Batalin and Vilkovisky define $^1$ an operation they call antibracket which is

$$(F,H) = \Big(\frac{\partial_r F}{\partial \Phi^A}\Big) \Big(\frac{\partial_l H}{\partial \Phi^* _A} \Big) - \Big(\frac{\partial_r F}{\partial \Phi^* _A}\Big) \Big(\frac{\partial_l H}{\partial \Phi^A} \Big) \tag{0} $$

where index $r$ and $l$ indicate respectively right and left derivative with respect to fields $\Phi$ and antifield $\Phi^*$.

This operation has some similar properties with super-Lie commutator such as Grassmann Parity

$$ \epsilon[(F,H)] = \epsilon(F) + \epsilon(H) + 1\tag{1} $$

and symmetry

$$ (F,H) = -(-1)^{(\epsilon_F + 1)(\epsilon_H+1)}(H,F)\tag{2} .$$

My question is about these properties. I am working on the way to prove them. I tried to use that $$FH = (-1)^{\epsilon_F\epsilon_H}HF\tag{3}$$ in second property but I didn't get to the right answer.


$^1$ I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky, Phys. Lett. B102 (1981) 27.

  1. Fun fact: Eqs. (1) & (2) can be intuitively understood via the Koszul sign rule/convention as that the comma in the antibracket (0) is Grassmann-odd/Fermionic $|,|=1$. E.g. the parity for permuting $F \leftrightarrow ","\leftrightarrow H$ in eq. (2) is then after some Boolean algebra$^1$ $$|F||H| + |F||,| +|H||,| ~=~|F||H| + |F| +|H| ~=~ (|F|+1)(|H|+1)+1. \tag{A}$$ Of course eq. (A) is only a pseudo-explanation. Let's now turn to an actual proof.

  2. Sketched proof of eq. (2): Use the following rules: $$ |\Phi^{\ast}_A|~=~|\Phi^A|+1~:=~|A|+1, \tag{B}$$ and $$ \frac{\partial^LF}{\partial z}~=~(-1)^{(|F|+1)|z|}\frac{\partial^RF}{\partial z}. \tag{C}$$ So e.g. the parity for permuting the first term $$ \frac{\partial^RF}{\partial \Phi^A}\frac{\partial^LH}{\partial \Phi^{\ast}_A} \leftrightarrow \frac{\partial^RH}{\partial \Phi^{\ast}_A}\frac{\partial^LF}{\partial \Phi^A}\tag{D}$$ in the antibracket (0) is $$ \underbrace{\overbrace{(|F|+|A|)(|H|+|A|+1)}^{\text{rule } (3)} }_{=~(|F|+|H|)|A|+|F|(|H|+1)} +\underbrace{\overbrace{(|F|+1)|A|}^{\text{rule } (C)} +\overbrace{(|H|+1)(|A|+1)}^{\text{rule } (C)} }_{=~(|F|+|H|)|A|+(|H|+1)} ~=~(|F|+1)(|H|+1).\tag{E}$$ Note that the rhs. (E) does not depend on $|A|$ (as it shouldn't!), and that the rhs. (E) is opposite the sought-for result (A). This explains the relative sign between the 2 terms in the antibracket (0). $\Box$


$^1$ In this answer we use $$|\cdot|~\equiv~ \epsilon(\cdot)~\in~ \mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}~\cong~\{0,1\} \tag{F}$$ to denote Grassmann-parity.

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for all the help, it was really usefull. $\endgroup$ – Fernandes Feb 11 at 12:16

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.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.