text:
# Freedman-Townsend vertex from Hamiltonian BRST cohomology

## 1 Introduction

The cohomological understanding of the antifield-BRST symmetry  was proved to be a useful tool for constructing consistent interactions in gauge theories . Among the models of great interest in theoretical physics that have been inferred along the deformation of the master equation, we mention the Yang-Mills theory , the Freedman-Townsend model , and the Chapline-Manton model . Also, it is important to notice the deformation results connected to Einstein’s gravity theory  and four- and eleven-dimensional supergravity .

Recently, first-order consistent interactions among exterior $`p`$-forms have been approached in  also by means of the antifield-BRST formulation. On the one hand, models with $`p`$-form gauge fields (antisymmetric tensor fields of various ranks) play an important role in string and superstring theory, supergravity and the gauge theory of gravity . The study of theoretical models with gauge antisymmetric tensor fields give an example of so-called ‘topological field theory’ and lead to the appearance of topological invariants, being thus in close relation to space-time topology, hence with lower dimensional quantum gravity . In the meantime, antisymmetric tensor fields of various orders are included within the supergravity multiplets of many supergravity theories , especially in $`10`$ or $`11`$ dimensions. The construction of ‘dual’ Lagrangians involving $`p`$-forms is naturally involved with General Relativity and supergravity in order to render manifest the $`SL(2,𝐑)`$ symmetry group of stationary solutions of Einstein’s vacuum equation, respectively to reveal some subtleties of ‘exact solutions’ for supergravity . On the other hand, the Hamiltonian version of BRST formalism ,  appears to be the most natural setting for implementing the BRST symmetry in quantum mechanics  (Chapter 14), as well as for establishing a proper connection with canonical quantization formalisms, like, for instance, the reduced phase-space or Dirac quantization procedures . These considerations motivate the necessity of a Hamiltonian BRST approach to consistent interactions that can be added among a system of exterior $`p`$-forms. To our knowledge, this problem has not been analyzed until now.

In this paper we investigate the consistent Hamiltonian interactions that can be introduced among a set of abelian two-form gauge fields in four dimensions. Our programme is the following. Initially, we show that the Hamiltonian problem of introducing consistent interactions among fields with gauge freedom can be reformulated as a deformation problem of the BRST charge and BRST-invariant Hamiltonian of a given “free” theory, and derive the main equations describing these two types of deformations, which turn out to involve the “free” Hamiltonian BRST differential. Subsequently, we start with the action of a set of abelian two-forms in four dimensions (in first-order form), and construct its corresponding BRST charge and BRST-invariant Hamiltonian. The BRST symmetry of this free model splits as the sum between the Koszul-Tate differential and the exterior derivative along the gauge orbits. Next, we solve the main equations that govern the Hamiltonian deformation procedure in the case of the model under study taking into account the BRST cohomology of the free theory. As a result of this cohomological approach, we find the BRST charge and BRST-invariant Hamiltonian of the deformed model. Relying on these deformed quantities, we then identify the deformed Hamiltonian theory by analyzing its first-class constraints, first-class Hamiltonian and also the corresponding gauge algebra plus reducibility relations. The resulting system is nothing but the non-abelian Freedman-Townsend model in four dimensions .

## 2 Hamiltonian deformation equations

We consider a dynamical “free” theory, described by the canonical variables $`z^A`$, subject to the first-class constraints

$$G_{a_0}\left(z^A\right)0,a_0=1,\mathrm{},M_0,$$
(1)
that can in principle be reducible. For definiteness, we take all the canonical variables to be bosonic, but our analysis can be extended to fermions modulo introducing some appropriate sign factors. It is well known that a constrained Hamiltonian system can be described by the action

$$S_0[z^A,u^{a_0}]=\underset{t_1}{\overset{t_2}{}}𝑑t\left(a_A\left(z\right)\dot{z}^AH_0u^{a_0}G_{a_0}\right),$$
(2)
where $`H_0`$ is the first-class Hamiltonian, $`u^{a_0}`$ stands for the Lagrange multipliers, and $`a_A\left(z\right)`$ is the one-form potential that induces a symplectic two-form $`\omega _{AB}`$, whose inverse $`\omega ^{AB}`$ defines the fundamental Dirac brackets $`[z^A,z^B]^{}=\omega ^{AB}`$. The Hamiltonian gauge algebra reads as

$$[G_{a_0},G_{b_0}]^{}=C_{a_0b_0}^{c_0}G_{c_0},[H_0,G_{a_0}]^{}=V_{a_0}^{b_0}G_{b_0},$$
(3)
while action (2) is invariant under the gauge transformations

$$\delta _ϵz^A=[z^A,G_{a_0}]^{}ϵ^{a_0},\delta _ϵu^{a_0}=\dot{ϵ}^{a_0}V_{b_0}^{a_0}ϵ^{b_0}C_{b_0c_0}^{a_0}ϵ^{c_0}u^{b_0}Z_{a_1}^{a_0}ϵ^{a_1},$$
(4)
with $`Z_{a_1}^{a_0}`$ the first-stage reducibility functions of the “free” theory. In order to generate consistent interactions at the Hamiltonian level, we deform the action (2) by adding to it some interaction terms $`S_0\stackrel{~}{S}_0=S_0+g\underset{0}{\overset{(1)}{S}}+g^2\underset{0}{\overset{(2)}{S}}+\mathrm{}`$, and modify the gauge transformations (4) in such a way that the deformed gauge transformations leave invariant the new action. Consequently, the deformation of the action (2) and of the gauge transformations (4) produces a deformation of the Hamiltonian “free” gauge algebra (3) and of the “free” reducibility functions. As the BRST charge $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ and the BRST-invariant Hamiltonian $`\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}}`$ contain all the information on the gauge structure of the “free” theory, we can conclude that the deformation of the “free” gauge algebra and “free” reducibility functions induces the deformation of the solutions to the equations $`[\mathrm{\Omega }_0,\mathrm{\Omega }_0]^{}=0`$ and $`[\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}},\mathrm{\Omega }_0]^{}=0`$. In conclusion, the problem of constructing consistent interactions at the classical Hamiltonian level can be reformulated as a deformation problem of the BRST charge, respectively, of the BRST-invariant Hamiltonian of the “free” theory.

If the interactions are consistently constructed, then the BRST charge of the “free” theory can be deformed as

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{\Omega }`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0+g{\displaystyle d^3x\omega _1}+g^2{\displaystyle d^3x\omega _2}+O\left(g^3\right)=`$ (5)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_0+g\mathrm{\Omega }_1+g^2\mathrm{\Omega }_2+O\left(g^3\right),`$
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ should satisfy the equation

$$[\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }]^{}=0.$$
(6)
Equation (6) can be analyzed order by order in the deformation parameter $`g`$, leading to

$$[\mathrm{\Omega }_0,\mathrm{\Omega }_0]^{}=0,$$
(7)
$$2[\mathrm{\Omega }_0,\mathrm{\Omega }_1]^{}=0,$$
(8)
$$2[\mathrm{\Omega }_0,\mathrm{\Omega }_2]^{}+[\mathrm{\Omega }_1,\mathrm{\Omega }_1]^{}=0,$$
(9)
$$\mathrm{}$$

While equation (7) is satisfied by assumption, from the remaining equations we deduce the pieces $`\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_k\right)_{k>0}`$ on account of the “free” BRST differential. With the deformed BRST charge at hand, we then deform the BRST-invariant Hamiltonian of the “free” theory

$`\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}}H_B`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}}+g{\displaystyle d^3xh_1}+g^2{\displaystyle d^3xh_2}+O\left(g^3\right)=`$ (10)
$`\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}}+gH_1+g^2H_2+O\left(g^3\right),`$
and impose that this is precisely the BRST-invariant Hamiltonian of the deformed system

$$[H_B,\mathrm{\Omega }]^{}=0.$$
(11)
Like in the previous case, equation (11) can be decomposed accordingly the deformation parameter like

$$[\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}},\mathrm{\Omega }_0]^{}=0,$$
(12)
$$[\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}},\mathrm{\Omega }_1]^{}+[H_1,\mathrm{\Omega }_0]^{}=0,$$
(13)
$$[\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}},\mathrm{\Omega }_2]^{}+[H_1,\mathrm{\Omega }_1]^{}+[H_2,\mathrm{\Omega }_0]^{}=0,$$
(14)
$$\mathrm{}$$

Obviously, equation (12) is fulfilled by hypothesis, while from the other equations one can determine the components $`\left(H_k\right)_{k>0}`$ relying on the BRST symmetry of the “free” system. Equations (79), etc. and (1214), etc. stand for the main equations governing our deformation procedure, and they will be explicitly solved in the next sections in order to obtain the consistent Hamiltonian interactions that can be added among a set of two-form gauge fields in four dimensions.

## 3 Free BRST differential

We begin with the Lagrangian action for a set of abelian two-form gauge fields in first-order form (also known as the abelian Freedman-Townsend model)

$$S_0^L[A_\mu ^a,B_a^{\mu \nu }]=\frac{1}{2}d^4x\left(B_a^{\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }^a+A_\mu ^aA_a^\mu \right),$$
(15)
where $`B_a^{\mu \nu }`$ stands for a set of antisymmetric tensor fields, and the field strength of $`A_\mu ^a`$ reads as $`F_{\mu \nu }^a=_\mu A_\nu ^a_\nu A_\mu ^a_{[\mu }A_{\nu ]}^a`$. After eliminating the second-class constraints ( the independent ‘co-ordinates’ of the reduced phase-space are $`A_i^a`$, $`B_a^{0i}`$, $`B_a^{ij}`$ and $`\pi _{ij}^a`$), we remain only with the first-class ones

$$G_i^{(1)a}ϵ_{0ijk}\pi ^{jka}0,G_i^{(2)a}\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{0ijk}F^{jka}0,$$
(16)
and the first-class Hamiltonian

$$H_0=\frac{1}{2}d^3x\left(B_a^{ij}F_{ij}^aA_i^aA_a^i+\left(^iB_{0i}^a\right)\left(_jB_a^{0j}\right)\right)d^3xh.$$
(17)
In addition, the functions $`G_i^{(2)a}`$ from (16) are first-stage reducible

$$^iG_i^{(2)b}=0.$$
(18)
The non-vanishing Dirac brackets among the independent components are expressed by

$$[B_a^{0i}\left(x\right),A_j^b\left(y\right)]_{x^0=y^0}^{}=\delta _a^b\delta _j^i\delta ^3\left(𝐱𝐲\right),$$
(19)
$$[B_a^{ij}\left(x\right),\pi _{kl}^b\left(y\right)]_{x^0=y^0}^{}=\frac{1}{2}\delta _a^b\delta _k^{[i}\delta _l^{j]}\delta ^3\left(𝐱𝐲\right),$$
(20)
so the Hamiltonian gauge algebra reads as

$$[G_i^{(1)a},G_j^{(1)b}]^{}=0,[G_i^{(1)a},G_j^{(2)b}]^{}=0,[G_i^{(2)a},G_j^{(2)b}]^{}=0,$$
(21)
$$[H_0,G_i^{(1)a}]^{}=G_i^{(2)a},[H_0,G_i^{(2)a}]^{}=0.$$
(22)
Then, the BRST charge and BRST-invariant Hamiltonian of the free theory are given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_0=d^3x\left(G_i^{(1)a}\eta _a^{\left(1\right)i}+G_i^{(2)a}\eta _a^{\left(2\right)i}+\eta _a^i𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)a}\right),$$
(23)
$$\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}}=H_0+d^3x\eta _a^{\left(1\right)i}𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)a}.$$
(24)
In (2324), $`\eta _a^{\left(1\right)i}`$ and $`\eta _a^{\left(2\right)i}`$ stand for the fermionic ghost number one ghosts, $`\eta _a`$ denote the bosonic ghost number two ghosts for ghosts, while the $`𝒫`$ ‘s represent their corresponding antighosts. The ghost number ($`\mathrm{g}h`$) is defined like the difference between the pure ghost number ($`\mathrm{p}gh`$) and the antighost number ($`\mathrm{a}ntigh`$), with

$$\mathrm{p}gh\left(z^A\right)=0,\mathrm{p}gh\left(\eta ^\mathrm{\Gamma }\right)=1,\mathrm{p}gh\left(\eta _a\right)=2,\mathrm{p}gh\left(𝒫_\mathrm{\Gamma }\right)=0,\mathrm{p}gh\left(𝒫^a\right)=0,$$
(25)
$$\mathrm{a}ntigh\left(z^A\right)=0,\mathrm{a}ntigh\left(\eta ^\mathrm{\Gamma }\right)=0,\mathrm{a}ntigh\left(\eta _a\right)=0,$$
(26)
$$\mathrm{a}ntigh\left(𝒫_\mathrm{\Gamma }\right)=1,\mathrm{a}ntigh\left(𝒫^a\right)=2,$$
(27)
where

$$z^A=(A_i^a,B_a^{\mu \nu },\pi _{ij}^a),\eta ^\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\eta _a^{\left(1\right)i},\eta _a^{\left(2\right)i}),𝒫_\mathrm{\Gamma }=(𝒫_i^{\left(1\right)a},𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)a}).$$
(28)
The BRST differential $`s=[,\mathrm{\Omega }_0]^{}`$ of the free theory splits as

$$s=\delta +\gamma ,$$
(29)
where $`\delta `$ is the Koszul-Tate differential, and $`\gamma `$ represents the exterior longitudinal derivative along the gauge orbits. These operators act like

$$\delta z^A=0,\delta \eta ^\mathrm{\Gamma }=0,\delta \eta _a=0,$$
(30)
$$\delta 𝒫_i^{\left(1\right)a}=ϵ_{0ijk}\pi ^{jka},\delta 𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)a}=\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{0ijk}F^{jka},\delta 𝒫^a=^i𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)a},$$
(31)
$$\gamma A_i^a=0,\gamma B_a^{0i}=ϵ^{0ijk}_j\eta _{ka}^{\left(2\right)},\gamma B_a^{ij}=ϵ^{0ijk}\eta _{ka}^{\left(1\right)},\gamma \pi _{ij}^a=0,$$
(32)
$$\gamma \eta _a^{\left(1\right)i}=0,\gamma \eta _a^{\left(2\right)i}=^i\eta _a,\gamma \eta _a=0,$$
(33)
$$\gamma 𝒫_i^{\left(1\right)a}=0,\gamma 𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)a}=0,\gamma 𝒫^a=0.$$
(34)
The above formulas will be used in the next sections at the deformation procedure.

## 4 Deformed BRST charge

In order to derive the deformed BRST charge resulting from (23), we proceed to solving the equations (89), etc., paying attention to the fact that the BRST differential of the uncoupled model decomposes like in (29). Equation (8) is satisfied if and only if $`\omega _1`$ is a $`s`$-co-cycle modulo the exterior spatial derivative $`\stackrel{~}{d}=dx^i_i`$, i.e., it fulfills

$$s\omega _1=_kj^k,$$
(35)
for some $`j^k`$. For solving the above equation, we develop $`\omega _1`$ accordingly the antighost number

$$\omega _1=\underset{1}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{\omega }}+\underset{1}{\overset{\left(1\right)}{\omega }}+\mathrm{}+\underset{1}{\overset{\left(J\right)}{\omega }},\mathrm{a}ntigh\left(\underset{1}{\overset{\left(I\right)}{\omega }}\right)=I,$$
(36)
and take into account that the last term in (36) can be assumed to be annihilated by $`\gamma `$. As $`\mathrm{a}ntigh\left(\underset{1}{\overset{\left(J\right)}{\omega }}\right)=J`$ and $`\mathrm{g}h\left(\underset{1}{\overset{\left(J\right)}{\omega }}\right)=1`$, it results that $`\mathrm{p}gh\left(\underset{1}{\overset{\left(J\right)}{\omega }}\right)=J+1`$. On the other hand, we observe that the ghosts for ghosts are $`\gamma `$-invariant, such that we can take $`\underset{1}{\overset{\left(J\right)}{\omega }}`$ under the form

$$\underset{1}{\overset{\left(J\right)}{\omega }}=\alpha ^{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_N}\eta _{a_1}\eta _{a_2}\mathrm{}\eta _{a_N},$$
(37)
where $`N`$ is a nonnegative integer with $`2N=J+1`$. This further enforces that $`J`$ should be odd, $`J=1,3,5\mathrm{}`$. Under this choice, it is simple to check that the $`\gamma `$-invariant coefficients $`\alpha ^{a_1a_2\mathrm{}a_N}`$ have to pertain to $`H_J\left(\delta |\stackrel{~}{d}\right)`$. Nevertheless, using the results from  adapted to the Hamiltonian case, it follows that $`H_J\left(\delta |\stackrel{~}{d}\right)=0`$ for all $`J>2`$, which leads to $`J=1`$. Consequently, we find that

$$\omega _1=\underset{1}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{\omega }}+\underset{1}{\overset{\left(1\right)}{\omega }},$$
(38)
where $`\underset{1}{\overset{\left(1\right)}{\omega }}=\alpha ^a\eta _a`$, with the coefficients $`\alpha ^a`$ from $`H_1\left(\delta |\stackrel{~}{d}\right)`$, i.e.

$$\delta \alpha ^a=^km_k^a,$$
(39)
for some $`m_k^a`$. From (31), it results that we have $`\alpha ^a=\alpha _{ib}^a𝒫^{\left(2\right)ib}`$, such that

$$\delta \alpha ^a=\frac{1}{2}\alpha _{ib}^aϵ^{0ijk}F_{jk}^b.$$
(40)
In order to restore a total derivative in the right hand-side of (40), we choose $`\alpha _{ib}^a=f_{bc}^aA_i^c`$, with $`f_{bc}^a`$ some constants antisymmetric in the lower indices, $`f_{bc}^a=f_{cb}^a`$. With this choice, we find that $`\delta \alpha ^a=_j\left(\frac{1}{2}f_{bc}^aϵ^{0ijk}A_k^bA_i^c\right)`$, while

$$\underset{1}{\overset{\left(1\right)}{\omega }}=f_{bc}^aA_i^c𝒫^{\left(2\right)ib}\eta _a.$$
(41)
Now, we investigate the equation (35) at antighost number zero, namely

$$\delta \underset{1}{\overset{\left(1\right)}{\omega }}+\gamma \underset{1}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{\omega }}=^j\nu _j,$$
(42)
for some $`\nu _j`$. Using (41), after some computation we arrive at

$$\delta \underset{1}{\overset{\left(1\right)}{\omega }}=^j(\frac{1}{2}f_{bc}^aϵ^{0ijk}A_k^bA_i^c\eta _a)+\gamma \left(\frac{1}{2}f_{bc}^aϵ^{0ijk}A_k^bA_i^c\eta _{ja}^{\left(2\right)}\right),$$
(43)
which further gives

$$\underset{1}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{\omega }}=\frac{1}{2}f_{bc}^aϵ^{0ijk}A_k^bA_i^c\eta _{ja}^{\left(2\right)}.$$
(44)
In this way, we have completely determined the first-order deformation of the BRST charge

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_1=d^3x\left(f_{bc}^aA_i^c𝒫^{\left(2\right)ib}\eta _a\frac{1}{2}f_{bc}^aϵ^{0ijk}A_j^bA_k^c\eta _{ia}^{\left(2\right)}\right).$$
(45)
Next, from (9) we conclude that the deformation is consistent also at order $`g^2`$ if and only if $`[\mathrm{\Omega }_1,\mathrm{\Omega }_1]^{}`$ is $`s`$-exact. In the meantime, with the help of (45) we deduce that

$$[\mathrm{\Omega }_1,\mathrm{\Omega }_1]^{}=\frac{1}{3}f_{a[d}^ef_{bc]}^ad^3x\left(ϵ^{0ijk}A_i^dA_j^bA_k^c\eta _e\right).$$
(46)
Thus, the integrand of $`[\mathrm{\Omega }_1,\mathrm{\Omega }_1]^{}`$ cannot be $`s`$-exact modulo $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$, so it should vanish. This can be attained if and only if the constants $`f_{bc}^a`$ fulfill the Jacobi identity

$$f_{a[d}^ef_{bc]}^a=0,$$
(47)
hence if and only if they represent the structure constants of a Lie algebra. Accordingly, we find that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2=0`$. Moreover, the higher-order equations that govern the deformation of the BRST charge are satisfied for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_3=\mathrm{\Omega }_4=\mathrm{}=0`$. In conclusion, the complete deformed BRST charge is expressed precisely by $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }_0+g\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$.

## 5 Deformed BRST-invariant Hamiltonian

In the sequel we determine the deformed BRST-invariant Hamiltonian corresponding to (24) with the help of the equations (1314), etc. We begin with the equation (13), whose first term is found of the type

$`[\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}},\mathrm{\Omega }_1]^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^3xf_{bc}^a(ϵ^{0ijk}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta _{ia}^{\left(1\right)}A_j^b+\eta _{ia}^{\left(2\right)}_j\left(^lB_{0l}^b\right))A_k^c`$ (48)
$`\eta _a𝒫^{\left(2\right)ib}_i\left(^lB_{0l}^c\right))={\displaystyle }d^3x\lambda .`$
We can thus write (13) in the equivalent form

$$sh_1+\lambda =_j\rho ^j,$$
(49)
for some $`\rho ^j`$. The solution to (49) is expressed by

$$h_1=f_{bc}^a\left(\frac{1}{2}A_j^bA_k^cB_a^{jk}+\left(^lB_{0l}^b\right)\left(B_a^{0i}A_i^c+\eta _a^{\left(2\right)i}𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)c}+\eta _a𝒫^c\right)\right),$$
(50)
which further yields

$$sh_1+\lambda =_j\left(f_{bc}^a\left(^lB_{0l}^b\right)\left(ϵ^{0ijk}\eta _{ia}^{\left(2\right)}A_k^c+\eta _a𝒫^{\left(2\right)jc}\right)\right).$$
(51)
On behalf of $`h_1`$, we approach now the equation (14). The first term in (14) is equal to zero as $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2=0`$, while the second one is given by

$`[H_1,\mathrm{\Omega }_1]^{}`$ $`=`$ $`f_{bc}^af_{de}^c{\displaystyle }d^3x(ϵ^{0ijl}A_j^e\eta _i^{\left(2\right)d}𝒫^{\left(2\right)le}\eta ^d)\times `$ (52)
$`_l\left(B_a^{0k}A_k^b+\eta _a^{\left(2\right)k}𝒫_k^{\left(2\right)b}+\eta _a𝒫^b\right){\displaystyle d^3x\beta }.`$
This means that equation (14) can be alternatively written as

$$sh_2+\beta =_l\mu ^l,$$
(53)
for some $`\mu ^l`$. After some computation, we find that its solution is

$`h_2=f_{bc}^af_{de}^cB_a^{0k}A_k^b\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}B_{0i}^dA^{ie}+\eta ^{\left(2\right)id}𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)e}+\eta ^d𝒫^e\right)+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}f_{bc}^af_{de}^c\left(\eta _a𝒫^b\eta ^d𝒫^e+\eta _a^{\left(2\right)k}𝒫_k^{\left(2\right)b}\eta ^{\left(2\right)jd}𝒫_j^{\left(2\right)e}+2\eta _a𝒫^b\eta ^{\left(2\right)jd}𝒫_j^{\left(2\right)e}\right),`$ (54)
where

$$\mu ^l=f_{bc}^af_{de}^c\left(ϵ^{0ijl}A_j^e\eta _i^{\left(2\right)d}𝒫^{\left(2\right)le}\eta ^d\right)\left(B_a^{0k}A_k^b+\eta _a^{\left(2\right)k}𝒫_k^{\left(2\right)b}+\eta _a𝒫^b\right).$$
(55)
In addition, we derive that $`[H_2,\mathrm{\Omega }_1]=0`$. Then, the equation of order $`g^3`$ associated with the BRST-invariant Hamiltonian is verified for $`h_3=0`$ as all the terms but that involving $`h_3`$ vanish. Further, all the higher-order deformation equations are checked if we take $`H_4=H_5=\mathrm{}=0`$. In consequence, the complete deformed BRST-invariant Hamiltonian for the model under study reads as $`H_B=\underset{B}{\overset{\left(0\right)}{H}}+gd^3xh_1+g^2d^3xh_2`$, where $`h_1`$ and $`h_2`$ are given by (50), respectively, (5).

## 6 Identification of the deformed model

At this point, we are able to identify the resulting interacting theory. Synthesizing the results from the previous two sections, so far we solved the deformation equations associated with the BRST charge and BRST-invariant Hamiltonian for the free theory, and obtained that their complete consistent solutions are respectively given by

$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^3x({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}ϵ_{0ijk}(F^{jka}gf_{bc}^aA^{jb}A^{kc})\eta _a^{\left(2\right)i}+`$ (56)
$`\eta _a\left(D^i\right)_b^a𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)b}+ϵ_{0ijk}\pi ^{jka}\eta _a^{\left(1\right)i}),`$
$`H_B={\displaystyle }d^3x({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}B_a^{ij}(F_{ij}^agf_{bc}^aA_i^bA_j^c){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}A_i^aA_a^i+\eta _a^{\left(1\right)i}𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)a}+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\left(D^i\right)_b^aB_{0i}^b\right)\left(\left(D_j\right)_a^cB_c^{0j}\right)gf_{bc}^a\left(\eta _a^{\left(2\right)i}𝒫_i^{\left(2\right)c}+\eta _a𝒫^c\right)\left(D^l\right)_d^bB_{0l}^d+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g^2f_{bc}^af_{de}^c(\eta _a𝒫^b\eta ^d𝒫^e+\eta _a^{\left(2\right)k}𝒫_k^{\left(2\right)b}\eta ^{\left(2\right)jd}𝒫_j^{\left(2\right)e}+2\eta _a𝒫^b\eta ^{\left(2\right)jd}𝒫_j^{\left(2\right)e})),`$ (57)
where we used the notations $`\left(D^i\right)_b^a=\delta _b^a^i+gf_{bc}^aA^{ic}`$ and $`\left(D^i\right)_b^a=\delta _b^a^igf_{bc}^aA^{ic}`$. From the antighosts-independent component in (56) we read that only the latter set in the initial first-class constraints (16) are deformed

$$\gamma _i^{\left(2\right)a}\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{0ijk}\left(F^{jka}gf_{bc}^aA^{jb}A^{kc}\right)0,$$
(58)
while the first set is kept unchanged. Another interesting aspect is that the resulting BRST charge contains no pieces quadratic in the ghost number one ghosts, hence the gauge algebra (in the Dirac bracket) of the deformed first-class constraints remains abelian, being not affected by the deformation method. Moreover, as can be noticed from the term linear in the ghosts for ghosts, the original reducibility relations (18) are also deformed, the new reducibility relations corresponding to (58) being of the form

$$\left(D^i\right)_b^a\gamma _i^{\left(2\right)b}=0.$$
(59)
Analyzing the structure of the pieces in (6) that involve neither ghosts nor antighosts, we discover that the first-class Hamiltonian of the deformed theory reads as

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }d^3x(B_a^{ij}(F_{ij}^agf_{bc}^aA_i^bA_j^c)A_i^aA_a^i+`$ (60)
$`\left(\left(D^i\right)_b^aB_{0i}^b\right)\left(\left(D_j\right)_a^cB_c^{0j}\right)),`$
while from the components linear in the antighost number one antighosts we find that the Dirac brackets among the new first-class Hamiltonian and first-class constraint functions $`\gamma _i^{\left(2\right)a}`$ are modified as

$$[H,\gamma _i^{\left(2\right)a}]^{}=gf_{bc}^a\left(\left(D^j\right)_d^bB_{0j}^d\right)\gamma _i^{\left(2\right)c},$$
(61)
the others being not altered by the deformation mechanism. The first-class constraints and first-class Hamiltonian generated until now along the deformation scheme reveal precisely the consistent Hamiltonian interactions that can be introduced among a set of two-form gauge fields, which actually produce the non-abelian Freedman-Townsend model in four-dimensions. As the first-class constraints generate gauge transformations, we can state that the added interactions deform the gauge transformations, the reducibility relations, but not the algebra of gauge transformations (due to the abelianity of the deformed first-class constraints).

The Lagrangian version corresponding to the deformed model constructed in the above can be inferred in the usual manner via the extended and total formalisms, which then lead to the expected Lagrangian action

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_0^L[A_\mu ^a,B_a^{\mu \nu }]=\frac{1}{2}d^4x\left(B_a^{\mu \nu }H_{\mu \nu }^a+A_\mu ^aA_a^\mu \right),$$
(62)
that is invariant under the gauge transformations

$$\delta _ϵB_{\mu \nu }^a=ϵ_{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }\left(D^\lambda \right)_b^aϵ^{\rho b},\delta _ϵA_\mu ^a=0.$$
(63)
The notation $`H_{\mu \nu }^a`$ signifies the field strength of Yang-Mills fields

$$H_{\mu \nu }^a=F_{\mu \nu }^agf_{bc}^aA_\mu ^bA_\nu ^c.$$
(64)
The deformation of the gauge transformations of the two-forms is due exactly to the term linear in the deformation parameter from the constraint functions (58).

## 7 Conclusion

To conclude with, in this paper we have investigated the consistent Hamiltonian interactions that can be introduced among a set of two-form gauge fields in four dimensions. Our analysis is based on the deformation of both BRST charge and BRST-invariant Hamiltonian of the uncoupled version of the model under study. Starting with the Hamiltonian BRST symmetry of the free theory, we infer the first-order deformation of the BRST charge by expanding the co-cycles accordingly the antighost number, and show that it is consistent also to higher orders in the deformation parameter. With the deformed BRST charge at hand, we proceed to deriving the corresponding deformed BRST-invariant Hamiltonian, which turns out to be at most quadratic in the coupling constant. In this way, we have generated the Hamiltonian version of the Freedman-Townsend model. As a result of our procedure, the added interactions deform the gauge transformations, the reducibility relations, but not the algebra of gauge transformations.

## Acknowledgment

This work has been supported by a Romanian National Council for Academic Scientific Research (CNCSIS) grant.

## Note added

After completion of this work, we became aware of two more papers,  and , containing relevant Hamiltonian results that can be related to our approach.