text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Motivated by the exciting progress on the correspondence between string theory on anti-de Sitter space ($`AdS`$) and conformal field theory , we have recently outlined an explicit construction of an infinite dimensional class of superconformal algebras (SCAs) on the boundary of $`AdS_3`$ . These space-time algebras are $`N`$ extended SCAs induced by an affine $`SL(2|N/2)`$ current superalgebra residing on the world sheet ($`N`$ is even). Our construction generalizes a work by Ito  in which $`N=1`$, 2 and 4 SCAs are studied. Our constructions are both supersymmetric extensions of the Giveon-Kutasov-Seiberg construction of the Virasoro algebra . A related approach to building $`N=1`$, 2 and 4 SCAs for fixed central charges may be found in Ref. .

In the present paper we shall complete our construction of the new and asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA discovered in Ref. , where the case of vanishing central charge was treated. Here we shall provide the algebra for generic central charge. Besides the Virasoro generator and 4 supercurrents, the algebra consists of an internal $`SL(2)U(1)`$ Kac-Moody algebra in addition to two spin 1/2 fermions and a bosonic scalar. Hence, it is not included in the standard classification of $`N=4`$ SCAs .

We shall also show that replacing the world sheet $`SL(2|2)`$ current superalgebra by that of the coset $`SL(2|2)/U(1)`$ induces the well known small $`N=4`$ SCA rather than the bigger, asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA induced by $`SL(2|2)`$. We hope this will clarify the incompatibility between our work and the result for $`N=4`$ in Ref. ; there a construction (similar to ours) based on $`SL(2|2)`$ was announced to result in the small $`N=4`$ SCA.

The new and asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA is invariant under a one-parameter twist. The starting point for this observation is a linear modification of the Giveon-Kutasov-Seiberg Virasoro generator. The remaining twisted generators are obtained by requiring the SCA to be invariant. All twisted generators are given in terms of linear combinations of the original untwisted generators. It is an interesting observation that for precisely one value of the continuous twist parameter, the invariance is broken and the twisting results in the small $`N=4`$ SCA. It is stressed that the invariance and this collapse of the asymmetric SCA to the small $`N=4`$ SCA, are both independent of our construction and rely solely on the defining (anti-)commutators of the two SCAs.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we summarize briefly some of our results  on the general construction of SCAs induced by affine $`SL(2|N/2)`$ current superalgebras.

Section 3 is devoted to $`N=4`$ SCAs, where the new and asymmetric algebra is provided. The small $`N=4`$ is shown to be induced by the coset $`SL(2|2)/U(1)`$ current superalgebra, and the invariance of the asymmetric SCA is discussed.

Section 4 contains concluding remarks, while details on the Lie superalgebra $`sl(2|M)`$ along with explicit free field realizations of the currents, are given in appendices A, B and C.

## 2 $`N`$ Extended Superconformal Algebras

### 2.1 Free Field Realizations of Affine Current Superalgebras

Associated to a Lie superalgebra $`𝐠`$ is an affine Lie superalgebra characterized by the central extension $`k`$. Associated to an affine Lie superalgebra is an affine current superalgebra whose generators, $`J_a`$, are conformal spin one primary fields (with respect to the Sugawara construction) and have the mutual operator product expansions (OPEs)

$$J_a(z)J_b(w)=\frac{\kappa _{a,b}k}{(zw)^2}+\frac{f_{a,b}^{}{}_{}{}^{c}J_c(w)}{zw}$$
(1)
$`\kappa _{a,b}`$ and $`f_{a,b}^{}{}_{}{}^{c}`$ are the Cartan-Killing form and structure constants, respectively, of the underlying Lie superalgebra. Regular terms have been omitted. The general free field realization obtained in Ref.  is based on a pair of free ghost fields ($`\beta _\alpha ,\gamma ^\alpha `$) of conformal weights (1,0) for every positive root $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ (written $`\alpha >0`$), and on a free scalar boson $`\phi _i`$ for every Cartan index $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, where $`r`$ is the rank of the underlying Lie superalgebra. They satisfy the OPEs

$$\beta _\alpha (z)\gamma ^\alpha ^{}(w)=\frac{\delta _{\alpha }^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha ^{}}}{zw},\phi _i(z)\phi _j(w)=\kappa _{i,j}\mathrm{ln}(zw)$$
(2)
Note that in this notation, the ghost fields ($`\beta _\alpha ,\gamma ^\alpha `$) associated to odd roots $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_+^1`$ are fermionic. ($`\mathrm{\Delta }_\pm ^1`$) $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\pm ^0`$ denotes the space of positive or negative (odd) even roots of the underlying Lie superalgebra, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\pm =\mathrm{\Delta }_\pm ^0\mathrm{\Delta }_\pm ^1`$. The corresponding energy-momentum tensor is

$$T=\underset{\alpha >0}{}\gamma ^\alpha \beta _\alpha +\frac{1}{2}\phi \phi \frac{1}{\sqrt{k+h^{}}}\rho ^2\phi $$
(3)
$`\rho `$ and $`h^{}`$ are the Weyl vector and the dual Coxeter number, respectively, of the underlying Lie superalgebra. Normal ordering is implicit. The generators of the affine current superalgebra are realized according to

$$J_a(z)=\underset{\alpha >0}{}V_a^\alpha (\gamma (z))\beta _\alpha (z)+\sqrt{k+h^{}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{r}{}}P_a^j(\gamma (z))\phi _j(z)+J_a^{\text{anom}}(\gamma (z),\gamma (z))$$
(4)
where

$$J_a^{\text{anom}}(\gamma (z),\gamma (z))=\{\begin{array}{c}0\text{for}a=i,\alpha >0\hfill \\ \\ _{\alpha ^{}>0}\gamma ^\alpha ^{}(z)F_{\alpha ,\alpha ^{}}(\gamma (z))\text{for}a=\alpha <0\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)
The explicit form of $`F_{\alpha ,\alpha ^{}}`$ is not needed here but may be found in refs. . For $`\alpha =\alpha _i`$ a simple root $`F_{\alpha _i,\alpha ^{}}`$ is a constant independent of the ghost fields $`\gamma `$:

$$F_{\alpha _i,\alpha ^{}}(\gamma )=\frac{1}{2}\delta _{\alpha _i,\alpha ^{}}\left((2k+h^{})\kappa _{\alpha _i,\alpha _i}A_{ii}\right)$$
(6)
$`A_{ij}`$ is the Cartan matrix of the underlying Lie superalgebra, and is related to the Cartan-Killing form as $`\kappa _{i,j}=A_{ij}\kappa _{\alpha _j,\alpha _j}`$. $`V`$ and $`P`$ are given by

$`V_\alpha ^\alpha ^{}(\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`\left[B(C(\gamma ))\right]_\alpha ^\alpha ^{}`$
$`V_i^\alpha ^{}(\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`\left[C(\gamma )\right]_i^\alpha ^{}`$
$`V_\alpha ^\alpha ^{}(\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha ^{\prime \prime }>0}{}}\left[e^{C(\gamma )}\right]_\alpha ^{\alpha ^{\prime \prime }}\left[B(C(\gamma ))\right]_{\alpha ^{\prime \prime }}^\alpha ^{}`$
$`P_\alpha ^j(\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`P_i^j(\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _i^j`$
$`P_\alpha ^j(\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`\left[e^{C(\gamma )}\right]_\alpha ^j`$ (7)
$`B(u)`$ is the generating function for the Bernoulli numbers $`B_n`$

$$B(u)=\frac{u}{e^u1}=\underset{n0}{}\frac{B_n}{n!}u^n$$
(8)
whereas the matrix $`C`$ is defined by

$$C_a^b(\gamma )=\underset{\alpha >0}{}\gamma ^\alpha f_{\alpha ,a}^{}{}_{}{}^{b}$$
(9)
The formal power series (7) all truncate and are thus polynomials.

### 2.2 Superconformal Algebra Generators

Most Lie superalgebras with even subalgebra $`𝐠^0=sl(2)𝐠^{}`$ have the property that the embedding of $`sl(2)`$ in $`𝐠`$ carried by the odd generators (the set of which is denoted $`𝐠^1`$) is a fundamental (spin 1/2) representation111This is true for all basic Lie superalgebras with even subalgebra $`𝐠^0=sl(2)𝐠^{}`$ except $`osp(3|2M)`$ where the embedding is a spin 1 representation, see e.g. .. This means that the space of odd roots may be divided into two parts

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^1=\mathrm{\Delta }^1\mathrm{\Delta }^{1+}$$
(10)
The roots $`\alpha ^\pm \mathrm{\Delta }^{1\pm }`$ are characterized by

$$\frac{\alpha _{sl(2)}\alpha ^\pm }{\alpha _{sl(2)}^2}=\pm \frac{1}{2}$$
(11)
and we have the correspondence

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{1+}=\alpha _{sl(2)}+\mathrm{\Delta }^1$$
(12)
Here $`\alpha _{sl(2)}`$ is the positive root associated to the embedded $`sl(2)`$. In particular, the Lie superalgebra $`sl(2|N/2)`$ allows such a decomposition of the root space. In the distinguished representation of $`sl(2|N/2)`$ discussed in Appendix A, the embedding is associated to the simple root $`\alpha _1`$, while the only odd simple root is $`\alpha _2`$. Furthermore, the root space enjoys the refined decomposition

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_+^1=\mathrm{\Delta }_+^1\mathrm{\Delta }_+^{1+}$$
(13)
This refinement is not valid for all Lie superalgebras respecting (10), as $`osp(1|2)`$ illustrates. In the following we shall concentrate on SCAs induced by affine $`SL(2|N/2)`$ current superalgebras.

Now, the Virasoro algebra is induced by the embedded $`SL(2)`$ and is generated by

$`L_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}_n(z)}`$
$`_n`$ $`=`$ $`a_+(n)\left(\gamma ^{\alpha _1}\right)^{n+1}E_{\alpha _1}+a_3(n)\left(\gamma ^{\alpha _1}\right)^nH_1+a_{}(n)\left(\gamma ^{\alpha _1}\right)^{n1}F_{\alpha _1}`$ (14)
The central charge is

$$c=6k_1^{}p_1$$
(15)
$`p_1`$ is the winding number

$$p_1=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}\frac{\gamma ^{\alpha _1}}{\gamma ^{\alpha _1}}$$
(16)
while $`k_1^{}=\kappa _{\alpha _1,\alpha _1}k`$ is the level of the embedded $`sl(2)`$ or the level in the direction $`\alpha _1`$. The constants $`a_+`$, $`a_3`$ and $`a_{}`$ are defined by

$$a_+(n)=\frac{1}{2}(nn^2),a_3(n)=\frac{1}{2}(1n^2),a_{}(n)=\frac{1}{2}(n+n^2)$$
(17)
In Ref.  it was found that for each pair of roots $`(\alpha ^{},\alpha ^+)`$ we have a pair of supercurrents of spin 3/2 with respect to (14):

$`G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}𝒢_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2}(z)}`$
$`𝒢_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`(n+1)(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^nE_\alpha ^{}n(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^{n+1}E_{\alpha ^+}`$ (18)
and

$`\overline{G}_{\alpha ^{};n1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}\overline{𝒢}_{\alpha ^{};n1/2}(z)}`$
$`\overline{𝒢}_{\alpha ^{};n1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`(n1)(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^nF_\alpha ^{}+n(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^{n1}F_{\alpha ^+}`$ (19)
$``$ $`n(n1)(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^{n2}V_\alpha ^{}^{\alpha _1}\left((\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^2E_{\alpha _1}+\gamma ^{\alpha _1}H_1F_{\alpha _1}\right)`$
$`+`$ $`n(n1)(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^{n2}{\displaystyle \underset{\nu ,\sigma >0}{}}\left((\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^2V_{\alpha _1}^\nu +\gamma ^{\alpha _1}V_1^\nu V_{\alpha _1}^\nu \right)_\nu _\sigma V_\alpha ^{}^{\alpha _1}\gamma ^\sigma `$
Their anti-commutators are

$$\{G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2},G_{\beta ^{};m+1/2}\}=0$$
(20)
and

$$\{G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2},\overline{G}_{\beta ^{};m1/2}\}=\delta _{\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}}L_{n+m}+(nm+1)K_{\alpha ^{};\beta ^{};n+m}+\frac{1}{6}cn(n+1)\delta _{n+m,0}\delta _{\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}}$$
(21)
where the primary spin 1 (with respect to (14)) current $`K`$ is defined by

$`K_{\alpha ^{};\beta ^{};n}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}𝒦_{\alpha ^{};\beta ^{};n}(z)}`$
$`𝒦_{\alpha ^{};\beta ^{};n}`$ $`=`$ $`n(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^{n1}V_\beta ^{}^{\alpha _1}\left(\gamma ^{\alpha _1}E_{\alpha ^+}E_\alpha ^{}\right)(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^nf_{\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}}^{}{}_{}{}^{c}J_c`$ (22)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _{\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}}(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^{n1}\left(n\left((\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^2E_{\alpha _1}+\gamma ^{\alpha _1}H_1F_{\alpha _1}\right)\gamma ^{\alpha _1}H_1\right)`$
$`+`$ $`n(\gamma ^{\alpha _1})^{n1}{\displaystyle \underset{\nu ,\sigma >0}{}}\left(\gamma ^{\alpha _1}V_{\alpha ^+}^\nu V_\alpha ^{}^\nu \right)_\nu _\sigma V_\beta ^{}^{\alpha _1}\gamma ^\sigma `$
It was also shown in Ref. , that the remaining anti-commutators are generally non-vanishing:

$$\{\overline{G}_{\alpha ^{};n1/2},\overline{G}_{\beta ^{};m1/2}\}0,\text{for}\alpha ^{}\beta ^{},nm,n+m1$$
(23)
This asymmetric property of the SCAs induced by $`SL(2|N/2)`$ will be illustrated in the following where we consider the case $`N=4`$.

## 3 $`N=4`$ Superconformal Algebras

Here we shall specialize the general considerations on $`SL(2|N/2)`$ in Section 2 to the case $`N=4`$. The resulting SCA is of a new and asymmetric form. Its classical and centerless analogue has recently been obtained in Ref. . Below we shall provide the full SCA for arbitrary central charge. We shall furthermore show that substituting the original $`SL(2|2)`$ by the coset $`SL(2|2)/U(1)`$ reduces the asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA to the well known small $`N=4`$ SCA. An invariance of the asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA is also presented.

### 3.1 Asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA from $`SL(2|2)`$

In the distinguished representation discussed in Appendix A, the Cartan matrix and the Cartan-Killing form of the Lie superalgebra $`SL(2|2)`$ are

$$A_{ij}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill 2& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 2\end{array}\right),\kappa _{i,j}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill 2& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 2\end{array}\right)$$
(24)
The dual Coxeter number is $`h^{}=0`$ while the number of supercurrents is $`2|\mathrm{\Delta }_+^1|=4`$. Accordingly, there are a priori 4 generators, $`K`$, of the internal Kac-Moody algebra. Using these facts, with the explicit realizations of the Virasoro generators (14), the supercurrents (18) and (19), and the affine currents (22) (given in Appendix C), one may work out the entire SCA. We find that closure is ensured by the following set of generators

Virasoro generator $`L`$ $`h=2`$
supercurrents $`G_{\alpha _2},G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3},\overline{G}_{\alpha _2},\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}`$ $`h=3/2`$
$`\text{affine}SL(2)`$ $`\stackrel{~}{E}=K_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;\alpha _2},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{H}=K_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}K_{\alpha _2;\alpha _2},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{F}=K_{\alpha _2;(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}`$ $`h=1`$
$`\text{affine}U(1)`$ $`U=K_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}+K_{\alpha _2;\alpha _2}`$ $`h=1`$
fermions $`\varphi _{\alpha _2},\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}`$ $`h=1/2`$
scalar $`S`$ $`h=0`$ (25)
and that the non-trivial (anti-)commutators are

$`[L_n,L_m]`$ $`=`$ $`(nm)L_{n+m}+{\displaystyle \frac{c}{12}}(n^3n)\delta _{n+m,0}`$
$`[L_n,A_m]`$ $`=`$ $`((h(A)1)nm)A_{n+m}`$
$`\{G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2},G_{\beta ^{};m+1/2}\}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\overline{G}_{\alpha ^{};n1/2},\overline{G}_{\alpha ^{};m1/2}\}=0`$
$`\{G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2},\overline{G}_{\beta ^{};m1/2}\}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}}L_{n+m}+(nm+1)K_{\alpha ^{};\beta ^{};n+m}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}cn(n+1)\delta _{n+m,0}\delta _{\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}}`$
$`\{\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;n1/2},\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}\}`$ $`=`$ $`(nm)(n+m1)S_{n+m1}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\stackrel{~}{E}_m]`$ $`=`$ $`2\stackrel{~}{E}_{n+m},[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\stackrel{~}{F}_m]=2\stackrel{~}{F}_{n+m}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{E}_n,\stackrel{~}{F}_m]`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{H}_{n+m}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}cn\delta _{n+m,0},[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\stackrel{~}{H}_m]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}cn\delta _{n+m,0}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{E}_n,G_{\alpha _2;m+1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;n+m+1/2},[\stackrel{~}{F}_n,G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;m+1/2}]=G_{\alpha _2;n+m+1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,G_{\alpha _2;m+1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`G_{\alpha _2;n+m+1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;m+1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;n+m+1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{E}_n,\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;n+m1/2}n\varphi _{\alpha _2;n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;n+m1/2}+n\varphi _{\alpha _2;n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n+m1/2}n\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{F}_n,\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n+m1/2}n\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n+m1/2}`$
$`[U_n,\overline{G}_{\alpha ^{};m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`n\varphi _{\alpha ^{};n+m1/2}`$
$`[S_n,G_{\alpha _2;m+1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n+m+1/2}`$
$`[S_n,G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;m+1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{\alpha _2;n+m+1/2}`$
$`\{G_{\alpha _2;n+1/2},\varphi _{\alpha _2;m1/2}\}`$ $`=`$ $`U_{n+m},\{G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;n+1/2},\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}\}=U_{n+m}`$
$`\{\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;n1/2},\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}\}`$ $`=`$ $`(n+m1)S_{n+m1}`$
$`\{\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n1/2},\varphi _{\alpha _2;m1/2}\}`$ $`=`$ $`(n+m1)S_{n+m1}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{E}_n,\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{\alpha _2;n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{F}_n,\varphi _{\alpha _2;m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\varphi _{\alpha _2;m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{\alpha _2;n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n+m1/2}`$
$`[U_n,U_m]`$ $`=`$ $`[S_n,S_m]=0`$ (26)
$`A_m`$ denotes any of the 11 generators listed in (25) different from the Virasoro generator. In the derivation we have used that integrating a total derivative gives zero. In particular, we find

$`\{\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;n1/2},\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}\}`$ (27)
$`=`$ $`(nm)(n+m1)\left(S_{n+m1}+{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}\frac{}{z}\left[\gamma ^{n+m2}(z)V_{\alpha _2}^{\alpha _1}(\gamma (z))V_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}^{\alpha _1}(\gamma (z))\right]}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`(nm)(n+m1)S_{n+m1}`$
The polynomials $`V_{\alpha _2}^{\alpha _1}`$ and $`V_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}^{\alpha _1}`$ are given (55) in Appendix C.

It is observed that this $`N=4`$ SCA (26) is a new and asymmetric one not contained in the standard classification of $`N=4`$ SCAs . Besides being asymmetric in the way the $`G`$ and $`\overline{G}`$ supercurrents are treated, it involves the unfamiliar number two of spin 1/2 fermions. We recall that the small $`N=4`$ SCA does not contain any spin 1/2 fermions, whereas the big $`N=4`$ SCAs are characterized by containing 4 such generators.

### 3.2 Small $`N=4`$ SCA from Coset $`SL(2|2)/U(1)`$

Among the Lie superalgebras $`sl(2|M)`$, $`M1`$, $`sl(2|2)`$ is the only one having a non-trivial center. This may be seen easily by considering the associated Cartan matrices; they are all invertible except when $`M=2`$. By simple inspection of the Cartan matrix for $`sl(2|2)`$ (24) it follows that the Lie superalgebra element

$$H_{u(1)}=H_1+2H_2H_3$$
(28)
generates the center $`u(1)`$ of $`sl(2|2)`$. The coset algebra $`sl(2|2)/u(1)`$ may therefore be realized straightforwardly in terms of the generators of the original $`sl(2|2)`$. All that one has to do is to invoke the vanishing of the generator of the center (28), and otherwise make no changes. It should be noted that the root space of the coset algebra is identified with the root space of $`sl(2|2)`$. In particular, the sets of simple roots are identical, despite the fact that the rank of the coset algebra is one smaller than the rank of $`sl(2|2)`$, the latter being $`r=3`$.

The associated affine $`SL(2|2)/U(1)`$ current superalgebra is equally simple to realize. By construction, its Virasoro generator $`T_{SL(2|2)/U(1)}=T_{SL(2|2)}T_{U(1)}`$ has vanishing OPE with the current

$`H_{U(1)}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`H_1(z)+2H_2(z)H_3(z)`$ (29)
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{k}(\phi _1(z)+2\phi _2(z)\phi _3(z))`$
while $`T_{U(1)}`$ has vanishing OPEs with all other affine currents. Thus, it makes sense from the conformal field theory point of view to put the central current (29) equal to zero without modifying the Virasoro generator of the original $`SL(2|2)`$ current superalgebra, but by imposing the (coset) condition

$$\phi _1+2\phi _2\phi _30$$
(30)
In this way the coset current superalgebra has the same free field realization as the original current superalgebra, though subject to the coset condition (30). Thus, at the level of the free field realization the coset condition (30) reflects modding out the $`U(1)`$ center of $`SL(2|2)`$.

From the explicit realization of the generators of the asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA induced by $`SL(2|2)`$ (see Appendix C) it follows that imposing the coset condition (30) has fundamental consequences for the resulting $`N=4`$ SCA. Even the number of generators is reduced as the affine $`U(1)`$ subalgebra generated by $`U`$ (52), the 2 spin 1/2 fermions $`\varphi `$ (53), and the bosonic scalar $`S`$ (54) all vanish identically

$$U_n\varphi _{\alpha _2;n1/2}\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n1/2}S_n0$$
(31)
We conclude that the $`N=4`$ SCA induced by the affine $`SL(2|2)/U(1)`$ current superalgebra is generated by

Virasoro generator $`L`$ $`h=2`$
supercurrents $`G_{\alpha _2},G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3},\overline{G}_{\alpha _2},\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}`$ $`h=3/2`$
$`\text{affine}SL(2)`$ $`\stackrel{~}{E}=K_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;\alpha _2},`$ (32)
$`\stackrel{~}{H}=K_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}K_{\alpha _2;\alpha _2},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{F}=K_{\alpha _2;(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}`$ $`h=1`$
where $`U=K_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}+K_{\alpha _2;\alpha _2}=0`$. The non-trivial (anti-)commutators are

$`[L_n,L_m]`$ $`=`$ $`(nm)L_{n+m}+{\displaystyle \frac{c}{12}}(n^3n)\delta _{n+m,0}`$
$`[L_n,A_m]`$ $`=`$ $`((h(A)1)nm)A_{n+m}`$
$`\{G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2},G_{\beta ^{};m+1/2}\}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\overline{G}_{\alpha ^{};n1/2},\overline{G}_{\beta ^{};m1/2}\}=0`$
$`\{G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2},\overline{G}_{\beta ^{};m1/2}\}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}}L_{n+m}+(nm+1)K_{\alpha ^{};\beta ^{};n+m}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}cn(n+1)\delta _{n+m,0}\delta _{\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{E}_n,G_{\alpha _2;m+1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;n+m+1/2},[\stackrel{~}{F}_n,G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;m+1/2}]=G_{\alpha _2;n+m+1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,G_{\alpha _2;m+1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`G_{\alpha _2;n+m+1/2},[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;m+1/2}]=G_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;n+m+1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{E}_n,\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{F}_n,\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{G}_{\alpha _2;n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);m1/2}]`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{G}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n+m1/2}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\stackrel{~}{E}_m]`$ $`=`$ $`2\stackrel{~}{E}_{n+m},[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\stackrel{~}{F}_m]=2\stackrel{~}{F}_{n+m}`$
$`[\stackrel{~}{E}_n,\stackrel{~}{F}_m]`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{H}_{n+m}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}cn\delta _{n+m,0},[\stackrel{~}{H}_n,\stackrel{~}{H}_m]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}cn\delta _{n+m,0}`$ (33)
$`A_m`$ denotes any of the 7 generators listed in (32) different from the Virasoro generator. The SCA (33) is recognized as the well known small $`N=4`$ SCA thus proving our assertion.

### 3.3 An Invariance and a Reduction

It turns out that the new and asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA possesses an invariance which may be revealed by considering the consequences of modifying the Virasoro generators according to

$$L_n^\lambda =L_n+\lambda (n+1)U_n$$
(34)
with $`\lambda `$ arbitrary. The Virasoro algebra is easily seen to be generated with unchanged central charge

$$c^\lambda =c$$
(35)
We find that the asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA (26) is invariant under the following one-parameter twist of its generators

$`L_n^\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`L_n+\lambda (n+1)U_n`$
$`G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2}^\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2}`$
$`\overline{G}_{\alpha ^{};n1/2}^\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`\overline{G}_{\alpha ^{};n1/2}+2\lambda n\varphi _{\alpha ^{};n1/2}`$
$`K_{\alpha ^{};\beta ^{};n}^\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`K_{\alpha ^{};\beta ^{};n}\lambda \delta _{\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}}U_n`$
$`\varphi _{\alpha ^{};n1/2}^\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`(12\lambda )\varphi _{\alpha ^{};n1/2}`$
$`S_n^\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`(12\lambda )S_n`$ (36)
In particular, the 11 generators besides $`L^\lambda `$ are all primary of unchanged weights

$$[L_n^\lambda ,A_m^\lambda ]=((h(A)1)nm)A_{n+m}^\lambda $$
(37)
It should be mentioned that one may obtain the twisted supercurrents by following the exact same procedure which leads to the construction of the untwisted supercurrents, see Ref. . In particular, we have the relations

$`[L_n^\lambda ,{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}E_\alpha ^{}}]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(n1)G_{\alpha ^{};n+1/2}^\lambda `$
$`[L_n^\lambda ,{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}F_\alpha ^{}}]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(n+1)\overline{G}_{\alpha ^{};n1/2}^\lambda `$ (38)
The remaining twisted generators may of course be found by working out the relevant (anti-)commutators of twisted generators already obtained, and requiring the algebra to be invariant. For the $`K`$ generators, let us write out the result of the twisting (36)

$`\stackrel{~}{E}_n^\lambda =\stackrel{~}{E}_n,`$ $`\stackrel{~}{H}_n^\lambda =\stackrel{~}{H}_n,`$ $`\stackrel{~}{F}_n^\lambda =\stackrel{~}{F}_n`$ (39)
$`U_n^\lambda =(12\lambda )U_n`$
We observe that for the unique value

$$\lambda =1/2$$
(40)
twisting (36) is not an invariance but rather a reduction. The 4 generators $`U^{\lambda =1/2}`$, $`\varphi _\alpha ^{}^{\lambda =1/2}`$ and $`S^{\lambda =1/2}`$ all vanish identically, and the resulting SCA is instead the small $`N=4`$ SCA.

So far we have not addressed the question of BRST invariance of our construction of the $`N=4`$ SCAs. As pointed out in Ref. , BRST invariance of the construction of the space-time conformal algebra based on a world sheet $`SL(2)`$ current algebra, is equivalent to requiring the Virasoro generators to be primary fields of weight one with respect to the world sheet energy-momentum tensor, ensuring that the integrated fields commute with the world sheet Virasoro algebra. This carries over to the superconformal case where all the generators are required to be integrated spin one primary fields with respect to the world sheet Virasoro algebra. In Ref.  we have shown that all the generators of the $`SL(2|2)`$ induced SCA are indeed BRST invariant. Since the twisted generators (36) are linear combinations of those fields, they are themselves BRST invariant. The generators of the small $`N=4`$ SCA induced by the coset $`SL(2|2)/U(1)`$ in Section 3.2, are also BRST invariant. This follows immediately, as the construction is based on the same free field realization as the original $`SL(2|2)`$, the only (and in this respect trivial) difference being the coset condition (30).

## 4 Conclusion

We believe that the general construction of SCAs outlined in Ref.  (and indicated in Ref. ) is interesting from a mathematical as well as from a string theoretical point of view. A mathematical or conformal field theoretical interest lies in the fact that besides providing new realizations of well known SCAs, the construction also produces whole new classes of SCAs. An additional virtue is that the SCAs are realized explicitly. The asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA discussed in the present paper is an example of such a new SCA. There are also convincing indications that new bosonic extensions of the Virasoro algebra may be obtained using a modification of the construction. This will be the subject of a forthcoming publication.

The construction is interesting from the string theoretical point of view, as it produces the unique boundary SCA associated to a string theory on $`AdS_3`$ with a certain affine Lie supergroup symmetry. As already pointed out, this pertains to Lie supergroups with $`SL(2)G^{}`$ decomposable bosonic subgroups. Due to the recently discovered $`AdS`$/CFT correspondence, the question of determining which superconformal field theory is associated to which string theory has become increasingly relevant. We hope that our work will add to the understanding of this.
Acknowledgment
The author thanks Spenta Wadia and Mark Walton for comments. The author is also grateful to The Niels Bohr Institute, where part of this work was done, for its kind hospitality. He is supported in part by NSERC of Canada.

## Appendix A Lie Superalgebra $`sl(2|M)`$

The root space of the Lie superalgebra $`sl(2|M)`$ in the distinguished representation may be realized in terms of an orthonormal two-dimensional basis $`\{ϵ_1,ϵ_2\}`$ and an orthonormal $`M`$-dimensional basis $`\left\{\delta _u\right\}_{u=1,\mathrm{},M}`$ with metrics

$$ϵ_\iota ϵ_\iota ^{}=\delta _{\iota ,\iota ^{}},\delta _u\delta _u^{}=\delta _{u,u^{}},ϵ_\iota \delta _u=0$$
(41)
The $`\frac{1}{2}(M+1)(M+2)`$ positive roots are then represented as

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_+^0`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{ϵ_1ϵ_2\right\}\left\{\delta _u\delta _v\right|u<v\}`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_+^{1+}`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{ϵ_1\delta _u\right|u=1,\mathrm{},M\}`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_+^1`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{ϵ_2\delta _u\right|u=1,\mathrm{},M\}`$ (42)
where the $`M+1`$ simple roots $`\alpha _i`$ are

$`\alpha _1`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_1ϵ_2`$
$`\alpha _2`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_2\delta _1`$
$`\alpha _{u+2}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _u\delta _{u+1}`$ (43)
The associated ladder operators $`E_\alpha `$ and $`F_\alpha `$, and the Cartan generators $`H_i`$ admit a standard oscillator realization (see e.g. )

$`E_{ϵ_1ϵ_2}=a_1^{}a_2,`$ $`E_{ϵ_\iota \delta _u}=a_\iota ^{}b_u,`$ $`E_{\delta _u\delta _v}=b_u^{}b_v`$
$`F_{ϵ_1ϵ_2}=a_2^{}a_1,`$ $`F_{ϵ_\iota \delta _u}=b_u^{}a_\iota ,`$ $`F_{\delta _u\delta _v}=b_v^{}b_u`$
$`H_1=a_1^{}a_1a_2^{}a_2,`$ $`H_2=a_2^{}a_2+b_1^{}b_1,`$ $`H_{u+2}=b_u^{}b_ub_{u+1}^{}b_{u+1}`$ (44)
where $`a_\iota ^{()}`$ and $`b_u^{()}`$ are fermionic and bosonic oscillators, respectively, satisfying

$$\{a_\iota ,a_\iota ^{}^{}\}=\delta _{\iota ,\iota ^{}},[b_u,b_v^{}]=\delta _{u,v},[b_u^{()},a_\iota ^{()}]=0$$
(45)
## Appendix B Free Field Realization of Affine $`SL(2|2)`$ Current Superalgebra

In this appendix we shall provide the explicit free field realization of the affine $`SL(2|2)`$ current superalgebra that is discussed in Section 2. Recall that the only bosonic ghost fields are $`\gamma ^{\alpha _1},\gamma ^{\alpha _3},\beta _{\alpha _1},\beta _{\alpha _3}`$. Let us introduce the abbreviations $`\gamma ^1,\gamma ^{23},\beta _{123},\mathrm{}`$ for the ghost fields $`\gamma ^{\alpha _1},\gamma ^{\alpha _2+\alpha _3},\beta _{\alpha _1+\alpha _2+\alpha _3},\mathrm{}`$. The free field realization is

$`E_{\alpha _1}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\beta _{12}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^3\gamma ^{23}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$`E_{\alpha _2}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\beta _{12}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^3\beta _{23}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^3\beta _{123}`$
$`E_{\alpha _3}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\beta _{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$`E_{\alpha _1+\alpha _2}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _{12}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^3\beta _{123}`$
$`E_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\beta _{123}`$
$`E_{\alpha _1+\alpha _2+\alpha _3}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _{123}`$
$`H_1`$ $`=`$ $`2\gamma ^1\beta _1+\gamma ^2\beta _2\gamma ^{12}\beta _{12}+\gamma ^{23}\beta _{23}\gamma ^{123}\beta _{123}+\sqrt{k}\phi _1`$
$`H_2`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma ^1\beta _1\gamma ^3\beta _3+\gamma ^{12}\beta _{12}\gamma ^{23}\beta _{23}+\sqrt{k}\phi _2`$
$`H_3`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma ^2\beta _22\gamma ^3\beta _3+\gamma ^{12}\beta _{12}\gamma ^{23}\beta _{23}\gamma ^{123}\beta _{123}+\sqrt{k}\phi _3`$
$`F_{\alpha _1}`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^2\beta _1+\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _{12}`$
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{23}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$`+`$ $`\gamma ^1\sqrt{k}\phi _1+(k1)\gamma ^1`$
$`F_{\alpha _2}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _1\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^3\gamma ^{23}\right)\beta _3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\beta _{12}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}\beta _{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^2\left(\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3\right)\beta _{123}+\gamma ^2\sqrt{k}\phi _2+k\gamma ^2`$
$`F_{\alpha _3}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{23}\right)\beta _2(\gamma ^3)^2\beta _3\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{12}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^3\gamma ^{23}\right)\beta _{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$`+`$ $`\gamma ^3\sqrt{k}\phi _3(k+1)\gamma ^3`$
$`F_{\alpha _1+\alpha _2}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma ^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\beta _2`$
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _3`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{23}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{5}{12}}(\gamma ^1)^2\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{123}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}+\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+\gamma ^{12}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _1\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _2`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{6k11}{12}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^1{\displaystyle \frac{3k+1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+\left(k1/2\right)\gamma ^{12}`$
$`F_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _1+\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}\beta _2`$
$``$ $`\gamma ^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^3\gamma ^{23}\right)\beta _3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{12}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{12}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}(\gamma ^3)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^{123}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{23}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^3\gamma ^{23}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _3`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3k1}{6}}\gamma ^3\gamma ^2{\displaystyle \frac{6k+11}{12}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+(k+1/2)\gamma ^{23}`$
$`F_{\alpha _1+\alpha _2+\alpha _3}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma ^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _1`$ (46)
$``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}\right)\beta _2`$
$`+`$ $`\gamma ^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _3`$
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(\gamma ^1)^2\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{12}`$
$``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}(\gamma ^3)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{23}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{123}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _1`$
$``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{123}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _2`$
$``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{123}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _3`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2k5}{12}}\gamma ^2\gamma ^3\gamma ^1+{\displaystyle \frac{k2}{2}}\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^1{\displaystyle \frac{k}{3}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^3\gamma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2k+5}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k+2}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{k1}{2}}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{12}{\displaystyle \frac{k+1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+k\gamma ^{123}`$
## Appendix C Generators of Asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA

For completeness and reference, below are listed explicit free field realizations of the integrands $`𝒜_n`$ of the generators $`A_n`$ (25) of the asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA

$$A=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}𝒜_n(z)$$
(47)
The realizations are obtained by inserting the results of Appendix B in the general expressions for the generators provided in Section 3. The realizations of $`\varphi _{\alpha _2}`$, $`\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}`$ and $`S`$ may be obtained by working out explicitly the relevant (anti-)commutators of the asymmetric $`N=4`$ SCA (26).

The Virasoro generator is realized as

$`_n`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n+1}\beta _1{\displaystyle \frac{n+1}{2}}(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+n\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _2`$ (48)
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\left({\displaystyle \frac{n(n3)}{8}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2n2}{4}}\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _{12}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{n+1}{2}}(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}n\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{23}`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n({\displaystyle \frac{n(n1)}{24}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{n(n3)}{8}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n+1)}{24}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(n+1)(n2)}{4}}\gamma ^{123})\beta _{123}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(n+1)(\gamma ^1)^n\sqrt{k}\phi _1`$
Here and throughout Appendix C we have taken advantage of the fact that terms proportional to $`n(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\gamma ^1`$ vanish upon integration. They are not included in the expressions for the integrands. The supercurrents are realized as

$`𝒢_{\alpha _2;n+1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\left((n+1)\beta _2{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{2}}\gamma ^1\beta _{12}{\displaystyle \frac{n+1}{2}}\gamma ^3\beta _{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{2n1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^3\beta _{123}\right)`$
$`𝒢_{\alpha _2+\alpha _3;n+1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\left((n+1)\beta _{23}{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{2}}\gamma ^1\beta _{123}\right)`$ (49)
and

$`\overline{𝒢}_{\alpha _2;n1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _1n(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\beta _2`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2n3}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}n\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3n\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _3`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{2}}(\gamma ^1)^n\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\beta _{12}`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n2}({\displaystyle \frac{n^22}{4}}(\gamma ^1)^2\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n+2)}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3\gamma ^{12}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n1)}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{123}+n(n1)\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{123})\beta _{23}`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}({\displaystyle \frac{n^24}{24}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{3n^24n4}{24}}(\gamma ^1)^2\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n2)}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{(3n4)n}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{123}+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n2)}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{123})\beta _{123}`$
$`+`$ $`n(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+\gamma ^{12}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _1`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+n\gamma ^{12}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _2`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(6kn3n8)n}{12}}(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\gamma ^2\gamma ^1+(k1/2)(n^2n)(\gamma ^1)^{n2}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^1`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(3n6)kn}{6}}(\gamma ^1)^n\gamma ^2+(k1/2)n(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\gamma ^{12}`$
$`\overline{𝒢}_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _1`$ (50)
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n2}({\displaystyle \frac{n(n7)}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2+n4}{4}}(\gamma ^1)^2\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n+1)}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n1)}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{123}+n(n1)\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{123})\beta _2`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\gamma ^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{2n3}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3n\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _3`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}({\displaystyle \frac{n^29n+6}{24}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2n2}{8}}(\gamma ^1)^2\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n1)}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n^23n+2}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{123}+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n3)}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{123})\beta _{12}`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n2}({\displaystyle \frac{n(n+5)}{24}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}(\gamma ^3)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n1)}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^3`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n1)}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3\gamma ^{123}+{\displaystyle \frac{(3n1)n}{24}}(\gamma ^1)^2\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^3`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n1)}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{123}+n\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^{123})\beta _{23}`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}({\displaystyle \frac{2n^2+7n15}{72}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^{12}(\gamma ^3)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2n^2n3}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^3`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2n^23n+1}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3\gamma ^{123}+{\displaystyle \frac{2n^2n3}{24}}(\gamma ^1)^2\gamma ^2\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^3`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n(n1)}{3}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{123}+{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}\gamma ^{123})\beta _{123}`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+n\gamma ^{123}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _1`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n3}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+n\gamma ^{123}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _2`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2n3}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3n\gamma ^{123}\right)\sqrt{k}\phi _3`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n2}({\displaystyle \frac{(4kn3n7)n}{24}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{(3k2)n(n1)}{6}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(2knn3)n}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+(k1/2)n(n1)\gamma ^{123})\gamma ^1`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{knn+1}{6}}(\gamma ^1)^n\gamma ^3\gamma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{(k1)n}{2}}(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\gamma ^3\gamma ^{12}`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{8kn12k+n^2+11n22}{24}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{(6k+n+11)n}{12}}\gamma ^{12}\right)\gamma ^3`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{kn2k1}{2}}(\gamma ^1)^n\gamma ^{23}+kn(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\gamma ^{123}`$
The affine $`SL(2)`$ current subalgebra is realized as

$`\stackrel{~}{}_n`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\beta _3(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n+1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+n\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _{23}`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\left({\displaystyle \frac{3n1}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$`\stackrel{~}{}_n`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n+2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+n\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _22(\gamma ^1)^n\gamma ^3\beta _3`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\right)\beta _{12}`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{5n}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n+2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+n\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+n\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{23}`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{7n}{12}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\sqrt{k}\phi _3`$
$`\stackrel{~}{}_n`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n+3}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n+2}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+n\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _2`$ (51)
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n(\gamma ^3)^2\beta _3`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\left({\displaystyle \frac{n+1}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{4}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{12}`$
$`+`$ $`(\gamma ^1)^{n1}\gamma ^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{n3}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n+2}{4}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{4}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{23}`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\gamma ^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{18}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{2n+1}{12}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{2n+3}{12}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{2n3}{6}}\gamma ^{123}\right)\beta _{123}`$
$``$ $`(\gamma ^1)^n\gamma ^3\sqrt{k}\phi _3+\left(k+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{12}}+1\right)(\gamma ^1)^n\gamma ^3`$
whereas the $`U(1)`$ generator is

$$U_n=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}(\gamma ^1)^n\sqrt{k}(\phi _12\phi _2+\phi _3)$$
(52)
The remaining 2 fermionic spin 1/2 generators and the bosonic scalar are

$`\varphi _{\alpha _2;n1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}(\gamma ^1)^{n1}V_{\alpha _2}^{\alpha _1}\sqrt{k}(\phi _12\phi _2+\phi _3)}`$
$`\varphi _{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3);n1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}(\gamma ^1)^{n1}V_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}^{\alpha _1}\sqrt{k}(\phi _12\phi _2+\phi _3)}`$ (53)
and

$$S_n=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}(\gamma ^1)^{n1}V_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}^{\alpha _1}V_{\alpha _2}^{\alpha _1}\sqrt{k}(\phi _12\phi _2+\phi _3)$$
(54)
According to (46), the polynomials $`V_{\alpha _2}^{\alpha _1}`$ and $`V_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}^{\alpha _1}`$ are

$`V_{\alpha _2}^{\alpha _1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2+\gamma ^{12}`$
$`V_{(\alpha _2+\alpha _3)}^{\alpha _1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^1\gamma ^{23}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\gamma ^{12}\gamma ^3+\gamma ^{123}`$ (55)


format: text

text:
# Correlation functions of chiral primary operators in perturbative 𝒩=4 SYM

## 1 Introduction

Recently much evidence has been provided in testing the conjectured equivalence of type $`IIB`$ superstring theory on anti-de-Sitter space ($`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$) times a five–sphere to the $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetric $`SU(N)`$ Yang-Mills conformal field theory living on the boundary, in the large-$`N`$ limit and at large ’t Hooft coupling $`\lambda =g^2N/4\pi `$ ($`g^2`$ being the Yang-Mills coupling constant) . According to this correspondence correlation functions of operators in the conformal field theory are mapped to appropriate on-shell amplitudes of superstring theory in the bulk AdS background.
$`𝒩=4`$ chiral primary operators

$$\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^k\mathrm{Tr}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^{\{i_1}(z)\mathrm{\Phi }^{i_2}(z)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Phi }^{i_k\}}(z)\right),$$
(1)
in the symmetric, traceless representation of the R-symmetry group $`SU(4)`$, play a special role in exploring non-perturbative statements concerning the above mentioned connection. These are local operators of the lowest scaling dimension in a given irreducible representation of the superconformal algebra $`SU(2,2|4)`$, and belong to short multiplets which are chiral under a $`𝒩=1`$ subalgebra. In the large-$`N`$ limit they correspond to Kaluza Klein modes in the AdS supergravity sector. In the special case of $`k=2`$, two- and three-point correlators are given by their free-field theory values for any finite $`N`$. In this case their form, fixed up to a constant by conformal invariance, is protected by a nonrenormalization theorem  valid for two- and three-point functions of operators in the same multiplet as the stress tensor and as the $`SU(4)`$ flavor currents.

For any strong-weak coupling duality test it is essential to have quantities that do not acquire radiative corrections as one moves from weak to strong coupling. If an exact computation in the supergravity sector shows agreement with a tree level result in the Yang-Mills sector, then there is an indication of a nonrenormalization theorem at work. This is the case for the three–point correlators $`\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^{k_1}\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^{k_2}\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^{k_3}`$ computed in ref.  in the large-$`N`$ limit of $`𝒩=4`$ $`SU(N)`$ Yang-Mills: the strong limit result $`\lambda =g^2N/4\pi 1`$ obtained using type $`IIB`$ supergravity was shown to agree with the weak ’t Hooft coupling limit $`\lambda =g^2N/4\pi 1`$ in terms of free fields. According to the AdS/CFT correspondence one concludes that the correlators are independent of $`\lambda `$ to leading order in $`N`$. A stronger conjecture made in ref.  claims that three-point functions might be independent of $`g`$ for *any* value of $`N`$. As emphasized above, for the case $`k=2`$ nonrenormalization properties have been proven to be enjoyed by two- and three-point functions of chiral operators. For general $`k`$ there exists evidence of nonrenormalization based on proofs that rely on reasonable assumptions (analyticity in harmonic superspace  and validity of a generalized Adler-Bardeen theorem ).

Explicit perturbative calculations in the $`𝒩=4`$ $`SU(N)`$ Yang-Mills conformal field theory are a way to confirm the conjectures and add insights into potential larger symmetries of the theory. Important steps along this program have been made in . In particular, it has been shown that to order $`g^2`$ radiative corrections do not affect the two- and three-point functions of chiral operators . Two-point functions have been computed for chiral operators with generic $`k`$ by showing that the order $`g^2`$ contributions are proportional to the one for the $`k=2`$ case which indeed satisfies the known nonrenormalization theorem mentioned above. Concretely, the cancellation to order $`g^2`$ can be traced back to the fact that at this order all the diagrams contain interactions involving at most two matter lines. Clearly this is not true, for example, at order $`g^4`$, where diagrams with gluon exchanges among three matter lines appear. Therefore, it is interesting to investigate whether the cancellation shown in  for the $`k>2`$ case is an accident of order $`g^2`$.

In our paper  we have addressed the nontrivial test left open at order $`g^4`$, by computing the two-point function for the operator $`\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^k`$ in the case $`k=3`$. The analysis for generic $`k`$ is now under investigation . However, as already mentioned, at order $`g^4`$ the $`k=3`$ case is a crucial test, being diagrams with interactions involving three matter lines present. We have found that corrections indeed vanish for *all* values of $`N`$, then supporting the stronger conjecture of ref. .

## 2 The main features of our calculation

The physical particle content of $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory is given by one spin-$`1`$ vector, four spin-$`1/2`$ Majorana spinors and six spin-$`0`$ particles in the $`\mathrm{𝟔}`$ of the R-symmetry group $`SU(4)SO(6)`$. All particles are massless and transform under the adjoint representation of the $`SU(N)`$ gauge group.

Perturbative calculations are quite difficult to handle using a component field formulation of the theory. (Note that in ref.  a component approach was used, but the order $`g^2`$ result for the two- and three-point correlators was obtained using a general argumentation based on colour combinatorics. Only a schematic knowledge of the structure of the component action was required.) In general, in order to resum Feynman diagrams at higher-loop orders it is greatly advantageous to work in superspace.

In $`𝒩=1`$ superspace the action can be written in terms of one vector superfield $`V`$ (real) and three chiral superfields $`\mathrm{\Phi }^i`$ containing the six scalars organized into the $`\mathrm{𝟑}\times \overline{\mathrm{𝟑}}`$ of $`SU(3)SU(4)`$ (we follow the notations in )

$`S[J,\overline{J}]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^8z\mathrm{Tr}\left(e^{gV}\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_ie^{gV}\mathrm{\Phi }^i\right)}`$ (2)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g^2}}{\displaystyle d^6z\mathrm{Tr}W^\alpha W_\alpha }`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{ig}{3!}}\mathrm{Tr}{\displaystyle d^6zϵ_{ijk}\mathrm{\Phi }^i[\mathrm{\Phi }^j,\mathrm{\Phi }^k]}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{ig}{3!}}\mathrm{Tr}{\displaystyle d^6\overline{z}ϵ_{ijk}\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}^i[\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}^j,\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}^k]}`$
$`+{\displaystyle d^6zJ𝒪}+{\displaystyle d^6\overline{z}\overline{J}\overline{𝒪}},`$
where $`W_\alpha =i\overline{D}^2(e^{gV}D_\alpha e^{gV})`$, and $`V=V^aT^a`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i=\mathrm{\Phi }_i^aT^a`$, $`T^a`$ being $`N\times N`$ matrices in the fundamental representation of $`SU(N)`$. We have added to the classical action source terms for the chiral primary operators generically denoted by $`𝒪`$ since our goal is the computation of their correlators.

Although in (2) the $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry invariance is realized only non linearly, the main advantage offered by a $`𝒩=1`$ formulation of the theory resides in the fact that a straightforward off-shell quantum formulation is available. Thus if the aim is to perform higher-loop perturbative calculations this is the most suited approach to follow. Feynman rules are by now standard (we refer to appendix B of  for a complete list).

We will now focus on the two-point super-correlator for the operator $`𝒪=\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Phi }^{\{i}\mathrm{\Phi }^j\mathrm{\Phi }^{k\}})`$. As in ref. , we consider the $`SU(3)`$ highest weight $`\mathrm{\Phi }^1`$ field and compute $`\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Phi }^1)^3\mathrm{Tr}(\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}^1)^3`$. This is not a restrictive choice since all the other primary chiral correlators can be obtained from this one by $`SU(3)`$ transformations. What we gain is that we have no flavour combinatorics and we are left to deal with the colour combinatorics only.

We work in euclidean space, with the generating functional defined as

$$W[J,\overline{J}]=𝒟\mathrm{\Phi }𝒟\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}𝒟Ve^{S[J,\overline{J}]}.$$
(3)
Thus the two-point function is given by

$$\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Phi }^1)^3(z_1)\mathrm{Tr}(\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}^1)^3(z_2)=\frac{\delta ^2W}{\delta J(z_1)\delta \overline{J}(z_2)}|_{J,\overline{J}=0}$$
(4)
where $`z(x,\theta ,\overline{\theta })`$. We use perturbation theory to evaluate the contributions to $`W[J,\overline{J}]`$ which are quadratic in the sources, i.e. of the form

$$d^4x_1d^4x_2d^4\theta J(x_1,\theta ,\overline{\theta })\frac{F(g^2,N)}{(x_1x_2)^6}\overline{J}(x_2,\theta ,\overline{\theta }),$$
(5)
where the $`x`$-dependence of the result is fixed by the conformal invariance of the theory, and the function $`F(g^2,N)`$ is what we want to determine up to order $`g^4`$. We will find a result valid for any $`N`$.

In order to perform the calculation we have found it convenient to work in momentum space, using dimensional regularization and minimal subtraction scheme. In $`n`$ dimensions, with $`n=42ϵ`$, the Fourier transform of the power factor $`(x_1x_2)^6`$ in (5) is given by

$$\frac{1}{(x^2)^3}=\frac{\pi ^{2+ϵ}}{64}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3)}d^np\frac{e^{ipx}}{(p^2)^{1ϵ}}.$$
(6)
The presence of the singular factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)1/ϵ`$ signals, in momentum space and in dimensional regularization, the UV divergence of the correlation function in (5) associated to the short-distance behaviour for $`x_1x_2`$. It follows that performing perturbative calculations in momentum space it is sufficient to look for all the contributions to (5) that behave like $`1/ϵ`$, therefore disregarding finite contributions. In fact, once the divergent terms are determined at a given order in $`g`$, using (6) one can reconstruct an $`x`$-space structure as in (5) with a non-vanishing contribution to $`F(g^2,N)`$. Finite contributions in momentum space would correspond in $`x`$-space to terms proportional to $`ϵ`$ which give rise only to contact terms .

The one stated above is the basic rule of our strategy that we can summarize as follows:

* consider all the two-point diagrams from $`W[J,\overline{J}]`$ with $`J`$ and $`\overline{J}`$ on the external legs,
* evaluate all the factors coming from combinatorics of the diagram and compute the colour structure,
* perform the superspace $`D`$-algebra following standard techniques,
* reduce the result to a multi-loop momentum integral,
* compute its $`1/ϵ`$ divergent contribution.

This last step, i.e. the calculation of the divergent part of the various integrals we have achieved using the method of uniqueness  and various rules and identities  that we have collected in appendix B of . Since the theory is at its conformal point, it is not affected by IR divergences. Therefore, even if we work in a massless regularization scheme, we never worry about the IR behavior of our integrals. Moreover, since the theory is finite, the diagrams that we consider do not possess UV divergent subdiagrams. Finally, as a general remark we observe that gauge-fixing the classical action requires the introduction of corresponding Yang-Mills ghosts. However they only couple to the vector multiplet and do not enter our specific calculation.

In the next section we will apply the general procedure just described to the analysis of the two-point function $`\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Phi }^1)^k\mathrm{Tr}(\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}^1)^k`$ with $`k=3`$ to order $`g^4`$.

## 3 Correlation functions to order $`g^4`$

Before coming to our main calculation, the $`k=3`$ case, we will first sketch how our formalism works in a simpler case, the order $`g^4`$ calculation of the two-point correlator with $`k=2`$. As previously discussed, in this case we already know that perturbative corrections should not be there: this simpler calculation is then a non trivial test of our techniques.

The two-point correlator we are interested in is obtained from $`W[J,\overline{J}]`$ inserting in the action (2) the chiral operators $`𝒪=\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Phi }^1)^2`$ and $`\overline{𝒪}=\mathrm{Tr}(\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}^1)^2`$. As outlined in the previous section, the relevant contribution is obtained from the generating functional isolating terms of the form

$$d^4x_1d^4x_2d^4\theta J(x_1,\theta ,\overline{\theta })\frac{E(g^2,N)}{(x_1x_2)^4}\overline{J}(x_2,\theta ,\overline{\theta }).$$
(7)
The general form of (7) is fixed by conformal invariance, while the function $`E(g^2,N)`$ is the unknown to be determined. Fourier transforming from $`x`$-space to momentum space

$$\frac{1}{(x^2)^2}=\frac{\pi ^{2+ϵ}}{16}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(ϵ)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2)}d^np\frac{e^{ipx}}{(p^2)^ϵ}$$
(8)
makes it clear that non-trivial contributions to the generating functional are given by the divergent part of our Feynman diagrams.

To start with we consider the tree-level contribution corresponding to the graph in figure 1. The calculation in this case is very simple : its contribution to the two-point function is given by

$$\frac{1}{(4\pi )^2}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}(N^21)\frac{1}{ϵ}d^4pd^4\theta J(p,\theta ,\overline{\theta })\overline{J}(p,\theta ,\overline{\theta }).$$
(9)
The order $`g^2`$ contribution, once evaluated in superspace gives immediately a zero result: the diagrams one would need to consider are shown in figure 2. Diagram 2$`a`$ does not contribute since the one-loop correction to the chiral propagator vanishes due to a complete cancellation between vector and chiral loops . Diagram 2$`b`$, after completion of the $`D`$-algebra leads to a finite momentum integral.

Now we consider the order $`g^4`$ contributions: they are shown in figure 3.

In figure 3$`a`$ we have the insertion of a two-loop propagator correction, while in figure 3$`b`$ a one-loop vertex correction appears . Note that a diagram with a vector propagator corrected at order $`g^2`$ is absent since at one-loop order there is a complete cancellation among chiral, vector and ghost contributions .

The graph in figure 3$`a`$ is easy to compute: with an overall factor

$`{\displaystyle \frac{16}{(4\pi )^6}}g^4N^2(N^21)`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }d^4pd^4\theta J(p,\theta ,\overline{\theta })\overline{J}(p,\theta ,\overline{\theta })`$ (10)
one obtains the following divergent contribution

$$\mathrm{figure}\text{3}a\zeta (3)\frac{1}{ϵ}.$$
(11)
For figure 3$`b`$, with the same overall factor as in (10), one obtains

$$\mathrm{figure}\text{3}b\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\zeta (3)\frac{1}{ϵ}.$$
(12)
A rather straightforward computation of the $`D`$-algebra for the diagrams in figures 3$`c`$3$`d`$ and 3$`e`$ allows to conclude that the corresponding momentum integrals are actually all finite and, as previously observed, not relevant for our purpose.

Finally, for the graphs in figure 3$`f`$ and in figure 3$`g`$, factoring out the same overall quantity we have

$$\mathrm{figure}\text{3}f\frac{1}{2}\zeta (3)\frac{1}{ϵ},$$
(13)
and

$$\mathrm{figure}\text{3}g\frac{1}{2}\zeta (3)\frac{1}{ϵ}.$$
(14)
It is a trivial matter to sum up the contributions listed in (11), (12), (13) and (14) and obtain a vanishing result, as expected from the nonrenormalization theorem.

We note that the diagrams in figures 3$`f`$ and 3$`g`$ lead to planar contributions, i.e. with exactly the same $`N`$ dependence from colour combinatorics as the other diagrams (the $`N`$ dependence is the one shown in the common overall factor (10)): indeed to this order nonplanar diagrams are absent. In the $`k=3`$ case we will be confronted with a more complicated situation.

Let us now come to the computation of the two-point function for the chiral operator $`𝒪=\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Phi }^1)^3`$. To this end we go back to (5) and compute the perturbative contributions to the function $`F(g^2,N)`$. As previously emphasized, making use of (6) we write Feynman diagrams in momentum space and isolate the $`1/ϵ`$ poles.

In figure 4 we have drawn the tree-level contribution. With an overall factor

$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{(4\pi )^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{(N^21)(N^24)}{N}}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }d^4pd^4\theta J(p,\theta ,\overline{\theta })\overline{J}(p,\theta ,\overline{\theta })`$ (15)
we obtain

$$\mathrm{figure}\text{4}\frac{1}{4ϵ}p^2.$$
(16)
The result in $`x`$-space is readily recovered using formula (6).

The superspace diagrams that enter the order $`g^2`$ computation are shown in figure 5. They are nothing but the ones that appear in figure 2 with one line added from the chiral external vertices. One proves that their contributions vanish with exactly the same reasoning outlined previously. As found in ref.  to order $`g^2`$ the vanishing of the correlator is due to the fact that it is proportional to the correlator of $`𝒪=\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Phi }^1)^2`$ for which the nonrenormalization theorem is valid. However, this is no longer true at order $`g^4`$ to which we turn now.

The diagrams contributing to $`g^4`$-order are collected in figure 6. The ones in figure 6$`a`$6$`g`$ are the same as in figure 3 with one extra line added from the chiral external vertices. From the result obtained in the previous case at order $`g^4`$, we would be tempted to believe that these diagrams still sum up to zero. However this would be a wrong conclusion. In fact, what makes things different is that in 6$`f`$ and 6$`g`$ the addition of the extra line changes completely the topology of the diagrams which become really *nonplanar*. As a consequence, their colour combinatorics changes and their $`N`$-dependence is distinct from the remaining planar diagrams 6$`a`$– 6$`e`$. More specifically, in this case it turns out that the nonplanar diagrams 6$`f`$ and 6$`g`$ lead to a vanishing colour combinatorics factor.

The evaluation of the colour coefficient for the other nonplanar diagram in figure 6$`h`$ reveals again a vanishing contribution. The fact that the nonplanar diagrams do not contribute indicates that the final answer is going to be valid for all values of $`N`$, independently of any large-$`N`$ limit. In light of this result it becomes challenging to prove the cancellation of nonplanar diagrams to all orders in the Yang-Mills coupling. Moreover it is natural to ask if this mechanism of cancellation is still valid for two-point correlation functions of the form $`\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Phi }^1)^k\mathrm{Tr}(\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}^1)^k`$, with $`k>3`$. However, a simple direct analysis shows that this is not true .

Going back to figure 6, one easily convinces oneself that for the graphs in figures 6$`c`$6$`d`$ and 6$`e`$ the same analysis as in the previous section applies. In this case the addition of the chiral line simply adds a $`D^2\overline{D}^2`$ factor which accounts for the $`D`$-algebra of one added loop; performing the $`D`$-algebra in the diagrams one is left with finite integrals.

We note that at this order diagrams containing the scalar superpotential vertex

$$ϵ_{ijk}\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{\Phi }^i[\mathrm{\Phi }^j,\mathrm{\Phi }^k])$$
(17)
do not contribute.

We are left with the contributions from figures 6$`a`$6$`b`$6$`i`$ and 6$`j`$. We will find that a highly nontrivial cancellation occurs.

For every diagram we need compute the specific combinatorics, the various factors from vertices and propagators and the colour structure. Then we have to perform the $`D`$-algebra in the loops and finally evaluate the momentum integrals. We factorize for each contribution the same quantity

$`{\displaystyle \frac{9}{(4\pi )^8}}g^4N(N^24)(N^21)`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }d^4pd^4\theta J(p,\theta ,\overline{\theta })\overline{J}(p,\theta ,\overline{\theta }).`$ (18)
The diagram in figure 6$`a`$ which contains the two-loop propagator correction, gives

$$\mathrm{figure}\text{6}a\frac{3}{2}\zeta (3)\frac{1}{ϵ}p^2.$$
(19)
The diagram in figure 6$`b`$ contains the one-loop vertex correction. In this case the resulting contribution is given by

$$\mathrm{figure}\text{6}b\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}\zeta (3)\frac{1}{ϵ}p^2.$$
(20)
In the same way for the graph in figure 6$`i`$ one has

$$\mathrm{figure}\text{6}i5\zeta (5)\frac{1}{ϵ}p^2.$$
(21)
Finally we concentrate on the diagram in Fig. $`6j`$. The evaluation of the corresponding momentum integral is highly nontrivial and we refer to our paper  for all the technical details. The result is given by

$$\mathrm{figure}\text{6}j\left[5\zeta (5)\frac{3}{2}\zeta (3)\right]\frac{1}{ϵ}p^2.$$
(22)
At this point it is simple to add the four contributions in (19), (20), (21) and (22) and check the complete cancellation of the $`1/ϵ`$ terms. It is interesting to note that, while the diagrams $`6a,6b`$ only contribute with a divergent term proportional to $`\zeta (3)`$ and the diagram $`6i`$ gives only a $`\zeta (5)`$-term, from the diagram $`6j`$ both terms arise with the correct coefficients to cancel completely the divergence.

## 4 Conclusions

We have discussed the calculation of the two-point correlation function for the chiral primary operator $`\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }_1^3`$ in $`𝒩=4`$ $`SU(N)`$ SYM theory up to $`g^4`$-order. We have found a complete cancellation of quantum corrections for any finite $`N`$. Our result represents the first $`𝒪(g^4)`$ direct check of the nonrenormalization theorem conjectured on the basis of the AdS/CFT correspondence . It supports also the stronger claim  that there might be no quantum corrections at all, for any finite $`N`$.

We have performed the calculation in $`𝒩=1`$ superspace using dimensional regularization. The loop-integrals have been evaluated in momentum space with the method of uniqueness . In momentum space nontrivial, potential contributions appear as local divergent terms that are easily isolated and evaluated. Finite contributions would correspond to contact terms and can be neglected.

Our procedure is applicable to the perturbative analysis of more complicated cases. Two-point functions for $`\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^k`$, $`k>3`$, three-point functions and extremal correlators for chiral primary operators are now under investigation .

###### Acknowledgments.

This work has been supported by the European Commission TMR programme ERBFMRX-CT96-0045, in which S.P. and D.Z. are associated to the University of Torino.