In the paper, the authors identified the chiral algebra of a free vector multiplet, given by a $(b,c)$ system. In doing so, they, in eq (3.41), identify the gauginos $\tilde \lambda(z) \sim b(z)$, $\lambda(z) \equiv \partial c(z)$, and they do so because the OPEs look the same.

But is there other argument to support this identification from a more "path-integral" point of view? Say, if I'm studying the correlation functions by computing the path integral, why on earth would I re-identify the fields in such a way? (I guess similar question can be asked for bosonization)

Is it legal to identify a field as the derivative of another? Naively, this will change drastically the kinetic term in the action, to say the least.

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.