The procedure of renormalization allows us to get rid of the UV poles
in a renormalizable theory. However, for that aim we need to know
explicit values of the renormalization constants.
The first step is to rewrite the (bare) Lagrangian of our theory in
terms of the renormalized Lagrangian Lren and the
counter-term Lagrangian Lct
L=Lren+Lct
The renormalization constants Zx
establish a connection between bare and renormalized quantities
appearing in the Lagrangian. For some generic masses, coupling constants
and fields we can write
The renormalization scale μ is
needed to account for the fact, that when going from 4 to D
dimensions, dimensionless coupling constants suddenly become
dimensionful.
For example, a scalar field (mass dimension 1 in 4 dimensions) gets
mass dimension (D−2)/2 in D dimensions. This can be deduced by looking
at the kinetic term and using that the mass dimension of the partial
derivative remains unity,
For D=4−2ε this yields
[λbare]=2ε, which is precisely compensated by imposing
λbare=μ2εZλλren,
so that [λren]=0.
A similar exercise for the fermion yields
[ψˉbareiγ⋅∂ψbare]=D⇒[ψbare]=2D−1
The splitting of the bare Lagrangian L into Lren and Lct is done by first
replacing all bare quantities by the renormalized ones and then using
the trivial decompositions
Each of the renormalization constants can be written as
Zx=1+δZx,
where δZx contains poles in
ε and possibly also finite
pieces (depending on the chosen renormalization scheme). Parametrically,
δZx is of order of the small
coupling constant so that we can “expand” in it as if δZx≪1.
Examples
of renormalized and counter-term Lagrangians
In the following, for the sake of convenience we drop the subscript
“ren” in the renormalized Lagrangian
In the case of the real ϕ4-theory (cf. e.g. arXiv:1606.0921) we
have
Notice that Ward identities for the photon propagator and the
electron-photon vertex link some of the renromalization constants to
each other
Zξ=ZA,Ze=1/ZA.
This way we only need to determine ZA, Zψ
and Zm, which can be done by looking
at the self-energies of the electron and photon fields.
Feynman rules
Having clarified the situation with the Lagrangian, let us discuss
the derivation of the Feynman rules. The main difference as compared to
the usual calculations is that here we also need to derive additional
Feynman rules for the counter terms.
Although those can be always derived by hand, doing so automatically
is more convenient and allows to avoid many stupid mistakes. To this aim
it is useful to employ FeynRules for generating
the corresponding FeynArts model. When writing down the Lagrangian of
our model we need to multiply every term in the counter term Lagragnian
by FR$CT, for example
From the computational point of view, the most convenient scheme is
Modified Minimal Subtraction MS. In this scheme all
δZx are chosen such, that they
subtract the poles and certain terms involving γE and log(4π). More precisely, at 1-loop for
D=4−2ε we subtract
ε1−γE+log(4π)
MS
renormalization constants are comparably easy to calculate, since we
only need to extract the UV-poles of the occurring loop integrals and
can ignore their finite parts.
On the other hand, we should be very careful to regularize all
IR-divergences in such a way, that they do not show up as ε poles. Otherwise we would include
IR poles into our renormalization constants and obtain wrong results. In
practice, this issue arises when dealing with theories containing
massless particles. It can be avoided by giving those particles
fictitious masses or using more advances techniques such as infrared
rearrangement.
Unfortunately, in most cases MS renormalization
constants alone are not sufficient to make physical predictions. First
of all, according to the LSZ reduction formula, in physical observables
such as cross sections or decay rates, external legs must be
renormalized in the on-shell (OS) scheme. This is why we at least need
to know ZOS for all
external fields in our computation.
Second, in many effective field theories the expansion in heavy
masses relies on the fact that those masses are also defined in the OS
scheme.
Apart from that there are many other renormalization schemes such as
Momentum Subtraction (MOM) etc. They can be useful in special cases, but
usually what we are most interested in are the MS and OS schemes.
Renormalization
conditions for the OS scheme
Following the presentation in Gauge theories of the
strong and electroweak interaction by Boehm, Denner and Joos let us
provide explicit formulas for the on-shell renormalization conditions
when dealing with two-point functions of different field types
Scalar field
The bare 2-point vertex function for the scalar field is defined
as
which corresponds to what one actually calculates when considering
the sum of a bare amplitude and the corresponding counter-term.
The renormalization condition reads
q2→m2lim[q2−m2ΓR(q2)=1]
Multiplying both sides of the equality by q2−m2 we get
ΓR(q2)=(q2−m2)=q2→m20⇒ΓR(q2)q2=m2=0
which implies that m is the physical
mass of the particle and that the renormalized particle propagator has
residue 1.
Using
ΓR(q2)=ΓR(m2)+(q2−m2)ΓR′(m2)+O((q2−m2)2)
we arrive at
ΓR(m2)=0,ΓR′(m2)=1
which is equivalent to
Γ~R(m2)=0,Γ~R′(m2)=0
because setting q2=m2 kills the
(q2−m2)-term.
Massless vector field
The bare 2-point function for the massless vector field is defined
as
Γμν(q)=−gμνq2−ξ1−ξqμqν−Πμν(q)
and the renormalized one reads
ΓRμν(q)=Γμν(q)+CT.
For convenience we also introduce
Γ~Rμν(q)=−Πμν(q)+CT
which corresponds to what one actually calculates when considering
the sum of a bare amplitude and the corresponding counter-term.
The renormalization condition reads,
q2→0lim[q2ΓRμν(q)ε(q)ν=−εμ(q)]
where the minus sign comes from the fact that ε∗μεμ=−1
and εμqμ=0 for the
projection onto the physical degrees of freedom of an on-shell massless
vector boson.
Multiplying both sides of the equality by q2 we get
Notice that if our ΓRμν does not happen to have a transverse structure, then most
likely something went wrong in the calculation, since the longitudinal
part is not supposed to receive higher-order corrections!
In practice, we will of course use projectors to extract the
transverse and longitudinal components PTμνPLμν=D−11(gμν−q2qμqν),=q2qμqν.
In the special case of the QED photon things can be further
simplified by making use of the Ward identity for the renormalized
propagator as Green function
−Zξ1ξ1q2qμZAΓRμν(q)=iqν,
which implies that ZA/Zξ must
be finite so that one can fix Zξ=ZA.
Decomposing the propagator into transverse and longitudinal parts and
applying the Ward identity for the renormalized propagator as vertex
function (1PI-part of the Green function)
At one loop the calculations on renormalization constants can be very
much streamlined using the capabilities of FeynCalc and FeynHelpers.
As far as the MS
scheme is concerned, it is not really necessary to regularize IR
divergences with fake masses. Instead, we can set the global variable
$KeepLogDivergentScalelessIntegrals to True,
which will prevent FeynCalc from setting log-divergent integrals (i.e. the ones that
are proportional to 1/εUV−1/εIR). Then, we can either use Package-X
or directly employ the built-in function PaVeUVPart to
extract the UV poles of all occurring 1-loop integrals.
As long as we are dealing with amplitudes containing only quadratic
propagators, this toolset is fully sufficient to determine the MS renormalization
constants of any theory at one loop.
The OS renormalization usually requires slightly more effort, but
using the formulas provided in this document and the capabilities of
Package-X provided via FeynHelpers, such calculations are always
doable.