-C-2}[(1-t_{1})(1-t_{2}%
680: )]^{B}[(1-xt_{1})(1-xt_{2})]^{C}\nonumber\\
681: F_{+}(x) & =%
682: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{0}^{1}}%
683: %BeginExpansion
684: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{1}}
685: %EndExpansion
686: dt_{1}%
687: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{0}^{t_{1}}}%
688: %BeginExpansion
689: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{t_{1}}}
690: %EndExpansion
691: dt_{2}(t_{1}-t_{2})^{2g}(t_{1}t_{2})^{A}[(1-t_{1})(1-t_{2})]^{C}%
692: [(1-xt_{1})(1-xt_{2})]^{B}\label{Fint}\\
693: F_{0}(x) & =%
694: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{0}^{1}}%
695: %BeginExpansion
696: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{1}}
697: %EndExpansion
698: t_{1}^{-2-A-B-C-2g}(1-t_{1})^{B}(1-xt_{1})^{C}dt_{1}%
699: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{0}^{1}}%
700: %BeginExpansion
701: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{1}}
702: %EndExpansion
703: dt_{2}t_{2}{}^{A}[(1-xt_{2})^{B}[(1-t_{2})^{C}(1-xt_{1}t_{2})^{2g}\nonumber
704: \end{align}
705: Parameters $A$, $B$, $C$ and $g$ are related to the super Liouville ones
706: $a_{1} $, $a_{2}$, $a_{3}$ and $b$ as
707: \begin{align}
708: A & =-\frac12+\frac{ba_{2+3-1}}2\,;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;B=-\frac12+\frac{ba_{1-2+3}%
709: }2\label{ABC}\\
710: C & =\frac12-\frac{ba_{1+2+3}}2+b^{2}\,\,;\;\;\;g=-\frac12-\frac{b^{2}%
711: }2\nonumber
712: \end{align}
713: For the sake of completeness in Appendix C we recapitulate from \cite{DF} the
714: third order differential equation of Dotsenko-Fateev type, relevant integral
715: representations of the solutions, as well as their monodromy properties.
716:
717: In particular, the combination (\ref{gFF}) is a single-valued function of the
718: two-dimensional coordinate $(x,\bar x)$ if
719: \begin{align}
720: \ & \frac{C_{+}(a_{1})C_{a_{1}+b,a_{2},a_{3}}}{C_{-}(a_{1})C_{a_{1}%
721: -b,a_{2},a_{3}}}=-\frac{\gamma\left( ba_{1}\right) \gamma\left(
722: ba_{1}-b^{2}\right) \gamma^{2}\left( \frac12-\frac{b^{2}}2+ba_{1}\right)
723: }{\left( \frac12-ba_{1}+\frac{b^{2}}2\right) ^{2}}\times\label{CpCp}\\
724: & \ \ \ \ \ \ \frac{\gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{ba_{2+3-1}}2\right)
725: \gamma\left( \frac{ba_{2+3-1}}2-\frac{b^{2}}2\right) \gamma\left(
726: \frac32-\frac{ba_{1+2+3}}2+b^{2}\right) \gamma\left( 1-\frac{ba_{1+2+3}%
727: }2+\frac{b^{2}}2\right) }{\gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{ba_{1+3-2}}2\right)
728: \gamma\left( \frac{ba_{1+3-2}}2-\frac{b^{2}}2\right) \gamma\left(
729: \frac12+\frac{ba_{1+2-3}}2\right) \gamma\left( \frac{ba_{1+2-3}}%
730: 2-\frac{b^{2}}2\right) }\nonumber
731: \end{align}
732: and
733: \begin{align}
734: \frac{\tilde C_{0}(a_{1})\tilde C_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}}{C_{-}(a_{1}%
735: )C_{a_{1}-b,a_{2},a_{3}}} & =\ \frac{-\gamma\left( -\frac12-\frac{b^{2}%
736: }2\right) \gamma\left( \frac12-\frac{b^{2}}2+ba_{1}\right) \gamma
737: ^{2}(ba_{1}-b^{2})}{b^{4}\gamma\left( -1-b^{2}\right) \gamma\left(
738: ba_{1}\right) }\times\label{C0C0}\\
739: & \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \frac{\gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{ba_{2+3-1}}2\right)
740: \gamma\left( \frac32-\frac{ba_{1+2+3}}2+b^{2}\right) }{\gamma\left(
741: \frac{ba_{3+1-2}}2-\frac12b^{2}\right) \gamma\left( \frac{ba_{1+2-3}}%
742: 2-\frac{b^{2}}2\right) }\nonumber
743: \end{align}
744: These formulas, together with the explicit expressions (\ref{Cm}), (\ref{C0})
745: and (\ref{Cp}) for the special structure constants, result in the following
746: functional relations for the three-point functions $C_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}} $
747: and $\tilde C_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}$%
748:
749: \begin{align}
750: \ & \frac{C_{a_{1}+b,a_{2},a_{3}}}{C_{a_{1}-b,a_{2},a_{3}}}=\frac
751: {\gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{b^{2}}2+a_{1}b\right) \gamma\left(
752: ba_{1}\right) \gamma\left( ba_{1}-b^{2}\right) \gamma\left( \frac
753: 12-\frac{b^{2}}2+ba_{1}\right) }{\pi^{2}\mu^{2}b^{4}\gamma^{2}\left(
754: \frac12+\frac{b^{2}}2\right) \gamma\left( -\frac12-\frac{b^{2}}%
755: 2+a_{1}b\right) \gamma\left( \frac12-\frac{b^{2}}2+a_{1}b\right) }%
756: \times\label{CC}\\
757: & \ \ \frac{\gamma\left( 1-\frac12ba_{1+2+3}+\frac12b^{2}\right)
758: \gamma\left( \frac32-\frac{ba_{1+2+3}}2+b^{2}\right) \gamma\left(
759: \frac12+\frac12ba_{2+3-1}\right) \gamma\left( \frac12ba_{2+3-1}-\frac
760: 12b^{2}\right) }{\gamma\left( \frac12+\frac12ba_{1+3-2}\right)
761: \gamma\left( \frac12ba_{1+3-2}-\frac12b^{2}\right) \gamma\left(
762: \frac12+\frac12ba_{1+2-3}\right) \gamma\left( \frac12ba_{1+2-3}-\frac
763: 12b^{2}\right) }\nonumber
764: \end{align}
765: and
766: \begin{align}
767: & \frac{\tilde C_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}}}{C_{a_{1}-b,a_{2},a_{3}}}=\label{C0C}\\
768: & \frac{2i\gamma\left( \frac12-\frac{b^{2}}2+ba_{1}\right) \gamma
769: (ba_{1}-b^{2})\gamma\left( \frac12+\frac{ba_{2+3-1}}2\right) \gamma\left(
770: \frac32-\frac{ba_{1+2+3}}2+b^{2}\right) }{\pi\mu b^{4}\gamma\left(
771: \frac12+\frac{b^{2}}2\right) \gamma\left( \frac{ba_{3+1-2}}2-\frac
772: 12b^{2}\right) \gamma\left( \frac{ba_{1+2-3}}2-\frac{b^{2}}2\right)
773: }\nonumber
774: \end{align}
775:
776: It is verified directly through the shift relations (\ref{Yshift}) that the
777: structure constants (\ref{C3}) satisfy these functional relations. A standard
778: consideration \cite{Teschner} with the ``dual'' functional relation (i.e., the
779: relation with $b\rightarrow b^{-1}$ and $\mu\rightarrow\tilde\mu$) now applies
780: and allows to argue that, at least at real irrational values of $b^{2}$,
781: expressions (\ref{C3}) give the unique solution to the singular vector
782: decoupling equations.
783:
784: \section{Analytic structure of NS block}
785:
786: Here we analyze in more details the properties of the superconformal blocks
787: $\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}$ and $\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}$ which enter the integral
788: representation (\ref{schan}) of the four-point function. The ``chain
789: operators'' introduced in (\ref{eodesc}) are mostly important in this
790: analysis. The ``right-left'' factorization allows to concentrate on the
791: holomorphic part only and then combine it with the (mostly identical)
792: antiholomorphic one. As it has been found in \cite{leshek} and \cite{vbelavin}%
793: , apart from the OPE (\ref{VV}) one has to consider the similar OPE
794: $\Lambda_{a_{1}}(x)V_{a_{2}}(0)$. Commutation relations
795: \begin{align}
796: \lbrack G_{k},V_{a}(x)] & =x^{k+1/2}\Lambda_{a}(x)\label{GV}\\
797: \{G_{k},\Lambda_{a}(x)\} & =x^{k+1/2}\left( \frac{2\Delta_{a}(k+1/2)}%
798: xV_{a}(x)+\frac\partial{\partial x}V_{a}(x)\right) \nonumber
799: \end{align}
800: follow directly from (\ref{WI}). Acting by any generator $G_{k}$ with $k>0$ on
801: the left hand side of (\ref{VV}) one finds
802: \begin{align}
803: \Lambda_{a_{1}}(x)V_{a_{2}}(0) & =x^{-1/2}\int\frac{dP}{4\pi}\left( x\bar
804: x\right) ^{\Delta-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}}\left( \mathbb{C}_{a_{1},a_{2}%
805: }^{Q/2+iP}\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta_{a},x)\;\overline{\mathcal{C}%
806: }_{\text{e}}(\Delta_{a},\bar x)V_{Q/2+iP}(0)\right. \nonumber\\
807: & \ \ \ \left. +\mathbb{\tilde C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}^{Q/2+iP}\mathcal{\tilde
808: C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta_{a},x)\;\overline{\mathcal{C}}_{\text{o}}(\Delta_{a},\bar
809: x)V_{Q/2+iP}(0)\right) \label{LambdaV}%
810: \end{align}
811: where $\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta_{a},x)$ and $\mathcal{\tilde
812: C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta_{a},x)$ are new chain operators\footnote{These operators
813: depend also on the dimensions $\Delta_{1}=\Delta_{a_{1}}$ and $\Delta
814: _{2}=\Delta_{a_{2}}$. For not to overload the notations, this dependence is
815: not indicated explicitly.}. It is convenient to unify the even and odd ones as
816: the joint series in integer and half-integer powers of $x$%
817: \begin{align}
818: \mathcal{C}(\Delta,x) & =\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta,x)+\mathcal{C}%
819: _{\text{o}}(\Delta,x)\label{chains}\\
820: \mathcal{\tilde C}(\Delta,x) & =\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta
821: ,x)+\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta,x)\nonumber
822: \end{align}
823: From (\ref{GV}) one finds
824: \begin{align}
825: \mathcal{\tilde C}(\Delta,x)V_{\Delta} & =x^{k}G_{k}\mathcal{C}(\Delta
826: ,x)V_{\Delta}\label{Cheq}\\
827: \mathcal{C}(\Delta,x)V_{\Delta} & =x^{k}\left( \Delta+2\Delta_{1}k-\Delta
828: _{2}-k+x\frac\partial{\partial x}\right) G_{k}\mathcal{\tilde C}%
829: (\Delta,x)V_{\Delta}\nonumber
830: \end{align}
831: For the coefficients in the level expansion
832: \begin{equation}
833: \mathcal{C}(\Delta,x)=\sum_{N}x^{N}\mathcal{C}_{N}(\Delta
834: )\;;\;\;\;\mathcal{\tilde C}(\Delta,x)=\sum_{N}x^{N}\mathcal{\tilde C}%
835: _{N}(\Delta)\label{Cn}%
836: \end{equation}
837: where $N$ runs over non-negative integer and half-integer numbers (levels),
838: these relations read ($k\leq N$)
839: \begin{align}
840: G_{k}\mathcal{C}_{N}(\Delta)V_{\Delta} & =\mathcal{\tilde C}_{N-k}%
841: (\Delta)V_{\Delta}\label{Cheqn}\\
842: G_{k}\mathcal{\tilde C}_{N}(\Delta)V_{\Delta} & =\left( \Delta+2\Delta
843: _{1}k-\Delta_{2}+N-k\right) \mathcal{C}_{N-k}(\Delta)V_{\Delta}\nonumber
844: \end{align}
845: This system turns out to be enough to reconstruct the chain operators up to
846: two overall constants. The latter can be fixed by the conditions
847: $\mathcal{C}_{0}=1$ and $\mathcal{\tilde C}_{0}=1$. Explicitly one finds,
848: level by level
849: \begin{align}
850: \mathcal{C}_{1/2}(\Delta) & =\frac1{2\Delta}G_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
851: \mathcal{C}_{1}(\Delta) & =\frac{\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}}{2\Delta}%
852: L_{-1}\nonumber\\
853: \mathcal{C}_{3/2}(\Delta) & =\frac{\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}+1/2}%
854: {2\Delta(2\Delta+1)}G_{-1/2}^{3}+\frac{2\left( \Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}\right)
855: }{4\Delta^{2}+2\widehat{c}\Delta-6\Delta+\widehat{c}}O_{-3/2}\nonumber\\
856: \mathcal{C}_{2}(\Delta) & =\frac{(\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2})(\Delta
857: +\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}+1)}{4\Delta(2\Delta+1)}L_{-1}^{2}\label{Ccoff}\\
858: & \ \ +\frac{2\left( \Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}\right) ^{2}+\Delta-(2\Delta
859: +1)\left( \Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}\right) }{(2\Delta+3)(4\Delta^{2}%
860: +2\widehat{c}\Delta-6\Delta+\widehat{c})}G_{-1/2}O_{-3/2}\nonumber\\
861: & \ \ +\frac{3\left( \Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}\right) ^{2}-2\Delta\left(
862: \Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}\right) -\Delta^{2}}{2\Delta(2\Delta+3)(16\Delta
863: +3\widehat{c}-3)}O_{-2}\nonumber
864: \end{align}
865: and
866: \begin{align}
867: \mathcal{\tilde C}_{1/2}(\Delta) & =\frac{\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}%
868: }{2\Delta}G_{-1/2}\nonumber\\
869: \mathcal{\tilde C}_{1}(\Delta) & =\frac{\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}%
870: +1/2}{2\Delta}L_{-1}\nonumber\\
871: \mathcal{\tilde C}_{3/2}(\Delta) & =\frac{(\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta
872: _{2})(\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}+1)}{2\Delta(2\Delta+1)}G_{-1/2}%
873: ^{3}\nonumber\\
874: & \ \ +\frac{2\left( \Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}\right) ^{2}+\Delta-(2\Delta
875: +1)\left( \Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}\right) }{4\Delta^{2}+2\widehat{c}%
876: \Delta-6\Delta+\widehat{c}}O_{-3/2}\label{Ctcoff}\\
877: \mathcal{\tilde C}_{2}(\Delta) & =\frac{(\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta
878: _{2}+1/2)(\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}+3/2)}{4\Delta(2\Delta+1)}L_{-1}%
879: ^{2}\nonumber\\
880: & \ \ +\frac{2\left( \Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}\right) (\Delta+\Delta_{1}%
881: -\Delta_{2}+3/2)}{(2\Delta+3)(4\Delta^{2}+2\widehat{c}\Delta-6\Delta
882: +\widehat{c})}G_{-1/2}O_{-3/2}\nonumber\\
883: & \ \ +\frac{12\left( \Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}\right) ^{2}-\left(
884: 2\Delta+3\right) \left( 2\Delta-1+4\left( \Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}\right)
885: \right) }{8\Delta(2\Delta+3)(16\Delta+3\widehat{c}-3)}O_{-2}\nonumber
886: \end{align}
887: where we have used the abbreviations
888: \begin{align}
889: O_{-3/2} & =\frac2{2\Delta+1}L_{-1}G_{-1/2}-G_{-3/2}\label{SCF}\\
890: O_{-2} & =3L_{-1}^{2}-4\Delta L_{-2}-3G_{-3/2}G_{-1/2}\nonumber
891: \end{align}
892:
893: Further coefficients are systematically evaluated level by level as a solution
894: of (\ref{Cheq}). At each level (\ref{Cheqn}) is a finite dimensional linear
895: problem, the coefficients being polynomials in $\widehat{c}$, $\Delta$ and the
896: ``external dimensions'' $\Delta_{1}$ and $\Delta_{2}$. The determinant of the
897: system is the Kac determinant\cite{Kac} of the corresponding level in the
898: representation of the superconformal algebra. Therefore, the singularities of
899: $\mathcal{C}(\Delta)$ are (simple in general) poles located at the singular
900: dimensions $\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}$, where $(m,n)$ is a pair of positive
901: integers,
902: \begin{equation}
903: \Delta_{m,n}=\frac{Q^{2}}8-\frac{\lambda_{m,n}^{2}}2\label{Dmn}%
904: \end{equation}
905: and we introduced a notation
906: \begin{equation}
907: \lambda_{m,n}=\frac{mb^{-1}+nb}2\label{lmn}%
908: \end{equation}
909: In the NS sector, which we only consider here, $m$ and $n$ are either both
910: even or both odd. At this values in the $SVir$ module over $V_{\Delta}$
911: appears a singular vector $D_{m,n}V_{m,n}$, a primary field of dimension
912: $\Delta_{m,n}+mn/2=\Delta_{m,-n}$. Here, as in ref.\cite{shigher}, we denoted
913: $V_{m,n}=V_{\Delta_{m,n}}$ and introduced a set of ``singular vector
914: creation'' operators $D_{m,n}$, which are graded polynomials in the generators
915: $G_{-k}$ and $L_{-n}$ (with the coefficients depending in $\widehat{c}$ (or
916: $b$) only) such that $G_{k}D_{m,n}V_{m,n}=0$ for every half integer $k>0$.
917: These operators are supposed to be normalized as in \cite{shigher}
918: \begin{equation}
919: D_{m,n}=G_{-1/2}^{mn}+\ldots\label{Dnorm}%
920: \end{equation}
921: Below we will need also the ``conjugate'' operator $D_{m,n}^{\dagger}$
922: defined, as in ref.\cite{shigher} through the following conjugation rules
923: $L_{n}^{\dagger}=L_{-n}$ and $G_{k}^{\dagger}=G_{-k}$. Apparently
924: \begin{equation}
925: D_{m,n}^{\dagger}D_{m,n}V_{\Delta}(0)=r_{m,n}^{\prime}(\Delta-\Delta
926: _{m,n})V_{\Delta}(0)+O\left( (\Delta-\Delta_{m,n})^{2}\right) V_{\Delta
927: }(0)\label{lognorm}%
928: \end{equation}
929: The coefficient $r_{m,n}^{\prime}$ (the ``logarithmic norm'' of the singular
930: vector) has been explicitly evaluated in \cite{shigher}
931: \begin{equation}
932: r_{m,n}^{\prime}=2^{mn-1}\prod_{\substack{k=1-m,\,l=1-n \\(k,l)\neq(0,0),(m,n)
933: }}^{m,\,n,\,k+l\in2\mathbb{Z}}\lambda_{k,l}\label{rp}%
934: \end{equation}
935:
936: The singular vector $D_{m,n}V_{m,n}$, once appeared in the chain vectors
937: (\ref{chains}), gives rise to its own chains $\mathcal{C}(\Delta
938: _{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}V_{m,n}$ and $\mathcal{\tilde C}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}%
939: V_{m,n}$ which by themselves satisfy the chain equations (\ref{Cheqn}) with
940: $\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}$. Apparently
941: \begin{equation}
942: \operatorname*{res}_{\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}}\mathcal{C}(\Delta,x)=x^{mn/2}%
943: X_{m,n}\mathcal{C}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}\label{res}%
944: \end{equation}
945: where $X_{m,n}$ are certain coefficients. Since $\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}%
946: (\Delta,x)$ with $\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta,x)$ and $\mathcal{C}%
947: _{\text{o}}(\Delta,x)$ with $\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta,x)$ form two
948: independent systems, we need to treat separately the integer and half-integer
949: chains. Denote
950: \begin{align}
951: \operatorname*{res}_{\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}}\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta,x) &
952: =x^{mn/2}\left\{
953: \begin{array}
954: [c]{l}%
955: X_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}%
956: \;\;\;\;\;\;m,n\;\;\;\text{even}\\
957: X_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}\mathcal{C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}%
958: \;\;\;\;\;\;m,n\;\;\;\text{odd}%
959: \end{array}
960: \right. \label{resC}\\
961: \operatorname*{res}_{\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}}\mathcal{C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta,x) &
962: =x^{mn/2}\left\{
963: \begin{array}
964: [c]{l}%
965: X_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}\mathcal{C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}%
966: \;\;\;\;\;\;m,n\;\;\;\text{even}\\
967: X_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}%
968: \;\;\;\;\;\;m,n\;\;\;\text{odd}%
969: \end{array}
970: \right. \nonumber
971: \end{align}
972: and let $\mathcal{C}(\Delta,x)$ with $\mathcal{\tilde C}(\Delta,x)$ be
973: normalized as above. The coefficients $X_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}$ and
974: $X_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}$ are then uniquely defined. By construction they are
975: polynomials in the external dimensions $\Delta_{1}$ and $\Delta_{2}$. To
976: describe these coefficients it is convenient to define the following ``fusion
977: polynomials'' \cite{vbelavin, leshek}
978: \begin{align}
979: P_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}(x) & =\prod_{\substack{k\in\{1-m,2,m-1\} \\l\in
980: \{1-n,2,n-1\} }}^{m+n-k-l\operatorname*{mod}4=0}(x-\lambda_{k,l})\label{Peo}\\
981: P_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}(x) & =\prod_{\substack{k\in\{1-m,2,m-1\} \\l\in
982: \{1-n,2,n-1\} }}^{m+n-k-l\operatorname*{mod}4=2}(x-\lambda_{k,l})\nonumber
983: \end{align}
984: Here e.g. $\{1-m,2,m-1\}$ means ``from $1-m$ to $m-1$ with step $2$'', i.e.,
985: $1-m,3-m,\ldots,m-1$. The degree of these polynomials
986: \begin{equation}
987: p_{\text{e,o}}(m,n)=\deg P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(x)\label{deg}%
988: \end{equation}
989: coincides with the number of multipliers in the products (\ref{Peo})
990: \begin{align}
991: p_{\text{e,o}}(m,n)=mn/2\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; & \text{at
992: }m,n\,\,\text{even}\nonumber\\%
993: \begin{array}
994: [c]{c}%
995: \,\,p_{\text{e}}(m,n)=mn/2-1/2\\
996: \,\,p_{\text{o}}(m,n)=mn/2+1/2
997: \end{array}
998: \;\;\; & \text{at }m,n\,\,\text{odd}\label{pmn}%
999: \end{align}
1000: In particular, the parity of $P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(x)$ is that of the
1001: integer $\,p_{\text{e,o}}(m,n)$. In the current context it turns out
1002: convenient to parameterize the external dimensions in terms of new variables
1003: $\lambda_{i}$ as
1004: \begin{equation}
1005: \Delta_{i}=\frac{Q^{2}}8-\frac{\lambda_{i}^{2}}2\label{li}%
1006: \end{equation}
1007:
1008: We will need some more notations. Consider a three point function of formal
1009: chiral fields, like $\left\langle V_{m,n}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}%
1010: V_{\Delta_{1}}(1)V_{\Delta_{2}}(0)\right\rangle $ and $\left\langle
1011: V_{m,n}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}V_{\Delta_{1}}(1)V_{\Delta_{2}}%
1012: (0)\right\rangle $. Application of the Ward identities, which read in this
1013: context simply as
1014: \begin{align}
1015: \lbrack G_{k},V_{\Delta_{1}}(1)] & =\Lambda_{\Delta_{1}}(1)\label{GValg}\\
1016: \{G_{k},\Lambda_{\Delta_{1}}(1)\} & =(2k\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}+\Delta
1017: _{m,n}+N)V_{\Delta_{1}}(1)\nonumber
1018: \end{align}
1019: ($N$ is some integer or half integer, corresponding to the level of the
1020: descendent of $V_{m,n}(\infty)$) is a purely algebraic procedure and leads to
1021: the relations
1022: \begin{align}
1023: \left\langle V_{m,n}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}V_{\Delta_{1}}(1)V_{\Delta_{2}%
1024: }(0)\right\rangle & =Y_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}(\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2})\left\{
1025: \begin{array}
1026: [c]{l}%
1027: \left\langle V_{m,n}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{1}}(1)V_{\Delta_{2}}(0)\right\rangle
1028: \;\;\;\text{at }m,n\;\text{even}\\
1029: \left\langle V_{m,n}(\infty)\Lambda_{\Delta_{1}}(1)V_{\Delta_{2}%
1030: }(0)\right\rangle \;\;\;\text{at }m,n\;\text{odd}%
1031: \end{array}
1032: \right. \label{Yeo}\\
1033: \left\langle V_{m,n}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}\Lambda_{\Delta_{1}}%
1034: (1)V_{\Delta_{2}}(0)\right\rangle & =Y_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}(\Delta_{1}%
1035: ,\Delta_{2})\left\{
1036: \begin{array}
1037: [c]{l}%
1038: \left\langle V_{m,n}(\infty)\Lambda_{\Delta_{1}}(1)V_{\Delta_{2}%
1039: }(0)\right\rangle \;\;\;\text{at }m,n\;\text{even}\\
1040: \left\langle V_{m,n}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{1}}(1)V_{\Delta_{2}}(0)\right\rangle
1041: \;\;\,\;\text{at }m,n\;\text{odd}%
1042: \end{array}
1043: \right. \nonumber
1044: \end{align}
1045: Apparently the $Y_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2})$ are polynomials
1046: in $\Delta_{1}$ and $\Delta_{2}$, the leading order term being generated by
1047: the term in $D_{m,n}$ with maximum number of generators $G_{k}$, i.e., the one
1048: quoted in (\ref{Dnorm}). Thus the degree of $Y_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta
1049: _{1},\Delta_{2})$ is $p_{\text{e,o}}(m,n)$ with leading term
1050: \begin{equation}
1051: Y_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2})=(\Delta_{1}-\Delta
1052: _{2})^{p_{\text{e,o}}(m,n)}+\;\text{lower order terms}\label{Yleading}%
1053: \end{equation}
1054: On the other hand, the standard decoupling consideration requires this
1055: polynomials to be proportional to the product $P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}%
1056: (\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2})P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\lambda_{2}-\lambda_{1})$. The
1057: last is apparently a polynomial in $\Delta_{1}$ and $\Delta_{2}$ with leading
1058: order term $(2\Delta_{1}-2\Delta_{2})^{p_{\text{e,o}}(m,n)}$ and therefore
1059: \begin{equation}
1060: Y_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2})=2^{-p_{\text{e,o}}(m,n)}%
1061: P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2})P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}%
1062: (\lambda_{2}-\lambda_{1})\label{YPP}%
1063: \end{equation}
1064:
1065: Consider first the case $m,n$ even and the following products
1066: \begin{align}
1067: & \ \left\langle V_{\Delta}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}%
1068: }(\Delta,x)V_{\Delta}(0)\right\rangle \nonumber\\
1069: \ & =\frac{x^{mn/2}X_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}}{\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}\left\langle
1070: V_{\Delta}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta
1071: _{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}V_{\Delta}(0)\right\rangle +O(\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}%
1072: )\label{DCee}\\
1073: & \ \ \left\langle V_{\Delta}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}G_{1/2}\mathcal{C}%
1074: _{\text{o}}(\Delta,x)V_{\Delta}(0)\right\rangle \nonumber\\
1075: \ & =\ \frac{x^{mn/2}X_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}}{\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}\left\langle
1076: V_{\Delta}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}G_{1/2}\mathcal{C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta
1077: _{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}V_{\Delta}(0)\right\rangle +O(\Delta-\Delta_{m,n})\nonumber
1078: \end{align}
1079: The estimates $O(\Delta-\Delta_{m,n})$ follows from the observation, that all
1080: non-polar terms in $\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta,x)$ or $G_{1/2}%
1081: \mathcal{C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta,x)$ are orthogonal to $V_{\Delta}(\infty
1082: )D_{m,n}^{\dagger}$ at $\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}$. Similarly, at $m,n$ odd we have
1083: \begin{align}
1084: & \ \left\langle V_{\Delta}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}\mathcal{C}_{\text{o}%
1085: }(\Delta,x)V_{\Delta}(0)\right\rangle \nonumber\\
1086: \ & =\frac{x^{mn/2}X_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}}{\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}\left\langle
1087: V_{\Delta}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}\mathcal{C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta
1088: _{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}V_{\Delta}(0)\right\rangle +O(\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}%
1089: )\label{DCoo}\\
1090: & \ \ \left\langle V_{\Delta}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}G_{1/2}\mathcal{C}%
1091: _{\text{e}}(\Delta,x)V_{\Delta}(0)\right\rangle \nonumber\\
1092: \ & =\ \frac{x^{mn/2}X_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}}{\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}\left\langle
1093: V_{\Delta}(\infty)D_{m,n}^{\dagger}G_{1/2}\mathcal{C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta
1094: _{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}V_{\Delta}(0)\right\rangle +O(\Delta-\Delta_{m,n})\nonumber
1095: \end{align}
1096: Then the right hand sides are evaluated using (\ref{lognorm}) and compared
1097: with the left hand sides coming from (\ref{Yeo}). This results
1098: in\cite{vbelavin, leshek}
1099: \begin{equation}
1100: X_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}=\frac{Y_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2}%
1101: )}{r_{m,n}^{\prime}}\label{Xeo}%
1102: \end{equation}
1103: Notice, that a simple change of the notations turns the above consideration to
1104: a proof of the residue formula for the complementary chain $\mathcal{\tilde
1105: C}(\Delta,x)$
1106: \begin{align}
1107: \operatorname*{res}_{\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}}\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{e}}%
1108: (\Delta,x) & =x^{mn/2}\left\{
1109: \begin{array}
1110: [c]{l}%
1111: X_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}%
1112: \;\;\;\;\;\;m,n\;\;\;\text{even}\\
1113: X_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}%
1114: \;\;\;\;\;\;m,n\;\;\;\text{odd}%
1115: \end{array}
1116: \right. \label{resCt}\\
1117: \operatorname*{res}_{\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}}\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{o}}%
1118: (\Delta,x) & =x^{mn/2}\left\{
1119: \begin{array}
1120: [c]{l}%
1121: X_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{o}}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}%
1122: \;\;\;\;\;\;m,n\;\;\;\text{even}\\
1123: X_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{e}}(\Delta_{m,-n},x)D_{m,n}%
1124: \;\;\;\;\;\;m,n\;\;\;\text{odd}%
1125: \end{array}
1126: \right. \nonumber
1127: \end{align}
1128:
1129: These simple analytic properties are inherited by the corresponding
1130: superconformal blocks. Define the odd and even blocks as
1131: \begin{equation}
1132: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e,o}}\left(
1133: \begin{array}
1134: [c]{cc}%
1135: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1136: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1137: \end{array}
1138: \left| \Delta\right| x\right) =x^{\Delta-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}}\left\langle
1139: V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}(1)\mathcal{C}_{\text{e,o}}^{\Delta
1140: _{1},\Delta_{2}}\left( \Delta,x\right) )V_{\Delta}(0)\right\rangle
1141: \label{Feo}%
1142: \end{equation}
1143: where again $V_{\Delta}$ are formal (chiral) primary fields and we have
1144: restored the implicit dependence of the chain operator on the external
1145: dimensions. Normalization is fixed by
1146: \begin{align}
1147: \left\langle V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}(1)V_{\Delta}%
1148: (0)\right\rangle & =1\label{N1}\\
1149: \left\langle V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}(1)G_{-1/2}V_{\Delta
1150: }(0)\right\rangle & =1\nonumber
1151: \end{align}
1152: The poles of $\mathcal{C}_{\text{e,o}}^{\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2}}(\Delta)$ turn
1153: to the poles of the blocks, the residues being evaluated similarly (to be more
1154: compact we suppress the external dimensions in the arguments of the blocks)
1155: \begin{align}
1156: \operatorname*{res}_{\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}}\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left(
1157: \Delta,x\right) & =B_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}\left(
1158: \begin{array}
1159: [c]{cc}%
1160: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1161: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1162: \end{array}
1163: \right) \left\{
1164: \begin{array}
1165: [c]{l}%
1166: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left( \Delta_{m,-n},x\right) \;\;\;\;\text{at
1167: }m,n\;\text{even}\\
1168: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left( \Delta_{m,-n},x\right) \;\;\;\;\text{at
1169: }m,n\;\text{odd}%
1170: \end{array}
1171: \right. \label{resB}\\
1172: \operatorname*{res}_{\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}}\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}\left(
1173: \Delta,x\right) & =B_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}\left(
1174: \begin{array}
1175: [c]{cc}%
1176: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1177: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1178: \end{array}
1179: \right) \left\{
1180: \begin{array}
1181: [c]{l}%
1182: \mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}\left( \Delta_{m,-n},x\right) \;\;\;\;\text{at
1183: }m,n\;\text{even}\\
1184: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left( \Delta_{m,-n},x\right) \;\;\;\;\,\text{at
1185: }m,n\;\text{odd}%
1186: \end{array}
1187: \right. \nonumber
1188: \end{align}
1189: Matrix elements $\left\langle V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}%
1190: (1)D_{m,n}V_{m,n}(0)\right\rangle $ are evaluated by the same algebraic
1191: procedure
1192: \begin{align}
1193: \left\langle V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}(1)D_{m,n}V_{m,n}%
1194: (0)\right\rangle & =Y_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}(\Delta_{3},\Delta_{4})\left\{
1195: \begin{array}
1196: [c]{l}%
1197: \left\langle V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}(1)V_{m,n}(0)\right\rangle
1198: \;\,\text{at }m,n\;\text{even}\\
1199: \langle V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}(1)\widehat{V}_{m,n}%
1200: (0)\rangle\;\,\;\text{at }m,n\;\text{odd}%
1201: \end{array}
1202: \right. \label{Y34}\\
1203: \left\langle V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}(1)\widehat{D}_{m,n}%
1204: V_{m,n}(0)\right\rangle & =Y_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}(\Delta_{3},\Delta
1205: _{4})\left\{
1206: \begin{array}
1207: [c]{l}%
1208: \langle V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}(1)\widehat{V}_{m,n}%
1209: (0)\rangle\;\,\,\text{at }m,n\;\text{even}\\
1210: \left\langle V_{\Delta_{4}}(\infty)V_{\Delta_{3}}(1)V_{m,n}(0)\right\rangle
1211: \;\,\text{at }m,n\;\text{odd}%
1212: \end{array}
1213: \right. \nonumber
1214: \end{align}
1215: where $\widehat{D}_{m,n}=G_{-1/2}D_{m,n}$ and $\widehat{V}_{m,n}%
1216: (0)=G_{-1/2}V_{m,n}$. Combining all together we find\cite{vbelavin, leshek}
1217: \begin{equation}
1218: B_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}\left(
1219: \begin{array}
1220: [c]{cc}%
1221: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1222: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1223: \end{array}
1224: \right) =\frac{Y_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2})Y_{m,n}%
1225: ^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta_{3},\Delta_{4})}{r_{m,n}^{\prime}}\label{Beo}%
1226: \end{equation}
1227: Important symmetries
1228: \begin{align}
1229: B_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}\left(
1230: \begin{array}
1231: [c]{cc}%
1232: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1233: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1234: \end{array}
1235: \right) & =B_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}\left(
1236: \begin{array}
1237: [c]{cc}%
1238: \Delta_{3} & \Delta_{1}\\
1239: \Delta_{4} & \Delta_{2}%
1240: \end{array}
1241: \right) =B_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}\left(
1242: \begin{array}
1243: [c]{cc}%
1244: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}\\
1245: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}%
1246: \end{array}
1247: \right) \label{Rpty}\\
1248: B_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}\left(
1249: \begin{array}
1250: [c]{cc}%
1251: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1252: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1253: \end{array}
1254: \right) & =(-)^{p_{\text{e,o}}(m,n)}B_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}\left(
1255: \begin{array}
1256: [c]{cc}%
1257: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{3}\\
1258: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{4}%
1259: \end{array}
1260: \right) \nonumber
1261: \end{align}
1262: follow directly from the symmetry properties of the fusion polynomials.
1263:
1264: \section{$\widehat{c}$-recursion}
1265:
1266: Analytic properties observed in the previous section give rise to convenient
1267: relations for the superconformal blocks $\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left(
1268: \Delta,x\right) $ and $\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}(\Delta,x)$ (we suppress
1269: sometimes the explicit dependence on the external dimensions) which allow
1270: their simple recursive evaluation, e.g. as a power series in $x$. The first
1271: way is to consider analytic properties in the central charge $\widehat{c}$ of
1272: the superconformal algebra\cite{vbelavin, leshek}. In this case the Kac
1273: dimensions (\ref{Dmn}) appear as (again in general simple) poles in
1274: $\widehat{c}$ at
1275: \begin{equation}
1276: \widehat{c}=\widehat{c}_{m,n}(\Delta)=5+2T_{m,n}(\Delta)+2T_{m,n}^{-1}%
1277: (\Delta)\label{cmn}%
1278: \end{equation}
1279: where again $(m,n)$ is a pair of natural numbers, both even or both odd, while
1280: $T_{m,n}(\Delta)$ is a root of the quadric (\ref{Dmn}) in $b^{2}$%
1281: \begin{align}
1282: T_{m,n}(\Delta) & =\frac{1-4\Delta-mn+\sqrt{16\Delta^{2}+8(mn-1)\Delta
1283: +(m-n)^{2}}}{n^{2}-1}\label{Tmn}\\
1284: T_{m,n}^{-1}(\Delta) & =\frac{1-4\Delta-mn-\sqrt{16\Delta^{2}+8(mn-1)\Delta
1285: +(m-n)^{2}}}{m^{2}-1}\nonumber
1286: \end{align}
1287: For this particular root all singularities corresponding to $m=1$ are sent to
1288: infinity and only the pairs with $m>1$ count. Notice that the root chosen is
1289: non-singular at $n=1$ so that (\ref{Tmn}) is understood as
1290: \begin{equation}
1291: T_{m,1}(\Delta)=\frac{m^{2}-1}{2(1-4\Delta-m)}\label{Tm1}%
1292: \end{equation}
1293: Corresponding residues are read off from those in (\ref{Beo}) when being
1294: expressed in terms of $\Delta$. In the present context it is convenient to use
1295: the symmetry of the polynomials (\ref{Peo}) to make the multipliers in the
1296: residues (\ref{YPP}) explicit polynomials in $\Delta_{1}$ and $\Delta_{2}$. At
1297: $m,n$ even the multipliers in $P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(x)$ always enter in
1298: pairs $(x-\lambda_{k,l})(x-\lambda_{-k,-l})$ and one can ``fold'' the product
1299: $2^{-p_{\text{e,o}}(m,n)}P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\lambda_{1}-\lambda
1300: _{2})P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2})$ as follows
1301: \begin{equation}
1302: Y_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2})=\prod_{\substack{k\in\{1,2,m-1\}
1303: \\l\in\{1-n,2,n-1\} }}^{m+n-k-l\operatorname*{mod}4=0,2}\mathcal{Y}%
1304: _{k,l}^{(m,n)}(\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2},\Delta)\label{PP}%
1305: \end{equation}
1306: where
1307: \begin{equation}
1308: \mathcal{Y}_{k,l}^{(m,n)}(\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2},\Delta)=(\Delta_{1}-\Delta
1309: _{2})^{2}+\Lambda_{k,l}^{(m,n)}(\Delta)(\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}-\Lambda
1310: _{1,1}^{(m,n)}(\Delta))+\frac14\left( \Lambda_{k,l}^{(m,n)}(\Delta)\right)
1311: ^{2}\label{Ykl}%
1312: \end{equation}
1313: and
1314: \begin{equation}
1315: \Lambda_{k,l}^{(m,n)}(\Delta)=\frac{k^{2}T_{m,n}^{-1}(\Delta)+2kl+l^{2}%
1316: T_{m,n}(\Delta)}4\label{Lkl}%
1317: \end{equation}
1318: Similar folding is possible also at $m,n$ odd if the degree of $P_{m,n}$ is
1319: even. If it is odd, the term with $(k,l)=(0,0)$ leads to an extra multiplier
1320: $\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}$.
1321:
1322: Once the multipliers in (\ref{Beo}) are expressed in terms of $\Delta$, the
1323: corresponding residues in $\widehat{c}$ read
1324: \begin{align}
1325: \operatorname*{res}_{\widehat{c}=\widehat{c}_{m,n}}\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}%
1326: }\left( \widehat{c},\Delta,x\right) & =\widehat{B}_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}%
1327: }(\Delta)\left\{
1328: \begin{array}
1329: [c]{l}%
1330: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left( \widehat{c}_{m,n},\Delta+mn/2,x\right)
1331: \;\;\;\;\text{at }m,n\;\text{even}\\
1332: \mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}\left( \widehat{c}_{m,n},\Delta+mn/2,x\right)
1333: \;\;\;\;\text{at }m,n\;\text{odd}%
1334: \end{array}
1335: \right. \label{rescF}\\
1336: \operatorname*{res}_{\widehat{c}=\widehat{c}_{m,n}}\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}%
1337: }\left( \widehat{c},\Delta,x\right) & =\widehat{B}_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}%
1338: }(\Delta)\left\{
1339: \begin{array}
1340: [c]{l}%
1341: \mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}\left( \widehat{c}_{m,n},\Delta+mn/2,x\right)
1342: \;\;\;\;\text{at }m,n\;\text{even}\\
1343: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left( \widehat{c}_{m,n},\Delta+mn/2,x\right)
1344: \;\;\;\;\,\text{at }m,n\;\text{odd}%
1345: \end{array}
1346: \right. \nonumber
1347: \end{align}
1348: where
1349: \begin{equation}
1350: \widehat{B}_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta)=B_{m,n}^{\text{(e.o)}}(\Delta
1351: )\frac{16(T_{m,n}(\Delta)-T_{m,n}^{-1}(\Delta))}{(n^{2}-1)T_{m,n}%
1352: (\Delta)-(m^{2}-1)T_{m,n}^{-1}(\Delta)}\label{Bmn}%
1353: \end{equation}
1354: the last fraction corresponding to $-\partial\widehat{c}/\partial\Delta$ along
1355: the $(m,n)$ Kac quadric (\ref{Dmn}).
1356:
1357: The asymptotic of $\mathcal{F}_{\text{e,o}}\left( \widehat{c},\Delta
1358: ,x\right) $ at $\widehat{c}\rightarrow\infty$ has been recovered in
1359: \cite{vbelavin, leshek}. Analytic properties in $\widehat{c}$ sum up to the
1360: following relations%
1361:
1362: \begin{align}
1363: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e,o}}\left( \widehat{c},\Delta,x\right) =f_{\text{e,o}%
1364: }(\Delta,x) & +\sum_{m,n\;\text{even}}\frac{\widehat{B}_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}%
1365: }(\Delta)}{\widehat{c}-\widehat{c}_{m,n}(\Delta)}\mathcal{F}_{\text{e,o}%
1366: }(\widehat{c}_{m,n},\Delta+mn/2,x)\label{crec}\\
1367: & \ \ +\sum_{\substack{m,n\;\text{odd} \\m>1 }}\frac{\widehat{B}%
1368: _{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta)}{\widehat{c}-\widehat{c}_{m,n}(\Delta
1369: )}\mathcal{F}_{\text{o,e}}(\widehat{c}_{m,n},\Delta+mn/2,x)\nonumber
1370: \end{align}
1371: where%
1372:
1373: \begin{align}
1374: f_{\text{e}}(\Delta,x) & =x^{\Delta-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}}{}_{2}F_{1}%
1375: (\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2},\Delta+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{4},2\Delta
1376: ,x)\label{feo}\\
1377: f_{\text{o}}(\Delta,x) & =\frac1{2\Delta}x^{\Delta-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}%
1378: +1/2}{}_{2}F_{1}\left( \Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}+\frac12,\Delta+\Delta
1379: _{3}-\Delta_{4}+\frac12,2\Delta+1,x\right) \nonumber
1380: \end{align}
1381:
1382: Equations (\ref{crec}) apparently can be used for recursive evaluation of the
1383: coefficients in the series expansions
1384: \begin{equation}
1385: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e,o}}\left( \widehat{c},\Delta,x\right) =x^{\Delta
1386: -\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}}\sum_{k}x^{N}F_{\text{e,o}}^{(N)}\left( \widehat
1387: {c},\Delta\right) \label{FN}%
1388: \end{equation}
1389: where the sum is over non-negative integer (for $\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}$) or
1390: half-integer (for $\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}$) numbers
1391: \begin{align}
1392: F_{\text{e,o}}^{(N)}\left( \widehat{c},\Delta\right) =f_{\text{e,o}}%
1393: ^{(N)}(\Delta) & +\sum_{m,n\;\text{even}}^{mn/2\leq N}\frac{\widehat{B}%
1394: _{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta)}{\widehat{c}-\widehat{c}_{m,n}(\Delta
1395: )}F_{\text{e,o}}^{(N-mn/2)}\left( \widehat{c}_{m,n},\Delta+mn/2\right)
1396: \label{FNrec}\\
1397: & +\sum_{\substack{m,n\;\text{odd} \\m>1 }}^{mn/2\leq N}\frac{\widehat
1398: {B}_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\Delta)}{\widehat{c}-\widehat{c}_{m,n}(\Delta
1399: )}F_{\text{o,e}}^{(N-mn/2)}\left( \widehat{c}_{m,n},\Delta+mn/2\right)
1400: \nonumber
1401: \end{align}
1402: In (\ref{FNrec})
1403: \begin{align}
1404: f_{\text{e}}^{(N)}(\Delta) & =\frac{(\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2})_{N}%
1405: (\Delta+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{4})_{N}}{N!(2\Delta)_{N}}\label{fN}\\
1406: f_{\text{o}}^{(N)}(\Delta) & =\frac{(\Delta+\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}%
1407: +1/2)_{N-1/2}(\Delta+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{4}+1/2)_{N-1/2}}{(N-1/2)!(2\Delta
1408: )_{N+1/2}}\nonumber
1409: \end{align}
1410:
1411: \section{Elliptic recursion}
1412:
1413: For practical calculations another relation turns out to be much more
1414: convenient. This relation is called the elliptic recursion (since it requires
1415: a parametrization in terms of the elliptic functions) or, sometimes, the
1416: $\Delta$-recursion, because it is based on the analytic properties of the
1417: blocks in $\Delta$ instead of $\widehat{c}$. As in ref.\cite{dblock} we
1418: understand the variable $x$ as the modulus of the elliptic curve
1419: $y^{2}=t(1-t)(1-xt)$ and introduce the ratio of its periods $\tau$
1420: \begin{equation}
1421: \tau=i\frac{K(1-x)}{K(x)}\label{tau}%
1422: \end{equation}
1423: where
1424: \begin{equation}
1425: K(x)=\int_{0}^{1}\frac{dt}{2y(t)}\label{K}%
1426: \end{equation}
1427: is the complete elliptic integral of the first kind. Let also $q=\exp(i\pi
1428: \tau)$ and denote in the standard way
1429: \begin{equation}
1430: \theta_{3}(q)=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}q^{n^{2}}\,;\;\;\;\;\;\theta
1431: _{2}(q)=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}q^{(n+1/2)^{2}}\label{theta}%
1432: \end{equation}
1433: so that
1434: \begin{equation}
1435: x=\frac{\theta_{2}^{4}(q)}{\theta_{3}^{4}(q)}\label{xq}%
1436: \end{equation}
1437: inverts (\ref{tau}). This elliptic parametrization has important advantages.
1438: Eq.(\ref{xq}) maps the half plane $\operatorname*{Im}\tau>0$ to the universal
1439: covering of the $x$-plane with punctures at $0$, $1$ and $\infty$. The power
1440: expansions (\ref{FN}) of the blocks in $x$ converge inside the disk $\left|
1441: x\right| <1$. Once reexpanded in $q$ it converges inside $\left| q\right|
1442: <1$, i.e., on the whole covering and therefore gives there a uniform
1443: approximation. Naturally, even in the region $\left| x\right| <1$ it is
1444: expected to converge faster. The elliptic recursion, which we describe now,
1445: gives the blocks directly in terms of the elliptic variable and allows to
1446: generate the $q$-series in a simple way.
1447:
1448: Define the ``elliptic'' blocks $H_{\text{e,o}}(\Delta,q)$ through the
1449: relations
1450: \begin{align}
1451: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left(
1452: \begin{array}
1453: [c]{cc}%
1454: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1455: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1456: \end{array}
1457: \left| \Delta\right| x\right) & =(16q)^{\Delta-Q^{2}/8}\frac
1458: {x^{Q^{2}/8-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}}(1-x)^{Q^{2}/8-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{3}}%
1459: }{\theta_{3}^{4\sum_{i=1}^{4}\Delta_{i}-3Q^{2}/2}(q)}H_{\text{e}}\left(
1460: \begin{array}
1461: [c]{cc}%
1462: \lambda_{1} & \lambda_{3}\\
1463: \lambda_{2} & \lambda_{4}%
1464: \end{array}
1465: \left| \Delta\right| q\right) \label{FH}\\
1466: 2\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}\left(
1467: \begin{array}
1468: [c]{cc}%
1469: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1470: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1471: \end{array}
1472: \left| \Delta\right| x\right) & =(16q)^{\Delta-Q^{2}/8}\frac
1473: {x^{Q^{2}/8-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}}(1-x)^{Q^{2}/8-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{3}}%
1474: }{\theta_{3}^{4\sum_{i=1}^{4}\Delta_{i}-3Q^{2}/2}(q)}H_{\text{o}}\left(
1475: \begin{array}
1476: [c]{cc}%
1477: \lambda_{1} & \lambda_{3}\\
1478: \lambda_{2} & \lambda_{4}%
1479: \end{array}
1480: \left| \Delta\right| q\right) \nonumber
1481: \end{align}
1482: where the parametrization (\ref{li}) of the external dimensions $\Delta_{i}$
1483: in terms of $\lambda_{i}$ is implied. In order, the elliptic blocks satisfy
1484: the following relations (the elliptic recursion)%
1485:
1486: \begin{align}
1487: H_{\text{e}}(\Delta,q)=\theta_{3}(q^{2}) & +\sum_{m,n\;\text{even}}%
1488: \frac{q^{mn/2}R_{m,n}^{\text{(e)}}}{\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}H_{\text{e}}\left(
1489: \Delta_{m,-n},q\right) +\sum_{m,n\;\text{odd}}\frac{q^{mn/2}R_{m,n}%
1490: ^{\text{(e)}}}{\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}H_{\text{o}}\left( \Delta_{m,-n},q\right)
1491: \label{Hrec}\\
1492: H_{\text{o}}(\Delta,q) & =\sum_{m,n\;\text{even}}\frac{q^{mn/2}%
1493: R_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}}{\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}H_{\text{o}}\left( \Delta
1494: _{m,-n},q\right) +\sum_{m,n\;\text{odd}}\frac{q^{mn/2}R_{m,n}^{\text{(o)}}%
1495: }{\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}H_{\text{e}}\left( \Delta_{m,-n},q\right) \nonumber
1496: \end{align}
1497: the residues reading simply
1498: \begin{equation}
1499: R_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}=\frac{P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\lambda_{1}+\lambda
1500: _{2})P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2})P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}%
1501: }(\lambda_{3}+\lambda_{4})P_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}(\lambda_{3}-\lambda_{4}%
1502: )}{r_{m,n}^{\prime}}\label{Reo}%
1503: \end{equation}
1504: These relations take into account the analytic properties of the
1505: superconformal blocks in $\Delta$ described in section 3. In addition they
1506: imply that in the limit $\Delta\rightarrow\infty$%
1507: \begin{align}
1508: H_{\text{e}}(\Delta,q) & =\theta_{3}(q^{2})+O(\Delta^{-1})\label{Hass}\\
1509: H_{\text{o}}(\Delta,q) & =\Delta^{-1}\theta_{2}(q^{2})+O(\Delta
1510: ^{-2})\nonumber
1511: \end{align}
1512: The first asymptotic is plugged explicitly into the relations, while the
1513: second is automatically generated by the recursion. To derive the relations
1514: (\ref{Hrec}) we need to justify the $\Delta\rightarrow\infty$ asymptotic of
1515: the blocks, summed up in (\ref{FH}) and (\ref{Hass}). The arguments will be
1516: reported elsewhere.
1517:
1518: Like the $\widehat{c}$-recursion of section 4, relations (\ref{Hrec}) allow to
1519: evaluate recursively the series expansions of the elliptic blocks in powers of
1520: $q$%
1521: \begin{equation}
1522: H_{\text{e.o}}(\Delta,q)=\sum_{N}q^{N}h_{\text{e,o}}^{(N)}(\Delta)\label{hN}%
1523: \end{equation}
1524: Again $H_{\text{e}}(\Delta,q)$ expands in non-negative integer powers of $q$
1525: while $H_{\text{o}}(\Delta,q)$ is a series in positive half-integer ones.
1526: Relations (\ref{Hrec}) give%
1527:
1528: \begin{equation}
1529: h_{\text{e,o}}^{(N)}(\Delta)=\eta_{\text{e,o}}^{(N)}+\sum_{m,n\;\text{even}%
1530: }^{mn/2\leq N}\frac{R_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}h_{\text{e,o}}^{(N-mn/2)}%
1531: (\Delta_{m,-n})}{\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}+\sum_{m,n\;\text{odd}}^{mn/2\leq N}%
1532: \frac{R_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}h_{\text{o,e}}^{(N-mn/2)}\Delta_{m,-n})}%
1533: {\Delta-\Delta_{m,n}}\label{HNrc}%
1534: \end{equation}
1535: where $\eta_{\text{o}}^{(N)}=0$ and $\eta_{\text{e}}^{(N)}$ are coefficients
1536: in the $q$-expansion of $\theta_{3}(q^{2})$. In practice this relation allows
1537: a much better algorithm as compared to the $\widehat{c}$-recursion
1538: (\ref{FNrec}), mostly because $\widehat{c}$ is fixed and the values
1539: $R_{m,n}^{\text{(e,o)}}$, $\Delta_{m,n}$ remain the same at all iteration
1540: steps (unlike (\ref{FNrec}), where at each level they have to be recomputed
1541: for the ``shifted'' values of $\Delta$). Once a necessary number of residues
1542: and dimensions is available, the remaining recursive procedure runs very fast.
1543:
1544: \section{Superconformal bootstrap}
1545:
1546: With the structure constants (\ref{C3}) and superconformal blocks known one is
1547: in the position to evaluate the four-point function (\ref{schan}) of basic NS
1548: fields in SLFT. The goal of this section is to verify numerically the crossing
1549: symmetry relations (\ref{cross}).
1550:
1551: For the reasons discussed above, we will use the elliptic representation
1552: (\ref{FH}) of the blocks. The four-point function (\ref{schan}) acquires the
1553: form
1554: \begin{equation}
1555: G\left( \left.
1556: \begin{array}
1557: [c]{cc}%
1558: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
1559: a_{2} & a_{4}%
1560: \end{array}
1561: \right| x,\bar x\right) =\frac{(x\bar x)^{Q^{2}/8-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}%
1562: }[(1-x)(1-\bar x)]^{Q^{2}/8-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{3}}}{[\theta_{3}(q)\theta
1563: _{3}(\bar q)]^{4\sum_{i}\Delta_{i}-3Q^{2}/2}}g\left( \left.
1564: \begin{array}
1565: [c]{cc}%
1566: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
1567: a_{2} & a_{4}%
1568: \end{array}
1569: \right| \tau,\bar\tau\right) \label{G}%
1570: \end{equation}
1571: where
1572: \begin{align}
1573: \ & g\left( \left.
1574: \begin{array}
1575: [c]{cc}%
1576: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
1577: a_{2} & a_{4}%
1578: \end{array}
1579: \right| \tau,\bar\tau\right) =\label{gtau}\\
1580: \ \ \ & \int\frac{dP}{4\pi}\left| 16q\right| ^{P^{2}}\left[ \mathbb{C}%
1581: _{a_{1},a_{2}}^{Q/2+iP}\mathbb{C}_{a_{3},a_{4}}^{Q/2-iP}H_{\text{e}}\left(
1582: \Delta,q\right) H_{\text{e}}\left( \Delta,\bar q\right) -\mathbb{\tilde
1583: C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}^{Q/2+iP}\mathbb{\tilde C}_{a_{3},a_{4}}^{Q/2-iP}H_{\text{o}%
1584: }\left( \Delta,q\right) H_{\text{o}}\left( \Delta,\bar q\right) \right]
1585: \nonumber
1586: \end{align}
1587: and $\Delta=Q^{2}/8+P^{2}/2$. The first of the relations (\ref{cross}) is
1588: verified analytically. Indeed, the identities
1589: \begin{align}
1590: H_{\text{e}}\left(
1591: \begin{array}
1592: [c]{cc}%
1593: \lambda_{1} & \lambda_{3}\\
1594: \lambda_{2} & \lambda_{4}%
1595: \end{array}
1596: \left| \Delta\right| -q\right) & =H_{\text{e}}\left(
1597: \begin{array}
1598: [c]{cc}%
1599: \lambda_{1} & \lambda_{4}\\
1600: \lambda_{2} & \lambda_{3}%
1601: \end{array}
1602: \left| \Delta\right| q\right) \label{Hs}\\
1603: H_{\text{o}}\left(
1604: \begin{array}
1605: [c]{cc}%
1606: \lambda_{1} & \lambda_{3}\\
1607: \lambda_{2} & \lambda_{4}%
1608: \end{array}
1609: \left| \Delta\right| e^{i\pi}q\right) & =e^{i\pi/2}H_{\text{o}}\left(
1610: \begin{array}
1611: [c]{cc}%
1612: \lambda_{1} & \lambda_{3}\\
1613: \lambda_{2} & \lambda_{4}%
1614: \end{array}
1615: \left| \Delta\right| q\right) \nonumber
1616: \end{align}
1617: for the elliptic blocks (the latter are easily derived from (\ref{Hrec}) and
1618: the symmetries (\ref{Rpty}) of the residues) directly result in
1619: \begin{equation}
1620: g\left( \left.
1621: \begin{array}
1622: [c]{cc}%
1623: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
1624: a_{2} & a_{4}%
1625: \end{array}
1626: \right| \tau,\bar\tau\right) =g\left( \left.
1627: \begin{array}
1628: [c]{cc}%
1629: a_{1} & a_{4}\\
1630: a_{2} & a_{3}%
1631: \end{array}
1632: \right| \tau+1,\bar\tau+1\right) \label{c1}%
1633: \end{equation}
1634:
1635: The second relation in eq.(\ref{cross}) in terms of the function $g$ reads
1636: \begin{equation}
1637: g\left( \left.
1638: \begin{array}
1639: [c]{cc}%
1640: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
1641: a_{2} & a_{4}%
1642: \end{array}
1643: \right| \tau,\bar\tau\right) =(\tau\bar\tau)^{3Q^{2}/4-2\sum_{i}\Delta_{i}%
1644: }g\left( \left.
1645: \begin{array}
1646: [c]{cc}%
1647: a_{1} & a_{2}\\
1648: a_{3} & a_{4}%
1649: \end{array}
1650: \right| -\frac1\tau,-\frac1{\bar\tau}\right) \label{c2}%
1651: \end{equation}
1652: It is a difficult mathematical problem to recover this property from the
1653: representation (\ref{g}). However, with the fast algorithms based on the
1654: elliptic representation of the blocks, it is an affordable problem for
1655: numerical analysis.
1656:
1657: As a simplest numerical test we have chosen the external parameters
1658: $a_{1}=a_{2}=a_{3}=a_{4}=Q/2$. The structure constants (\ref{C3}) vanish for
1659: these values of the external parameters, so that we take a first derivative in
1660: all four of them. This means that we consider the four point function of the
1661: primary fields $V_{Q/2}^{\prime}=\phi\exp(Q\phi/2)$. Denoting
1662: \begin{equation}
1663: \frac{\partial^{4}}{\partial a_{1}\partial a_{2}\partial a_{3}\partial a_{4}%
1664: }\left. g\left( \left.
1665: \begin{array}
1666: [c]{cc}%
1667: a_{1} & a_{3}\\
1668: a_{2} & a_{4}%
1669: \end{array}
1670: \right| \tau,\bar\tau\right) \right| _{a_{i}=Q/2}=4\Upsilon_{\text{NS}%
1671: }^{\prime4}(0)\Upsilon_{\text{R}}^{2}(b)f(\tau,\bar\tau)\label{gf}%
1672: \end{equation}
1673: we find
1674: \begin{equation}
1675: f(\tau,\bar\tau)=\int\frac{dP}{4\pi}\left| 16q\right| ^{P^{2}}\left[
1676: r_{\text{e}}(P)\left| H_{\text{e}}\left(
1677: \begin{array}
1678: [c]{cc}%
1679: 0 & 0\\
1680: 0 & 0
1681: \end{array}
1682: \left| \Delta\right| q\right) \right| ^{2}+r_{\text{o}}(P)\left|
1683: H_{\text{o}}\left(
1684: \begin{array}
1685: [c]{cc}%
1686: 0 & 0\\
1687: 0 & 0
1688: \end{array}
1689: \left| \Delta\right| q\right) \right| ^{2}\right] \label{f}%
1690: \end{equation}
1691: The auxiliary functions $r_{\text{e}}(P)$ and $r_{\text{o}}(P)$ read in terms
1692: of standard upsilon functions $\Upsilon_{b}(x)$
1693: \begin{align}
1694: r_{\text{e}}(P) & =\frac{\Upsilon_{b}(iP)\Upsilon_{b}(-iP)\Upsilon_{b}%
1695: ^{2}(iP+Q/2)}{\Upsilon_{b}^{8}(Q/4+iP/2)\Upsilon_{b}^{8}(Q/4-iP/2)}%
1696: \label{reo}\\
1697: r_{\text{o}}(P) & =\frac{\Upsilon_{b}(iP)\Upsilon_{b}(-iP)\Upsilon_{b}%
1698: ^{2}(Q/2+iP)}{\Upsilon_{b}^{8}(Q/4+b/2+iP/2)\Upsilon^{8}(Q/4+b^{-1}%
1699: /2+iP/2)}\nonumber
1700: \end{align}
1701: and allow the following integral representations
1702: \begin{align}
1703: r_{\text{e}}(P) & =P^{2}\exp\left\{ \int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{dt}t\left[
1704: -\frac{(1+6b^{2}+b^{4})e^{-t}}{2b^{2}}\right. \right. \label{re}\\
1705: & \ \ \ \ \ +\left. \left. \frac{8\cos(Pt/2)\cosh[(b+1/b)t/4]-2\cos
1706: (Pt)\cosh^{2}[(b-1/b)t/4]-6}{\sinh(t/2b)\sinh(bt/2)}\right] \right\}
1707: \nonumber
1708: \end{align}%
1709: \begin{align}
1710: r_{\text{o}}(P) & =P^{2}\exp\left\{ \int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{dt}t\left[
1711: -\frac{(1-2b^{2}+b^{4})e^{-t}}{2b^{2}}\right. \right. \label{ro}\\
1712: & \ \ \ \ \ \left. \left. +\frac{8\cos(Pt/2)\cosh[(b-1/b)t/4]-2\cos
1713: (Pt)\cosh^{2}[(b-1/b)t/4]-6}{\sinh(t/2b)\sinh(bt/2)}\right] \right\}
1714: \nonumber
1715: \end{align}%
1716:
1717: %TCIMACRO{\FRAME{ftbhFU}{5.0194in}{3.5198in}{0pt}{\Qcb{The results of
1718: %comparison for different values of $b$.}}{}{d:\tex\papers\sliouv
1719: %\NSbootstrap\arXiv\boot.eps}{\special{ language "Scientific Word";
1720: %type "GRAPHIC"; maintain-aspect-ratio TRUE; display "ICON";
1721: %valid_file "F"; width 5.0194in; height 3.5198in; depth 0pt; cropleft "0";
1722: %croptop "1"; cropright "1"; cropbottom "0";
1723: %filename 'boot.eps';file-properties "XNPEU";}}}%
1724: %BeginExpansion
1725: \begin{figure}
1726: [tbh]
1727: \begin{center}
1728: \includegraphics[
1729: height=3.5198in,
1730: width=5.0194in
1731: ]%
1732: {boot.eps}%
1733: \caption{The results of comparison for different values of $b$.}%
1734: \end{center}
1735: \end{figure}
1736: %EndExpansion
1737:
1738: In Figure 1 the values of $f(\tau,\bar\tau)$ (solid curves) are compared with
1739: that of $(\tau\bar\tau)^{-Q^{2}/4}\times f(-1/\tau,-1/\bar\tau)$ (symbols) for
1740: pure imaginary $\tau=it$ and certain values of the parameter $b$. To give an
1741: idea about the accuracy, some numbers are shown in the Table 1. These numbers
1742: correspond to the approximation of the elliptic blocks $H_{\text{e}}(q)$ and
1743: $q^{1/2}H_{\text{o}}(q)$ as power series up to the order $q^{6}$. It seems
1744: like the main source of the discrepancy is in this approximation. For example
1745: at $t=0.5$ ($q^{2}\approx0.0432$) the numbers differ in the fifth decimal
1746: digit (e.g., the numbers $7.12534$ and $7.12512$ in the Table), while the
1747: approximation improved up to the order $q^{10}$ gives seven correct decimal
1748: digits (respectively $7.12511575$ and $7.12511599 $).
1749:
1750: \begin{center}%
1751: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{B}{\begin{table}[tbp] \centering}}%
1752: %BeginExpansion
1753: \begin{table}[tbp] \centering
1754: %EndExpansion
1755: \begin{tabular}
1756: [c]{|c|c|c|c|c|}\hline
1757: & $f(t)$ & $t^{-Q^{2}/2}f(1/t)$ & $f(t)$ & $t^{-Q^{2}/2}f(1/t)$\\
1758: $t$ & for $b=0.8$ & for $b=0.8$ & for $b=i\pi/4$ & for $b=i\pi/4$\\\hline
1759: 0.1 & 25.900821 & 25.456246 & 1.5305811 & 1.5232342\\
1760: 0.2 & 15.372272 & 15.365205 & 1.5884637 & 1.5881483\\
1761: 0.3 & 11.123984 & 11.123971 & 1.5267458 & 1.5264759\\
1762: 0.4 & 8.7059097 & 8.7060123 & 1.4398383 & 1.4396855\\
1763: 0.5 & 7.1251188 & 7.125178 & 1.3522805 & 1.3521968\\
1764: 0.6 & 6.0067008 & 6.0067341 & 1.2708572 & 1.2708109\\
1765: 0.7 & 5.1733043 & 5.1733228 & 1.1971168 & 1.1970912\\
1766: 0.8 & 4.528805 & 4.5288147 & 1.1308767 & 1.1308632\\
1767: 0.9 & 4.0160968 & 4.0161008 & 1.0713992 & 1.0713936\\\hline
1768: \end{tabular}
1769: \caption{Numerical data for $f(t)$ for $b=0.8$ and $b=i\pi/4$.\label{key}}%
1770: %TCIMACRO{\TeXButton{E}{\end{table}}}%
1771: %BeginExpansion
1772: \end{table}%
1773: %EndExpansion
1774: \end{center}
1775:
1776: We have performed a similar comparison for some different values of
1777: $a_{1},a_{2},a_{3},a_{4}$ (chosen at random, but close enough to $Q/2$ to
1778: preserve the convergence of the representations (\ref{re}) and (\ref{ro})).
1779: E.g., at
1780: \begin{equation}
1781: a_{1}=\frac9{14}Q\,;\;a_{3}=\frac{2Q}3\,;\;a_{2}=\frac{13Q}{30}\,;\;a_{4}%
1782: =\frac{7Q}{10}\label{atest}%
1783: \end{equation}
1784: we have for $b=2.8$ and $t=0.3$
1785: \begin{align}
1786: f_{a_{1},a_{2},a_{3},a_{4}}(t) & =2141.5325\label{ftest}\\
1787: t^{3Q^{2}/2-4\sum_{i}\Delta_{i}}f_{a_{1},a_{3},a_{2},a_{4}}(1/t) &
1788: =2141.5101\nonumber
1789: \end{align}
1790:
1791: \section{Discussion}
1792:
1793: In the present paper a preliminary analysis of the bootstrap properties has
1794: been performed for the four point functions in the $N=1$ supersymmetric
1795: Liouville field theory. Some, mostly numerical, arguments are presented that
1796: the NS operator algebra, based on the structure constants (\ref{C3}),
1797: satisfies the locality property. Of course, a separate analysis is needed to
1798: include the Ramond sector. This problem remains for future work.
1799:
1800: Even in the purely NS sector the program is not yet completely finished. We
1801: considered only the four point functions of four ``bottom'' components $V$ of
1802: any supermultiplet. Correlation functions involving other components, like
1803: $\left\langle VVVW\right\rangle $ or $\left\langle \Lambda\Lambda
1804: VV\right\rangle $ etc., remain to be studied. Obviously they can be expressed
1805: in terms of the structure constants (\ref{C3}), like in eq.(\ref{schan}) for
1806: $\left\langle VVVV\right\rangle $, with different superconformal blocks. We
1807: arrive at the problem to describe completely the set of $32$ different blocks
1808: like (in obvious notations)
1809: \begin{align}
1810: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e,o}}\left(
1811: \begin{array}
1812: [c]{cc}%
1813: \Delta_{1} & \widehat{\Delta}_{3}\\
1814: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1815: \end{array}
1816: \left| \Delta\right| x\right) & =\left\langle V_{4}(\infty)\Lambda
1817: _{3}(1)\left| \Delta,\widehat{\Delta}\right| V_{1}(x)V_{2}(0)\right\rangle
1818: \label{Fex}\\
1819: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e,o}}\left(
1820: \begin{array}
1821: [c]{cc}%
1822: \widehat{\Delta}_{1} & \widehat{\Delta}_{3}\\
1823: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1824: \end{array}
1825: \left| \Delta\right| x\right) & =\left\langle V_{4}(\infty)\Lambda
1826: _{3}(1)\left| \Delta,\widehat{\Delta}\right| \Lambda_{1}(x)\Lambda
1827: _{2}(0)\right\rangle \nonumber\\
1828: & \ \ \text{etc.}\nonumber
1829: \end{align}
1830: where in the present context $V$ and $\Lambda$ are formal chiral components of
1831: the ``right'' supermultiplet, and, by definition
1832: \begin{equation}
1833: \left\langle V_{4}(\infty)\Lambda_{3}(1)\left| \Delta,\widehat{\Delta
1834: }\right| V_{1}(x)V_{2}(0)\right\rangle =\left\langle V_{4}(\infty)\Lambda
1835: _{3}(1)\mathcal{C}_{\text{e,o}}^{\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2}}(\Delta,x)V_{\Delta
1836: }(0)\right\rangle \label{VL}%
1837: \end{equation}
1838: (similarly for other components).
1839:
1840: The problem is slightly less involved than it seems at first glance. A study
1841: of the superprojective Ward identities, similar to that in Appendix A, allows
1842: to reduce the set to $8$ independent functions. Moreover, their analytic
1843: properties follow directly form those of the basic chains $\mathcal{C}%
1844: _{\text{e,o}}(\Delta,x)$ and $\mathcal{\tilde C}_{\text{e,o}}(\Delta,x)$. In
1845: particular, the residues at the singular dimensions $\Delta=\Delta_{m,n}$ are
1846: expressed similarly to (\ref{Beo}) in terms of the fusion polynomials.
1847: Construction of the recursive representations, analogous to (\ref{crec}) or
1848: (\ref{Hrec}), presents a separate problem, which we hope to analyze in the future.
1849:
1850: Another topic of a future report is the justifications of the asymptotic
1851: (\ref{FH}) and (\ref{Hass}) of the block at $\Delta\rightarrow\infty$, which
1852: has been simply conjectured in section 5 in order to write down the elliptic
1853: recursion relations. This analysis requires several essential steps and
1854: presently we prefer to skip it.
1855:
1856: The superconformal blocks, considered above, are expected to satisfy certain
1857: ``crossing'', or ``fusion'' relations, the set with different values of the
1858: intermediate dimension forming an infinite dimensional representation of the
1859: monodromy group. In the present case the group is equivalent to the modular
1860: group generated by the maps $x\rightarrow x/(x-1)$ and $x\rightarrow1-x$. In
1861: terms of the elliptic parameter $\tau$ these are $\tau\rightarrow\tau+1$ and
1862: $\tau\rightarrow-1/\tau$. The representation is completely determined by the
1863: relations
1864: \begin{align}
1865: \mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left(
1866: \begin{array}
1867: [c]{cc}%
1868: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1869: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1870: \end{array}
1871: \left| \Delta\right| x\right) & =e^{-i\pi(\Delta-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}%
1872: )}(1-x)^{-2\Delta_{1}}\mathcal{F}_{\text{e}}\left(
1873: \begin{array}
1874: [c]{cc}%
1875: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1876: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1877: \end{array}
1878: \left| \Delta\right| \frac{xe^{i\pi}}{1-x}\right) \label{crossI}\\
1879: \mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}\left(
1880: \begin{array}
1881: [c]{cc}%
1882: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1883: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1884: \end{array}
1885: \left| \Delta\right| x\right) & =e^{-i\pi(\Delta-\Delta_{1}-\Delta
1886: _{2}+1/2)}(1-x)^{-2\Delta_{1}}\mathcal{F}_{\text{o}}\left(
1887: \begin{array}
1888: [c]{cc}%
1889: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1890: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1891: \end{array}
1892: \left| \Delta\right| \frac{xe^{i\pi}}{1-x}\right) \nonumber
1893: \end{align}
1894: and
1895: \begin{equation}
1896: \mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon}\left(
1897: \begin{array}
1898: [c]{cc}%
1899: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1900: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1901: \end{array}
1902: \left| \Delta_{P}\right| x\right) =\sum_{\varepsilon^{\prime}=\text{e,o}%
1903: }\int\frac{dP^{\prime}}{4\pi}K_{\varepsilon}^{\varepsilon^{\prime}}\left(
1904: \begin{array}
1905: [c]{cc}%
1906: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1907: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1908: \end{array}
1909: |P,P^{\prime}\right) \mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon^{\prime}}\left(
1910: \begin{array}
1911: [c]{cc}%
1912: \Delta_{1} & \Delta_{3}\\
1913: \Delta_{2} & \Delta_{4}%
1914: \end{array}
1915: \left| \Delta_{P^{\prime}}\right| x\right) \label{ker}%
1916: \end{equation}
1917: Here we introduced an index $\varepsilon=\,$e,o to unify the notations, and
1918: $K_{\varepsilon}^{\varepsilon^{\prime}}(P,P^{\prime})$ is the kernel of a
1919: certain integral operator, called the crossing matrix (or, sometimes, the
1920: fusion matrix). In our construction the first relation follow directly from
1921: the symmetries (\ref{Hs}) of the elliptic blocks. The second one is very
1922: non-trivial, the crossing matrix $K_{\varepsilon}^{\varepsilon^{\prime}%
1923: }(P,P^{\prime})$ remaining to be found. In the case of the ordinary
1924: (non-supersymmetric) conformal block an explicit expression for the crossing
1925: matrix has been conjectured in ref.\cite{Ponsot} on the basis of an
1926: appropriate quantum group analysis. Similar analysis seems to be feasible in
1927: the present superconformal situation.
1928:
1929: Finally, we hope that the construction of the SLFT four point function,
1930: started in the present paper, will turn useful for the applications in the
1931: Liouville supergravity as well as in non-critical superstring theory.
1932:
1933: \vspace{0.4cm}
1934:
1935: \textbf{Acknowledgements.} V.Belavin thanks sincerely G.Mussardo and G.Delfino
1936: for their hospitality at SISSA and valuable discussions. His work was
1937: partially supported by the MIUR programme ``Quantum field theory and
1938: statistical mechanics in low dimensions'' and also by the grant RFBR
1939: 05-01-01007. A.Belavin acknowledges the hospitality of MPIM during his visit
1940: in February-March 2007 and a support by the grants RFBR 07-02-00799, RFBR-JSPS
1941: 05-01-02934, SS-2044-2003 and by the program RAS ''Elementary particles and
1942: Fundamental nuclear physics''. Also he is grateful to R.Poghossian and
1943: L.Hadasz for useful discussions. Both A.Belavin and V.Belavin would like to
1944: express their sincere gratitude to G.Delfino, G.Mussardo, G.von Gehlen,
1945: R.Flume, A.Klumper and T.Miwa, whose help made their collaboration possible at
1946: different stages of the work. Work of Al.Z was sponsored by the European
1947: Committee under contract EUCLID HRPN-CT-2002-00325. An important part has been
1948: made during his visit at the Deptartment of Physics and Astronomy of the
1949: Rutgers University. Hospitality and stimulating scientific atmosphere of the
1950: Theory Group are greatly appreciated, as well as many discussions with A.Zamolodchikov.
1951:
1952: \appendix
1953:
1954: \section{Superprojective invariance. Three point function}
1955:
1956: In this Appendix we consider only Ward identities related to the ``right''
1957: superconformal algebra, formed by the holomorphic components $S(z)$ and $T(z)
1958: $. Respectively, supermultiplets consist of the highest weight vectors $V_{i}$
1959: or $\bar\Lambda_{i}$ defined as in (\ref{W}) (in this section we omit the
1960: parameter $a$ near the primary field to give place for the identification
1961: number $1,2$ etc.) and the ``top components'' $\Lambda_{i}$ or $W_{i}$. To be
1962: definite, we will talk about the multiplet $(V_{i},\Lambda_{i})$. It seems to
1963: require no comments how to combine the results below to the complete
1964: holomorphic-antiholomorphic combinations.
1965:
1966: To describe all $2^{3}$ possible three point functions denote
1967: \begin{align}
1968: C_{123} & =\left\langle V_{1}V_{2}V_{3}\right\rangle \nonumber\\
1969: C_{\widehat{1}23} & =\left\langle \Lambda_{1}V_{2}V_{3}\right\rangle
1970: \label{C123}\\
1971: & \text{etc.}\nonumber
1972: \end{align}
1973: From the operator product expansions (\ref{WI}) we have the following
1974: supercurrent Ward identities
1975: \begin{align}
1976: \left\langle S(z)\Lambda_{1}V_{2}V_{3}\right\rangle & =\left( \frac
1977: {2\Delta_{1}}{(z-x_{1})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{1}}\frac\partial{\partial x_{1}%
1978: }\right) C_{123}-\frac1{z-x_{2}}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3}-\frac1{z-x_{3}%
1979: }C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}}\nonumber\\
1980: \left\langle S(z)V_{1}\Lambda_{2}V_{3}\right\rangle & =\left( \frac
1981: {2\Delta_{2}}{(z-x_{2})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{2}}\frac\partial{\partial x_{2}%
1982: }\right) C_{123}+\frac1{z-x_{1}}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3}-\frac1{z-x_{3}%
1983: }C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\label{Seven}\\
1984: \left\langle S(z)V_{1}V_{2}\Lambda_{3}\right\rangle & =\left( \frac
1985: {2\Delta_{3}}{(z-x_{3})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{3}}\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}%
1986: }\right) C_{123}+\frac1{z-x_{1}}C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}}+\frac1{z-x_{2}%
1987: }C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\nonumber
1988: \end{align}
1989: where $\Delta_{1}$, $\Delta_{2}$ and $\Delta_{3}$ are respectively the
1990: dimensions of $V_{1}$, $V_{2}$ and $V_{3}$. As $S(z)=O(z^{-3})$ at
1991: $z\rightarrow\infty$, the following super projective identities hold
1992: \begin{align}
1993: \frac\partial{\partial x_{1}}C_{123} & =C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}%
1994: 3}+C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}}\nonumber\\
1995: \frac\partial{\partial x_{2}}C_{123} & =-C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}%
1996: 3}+C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\nonumber\\
1997: \frac\partial{\partial x_{3}}C_{123} & =-C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}%
1998: }-C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\label{WI1}\\
1999: \left( x_{1}\frac\partial{\partial x_{1}}+2\Delta_{1}\right) C_{123} &
2000: =x_{2}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3}+x_{3}C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}}\nonumber\\
2001: \left( x_{2}\frac\partial{\partial x_{2}}+2\Delta_{2}\right) C_{123} &
2002: =-x_{1}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3}+x_{3}C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\nonumber\\
2003: \left( x_{3}\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}}+2\Delta_{3}\right) C_{123} &
2004: =-x_{1}C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}}-x_{2}C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\nonumber
2005: \end{align}
2006: These identities involve only the correlation functions with even number of
2007: ``fermions'' $\Lambda_{i}$. Eliminating the derivatives one finds
2008: \begin{align}
2009: 2\Delta_{1}C_{123} & =-x_{12}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3}+x_{31}C_{\widehat
2010: {1}2\widehat{3}}\nonumber\\
2011: 2\Delta_{2}C_{123} & =-x_{12}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3}-x_{23}%
2012: C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\label{eqs1}\\
2013: 2\Delta_{3}C_{123} & =x_{31}C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}}-x_{23}C_{1\widehat
2014: {2}\widehat{3}}\nonumber
2015: \end{align}
2016: and thus
2017: \begin{align}
2018: C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}} & =-\frac{\Delta_{2}+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{1}%
2019: }{x_{23}}C_{123}\nonumber\\
2020: C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}} & =\frac{\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{2}}%
2021: {x_{31}}C_{123}\label{CevevC}\\
2022: C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3} & =-\frac{\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}-\Delta_{3}%
2023: }{x_{12}}C_{123}\nonumber
2024: \end{align}
2025: Being substituted to differential equations this sums up to
2026: \begin{align}
2027: \frac\partial{\partial x_{1}}C_{123} & =-\frac{\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}%
2028: -\Delta_{3}}{x_{12}}C_{123}-\frac{\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{2}}{x_{13}%
2029: }C_{123}\nonumber\\
2030: \frac\partial{\partial x_{2}}C_{123} & =-\frac{\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}%
2031: -\Delta_{3}}{x_{21}}C_{123}-\frac{\Delta_{2}+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{1}}{x_{23}%
2032: }C_{123}\label{diff1}\\
2033: \frac\partial{\partial x_{3}}C_{123} & =-\frac{\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{3}%
2034: -\Delta_{2}}{x_{31}}C_{123}-\frac{\Delta_{2}+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{1}}{x_{32}%
2035: }C_{123}\nonumber
2036: \end{align}
2037: and gives finally
2038: \begin{equation}
2039: C_{123}=\frac C{x_{12}^{\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}-\Delta_{3}}x_{23}^{\Delta
2040: _{2}+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{1}}x_{31}^{\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{2}}%
2041: }\label{C123C}%
2042: \end{equation}
2043: where $C$ is an integration constant, independent on $x_{1}$, $x_{2}$ and
2044: $x_{3}$.
2045:
2046: Another Ward identity, relevant for the even in fermions functions, is
2047: \begin{align}
2048: \ \left\langle S(z)\Lambda_{1}\Lambda_{2}\Lambda_{3}\right\rangle &
2049: =\ \left( \frac{2\Delta_{1}}{(z-x_{1})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{1}}\frac
2050: \partial{\partial x_{1}}\right) C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\label{WI2}\\
2051: & -\left( \frac{2\Delta_{2}}{(z-x_{2})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{2}}\frac
2052: \partial{\partial x_{2}}\right) C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}}+\left(
2053: \frac{2\Delta_{3}}{(z-x_{3})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{3}}\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}%
2054: }\right) C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3}\nonumber
2055: \end{align}
2056: In the same manner it gives
2057: \begin{align}
2058: \frac\partial{\partial x_{1}}C_{1\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}-\frac\partial
2059: {\partial x_{2}}C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}}+\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}%
2060: }C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3} & =0\label{deq2}\\
2061: \left( 2\Delta_{1}+x_{1}\frac\partial{\partial x_{1}}\right) C_{1\widehat
2062: {2}\widehat{3}}-\left( 2\Delta_{2}+x_{2}\frac\partial{\partial x_{2}}\right)
2063: C_{\widehat{1}2\widehat{3}}+\left( 2\Delta_{3}+x_{3}\frac\partial{\partial
2064: x_{3}}\right) C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}3} & =0\nonumber
2065: \end{align}
2066: It is straightforward to verify that these relations are satisfied identically
2067: with the explicit expressions (\ref{CevevC}).
2068:
2069: For the odd fermion number functions consider the Ward identity
2070: \begin{equation}
2071: \left\langle S(z)V_{1}V_{2}V_{3}\right\rangle =\frac1{z-x_{1}}C_{\widehat
2072: {1}23}+\frac1{z-x_{2}}C_{1\widehat{2}3}+\frac1{z-x_{3}}C_{12\widehat{3}%
2073: }\label{WI3}%
2074: \end{equation}
2075: It follows that
2076: \begin{align}
2077: C_{\widehat{1}23}+C_{1\widehat{2}3}+C_{12\widehat{3}} & =0\label{eq3}\\
2078: x_{1}C_{\widehat{1}23}+x_{2}C_{1\widehat{2}3}+x_{3}C_{12\widehat{3}} &
2079: =0\nonumber
2080: \end{align}
2081: This system is solved in terms of a single function $\tilde C_{123}$
2082: \begin{align*}
2083: C_{\widehat{1}23} & =x_{23}\tilde C_{123}\\
2084: C_{1\widehat{2}3} & =x_{31}\tilde C_{123}\\
2085: C_{12\widehat{3}} & =x_{12}\tilde C_{123}%
2086: \end{align*}
2087: Next, we need the identities
2088: \begin{align}
2089: \left\langle S(z)V_{1}\Lambda_{2}\Lambda_{3}\right\rangle & =\frac1{z-x_{1}%
2090: }C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\nonumber\\
2091: & +\left( \frac{2\Delta_{2}}{(z-x_{2})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{2}}\frac
2092: \partial{\partial x_{2}}\right) C_{12\widehat{3}}-\left( \frac{2\Delta_{3}%
2093: }{(z-x_{3})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{3}}\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}}\right)
2094: C_{1\widehat{2}3}\nonumber\\
2095: \left\langle S(z)\Lambda_{1}V_{2}\Lambda_{3}\right\rangle & =-\frac
2096: 1{z-x_{2}}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\label{WI4}\\
2097: & +\left( \frac{2\Delta_{1}}{(z-x_{1})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{1}}\frac
2098: \partial{\partial x_{1}}\right) C_{12\widehat{3}}-\left( \frac{2\Delta_{3}%
2099: }{(z-x_{3})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{3}}\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}}\right)
2100: C_{\widehat{1}23}\nonumber\\
2101: \left\langle S(z)\Lambda_{1}\Lambda_{2}V_{3}\right\rangle & =\frac1{z-x_{3}%
2102: }C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}\nonumber\\
2103: & +\left( \frac{2\Delta_{1}}{(z-x_{1})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{1}}\frac
2104: \partial{\partial x_{1}}\right) C_{1\widehat{2}3}-\left( \frac{2\Delta_{2}%
2105: }{(z-x_{2})^{2}}+\frac1{z-x_{2}}\frac\partial{\partial x_{2}}\right)
2106: C_{\widehat{1}23}\nonumber
2107: \end{align}
2108: They result in the relations
2109: \begin{align}
2110: \frac\partial{\partial x_{2}}C_{12\widehat{3}}-\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}%
2111: }C_{1\widehat{2}3}+C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}} & =0\nonumber\\
2112: \frac\partial{\partial x_{1}}C_{12\widehat{3}}-\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}%
2113: }C_{\widehat{1}23}-C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}} & =0\nonumber\\
2114: \frac\partial{\partial x_{1}}C_{1\widehat{2}3}-\frac\partial{\partial x_{2}%
2115: }C_{\widehat{1}23}+C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}} & =0\label{eqs4}\\
2116: \left( 2\Delta_{2}+x_{2}\frac\partial{\partial x_{2}}\right) C_{12\widehat
2117: {3}}-\left( 2\Delta_{3}+x_{3}\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}}\right)
2118: C_{1\widehat{2}3}+x_{1}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}} & =0\nonumber\\
2119: \left( 2\Delta_{1}+x_{1}\frac\partial{\partial x_{1}}\right) C_{12\widehat
2120: {3}}-\left( 2\Delta_{3}+x_{3}\frac\partial{\partial x_{3}}\right)
2121: C_{\widehat{1}23}-x_{2}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}} & =0\nonumber\\
2122: \left( 2\Delta_{1}+x_{1}\frac\partial{\partial x_{1}}\right) C_{1\widehat
2123: {2}3}-\left( 2\Delta_{2}+x_{2}\frac\partial{\partial x_{2}}\right)
2124: C_{\widehat{1}23}+x_{3}C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}} & =0\nonumber
2125: \end{align}
2126: All of them are satisfied by
2127: \begin{equation}
2128: \tilde C_{123}=\frac{\tilde C}{x_{12}^{\Delta_{1}+\Delta_{2}-\Delta_{3}%
2129: +1/2}x_{23}^{\Delta_{2}+\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{1}+1/2}x_{31}^{\Delta_{1}%
2130: +\Delta_{3}-\Delta_{2}+1/2}}\label{C123tilde}%
2131: \end{equation}
2132: with a new integration constant $\tilde C$, and
2133: \begin{equation}
2134: C_{\widehat{1}\widehat{2}\widehat{3}}=(1/2-\Delta_{1}-\Delta_{2}-\Delta
2135: _{3})\tilde C_{123}\label{C112233}%
2136: \end{equation}
2137:
2138: \section{General OPE and special structure constants}
2139:
2140: It is instructive to show how the general continuous OPE (\ref{VV}) turns to
2141: the discrete one (\ref{OPE13}) if one of the parameters $a_{1}$ or $a_{2}$ is
2142: set to the degenerate value $-b$. Let us take $a_{2}=-b+\epsilon$ and consider
2143: the first term in (\ref{VV}) with $\mathbb{C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}^{p}$ given by
2144: (\ref{C3})
2145: \begin{align}
2146: \mathbb{C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}^{p} & =\left( \pi\mu\gamma\left( \frac
2147: {Qb}2\right) b^{1-b^{2}}\right) ^{(p-a_{1}-a_{2})/b}\times\label{C}\\
2148: & \ \ \ \ \ \frac{\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}^{\prime}(0)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}%
2149: (2a_{1})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{2})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2Q-2p)}%
2150: {\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(Q+p-a_{1}-a_{2})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(a_{2}%
2151: +p-a_{1})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(a_{1}+p-a_{2})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(a_{1}%
2152: +a_{2}+p-Q)}\nonumber
2153: \end{align}
2154: At $a_{2}\rightarrow-b$ this expression vanishes due to the zero of the
2155: multiplier $\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{2})$. This means that the integral term
2156: in (\ref{VV}) disappears and only the discrete terms contribute. The latter
2157: are due to the singularities of the integral, which come from the pole
2158: structure of the integrand. Expression (\ref{C}) has poles in $p$ at (the four
2159: lines of singularities here correspond respectively to the four multipliers in
2160: the denominator of (\ref{C}))
2161: \begin{align}
2162: & \ \ \ \ a_{1}+a_{2}-Q-mb^{-1}-nb\;\;\;\text{and\ \ \ \ }a_{1}+a_{2}%
2163: +mb^{-1}+nb\nonumber\\
2164: & \ \ \ \ a_{1}-a_{2}-mb^{-1}-nb\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\text{and\ \ \ \ }%
2165: Q+a_{1}-a_{2}+mb^{-1}+nb\label{polesC}\\
2166: & \ \ \ \ a_{2}-a_{1}-mb^{-1}-nb\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\text{and\ \ \ \ }%
2167: Q+a_{2}-a_{1}+mb^{-1}+nb\nonumber\\
2168: & \ \ \ \ Q-a_{1}-a_{2}-mb^{-1}-nb\;\;\;\text{and\ \ \ }2Q-a_{1}%
2169: -a_{2}+mb^{-1}+nb\nonumber
2170: \end{align}
2171: where $(m,n)$ -- any pair of non-negative integers of the same parity. At
2172: $a_{2}=-b+\epsilon$ the poles at $p=a_{1}-b+\epsilon$ and $p=a_{1}+b+\epsilon$
2173: of the first multiplier in the denominator of (\ref{C}) come across the poles
2174: at $p=a_{1}-b-\epsilon$ and $p=a_{1}+b-\epsilon$ of the second multiplier
2175: producing two singular terms. The same singularity appears from the two
2176: ``reflection symmetric'' pinches at $p=Q-a_{1}+b$ and $p=Q-a_{1}-b$. Due to
2177: the symmetry properties of the integrand and the reflection relation
2178: (\ref{reflection}) the ``reflected'' terms give the same contributions and
2179: don't need separate consideration.
2180:
2181: First, let us pick up the pole at $p=a_{1}-b-\epsilon$%
2182: \begin{equation}
2183: \operatorname*{res}_{p=a_{1}-b-\epsilon}\mathbb{C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}^{p}%
2184: =\frac{\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}^{\prime}(0)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1}%
2185: )\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(-2b+2\epsilon)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2Q-2a_{1}%
2186: +2b)}{\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(Q-2\epsilon)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}^{\prime
2187: }(-2b)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1}-2b-Q)}%
2188: =1\label{resCm}%
2189: \end{equation}
2190: Similar calculation for the residue at $p=a_{1}+b-\epsilon$ results in
2191: \begin{align}
2192: \operatorname*{res}_{p=a_{1}+b-\epsilon}\mathbb{C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}^{p} &
2193: =\left( \pi\mu\gamma\left( \frac{Qb}2\right) b^{1-b^{2}}\right)
2194: ^{2}\ \frac{\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1}%
2195: +2b-Q)}{\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1}+2b)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1}%
2196: -Q)}\label{resCp}\\
2197: & =\left( \gamma\left( \frac{Qb}2\right) \right) ^{2}\ \frac{(\pi\mu
2198: )^{2}b^{4}\gamma(a_{1}b-1/2-b^{2}/2)}{\gamma(1/2+b^{2}/2+a_{1}b)}\nonumber
2199: \end{align}
2200: where we systematically use the shift relations (\ref{Yshift}).
2201:
2202: Second, let's work out the contribution of the second term with
2203: \begin{align}
2204: \mathbb{\tilde C}_{a_{1},a_{2}}^{p} & =\left( \pi\mu\gamma\left( \frac
2205: {Qb}2\right) b^{1-b^{2}}\right) ^{(p-a_{1}-a_{2})/b}\times\label{Ctilde}\\
2206: & \ \ \ \ \ \ \frac{2i\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}^{\prime}(0)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}%
2207: }(2a_{1})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{2})\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2Q-2p)}%
2208: {\Upsilon_{\text{R}}(Q+p-a_{1}-a_{2})\Upsilon_{\text{R}}(a_{2}+p-a_{1}%
2209: )\Upsilon_{\text{R}}(a_{1}+p-a_{2})\Upsilon_{\text{R}}(a_{1}+a_{2}%
2210: +p-Q)}\nonumber
2211: \end{align}
2212: The pole structure is given by the same formula (\ref{polesC}) where now
2213: $(m,n)$ is a pair of non-negative integers of opposite parity. At
2214: $a_{2}=-b+\epsilon$ we have to pick up a singular term at $p=a_{1}-\epsilon$
2215: \begin{align}
2216: \operatorname*{res}_{p=a_{1}-\epsilon}\mathbb{\tilde C}_{a_{1},-b+\epsilon
2217: }^{p} & =\left( \pi\mu\gamma\left( \frac{Qb}2\right) \right)
2218: \frac{2i\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}^{\prime}(0)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2a_{1}%
2219: )\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(-2b+2\epsilon)\Upsilon_{\text{NS}}(2Q-2p)}%
2220: {\Upsilon_{\text{R}}(Q+b-2\epsilon)\Upsilon_{\text{R}}^{\prime}(-b)\Upsilon
2221: _{\text{R}}(2a_{1}+b)\Upsilon_{\text{R}}(2a_{1}-b-Q)}\label{resC0}\\
2222: & =\frac{2\pi i\mu}{\gamma\left( -b^{2}\right) \gamma\left( ba_{1}\right)
2223: \gamma\left( 1+b^{2}-ba_{1}\right) }\nonumber
2224: \end{align}
2225: Residues (\ref{resCm}), (\ref{resCp}) and (\ref{resC0}) can be compared with
2226: the special stricture constants, derived in section 2 in terms of the
2227: ``screening'' integrals.
2228:
2229: \section{Dotsenko-Fateev type equation}
2230:
2231: Substitution
2232: \begin{equation}
2233: g=x^{a_{1}b}(1-x)^{a_{2}b}F\label{gF}%
2234: \end{equation}
2235: renders eq.(\ref{diffeq}) to the form
2236: \begin{align}
2237: x^{2}(1-x)^{2}F^{\prime\prime\prime}-x(1-x)(K_{1}x-K_{2}(1-x))F^{\prime
2238: \prime} & +(L_{1}x^{2}+L_{2}(1-x)^{2}-L_{3}x(1-x))F^{\prime}\label{FDeq}\\
2239: \ & +(M_{1}x-M_{2}(1-x))F=0\nonumber
2240: \end{align}
2241: where
2242: \begin{align}
2243: K_{1} & =-2g-3B-3C\,;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;K_{2}%
2244: =-2g-3A-3C\nonumber\\
2245: L_{1} & =(B+C)(2B+2C+2g+1)\,;\;\;\;\;L_{2}=(A+C)(2A+2C+2g+1)\nonumber\\
2246: L_{3} & =4AB+4(2A+2B+2C+1)C+4(A+B+3C)g+\allowbreak4g^{2}+2g\label{KLM}\\
2247: M_{1} & =-2C(A+B+C+g+1)(2B+2C+2g+1)\,\nonumber\\
2248: M_{2} & =-2C(A+B+C+g+1)(2A+2C+2g+1)\nonumber
2249: \end{align}
2250: while the parameters $A$, $B$, $C$ and $g$ are related to $a_{1}$, $a_{2}$,
2251: $a_{3}$ and $b$ as in eq.(\ref{ABC}).
2252:
2253: Consider the two-fold contour integrals
2254: \begin{equation}
2255: I_{\alpha\beta}(x)=%
2256: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{C_{\alpha}}}%
2257: %BeginExpansion
2258: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{C_{\alpha}}}
2259: %EndExpansion%
2260: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{C_{\beta}}}%
2261: %BeginExpansion
2262: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{C_{\beta}}}
2263: %EndExpansion
2264: dt_{1}dt_{2}\left| t_{1}t_{2}\right| ^{A}\left| (1-t_{1})(1-t_{2})\right|
2265: ^{B}\left| (x-t_{1})(x-t_{2})\right| ^{C}\left| t_{1}-t_{2}\right|
2266: ^{2g}\label{Iab}%
2267: \end{equation}
2268: at $\alpha\neq\beta$ and
2269: \begin{equation}
2270: I_{\alpha\alpha}(x)=\frac12%
2271: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{C_{\alpha}}}%
2272: %BeginExpansion
2273: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{C_{\alpha}}}
2274: %EndExpansion%
2275: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{C_{a}}}%
2276: %BeginExpansion
2277: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{C_{a}}}
2278: %EndExpansion
2279: dt_{1}dt_{2}\left| t_{1}t_{2}\right| ^{A}\left| (1-t_{1})(1-t_{2})\right|
2280: ^{B}\left| (x-t_{1})(x-t_{2})\right| ^{C}\left| t_{1}-t_{2}\right|
2281: ^{2g}\label{Iaa}%
2282: \end{equation}
2283: where the contours $C_{\alpha}$, $\alpha=1,2,3,4$ are numbered as follows
2284: \begin{align}
2285: C_{1}=(-\infty,0]\,;\;\;C_{2}=[0,x]\,;\;\;C_{3}=[x,1]\,;\;\;C_{4}%
2286: =[1,\infty)\label{Ca}%
2287: \end{align}
2288: It is verified directly\footnote{It is implied that the parameters are chosen
2289: in a way to ensure convergence of all these integrals. Otherwise, standard
2290: regularization is in order.} that all these integrals are solutions to
2291: eq.(\ref{FDeq}).
2292:
2293: Of all the nine integrals only three are independent. As a base one can choose
2294: the set with a diagonal monodromy around the point $x=0$%
2295: \begin{align}
2296: \mathcal{I}_{1}(x) & =I_{44}(x)\sim\mathcal{I}_{1}^{(0)}(1+\ldots)\nonumber\\
2297: \mathcal{I}_{2}(x) & =I_{24}(x)\sim x^{1+A+C}\mathcal{I}_{2}^{(0)}%
2298: (1+\ldots)\label{I123}\\
2299: \mathcal{I}_{3}(x) & =I_{22}(x)\sim x^{2+2A+2C+2g}\mathcal{I}_{3}%
2300: ^{(0)}(1+\ldots)\nonumber
2301: \end{align}
2302: where $\ldots$ stands for a regular series in $x$. The constants
2303: \begin{align}
2304: \mathcal{I}_{1}^{(0)} & =\frac{\Gamma(2g)\Gamma(1+B)\Gamma(1+B+g)\Gamma
2305: (-1-2g-A-B-C)\Gamma(-1-g-A-B-C)}{\Gamma(g)\Gamma(-g-A-C)\Gamma(-A-C)}%
2306: \nonumber\\
2307: \mathcal{I}_{2}^{(0)} & =\frac{\Gamma(1+A)\Gamma(1+B)\Gamma(1+C)\Gamma
2308: (-1-2g-A-B-C)}{\Gamma(2+A+C)\Gamma(-2g-A-C)}\label{Iconst}\\
2309: \mathcal{I}_{3}^{(0)} & =\frac{\Gamma(2g)\Gamma(1+A)\Gamma(1+A+g)\Gamma
2310: (1+C)\Gamma(1+C+g)}{\Gamma(g)\Gamma(2+A+C+g)\Gamma(2+A+C+2g)}\nonumber
2311: \end{align}
2312: are calculated using the Selberg integral\cite{Selberg}
2313: \begin{equation}
2314: \frac1{n!}%
2315: %TCIMACRO{\dint \limits_{0}^{1}}%
2316: %BeginExpansion
2317: {\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{1}}
2318: %EndExpansion%
2319: %TCIMACRO{\dprod \limits_{i=1}^{n}}%
2320: %BeginExpansion
2321: {\displaystyle\prod\limits_{i=1}^{n}}
2322: %EndExpansion
2323: dt_{i}t_{i}^{\mu-1}(1-t_{i})^{\nu-1}\prod\limits_{i>j}\left| t_{i}%
2324: -t_{j}\right| ^{2g}=%
2325: %TCIMACRO{\dprod \limits_{k=0}^{n-1}}%
2326: %BeginExpansion
2327: {\displaystyle\prod\limits_{k=0}^{n-1}}
2328: %EndExpansion
2329: \frac{\Gamma(g+kg)\Gamma(\mu+kg)\Gamma(\nu+kg)}{\Gamma(g)\Gamma(\mu
2330: +\nu+(n-1+k)g)}\label{Selberg}%
2331: \end{equation}
2332: Another base
2333: \begin{align}
2334: \mathcal{J}_{1}(x) & =I_{11}(x)\sim\mathcal{J}_{1}^{(0)}(1+\ldots)\nonumber\\
2335: \mathcal{J}_{2}(x) & =I_{13}(x)\sim(1-x)^{1+B+C}\mathcal{J}_{2}%
2336: ^{(0)}(1+\ldots)\label{J123}\\
2337: \mathcal{J}_{3}(x) & =I_{33}(x)\sim(1-x)^{2+2B+2C+2g}\mathcal{J}_{3}%
2338: ^{(0)}(1+\ldots)\nonumber
2339: \end{align}
2340: where the dots now replace a regular series in $1-x$, enjoys diagonal
2341: monodromy around $x=1$. Apparently%
2342:
2343: \begin{equation}
2344: \mathcal{I}_{\alpha}=\sum_{\beta}\mathcal{M}_{\alpha\beta}\mathcal{J}_{\beta
2345: }\label{IJ}%
2346: \end{equation}
2347: where the ``fusion matrix'' $\mathcal{M}_{\alpha\beta}$ is evaluated by
2348: manipulating the contours of integration. It has the following entries
2349: \cite{FD2}
2350: \begin{align}
2351: \mathcal{M}_{11} & =\dfrac{\sin\pi A\sin\pi(g+A)}{\sin\pi(C+B)\sin\pi
2352: (g+C+B)}\nonumber\\
2353: \mathcal{M}_{12} & =-\dfrac{\sin\pi A\sin\pi C}{\sin\pi(C+B)\sin\pi
2354: (2g+C+B)}\nonumber\\
2355: \mathcal{M}_{13} & =\dfrac{\sin\pi C\sin\pi(g+C)}{\sin\pi(g+C+B)\sin
2356: \pi(2g+C+B)}\nonumber\\
2357: \mathcal{M}_{21} & =-\dfrac{2\cos\pi g\sin\pi(g+A)\sin\pi(g+A+B+C)}{\sin
2358: \pi(C+B)\sin\pi(g+C+B)}\label{Mab}\\
2359: \mathcal{M}_{22} & =\dfrac{\sin\pi C\sin\pi(g+A+B+C)}{\sin\pi(C+B)\sin
2360: \pi(g+C+B)}-\dfrac{\sin\pi(g+B)\sin\pi A}{\sin\pi(g+C+B)\sin\pi(2g+C+B)}%
2361: \nonumber\\
2362: \mathcal{M}_{23} & =\dfrac{2\cos\pi g\sin\pi(g+C)\sin\pi(g+B)}{\sin
2363: \pi(g+C+B)\sin\pi(2g+C+B)}\nonumber\\
2364: \mathcal{M}_{31} & =\dfrac{\sin\pi(g+A+B+C)\sin\pi(2g+A+B+C)}{\sin
2365: \pi(C+B)\sin\pi(g+C+B)}\nonumber\\
2366: \mathcal{M}_{32} & =\dfrac{\sin\pi B\sin\pi(2g+A+B+C)}{\sin\pi(C+B)\sin
2367: \pi(2g+C+B)}\nonumber\\
2368: \mathcal{M}_{33} & =\dfrac{\sin\pi B\sin\pi(g+B)}{\sin\pi(g+C+B)\sin
2369: \pi(2g+C+B)}\nonumber
2370: \end{align}
2371: Next, it is verified\cite{FD2} that the combination
2372: \begin{equation}
2373: X_{1}\mathcal{I}_{1}(x)\mathcal{I}_{1}(\bar x)+X_{2}\mathcal{I}_{2}%
2374: (x)\mathcal{I}_{2}(\bar x)+X_{3}\mathcal{I}_{3}(x)\mathcal{I}_{3}(\bar
2375: x)\label{Xc}%
2376: \end{equation}
2377: is a single-valued function of $(x,\bar x)$ if
2378: \begin{align}
2379: \frac{X_{3}}{X_{1}} & =\frac{\sin\pi A\sin\pi C\sin\pi(A+C)\sin\pi
2380: (A+g)\sin\pi(C+g)}{\sin\pi B\sin\pi(B+g)\sin\pi(A+B+C+g)\sin\pi(A+C+2g)\sin
2381: \pi(A+B+C+2g)}\nonumber\\
2382: \frac{X_{2}}{X_{1}} & =\frac{\sin\pi(A+C+g)\sin\pi A\sin\pi C}{2\cos\pi
2383: g\sin\pi(B+g)\sin\pi(A+B+C+g)\sin\pi(A+C+2g)}\label{XX}%
2384: \end{align}
2385:
2386: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
2387: \bibitem{Polyakov}A. Polyakov. Quantum geometry of fermionic strings.
2388: Phys.Lett., \textbf{B103} (1981) 211--213.
2389:
2390: \bibitem {ZP}A.Zamolodchikov and R.Pogossian. Operator algebra in
2391: two-dimensional superconformal field theory. Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 47 (1988) 929--936.
2392:
2393: \bibitem {MSS}G.Mussardo, G.Sotkov and M.Stanishkov. Fine structure of the
2394: supersymmetric operator product expansion algebras. Nucl. Phys. B305 [FS23]
2395: (1988) 69-108.
2396:
2397: \bibitem {DHK}J.Distler, Z.Hloused and H.Kawai. Superliouville theory as a
2398: two-dimensional superconformal supergravity theory. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A5
2399: (1990) 391.
2400:
2401: \bibitem {AG}L.Alvarez-Gaume and P Zaugg. Structure constants in the N=1
2402: superoperator algebra. Annals Phys. 215 (1992) 171--230; hep-th/9109050.
2403:
2404: \bibitem {Rubik}R.Poghossian. Structure Constants in the $N=1$ Super-Liouville
2405: Field Theory. Nucl.Phys. \textbf{B496} (1997) 451.
2406:
2407: \bibitem {NS}A.Neveu and J.Schwarz. Factorizable dual model of pions. Nucl.
2408: Phys., B31 (1971) 86-112.
2409:
2410: \bibitem {R}P.Ramond. Dual theory of free fermions. Phys. Rev. D3 (1971) 2415--2418.
2411:
2412: \bibitem {Fukuda}Fukuda and K.Hosomichi. Super-Liouville theory with boundary.
2413: Nucl. Phys. \textbf{B635} (2002) 215--254; hep-th/0202032.
2414:
2415: \bibitem {LFT}A.Zamolodchikov and Al.Zamolodchikov. Structure constants and
2416: conformal bootstrap in Liouville field theory. Nucl. Phys. B477 (1996)
2417: 577--605; hep-th/9506136.
2418:
2419: \bibitem {BPZ}A.Belavin, A.Polyakov and A.Zamolodchikov. Nucl. Phys.,
2420: \textbf{B241} (1984) 333--380.
2421:
2422: \bibitem {Marian}R.Rashkov and M.Stanishkov. Three point correlation functions
2423: in N=1 super Liouville theory. Phys.Lett., \textbf{B380} (1996) 49.
2424:
2425: \bibitem {DO}H.Dorn and H.-J.Otto. On correlation functions for noncritical
2426: strings with $c\leq1$ $d\geq1.$ Phys. Lett. B291 (1992)39--43;
2427:
2428: H.Dorn and H.-J.Otto. Two and three point functions in Liouville theory. Nucl.
2429: Phys. B429 (1994) 375.
2430:
2431: \bibitem {vbelavin}V.Belavin. N=1 SUSY Conformal Block Recursive Relations.
2432: SISSA 72/2006/EP; hep-th/0611295.
2433:
2434: \bibitem {leshek}L. Hadasz, Z. Jaskolski, P. Suchanek. Recursion
2435: representation of the Neveu-Schwarz superconformal block. hep-th/0611266.
2436:
2437: \bibitem {cblock}Al. Zamolodchikov. Conformal symmetry in two dimensions: An
2438: explicit recurrence formula for the conformal partial wave amplitude. Commun.
2439: Math. Phys. 96 (1984) 419--422.
2440:
2441: \bibitem {dblock}Al. Zamolodchikov, Conformal symmetry in two-dimensional
2442: space: recursion representation of conformal block, Theor. Math. Phys. 73
2443: (1987) 1088.
2444:
2445: \bibitem {Ponsot}B.Ponsot and J.Teschner. Liouville bootstrap via harmonic
2446: analysis on a noncompact quantum group. hep-th/9911110.
2447:
2448: \bibitem {FZZ}V.Fateev, A.Zamolodchikov and Al.Zamolodchikov. Boundary
2449: Liouville field theory. 1. Boundary state and boundary two point function. hep-th/0001012.
2450:
2451: \bibitem {DF}V.Dotsenko and V.Fateev. Conformal algebra and multipoint
2452: correlation functions in two-dimensional statistical models. Nucl. Phys. B240
2453: (1984) 312.
2454:
2455: \bibitem {FD2}V.Dotsenko and V.Fateev. Four point correlation functions and
2456: the operator algebra in the two-dimensional conformal invariant theories with
2457: the central charge c
2458: %TCIMACRO{\TEXTsymbol{<}}%
2459: %BeginExpansion
2460: $<$%
2461: %EndExpansion
2462: 1. Nucl. Phys. B251(1985) 691.
2463:
2464: \bibitem {Teschner}J.Teschner. On the Liouville three point function. Phys.Lett.B363:65-70,1995.
2465:
2466: \bibitem {Kac}V.Kac. Infinite-dimensional Lie algebras. Prog. Math., Vol.44,
2467: Birkh\"auser, Boston, 1984.
2468:
2469: \bibitem {shigher}A.Belavin and Al.Zamolodchikov. Higher equations of motion
2470: in $N=1$ SUSY Liouville field theory. ZhETP Lett. 84 (2006) 418--424; hep-th/0610316.
2471:
2472: \bibitem {Selberg}A. Selberg, Remarks on a multiple integral (Norwegian),
2473: Norsk Mat. Tidsskr. 26 (1944) 71-78.
2474: \end{thebibliography}
2475: \end{document}