What Justifies the Grassmann Integral ∫dθ θ = 1?

[FJ Rolfes]

I tried putting this in the math forum, but got no response:

I can find various derivations of ∫ dθ = 0 which are satisfactory, but none of ∫dθ θ =1.

Cheng and Li says it's just a normalization convention, of course that assumes that the integral is finite.

Is this just a matter of definition, or is there a better reason that that?

Thanks very much !

 

[chrispb]

As far as I remember, it's a definition.

 

[FJ Rolfes]

Thank you.

The rules for differentiation seems natural enough, and they do seem to give arguments for ∫dθ = 0, but not for ∫dθ θ =1.