Pauli-villars regularization in simple phi^4 case

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter copernicus1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Regularization
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Pauli-Villars regularization in the context of one-loop calculations in \(\phi^4\) theory, specifically focusing on the seagull diagram. Participants explore the challenges of integrating momentum dependencies and the implications of divergences in the calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in obtaining the expected momentum independence after integrating the seagull diagram, noting that the resulting integral diverges logarithmically with respect to momentum \(q\).
  • Another participant suggests that the Pauli-Villars regularization should allow for tuning the mass parameter \(M\) to cancel the divergent part, ultimately leaving a single large parameter \(\Lambda\).
  • A different participant agrees that there should be no momentum dependence in the seagull diagram and questions whether a minus sign in the integral's second term could lead to cancellation of the logarithmic divergences.
  • One participant argues that Pauli-Villars regularization may not be sufficient to regulate the divergence in this case, suggesting that the single closed loop of one propagator presents a unique challenge.
  • Another participant discusses the need for a specific subtraction procedure for the tadpole self-energy diagram, indicating that it is quadratically divergent and requires careful treatment to achieve renormalization.
  • A participant expresses gratitude for the insights shared and seeks clarification on the use of a derivative in the renormalization process, asking for recommended sources on the topic.
  • One participant mentions that the method discussed is a modified BPHZ renormalization technique and contrasts it with dimensional regularization as a potentially more convenient approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the effectiveness of Pauli-Villars regularization in this context. While some believe it should work under certain conditions, others highlight specific challenges and limitations that suggest the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the calculations involve assumptions about the behavior of integrals and the treatment of divergences, which may not be fully addressed in the current discussion. The dependence on specific definitions and the nuances of renormalization techniques are also acknowledged.

copernicus1
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to work through the one-loop, one-vertex diagram in \phi^4 theory using Pauli-Villars regularization, and I'm having trouble. Specifically, I can't get the momentum dependence to fall out after integrating, which I think it should. In computing the "seagull" diagram (two external legs, and one loop that begins and ends on the same vertex), assuming my steps up to this point are correct, I end up, after Wick rotation to 4D spherical coordinates, with an integral (with some factors out front) $$\int_0^\infty\left(\frac{q^3}{q^2+m^2}-\frac{q^3}{q^2+M^2}\right)dq.$$ But this doesn't converge. It is logarithmically dependent on the momentum q, so I end up with two large parameters, M and whatever cutoff \Lambda I impose on the integral.

I thought the whole point was that with Pauli-Villars regularization you can perform the integral over the momentum and be left with a single parameter M? Can anyone explain what I'm missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not really familiar with the Pauli-Villars regularation but I think that the idea is that you can always tune M such that the divergent part is exactly canceled. In other words, at the end of all your calculation you will end up with just one large parameter, \Lambda, which will enter the definition of your mass M.
 
I've never done PV regularization on phi-4 theory before, so I'm not exactly sure what the math is going to look like, but you're right that there should be no momentum dependence in the seagull diagram. Looking at your integral, though, my naive thought is that you've got a minus sign in your second term, so shouldn't that cause the q logarithms to cancel? That would feel in keeping with how PV usually manifests in the examples I've done before.
 
PV is not sufficient to regulate this divergence. I'm not completely sure, but I think this single closed loop of one propagator is the only failure. This loop then has to be assigned some constant value every time it appears. This value will ultimately be absorbed into the renormalization of the mass.
 
The tadpole self-energy diagram in ##\phi^4## theory is quaddratically divergent. Thus you need to subtract twice. If ##\Pi(M^2)## is the unrenormalized tadpole (it's independent of the external four-momentum since it's effectively a one-point function), then the minimal subraction to make it finite is
$$\Pi_{\text{ren}}(M^2)=\Pi(M^2)-\Pi(\mu^2)-(M^2-\mu^2) \Pi'(\mu^2)+C_1 +C_2 M^2,$$
where the constants ##C_1## and ##C_2## are determined by the appropriate renormalization conditions. ##\mu^2## is the mass-subtraction scale. Indeed, using your schematic expression leads to
$$\Pi(M^2)-\Pi(\mu^2)-(M^2-\mu^2) \Pi'(\mu^2)=\int_0^{\infty} \mathrm{d} q \frac{q^3(M^2-\mu^2)^2}{(q^2+\mu^2)^2(q^2+M^2)},$$
which is convergent.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: copernicus1
Thanks all for your input. vanhees71, thanks a lot, this is making more sense now. I've seen PV regularization done with multiple regulator fields but I'm not quite used to it yet. It seems you are doing something slightly different though, with a derivative \Pi'(\mu^2). Is there a source you recommend for doing it this way?
 
This is a slightly modified BPHZ renormalization technique, using a mass-independ renormalization scheme. There's a bit about renormalization theory in my QFT manuscript:

http://fias.uni-frankfurt.de/~hees/publ/lect.pdf

Pauli-Villars is one of many regularization methods, which is usually quite tedious. A much more convenient regularization is dimensional regularization.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K