text:
# Neutrino Proper Time?

## 1 Introduction

The quantum phase of a free electron on a given path $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the product of its mass and the proper time along $`\mathrm{\Gamma },`$ divided by the constant $`\mathrm{}.`$ Expressed in a general reference frame the product of mass and proper time, i.e. the action, is the integral of the space-time scalar product of energy-momentum and displacement. The classical path is a path that has a quantum phase that is stationary against small fluctuations $`\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in the path.

If the path for a neutrino is light-like and in the direction of its light-like energy-momentum, then its quantum phase doesn’t change, because the scalar product of its energy-momentum and displacement is then zero. This is the problem; the electron quantum phase on the electron’s classical path is nonzero and proportional to its proper time while the neutrino quantum phase is completely different: the neutrino clock is frozen - it doesn’t change as the neutrino moves.

Hence, in Sec. 2 and 3, we consider neutrino paths with varying proper time, i.e. clocks that actually run. The neutrino proper time increases along the paths just as the proper time increases as an electron moves on its classical path. The neutrino quantum phase is then defined to be the proper time times the electron mass, just as it is for an electron. This definition makes the quantum phase of electrons and electron neutrinos agree. Electron, muon, and tau neutrinos have phases that disagree because the proper time is multiplied by the electron, muon, or tau mass, respectively.

In Sec. 4 we consider the possibility that muon neutrinos travel along space-like paths. We show that there is a loss of 7% of the muon neutrinos from pion decays and a 10% loss of muon neutrinos from muon decays, giving an average loss of 9%. These 9% carry their forward momentum backwards into space and are not detected.

Evidence for such an effect may have been found by the Super-Kamiokande collaboration (SK). SK finds a depletion of atmospheric muon neutrinos compared with the expected flux. Determining the expected flux is in itself a complex problem. At SK both the dependence on distance from source to detector and the overall normalization are measured. The observed overall normalization is 15.8% with an estimated uncertainty of 25%. Therefore the 9% depletion derived in Sec. 4 is about half of the central value reported, 15.8%. Thus the depletion of muon neutrinos at the source could be partly caused by some muon neutrinos moving in directions that differ from their momenta.

No electron neutrino depletion is reported by Super-Kamiokande. In Sec. 5 we show that no depletion implies that the electron neutrinos have time-like or light-like paths. The arrival of electron neutrinos only a matter of hours ahead of light from SN1987A  is generally taken to mean that the neutrinos traveled to Earth from the supernova at light-speed or at near-light speed. Thus the light-like option for electron neutrinos explains both the SK observations and the SN1987A reports.

The predicted motions can be tested with current accelerator and detector technology. Arranging for a neutrino detector to be placed upstream from a pion or muon beam should detect the reverse motion muon neutrinos produced in the pion or muon decays, if such reverse motion muon neutrinos exist.

## 2 Neutrino Paths with Proper Time

Before dealing with the neutrino, we discuss the path of an electron in space-time and how electron paths are related to quantum phase. Let $`p^\mu `$ be energy-momentum, $`p^\mu `$ = $`\{p^k,E\},`$ and let $`x^\mu `$ be position, $`x^\mu `$ = $`\{x^k,t\},`$ where $`\mu `$ $`\{1,2,3,4\}`$ and $`k`$ $`\{1,2,3\}.`$ Consider a path $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ = $`x^\mu (\tau ),`$ where $`\tau `$ is the proper time along $`\mathrm{\Gamma },`$ $`(d\tau )^2`$ = $`(dt)^2`$ $`dx^kdx^k.`$ The quantum phase $`\varphi `$ along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is just $`S_\mathrm{\Gamma }/\mathrm{}.`$ The classical path is a straight line that has a quantum phase of

$$\varphi =\frac{S}{\mathrm{}}=\frac{Et+p^kx^k}{\mathrm{}},(\mathrm{electron})$$
(1)
where $`S`$ is the action along the classical path and repeated indices are summed.

The mass $`m,`$ $`m>`$ 0, determines the square of the energy-momentum,

$$E^2p^kp^k=m^2(\mathrm{electron})$$
(2)
The action $`S`$ is invariant under space-time transformations of the 4-vectors $`p^\mu `$ and $`x^\mu `$. So we can transform to a reference frame in which the momentum $`p^k`$ vanishes. We assume that $`x^k`$ is proportional to $`p^k`$ so that $`x^k`$ also vanishes. By (2), $`E`$ = $`m.`$ By (1), $`t`$ = $`S/m,`$ and, since this is the rest frame, the proper time $`\tau `$ is $`S/m.`$ Hence the square of the magnitude of $`x^\mu `$ in that frame as in all frames is

$$\tau ^2=t^2x_{}^{k}{}_{}{}^{2}=\frac{S^2}{m^2}(\mathrm{electron})$$
(3)
By (1) and (3) the action on the classical path in the rest frame is $`S`$ = $`Et`$ = $`m\tau ,`$ the electron mass times the proper time. In a general inertial frame we get

$$S=Etp^kx^k=m\tau (\mathrm{electron})$$
(4)
Assume that the electron and the electron neutrino have the same form for the quantum phase along the classical path,

$$\varphi =\frac{S}{\mathrm{}}=\frac{pt+p^kx^k}{\mathrm{}},(\mathrm{neutrino})$$
(5)
where the energy of the neutrino is the magnitude $`p`$ of its momentum, so that the energy-momentum is a null 4-vector.

In this paper the electron and the electron neutrino share the same quantum phase, $`m\tau .`$ We get

$$S=ptp^kx^k=m\tau ,(\mathrm{neutrino})$$
(6)
where $`m`$ is the electron mass. Each flavor has its own mass; for the muon or tau neutrino $`m`$ is the muon or tau mass.

The alternative classical paths possible for a neutrino have sub- or super-luminal speeds or have the speed of light but in the direction opposite to the momentum. For space-like paths proper distance is more appropriate than proper time; I continue to say ‘proper time’ even when I mean proper distance.

We define $`\tau `$ to be the proper time as usual for time-like paths. For space-like paths it is actually the proper distance. We have

$$t^2x_{}^{k}{}_{}{}^{2}=\eta \tau ^2,(\mathrm{neutrino})$$
(7)
where $`\eta `$ = $`+1`$ indicates a time-like path, $`\eta `$ = $`1`$ indicates a space-like path, and $`\eta `$ = $`0`$ indicates a light-like path.

By (7), a light-like path, $`\eta `$ = 0, implies that $`x^k`$ = $`\pm tn^k,`$ if $`x^k`$ and $`p^k`$ are both in the direction of the unit 3-vector $`n^k.`$ For the solution $`x^k`$ = $`+tn^k,`$ and by (6), the proper time $`\tau `$ is stuck at zero. In this paper the underlying presumption is that the action for an electron and its neutrino are one and the same function of proper time. Hence we dismiss the possibility that a neutrino path can have the solution $`x^k`$ = $`+tn^k,`$ because no electron path has zero proper time.

It may be that the neutrino follows a space-like path, i.e. $`\eta `$ = $`1`$ in (7). In this case the electron and its neutrino do not travel the same kind of path; the electron’s classical path is time-like, $`\eta `$ = $`+1.`$ This is true for the classical paths. But in quantum mechanics we can consider paths $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ that are space-like even for electrons. Thus having the electron and its neutrino share the same internal clock implies extending the formulas to space-like neutrino paths.

## 3 Neutrino Paths in Two Frames

Relativity protects scalar products and 4-vector magnitudes, but directions in space are not preserved under Lorentz transformations. If neutrino momentum and displacement can be in different directions, then only in special frames do momentum and displacement align, dubbed ‘Aligned Momentum’ (AM) frames. ‘Aligned’ is used in the following ways: the momentum is ‘in the same direction’ as the displacement or the momentum is ‘in the opposite direction’ of the displacement. A boost in the direction of the momentum and displacement takes one AM frame to another AM frame.

In an AM frame we introduce new notation $`X`$ and $`T`$ defined by

$$x^k=X\frac{\tau }{2}n^kt=T\frac{\tau }{2}.(\mathrm{AM})$$
(8)
where $`n^k`$ is a unit vector in the direction of the momentum, $`p^k`$ = $`pn^k.`$ By (6) and (7) we have

$$X=\eta s\frac{1}{s}T=\eta s+\frac{1}{s}(\mathrm{AM})$$
(9)
where $`s`$ stands for the ratio of momentum to mass, $`s`$ = $`p/m`$ (= $`\mathrm{sinh}w,`$ where $`\mathrm{tanh}w`$ is the speed of a particle of mass $`m`$ and momentum $`p.`$) In Fig. 2 the path $`(X,T)`$ is plotted for the three values of $`\eta .`$

The AM frame and a general frame, the ‘LAB’ frame, differ by a space-time transformation, i.e. a rotation followed by a boost. Choose the positive $`x`$-axis as the direction of the boost. Let $`\alpha `$ be the angle between the direction $`X,`$ i.e. the direction $`n^k`$ of the momentum in the AM frame, and the positive $`x`$-axis. See Fig. 3a. We get

$$X^{}=\gamma [X\mathrm{cos}\alpha +\beta T]Y^{}=X\mathrm{sin}\alpha T^{}=\gamma [T+\beta X\mathrm{cos}\alpha ](\mathrm{LAB})$$
(10)
where a prime indicates a value in the LAB frame, $`\beta `$ is the boost velocity, and $`\gamma `$ = $`(1\beta ^2)^{1/2}.`$ The neutrino energy-momentum in the LAB frame is

$$p_x^{}=\gamma [p\mathrm{cos}\alpha +\beta p]p_y^{}=p\mathrm{sin}\alpha p^{}=\gamma [p+\beta p\mathrm{cos}\alpha ](\mathrm{LAB})$$
(11)
## 4 Muon Neutrinos

Cosmic rays continually bombard the Earth’s atmosphere creating muon and electron neutrinos as well as other particles. A muon neutrino is produced together with a muon in charged pion decay and together with an electron and an electron neutrino when a muon decays. Other neutrino-producing processes are said to occur much less often.

In the Super-Kamiokande (SK) experiment atmospheric neutrinos are detected, muon neutrinos from pion and muon decays and electron neutrinos from the muon decays. We consider muon neutrinos first. We consider only what happens to muon neutrinos just after they are created at the source. This discussion has no bearing on the depletion of muon neutrinos in flight from the source in the atmosphere to the SK detector.

In the rest frame of the decaying particle, all directions in space are equivalent. Hence the rest frame, i.e. the Center of Mass (COM) frame, is convenient for finding average momenta. See Fig. 4.

In the decay of a pion or muon, the muon and the muon neutrino can share a common momentum and be aligned only in one special reference frame. To make the muon and muon neutrino even more alike in this frame assume that this special frame is also an Aligned Momentum (AM) frame so that the muon neutrino and its displacement are aligned. The muon momentum and the muon neutrino momentum are equal in magnitude and aligned and the muon and muon neutrino displacements are also aligned. See Fig. 1.

For muon neutrinos originating in pion decay, the pion rest frame is both the Center of Mass frame in which neutrinos are emitted in all directions equally and the AM frame in which the neutrino momentum and muon momentum are equal in magnitude. Let the SK rest frame be the LAB frame. Since the pion rest frame and the LAB frame typically differ by a large boost, the direction of the boost from the AM to the LAB frame, the $`x`$-direction in Fig. 3a, is along the line from the pion to SK. And, in the pion rest frame, the angle $`\alpha `$ is the angle between the emitted neutrino and the $`x`$-direction toward SK.

For muon neutrinos detected at SK with momenta of 400 MeV/$`c`$ or more, the factor $`\gamma `$ is more than 10. By (10) and (11) and as shown in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6, for large factors $`\gamma >>`$ 1, the displacement $`X_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{k}`$ is mainly either in the same direction as or in the direction opposite to the momentum $`p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{k}`$ in the LAB frame.

From Fig. 6, we see that reverse motion, i.e. $`x_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{k}`$ opposite to momentum $`p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{k},`$ occurs for space-like paths, $`\eta `$ = $`1.`$ By (9), (10), and (11) we find that $`X^{}`$ is opposite to $`p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{k}`$, i.e. $`\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ = $`1,`$ for directions with $`\alpha <\alpha _0`$ where

$$\mathrm{cos}\alpha _0=\frac{T}{X}=\frac{1s^2}{1+s^2}.(\eta =1)(\gamma >>1)$$
(12)
Therefore muon neutrinos emitted in the direction of SK out to an angle of $`\alpha _0`$ actually move back toward outer space in the SK frame of reference. These muon neutrinos cannot be detected at SK.

Assume that muon neutrinos travel along space-like paths, i.e. choose $`\eta `$ = $`1`$ in (7). Since all directions $`\alpha `$ in the pion frame are equally likely, we calculate the expected normalization $`N`$ to be the fraction of the unit sphere for which the path of the muon neutrinos is toward SK. We get

$$N=\frac{\mathrm{toward}\mathrm{SK}}{\mathrm{all}}=\frac{_{\alpha _0}^\pi 2\pi \mathrm{sin}\alpha d\alpha }{4\pi }=\frac{1}{1+s^2}.(\eta =1)$$
(13)
In the rest frame of a decaying pion, by conservation of energy and momentum and the known rest masses of the pion and muon, we find that the ratio of muon neutrino momentum to muon mass is $`s`$ = $`p/m_\mu `$ = $`(m_\pi ^2m_\mu ^2)/(2m_\mu m_\pi )`$ = 0.28. By (13) the normalization $`N`$ for muon neutrinos from pion decay is $`N`$ = 0.93.

Atmospheric muon neutrinos are also produced in muon decay. A muon decays to an electron, an electron neutrino, and a muon neutrino. The electron mass is only 1/210th of the muon mass, so let us neglect the electron mass. Then we can treat the three decay particles equally, since each decay particle has a null energy-momentum 4-vector. The energy of each decay particle is the magnitude of its momentum. In the rest frame of the muon, the three momenta cancel. Thus the three momenta form a triangle with a constant perimeter equal to the muon mass, see Fig. 4b. An equilateral triangle is the symmetric solution with no one decay particle being given any more or less momentum than any other decay particle. Thus an estimate of the average muon neutrino momentum is about one-third of a muon mass, $`p_\nu `$ = $`m_\mu /3.`$

But the muon rest frame is also an Aligned Momentum frame for the muon neutrino. This follows because, as we already assumed, the muon neutrino is certain to have its momentum and displacement aligned in the frame in which the muon and the muon neutrino have aligned momenta with equal magnitudes as in Fig. 1b. Furthermore the transformation from the AM frame with equal momenta, i.e. Fig. 1b, to the muon rest frame, Fig. 4b, is a boost that is itself aligned with the momenta and displacements. Hence the muon rest frame is an Aligned Momentum frame for the muon neutrino.

Since the muon rest frame is an AM frame and since all directions in the rest frame are equivalent, we can use (13) to calculate the normalization. The estimate above gives $`s`$ = $`p/m_\mu `$ = $`1/3.`$ By (13) we get $`N`$ = $`0.90`$.

The overall normalizations estimated for muon neutrinos from pion and muon decay are collected in the following table.

| $`\nu _\mu `$ Source | $`s`$ = $`p/m_\mu `$ | $`\nu _\mu `$ Normalization |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`\pi ^{}`$ $`\mu ^{}+\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ | $`0.28`$ | 0.93 |
| $`\mu ^{}`$ $`e^{}+\overline{\nu }_e+\nu _\mu `$ | $`0.33`$ | 0.90 |

Together the pion and muon sources of muon neutrinos give an average normalization of

$$\overline{N}=\frac{0.93+0.90}{2}=0.91,(\mathrm{neutrino})(\eta =1)$$
(14)
which is an 9% depletion. The best fit value of the source depletion at Super-Kamiokande is an overall normalization of 15.8% with an estimated 25% uncertainty. Thus the observed Super-Kamiokande depletion can be partly explained by muon neutrinos that move along space-like paths carrying light-like momenta. If future observations bring the 15.8% depletion down closer to 9%, then some other muon depletion mechanism would not be needed.

An accelerator based experiment testing the model could be devised. By the discussion of pion and muon decays above, arranging for a detector to be placed upstream of a pion or muon beam should detect upstream muon neutrinos. These muon neutrinos carry light-like momenta backwards, opposite to the direction of the neutrino momentum. Thus experiments should look for neutrino-induced events upstream that deposit downstream momenta.

## 5 Electron and Tau Neutrinos

Atmospheric electron neutrinos are produced in muon decays. By the discussion in Sec. 4 the electron neutrino is emitted in all directions equally likely in the muon rest frame, the COM frame. And the average electron neutrino has a momentum of $`m_\mu /3`$ the same as the muon neutrino. For an electron neutrino the momentum to mass ratio is very large, $`s`$ = $`p/m_e`$ = $`m_\mu /(3m_e)`$ = 70. By (13), if the electron neutrinos move on space-like paths, then 99.98% of atmospheric electron neutrinos move in the direction opposite to their momenta in the SK LAB frame. These would not be seen at SK.

But no electron depletion is reported by SK. Hence electron neutrinos cannot move on space-like paths, $`\eta `$ $`1.`$ From Fig. 5 we see that time-like and light-like paths are still open to the electron neutrino since virtually all neutrinos with $`\eta `$ = $`+1`$ or $`\eta `$ = 0 would move in the direction of their momenta and arrive at the SK detector.

The detection of neutrinos just hours before photons from the supernova SN1987A is strong evidence that neutrinos traveled on light-like or at least near light-like paths in the direction from SN1987A toward Earth. Furthermore the momentum absorbed in the detectors pointed away from SN1987A. The displacement and energy-momentum appear to be null 4-vectors pointing in the same direction. By Fig. 5 these electron neutrinos could have $`\eta `$ = $`0`$ if the factor $`\gamma `$ for the boost from the COM frame to the LAB frame is large enough. We assume that it is and conclude that electron neutrinos move along light-like paths.

Tau neutrinos have not been detected, as far as I know. By the discussion of muon decay, a tau neutrino would have an average momentum of $`p`$ = $`m_\tau /3`$ = $`592`$ MeV in the tau rest frame. For taus created essentially at rest in the LAB frame, the tau neutrinos would follow one of the paths in Fig. 2 but with $`s`$ = $`0.33.`$ Hence, for a time-like path, a space-like path, or a light-like path, all the tau neutrinos would travel in the direction opposite to the momentum carried by the tau neutrino. Experiments verifying this behavior would find tau neutrino induced events with momenta pointing towards the tau source, not away from the source.

## Appendix A Problems

1. Consider muon decay in the case when the muon neutrino has the average muon neutrino momentum of $`p`$ = $`m_\mu /3`$ in the muon rest frame, as found in Sec. 4. Find the relative velocity of the AM frame with equal momenta, Fig. 1b, with respect to the muon rest frame, Fig. 4b.

2. Show that there is no AM frame with equal momenta for neutrino scattering, i.e. no frame such as the ones illustrated in Fig. 1. The momentum before the interaction cannot be aligned with the momentum after the interaction and keep the same magnitude.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

We showed in part I of this paper  that perturbative renormalization is a special case of a general mathematical procedure of extraction of finite values based on the Riemann-Hilbert problem. More specifically we associated to any given renormalizable quantum field theory an (infinite dimensional) complex Lie group $`G`$. We then showed that passing from the unrenormalized theory to the renormalized one was exactly the replacement of the loop $`d\gamma (d)G`$ of elements of $`G`$ obtained from dimensional regularization (for $`dD=`$ dimension of space-time) by the value $`\gamma _+(D)`$ of its Birkhoff decomposition, $`\gamma (d)=\gamma _{}(d)^1\gamma _+(d)`$.

The original loop $`d\gamma (d)`$ not only depends upon the parameters of the theory but also on the additional “unit of mass” $`\mu `$ required by dimensional analysis. We shall show in this paper that the mathematical concepts developped in part I provide very powerful tools to lift the usual concepts of the $`\beta `$-function and renormalization group from the space of coupling constants of the theory to the complex Lie group $`G`$.

We first observe, taking $`\phi _6^3`$ as an illustrative example to fix ideas and notations, that even though the loop $`\gamma (d)`$ does depend on the additional parameter $`\mu `$,

$$\mu \gamma _\mu (d),$$
$`(1)`$
the negative part $`\gamma _\mu ^{}`$ in the Birkhoff decomposition,

$$\gamma _\mu (d)=\gamma _\mu ^{}(d)^1\gamma _{\mu ^+}(d)$$
$`(2)`$
is actually independent of $`\mu `$,

$$\frac{}{\mu }\gamma _\mu ^{}(d)=0.$$
$`(3)`$
This is a restatement of a well known fact and follows immediately from dimensional analysis. Moreover, by construction, the Lie group $`G`$ turns out to be graded, with grading,

$$\theta _t\mathrm{Aut}G,tR,$$
$`(4)`$
inherited from the grading of the Hopf algebra $``$ of Feynman graphs given by the loop number,

$$L(\mathrm{\Gamma })=\text{loop number of}\mathrm{\Gamma }$$
$`(5)`$
for any 1PI graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

The straightforward equality,

$$\gamma _{e^t\mu }(d)=\theta _{t\epsilon }(\gamma _\mu (d))tR,\epsilon =Dd$$
$`(6)`$
shows that the loops $`\gamma _\mu `$ associated to the unrenormalized theory satisfy the striking property that the negative part of their Birkhoff decomposition is unaltered by the operation,

$$\gamma (\epsilon )\theta _{t\epsilon }(\gamma (\epsilon )).$$
$`(7)`$
In other words, if we replace $`\gamma (\epsilon )`$ by $`\theta _{t\epsilon }(\gamma (\epsilon ))`$ we do not change the negative part of its Birkhoff decomposition. We settled now for the variable,

$$\epsilon =DdC\backslash \{0\}.$$
$`(8)`$
Our first result (section 2) is a complete characterization of the loops $`\gamma (\epsilon )G`$ fulfilling the above striking invariance. This characterization only involves the negative part $`\gamma _{}(\epsilon )`$ of their Birkhoff decomposition which by hypothesis fulfills,

$$\gamma _{}(\epsilon )\theta _{t\epsilon }(\gamma _{}(\epsilon )^1)\text{is convergent for}\epsilon 0.$$
$`(9)`$
It is easy to see that the limit of (9) for $`\epsilon 0`$ defines a one parameter subgroup,

$$F_tG,tR$$
$`(10)`$
and that the generator $`\beta =\left(\frac{}{t}F_t\right)_{t=0}`$ of this one parameter group is related to the residue of $`\gamma `$

$$\underset{\epsilon =0}{Res}\gamma =\left(\frac{}{u}\gamma _{}\left(\frac{1}{u}\right)\right)_{u=0}$$
$`(11)`$
by the simple equation,

$$\beta =Y\mathrm{Res}\gamma ,$$
$`(12)`$
where $`Y=\left(\frac{}{t}\theta _t\right)_{t=0}`$ is the grading.

This is straightforward but our result is the following formula (14) which gives $`\gamma _{}(\epsilon )`$ in closed form as a function of $`\beta `$. We shall for convenience introduce an additional generator in the Lie algebra of $`G`$ (i.e. primitive elements of $`^{}`$) such that,

$$[Z_0,X]=Y(X)X\text{Lie}G.$$
$`(13)`$
The scattering formula for $`\gamma _{}(\epsilon )`$ is then,

$$\gamma _{}(\epsilon )=\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}e^{t\left(\frac{\beta }{\epsilon }+Z_0\right)}e^{tZ_0}.$$
$`(14)`$
Both factors in the right hand side belong to the semi-direct product,

$$\stackrel{~}{G}=G\underset{\theta }{>}R$$
$`(15)`$
of the group $`G`$ by the grading, but of course the ratio (14) belongs to the group $`G`$.

This shows (section 3) that the higher pole structure of the divergences is uniquely determined by the residue and gives a strong form of the t’Hooft relations, which will come as an immediate corollary.

In section 4 we show, specializing to the massless case, that the formula for the bare coupling constant,

$$g_0=gZ_1Z_3^{3/2}$$
$`(16)`$
where both $`gZ_1=g+\delta g`$ and the field strength renormalization constant $`Z_3`$ are thought of as power series (in $`g`$) of elements of the Hopf algebra $``$, does define a Hopf algebra homomorphism,

$$_{CM}\stackrel{g_0}{},$$
$`(17)`$
from the Hopf algebra $`_{CM}`$ of coordinates on the group of formal diffeomorphisms of $`C`$ such that,

$$\phi (0)=0,\phi ^{}(0)=\mathrm{id}$$
$`(18)`$
to the Hopf algebra $``$ of the massless theory. We had already constructed in  a Hopf algebra homomorphism from $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ to the Hopf algebra of rooted trees, but the physical significance of this construction was unclear.

The homomorphism (17) is quite different in that for instance the transposed group homomorphism,

$$G\stackrel{\rho }{}\mathrm{Diff}(C)$$
$`(19)`$
lands in the subgroup of odd diffeomorphisms,

$$\phi (z)=\phi (z)z.$$
$`(20)`$
Moreover its physical significance will be transparent. We shall show in particular that the image by $`\rho `$ of $`\beta =Y\mathrm{Res}\gamma `$ is the usual $`\beta `$-function of the coupling constant $`g`$.

We discovered the homomorphism (17) by lengthy concrete computations. We have chosen to include them in an appendix besides our conceptual proof given in section 4. The main reason for this choice is that the explicit computation allows to validate the concrete ways of handling the coproduct, coassociativity, symmetry factors$`\mathrm{}`$ that underly the theory.

As a corollary of the construction of $`\rho `$ we get an action by (formal) diffeomorphisms of the group $`G`$ on the space $`X`$ of (dimensionless) coupling constants of the theory. We can then in particular formulate the Birkhoff decomposition directly in the group,

$$\mathrm{Diff}(X)$$
$`(21)`$
of formal diffeomorphisms of the space of coupling constants.

The unrenormalized theory delivers a loop

$$\delta (\epsilon )\mathrm{Diff}(X),\epsilon 0$$
$`(22)`$
whose value at $`\epsilon `$ is simply the unrenormalized effective coupling constant.

The Birkhoff decomposition,

$$\delta (\epsilon )=\delta _+(\epsilon )\delta _{}(\epsilon )^1$$
$`(23)`$
of this loop gives directly then,

$$\delta _{}(\epsilon )=\text{ bare coupling constant}$$
$`(24)`$
and,

$$\delta _+(D)=\text{renormalized effective coupling constant.}$$
$`(25)`$
This result is now, in its statement, no longer depending upon our group $`G`$ or the Hopf algebra $``$. But of course the proof makes heavy use of the above ingredients.

Now the Birkhoff decomposition of a loop,

$$\delta (\epsilon )\mathrm{Diff}(X),$$
$`(26)`$
admits a beautiful geometric interpretation. If we let $`X`$ be a complex manifold and pass from formal diffeomorphisms to actual ones, the data (26) is the initial data to perform, by the clutching operation, the construction of a complex bundle,

$$P=(S^+\times X)_\delta (S^{}\times X)$$
$`(27)`$
over the sphere $`S=P_1(C)=S^+S^{}`$, and with fiber $`X`$,

$$XP\stackrel{\pi }{}S.$$
$`(28)`$
The meaning of the Birkhoff decomposition (23),

$$\delta (\epsilon )=\delta _+(\epsilon )\delta _{}(\epsilon )^1$$

is then exactly captured by an isomorphism of the bundle $`P`$ with the trivial bundle,

$$S\times X.$$
$`(29)`$
## 2 Asymptotic scaling in graded complex Lie groups

We shall first prove the formula (14) of the introduction in the general context of graded Hopf algebras and then apply it to the Birkhoff decomposition of the loop associated in part I to the unrenormalized theory.

We let $``$ be a connected commutative graded Hopf algebra (connected means that $`^{(0)}=C`$) and let $`\theta _t`$, $`tR`$ be the one parameter group of automorphisms of $``$ associated with the grading so that for $`x`$ of degree $`n`$,

$$\theta _t(x)=e^{tn}xtR.$$
$`(1)`$
By construction $`\theta _t`$ is a Hopf algebra automorphism,

$$\theta _t\mathrm{Aut}().$$
$`(2)`$
We also let $`Y=\left(\frac{}{t}\theta _t\right)_{t=0}`$ be the generator which is a derivation of $``$.

We let $`G`$ be the group of characters of $``$,

$$\phi :C$$
$`(3)`$
i.e. of homomorphisms from the algebra $``$ to $`C`$. The product in $`G`$ is given by,

$$(\phi _1\phi _2)(x)=\phi _1\phi _2,\mathrm{\Delta }x$$
$`(4)`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the coproduct in $``$. The augmentation $`\overline{e}`$ of $``$ is the unit of $`G`$ and the inverse of $`\phi G`$ is given by,

$$\phi ^1,x=\phi ,Sx$$
$`(5)`$
where $`S`$ is the antipode in $``$.

We let $`L`$ be the Lie algebra of derivations,

$$\delta :C,$$
$`(6)`$
i.e. of linear maps on $``$ such that

$$\delta (xy)=\delta (x)\overline{e}(y)+\overline{e}(x)\delta (y)x,y.$$
$`(7)`$
Even if $``$ is of finite type so that $`^{(n)}`$ is finite dimensional for any $`nN`$ there are more elements in $`L`$ than in the Lie algebra $`P`$ of primitive elements,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }Z=Z1+1Z$$
$`(8)`$
in the graded dual Hopf algebra $`_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}`$ of $``$. But one passes from $`P`$ to $`L`$ by completion relative to the $`I`$-adic topology, $`I`$ being the augmentation ideal of $`_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}`$.

The linear dual $`^{}`$ is in general an algebra (with product given by (4)) but not a Hopf algebra since the coproduct is not necessarily well defined. It is however well defined for characters $`\phi `$ or derivations $`\delta `$ which satisfy respectively $`\mathrm{\Delta }\phi =\phi \phi `$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\delta =\delta 1+1\delta `$.

For $`\delta L`$ the expression,

$$\phi =\mathrm{exp}\delta $$
$`(9)`$
makes sense in the algebra $`^{}`$ since when evaluated on $`x`$ one has $`x,\delta ^n=0`$ for $`n`$ large enough (since $`x,\delta ^n=\mathrm{\Delta }^{(n1)}x,\delta \mathrm{}\delta `$ vanishes for $`n>\mathrm{deg}x`$). Moreover $`\phi `$ is a group-like element of $`^{}`$, i.e. a character of $``$. Thus $`\phi G`$.

The one parameter group $`\theta _t\mathrm{Aut}()`$ acts by automorphisms on the group $`G`$,

$$\theta _t(\phi ),x=\phi ,\theta _t(x)x$$
$`(10)`$
and the derivation $`Y`$ of $``$ acts on $`L`$ by

$$Y(\delta ),x=\delta ,Y(x),$$
$`(11)`$
and defines a derivation of the Lie algebra $`L`$ where we recall that the Lie bracket in $`L`$ is given by,

$$[\delta _1,\delta _2],x=\delta _1\delta _2\delta _2\delta _1,\mathrm{\Delta }xx.$$
$`(12)`$
Let us now consider a map,

$$\epsilon C\backslash \{0\}\phi _\epsilon G$$
$`(13)`$
such that for any $`x`$, $`\overline{e}(x)=0`$ one has,

$$\epsilon \phi _\epsilon ,x\text{is a polynomial in}\frac{1}{\epsilon }\text{without constant term.}$$
$`(14)`$
Thus $`\epsilon \phi _\epsilon `$ extends to a map from $`P_1(C)\backslash \{0\}`$ to $`G`$, such that

$$\phi _{\mathrm{}}=1.$$
$`(15)`$
For such a map we define its residue as the derivative at $`\mathrm{}`$, i.e. as,

$$\mathrm{Res}\phi =\underset{\epsilon \mathrm{}}{lim}\epsilon (\phi _\epsilon 1).$$
$`(16)`$
By construction $`\mathrm{Res}\phi L`$ is a derivation $`C`$. When evaluated on $`x`$, $`\mathrm{Res}\phi `$ is just the residue at $`\epsilon =0`$ of the function $`\epsilon \phi _\epsilon ,x`$.

We shall now assume that for any $`tR`$ the following limit exists for any $`x`$,

$$\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{t\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon ),x.$$
$`(17)`$
Using (10), (4) and (5) we have,

$$\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{t\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon ),x=\phi _\epsilon \phi _\epsilon ,(S\theta _{t\epsilon })\mathrm{\Delta }x,$$
$`(18)`$
so that with $`\mathrm{\Delta }x=x_{(1)}x_{(2)}`$ we get a sum of terms $`\phi _\epsilon ,Sx_{(1)}\phi _\epsilon ,\theta _{t\epsilon }(x_{(2)})`$ $`=P_1\left(\frac{1}{\epsilon }\right)e^{kt\epsilon }P_2\left(\frac{1}{\epsilon }\right)`$. Thus (17) just means that the sum of these terms is holomorphic at $`\epsilon =0`$. It is clear that the value at $`\epsilon =0`$ is then a polynomial in $`t`$,

$$F_t,x=\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{t\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon ),x.$$
$`(19)`$
Let us check that $`tF_tG`$ is a one parameter group,

$$F_{t_1+t_2}=F_{t_1}F_{t_2}t_iR.$$
$`(20)`$
The group $`G`$ is a topological group for the topology of simple convergence, i.e.,

$$\phi _n\phi \text{iff}\phi _n,x\phi ,xx.$$
$`(21)`$
Moreover, using (10) one checks that

$$\theta _{t_1\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{t_2\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon ))F_{t_2}\text{when}\epsilon 0.$$
$`(22)`$
We then have $`F_{t_1+t_2}`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{(t_1+t_2)\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon )`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{t_1\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon )\theta _{t_1\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{t_2\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon ))`$ $`=`$ $`F_{t_1}F_{t_2}`$.

This proves (20) and we let,

$$\beta =\left(\frac{}{t}F_t\right)_{t=0}$$
$`(23)`$
which defines an element of $`L`$ such that,

$$F_t=\mathrm{exp}(t\beta )tR.$$
$`(24)`$
As above, we view $`^{}`$ as an algebra on which $`Y`$ acts as a derivation by (11). Let us prove,

Lemma 1. Let $`\epsilon \phi _\epsilon G`$ satisfy $`(17)`$ with $`\phi _\epsilon =1+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\frac{d_n}{\epsilon ^n}`$, $`d_n^{}`$. One then has

$$Y(d_1)=\beta Yd_{n+1}=d_n\beta n1.$$

Proof. Let $`x`$ and let us show that

$$\beta ,x=\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\epsilon \phi _\epsilon \phi _\epsilon ,(SY)\mathrm{\Delta }(x).$$
$`(25)`$
Using (18) we know by hypothesis that,

$$\phi _\epsilon \phi _\epsilon ,(S\theta _{t\epsilon })\mathrm{\Delta }(x)F_t,x$$
$`(26)`$
where the convergence holds in the space of holomorphic functions of $`t`$ in say $`|t|1`$ so that the derivatives of both sides at $`t=0`$ are also convergent thus yielding (25).

Now the function $`\epsilon \epsilon \phi _\epsilon \phi _\epsilon ,(SY)\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ is holomorphic for $`\epsilon C\backslash \{0\}`$ and also at $`\epsilon =\mathrm{}P_1(C)`$ since $`\phi _{\mathrm{}}=1`$. Moreover by (25) it is also holomorphic at $`\epsilon =0`$ and is thus a constant, which gives,

$$\phi _\epsilon \phi _\epsilon ,(SY)\mathrm{\Delta }(x)=\frac{1}{\epsilon }\beta ,x.$$
$`(27)`$
Using the product in $`^{}`$ this means that

$$\phi _\epsilon ^1Y(\phi _\epsilon )=\frac{1}{\epsilon }\beta ,$$
$`(28)`$
and multiplying by $`\phi _\epsilon `$ on the left, that,

$$Y(\phi _\epsilon )=\frac{1}{\epsilon }\phi _\epsilon \beta .$$
$`(29)`$
One has $`Y(\phi _\epsilon )={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\frac{Y(d_n)}{\epsilon ^n}`$ and $`\frac{1}{\epsilon }\phi _\epsilon \beta =\frac{1}{\epsilon }\beta +{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\frac{1}{\epsilon ^{n+1}}d_n\beta `$. Thus (29) gives the lemma.

In particular we get $`Y(d_1)=\beta `$ and since $`d_1`$ is the residue, $`\mathrm{Res}\phi `$, this gives,

$$\beta =Y(\mathrm{Res}\phi ),$$
$`(30)`$
which shows that $`\beta `$ is uniquely determined by the residue of $`\phi _\epsilon `$.

We shall now write a formula for $`\phi _\epsilon `$ in terms of $`\beta `$. This is made possible by Lemma 1 which shows that $`\beta `$ uniquely determines $`\phi _\epsilon `$. What is not transparent from Lemma 1 is that for $`\beta L`$ the elements $`\phi _\epsilon ^{}`$ are group-like, so that $`\phi _\epsilon G`$. In order to obtain a nice formula we take the semi direct product of $`G`$ by $`R`$ acting on $`G`$ by the grading $`\theta _t`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{G}=G\underset{\theta }{>}R,$$
$`(31)`$
and similarly we let $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ be the Lie algebra

$$\stackrel{~}{L}=LCZ_0$$
$`(32)`$
where the Lie bracket is given by

$$[Z_0,\alpha ]=Y(\alpha )\alpha L$$
$`(33)`$
and extends the Lie bracket of $`L`$.

We view $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ as the Lie algebra of $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ in a way which will become clear in the proof of the following,

Theorem 2. Let $`\epsilon \phi _\epsilon G`$ satisfy $`(17)`$ as above. Then with $`\beta =Y(\mathrm{Res}\phi )`$ one has,

$$\phi _\epsilon =\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}e^{tZ_0}e^{t\left(\frac{\beta }{\epsilon }+Z_0\right)}.$$

The limit holds in the topology of simple convergence in $`G`$. Both terms $`e^{tZ_0}`$ and $`e^{t\left(\frac{\beta }{\epsilon }+Z_0\right)}`$ belong to $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ but their product belongs to $`G`$.

Proof. We endow $`^{}`$ with the topology of simple convergence on $``$ and let $`\theta _t`$ act by automorphisms of the topological algebra $`^{}`$ by (10). Let us first show, with,

$$\phi _\epsilon =1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d_n}{\epsilon ^n},d_n^{},$$
$`(34)`$
that the following holds,

$$d_n=_{s_1s_2\mathrm{}s_n0}\theta _{s_1}(\beta )\theta _{s_2}(\beta )\mathrm{}\theta _{s_n}(\beta )\mathrm{\Pi }𝑑s_i.$$
$`(35)`$
For $`n=1`$, this just means that,

$$d_1=_0^{\mathrm{}}\theta _s(\beta )𝑑s,$$
$`(36)`$
which follows from (30) and the equality

$$Y^1(x)=_0^{\mathrm{}}\theta _s(x)𝑑sx,\overline{e}(x)=0.$$
$`(37)`$
We see from (37) that for $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}^{}`$ such that

$$Y(\alpha )=\alpha ^{},\alpha ,1=\alpha ^{},1=0$$
$`(38)`$
one has,

$$\alpha =_0^{\mathrm{}}\theta _s(\alpha ^{})𝑑s.$$
$`(39)`$
Combining this equality with Lemma 1 and the fact that $`\theta _s\mathrm{Aut}^{}`$ is an automorphism, gives an inductive proof of (35). The meaning of this formula should be clear, we pair both sides with $`x`$, and let,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{(n1)}x=x_{(1)}x_{(2)}\mathrm{}x_{(n)}.$$
$`(40)`$
Then the right hand side of (35) is just,

$$_{s_1\mathrm{}s_n0}\beta \mathrm{}\beta ,\theta _{s_1}(x_{(1)})\theta _{s_2}(x_{(2)})\mathrm{}\theta _{s_n}(x_{(n)})\mathrm{\Pi }𝑑s_i$$
$`(41)`$
and the convergence of the multiple integral is exponential since,

$$\beta ,\theta _s(x_{(i)})=O(e^s)\text{for}s+\mathrm{}.$$
$`(42)`$
We see moreover that if $`x`$ is homogeneous of degree $`\mathrm{deg}(x)`$, and if $`n>\mathrm{deg}(x)`$, at least one of the $`x_{(i)}`$ has degree 0 so that $`\beta ,\theta _s(x_{(i)})=0`$ and (41) gives 0. This shows that the pairing of $`\phi _\epsilon `$ with $`x`$ only involves finitely many non zero terms in the formula,

$$\phi _\epsilon ,x=\overline{e}(x)+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{\epsilon ^n}d_n,x.$$
$`(43)`$
With all convergence problems out of the way we can now proceed to prove the formula of Theorem 2 without care for convergence.

Let us first recall the expansional formula ,

$$e^{(A+B)}=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_{{\scriptscriptstyle u_j}=1,u_j0}e^{u_0A}Be^{u_1A}\mathrm{}Be^{u_nA}\mathrm{\Pi }𝑑u_j$$
$`(44)`$
(cf.  for the exact range of validity of (44)).

We apply this with $`A=tZ_0`$, $`B=t\beta `$, $`t>0`$ and get,

$$e^{t(\beta +Z_0)}=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_{{\scriptscriptstyle v_j}=t,v_j0}e^{v_0Z_0}\beta e^{v_1Z_0}\beta \mathrm{}\beta e^{v_nZ_0}\mathrm{\Pi }𝑑v_j.$$
$`(45)`$
Thus, with $`s_1=tv_0`$, $`s_1s_2=v_1,\mathrm{},s_{n1}s_n=v_{n1}`$, $`s_n=v_n`$ and replacing $`\beta `$ by $`\frac{1}{\epsilon }\beta `$, we obtain,

$$e^{t(\beta /\epsilon +Z_0)}=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{\epsilon ^n}_{ts_1s_2\mathrm{}s_n0}e^{tZ_0}\theta _{s_1}(\beta )\mathrm{}\theta _{s_n}(\beta )\mathrm{\Pi }𝑑s_i.$$
$`(46)`$
Multiplying by $`e^{tZ_0}`$ on the left and using (41) thus gives,

$$\phi _\epsilon =\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}e^{tZ_0}e^{t(\beta /\epsilon +Z_0)}.$$
$`(47)`$
It is obvious conversely that this formula defines a family $`\epsilon \phi _\epsilon `$ of group-like elements of $`^{}`$ associated to any preassigned element $`\beta L`$.

Corollary 3. For any $`\beta L`$ there exists a (unique) map $`\epsilon \phi _\epsilon G`$ satisfying $`(17)`$ and $`(34)`$.

## 3 The renormalization group flow

Let us now apply the above results to the group $`G`$ associated in part I to the Hopf algebra $``$ of 1PI Feynman graphs of a quantum field theory. We choose $`\phi _6^3`$ for simplicity. As explained in part I the group $`G`$ is a semi-direct product,

$$G=G_0>G_c$$
$`(1)`$
of an abelian group $`G_0`$ by the group $`G_c`$ associated to the Hopf subalgebra $`_c`$ constructed on 1PI graphs with two or three external legs and fixed external structure. Passing from $`G_c`$ to $`G`$ is a trivial step and we shall thus concentrate on the group $`G_c`$. The unrenormalized theory delivers, using dimensional regularization with the unit of mass $`\mu `$, a loop,

$$\epsilon \gamma _\mu (\epsilon )G_c,$$
$`(2)`$
and we first need to see the exact $`\mu `$ dependence of this loop. We consider the grading of $`_c`$ and $`G_c`$ given by the loop number of a graph,

$$L(\mathrm{\Gamma })=IV+1$$
$`(3)`$
where $`I`$ is the number of internal lines and $`V`$ the number of vertices.

One has,

$$\gamma _{e^t\mu }(\epsilon )=\theta _{t\epsilon }(\gamma _\mu (\epsilon ))tR.$$
$`(4)`$
Let us check this using the formulas of section 3 of part I. For $`N=2`$ external legs the dimension $`B`$ of $`\sigma ,U_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is equal to 0 by (12) of loc.cit. Thus the $`\mu `$ dependence is given by

$$\mu ^{\frac{\epsilon }{2}V_3}$$
$`(5)`$
where $`V_3`$ is the number of 3-point vertices of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. One checks that $`\frac{1}{2}V_3=L`$ as required. Similarly if $`N=3`$ the dimension $`B`$ of $`\sigma ,U_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is equal to $`\left(1\frac{3}{2}\right)d+3`$, $`d=6\epsilon `$ by (12) of loc.cit. so that the $`\mu `$-dependence is,

$$\mu ^{\frac{\epsilon }{2}V_3}\mu ^{\epsilon /2}.$$
$`(6)`$
But this time, $`V_3=2L+1`$ and we get

$$\mu ^{\epsilon L}$$
$`(7)`$
as required.

We now reformulate a well known result, the fact that counterterms, once appropriately normalized, are independent of $`m^2`$ and $`\mu ^2`$,

Lemma 4. Let $`\gamma _\mu =(\gamma _\mu ^{})^1(\gamma _{\mu ^+})`$ be the Birkhoff decomposition of $`\gamma _\mu `$. Then $`\gamma _\mu ^{}`$ is independent of $`\mu `$.

As in part I we perform the Birkhoff decomposition with respect to a small circle $`C`$ with center $`D=6`$ and radius $`<1`$.

The proof of the lemma follows immediately from . Indeed the dependence in $`m^2`$ has in the minimal subtraction scheme the same origin as the dependence in $`p^2`$ and we have chosen the external structure of graphs (eq. (41) of part I) so that no $`m^2`$ dependence is left <sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2This can be easily achieved by maintaining non-vanishing fixed external momenta. $`\gamma _\mu ^{}`$ is independent on such external structures by construction .. But then, since $`\mu ^2`$ is a dimensionful parameter, it cannot be involved any longer.

Corollary 5. Let $`\phi _\epsilon =(\gamma _\mu ^{})^1(\epsilon )`$, then for any $`tR`$ the following limit exists in $`G_c`$,

$$\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{t\epsilon }(\phi _\epsilon ).$$

In other words $`\epsilon \phi _\epsilon G_c`$ fulfills the condition (17) of section 2.

Proof. The product $`\phi _\epsilon ^1\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )`$ is holomorphic at $`\epsilon =0`$ for any value of $`\mu `$. Thus by (4), for any $`tR`$, both $`\phi _\epsilon ^1\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )`$ and $`\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{\epsilon t}(\gamma _\mu (\epsilon ))`$ are holomorphic at $`\epsilon =0`$. The same holds for $`\theta _{\epsilon t}(\phi _\epsilon ^1)\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )`$ and hence for the ratio

$$\phi _\epsilon ^1\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )(\theta _{\epsilon t}(\phi _\epsilon ^1)\gamma _\mu (\epsilon ))^1=\phi _\epsilon ^1\theta _{\epsilon t}(\phi _\epsilon ).$$

We let $`\gamma _{}(\epsilon )=\phi _\epsilon ^1`$ and translate the results of section 2.

Corollary 6. Let $`F_t=\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\gamma _{}(\epsilon )\theta _{t\epsilon }(\gamma _{}(\epsilon )^1)`$. Then $`F_t`$ is a one parameter subgroup of $`G_c`$ and $`F_t=\mathrm{exp}(t\beta )`$ where $`\beta =Y\mathrm{Res}\phi _\epsilon `$ is the grading operator $`Y`$ applied to the residue of the loop $`\gamma (\epsilon )`$.

In general, given a loop $`\epsilon \gamma (\epsilon )G`$ it is natural to define its residue at $`\epsilon =0`$ by first performing the Birkhoff decomposition on a small circle $`C`$ around $`\epsilon =0`$ and then taking,

$$\mathrm{Res}_{\epsilon =0}\gamma =\frac{}{u}(\phi _{1/u})_{u=0}$$
$`(8)`$
where $`\phi _\epsilon =\gamma _{}(\epsilon )^1`$ and $`\gamma (\epsilon )=\gamma _{}(\epsilon )^1\gamma _+(\epsilon )`$ is the Birkhoff decomposition.

As shown in section 2, the residue or equivalently $`\beta =Y\mathrm{Res}`$ uniquely determines $`\phi _\epsilon =\gamma _{}(\epsilon )^1`$ and we thus get, from Theorem 2,

Corollary 7. The negative part $`\gamma _{}(\epsilon )`$ of the Birkhoff decomposition of $`\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )`$ is independent of $`\mu `$ and given by,

$$\gamma _{}(\epsilon )=\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}e^{t\left(\frac{\beta }{\epsilon }+Z_0\right)}e^{tZ_0}.$$

As above we adjoined the primitive element $`Z_0`$ to implement the grading $`Y`$ (cf. section 2). Our choice of the letter $`\beta `$ is of course not innocent and we shall see in section 5 the relation with the $`\beta `$-function.

## 4 The action of $`G_c`$ on the coupling constants

We shall show in this section that the formula for the bare coupling constant $`g_0`$ in terms of 1PI graphs, i.e. the generating function,

$$g_0=(gZ_1)(Z_3)^{3/2}$$
$`(1)`$
where we consider the right hand side as a formal power series with values in $`_c`$ given explicitly by, (with $`\mathrm{}=L(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ the loop number of the graphs),

$$g_0=\left(x+\underset{\text{}}{}x^{2l+1}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma })}\right)\left(1\underset{\text{}}{}x^{2l}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma })}\right)^{3/2}$$
$`(2)`$
does define a Hopf algebra homomorphism,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:_{\mathrm{CM}}$$
$`(3)`$
from the Hopf algebra $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ of coordinates on the group of formal diffeomorphisms of $`C`$ with

$$\phi (0)=0,\phi ^{}(0)=1,$$
$`(4)`$
to the Hopf algebra $`_c`$ of 1PI graphs.

This result is only valid if we perform on $`_c`$ the simplification that pertains to the massless case, $`m=0`$, but because of the $`m`$-independence of the counterterms all the corollaries will be valid in general. The desired simplification comes because in the case $`m=0`$ there is no need to indicate by a cross left on an internal line the removal of a self energy subgraph. Indeed and with the notations of part I we can first of all ignore all the $`\text{}_{(0)}`$ since $`m^2=0`$, moreover the  yield a $`k^2`$ term which exactly cancels out with the additional propagator when we remove the subgraph and replace it by . This shows that we can simply ignore all these crosses and write coproducts in the simplest possible way. To get familiar with this coproduct and with the meaning of the Hopf algebra morphism (3) we urge the reader to begin by the concrete computation done in the appendix, which checks its validity up to order six in the coupling constant.

Let us now be more explicit on the meaning of formula (2). We first expand $`g_0`$ as a power series in $`x`$ and get a series of the form,

$$g_0=x+\underset{2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\alpha _nx^n$$
$`(5)`$
where the even coefficients $`\alpha _{2n}`$ are zero and the coefficients $`\alpha _{2n+1}`$ are finite linear combinations of products of graphs, so that,

$$\alpha _{2n+1}n1.$$
$`(6)`$
We let $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ be the Hopf algebra of the group of formal diffeomorphisms such that (4) holds. We take the generators $`a_n`$ of $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ given by the equality

$$\phi (x)=x+\underset{n2}{}a_n(\phi )x^n.$$
$`(7)`$
and define the coproduct in $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ by the equality

$$\mathrm{\Delta }a_n,\phi _1\phi _2=a_n(\phi _2\phi _1)$$
$`(8)`$
We then define uniquely the algebra homomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:_{\mathrm{CM}}$$

by the condition,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(a_n)=\alpha _n.$$
$`(9)`$
By construction $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a morphism of algebras. We shall show that it is comultiplicative, i.e.

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi })\mathrm{\Delta }x=\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }(x)x_{\mathrm{CM}}$$
$`(10)`$
and comes from a group morphism,

$$\rho :G_cG_2.$$
$`(11)`$
where $`G_2`$ is the group of characters of $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ which is by construction the opposite of the group of formal diffeomorphisms. In fact we shall first describe the corresponding Lie algebra morphism, $`\rho `$.

Let us first recall from part I that a 1PI graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ defines a primitive element $`(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ of $`_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}`$ which only pairs nontrivially with the monomial $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $``$ and satisfies $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }),\mathrm{\Gamma }=1`$. We take the following natural basis $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}=S(\mathrm{\Gamma })(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ for the Lie algebra of primitive elements of $`_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}`$, labelled by 1PI graphs with two or three external legs. By part I, theorem 2, their Lie bracket is given by,

$$[\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }},\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}^{}]=\underset{v^{}}{}\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}^v^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }}\underset{v}{}\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^v\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}},$$
$`(12)`$
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}_v^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the graph obtained by grafting $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ at the vertex $`v^{}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$. (Our basis differs from the one used in loc. cit. by an overall - sign, but the present choice will be more convenient). In our context of the simplified Hopf algebra the places where a given graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can be inserted in another graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ are no longer always labelled by vertices of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$. They are when $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a vertex graph but when $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a self energy graph such places are just labelled by the internal lines of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, as we could discard the use of external structures and two-point vertices for self energy graphs.

We also let $`Z_n^{}`$ be the natural basis of the Lie algebra of primitive elements of $`_{\mathrm{CM}}^{}`$ which corresponds to the vector fields $`x^{n+1}\frac{}{x}`$. More precisely, $`Z_n^{}`$ is given as the linear form on $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ which only pairs with the monomial $`a_{n+1}`$,

$$Z_n^{},a_{n+1}=1,$$
$`(13)`$
and the Lie bracket is given by,

$$[Z_n^{},Z_m^{}]=(mn)Z_{n+m}^{}.$$
$`(14)`$
We then first prove,

Lemma 8. Let $`\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{3}{2}`$ for $`2`$-point graphs and $`\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }=1`$ for $`3`$-point graphs. The equality $`\rho (\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }})=\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }Z_2\mathrm{}^{}`$, where $`\mathrm{}=L(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is the loop number, defines a Lie algebra homomorphism.

Proof. We just need to show that $`\rho `$ preserves the Lie bracket. Let us first assume that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ are vertex graphs and let $`V_i`$ be the vertex number of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$. One has,

$$V=2L+1$$
$`(15)`$
for any vertex graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Thus the Lie bracket $`\rho [\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1,\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2]`$ provides $`V_2V_1=2(L_2L_1)`$ vertex graph contributions all equal to $`Z_{2(L_1+L_2)}^{}`$ so that

$$\rho ([\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1,\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2])=2(L_2L_1)Z_{2(L_1+L_2)}^{}$$
$`(16)`$
which is exactly $`[\rho (\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1),\rho (\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2)]`$ by (14).

Let then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ be 2-point graphs. For any such graph one has,

$$I=3L1$$
$`(17)`$
where $`I`$ is the number of internal lines of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Thus $`\rho ([\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1,\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2])`$ gives $`I_2I_1=3(L_2L_1)`$ 2-point graph contributions, each equal to $`\frac{3}{2}Z_{2(L_1+L_2)}^{}`$. Thus,

$$\rho ([\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1,\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2])=\frac{3}{2}3(L_2L_1)Z_{2(L_1+L_2)}^{}$$
$`(18)`$
but the right hand side is $`\rho _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}\rho _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}(L_2L_1)Z_{2(L_1+L_2)}^{}`$ so that,

$$\rho ([\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1,\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2])=[\rho (\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1),\rho (\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2)],$$
$`(19)`$
as required.

Finally if say $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ is a 3-point graph and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ a 2-point graph, we get from $`[\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1,\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2]`$ a set of $`V_2`$ 2-point graphs minus $`I_1`$ 3-point graphs which gives,

$$\left(\frac{3}{2}V_2I_1\right)Z_{2(L_1+L_2)}^{}.$$
$`(20)`$
One has $`V_2=2L_2`$, $`I_1=3L_1`$ so that $`\frac{3}{2}V_2I_1=3(L_2L_1)=\rho _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}\rho _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}(L_2L_1)`$ which gives (19) as required.

We now have the Lie algebra morphism $`\rho `$ and the algebra morphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. To $`\rho `$ corresponds a morphism of groups,

$$\rho :G_cG_2$$
$`(21)`$
and we just need to check that the algebra morphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the transposed of $`\rho `$ on the coordinate algebras,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(a)=a\rho a_{\mathrm{CM}}.$$
$`(22)`$
To prove (22) it is enough to show that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is equivariant with respect to the action of the Lie algebra $`L`$ of primitive elements of $`_{\mathrm{gr}}^{}`$. More precisely, given a primitive element

$$Z_{\mathrm{gr}}^{},\mathrm{\Delta }Z=Z1+1Z,$$
$`(23)`$
we let $`_Z`$ be the derivation of the algebra $``$ given by,

$$_Z(y)=Z\mathrm{id},\mathrm{\Delta }yy.$$
$`(24)`$
What we need to check is the following,

Lemma 9. For any $`a_{\mathrm{CM}}`$, $`ZL`$ one has $`_Z\mathrm{\Phi }(a)=\mathrm{\Phi }(_{(\rho Z)}(a))`$.

Proof. It is enough to check the equality when $`Z`$ is of the form $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}=S(\mathrm{\Gamma })(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ with the above notations. Thus we let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a 1PI graph and let $`_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be the corresponding derivation of $``$ given by (24) with $`Z=S(\mathrm{\Gamma })(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Now by definition of the primitive element $`(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ one has (cf. (48) section 2 of part I),

$$(\mathrm{\Gamma })\mathrm{id},\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}=n(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime };\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime }$$
$`(25)`$
where the integer $`n(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime };\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$ is the number of subgraphs of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ which are isomorphic to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ while $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}/\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime }`$. By Theorem 2 of part I we have,

$$S(\mathrm{\Gamma })S(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime })n(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime };\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=i(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime };\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})S(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})$$
$`(26)`$
where $`i(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime };\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$ is the number of times $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ appears in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We thus get,

$$_\mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})}=i(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime };\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime }}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime })}$$
$`(27)`$
which shows that $`_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ admits a very simple definition in the generators $`\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})}`$ of $``$.

The derivation $`_{(\rho Z)}`$ of $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ is also very easy to compute. One has by construction, (Lemma 8),

$$\rho (Z)=\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }Z_2\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{}=L(\mathrm{\Gamma })$$
$`(28)`$
and the derivation $`d_k`$ of $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ associated to the primitive element $`Z_k^{}`$ of $`_{\mathrm{CM}}^{}`$ is simply given, in the basis $`a_n_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ by,

$$d_k(a_n)=(nk)a_{nk}.$$
$`(29)`$
We thus get,

$$_{(\rho Z)}=\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }d_2\mathrm{},\mathrm{}=L(\mathrm{\Gamma }).$$
$`(30)`$
Now by construction both $`_Z\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{(\rho Z)}`$ are derivations from the algebra $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ to $``$ viewed as a bimodule over $`_{\mathrm{CM}}`$, i.e. satisfy,

$$\delta (ab)=\delta (a)\mathrm{\Phi }(b)+\mathrm{\Phi }(a)\delta (b).$$
$`(31)`$
Thus, to prove the lemma we just need to check the equality,

$$_\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Phi }(a_n)=\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Phi }(d_2\mathrm{}(a_n))\mathrm{}=L(\mathrm{\Gamma })$$
$`(32)`$
or equivalently using the generating function

$$g_0=x+\mathrm{\Phi }(a_n)x^n,$$
$`(33)`$
that

$$_\mathrm{\Gamma }g_0=\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }x^{2\mathrm{}+1}\frac{}{x}g_0.$$
$`(34)`$
Now by construction of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ we have,

$$g_0=(xZ_1)(Z_3)^{3/2},Z_3=1\delta Z$$
$`(35)`$
where,

$$Z_1=1+\underset{\text{}}{}x^{2l}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma })},\delta Z=\underset{\text{}}{}x^{2l}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma })}$$
$`(36)`$
Thus, since both $`_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\frac{}{x}`$ are derivations we can eliminate the denominators in (34) and rewrite the desired equality, after multiplying both sides by $`(1\delta Z)^{5/2}`$ as,

$$\begin{array}{cc}\left(x\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}Z_1\right)(1\delta Z)+\frac{3}{2}\left(\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\delta Z\right)(xZ_1)\text{ }\hfill & (37)\hfill \\ =\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(x^{2\mathrm{}+1}\left(\frac{}{x}(xZ_1)\right)(1\delta Z)+\frac{3}{2}(xZ_1)x^{2\mathrm{}+1}\frac{}{x}\delta Z\right).\text{ }\hfill & \end{array}$$

Both sides of this formula are bilinear expressions in the 1PI graphs. We first need to compute $`\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}Z_1`$ and $`\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\delta Z`$. One has

$$\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}Z_1=\underset{\text{}}{}x^{2l+2l^{}}c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})}$$
$`(38)`$
and,

$$\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\delta Z=\underset{\text{}}{}x^{2l+2l^{}}c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})},$$
$`(39)`$
where $`\mathrm{}=L(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$, $`\mathrm{}^{}=L(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$ are the loop numbers and the integral coefficient $`c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$ is given by,

$$c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=V^{}\text{if}\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }=1\text{and}c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=I^{}\text{if}\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }=3/2$$
$`(40)`$
(where $`V^{}`$ and $`I^{}`$ are respectively the number of vertices and of internal lines of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$).

To prove (38) and (39) we use (27) and we get in both cases expressions like (38), (39) with

$$c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=\underset{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime }}{}i(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }^{};\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime }).$$
$`(41)`$
But this is exactly the number of ways we can insert $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ inside $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ and is thus the same as (40). Let now $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ be a 3-point graph and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ a 2-point graph. The coefficient of the bilinear term,

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_2)},$$
$`(42)`$
in the left hand side of (37) is given by

$$\left(\frac{3}{2}c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_2)c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)\right)x^{2\mathrm{}+2\mathrm{}_1+2\mathrm{}_2+1}.$$
$`(43)`$
Its coefficient in the right hand side of (37) is coming from the terms,

$$\begin{array}{cc}x^{2\mathrm{}+1}\frac{}{x}\left(x^{2\mathrm{}_1+1}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)}\right)\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_2)}\right)x^{2\mathrm{}_2}+\text{ }\hfill & (44)\hfill \\ \frac{3}{2}x^{2\mathrm{}_1+1}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)}x^{2\mathrm{}+1}\frac{}{x}\left(x^{2\mathrm{}_2}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_2)}\right)\text{ }\hfill & \end{array}$$

which gives,

$$(3\mathrm{}_22\mathrm{}_11)x^{1+2\mathrm{}+2\mathrm{}_1+2\mathrm{}_2}.$$
$`(45)`$
We thus only need to check the equality,

$$\frac{3}{2}c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_2)c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)=(3\mathrm{}_22\mathrm{}_11)\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
$`(46)`$
Note that in general, for any graph with $`N`$ external legs we have,

$$V=2(L1)+N,I=3(L1)+N.$$
$`(47)`$
Let us first take for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ a 3-point graph so that $`\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }=1`$. Then the left hand side of (46) gives $`\frac{3}{2}V_2V_1=\frac{3}{2}(2\mathrm{}_2)(2(\mathrm{}_11)+3)=3\mathrm{}_22\mathrm{}_11`$.

Let then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a 2-point graph, i.e. $`\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{3}{2}`$. Then the left hand side of (46) gives $`\frac{3}{2}I_2I_1=\frac{3}{2}(3\mathrm{}_21)3\mathrm{}_1=\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }(3\mathrm{}_22\mathrm{}_11)`$ which gives the desired equality.

Finally we also need to check the scalar terms and the terms linear in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ or in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$. The only scalar terms in the left hand side of (37) are coming from $`x\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}Z_1+\frac{3}{2}x\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\delta Z`$ and this gives,

$$x^{2\mathrm{}+1}\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
$`(48)`$
The only scalar term in the right hand side of (37) comes from $`x^{2\mathrm{}+1}`$ thus they fulfill (37).

The terms linear in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ in the left hand side of (37) come only from $`x\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}Z_1`$ if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a 3-point graph and the coefficient of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1/S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)`$ is thus,

$$c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)x^{1+2\mathrm{}_1+2\mathrm{}}.$$
$`(49)`$
In the right hand side of (37) we just get

$$(2\mathrm{}_1+1)x^{1+2\mathrm{}_1+2\mathrm{}}.$$
$`(50)`$
We thus need to check that $`c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)=2\mathrm{}_1+1`$ which follows from (40) and (47) since $`V_1=2\mathrm{}_1+1`$.

Similarly, if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a 2-point graph the left side of (37) only contributes by $`x\frac{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}Z_1+\frac{3}{2}x^{2\mathrm{}+1}Z_1`$, so that the coefficient of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1/S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)`$ is

$$\left(c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)+\frac{3}{2}\right)x^{1+2\mathrm{}+2\mathrm{}_1}.$$
$`(51)`$
In the right hand side of (37) we get just as above

$$(2\mathrm{}_1+1)x^{1+2\mathrm{}+2\mathrm{}_1}$$
$`(52)`$
multiplied by $`\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }=3/2`$.

Now here, since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a 2-point graph, we have $`c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)=I_1=3(\mathrm{}_11)+3=3\mathrm{}_1`$ so that

$$c(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)+\frac{3}{2}=\frac{3}{2}(2\mathrm{}_1+1)=\rho _\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\mathrm{}_1+1)$$

as required.

The check for terms linear in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ is similar.

We can now state the main result of this section,

Theorem 10. The map $`\mathrm{\Phi }=_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ given by the effective coupling is a Hopf algebra homomorphism. The transposed Lie group morphism is $`\rho :G_cG_2`$.

The proof follows from Lemma 9 which shows that the map from $`G_c`$ to $`G_2`$ given by the transpose of the algebra morphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the Lie group morphism $`\rho `$. By construction the morphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is compatible with the grading $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ of $``$ and $`\alpha `$ of $`_{CM}`$ given by $`\mathrm{deg}(a_n)=n1`$ (cf. ), one has indeed,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }\alpha _t=\mathrm{\Theta }_{2t}\mathrm{\Phi },tR.$$
$`(51)`$
Finally we remark that our proof of Theorem 10 is similar to the proof of the equality

$$F_{\varphi _1\varphi _2}=F_{\varphi _2}F_{\varphi _1}$$
$`(52)`$
for the Butcher series used in the numerical integration of differential equations, but that the presence of the $`Z_3`$ factor makes it much more involved in our case.

## 5 The $`\beta `$-function and the Birkhoff decomposition of the unrenormalized effective coupling in the diffeomorphism group

Let us first recall our notations from part I concerning the effective action. We work in the Euclidean signature of space time and in order to minimize the number of minus signs we write the functional integrals in the form,

$$𝒩e^{S(\phi )}P(\phi )[D\phi ]$$
$`(1)`$
so that the Euclidean action is<sup>3</sup><sup>3</sup>3We know of course that the usual sign convention is better to display the positivity of the action functional.,

$$S(\phi )=\frac{1}{2}(_\mu \phi )^2\frac{1}{2}m^2\phi ^2+\frac{g}{6}\phi ^3.$$
$`(2)`$
The effective action, which when used at tree level in (1) gives the same answer as the full computation using (2), is then given in dimension $`d=6\epsilon `$ by,

$$\begin{array}{cc}S_{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )=S(\phi )+\underset{1\mathrm{P}\mathrm{I}}{}\frac{(\mu ^{\epsilon /2}g)^{n2}}{n!}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{S(\mathrm{\Gamma })}(p_1,\mathrm{},p_n)\text{ }\hfill & (3)\hfill \\ \times \phi (p_1)\mathrm{}\phi (p_n)\mathrm{\Pi }dp_i\text{ }\hfill & \end{array}$$

where, as in part I, we do not consider tree graphs as 1PI and the integral is performed on the hyperplane $`p_i=0`$. To be more precise one should view the right hand side of (3) as a formal power series with values in the Hopf algebra $``$. The theory provides us with a loop

$$\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )=\gamma _{}(\epsilon )^1\gamma _{\mu _+}(\epsilon )$$
$`(4)`$
of characters of $``$. When we evaluate $`\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )`$ (resp. $`\gamma _{}`$, $`\gamma _{\mu ^+}`$) on the right hand side of (3) we get respectively the unrenormalized effective action, the bare action and the renormalized effective action (in the MS scheme).

Our notation is hiding the $`g`$-dependence of $`\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )`$, but this dependence is entirely governed by the grading. Indeed with $`t=\mathrm{log}(g)`$ one has, with obvious notations,

$$\gamma _{\mu ,g}(\epsilon )=\mathrm{\Theta }_{2t}(\gamma _{\mu ,1}(\epsilon ))$$
$`(5)`$
Since $`\mathrm{\Theta }_t`$ is an automorphism the same equality holds for both $`\gamma _{\mu _+}`$ and $`\gamma _{}`$.

As in section 4 we restrict ourselves to the massless case and let $`\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )=\gamma _{}(\epsilon )^1\gamma _{\mu _+}(\epsilon )`$ be the Birkhoff decomposition of $`\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )=\gamma _{\mu ,1}(\epsilon )`$.

Lemma 11. Let $`\rho :G_cG_2`$ be given by Theorem 10. Then $`\rho (\gamma _\mu (\epsilon ))(g)`$ is the unrenormalized effective coupling constant, $`\rho (\gamma _{\mu _+}(0))(g)`$ is the renormalized effective coupling constant and $`\rho (\gamma _{}(\epsilon ))(g)`$ is the bare coupling constant $`g_0`$.

This follows from (3) and Theorem 10. It is now straightforward to translate the results of the previous sections in terms of diffeomorphisms. The only subtle point to remember is that the group $`G_2`$ is the opposite of the group of diffeomorphisms so that if we view $`\rho `$ as a map to diffeomorphisms it is an antihomomorphism,

$$\rho (\gamma _1\gamma _2)=\rho (\gamma _2)\rho (\gamma _1).$$
$`(6)`$
Theorem 12. The renormalization group flow is the image $`\rho (F_t)`$ by $`\rho :G_c\mathrm{Diff}`$ of the one parameter group $`F_tG_c`$.

Proof. The bare coupling constant $`g_0`$ governs the bare action,

$$S_{\mathrm{bare}}(\phi _0)=\frac{1}{2}(_\mu \phi _0)^2+\mu ^{\epsilon /2}\frac{g_0}{6}\phi _0^3$$
$`(7)`$
in terms of the bare field $`\phi _0`$.

Now when we replace $`\mu `$ by

$$\mu ^{}=e^t\mu $$
$`(8)`$
we can keep the bare action, and hence the physical theory, unchanged provided we replace the renormalized coupling constant $`g`$ by $`g^{}`$ where

$$g_0(\epsilon ,g^{})=e^{\epsilon \frac{t}{2}}g_0(\epsilon ,g).$$
$`(9)`$
By construction we have,

$$g^{}=\psi _\epsilon ^1(e^{\epsilon \frac{t}{2}}\psi _\epsilon (g))$$
$`(10)`$
where $`\psi _\epsilon `$ is the formal diffeomorphism given by

$$\psi _\epsilon =\rho (\gamma _{}(\epsilon )).$$
$`(11)`$
Now the behaviour for $`\epsilon 0`$ of $`g^{}`$ given by (10) is the same as for,

$$\psi _\epsilon ^1\alpha _{\epsilon t/2}(\psi _\epsilon )$$
$`(12)`$
where $`\alpha _s`$ is the grading of $`\mathrm{Diff}`$ given as above by

$$\alpha _s(\psi )(x)=e^s\psi (e^sx).$$
$`(13)`$
Thus, since the map $`\rho `$ preserves the grading,

$$\rho (\theta _t(\gamma ))=\alpha _{t/2}\rho (\gamma )$$
$`(14)`$
(by (51) of section 4), we see by Corollary 6 of section 3 that,

$$g^{}\rho (F_t)g\text{when}\epsilon 0.$$
$`(15)`$
As a corollary we get of course,

Corollary 13. The image by $`\rho `$ of $`\beta L`$ is the $`\beta `$-function of the theory.

In fact all the results of section 3 now translate to the group $`G_2`$. We get the formula for the bare coupling constant in terms of the $`\beta `$-function, namely,

$$\psi _\epsilon =\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}e^{tZ_0}e^{t\left(\frac{\beta }{\epsilon }+Z_0\right)}$$
$`(16)`$
where $`Z_0=x\frac{}{x}`$ is the generator of scaling. But we can also express the main result of part I independently of the group $`G`$ or of its Hopf algebra $``$. Indeed the group homomorphism $`\rho :GG_2`$ maps the Birkhoff decomposition of $`\gamma _\mu (\epsilon )`$ to the Birkhoff decomposition of $`\rho (\gamma _\mu (\epsilon ))`$. But we saw above that $`\rho (\gamma _\mu (\epsilon ))`$ is just the unrenormalized effective coupling constant. We can thus state,

Theorem 14. Let the unrenormalized effective coupling constant $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}(\epsilon )`$ viewed as a formal power series in $`g`$ be considered as a loop of formal diffeomorphisms and let $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}(\epsilon )=(g_{\mathrm{eff}_{}})^1(\epsilon )g_{\mathrm{eff}_+}(\epsilon )`$ be its Birkhoff decomposition in the group of formal diffeomorphisms. Then the loop $`g_{\mathrm{eff}_{}}(\epsilon )`$ is the bare coupling constant and $`g_{\mathrm{eff}_+}(0)`$ is the renormalized effective coupling.

Note that $`G_2`$ is naturally isomorphic to the opposite group of Diff so we used the opposite order in the Birkhoff decomposition.

This result is very striking since it no longer involves the Hopf algebra $``$ or the group $`G`$ but only the idea of thinking of the effective coupling constant as a formal diffeomorphism. The proof is immediate, by combining Lemma 11, Theorem 10 of section 4 with Theorem 4 of part I.

Now in the same way as the Riemann-Hilbert problem and the Birkhoff decomposition for the group $`G=\mathrm{GL}(n,C)`$ are intimately related to the classification of holomorphic $`n`$-dimensional vector bundles on $`P_1(C)=C_+C_{}`$, the Birkhoff decomposition for the group $`G_2=\mathrm{Diff}^0`$ is related to the classification of one dimensional complex (non linear) bundles,

$$P=(C_+\times X)_{g_{\mathrm{eff}}}(C_{}\times X).$$
$`(17)`$
Here $`X`$ stands for a formal one dimensional fiber and $`C_\pm `$ are, as in part I, the components of the complement in $`P_1(C)`$ of a small circle around $`D`$. The total space $`P`$ should be thought of as a 2-dimensional complex manifold which blends together the $`\epsilon =Dd`$ and the coupling constant of the theory.

## 6 Conclusions

We showed in this paper that the group $`G`$ of characters of the Hopf algebra $``$ of Feynman graphs plays a key role in the geometric understanding of the basic ideas of renormalization including the renormalization group and the $`\beta `$-function.

We showed in particular that the group $`G`$ acts naturally on the complex space $`X`$ of dimensionless coupling constants of the theory. Thus, elements of $`G`$ are a refined form of diffeomorphisms of $`X`$ and as such should be called diffeographisms.

The action of these diffeographisms on the space of coupling constants allowed us first of all to read off directly the bare coupling constant and the renormalized one from the Riemann–Hilbert decomposition of the unrenormalized effective coupling constant viewed as a loop of formal diffeomorphisms. This showed that renormalization is intimately related with the theory of non-linear complex bundles on the Riemann sphere of the dimensional regularization parameter $`\epsilon `$. It also allowed us to lift both the renormalization group and the $`\beta `$-function as the asymptotic scaling in the group of diffeographisms. This used the full power of the Riemann–Hilbert decomposition together with the invariance of $`\gamma _{}(\epsilon )`$ under a change of unit of mass. This gave us a completely streamlined proof of the existence of the renormalization group and more importantly a closed formula of scattering nature, delivering the full higher pole structure of minimal subtracted counterterms in terms of the residue.

In the light of the predominant role of the residue in NCG we expect this type of formula to help us to decipher the message on space-time geometry burried in the need for renormalization.

Moreover, thanks to  the previous results no longer depend upon dimensional regularization but can be formulated in any regularization or renormalization scheme. Also, we could discard a detailed discussion of anomalous dimensions, since it is an easy corollary  of the knowledge of the $`\beta `$-function.

For reasons of simplicity our analysis was limited to the case of one coupling constant. The generalization to a higher dimensional space $`X`$ of coupling constants is expected to involve the same ingredients as those which appear in higher dimensional diffeomorphism groups and Gelfand-Fuchs cohomology . We left aside the detailed study of the Lie algebra of diffeographisms and its many similarities with the Lie algebra of formal vector fields. This, together with the interplay between Hopf algebras, rational homotopy theory, BRST cohomology, rooted trees and shuffle identities will be topics of future joint work.

## 7 Appendix: up to three loops

We now want to check the Hopf algebra homomorphism $`_{CM}`$ up to three loops as an example. We regard $`g_0`$ as a series in a variable $`x`$ (which can be thought of as a physical coupling) up to order $`x^6`$, making use of $`g_0=xZ_1Z_3^{3/2}`$ and the expression of the $`Z`$-factors in terms of 1PI Feynman graph. The challenge is then to confirm that the coordinates $`\delta _n`$ on $`G_2`$, implicitly defined by

$$\mathrm{log}\left[g_0(x)^{}\right]^{(n)}$$

commute with the Hopf algebra homomorphism: calculating the coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{CM}`$ of $`\delta _n`$ and expressing the result in Feynman graphs must equal the application of the coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ applied to $`\delta _n`$ expressed in Feynman graphs.

By (2) of section 4 we write $`g_0=xZ_1Z_3^{3/2}`$,

$$Z_1=1+\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}z_{1,2k}x^{2k},$$

$$Z_3=1\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}z_{3,2k}x^{2k},$$

and

$$Z_g=Z_1Z_3^{3/2},z_{i,2k}_c,i=1,3,$$

as formal series in $`x^2`$. Using

$$\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{}{x}xZ_g\right)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\delta _{2k}}{(2k)!}x^{2k},$$

which defines $`\delta _{2k}`$ as the previous generators $`a_n(\varphi )`$ of coordinates of $`G_2`$, we find

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2!}}\delta _2\stackrel{~}{\delta _2}`$ $`=`$ $`3z_{1,2}+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{2}}z_{3,2},`$ (1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4!}}\delta _4\stackrel{~}{\delta _4}`$ $`=`$ $`5[z_{1,4}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}z_{3,4}]{\displaystyle \frac{9}{2}}z_{1,2}^26z_{1,2}z_{3,2}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}z_{3,2}^2,`$ (2)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6!}}\delta _6\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}`$ $`=`$ $`9z_{1,2}^3+18z_{1,2}^2z_{3,2}5[3z_{1,2}z_{1,4}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}z_{3,2}z_{3,4}]`$
$`+12[z_{1,2}z_{3,2}^2z_{1,2}z_{3,4}z_{1,4}z_{3,2}]+7[z_{1,6}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}z_{3,2}^3+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}z_{3,6}].`$
The algebra homomorphism $`_c`$ of section(4) is effected by expressing the $`z_{i,2k}`$ in Feynman graphs, with 1PI graphs with three external legs contributing to $`Z_1`$, and 1PI graphs with two external legs, self-energies, contributing to $`Z_3`$.

Explicitly, we have

$`z_{1,2}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{},`$
$`z_{3,2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{},`$
$`z_{1,4}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{},`$
$`z_{3,4}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\text{}+\text{}\right].`$
The symmetry factor

$$2=S\left(\text{}\right)$$

is most obvious if we redraw

$$\text{}.$$

Further, we have

$`z_{1,6}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}`$
$`+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}]+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}`$
$`+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]+\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]+\text{primitive terms},`$
and

$`z_{3,6}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}+\text{}.`$
Here, primitive terms refers to 1PI three-loop vertex graphs without subdivergences. They fulfil all desired identities below trivially, and are thus not explicitly given. On the level of diffeomorphisms, we have the coproducts

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{CM}[\delta _4]`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _41+1\delta _4+4\delta _2\delta _2,`$ (4)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{CM}[\delta _6]`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _61+1\delta _6+20\delta _2\delta _4+6\delta _4\delta _2`$ (5)
$`+28\delta _2^2\delta _2,`$
where we skip odd gradings.

We have to check that the coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of Feynman graphs reproduces these results.

Applying $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ to the rhs of (2) gives, using the expressions for $`z_{i,k}`$ in terms of Feynman graphs,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\stackrel{~}{\delta _4}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`6\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{2}}\left[\text{}\text{}+\text{}\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{27}{8}}\text{}\text{}+\stackrel{~}{\delta _4}1+1\stackrel{~}{\delta _4}.`$
This has to be compared with $`\stackrel{~}{\delta _4}1+1\stackrel{~}{\delta _4}+\frac{2!2!}{4!}4\stackrel{~}{\delta _2}\stackrel{~}{\delta _2}`$, which matches perfectly, as

$`\stackrel{~}{\delta _2}\stackrel{~}{\delta _2}`$ $`=`$ $`9\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{27}{4}}\left[\text{}\text{}+\text{}\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{81}{16}}\text{}\text{}.`$
After this warming up, let us do the check at order $`g^6`$, which will be much more demanding, as the coproduct will be noncocommutative now.

We need that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{CM}(\delta _6)`$ in (5) is equivalent to

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{CM}(\stackrel{~}{\delta _6})`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}1+1\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}+20{\displaystyle \frac{2!4!}{6!}}\stackrel{~}{\delta _2}\stackrel{~}{\delta _4}+6{\displaystyle \frac{2!4!}{6!}}\stackrel{~}{\delta _4}\stackrel{~}{\delta _2}`$ (6)
$`+28{\displaystyle \frac{2!2!2!}{6!}}\stackrel{~}{\delta _2}^2\stackrel{~}{\delta _2}.`$
Applying the Hopf algebra homomorphism to Feynman graphs on both sides of the tensor product delivers

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}1+1\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}`$ (7)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{28}{90}}\left[3\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}\text{}\right]^2\left[3\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{6}{15}}[5[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}]]`$
$`3[{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\text{}+\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16}}\text{}\text{}]]`$
$`\left[3\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{20}{15}}\left[3\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}\text{}\right]`$
$`5[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}+\text{}]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}]]`$
$`3\left[{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\text{}+\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16}}\text{}\text{}\right].`$
Multiplying this out, we find the following result

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}\right)=\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}`$ $``$ $`1`$
$`+1`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}`$
$`+10\text{}`$ $``$
$`+3\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{15}{2}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{15}{2}}\text{}`$ $``$ $`\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{2}}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$ $``$
$`+15\text{}`$ $``$ $`\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{2}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+15\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{2}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+15\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{27}{8}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{45}{4}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{27}{8}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{45}{4}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+3\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$ $``$
$`+10\text{}`$ $``$ $`\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+6\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$ $``$
$`+20\text{}`$ $``$ $`\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`9\text{}`$ $``$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{9}{2}}\text{}\text{}`$ $``$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{9}{16}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{27}{2}}\text{}`$ $``$
$`12\text{}`$ $``$
$`18\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{27}{4}}\text{}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+\text{}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+9\text{}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}\text{}\text{}`$ $``$
$`+3\text{}\text{}`$ $``$ $`\text{}.`$ (8)
Now we have to compare with $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{~}{\delta _6})`$, so we first apply the homomorphism to graphs and use the coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ on them. For this, we need

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left[z_{1,2}\right]`$ $`=`$ $`\text{}1+1\text{},`$ (9)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left[z_{3,2}\right]`$ $`=`$ $`\text{}1+1\text{},`$ (10)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left[z_{1,4}\right]`$ $`=`$ $`z_{1,4}1+1z_{1,4}+3\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\text{},`$ (11)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left[z_{3,2}\right]`$ $`=`$ $`z_{3,4}1+1z_{3,4}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}\text{}+\text{}\text{},`$ (12)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left[z_{1,6}\right]`$ $`=`$ $`z_{1,6}1+1z_{1,6}+3\text{}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+3\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]\text{}`$
$`+2\text{}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+3\text{}\text{}\text{}+\text{}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+\text{}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{2}}\text{}\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{2}}\text{}\text{}+3\text{}\text{},`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left[z_{3,6}\right]`$ $`=`$ $`z_{3,6}1+1z_{3,6}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\text{}\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\text{}\text{}\text{}+\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}\text{}+\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}\text{}\text{}`$
$`+\text{}\text{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\text{}\text{}+\text{}\text{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\text{}+\text{}\right]\text{}+\text{}\text{}+\text{}\text{}`$
$`+\left[\text{}+\text{}+\text{}\right]\text{}.`$
It is now only a matter of using the rhs of (7) for $`\stackrel{~}{\delta _6}`$ to confirm that we reproduce the result (8). For example, for the contribution to $`\text{}\text{}`$ in $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{~}{\delta _6})`$ we find

$$\frac{5\times 3}{2}\text{}\text{}+7\times \frac{5}{2}\text{}\text{}=10\text{}\text{},$$

as desired. Similarly, one checks all of the 32 tensorproducts of (8).

## Acknowledgements

Both authors thank the IHES for generous support during this collaboration. D.K. is grateful to the DFG for a Heisenberg Fellowship.